Disclosure of the moon landing hoax.

choos, you posted an image of Dick Gordon in a simulator.

I see your bet. I call your bluff. And I am raising you. Are you in?

SayonaraJupiter
choos, you posted an image of Dick Gordon in a simulator.

I see your bet. I call your bluff. And I am raising you. Are you in?

edit on 12/5/2013 by SayonaraJupiter because: (no reason given)

Why bother you have nothing left to bet. Youve been proved wrong on every point you made in this thread at this point we no longer work on credit. This means you have to show us proof the apollo mission was hoaxed this means no diatribes no innuendos but proof. So please dont rehash your old statements because none of them contained any proof or truth for that matter. So advanced warning throwing up nixon was evil card not going to work. Missing landers they crashed unless you can prove otherwise. It was filmed in a sound stage show proof like testimony from camera man prop people ect. Any statement you make from this point forward to prove apollo was faked needs to include evidence of the faking!!! If it is not included you must immediately leave the table as i said we no longer run on credit.

reply to post by dragonridr


Why are you answering for choos? Has choos chosen you has his spokesperson??

choos, you posted an image of Dick Gordon in a simulator.

SayonaraJupiter
choos, you posted an image of Dick Gordon in a simulator.

I see your bet. I call your bluff. And I am raising you. Are you in?

mistake on my behalf i didnt check properly..

now answer all of my questions.

im calling your bluff..

theres a video of apollo 12 astronauts reflections..

there are videos of apollo 12 lunar footage with visor reflections..

are you in?

its what you wanted right?? reflections of astronauts right??
youtu.be...

p.s. i forgot, what about the candid photos from apollo 11, 13-17?? are you still in?

and why did you completely ignore this candid image?
www.sciencephoto.com...

SayonaraJupiter
reply to post by dragonridr

 

Why are you answering for choos? Has choos chosen you has his spokesperson??

choos, you posted an image of Dick Gordon in a simulator.

Just read one of your posts on the china mining the moon thread. In that you, state that the USA and the Russians both have achieved soft landings and you go on to state that its possible that they found evidence of alien civilizations. If i could directly quote you into this thread i would.

Given that post, i have lost all my respect for you in this thread. You now appear to me to be nothing but a troll here. Every time one of your stupid points is totally quashed, you raise another stupid and insignificant point. And after reading your other posts, its evident to me that even YOU don't believe some of the guff you have posted here.

Its a shame, because this thread was almost enjoyable, now i just cant take you seriously at all

choos

SayonaraJupiter
choos, you posted an image of Dick Gordon in a simulator.

I see your bet. I call your bluff. And I am raising you. Are you in?

mistake on my behalf i didnt check properly..

now answer all of my questions.

im calling your bluff..

theres a video of apollo 12 astronauts reflections.. Are you talking about the Apollo 12 youtube video that OBMonkey posted? My first objection to that video is that it's on youtube, youtube is not a government source, therefore, I can't accept that video as proof of anything... and neither should you.

there are videos of apollo 12 lunar footage with visor reflections.. I guess that means you will be posting more youtube videos? Why bother? You know what my objections are to youtube videos and you already know that I am going to demand the .gov sources for your claims that you make!

are you in? No, not when you are so obviously stacking the deck!

its what you wanted right?? reflections of astronauts right??
youtu.be...

p.s. i forgot, what about the candid photos from apollo 11, 13-17?? are you still in? It's true, I have already stipulated that A11 and A13 took many candid photos of themselves (their faces, choos, FACES!) whereas, Apollo 12 failed to take just one single candid image, in earth orbit, in cis-lunar space, in lunar orbit, on the surface of the "moon" or anywhere else. Maybe your argument isn't as strong as you think it is, choos. Read it carefully again...

and why did you completely ignore this candid image?
www.sciencephoto.com...

I told you it's not sourced from .gov therefore you have nothing.

SayonaraJupiter

choos

SayonaraJupiter
choos, you posted an image of Dick Gordon in a simulator.

