Young Aussie genius whipping NASA in Moon Hoax Debate!

Originally posted by DJW001

In other words, faced with a pressing need for materiel, someone at Goddard did what quartermasters have been doing since the time of the Roman Legions: misappropriate government property to satisfy the immediate need of his unit. The tapes are no doubt in storage somewhere, but they've been written over with Landsat telemetry.

So somebody decided that Landsat tapes were more important than Apollo tapes and who could that be?
Richard Nafzger, Michael Collins or Noel W. Hinners?

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter

Originally posted by DJW001

In other words, faced with a pressing need for materiel, someone at Goddard did what quartermasters have been doing since the time of the Roman Legions: misappropriate government property to satisfy the immediate need of his unit. The tapes are no doubt in storage somewhere, but they've been written over with Landsat telemetry.

So somebody decided that Landsat tapes were more important than Apollo tapes and who could that be?
Richard Nafzger, Michael Collins or Noel W. Hinners?

They built archives for the Apollo missions and we are to believe the couldn't store these tapes.
We are also to believe that NASA became so broke they had to recycle the tapes.
We are also to believe that the data on these tapes was not considered important for scientists to study?
Its quite frankly a bunch of bologna.

reply to post by FoosM

They built archives for the Apollo missions and we are to believe the couldn't store these tapes.

If you read the link, you would know that they did not "build archives for the Apollo missions."

We are also to believe that NASA became so broke they had to recycle the tapes.

No, we are to believe that the huge increase of data from Earth applications satellites was outpacing the ability of vendors to produce high quality magnetic tape.

We are also to believe that the data on these tapes was not considered important for scientists to study?

Correct. It's not. There are first generation copies of the audio and visual telemetry, which is all that Hoax Propagandists are concerned about. These are pristine and will provide you with all the "evidence of fakery" you require. Everything else is beeps and boops monitoring the astronaut's and spacecraft's health, all of which was recorded on lengthy sheets of paper.

Its quite frankly a bunch of bologna.

Since some of the data on the "missing tapes" is available, I assume you intend to start by analyzing that:

reply to post by SayonaraJupiter

So somebody decided that Landsat tapes were more important than Apollo tapes and who could that be?
Richard Nafzger, Michael Collins or Noel W. Hinners?

You tell me. Which of them was posted at GSFC?

reply to post by SayonaraJupiter

Jarrah has already addressed all the major scientific objections to Apollo: He has addressed the moon rocks, the radiation, he has addressed the photos and the flapping flags.

And he has been shown to be wrong every time. In fact, he has been shown to lie:

He lied about Kovalev's radiation data.
He actually BOASTED about lying to cover up a previous lie.
He lied about his "expert."
When caught in a lie, he just changes the topic.

Which reminds me...



You still haven't posted a link to Jarrah's response to this video. Is that why you guys have been spamming so furiously lately?

THREE HORSES


A Knight Templar would receive three horses when setting off on an expedition.


In continuation of:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

I asked the question, what makes the Apollo 11 patch different than the other lunar landing Apollo patches?


Apollo 11:

We wanted to keep our three names off it because we wanted the design to be representative of everyone who had worked toward a lunar landing, and there were thousands who could take a proprietary interest in it, yet who would never see their names woven into the fabric of a patch. Further, we wanted the design to be symbolic rather than explicit.

Apollo 13:

Anyway, we said, 'Why put names on it?' We decided to eliminate the names and instead put in the Latin 'Ex Luna, Scientia' or 'From the Moon, Knowledge.' I plagiarized this somewhat because it is similar to the Naval Academy 'Ex trident, scientia' which is 'From the sea, knowledge.'"

Apollo 13 was supposed to be the first "scientific" mission.
To bad that failed.

It is an interesting coincidence that, aside from Apollo 11, this was the only flight of the Apollo series (including Skylab and ASTP) that did not include the names of the crewmembers on the patch -- and that this was the only flight to have a change in crew.

