Dedicated "Moon Hoax" Forum?

a reply to: Gaspode

The US Military sent 9,087,000 people to Vietnam, how many of them were aware that the CIA was hauling opium in military planes over their heads?The problem with that equation is this... How many of those 411,000 NASA employees were say, looking at blips on a screen that they were told was telemetry data?

a reply to: twitchy

Wow. You're a really fast reader. I'm impressed that you were able to read and understand the article in mere minutes. Because surely that's the only way you could confidently counter-argue if you know what it is you are arguing about?

originally posted by: twitchy
a reply to: Gaspode

The US Military sent 9,087,000 people to Vietnam, how many of them were aware that the CIA was hauling opium in military planes over their heads?The problem with that equation is this... How many of those 411,000 NASA employees were say, looking at blips on a screen that they were told was telemetry data?

The people loading opium on the planes knew they were doing it, therefore the people who built and launched the spacecraft must have known what they were doing. Not a very good argument.

a reply to: twitchy

There's threads in the hoax forum that are simple questions, how is a 'question' a hoax?

Sometimes questions are a rhetorical device to promote an agenda. Certain types of speech are proscribed here: hate speech, harassment, advertising, and so forth. "Why are Jews/Blacks/Arabs/Women so greedy/lazy/violent/stupid?" is not a question.

There's threads there like the Mossad/9-11 Connections that were in evidence to the US Government, but not to ATS?

I'm not sure exactly what you're talking about, but if the source of a story is not credible, the thread can get moved.

There's threads moved there AUTOMATICALLY because the staff here doesn't like certain sources.

That is because those sources are either known to present lies as truth, are commercial sites that are trying to use ATS for guerrilla advertising, or are rival sites that have made false claims about ATS.

There's threads about the Talmud in there that are simple discussions about it's blatant racism.

Those threads generally cite known Anti-Semitic sources and rapidly deteriorate into hate speech. The Anti-Semitism on ATS is so virulent that, unlike the Christians and Muslims who discuss the esoteric side of their religions here, Jews are afraid of starting a thread on, say, the Babylonian Exile and its influence on the religion, because the thread would rapidly be hijacked and flooded with hate speech.

There's threads in there that are clearly opinions, stated as such. How is that a hoax.

Again, that would depend upon the opinion and how it is presented.

A mere mention of Billy Meier or Ace Baker? Off to the Hoax Bin even if the thread specifically states they aren't proponents of either.

Some hoaxers have been debunked so thoroughly that even expressing doubt that they have been debunked can be construed as support.

The Protocols of Zion have never been vetted or proven to be fake, yet these get moved to the hoax bin.

Thank you for illustrating the point I was making about the Talmud. The Protocols are one of the vilest forgeries in history. The sources they were plagiarized from are well known. It requires a thoroughly closed mind to believe they might be real. Educate yourself, please:

www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org...

a reply to: eriktheawful

Amen brother Awful!

a reply to: twitchy

It's still exactly the way you describe it, the only reason we decided, years ago, to move utter bollocks into the HOAX and LOL forums was because we don't want to give the garbage free publicity and traffic. If you consider it from that perspective I hope it clears it up a little.

originally posted by: Gaspode
a reply to: twitchy

Wow. You're a really fast reader. I'm impressed that you were able to read and understand the article in mere minutes. Because surely that's the only way you could confidently counter-argue if you know what it is you are arguing about?

And a prolific one, I've seen the equation before.

a reply to: Springer

And I hope maybe you will take post this as an additional perspective as well...

a reply to: twitchy

I'm a member and I think that thread should be moved to [HOAX!]. Are you saying you are upset because a Mod has decided not to do it?

a reply to: DJW001

What? lol
Try to relax, I'm saying um... what I said.

a reply to: twitchy

Are you trying to be obtuse The membership IS who decides when something goes to HOAX or LOL. We can't say it any plainer than that.

a reply to: twitchy

belief has no bearing on veracity

originally posted by: Springer
a reply to: twitchy

Are you trying to be obtuse

The membership IS who decides when something goes to HOAX or LOL. We can't say it any plainer than that.

No, Springer. Equilateral. Labeling topics like that is wrong, I can't say it any plainer either.

originally posted by: twitchy

originally posted by: Springer
a reply to: twitchy

Are you trying to be obtuse

The membership IS who decides when something goes to HOAX or LOL. We can't say it any plainer than that.

No, Springer. Equilateral. Labeling topics like that is wrong, I can't say it any plainer either.

So if I label arsenic "sugar" you could put it in your coffee without harm? A hoax is is hoax, a lie is a lie. Why would you want to embrace them as truth?

a reply to: DJW001

Your local library is full of lies and hoaxes as well, they don't tell me what is best for me to read, if they did I'd quit going there. What makes you think I'd want to 'embrace' hoaxes and lies when I just don't want uptight wannabe debunkers, or moderators/admns deciding what information is valid on a site that professes to maintain 'editorial agnosticism'. And I don't want whatever squabbles take place between ATS and BIN for example, to affect what sources I'm able to take from to debate here.
I told myself about a page ago it will be a few posts more and one of the amigos will show up defensive and hostile over it, either I'm psychic or it's just that disgustingly predictable.

I have a problem with any information, here of all places, being prepackaged as a lie or a hoax because we're able to figure that out for ourselves, I'm speaking up about it, unless dissent is now to be added to an ever growing list of taboo topics as well.

a reply to: twitchy

Your local library classifies things too! They divide books into "fiction" and "non-fiction." Remember when Jonathan Franzen claimed his book was a memoir? They classified it as "non-fiction." When it turned out that it was all a lie, they reclassified it as "fiction." That is all that is going on here.

Now: why do you resent it when fiction is placed in the appropriate forum? The people who created the fiction know its not true, so they have no reason to complain (unless it robs them of a chance to make money). If you want to play a mental game trying to determine if something outrageous is true or not, you can always visit the "Grey Area" or "Skunkworks." There are no standards of evidence or plausibility there.

originally posted by: DJW001...trying to determine if something outrageous is true or not, you can always visit the "Grey Area" or "Skunkworks." There are no standards of evidence or plausibility there.

Exactly, there's already a forum for this stuff without the asinine labeling.
I've said my piece, knock yourselves out (of your own target audience even).

a reply to: twitchy

I can't believe that you equate classifying a work of fiction as fiction with burning books. You still haven't explained why you resent others pointing out the truth. After all, once Ricky Rocket's adventures on Comet ELEnin have been moved to [HOAX!] you can continue to post on that thread explaining why you think it's for reals. You just won't get any stars for posting there. Is that what this is really about?

a reply to: uktorah

I'm confused ! Did you mean the 'moon hoax' threads are LOL or moon landing threads are LOL?

Well the moon is actually there so it can't be a hoax.

And we did land on the moon so that isn't a hoax.

So yes both should be there.

a reply to: DJW001
Spare me your ridiculous construances and assumptions, I've said my piece.