The Effectiveness of The On Line Apollo Is Fraud Movement

page: 1
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 04:47 PM
link   
Try this; google "Charles Berry, Apollo"

As Charles Berry was the head NASA/Apollo physician, one would expect the electronic references returned, especially the majority of the first ones that come up, would be references to his library, or his medical work, or biographical information on the "important man", a true aerospace medicine pioneer.

Some of us that have studied the Apollo narrative with a special interest in determining how an investigation of the astronauts' medical problems might give one a clue one way or the other as regards Apollo's authenticity/inauthenticity have come to the conclusion that evidence abounds for Apollo as fraud based on study of these revealing "medical issues".

In a very real sense, this is old news, colleagues of mine and I have been doing this for over a year now, studying "Apollo medicine", and to be sure, there is absolutely no question whatsoever that one can come to know Apollo as the fraud that it is by way of studying Alan Shepard's bogus Meniere's Disease "cure", Deke Slayton's bogus vitamin aided and abetted atrial fibrillation cure, and Frank Borman's fraudulent bout of cislunar infectious diarrhea, not to mention other examples. The 3 mentioned here are but my "favorites".

What the general "Apollo Community" may not be aware of, what those generally Apollo curious and interested may not know, is how sharp have grown our movement's teeth.

Googling "Charles Berry, Apollo" today, 06/13/2012, yields as a very first reference, a link to an internet forum thread titled, "Charles Berry was in on the Apollo Fraud";

www.bautforum.com...

Reference two is to a paper Berry wrote about Apollo 7 and 8 medical concerns;

ntrs.nasa.gov...

Reference three is to another internet forum, the theme of which charges Berry with his being an Apollo Fraud insider. This thread titled, "Medical Concerns Prove Apollo Bogus";

apollohoax.proboards.com...

The tenth Google based/search engine generated "Charles Berry, Apollo" reference is to an ATS thread, "Lovell and Shepard Star Sighting Contradiction Proves Navigation Bogus and Apollo Inauthenticity,"

www.abovetopsecret.com...

So the first page of 10 in total "Charles Berry, Apollo" google search engine generated references features 3 which are "Berry was in on the fraud" themed, and that includes THE FIRST AND THE THIRD !!!

The next page, "Charles Berry, Apollo" google search engine generated references features as its first 4 references, one video and three ATS forum threads, all of which are "Berry is an Apolllo fraud insider" themed.

YouTube video, "Borman is a Lyin' Apollo Fraud PERP";



And ATS threads;

Simple Irrationalities Are The Best Way To Show The World Apollo Was Fake

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Nature Abhors A Fraudulent Cislunar Vacuum As Truth Does Inconsistency, Short Circuiting Apollo

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Alan Shepard Is So Much A Big Fake, Reading His Story Makes Patriotic Americans Crave Antiemetics,

www.abovetopsecret.com...

So the next time someone suggests the "Apollo Is Fraud Movement" has no teeth, no traction in the community at large, try this little Apollo Fraud public awareness barometer "experiment" of mine. Goolge "Charles Berry, Apollo" and see what comes up. As of today; 3 of the 10 first page references are "Charles Berry Was A Fraud Insider" themed, and that includes numbers ONE and THREE, and on page two, the first four references of the page are "Charles Berry Was A Fraud Insider" themed.

One of our roles as Apollo historians is to bring the message of the Apollo Fraud to the community at large. Help those not as interested for whatever reason to at least have some casual sense as to what it is we do and how it is we know the Apollo missions were fraudulent. At least as far as the google search engine "Charles Berry, Apollo" barometer goes, we are doing a pretty dang good job. Try it for yourselves.

Apollo is fraudulent, and contrary to the opinion of many official story advocates/apologists, our writing, our film making, our views, are pretty well known and becoming more so all the time.

Who was Charles Berry ? Well simply google him up, and you shall find he was a doctor that was in on the Apollo fraud.

