Young Aussie genius whipping NASA in Moon Hoax Debate!

Note how the PPK character has now deviated wildly from the videos showing the falling over now he's ideas have been proven wrong, ignored a request for he's credentials or relevant experience and is now reposting videos from before in a vague attempt to change the subject to something he is more familaiar with - watching moving pictures with sound.
I think it's clear that PPK is trolling, the only other alternative cannot be stated as it would breach board T&Cs.

OMG ! mythbusters Pwnd !

I'm sorry, but how many of you big arm chair critics flew half a world away to do this. (this is one of five videos)



[edit on 28-7-2010 by ppk55]

Originally posted by AgentSmith

Originally posted by Pinke
Here is how Jarrah deals with people. I have only censored a swear word.

This is the video link:
il.youtube.com...

I'm glad you posted that Pinke as it's an excellent opportunity to remind Foosm that the expert was just Jarrah's school teacher who was acting out a part for his school project. Foosm keeps trying to forget about this, so I feel it's my duty to keep reminding him. Credit to CHRLZ for finding this:

He required footage of a so called ‘expert’ to support the story line he wished to persue, and as a teacher (at the coledge at that time) he asked if I would be willing to do the interview for his assignment. I agreed as he did not have access to a ‘real authority’. The reality is that I am not even a professional photographer, the interesting thing is that when a person is portrayed as an expert on film, people tend to believe it (I am a fine arts teacher).
educationforum.ipbhost.com...

[edit on 28-7-2010 by AgentSmith]

I havent forgotten about it,
Jarrah mentioned it in his video
And I dont see what the issue is.
Some of you guys are making a mountain out of a molehill.
I mean if this is the only thing to get Jarrah on, then well the case
for Apollo is on thin ice

So mention it all you want, but when people watch his video,
they will laugh that people are making it sound like a conspiracy.

reply to post by AgentSmith


Dear Agent Smith, maybe you should get a bit of a contribution level before pointing fingers. Just a suggestion.

reply to post by ppk55


Contribution level? I was around long before your precious contribution level was introduced and I only returned recently after a break of several years (after it was introduced). I like how you're avoiding the direct questions I have asked of you, I'm not sure how the ATS 'Contribution Level' qualifies you in any way, so I ask once more - what are your credentials and relevant experience in this field?

[edit on 28-7-2010 by AgentSmith]

I'm sorry but every other day I come to these forums I see this thread constantly up on page one and I wonder why?

Here is the topic of this thread:
"Young Aussie genius whipping NASA in Moon Hoax Debate!"

He is clearly not whipping NASA so why do you people continue to debate over such a useless topic?
I swear there are reverse disinfo agents all over the place. Whether or not someone wants to believe we went to the moon as the wrong debate to be having.
There are other myths that permeate minds that are far more harmful.

Originally posted by AgentSmith
Contribution level? I was around long before your precious contribution level was introduced

Ok then, since you joined in 2003, what do you think of the above videos ?
pretty simple question.

edit: I mean come on, a guy that confronts plait and the mythbusters .. what did you ever do that matches that ?

[edit on 28-7-2010 by ppk55]

You have avoided my question AGAIN PPK! WHAT ARE YOUR CREDENTIALS AND RELEVANT EXPERIENCE ON THE SUBJECT?

Originally posted by ppk55
edit: I mean come on, a guy that confronts plait and the mythbusters .. what did you ever do that matches that ?

I spent an evening with Buzz Aldrin and Charlie Duke (amongst others), and actually spent several hours sat next to Buzz having dinner discussing the Moon program. I even took the opportunity to congratulate him on smacking Sibrel.
Does that qualify as 'matching' that?

Originally posted by AgentSmith
reply to post by ppk55

 

I'm not sure how the ATS 'Contribution Level' qualifies you in any way, so I ask once more
[edit on 28-7-2010 by AgentSmith]

I think it proves that he can find the "Flag this post" button.

So Pkk55:
What do you do when you trip, and fall over, and realize that you might hurt yourself? I take it you stop falling and righten yourself up again, yes?

reply to post by FoosM

Some of you guys are making a mountain out of a molehill.
I mean if this is the only thing to get Jarrah on, then well the case
for Apollo is on thin ice

WHAT? The only case for the historicity of the Apollo program is that Jarrah White lied about the credentials of one of his experts in one of his videos? So all the witnesses, documents, physical artifacts, testimonies, visual records and data don't make a case?

As for making a mountain out of a molehill: you spot a reflection of the Earth on an astronaut's helmet, claim it was a spotlight without any evidence, then conclude that proves it was "faked." Every tiny detail you misunderstand is blown up into "proof" of a gigantic conspiracy involving:
NASA
CIA
Walt Disney
Stanley Kubrick
Every news outlet on the planet
Every newspaper on the planet
Every astronomer on the planet
Every geologist on the planet
Every engineer on the planet...
I could go on and on. Who seems to be the one making mountains of molehills?

