Young Aussie genius whipping NASA in Moon Hoax Debate!

Originally posted by Tomblvd
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.

He has actually.

I can't dig them up just now, but he has stated in videos where he has made small errors or corrections. He doesn't really address his leaps of logic or inability to explain evidence. IE ... Satweaver's photos where he responded by telling Satweaver to f-off instead of addressing the content.

Usually he blames his opponents though or such like, and doesn't seem to give them the benefit of the doubt he provides himself.

Edit: Not sure of any new arguments though!



[edit on 28-8-2010 by Pinke]

Originally posted by Pinke

Originally posted by Tomblvd
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.

He has actually.

I can't dig them up just now, but he has stated in videos where he has made small errors or corrections. He doesn't really address his leaps of logic or inability to explain evidence. IE ... Satweaver's photos where he responded by telling Satweaver to f-off instead of addressing the content.

Usually he blames his opponents though or such like, and doesn't seem to give them the benefit of the doubt he provides himself.

Edit: Not sure of any new arguments though!



[edit on 28-8-2010 by Pinke]

I understand what you are saying, but I don't consider that admitting an error. (although admittedly I never specified that). He did much the same with the Ham radio video. After first showing the Ham radio bands and then basing an entire 10 minute video accusing them of making the evidence up, once he realizes he screwed the pooch, he just makes another 10 minute video mentioning the mistake followed with the now-famous JW "HOWEVER", where he then goes off in a completely different direction.

I just wondered if he ever admitted error and left it at that.

As another aside, have we failed to completely debunk any of JW's videos? This has really been a comprehensive debunking.

reply to post by Tomblvd

As another aside, have we failed to completely debunk any of JW's videos? This has really been a comprehensive debunking.

Vexing, it is though....like the game "Whack-a-Mole".

Or, trying to put toothpaste back into a squeeze tube....EVERY inane "claim" in every "JW" video has been addressed, and demolished, yet the insanity continues, always with the "shifting goalposts" strategy.

Promulgated by a few fervent sycophants, as well.......

I think it's high time we pick a champion to debate in the debate forum. I don't see any moon hoax issues there.

Foo vrs. ___ My pick is Tomblvd. In my opinion he has dealt the most devastating rhetorical blows. But really all of you guys are great - DJW001, Weedwacker, AgentSmith...

Any of you guys would blow him out of the water in a moderated debate - especially if he's not allowed to use the "argumentum ad YouTubem" crutch.

reply to post by Smack


YOUR idea.....so, Presto!...

YOU'RE nominated!!

Perhaps we should nominate a person each week to take FoosM's place instead? Devil's advocate perhaps.

So this week Smack can be FoosM and try to convince us that the moon landing is fake.

Originally posted by Smack
I think it's high time we pick a champion to debate in the debate forum. I don't see any moon hoax issues there.

Foo vrs. ___ My pick is Tomblvd. In my opinion he has dealt the most devastating rhetorical blows. But really all of you guys are great - DJW001, Weedwacker, AgentSmith...

Any of you guys would blow him out of the water in a moderated debate - especially if he's not allowed to use the "argumentum ad YouTubem" crutch.

Actually, what made this thread so devastating to Jarrah's claims is that there are so many people here with different skill sets. I'm a dentist, so I have a decent background in radiation, an amateur (prosumer?) photographer, so I can deal with photographic issues, and an amateur astronomer. But I'm weak in physics and anything to do with math.

So a group approach is by far the best.

Which brings up a point I've been thinking about recently. Jarrah absolutely refuses to leave the safe-haven of Youtube to debate his detractors, fearing he wouldn't get a fair shake at places like Bad Astronomy or ApolloHoax. Why doesn't one of his acolytes invite him here, to an undoubtedly friendlier forum, to debate his issues? The mods here do a great job of keeping things on topic and not allowing them to get personal.

I can't see why this wouldn't be the perfect place for Jarrah to come and finally put all his cards on the table.

What do you guys (and gals) think?

I have an idea ...

