Young Aussie genius whipping NASA in Moon Hoax Debate!

Originally posted by 000063
reply to post by backinblack

 

I like how the rest of the post apparently seems to have vanished. The parts with the scientists saying Jarrah is wrong.

It didn't vanish mate, it's still clearly there..

I just pointed out the 20 lines of useless rant you had to read to get to any actual debate..

Many wouldn't bother..
If the first chapter of a book is crap do you go on reading? I don't.

reply to post by backinblack


I see, in your "quoting", you excised the rest, and the VERY pertinent YouTube transcripts....for those who simply CANNOT (for whatever reason) see those videos.

I am led to understand that in some countries, people have to pay exorbitant rates for their Internet access.....and they are somehow billed by the data bit (or something)....by the numbers of kilo- or megabytes they download...which videos eat up rather quickly.

But, your deceptive tactics are clearly in view, yet again.

Bravo.

reply to post by FoosM

Nataylor says there was no SEVA on Apollo 12.
Do you agree or disagree?

Do you still beat your wife, FoosM? True or false? Do you really think anyone here is going to fall for such a sophomoric tactic as your excluded middle fallacy?

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by backinblack

 

I see, in your "quoting", you excised the rest, and the VERY pertinent YouTube transcripts....for those who simply CANNOT (for whatever reason) see those videos.
I am led to understand that in some countries, people have to pay exorbitant rates for their Internet access.....and they are somehow billed by the data bit (or something)....by the numbers of kilo- or megabytes they download...which videos eat up rather quickly.
But, your deceptive tactics are clearly in view, yet again.
Bravo.

Obviously you don't bother with reading posts or you would notice I actually addressed part of that information you posted..
But then it's more like you to jump in and rant without actually looking..

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by FoosM

 

Nataylor says there was no SEVA on Apollo 12.
Do you agree or disagree?

Do you still beat your wife, FoosM? True or false? Do you really think anyone here is going to fall for such a sophomoric tactic as your excluded middle fallacy?

I didn't know Foosm's wife was the topic of the thread..

BTW DJ, do you beat your wife and kids.??

Originally posted by backinblack

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by FoosM

 

Nataylor says there was no SEVA on Apollo 12.
Do you agree or disagree?

Do you still beat your wife, FoosM? True or false? Do you really think anyone here is going to fall for such a sophomoric tactic as your excluded middle fallacy?

I didn't know Foosm's wife was the topic of the thread..

BTW DJ, do you beat your wife and kids.??

You're missing the point again. The excluded middle fallacy is a trick question. It's like the old playground chestnut "Does you mother know you're gay?" Whether you say yes or no, you've confirmed that you like dudes.

The correct form is "still beat your..." That makes it so whatever the person answers, they're validating the premise that they're a domestic abuser.

reply to post by 000063


Where's the trick in asking if there was an SEVA or not??

It's supposed to be history and well documented unlike Foosm's personal life..

reply to post by backinblack
See, that's what you should've asked in the first place.

Originally posted by 000063
reply to post by backinblack

 

See, that's what you should've asked in the first place.

Really??
It's a yes/no question...
I don't personally see the trick involved...

Originally posted by backinblack

Really??
It's a yes/no question...
I don't personally see the trick involved...

A yes/no question amongst an issue such as this IS a trick question.

An example:
Is radiation deadly, yes or no?

You expect us to answer yes, because if we say no, you will counter that we are either delusional or liars and reference to something like Nagasaki or Chernobyl saying, "Oh, so radiation isn't deadly?"

Then, if we try to explain why it wouldn't be deadly in this specific example, you'll simply retort, "I'm only asking, is radiation deadly, yes or no?"

This is the issue of the "excluded middle fallacy" that was addressed earlier. If we answer in a specific way, you must give us the means in which to defend it.

Again, I'm not citing you specifically in this example, but this sort of thing has happened in this thread many times, but if you refuse to heed my warning of such questions, then you are equally accountable for answering these questions like:

Has any other developed country as a whole proven that the missions were faked, yes or no?

Originally posted by FoosM

Why are you so afraid to challenge NASA's claims?

Because I don't want to look like an idiot--NASA has a lot more quality evidence supporting they did it than HBs have disproving they did. Why are you so unwilling to support NASA's claim DESPITE evidence supporting it--and not just from NASA? Why do you keep acting as if no evidence was given to you and asking, "Where is the evidence?" Upon being given evidence, you have not once disputed it, but simply asked for more. Stop asking impossible questions and start answering some of our questions.

So list the outside evidence.
Let me start you off:

Another independent nation or group has filmed or photographed Apollo remains on the moon.
Answer?

Another independent nation, or group has been able to land on the moon.
Answer?

Moon rocks brought back from the Apollo missions could be compared with other moon rocks that geologists found prior to the missions.
True or False?

Start with those plz.

