Young Aussie genius whipping NASA in Moon Hoax Debate!

reply to post by DJW001


Something tells me he's not listening to us anymore.
I can't find a logical reason for it, but that doesn't preclude another dazzling rebuttal from the master.

reply to post by Smack


Don't you guys understand that no one is listening to you anymore? Have you not realized that its the same group starring each other? The thread was hijacked with "We did go to the moon" which makes it less interesting because I have been hearing that my whole life. I saw this in the first 20 pages. Self righteous and pretentious to say the least by the same old so called professional debunker's. The rest of the thread is 200 pages of debunker's in a mad drunken rage of self fulfillment. I like Jarrah White just for that. I cant stand pricks and this thread is full of them.

reply to post by stanislas

The thread was hijacked with "We did go to the moon" which makes it less interesting because I have been hearing that my whole life.

Then stop whining and fight back! Why do you believe the moon landing was a hoax? If you don't, why are you siding with professional liars like Jarrah White?

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by stanislas

 

The thread was hijacked with "We did go to the moon" which makes it less interesting because I have been hearing that my whole life.

Then stop whining and fight back! Why do you believe the moon landing was a hoax? If you don't, why are you siding with professional liars like Jarrah White?

Thats just it mate! You hit my previous post on the head. Can I say your full of it? You asked why I believe in the moon landing hoax. I never said that I did!
I think it is a possible conspiracy... has nothing to do with belief. I look at why this conspiracy exists but I don't try to prove it especially with those that oppose it.

I am not whining and please don't put words in my mouth or try to provoke me. You should respectfully take that back.

You know, about your words regarding fighting back, give yourself a break. Live and let live, be real, be nice and be caring and try to understand people from all levels of knowledge.

My message to the debunker's is: be modest, show humility and respect peoples opinions and their knowledge.
Please dont be a prick.

Originally posted by stanislas
My message to the debunker's is: be modest, show humility and respect peoples opinions and their knowledge.
Please dont be a prick.

I don't think being a prick is out of order. You have to take into account that believers use the dirtiest tactics available. They lie, take things out of contest, refuse to admit their mistakes etc. If this was real life things would get physical really quick.

Originally posted by stanislas

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by stanislas

 

The thread was hijacked with "We did go to the moon" which makes it less interesting because I have been hearing that my whole life.

Then stop whining and fight back! Why do you believe the moon landing was a hoax? If you don't, why are you siding with professional liars like Jarrah White?

Thats just it mate! You hit my previous post on the head. Can I say your full of it? You asked why I believe in the moon landing hoax. I never said that I did!
I think it is a possible conspiracy... has nothing to do with belief. I look at why this conspiracy exists but I don't try to prove it especially with those that oppose it.

I am not whining and please don't put words in my mouth or try to provoke me. You should respectfully take that back.

You know, about your words regarding fighting back, give yourself a break. Live and let live, be real, be nice and be caring and try to understand people from all levels of knowledge.

My message to the debunker's is: be modest, show humility and respect peoples opinions and their knowledge.
Please dont be a prick.

Your first post:

Don't you guys understand that no one is listening to you anymore? Have you not realized that its the same group starring each other? The thread was hijacked with "We did go to the moon" which makes it less interesting because I have been hearing that my whole life. I saw this in the first 20 pages. Self righteous and pretentious to say the least by the same old so called professional debunker's. The rest of the thread is 200 pages of debunker's in a mad drunken rage of self fulfillment. I like Jarrah White just for that. I cant stand pricks and this thread is full of them.

"self righteous and pretentious"?

"so called professional debunker's (sic)"?

"debunker's (sic) in a mad drunken rage"?

"I cant stand pricks and this thread is full of them"?

All of those insults without a single word being spoken to you.

Who's being the prick?

If you say all that, and then come up with the gem "I like Jarrah White just for that.", it's a safe bet you are a hoax believer.

Originally posted by PsykoOps

Originally posted by stanislas
My message to the debunker's is: be modest, show humility and respect peoples opinions and their knowledge.
Please dont be a prick.

I don't think being a prick is out of order. You have to take into account that believers use the dirtiest tactics available. They lie, take things out of contest, refuse to admit their mistakes etc. If this was real life things would get physical really quick.

Thats a fair call. However I feel the same way about religion which to me has the same value as conspiracy theories.

reply to post by Tomblvd


Hey Tom, no problems, your talking to a fellow human being....lol
I will stay by my words though....

Tell me, could you sum up the ATS users in the last 100 posts? Not many right? I am just asking if you could all be more polite, there are many of you and not many of them.

Originally posted by Smack
reply to post by NeedsNoName

 

Don't be shy. Do tell us what it is, please. Is it the ruins of ancient cities? forgotten relics of a long dead alien race? Perhaps the Moon is hollow or is actually a gigantic Dyson sphere. I do enjoy Science fiction.
Please be entertaining.

edit on 22-11-2010 by Smack because: spelling

... wouldnt that be a tiny dyson sphere?

reply to post by stanislas

Thats just it mate! You hit my previous post on the head. Can I say your full of it? You asked why I believe in the moon landing hoax. I never said that I did!
I think it is a possible conspiracy... has nothing to do with belief. I look at why this conspiracy exists but I don't try to prove it especially with those that oppose it.

I am not whining and please don't put words in my mouth or try to provoke me. You should respectfully take that back.