Jarrah has his paypal account for his trip to the moon ...

I'll perhaps paypal him $5 or some such to invite him to a debate with perhaps a small group from this thread?

Great ideas, except for weedwacker's...
I'd be a terrible pick to debate this issue. I've learned a lot, but no thanks. I'm afraid I'd embarrass you guys.

But perhaps we could collaborate on strategies, information, etc, thru the mail.

How 'bout it Foosm? Write your pal Jarrah White and tell him to bring it on!

To be honest ... I came to this thread being slightly unsure. I'm leaving without a doubt the moon was landed on.

I would quite happily offer Jarrah cash for every round of debating he could win against the intelligent people in this thread; each round being based off Jarrah's own videos. The decision would be made by a pool of voters chosen at random from this site I suppose.

I seriously doubt Jarrah could pull results in a structured debate like this, but I would very much enjoy reading/watching the contents of such a debate.

Originally posted by Pinke
I'll perhaps paypal him $5 or some such to invite him to a debate with perhaps a small group from this thread?

I suspect (hope) you aren't serious, but just in case - I am dead set against rewarding anyone for their deceit.

JW has been challenged to debate at moderated forums before. But on the very few occasions he has agreed, it ends the same way.. he (deliberately) gets angry and abusive, posts obscenities, and then uses the excuse that he was being suppressed for his views. Check IMDB, strangely!, for an example:

www.imdb.com...

It's a long and tiresome thread, so I've linked directly to a page showing the sort of thing I mean. Note the deleted posts.

I guess IMDB is in on the conspiracy too...


Let's face it - there is nothing left except a few well-known deniers flogging the same old garbage. Anyone new to the topic sees through the rubbish in a short time - have you noticed how few posters have been attracted to this thread, and that most who have, have turned *against* the deniers?

While the Internet does provide a 'forum' for the deniers to *try* to convince the gullible and uninformed (and make a few dollars or gain a bit of 'fame') they can ONLY do that while hiding behind the protection of sites where they can control the debate - Youtube being the prime example. The rest of the Internet, where forums are moderated and at least a semblance of proper debate takes place, is where he and his ilk get shredded. Again and again.


[edit on 28-8-2010 by CHRLZ]

reply to post by CHRLZ


I see your point, but wouldn't it be a coup for ATS?

I'd like to see it happen, regardless of the outcome.
One more nail in the MOON hoax coffin, eh?

p.s. didn't mean to leave you out of my list earlier. You've been great too. I've learned a lot from you guys.

Originally posted by CHRLZ

It's a long and tiresome thread, so I've linked directly to a page showing the sort of thing I mean. Note the deleted posts.

I can confirm that thread. Jarrah became quite belligerent and nasty. And was eventually banned. IIRC, ALL the deleted posts were his.

Let's face it - there is nothing left except a few well-known deniers flogging the same old garbage. Anyone new to the topic sees through the rubbish in a short time - have you noticed how few posters have been attracted to this thread, and that most who have, have turned *against* the deniers?

[edit on 28-8-2010 by CHRLZ]

Have you also compared his last post to that thread with most of Foos' posts? A dozen argumentum ad youtubum followed by page after page of cut-and-paste nonsense?

It looks a bit.........familiar.

Originally posted by Tomblvd

Originally posted by CHRLZ

It's a long and tiresome thread, so I've linked directly to a page showing the sort of thing I mean. Note the deleted posts.

I can confirm that thread. Jarrah became quite belligerent and nasty. And was eventually banned. IIRC, ALL the deleted posts were his.

Let's face it - there is nothing left except a few well-known deniers flogging the same old garbage. Anyone new to the topic sees through the rubbish in a short time - have you noticed how few posters have been attracted to this thread, and that most who have, have turned *against* the deniers?

[edit on 28-8-2010 by CHRLZ]

Have you also compared his last post to that thread with most of Foos' posts? A dozen argumentum ad youtubum followed by page after page of cut-and-paste nonsense?

It looks a bit.........familiar.

Risking admonishment, but I think addressing and considering motives is important...