True that other nations have, as I mentioned in a previous post; true that another nation has landed on the moon; true that moon rocks can be compared with moon rocks--in fact, they prefer it that way. Now I've answered your questions, so you answer mine.

For the majority of the WORLD (not just the USA), the belief that the Apollo missions were real is a fact (or accepted as one).
True or False?

No HB has been able to explain, in detail, how every aspect of the Apollo missions were faked, and that includes the deception of not only the USA, but the world.
True or False?

Despite the "absence of evidence," there is still a lot of evidence present that proves that the Apollo missions were real.
True or False?

I'll shall use the same format you used with me, and I demand it be answered the same way, lest you admit that asking questions in such a manner is a trap.

Okay, in case HBs haven't notice, your questions have received answers and you've ignored the answers in their entirety and/or simply moved on to another question that you demand we answer.

If you want your questions answered, answer some of ours.

Why was the equipment from that era inadequate? (And don't say it's because we cannot go now, because you have yet to prove that the reason the missions stopped was because we simply "can't do it.")

Why has no nation admitted to being unable to track or prove the legitimacy of the Apollo?

And finally, as FoosM stated, our government has been proven to be lying to us on multiple occasions (and this is on a smaller scale, mind you), yet they can still keep something this astronomical hidden from the entire world for this long?

Originally posted by backinblack

Originally posted by 000063
reply to post by backinblack

 

I like how the rest of the post apparently seems to have vanished. The parts with the scientists saying Jarrah is wrong.

It didn't vanish mate, it's still clearly there..

I just pointed out the 20 lines of useless rant you had to read to get to any actual debate..

Many wouldn't bother..
If the first chapter of a book is crap do you go on reading? I don't.

We don't need you to point out the "useless rant," we only need you to address the evidence that was given. If you don't like the ranting, then simply don't read it and just dispute the evidence given instead of aiming personal attacks while dodging the relevant evidence present.

Originally posted by ruserious8D
Okay, in case HBs haven't notice, your questions have received answers

No, I didnt notice.
And I didnt notice that you answered any of them.
They were directed towards you.
As a matter of fact, I thought you went to sleep?

As for now, I must sleep. I have class, but I will address your question tomorrow. (Now if you would actually address some of mine, or else you will in no way be entitled to an answer from me.)

Originally posted by backinblack

Originally posted by 000063
reply to post by backinblack

 

See, that's what you should've asked in the first place.

Really??
It's a yes/no question...
I don't personally see the trick involved...

I dont see the trick either.
Its a pretty straight forward question.

But now it seems apollogists will claim a conspiracy behind any question asked.

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by FoosM

 

Thank you for illustrating my point:

So list the outside evidence.
Let me start you off:

Another independent nation or group has filmed or photographed Apollo remains on the moon.
Answer?

Yes, Japan, but of course you resolutely refuse to accept that evidence.

Show me the photo with Apollo remains on the moon. I wont begin to accept it till I see it.
Not because you state it.

Another independent nation, or group has been able to land on the moon.
Answer?

Yes, the Soviets. They even returned samples that could be compared to the Apollo samples for verification.

Oh please DJ. That doesn't count. We are not disputing landing robots or unmanned craft.
We are disputing manned landing. And you know it.

Moon rocks brought back from the Apollo missions could be compared with other moon rocks that geologists found prior to the missions.
True or False?

I'm not sure what you're even asking here. It had been theorized for decades that tektites, glassy blobs of minerals found strewn across several regions of the Earth, may have originated as ejecta from the lunar surface.

True or false DJ, true or false.
I think my english is clear enough.

reply to post by FoosM

No, I didnt notice.
And I didnt notice that you answered any of them.
They were directed towards you.

Pay attention, FoosM:

True that other nations have, as I mentioned in a previous post; true that another nation has landed on the moon; true that moon rocks can be compared with moon rocks--in fact, they prefer it that way. Now I've answered your questions, so you answer mine.

ruserious8D

I also took it upon myself to answer your questions:

So list the outside evidence.
Let me start you off:

Another independent nation or group has filmed or photographed Apollo remains on the moon.
Answer?

Yes, Japan, but of course you resolutely refuse to accept that evidence.

Another independent nation, or group has been able to land on the moon.
Answer?

Yes, the Soviets. They even returned samples that could be compared to the Apollo samples for verification.

Moon rocks brought back from the Apollo missions could be compared with other moon rocks that geologists found prior to the missions.
True or False?

I'm not sure what you're even asking here. It had been theorized for decades that tektites, glassy blobs of minerals found strewn across several regions of the Earth, may have originated as ejecta from the lunar surface.

My response.

Incidentally, you still haven't clarified your third question. (Never mind answering any of the questions posed of you.)

