Young Aussie genius whipping NASA in Moon Hoax Debate!

reply to post by FoosM

You said you like debates.
Ok, lets debate. Lets talk about Apollo 12.

Did NASA lie regarding an Apollo 12 SEVA?
Yes or No?

It is common knowledge that certain aspects of the space program were classified. Not revealing something that may provide information to a potential enemy is not lying, it is common sense. If the Apollo 12 LM were sitting in a studio in Burbank, there would be no need for a stand up EVA to confirm its location. On the other hand, if they were on the lunar surface but uncertain of their exact location, a SEVA might be necessary, and it might be felt that keeping it secret might leave their potential enemies in the dark about the precision of their deep space tracking, command and control capabilities. As usual, you have brought up a point that strongly affirms the materiality of the lunar landings and their historical context.

Now, your turn: when Jarrah interviewed an expert on Aboriginal culture as an "expert witness" on photography, was he lying? Yes or no?

When Jarrah claimed that the Apollo 8 CSM could have hidden in "polar orbit," then reversed himself when someone explained what a polar orbit actually is, then claimed that he intentionally lied to "trap" his opponent, was he lying? Yes or no?

When Jarrah claimed that E. E. Kovalev's data contradicted NASA's, even though it actually confirmed it, was he lying? Yes or no?

reply to post by DJW001


DJ, I think you're being a bit too harsh on Jarrah. There is also the possibility that he is incompetent. Both lying and incompetence can be covered under the descriptor "wrong", with which FoosM is just as unable to admit Jarrah is as an outright lie.

Originally posted by FoosM
They would never lie to their citizens!

Funnt thing is, the Osama CTers are using this same straw man elsewhere in the forum right now. "Since the gov't has lied, ever, we just assume that a given argument is a lie without proving it! lololol emote"

reply to post by 000063

DJ, I think you're being a bit too harsh on Jarrah. There is also the possibility that he is incompetent. Both lying and incompetence can be covered under the descriptor "wrong", with which FoosM is just as unable to admit Jarrah is as an outright lie.

I was simply mirroring FoosM's debating tactics. He loves creating false dualities and then demanding a "yes" or "no" answer. Radiation is deadly, "yes" or "no." Everything anyone, especially NASA, says is either 100% true or 100% false, "yes" or "no." I agree with you, though. Jarrah is a sad case of an incompetent person who refuses to accept his limitations.

reply to post by 000063

Funnt thing is, the Osama CTers are using this same straw man elsewhere in the forum right now. "Since the gov't has lied, ever, we just assume that a given argument is a lie without proving it! lololol emote"

Well the FACT is Government rarely tells the full, honest truth..
There's usually total or partial lies in the majority of what they tell us..

reply to post by FoosM


So......we arrive at the core of your delusional "beliefs".....illustrating your lack of rational and logical thinking, and your dearth of experience to actually comprehend the science and technological intricacies, that so many others of us (based on an exposure to such things) have no problem understanding:

My belief that men did not go to the moon does not hang on JW, btw. I didnt believe it before I saw his videos.

SO, for whatever twisted, ignorant reason from the outset, you had this notion implanted firmly in your "mind". Usually, this is due to (as mentioned) a completely inability to understand the very complex mechanisms, and how they can work.....how people ACTUALLY do things, in the real world.....whilst cowering behind a sheet of solid ignorance. Generally, also, this same "mind"-set is further reinforced by like-"mind"ed, equally inexperienced know-nothings....as is evidenced on YouTube, of late (and previously, by the likes of Ralph Rene' and Bill Kaysing.

These same "Apollo naysayers"....or 'HB's...(Hoax Believers)...must, by virtue of their delusions, cherry-pick and ignore the irrefutable evidence....hand-waving it aside....and face the very, very inconsistent problem of the REST of the Space Program, that they must IGNORE, or just "not look at", since it destroys their "hoax" fantasy, immediately.

This includes ALL of the various programs....in the Apollo era, there were only the Soviets. Today? Far, far more. (Not ONE of those very intelligent and accomplished individuals, working in any of the other Nations' programs, have any doubts, whatsoever, about the reality of Apollo. Not one....)