Originally posted by Pinke
I don't get you really ether. You still haven't altered your theories/contridictions/answered to the various facts you've posted that are false or incorrect.
----
I dont see what was false or incorrect about the issues I pointed out.
Some issues I pointed out were posed as questions. As a matter of fact, I ask many questions. You cant debunk a question.
Some people have answered some of my questions, by offering their theories or views on the issue. Some questions were clearly answered and backed by evidence. Like the white blob being Neil Armstrong. So when questions are answered backed by evidence and not speculation, what more to say about it? I dont apologize for asking questions. Those questions that are left open, I may return to ask them again in the future for new opinions. Or to show, that the questions are still open.

Now if you want to get deeper into certain points I raised, please do. Maybe you can provide evidence that will change my mind. But if its just speculation, then sorry, its just speculation.


The questions:

1. How can you allege that the idea that NASA and the government would murder their own astronauts is "a particularly loathsome accusation", when in fact the CIA's General William H. Craig came up with Operation Dirty Trick: a proposal to blame John Glenn's possible death aboard Friendship 7 on the Cubans and use his death to justify all out war?

I'm sure there's some buzzword for this ... straw person or whatever but it's a catch-22 unanswerable question. Not because its smart. Not because it brings facts, but because it's an open ended question. I could use this logic to say that any cooporation or government did or didn't do something. Would it make it any more real? No. Does Phil's answer to this question bare any significance. NO!

No its not unanswerable to Phil Plait who brought up the issue.
He claims that governments wouldn't kill their own people for political
leverage or power plays. He is clearly wrong. Jarrah simply pointed out that indeed governments will assassinate their own if it advances their agenda. Phil must acknowledge this for his own personal credibility.

2. How can you frequently allege that Bill Kaysing said "any kind of space travel is impossible", when in the exact same interview that you refer to Kaysing explicitly says "I will concede that certain unmanned vehicles might have made it to the moon. The Russians are supposed to have sent some unmanned vehicles to the moon. And possibly our Surveyor did land on the moon."?

I still need to watch all the way through this section of the videos but ... so what? People make mistakes. People sometimes say the wrong thing. Jarrah has done it. You've done it plenty of times in this thread and not answered to it, yet you still retain your own integrity. Does this make Phil's points less valid? No.

Does this make Bill Kaysing any more reliable? No.

Again, goes to the credibility of Phil Plait as a self proclaimed or anointed mouthpiece for moonlanding conspiracy debunkers. If Plait had put in his BOOK that Kaysing said space travel is impossible, then me must acknowledge he has wronged a person publicly publicly. I dont recall Kaysing ever attacking, or personally addressing any issues towards Plait, so why does Plait have to say things about Kaysing that are not true? Does that help his cause? No, it kills his credibility.

3. How can you allege that there were no major solar flares during the Apollo missions when NOAA's Comprehensive Flare Index for Major Flares explicitly logs 30 major x-ray solar flares during the time eight of those missions were supposedly in cislunar space?

There are pages and pages on this stuff. So very many pages. Again, I'm no physicist, but the information is freely available for Jarrah to read and accept or reject.

Well obviously Jarrah has rejected what information that is out there. Or doesn't consider that information complete. Do you know what information is out there for people to look into? Have you compared that data with what Jarrah and others have been using? Because you have stated information is 'freely' out there. So, please share where this info is. Otherwise, to tell someone else to just go look for something, when you dont know yourself what is out there, is a weak move to make. Jarrah has stated what information he is using. Why dont I hear you give your opinion about that. Do your trust information from NOAA?

Here is how Jarrah deals with people. I have only censored a swear word.

This is the video link:
il.youtube.com...

These are the comments:

Satweavers 2 years ago
Once again, Jarrah. You try so hard to avoid the obvious. Check my evidence. Go to PhotoBucket dot com. Search "satweavers", click "view satweaavers album", select "Moon Hoax" then look at sub albums, "Moon Light", "Moon Shadow" and "Astronaut Shadows". Without any trick photography or plastic buckets, the mystery of the shadows is fully explained.

#
WhiteJarrah
2 years ago
"My goodness, Jarrah. You try so hard to avoid the obvious. Check my evidence."
I've seen you're feeble excuses a million times, I am tired and have more important things to do than give my time of day to propagandists like you. So please, f**k off.
WhiteJarrah 2 years ago

Jarrah's response isn't changing my mind about anything. Phil was much nicer to Jarrah than Jarrah was to satweavers. I'm not even a Phil Plait fan.