Very interesting indeed.
Could one postulate that the Apollo 11 crew, in silent protest, kept their names off due to the fact they knew it was fake? And that the Apollo 13 crew, who actually knew in their storyline that they were not going to officially land, kept their names off in protest?


genedorr.com...

Originally posted by FoosM
THREE HORSES

A Knight Templar would receive three horses when setting off on an expedition.


In continuation of:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

I asked the question, what makes the Apollo 11 patch different than the other lunar landing Apollo patches?


Apollo 11:

We wanted to keep our three names off it because we wanted the design to be representative of everyone who had worked toward a lunar landing, and there were thousands who could take a proprietary interest in it, yet who would never see their names woven into the fabric of a patch. Further, we wanted the design to be symbolic rather than explicit.

Apollo 13:

Anyway, we said, 'Why put names on it?' We decided to eliminate the names and instead put in the Latin 'Ex Luna, Scientia' or 'From the Moon, Knowledge.' I plagiarized this somewhat because it is similar to the Naval Academy 'Ex trident, scientia' which is 'From the sea, knowledge.'"

Apollo 13 was supposed to be the first "scientific" mission.
To bad that failed.

It is an interesting coincidence that, aside from Apollo 11, this was the only flight of the Apollo series (including Skylab and ASTP) that did not include the names of the crewmembers on the patch -- and that this was the only flight to have a change in crew.

Very interesting indeed.
Could one postulate that the Apollo 11 crew, in silent protest, kept their names off due to the fact they knew it was fake? And that the Apollo 13 crew, who actually knew in their storyline that they were not going to officially land, kept their names off in protest?


genedorr.com...

And why is the word 'Mission' missing by apollo 11 ?

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter

 

Jarrah has already addressed all the major scientific objections to Apollo: He has addressed the moon rocks, the radiation, he has addressed the photos and the flapping flags.

And he has been shown to be wrong every time.

Hyperbole.

All his videos have not been addressed in this thread,
and the ones that were, have not been sufficiently debunked.

Even the claim that JW lies has been squashed.
Yet you continuously want to hang on to that mantra.
Who is doing the actual lying?

reply to post by FoosM

Even the claim that JW lies has been squashed.

True or false: Jarrah White claimed that Kovalev's data contradicted NASA's.
True or false: Kovalev's data supported NASA's.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Squash away.

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by FoosM

 

Even the claim that JW lies has been squashed.

True or false: Jarrah White claimed that Kovalev's data contradicted NASA's.
True or false: Kovalev's data supported NASA's.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Squash away.

Scientists are free to disagree about interpretations of data so what's the problem? Harrison Schmitt says that our Moon is a "captured planet" while the prevailing thought is that our Moon was created out of massive body crashing into the Earth. Now the scientists are so confused about the Moon that a new theory has come out : it's the 2 Moon theory!

Some recent headlines:
Earth Had 2 Moons That Merged Into 1, New Theory Says - ABC News
Scientists Think Earth Once Had 2 Moons | Science and Technology ...VOA News
Earth May Have Had Two Moons : Discovery News
Earth's 2 Moons? It's Not Lunacy, But New Theory - Huffington Post
Early Earth may have had two moons : Nature News
Spaceports: GRAIL to Test Two Moon Theory

reply to post by SayonaraJupiter

Scientists are free to disagree about interpretations of data so what's the problem?

Entirely beside the point: Kovalev's data agreed with NASA's. Jarrah claimed otherwise. He lied. How about this one:

True or false: Jarrah claims that the radiation in space is lethal, therefore no-one can travel to the Moon.
True or false: Jarrah is soliciting donations so that he can take a commercial flight to the Moon.