In this dedicated thread, we'll be looking not to explore the Fraud per se, but instead hope to gain a sense for what it is that the general public's awareness is as regards Apollo Authenticity/Inauthenticity. What does the public know, and how do they know it, a critical issue for both sides.

edit on 13-6-2012 by decisively because: came>come
edit on 13-6-2012 by decisively because: removed comma
edit on 13-6-2012 by decisively because: commas,
edit on 13-6-2012 by decisively because: spelling ,comma
edit on 13-6-2012 by decisively because: spelling , comma
edit on 13-6-2012 by decisively because: fixed space for a thread title, removed "ONE", spacing
edit on 13-6-2012 by decisively because: removed comma
edit on 13-6-2012 by decisively because: added comma,
edit on 13-6-2012 by decisively because: will> instead
edit on 13-6-2012 by decisively because: problems> issues
edit on 13-6-2012 by decisively because: commas,




posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 05:03 PM
link   
Just because a lot of people believe it's fraud and discuss it at great lengths in the forums .. or just because a search phrase makes up the top google results ( as a result of forum discussions mind you ) doesn't make it true .. just ask Rick Santorum, he'd know all about that... a group of pranksters poisoned the google search engine by linking the name santorum with something disgusting.. that caused searching for santurm to return those things first.. search engine poisoning is easy to do .. and I wouldn't doubt some of these Apollo fraud supporters could have even tried that... but I can't know


There's no credible evidence of Apollo being a fraud, just many people passionate about the topic and looking for anything they can find... but you can find credible evidence that it isn't a fraud.. satellite images of the landing sites for one.. which really, what else more do you need? .. in order to fake the satellite imagery .. everyone who's imaged the sites would have to be involved in this hoax .. including Russia and China who've both imaged the landing sites! .. why on earth would they have anything to gain by helping perpetrate this hoax? .. lets not forget it was Russia we were racing.. and they have imaged the sites! ..

It makes zero sense to even try to say it's a fraud.. but they will never stop doing it despite being completely wrong.. Sure the movement has teeth.. but that doesn't make them correct.. it just means they sincerely deluded themselves into believing it and have struck up a large conversation on the internet..

Google doesn't rank by truthiness ....
edit on 6/13/2012 by miniatus because: (no reason given)
edit on 6/13/2012 by miniatus because: (no reason given)
edit on 6/13/2012 by miniatus because: (no reason given)
edit on 6/13/2012 by miniatus because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 05:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by decisively
Who was Charles Berry ? Well simply google him up, and you shall find he was a doctor that was in on the Apollo fraud.



So if I understand your logic correctly,

1. Google searches produce top hits generated by you and your friends
2. Thus, proof that you and your friends are correct in your assertions





posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 05:08 PM
link   
A relevant link on google poisoning / google bombing ..

en.wikipedia.org...

And the specific case of Santorum's google bombing

en.wikipedia.org...
edit on 6/13/2012 by miniatus because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 05:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by alfa1

Originally posted by decisively
Who was Charles Berry ? Well simply google him up, and you shall find he was a doctor that was in on the Apollo fraud.



So if I understand your logic correctly,

1. Google searches produce top hits generated by you and your friends
2. Thus, proof that you and your friends are correct in your assertions





Exactly my point, but put much simpler! bravo



posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 05:19 PM
link   
This is a VERY interesting vid. Part 1 seems to be missing from YT for some reason, or I cant find it.

This part deals with the problem of radiation.

Anyone interested in this subject will enjoy this vid.



posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 05:20 PM
link   
reply to post by miniatus
 


I agree absolutely. The point I am trying to make right out of the blocks here with this thread is that contrary to popular opinion within the Apollo apologist camp, people are looking at this stuff, our stuff, our stuff that argues Apollo can easily be demonstrated to be fraudulent by way of examining the astronauts' medical records, Charles Berry's work.

Note how I emphasized this was NOT a thread about google search results vindicating our position of Apollo as Inauthentic.

But BOOM, right out of the blocks, it hits the unaware Apollo official story apologist with a haymaker. You'd never anticipate that sort of a result from googling "Charles Berry, Apollo".

What is also interesting is that the subject matter is so so so esoteric, Apollo' medical concerns showing Apollo fraudulent and implicating Berry no less.

So agreed, we are not talking Apollo authenticity /inauthenticity here, we are talking;

What does the public know ?

How do they know it ?

How do we as researchers reach them ?

Apart from the questions, the first post stands alone as powerful proof that contrary to popular opinion in the Apollo official story apologist camp, it is NOT NOT NOT the case that what we do on my side is much ado 'bout nuttin'.....
edit on 13-6-2012 by decisively because: spelling ,



posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 05:28 PM
link   
reply to post by alfa1
 

Charles Berry/Apollo Yields FRAUD not library !!!!!!



No incorrect, read the first post again and my response to your colleague above. In brief, to say it once again, it is commonly said that no one pays attention to us. Now this simple search engine experiment demonstrates that cannot be true.