Its not up to Jarrah to change your mind. Phil Plait could be a great guy, doesnt mean I agree with him. This is not a popularity contest. My mind was made up long before seeing Jarrah's videos. Jarrah's videos filled in the blanks that I had, namely, why the trip is impossible. It was his radiation series that stood out for me. Other videos ranged from weak to strong. Particularly photos and videos are difficult to make cases for because we dont know what technology was used to fake it. That would be like showing AVATAR to viewers in 1980 and asking them how it was done. For a long time people didnt understand how the light saber effect was done. Obviously NASA and the DoD have access to tech that we are not aware of, and could use it to fake the missions

Originally posted by FoosM

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by FoosM

 

No the post is not misleading. I dont know why you insist it is. The link to the quote is there, and I didnt link it to you.
It wasnt even a reply to you. What you think you are the only one who thought Earth light has influence on the moon?

Because I was the only one on this board that made the assertion that the blue light you claimed is a "spotlight" was the Earth. You have just stated the reasons why the post was misleading.

You just stated the reason why you were confused

And if I was confused, I suspect others were confused as well. That is the whole point: why are you trying to confuse people, FoosM?

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by FoosM

 

Some of you guys are making a mountain out of a molehill.
I mean if this is the only thing to get Jarrah on, then well the case
for Apollo is on thin ice

WHAT? The only case for the historicity of the Apollo program is that Jarrah White lied about the credentials of one of his experts in one of his videos?

Please explain how Jarrah lied. I mean really, point out the actual lie.

Look I don't mean to be rude, but can one of you apollo believers please just give a detailed debunk of these videos (from jarrah white) 'The Aussie Genius' ? Or is that too much ?
I'm being serious. People who doubt the apollo landings are always being asked to provide proof, well, here's your chance for the apollo believers. Are you up to it ?

ps. you may have to watch them all ... ouch

Originally posted by FoosM

I tell you, this series of videos reveal Phil Plait and his buddy Adam Savage as lying cowards. Well done J.W. Maybe defenders on this forum are willing to answer the questions that Plait has a hard time answering.

[edit on 28-7-2010 by ppk55]

PPK, stop avoiding the questions I have been asking you for a couple of pages now - What ARE YOUR Credentials? What is YOUR experience? What have YOU ever done in relation to this? Stop posting videos and then running away when you're asked anything. ANSWER THE QUESTIONS.

reply to post by ppk55


OH, I would LOVE to tear into all of those!!!

At the moment, I can't listen to them....(in any case, it is also extremely painful to endure the "White Noise" spewing form Jarrah's mouth...)

So, not being able to hear, unfortunately I will have to defer, for now, to others....and I am CERTAIN many will be able to tear Jarrah new one, very, very quickly.

He is such an easy target, since he's so ignorant. His blind arrogance is his ultimate downfall.

I do find it astonishing that a person like YOU, ppk55, can be fooled so easily by that wanker....it reflects poorly on your skills of observation and reason ability.

Originally posted by weedwhacker
OH, I would LOVE to tear into all of those!!!

You know what, why don't you 'tear into all of those' . All the videos are posted above.
One last thing, your posting style is uncanny, it's almost like CHRLZ is back.
Anyway, when you decide you have the guts to debunk the 5 videos above, let me know. x

edit: can you give me an ETA of when you will 'tear into all of those' ?

edit again: for all those curious of what weedwhacker is going to tear into .. the videos are posted above

[edit on 28-7-2010 by ppk55]

Originally posted by FoosM

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by FoosM

 

Some of you guys are making a mountain out of a molehill.
I mean if this is the only thing to get Jarrah on, then well the case
for Apollo is on thin ice

WHAT? The only case for the historicity of the Apollo program is that Jarrah White lied about the credentials of one of his experts in one of his videos?

Please explain how Jarrah lied. I mean really, point out the actual lie.

Here's one you weren't expecting:

Speaking of correcting matters, you should tell that Jarrah person he has got things backward in that silly moonfaker clip.

He says that Jay Windley is a "self-proclaimed aerospace engineer". This is actually wrong, since Jay actually holds aerospace engineering qualifications and works in aerospace engineering. I think what Jarrah (I wanna be 007) White meant to say was Ralph Rene is a self-proclaimed... something, since he is self-taught in the 'academic' matters such as physics, engineering, etc. Rene does not hold any academic qualifications.

References:

ralphrene.com...

en.wikipedia....wiki...

educationforum.ipbhost.com...

No need to repeat how he used his art teacher as an expert on photography. Jarrah does tend to stretch the truth.

reply to post by DJW001


So you don't want to talk about operation 'dirty trick' that's in Jarrah's video above either ?

edit Adam Savage: "We might be wrong, and I'm ok with that."

[edit on 28-7-2010 by ppk55]