As for the question about the Apollo 12 SEVA, that would depend upon which historical documents you consult; after all, this is history, none of us were actually present on the lunar surface at the time, just as none of us were present at Serajevo when Archduke Ferdinand was shot. I have already explained why there may be discrepancies in the record over this point, which you are ignoring for the second time on this thread:

It is common knowledge that certain aspects of the space program were classified. Not revealing something that may provide information to a potential enemy is not lying, it is common sense. If the Apollo 12 LM were sitting in a studio in Burbank, there would be no need for a stand up EVA to confirm its location. On the other hand, if they were on the lunar surface but uncertain of their exact location, a SEVA might be necessary, and it might be felt that keeping it secret might leave their potential enemies in the dark about the precision of their deep space tracking, command and control capabilities. As usual, you have brought up a point that strongly affirms the materiality of the lunar landings and their historical context.

Now, your turn: when Jarrah interviewed an expert on Aboriginal culture as an "expert witness" on photography, was he lying? Yes or no?

When Jarrah claimed that the Apollo 8 CSM could have hidden in "polar orbit," then reversed himself when someone explained what a polar orbit actually is, then claimed that he intentionally lied to "trap" his opponent, was he lying? Yes or no?

When Jarrah claimed that E. E. Kovalev's data contradicted NASA's, even though it actually confirmed it, was he lying? Yes or no?

Well?

Originally posted by FoosM

No, I didnt notice.
And I didnt notice that you answered any of them.
They were directed towards you.
As a matter of fact, I thought you went to sleep?

As for now, I must sleep. I have class, but I will address your question tomorrow. (Now if you would actually address some of mine, or else you will in no way be entitled to an answer from me.)

As a matter of fact, I did. That was posted at 3AM my time and it is now 2:30PM, so stop pointing out useless information.

And I didn't need to answer your questions because they were already answered while I was away. Just because I didn't answer them doesn't mean that someone else can't, which they did. (Although as was pointed out earlier, I did answer some of your questions, which is more than I can say that you have done for me.

reply to post by FoosM

Show me the photo with Apollo remains on the moon. I wont begin to accept it till I see it.
Not because you state it.

Been there, done that. Remember? I suppose you're now going to argue that a large area of disturbed regolith doesn't constitute "remains." That is like arguing that a burnt out campfire is not proof of human visitation. True or false?

Oh please DJ. That doesn't count. We are not disputing landing robots or unmanned craft.
We are disputing manned landing. And you know it.

This statement contains no reference specifying manned landings and/or excluding robotic probes. True or false:

Another independent nation, or group has been able to land on the moon.
Answer?

Hey, I like this stupid game!

]Moon rocks brought back from the Apollo missions could be compared with other moon rocks that geologists found prior to the missions.
True or False?

I'm not sure what you're even asking here. It had been theorized for decades that tektites, glassy blobs of minerals found strewn across several regions of the Earth, may have originated as ejecta from the lunar surface.

True or false DJ, true or false.
I think my english is clear enough.

Is what true or false? How would geologists know they had found Moon rocks on Earth if they didn't have Moon rocks to compare them to? Is that what you're asking? True or false?

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by FoosM

 

No, I didnt notice.
And I didnt notice that you answered any of them.
They were directed towards you.

Pay attention, FoosM:

True that other nations have, as I mentioned in a previous post; true that another nation has landed on the moon; true that moon rocks can be compared with moon rocks--in fact, they prefer it that way. Now I've answered your questions, so you answer mine.

ruserious8D

looks like he was embarrassed by his answers

So now wait a minute.
Ruserious8D has stated that other nations have landed men on the moon?
Incredible.

true that moon rocks can be compared with moon rocks

that wasnt even my question.
Should have gone to sleep first then answer my questions.

And the other questions weren't touched.
And here I thought he was all about the debate.
LOL.

I also took it upon myself to answer your questions:

Yeah, but you didnt do a good job.
And I doubt you will do better with the follow up.

Incidentally, you still haven't clarified your third question.

I dont need to.
Its pretty clear.
Unless you can show me where my sentence structure doesn't make sense.

As for the question about the Apollo 12 SEVA, that would depend upon which historical documents you consult;

Nataylor answered the question directly.
Why cant you?
Did Apollo 12 have a SEVA.
Its a "yes or no" answer.
There cant be any in between unless the missions were faked.
Im sure if I ask 'did NASA land men on the moon?', You would all say "yes".
Im sure if I asked 'was there a deep space EVA conducted on Apollo 16?' You would all say "yes"
So either the SEVA happened or it didn't.

Now, your turn: when Jarrah interviewed an expert on Aboriginal culture as an "expert witness" on photography, was he lying? Yes or no?

Need more info.

When Jarrah claimed that the Apollo 8 CSM could have hidden in "polar orbit," then reversed himself when someone explained what a polar orbit actually is, then claimed that he intentionally lied to "trap" his opponent, was he lying? Yes or no?

Simple, would JW make such a mistake?
Of course not. He wasnt lying about tricking this opponents.
He made a rookie mistake.

When Jarrah claimed that E. E. Kovalev's data contradicted NASA's, even though it actually confirmed it, was he lying? Yes or no?

What was contradicted?