I did not google "Charles Berry, Apollo, Fraud". I googled "Charles Berry, Apollo". And what came back ? Not, "blah blah blah, Charles Berry Medical Library, what a great guy, blah blah blah, Charles Berry is such a great innovator, Dr. Aerospace Medicine pioneer, blah blah blah ". What came back in ANSWER TO CHARLES BERRY/APOLLO was


FRAUD !!!!!!

That is very sobering....... a sensational result....
edit on 13-6-2012 by decisively because: added "this simple search engine experiment demonstrates "
edit on 13-6-2012 by decisively because: spelling ,
edit on 13-6-2012 by decisively because: added "blah blah blah"
edit on 13-6-2012 by decisively because: commas,



posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 08:32 PM
link   

Another one, I would encourage everyone to try this



I googled , "Can you see stars in cislunar space". No "fraud" words, no "hoax" words. Here is what I got;

Number one reference was this YouTube discussion that featured a hefty dose of fraud oriented comments;

www.youtube.com...

Number two was a BAUT forum thread titled "BOGUS PHYSIOLOGY PROVES ASTRONAUTS LIE", fraud based theme no question.

Number three was a link to "Starand Nebulae-Kerbal Space Program", which for some reason does not work.

Number four linked NewScientist Posts, very fraud oriented;

www.last-word.com...

Number 5, my own ATS thread here highlighting the Lovell/Shepard Star Sighting Contradiction;

www.abovetopsecret.com...

So, no leading words at all. The question did not contain 'hoax", "fraud", noting like that.

Simple question, "can you see stars from cislunar space?". And a legitimate question. Can you ? According to Neil Armstrong , for the most part, you cannot. But the fraud debate itself aside, 4 of the 5 google based search engine references generated were to links where Apollo as fraud was discussed NOT, links to physiologic/visibility concerns per se. And were I able to link the fifth , I may have found that one was based in our "Apollo Is Fraud" camp.

More than compelling this is, much more than simply compelling.

Ask a relatively simple question and you find members of my camp attracting the attention of many people with their more often than not, good responses

edit on 13-6-2012 by decisively because: added quotes
edit on 13-6-2012 by decisively because: was > linked, post > posts



posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 09:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by decisivelyreply to post by alfa1
 

Charles Berry/Apollo Yields FRAUD not library !!!!!!


No incorrect, read the first post again and my response to your colleague above. In brief, to say it once again, it is commonly said that no one pays attention to us. Now this simple search engine experiment demonstrates that cannot be true.

I did not google "Charles Berry, Apollo, Fraud". I googled "Charles Berry, Apollo". And what came back ? Not, "blah blah blah, Charles Berry Medical Library, what a great guy, blah blah blah, Charles Berry is such a great innovator, Dr. Aerospace Medicine pioneer, blah blah blah ". What came back in ANSWER TO CHARLES BERRY/APOLLO was


FRAUD !!!!!!

That is very sobering....... a sensational result....

Don't go celebrating too soon. First, do you actually know how Google does a search? What parameters are put in place in a search and then how a page is selected?

In brief, here is the synopsis of the following Youtube video on Google Search: How Google Search Works

Google does not actually search the web, it searches Google's index of the web using software programing called spiders. Spiders start with a few index pages and connects to other pages from links in those pages and then connects to other pages through links found in those pages, and so on.

A search parameter, in this case "Charles Berry Apollo", searches the index for every page that has those specific words on them. There are over 200 questions that are used as qualifiers.

Google search uses qualifiers (questions) to determine which pages are most releveant such as:

How many times does this page contain the searches key word(s)?

Do the words appear in the Title?

Do the words appear in the URL?

Do the words appear directly adjacent? (are the words next to each other, or in the same syntax)

Does the page include synonyms for the search word(s)?

Is this page from a quality website or is it a low quality page?

What rank does this page hold?


Finally, all these factors are then combined to give each page an overall score. This score determines what is displayed. This is how a Google search result is built.



Sadly, your proposition is flawed in thinking that people are accessing what you have written to find out about the "fraud" in Apollo. If you haven't noticed, most of the people that respond to your posts are the same people since you began this tirade over a year ago. The stars that are given in your threads are awarded to pro apollogists and not to the you nor the other hoaxers. The hoax theories you espouse attract those who want to refute you, not support you.
edit on 6/13/2012 by Gibborium because: clarification in wording



posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 05:27 AM
link   
reply to post by Gibborium
 

Beyond Beautiful AND Utterly Mind Blowing When You Get Down To It





This will utterly blow your mind. Say you heard about H. David Reed's "reverse rendezvous radar solution" run to determine the Eagle/Columbia relationship at the time of the launch 07/21/1969. So you google "reverse rendezvous radar solution, Apollo". Take a look at what you get my friends .........


www.google.com... pollo&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_l=hp.1

Beautiful, ABSOLUTELY BEAUTIFUL. And you don't think WE ARE WRITING APOLLO HISTORY HERE ?