Yes, the modus operandi is eerily familiar, but then.. it is the method of choice for snake-oil-pushers - original thought is not their forte, it seems. But I do have strong suspicions about how these posters are *fed* the stuff they present. There have been a few notable occasions where they are busted parroting (exactly) other posts on other forums (without citation, of course), and then there's the strange way their tone, spelling and grammar seems to change suddenly and periodically....

These folk include our very own OP (who spammed the op to many forums and boards), ppk (who says he lives in Sydney..), FoosM (aka FoosMasoos et al) and others like Cosmored (at unexplained-mysteries et al)...

It's hard not to suspect a conspiracy in the way JW is being 'promoted'.. and it's not hard to point out other examples of those who are spamming this board and pretending to be an unbiased observer .

A special hi to freespirit. (Don't know why I just thought of him......)

Originally posted by Smack
I see your point, but wouldn't it be a coup for ATS?

I think you would just see a repeat of what happened at IMDB, or BAUT or several other locations.. I can't see ATS ever relegating the hoax believers to the Hoax category, if only for the reason that would confuse everyone with the double negative...

I'd like to see it happen, regardless of the outcome.
One more nail in the MOON hoax coffin, eh?

I guess so, but it would just mean more repeating of the same old.. IF a denier would ever agree to debating under the moderation of a recognised scientist, or even engineer, then it might count... Do you think that might happen? I don't. They run for it as soon as there is a sniff of credible expertise.

p.s. didn't mean to leave you out of my list earlier. You've been great too. I've learned a lot from you guys.

No prob's - I've been quiet on this for a while anyways. Still have to get off my backside and finish the radiation stuff - although i see I've been largely made redundant by some of the excellent work done by others in the latter pages here..

cheers

As for this one, I can hear the soft tones of a large lady rhythmically orating...

I'm not actually expecting Jarrah to accept the challenge I suppose.

But he always complains about people dodging him, so I think it would be a win for ATS.

My expectation is he will say that he doesn't 'win' anything from communicating with a bunch of trolls or some such.

Originally posted by Tomblvd

Actually, what made this thread so devastating to Jarrah's claims is that there are so many people here with different skill sets.

You are overestimating the effect you have.

Most people who watch Jarrah White's videos won't read this thread.

Originally posted by Exuberant1
Most people who watch Jarrah White's videos won't read this thread.

Which is why he hides there.

BTW, Exuberant1, are you ever going to add anything of ontopic substance to the thread? Still haven't committed yourself to the one biggie that really nails it for you?

We're ready and willing to debate anyone who has a grasp of the topics.

...

(did I say the wrong thing..?)

Originally posted by Exuberant1

Originally posted by Tomblvd

Actually, what made this thread so devastating to Jarrah's claims is that there are so many people here with different skill sets.

You are overestimating the effect you have.

Most people who watch Jarrah White's videos won't read this thread.

Most persons who agree with Jarrah sit on the side lines and merely state 'yeah go Jarrah! We agree!' They don't add anything to the debate or show any understanding of it.

Some people are just blatantly anti-government etc to a fault. They will believe any information that states the government is bad/evil/wrong.

It's not different from living room psychics and channeling persons who refuse to go somewhere a skeptic might see them but quite happily charge $135 an hour for clients. There's a few of them around here, and I was recently invited to attend one of their meetings.

I was respectful but I wasn't not invited back.

Originally posted by Exuberant1

Originally posted by Tomblvd

Actually, what made this thread so devastating to Jarrah's claims is that there are so many people here with different skill sets.

You are overestimating the effect you have.

Most people who watch Jarrah White's videos won't read this thread.

At least you can admit that those who read this thread will see through JW's nonsense.

If he had balls, and genuinely believed he was right, he'd link to it (and other similar threads) on his Youtube channel and show why he is right.

Of course i think he is intelligent enough to know he is wrong and is just doing this for attention/money/fame/whatever.

Its kinda like the online version of starting your own cult...

[edit on 29-8-2010 by zvezdar]