Now....speaking of the ignoring of irrefutable evidence.....it is too "painful", apparently, for the stalwart (and ignorant, as is proven) HB to wrap their "minds" around:

The Apollo landing sites have been photographed, and the equipment that was left behind is there, still....for ALL to see. As well as the signs of disturbance, due to the activities of the EVAs.

But first.....this YT video was posted, recently. Some readers cannot also watch a vid....so, here is the transcript from www.youtube.com...:

"Replies to Jarrah White's Claims About Apollo"

[...the text continues...]
Jarrah White, have you got any credibility?
I am not talking about your credibility in the moon hoax scene.
Are you acknowledged by real scientists?

Let me show you some replies:

________
This is a reply to Jarrah's clams that films of 1/6G training and NASA's own documents regarding such training, when compared to films of astronauts on the lunar surface, 'prove' that the lunar films are 'faked'.

"Thanks also for the URL to the youtube video. The speaker is very ignorant of basic physics, and contradicts himself a few times (in the sense of Physics)."

Dr Karl Kruszelnicki
Julius Sumner Miller Fellow
The Science Foundation for Physics,
School of Physics,
The University of Sydney

________
Now a reply to Jarrah's claims about the fire on Apollo 1.

"Guys like this idiot Jarrah White are a dime-a-dozen and no matter what we say, they are not going to change their mind."

Mr Stephen Clemmons
Apollo 1 Pad Technician (North American Aviation)
Present on Level 7 during AS-204 fire, 27 Jan 67

________
The next reply is a bit longer, so you should pause the clip to read. It is a reply to claims that radiation or solar flares would have killed Apollo astronauts.

Richard B. Setlow
Senior Biophysicist Emeritus,
Member of the National Academy of Science,
Brookhaven National Laboratory

"....all space missions carry devices to measure the radiation doses. Astronauts should not be outside of a space craft if there were an SPE. They should be shielded inside the space craft. Hence, radiation exposures for Apollo missions would be very small. Hence, I believe that radiation exposures from Apollo missions were very small, unless astronauts stayed outside during an SPE about which they would have been informed..."


_________
The last reply to claims that the MOCR flight controllers could have been fooled by a simulaiton instead of a real flight is from:

Sy Liebergot
Apollo Flight Controller / EECOM

"The simulations were good but far from being perfect and they always required some kluges that Pete Klapach or others had to fix each time we ran a simulation. The data flow paths were different and sequencing of data from the tracking sites, pre-processed into 2.4 kbps or I believe later 4.8 kpbs bit streams. We did elaborate checkouts of these paths from the bird to a spot on our displays or event lights."

See the rest of the reply on the following tableau.

"The tracking sites knew where their antennas were pointed and when they had data, etc, etc. These questioners must think that we are stupid (hundreds of us that is); the data was recorded, archived and analyzed by dozens of engineers. Don't they know it was US who conducted simulaitons, so we would be fooling ourselves?"

_______
Jarrah, I know, this hurts very much. But you should be aware, that the whole scientific world take these replies more serious than your work.

Could it be that you and your grandfather in mind are wrong, and the vast majority of the scientific world are right?

Remembering all your clips and claims, there is only one answer:
YES, THEY ARE RIGHT AND YOU ARE WRONG!

Source for the replies:
as204.blogspot.co...

reply to post by 000063


Now see, tell me what's worth reading in this latest Weedwhacher post..
It's just the same boring rant over and over and it isn't limited to this thread..

So......we arrive at the core of your delusional "beliefs".....illustrating your lack of rational and logical thinking, and your dearth of experience to actually comprehend the science and technological intricacies, that so many others of us (based on an exposure to such things) have no problem understanding:

My belief that men did not go to the moon does not hang on JW, btw. I didnt believe it before I saw his videos.