I see your bet. I call your bluff. And I am raising you. Are you in?

mistake on my behalf i didnt check properly..

now answer all of my questions.

im calling your bluff..

theres a video of apollo 12 astronauts reflections.. Are you talking about the Apollo 12 youtube video that OBMonkey posted? My first objection to that video is that it's on youtube, youtube is not a government source, therefore, I can't accept that video as proof of anything... and neither should you.

there are videos of apollo 12 lunar footage with visor reflections.. I guess that means you will be posting more youtube videos? Why bother? You know what my objections are to youtube videos and you already know that I am going to demand the .gov sources for your claims that you make!

are you in? No, not when you are so obviously stacking the deck!

its what you wanted right?? reflections of astronauts right??
youtu.be...

p.s. i forgot, what about the candid photos from apollo 11, 13-17?? are you still in? It's true, I have already stipulated that A11 and A13 took many candid photos of themselves (their faces, choos, FACES!) whereas, Apollo 12 failed to take just one single candid image, in earth orbit, in cis-lunar space, in lunar orbit, on the surface of the "moon" or anywhere else. Maybe your argument isn't as strong as you think it is, choos. Read it carefully again...

and why did you completely ignore this candid image?
www.sciencephoto.com...

I told you it's not sourced from .gov therefore you have nothing.

CT: I demand evidence
Non-CT: You mean this evidence?
CT: No, other evidence that doesn't prove me wrong

and so on...

You are not in charge, you do not get to dictate which direction the thread takes or what evidence is acceptable. I've posted several videos on youtube sourced from NASA. Them being on youtube does not mean they are wrong, nor does it excuse you from needing to answer questions.

Do the videos show Apollo 12 astronauts in zero G?
Do the videos show reflections of astronauts in the window as it flies over the moon.
Do the videos show lunar surface details that could not have been filmed from Earth?
Do the videos show a solar eclipse that could only have been filmed in space?

Just dismissing these videos, which provide direct rebuttals to points you have made, shows your true colour.

Try downloading it from here

archive.org...

Lots of high quality there.

It actually credits the producers as NASA/Johnson Space Centre.

Read the photo index here www.hq.nasa.gov...

it shouldn't take you long to match up the descriptions in the document with the video.

You could even buy that Alan Bean shaving shot on ebay www.ebay.com... stronaut-Alan-Bean-Shaving-as-Pete-Conrad-Observes-in-Space-Wire-Photo-/271140086686

Or shall i just wait here making chicken noises?

SayonaraJupiter Are you talking about the Apollo 12 youtube video that OBMonkey posted? My first objection to that video is that it's on youtube, youtube is not a government source, therefore, I can't accept that video as proof of anything... and neither should you.

the video credits NASA..

hold on are you saying that evidence of the moon landing should be .gov and therefore reliable? because we have stack of that..

I guess that means you will be posting more youtube videos? Why bother? You know what my objections are to youtube videos and you already know that I am going to demand the .gov sources for your claims that you make!

again.. asking for .gov sources.. can i ask, if i give evidence from a .gov site will that shut you up?

it looks to me that only a .gov sources are reliable to you, and if you are saying you only trust .gov sites well then if a .gov site proves they landed man on the moon it should be reliable enough for you to admit defeat right?

is that what you want?? evidence that they landed man on the moon from a .gov site? and that will satisfy you?

No, not when you are so obviously stacking the deck!

knew you would fold.. on your way home now boy.

It's true, I have already stipulated that A11 and A13 took many candid photos of themselves (their faces, choos, FACES!) whereas, Apollo 12 failed to take just one single candid image, in earth orbit, in cis-lunar space, in lunar orbit, on the surface of the "moon" or anywhere else. Maybe your argument isn't as strong as you think it is, choos. Read it carefully again...

i dont think you understand the pure stupidity of your own statement..

A11,13-17 took candid photos proving they went to the moon except A12.. so therefore they went to the moon for A11,13-17, except for A12 because they didnt take any candid photos..

this is their capabilities of getting to the moon:

A11: capable
A12: incapable
A13: capable but failed
A14: capable
A15: capable
A16: capable
A17: capable

logic fails you.