Where do I say that you believe the moon landings were a hoax? You're the one putting words in my mouth. I asked a conditional question of you: if you don't believe the moon landings were a hoax, why are you defending a professional liar like JW? As for hijacking the thread, what is it that you seem to be trying to do? You have contributed nothing to the debate but have attempted to steer it off course. If you have read the entirety of this thread, you would have noticed that I, personally, avoid name calling and juvenile theatrics. I have certainly never called anyone a "prick." I'm not the one who owes an apology here.

I'll take being a prick over being a lying, cheating, swindling and mentally retarded person anyday thanks.

Originally posted by AgentSmith
I'll take being a prick over being a lying, cheating, swindling and mentally retarded person anyday thanks.

I'd take either of them over being a concern troll.

"Why can't you boys fight nice???"

"Don't pick on Foos, he's a good boy."

Must be Foos' mom.

ATTENTION!!!!

For those who seem to have forgotten, here is the topic of this thread:

Young Aussie genius whipping NASA in Moon Hoax Debate!

Please return to the topic: further off topic posts, personal attacks and name-calling can and will be removed and/or warned.

Originally posted by debunky

Originally posted by Smack
reply to post by NeedsNoName

 

Don't be shy. Do tell us what it is, please. Is it the ruins of ancient cities? forgotten relics of a long dead alien race? Perhaps the Moon is hollow or is actually a gigantic Dyson sphere. I do enjoy Science fiction.
Please be entertaining.

edit on 22-11-2010 by Smack because: spelling

... wouldnt that be a tiny dyson sphere?

Poetic License. ...not that it rhymes or is really important. The op decided not to enlighten us....alas.

Originally posted by debunky

Originally posted by Smack
reply to post by NeedsNoName

 

Don't be shy. Do tell us what it is, please. Is it the ruins of ancient cities? forgotten relics of a long dead alien race? Perhaps the Moon is hollow or is actually a gigantic Dyson sphere. I do enjoy Science fiction.
Please be entertaining.

edit on 22-11-2010 by Smack because: spelling

... wouldnt that be a tiny dyson sphere?

Actually, it depends on how big the people who built it are. ;-)

253 pages. I am a little late to the game. I have just finished reviewing Jarrah's 20-part MoonFaker-Radioactive series. I then listened to the 10-part Penn Jillette/Joe Rogan/Phil Plait discussion. (both series are quickly found and available on youtube).

The reason I bring them both up together is because Rogan is hitting on all the main beats that Jarrah White does in his videos. Phil Plait has ostensibly dealt with the same lunar hoax questions a thousand times. Phil should be able to soundly convince me that he knows what he is talking about. Rogan is simply better because he hits on all the same beats that Jarrah White has : cosmic radioactivity, space flight altitudes, van allen altitudes, sun flare data from 1969-1972, etc. while the counter points that Plait puts forth are sounding to me like a pre-approved NASA script.

Jarrah's massive series is definitely worth watching because he has done a stunning job with the presentation of his source material and methodology. And it is his methodology which I find the most convincing. Plait, who is the general of BadAstronomy.com, deals with ALL bad astronomy and does not have a singular focus on Apollo. Whereas Jarrah's video series is heavily focussed on Apollo. It seems as though Jarrah White has done the more homework and makes the more convincing arguments. As stated by Penn on his show "Joe holds his own" in the conspiracy moon hoax discussion with Phil Plait the BadAstronomer himself.

Jarrah White's moon hoax research videos are well worth looking at.

reply to post by SayonaraJupiter


Thank you for you considered opinion. That Aussie accent is irresistible eh?
Yeah those bores at Bad Astronomy aren't nearly as appealing as our young jarred.
They might know more about science over there, but they don't have his charisma.

Well played.

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter

Jarrah's massive series is definitely worth watching because he has done a stunning job with the presentation of his source material and methodology. And it is his methodology which I find the most convincing. *snip*

Seriously? He was caught lying in his 'expert' interview which turns out was his teacher who wen't along with the show. Also as for his methodology it is flawed to hell. His photographs showing how shadows in his opinion should work don't take into account any of the variables. It's like he is actually saying all photographs ever taken in those conditions should look like the few examples he puts forth. For other methodology madness you might want read the whole thread. He has been shown to do 'experiments' to prove his arguments without taking all the conditions into consideration. for not reading the thread.

reply to post by SayonaraJupiter


I suggest you review the 253 pages in this thread. It may help you revise your opinion of Jarrah White.

Let us know how you go

I will give Jarrah White some credit and that is he has managed to collage a massive amount of free hoax theories and distribute them. I wouldn't really have been able to see the huge amount of ideas that have gone into the moon hoax theory without Jarrah White's contribution.

When I first joined this thread I wasn't incredibly well educated on the whole thing, but really most of Jarrah's evidence requires somewhat of a leap of faith. IE the much lauded Elenor Blakley statements and being told to 'read between the lines' ...

We would have to believe that scientists born after the moon 'hoax' were kept in a position where they felt the need not to speak out and leave coded messages for people. So we could ask Blakley what her stance was and she would say 'it happened' but she would really be meaning 'it didn't happen'. What?

Surely it would be a common occurance for young scientists to question this event if this was so??? I can't believe all scientists are born with a the idea in their head that to question the moon landing would be career suicide. It just seems so far fetched to be impossible to believe unless we are to entertain the idea that all the scientists the believe this get shipped to China.