SO, for whatever twisted, ignorant reason from the outset, you had this notion implanted firmly in your "mind". Usually, this is due to (as mentioned) a completely inability to understand the very complex mechanisms, and how they can work.....how people ACTUALLY do things, in the real world.....whilst cowering behind a sheet of solid ignorance. Generally, also, this same "mind"-set is further reinforced by like-"mind"ed, equally inexperienced know-nothings....as is evidenced on YouTube, of late (and previously, by the likes of Ralph Rene' and Bill Kaysing.

These same "Apollo naysayers"....or 'HB's...(Hoax Believers)...must, by virtue of their delusions, cherry-pick and ignore the irrefutable evidence....hand-waving it aside....and face the very, very inconsistent problem of the REST of the Space Program, that they must IGNORE, or just "not look at", since it destroys their "hoax" fantasy, immediately.

This includes ALL of the various programs....in the Apollo era, there were only the Soviets. Today? Far, far more. (Not ONE of those very intelligent and accomplished individuals, working in any of the other Nations' programs, have any doubts, whatsoever, about the reality of Apollo. Not one....)


Now....speaking of the ignoring of irrefutable evidence.....it is too "painful", apparently, for the stalwart (and ignorant, as is proven) HB to wrap their "minds" around:

Originally posted by FoosM
You said you like debates.
Ok, lets debate. Lets talk about Apollo 12.

Did NASA lie regarding an Apollo 12 SEVA?
Yes or No?

You can read this for background:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

There was no SEVA on Apollo 12.

Originally posted by ruserious8D

Originally posted by FoosM
So your claim is that your government has never lied to you?
And please tell me which government that is so I can immigrate.

Again, irrelevant, but I'll explain this VERY carefully so that you do not misinterpret it yet again.

You stated that because NASA has lied before, we shouldn't "scrutinize" any evidence they provide.


No, I dont think I said that. You claim that you would scrutinize government claims if it has been shown that they lied. Well I provided some evidence of lying and now you want to not scrutinize government?
Isnt that backpedaling? Why are you so afraid to challenge NASA's claims?

I merely pointed out that BECAUSE of that alleged lie, that gives us reason to "examine [the evidence] closely and carefully," which is the definition of scrutiny. In other words, I am actually AGREEING that once a lie has been revealed, everything else cannot simply be taken at face-value. However, where you and I differ is that when an astounding amount of outside evidence supporting said "liar's" position (be it an individual or an organization) is taken into account, I'm inclined to finally believe it, despite the previous deceit.

So list the outside evidence.
Let me start you off:

Another independent nation or group has filmed or photographed Apollo remains on the moon.
Answer?

Another independent nation, or group has been able to land on the moon.
Answer?

Moon rocks brought back from the Apollo missions could be compared with other moon rocks that geologists found prior to the missions.
True or False?

Start with those plz.

As for now, I must sleep. I have class, but I will address your question tomorrow. (Now if you would actually address some of mine, or else you will in no way be entitled to an answer from me.)

Nighty night.

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by FoosM

 

You said you like debates.
Ok, lets debate. Lets talk about Apollo 12.

Did NASA lie regarding an Apollo 12 SEVA?
Yes or No?

It is common knowledge that certain aspects of the space program were classified. Not revealing something that may provide information to a potential enemy is not lying, it is common sense. If the Apollo 12 LM were sitting in a studio in Burbank, there would be no need for a stand up EVA to confirm its location. On the other hand, if they were on the lunar surface but uncertain of their exact location, a SEVA might be necessary, and it might be felt that keeping it secret might leave their potential enemies in the dark about the precision of their deep space tracking, command and control capabilities. As usual, you have brought up a point that strongly affirms the materiality of the lunar landings and their historical context.

Nataylor says there was no SEVA on Apollo 12.
Do you agree or disagree?

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by 000063

 

Funnt thing is, the Osama CTers are using this same straw man elsewhere in the forum right now. "Since the gov't has lied, ever, we just assume that a given argument is a lie without proving it! lololol emote"

Well the FACT is Government rarely tells the full, honest truth..
There's usually total or partial lies in the majority of what they tell us..

Unsupported assertion which doesn't actual refute my point. Assuming, for the sake of argument, that you're right, they still have to be telling the truth at least some of the time.

reply to post by backinblack
I like how the rest of the post apparently seems to have vanished. The parts with the scientists saying Jarrah is wrong.