We have already changed this world from one of "played for chumps" , to one of FRAUD EXPOSED. these are interesting and marvelous times indeed indeed indeed.



posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 05:36 AM
link   
reply to post by decisively
 



We have already changed this world from one of "played for chumps" , to one of FRAUD EXPOSED. these are interesting and marvelous times indeed indeed indeed.


You are insane. You have gotten it in your head that you can rewrite history by spamming on the internet. Too bad for you that every time someone actually clicks on one of your threads, what they see is:

"me and my friend timmy baught a book at an antiquarium bookstore and red how...."

Monumental self-sabotage. Get psychiatric help. Now.



posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 05:46 AM
link   
To the Mods:


In September 2000 the first Google bomb with a verifiable creator was created by Hugedisk Men's Magazine, a now-defunct online humor magazine, when it linked the text "dumb [redacted --DJW001]" to a site selling George W. Bush-related merchandise.[6] Hugedisk had also unsuccessfully attempted to Google bomb an equally derogatory term to bring up an Al Gore-related site. After a fair amount of publicity the George W. Bush-related merchandise site retained lawyers and sent a cease and desist letter to Hugedisk, thereby ending the Google bomb.


en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 02:45 PM
link   
reply to post by decisively
 


Sputniksteve checking into obligatory self promotion thread. Lets bump this whole cause into legitimacy!



posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 08:09 PM
link   

decisively said What the general "Apollo Community" may not be aware of, what those generally Apollo curious and interested may not know, is how sharp have grown our movement's teeth.


edit on 6/14/2012 by SayonaraJupiter because: add pic



posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 08:28 PM
link   
In the new Apollo Narrative James "Captain Shakey" Lovell plays a significant role as the leading man in the telenovela, Apollo 13.

This is just one more example of how the On Line Apollo Is Fraud Movement has taken ownership of


the new Apollo narrative.







posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 08:40 PM
link   
So I take it your sister or whatever it was quit helping you out . No I'm not reading your stuff just laughing at your silly attacks.



posted on Jun, 15 2012 @ 04:55 AM
link   
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 


Sayonara, do you actually believe that decisively is a doctor? Be honest.



posted on Jun, 18 2012 @ 11:19 AM
link   

My Point was not that people by the zillions are reading our stuff

reply to post by Gibborium
 


My point is that they might. Because of the net, we have a great avenue of access. Google "Charles Berry, Apollo" and you will know him as the fraudster he is. Google "Bart Sibrel" as I just did and not until reference 21 do you see a Sibrel as fraudster video listed .

I contend this is very sobering, even with Sibrel as fraudster not coming up until number 21. There is no advertising on our part, absolutely no intentionality whatsoever to "play" the net, "game it" , manipulate. We simply post, some make videos, and we have access now, and prominent, prevalent, pertinent access. As Al Pacino said in Donnie Brasco, "It's a beautiful thing". At least he said something like that, or maybe it was the Donnie character ?

edit on 18-6-2012 by decisively because: added "even with Sibrel as fraudster not coming up until number 21", spelling
edit on 18-6-2012 by decisively because: commas



posted on Jun, 18 2012 @ 11:30 AM
link   

The other point, and an incredibly important one



When one casually internet searches this or that as regards Apollo, and then stumbles across a post, thread, video what not that covers some relevant aspect of the fraud, the curious can now see that our work is NOT ABOUT WAVING FLAGS IN VACUUMS, INVISIBLE LM EXHAUST, THE ABSENCE OF BLAST CRATERS. On the contrary, people learn that out work is about ASTRONAUTS LYING, ABOUT THE FATAL INCONSISTENCIES INTERNAL INCOHERENCIES AND IRRATIONALITIES OF THE OFFICIAL NARRATIVE.

They also learn that contrary to popular believe, general public awareness, we know who some of the PERPS are, in most cases with a very high degree of confidence, in many cases with absolute unmitigated metaphysical certitude. There identities as Apollo fraud perpetrators is incontrovertible.

This is most significant, sobering indeed for the fraudulent dark side.
edit on 18-6-2012 by decisively because: speliing, comma




new topics
top topics
 
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join