Young Aussie genius whipping NASA in Moon Hoax Debate!

reply to post by Smack


The buzzword in the US is: "Teach the controversy." Rather than focus on facts, they focus on beliefs and opinions. Why teach biology when you can argue about creationism? (Oops, drifting off topic here, sorry.)

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by Smack

 

The buzzword in the US is: "Teach the controversy." Rather than focus on facts, they focus on beliefs and opinions. Why teach biology when you can argue about creationism? (Oops, drifting off topic here, sorry.)

Well, I for one wish they'd teach more biology and chemistry, without the HBs, I'm let defending vaccines and fluoridation.

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by FoosM

 

Your last few posts have been excellent, FoosM. They are focussed, directly on topic and show every indication that you have tried to engage the material.

Thank you...

I came across this just recently.
I'm even curious if someone from these boards is behind it

www.youtube.com...

Its one thing to not agree with somebody and to get into fiery debates, but this... what purpose does it really serve? I'm sure many of you will get a kick out it though

reply to post by FoosM


If you are referring to his account being banned, I am totally opposed to infringements on speech; and in favor of fair use of copyrighted material.
It is a shame that this happened; no matter who it is, we all should, by right, be free to express ourselves.

On the other hand, YouTube is privately owned. Private property owners are under no such obligation to provide guarantees of free speech per se.
If people are annoyed by the business practices of YouTube, then they should find more amenable places to do business.

Originally posted by Smack

You are correct. Many of the universities in the US have started, and suddenly, every HB disappears. Pretty amazing.

Kinda makes you wonder what the hell they teach these kids at school nowadays.

1º “They do not wear watches to check the time; instead they use their cell phones.”
2º “They believe Beethoven is a dog they saw in a film.”
3º “They think Michael Angelo is a computer virus.”
4º “They believe e-mail is ‘too slow’, used as they are to texting through sophisticated mobile phones.”
5º “Very few of them can write cursive.”
6º “They believe Czechoslovakia never existed.”
7º “They think that American companies have always done business in Vietnam.”
8º “They think that Korean cars have always been running in their country.”
9º “They believe that the United States, Canada and Mexico have always been linked to each other by a Free Trade Agreement.”

www.cuba.cu...

[edit on 27.8.2010 by bokonon2010]

Originally posted by FoosM

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by FoosM

 

Your last few posts have been excellent, FoosM. They are focussed, directly on topic and show every indication that you have tried to engage the material.

Thank you...

I came across this just recently.
I'm even curious if someone from these boards is behind it

www.youtube.com...

Its one thing to not agree with somebody and to get into fiery debates, but this... what purpose does it really serve? I'm sure many of you will get a kick out it though

Foos is referring to someone making a joke Jarrah White account and making a Jarrah White virtual sex video.

It really means nothing other than Jarrah is someone who responds to being wound up, and therefore will attract idiots.

The end.

I really wish persons wouldn't make big out of events like this ... Just stating in advance ... just because someone is the victim of a practical joke doesn't make them any more or less right or wrong.

reply to post by Pinke

Foos is referring to someone making a joke Jarrah White account and making a Jarrah White virtual sex video.

Satire and parody is covered under free speech.

Originally posted by FoosM

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by FoosM

 

Your last few posts have been excellent, FoosM. They are focussed, directly on topic and show every indication that you have tried to engage the material.

Thank you...

I came across this just recently.
I'm even curious if someone from these boards is behind it

www.youtube.com...

Its one thing to not agree with somebody and to get into fiery debates, but this... what purpose does it really serve? I'm sure many of you will get a kick out it though

Considering all the vitriol he demonstrates toward Windley, Plaitt, and the rest, he shouldn't be suprised when someone takes a swipe at him.

IIRC, Jarrah actually accused Windley of destroying his computer remotely online!

You don't have to push many buttons to push Jarrah into full meltdown mode.

Hey, ATS team!

I may have discovered further proof of the Apollo missions on the Moon...

...this link was transmitted to me through a hyper-space wormhole time-traveling thingie....(at least that's what they told me. Of course, I could be wrong).

It's from some time in the future, and the Earth's Moon has been taken over...the "alien" dude on the left is the real-estate agent.

"O-Dor", from Uranus.

www.gocomics.com...

"A good intention clothes itself with power.” --Ralph Waldo Emerson

Steely Dan in 1996 playing IGY from Donald Fagen's Nightfly,

In March 1950, at a gathering of eight or ten top scientists (including Lloyd Berkner, S. Fred Singer, and Harry Vestine) in James Van Allen's living room, someone suggested that with the development of new tools such as rockets, radar and computers, the time was ripe for a worldwide geophysical year.