I told you it's not sourced from .gov therefore you have nothing.

i take it you admit that .gov sites are reliable and can be used as genuine evidence man landed on the moon?

reply to post by choos


For gods sakes show him where the youtube videos come from hes obviously unaware of the apollo 12 video library. See once again we can see personal shots of the astronauts on the way to the moon. The difference between 12 and apollo 11 is apollo 12 relied more on video. Mostly because the press complained there but off sitting in johnson space center with hours of nothing to report. So for apollo 12 they made them interact with the press and answer questions posed by them. See once again we have to do his research he makes wild accusations and we have to prove him wrong getting old fast wouldnt you say?

reply to post by choos

again.. asking for .gov sources.. can i ask, if i give evidence from a .gov site will that shut you up?

Choos, you know very well that youtube retranslates the videos for presentation purposes. Always Remember to present *your best evidence* not some crappy recoded video from somebody's youtube page.

If this was a courtroom and you presented that crap as your *best evidence*, well, the judge is going to sustain my objections every single time.

Have you ever been in a courtroom? Do you know that there are written procedures for admitting evidence? Did you know that each side has the opportunity to look at the real evidence, the *best evidence*?

If youtube is not your *best evidence* then why are you putting it out there? Are you a charlatan?

Choos, in the future, don't bother showing any more youtube videos that deal solely with images. But it's okay if you have youtube videos that are things like interviews, oral histories, and those types of evidence which we can have a certain amount of confidence.

As you know, the Apollo 16mm films, are 16mm film stock and they are not youtube videos. It is important that we all understand the difference between what is, and what is not, evidence. Am I making myself perfectly clear or should I try again to explain to you -- that it is up to YOU -- to present your *BEST EVIDENCE*.

I have no further objections.

SayonaraJupiter

Choos, you know very well that youtube retranslates the videos for presentation purposes. Always Remember to present *your best evidence* not some crappy recoded video from somebody's youtube page.

If this was a courtroom and you presented that crap as your *best evidence*, well, the judge is going to sustain my objections every single time.

Have you ever been in a courtroom? Do you know that there are written procedures for admitting evidence? Did you know that each side has the opportunity to look at the real evidence, the *best evidence*?

If youtube is not your *best evidence* then why are you putting it out there? Are you a charlatan?

complete transfer.. you didnt even bother answering my question.. why is it that you never answer questions asked to you. the answers you give are usually completely unrelated to the question, you are like a politician..

also same goes for you.. you have provided no evidence, only rehashed and self-edited images.. why have you never once posted REAL reliable evidence??

so therefore my objections will also be sustained.. your double standards are astonishing..

Choos, in the future, don't bother showing any more youtube videos that deal solely with images. But it's okay if you have youtube videos that are things like interviews, oral histories, and those types of evidence which we can have a certain amount of confidence.

As you know, the Apollo 16mm films, are 16mm film stock and they are not youtube videos. It is important that we all understand the difference between what is, and what is not, evidence. Am I making myself perfectly clear or should I try again to explain to you -- that it is up to YOU -- to present your *BEST EVIDENCE*.

I have no further objections.

are you backing away from the .gov sources??

also i dont think i have posted any youtube videos that deal solely on images.. they have all been videos.. being credited back to NASA..

also why are you asking for evidence of man landing on the moon?? you are sorely mistaken, there is an abundance of evidence that man has landed on the moon.. majority of which are from .gov sites.. which is exactly what you just requested above..

you wanted sources from .gov sites as if it were good enough evidence to prove man landed on the moon.. so why are you asking for more evidence?? are they suddenly not reliable enough??

you flip flop more than a politician.. you dodge questions like a politician.. you have no credibility whatsoever with the amount of flip flopping and dodging you do..

p.s. what gives you the authority to decide what is and what isnt evidence?