Which is it? Does he not believe the radiation is lethal, or is he soliciting money under false pretenses?

reply to post by DJW001


He is looking for dosh, I saw that the other day. At the moment he has the grand sum of $300+ as against the $150 million needed, although he does say it is a do or die thing such contraditions though. Slightly off topic, but not completely, has anyone been using their Google Earth/Moon? I've just noticed that it has nasa/usgs/jaxa/selene layers on it now. There are some very clear pics around Titov, but it's difficult to home into any area in particular. I'm assuming it is some kind of alpha version, as there are cliches when you zoom in with white pixels popping up in dark areas of craters. It's not finer detail showing up, one crater has a flying 'V' inside it with perfect symmetry. Any Ideas?

reply to post by SayonaraJupiter

Apollogists can be productive in this thread by providing:

1. sourced links to videos of Apollo astronauts post-flight press conferences for missions A12-A17.

Done.

2. a compelling scientific justification for the 5 counts of animal cruelty in Biosat III experiment.

Done.

3. data which refutes Jarrah White's conclusions that Apollo moon rocks contain water & minerals showing that Apollo moon rocks are indistinguishable from terrestrial counterparts. I highly recommend that Apollogists review this series ...

MoonFaker: Moon Rocks Revisited. Episode 2, Apollo Samples & Earth Rocks Are The Same. PART 1.

Coming soon.

Just wait until the Japanese, Chinese, Indians get their machines on the moon. Then there will be a proper scientific investigation of the moon. NASA's fake moon rocks will no longer hold scientific or monetary value.

Researches have been looking at the same fake moon rocks for 40 years now. That's why recently lunar scientists have been campaigning for new sample return missions - a task which is far beyond NASA's current technological capabilities.

The last statement by Lars Borg says it all:

A study in the journal Nature, based on a new analysis of a lunar rock brought back to Earth in 1972 by Apollo 16 astronauts, indicates that the moon could be a more youthful 4.36 billion years old — and that the process by which it was formed happened later than scientists thought. Or possibly this lunar rock, part of the moon's crust, isn't exactly what scientists thought it was. Maybe the crust wasn't formed by a magma ocean after all. "And that's a big deal," said Lars Borg, the lead author of the study and a geochemist at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory.

Although not a done deal. Scientists will keep studying and debating this. "I'm running a lunar sample on the mass spectrometer as we speak," noted Borg.

But the beauty of science is how it embraces redefinition, even if it's disconcerting. And these days, a scientist rarely risks being brought to trial for it — as Galileo was. They must just weather debate. "In science, nothing is ever taken to be absolute truth," said Borg.

Source www.latimes.com...

edit on 10/11/2011 by SayonaraJupiter because: (no reason given)

reply to post by SayonaraJupiter

Just wait until the Japanese, Chinese, Indians get their machines on the moon.

Not only their machines, but they will eventually be crewed with Humans as well.....

And then, each of us here on ATS will be expecting formal apologies from the likes of yourself, and several others of note in this thread......

Most importantly though, will be the chance to finally see Jarrah White ("KangaBoy") dining on crow........they have crows in Australia, right? If not, we can pay to ship a few down under for his meal.

This Just In....

Jarrah White Admits That Apollo 14 Was Real!!

Well, really it was a bit older.....because of Jarrah White's false and perjured DMCA claims, this video was unavailable for a time....YouTube has recently re-instated all of this user's videos. (Among others who were victimized by Jarrah White similarly).

SO, let us listen in to Jarrah Whites actual words. Seems in his fevered quest for quantity over quality, he shoots himself in the feet more than once...multiple times, actually.

It is painfully apparent that this "boy wonder" is a fraud, a charlatan, and a self-aggrandizing attention whore:

reply to post by ProudBird


I just realized something. If you want to promote Phil Webb's video why don't you start your own thread and call it
"Phil Webb debunks Jarrah White" and see if that thread lasts more than a few days.