Originally posted by 000063

Originally posted by FoosM
They would never lie to their citizens!

Funnt thing is, the Osama CTers are using this same straw man elsewhere in the forum right now. "Since the gov't has lied, ever, we just assume that a given argument is a lie without proving it! lololol emote"

Thats your job as a citizen.
Or didnt you know that?
You want to keep your country free of corruption you dont trust your leaders.
You dont trust your government.
You dont trust anyone or anything that has the ability to take your life & liberty away from you.
The government has to fear you, not the other way around.

reply to post by FoosM


You're still avoiding DJ's post.

reply to post by weedwhacker

"....all space missions carry devices to measure the radiation doses. Astronauts should not be outside of a space craft if there were an SPE. They should be shielded inside the space craft. Hence, radiation exposures for Apollo missions would be very small. Hence, I believe that radiation exposures from Apollo missions were very small, unless astronauts stayed outside during an SPE about which they would have been informed..."

They really had no idea and were just very lucky "all those times"..
Even now NASA plans missions during solar minimums..
I wonder why that is if everything is perfectly safe and shielding is more than adequate..

18 Oct 2005 ... Solar Particle Events are potent killers and mission showstoppers; SPEs can be adequately mitigated with modest shielding ...
hesperia.gsfc.nasa.gov/sspvse/oral/Ronald_Turner/presentation.ppt - Similar

Search the words and download the pdf...

Originally posted by FoosM

Originally posted by 000063

Originally posted by FoosM
They would never lie to their citizens!

Funnt thing is, the Osama CTers are using this same straw man elsewhere in the forum right now. "Since the gov't has lied, ever, we just assume that a given argument is a lie without proving it! lololol emote"

Thats your job as a citizen.
Or didnt you know that?
You want to keep your country free of corruption you dont trust your leaders.
You dont trust your government.
You dont trust anyone or anything that has the ability to take your life & liberty away from you.
The government has to fear you, not the other way around.

It is not my job as a citizen to assume something is a lie without any evidence. That's not skepticism, that's paranoia. I have a right as a citizen to investigate the gov't claims, but starting with the premise that they're false, and sticking to it despite all contrary evidence is not logical.

Oh, and I'm not American.

reply to post by FoosM


Thank you for illustrating my point:

So list the outside evidence.
Let me start you off:

Another independent nation or group has filmed or photographed Apollo remains on the moon.
Answer?

Yes, Japan, but of course you resolutely refuse to accept that evidence.

Another independent nation, or group has been able to land on the moon.
Answer?

Yes, the Soviets. They even returned samples that could be compared to the Apollo samples for verification.

Moon rocks brought back from the Apollo missions could be compared with other moon rocks that geologists found prior to the missions.
True or False?

I'm not sure what you're even asking here. It had been theorized for decades that tektites, glassy blobs of minerals found strewn across several regions of the Earth, may have originated as ejecta from the lunar surface.

Originally posted by 000063

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by 000063

 

Funnt thing is, the Osama CTers are using this same straw man elsewhere in the forum right now. "Since the gov't has lied, ever, we just assume that a given argument is a lie without proving it! lololol emote"

Well the FACT is Government rarely tells the full, honest truth..
There's usually total or partial lies in the majority of what they tell us..

Unsupported assertion which doesn't actual refute my point. Assuming, for the sake of argument, that you're right, they still have to be telling the truth at least some of the time.

Read properly...
I said "rarely" tells the truth...Why make already answered statements..

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by weedwhacker

 

They really had no idea and were just very lucky "all those times"..
Even now NASA plans missions during solar minimums..
I wonder why that is if everything is perfectly safe and shielding is more than adequate..

It's called "risk mitigation". You seek to make things as safe as possible by reducing or eliminating risks, even ones you think are unlikely.

Originally posted by backinblack
I said "rarely" tells the truth...Why make already answered statements..

My point was that your point is both a)unsupported, and b)doesn't actually change my earlier point that claims need to be examined case-by-case.