p.s. i forgot, what about the candid photos from apollo 11, 13-17?? are you still in? It's true, I have already stipulated that A11 and A13 took many candid photos of themselves (their faces, choos, FACES!) whereas, Apollo 12 failed to take just one single candid image, in earth orbit, in cis-lunar space, in lunar orbit, on the surface of the "moon" or anywhere else. Maybe your argument isn't as strong as you think it is, choos. Read it carefully again...

also you have completely ignored this again.. you have completely agreed they have candid photos of apollo 11 and 13 in cis-lunar space.

so you have already completely agreed that for apollo 11 and apollo 13 that they were indeed in cis-lunar space..

its only apollo 12 that you do not agree on but thats almost irrelevant now since they reached the moon for apollo 11 and lunar orbit for 13.

There is no reason to further prove that man landed on the moon from 69-72, since you have confirmed yourself that it was done on apollo 11 and lunar orbit was completed for apollo 13.. straight from the horses mouth..

reply to post by SayonaraJupiter


So you think you cn decide what is valid information when you never present any odd way of thinking. Just in case you are unaware NASA posts videos on you tube as well so to say its not a valid source is stupid. Videos are often made to accompany research books as well and guess what they go on you tube. I know this you tube thing is new to you and you think it only has posts from a couple of people, but guess what government agencies post on there all the time along with researchers like cern for example time to come out the dark ages.

SayonaraJupiter
reply to post by choos

 

again.. asking for .gov sources.. can i ask, if i give evidence from a .gov site will that shut you up?

Choos, you know very well that youtube retranslates the videos for presentation purposes. Always Remember to present *your best evidence* not some crappy recoded video from somebody's youtube page.

If this was a courtroom and you presented that crap as your *best evidence*, well, the judge is going to sustain my objections every single time.

Have you ever been in a courtroom? Do you know that there are written procedures for admitting evidence? Did you know that each side has the opportunity to look at the real evidence, the *best evidence*?

If youtube is not your *best evidence* then why are you putting it out there? Are you a charlatan?

Choos, in the future, don't bother showing any more youtube videos that deal solely with images. But it's okay if you have youtube videos that are things like interviews, oral histories, and those types of evidence which we can have a certain amount of confidence.

As you know, the Apollo 16mm films, are 16mm film stock and they are not youtube videos. It is important that we all understand the difference between what is, and what is not, evidence. Am I making myself perfectly clear or should I try again to explain to you -- that it is up to YOU -- to present your *BEST EVIDENCE*.

I have no further objections.

I'm not interested if you have objections, it's not for you to decide.

If you have such an objection to youtube's video conversion methods, then you are welcome to download the much higher quality file I linked to at archive.org above.

This will then allow to discuss without any problem the views of the lunar far side, the work being carried out by astronauts on the lunar surface, the landing video (which shows details not available prior to the landing and later revealed by the LRO), reflections of astronauts in the CSM/LM windows as they fly over the lunar surface, and film of the astronauts in the CSM in zero G conditions (not to mention all of the other objects floating around, like drops of water).

All of these, by the way, are visible in the youtube footage as well as the archive.org video. The argument that somehow only youtube uses lossy compression is a stupid one and a failed attempt at dodging questions.

Apollo Defenders didn't realize that Nixon was both a good poker player and a cynical lawyer.

reply to post by onebigmonkey

then you are welcome to download the much higher quality file I linked to at archive.org above.

Are you saying that archive.org is your *best evidence*? What a laugh! HAAHAA.

You have a lot to learn about *best evidence*.

There is simply no substitute for a video file. It must be hosted from a .gov website and any of you Apollo Defenders who continue to post youtube videos will be reminded to get your *best evidence* or shut up.

Isn't that right Choos? You want me to shut up? Well you have been challenged to present your *best evidence* now do that or you can shut up yourself.

Are you afraid to disclose the truth about Apollo?

SayonaraJupiter

Are you saying that archive.org is your *best evidence*? What a laugh! HAAHAA.

You have a lot to learn about *best evidence*.

did you just say public libraries are no good as evidence??