You have to consider that Jarrah White really is whipping NASA in the Moon Hoax Debate! Here's the proof:

Originally posted by smurfySlightly off topic, but not completely, has anyone been using their Google Earth/Moon? I've just noticed that it has nasa/usgs/jaxa/selene layers on it now. There are some very clear pics around Titov, but it's difficult to home into any area in particular. I'm assuming it is some kind of alpha version, as there are cliches when you zoom in with white pixels popping up in dark areas of craters. It's not finer detail showing up, one crater has a flying 'V' inside it with perfect symmetry. Any Ideas?

I hear you smurfy. There is something up there. I think the main purpose of Google Moon will help the general public to understand that lunar information has been sanitized for 50 years. Certain factions of the political and religious elite have gained the upper hand by doing this.

Now that foreign countries and commercial entities are heading toward the moon via a New Race To The Moon I think we are getting closer to finding out what is really up there.


Remember when the Apollo 8 crew read from the book of Genesis on Christmas 1968? It served 2 purposes:
1. First, it was a direct response to Communist/Athiest Russia... in fact,

Some sources have claimed that Gagarin commented during the flight, "I don't see any God up here." However, no such words appear in the verbatim record of his conversations with Earth-based stations during the spaceflight.[17] In a 2006 interview, Gagarin's friend Colonel Valentin Petrov stated that the cosmonaut never said such words, and that the quote originated from Nikita Khrushchev's speech at the plenum of the Central Committee of the CPSU about the state's anti-religion campaign, saying "Gagarin flew into space, but didn't see any god there."

With this example we can clearly see how religion and political ideology have dominated space exploration from the very beginning.

2. Secondly, Apollo was a religious cult programme designed specifically for Christianized western audiences. The average pedestrian in 1968-1969 timeframe got his information from the TV or from newspapers. The average pedestrian can easily be programmed by doctrines of faith, namely religious and mythological storytelling. Therefore it is reasonable to conclude that religion and space exploration were co-mingled in order to present the overtone of an heroic expedition on a cosmic scale .... "men landing on the moon".

Really I think that Google Moon is part of a disclosure. There are many factions presently involved. Google Moon is a step forward for disclosure. What that disclosure is...... welll......... that will be a big thread!

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter
Just wait until the Japanese, Chinese, Indians get their machines on the moon. Then there will be a proper scientific investigation of the moon. NASA's fake moon rocks will no longer hold scientific or monetary value.

You sound pretty sure of that. What will you say when they confirm the authenticity of the Apollo and former Soviet Union samples?

Researches have been looking at the same fake moon rocks for 40 years now. That's why recently lunar scientists have been campaigning for new sample return missions - a task which is far beyond NASA's current technological capabilities.

Please show me a source where researchers are campaigning for new sample return missions because they think the Apollo samples are fake. Either that, or stop twisting things around by injecting your own bias into what you're claiming.

The last statement by Lars Borg says it all:

How does that say it all?

Personally I think the rest of what you quoted really "says it all", in regards to the Lunar samples. The fact that we're still learning new things and making new discoveries with the samples brought back from Apollo really speaks to their authenticity. I can't imagine much could be learnt from something that was faked.

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter

 

Scientists are free to disagree about interpretations of data so what's the problem?

Entirely beside the point: Kovalev's data agreed with NASA's. Jarrah claimed otherwise. He lied. How about this one:

True or false: Jarrah claims that the radiation in space is lethal, therefore no-one can travel to the Moon.
True or false: Jarrah is soliciting donations so that he can take a commercial flight to the Moon.

Which is it? Does he not believe the radiation is lethal, or is he soliciting money under false pretenses?

None of that matters DJ. If Kovalev got his data from Monte Carlo simulations, then, in theory, he hasn't measured anything at all.

There is only one way to solve the problem of space radiation and that's to have a probe launched from earth with a dozen radiation instruments on it, and to have that probe simulate the exact trajectories of Apollo 11-17. And then we can all peer review that radiation data.

Until then, Apollo is a hoax from Low Earth Orbit.