From the March 1950 meeting, Lloyd Berkner and other participants proposed to the International Council of Scientific Unions that an International Geophysical Year (IGY) be planned for 1957—58, during an approaching period of maximum solar activity.

April 11, 1957, the U.S. Navy tested a satellite[clarification needed] at an altitude of 126 mi.

October 4, 1957, the USSR launched the world's first artificial satellite, Sputnik 1.

November 8, 1957, U.S. Secretary of Defense Neil McElroy instructed the U.S. Army to use a modified Jupiter-C rocket to launch a satellite as part of the IGY.

January 31, 1958, the U.S. launched Explorer 1.

July 29, 1958, the U.S. created the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA).

IGY? IDK!

Given the state of science in the late 1950s, the timing of the IGY was highly opportune. Research technologies and tools had advanced greatly since the 1930s, allowing scientists a scope of investigation without precedent. Cosmic ray recorders, spectroscopes, and radiosonde balloons had opened the upper atmosphere to detailed exploration, while newly developed electronic computers facilitated the analysis of large data sets. But the most dramatic of the new technologies available to the IGY was the rocket. Post-World War II developments in rocketry for the first time made the exploration of space a real possibility; working with the new technologies, Soviet and American participants sent artificial satellites into earth orbit. In successfully launching science into space, the IGY may have scored its greatest breakthrough. Overall, the IGY was highly successful in achieving its goals, which were summed up in an NAS IGY Program Report:

...to observe geophysical phenomena and to secure data from all parts of the world; to conduct this effort on a coordinated basis by fields, and in space and time, so that results could be collated in a meaningful manner.

I find it interesting that we went from a global effort in the pursuit of knowledge to a politically motivated "Space Race" between two "Super Powers".

Again, why was it a race?
What were they really racing for?
What was the winner supposed to get?



www.nationalacademies.org...
en.wikipedia.org...

Foos has sunk so low he is debating using music videos.

(When he gets to the dangers of radiation again, I hope he posts "The Safety Dance"!

Originally posted by FoosM
"A good intention clothes itself with power.” --Ralph Waldo Emerson

Steely Dan in 1996 playing IGY from Donald Fagen's Nightfly,




IGY? IDK!

Yes, we know. There's a lot of things you "DK".

I find it interesting that we went from a global effort in the pursuit of knowledge to a politically motivated "Space Race" between two "Super Powers".

I find it interesting that all you have to bring to the hoax table are weak "IDK" questions.

Again, why was it a race?

Because there were two groups, one trying to get someplace before the other?

That's the standard definition of "race".

What were they really racing for?

To get to the moon first?

"IDK" why that is such a difficult concept for you.

What was the winner supposed to get?

An immense propaganda victory, a place in history, a greatly increased headstart on interplanetary space travel (since squandered), etc., etc....


Are you trying to make a point here, or do you just like Steely Dan? (NTTAWWT)

reply to post by Tomblvd

Foos has sunk so low he is debating using music videos.

Oh IDK. Perhaps that was his way of extending an olive branch. You know, maybe he's saying he's been wrong all along and that he apologizes for being so utterly and completely ignorant.

IDK.

reply to post by FoosM


I was wondering how long it would take. He was using footages from other sources than nasa that are not public domain and sound tracks from various places. Also the whole thing about fair use is that youtube doesn't allow it. Everyone knows that.

reply to post by andromedios


Wrong thread, dude. You want the one next door - therapeutic Psycho-babble thread.

k. thanks.

reply to post by andromedios


Huh?

Originally posted by Smack
reply to post by andromedios

 

Wrong thread, dude. You want the one next door - therapeutic Psycho-babble thread.

k. thanks.

IDK

Maybe he's showing us what this thread would be like if Foos did not use youtube vids.

reply to post by andromedios


ROFL the most productive thing to come out of this thread yet!

reply to post by andromedios


Could you condense this a bit so we can get the gist of it? I've got another 300 pages of "The Guns of August" to finish up by next week and would appreciate a precis.

So, has Jarrah come up with any new arguments recently?

I mean new, not recycled from someone else.

Also, do the Jarrah fans have any examples of JW making corrections to mistakes he's made? Not stealth corrections, but "I've been told I made a mistake in the Ham radio video, and after investigating it, they were right and I did make a mistake."

That'd be nice to see.