Young Aussie genius whipping NASA in Moon Hoax Debate!

reply to post by SayonaraJupiter

"Propaganda and public relations turned out to be major priorities for the moon rocks." - 1976 St. Petersburg Times

Classical propaganda..
Everyone on this thread is screaming how important these rocks are and yet NASA didn't seem to think so..

They gave samples to "several hundred" officials...

Mind you I love the bit that states the astronauts got NONE..
You know, the heroes that did the actual work

It's all politics and propaganda IMO..

reply to post by DJW001

So, why do you assume Columbus lied?

Why do you assume he didn't??

But although I know where you're going with this it's still a bit off topic when you consider all you can give is an opinion..
No facts will show either way what you are requesting..

Originally posted by FoosM

Originally posted by Logical one

Originally posted by FoosM

Sorry, dont know what you are talking about.
Havent looked into Challenger because its not Apollo.

Hey I thought you were the one telling others to watch ALL of Jarrah videos in order to comment on this thread!

So Foo you better play catch up then!

Why? I just said I have not looked into Challenger.
Doesn't mean I didnt see his videos on it, but I dont see what it has to do with Apollo so I dont really care.
If you disagree with Jarrah and believe that NASA had no idea that launching the Shuttle in cold weather was highly risky, then, great, you disagree with Jarrah. But it has no impact on the validity of the moon landings one way or another. And I take this whole thing as a stalling tactic from researching and discussing actual Apollo issues like the Van Allen Belt. I take it you are probably stalling because the info you found about van Allen doesn't jive with your previously posted comments on the subject.

Hang on a minute here Foos,

Logical One is making an important point here: you and the other hoax-believers will stop at nothing to poke holes in the official story, accusing NASA of murder, trying to discredit the Astronauts, calling them liars, dragging anybody and anything into the argument that somehow will support your claims. When Logical One questions the theories of the main proponent and the reason for this thread you say 'I really don't care'......

......that sounds hypocritical.....no it IS hypocritical.

reply to post by seabhac-rua

......that sounds hypocritical.....no it IS hypocritical.

Not really..
The thread is about Apollo, not Challenger or even JW's opinions regarding Challenger..

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by seabhac-rua

 

......that sounds hypocritical.....no it IS hypocritical.

Not really..
The thread is about Apollo, not Challenger or even JW's opinions regarding Challenger..

Yes it is.

reply to post by seabhac-rua


You're entitled to your opinion and without a little more justification with facts then that's all it is...

reply to post by backinblack

And you yours, do you really think that, with all the accusations being flung around in this thread, that the motives, sanity, logic, etc of the person who this thread is about, are exempt from investigation?

Originally posted by seabhac-rua
reply to post by backinblack

 

And you yours, do you really think that, with all the accusations being flung around in this thread, that the motives, sanity, logic, etc of the person who this thread is about, are exempt from investigation?

No, but neither is that of others..

It has been shown that your "Bad Astronomy" mate doesn't mind the odd lie..
So do we just assume everything he says is a lie??

Originally posted by backinblack

Originally posted by seabhac-rua
reply to post by backinblack

 

And you yours, do you really think that, with all the accusations being flung around in this thread, that the motives, sanity, logic, etc of the person who this thread is about, are exempt from investigation?

No, but neither is that of others..

It has been shown that your "Bad Astronomy" mate doesn't mind the odd lie..
So do we just assume everything he says is a lie??

If somebody is going to publicly make the claims that White makes, then they deserve scrutiny. If somebody accused you of murder would you simply try to prove you didn't do it or would you also question the motives of the accuser? I know what I would do.

reply to post by seabhac-rua

If somebody is going to publicly make the claims that White makes, then they deserve scrutiny. If somebody accused you of murder would you simply try to prove you didn't do it or would you also question the motives of the accuser? I know what I would do.

Still very opinion based..
There's motives on both sides of the debate I'm sure..
Many earn their daily bread from this event and that's on both sides..
Many have books and web sites that ALL are happy to accept cash or checks..

Where would you like to start?

reply to post by backinblack


How is it my opinion that White accuses NASA of murder?

Originally posted by seabhac-rua
reply to post by backinblack

 

How is it my opinion that White accuses NASA of murder?

edit on 28-10-2011 by seabhac-rua because: (no reason given)

I thought you post was addressing his motives and sanity etc..
Not his actual comments..

BTW, I don't agree with him on that particular point.

Originally posted by backinblack

Originally posted by seabhac-rua
reply to post by backinblack

 

How is it my opinion that White accuses NASA of murder?

edit on 28-10-2011 by seabhac-rua because: (no reason given)

I thought you post was addressing his motives and sanity etc..
Not his actual comments..

BTW, I don't agree with him on that particular point.

At last, we agree on something.

reply to post by seabhac-rua


we probably agree on many things but they are usual not acknowledged..

reply to post by Ove38


What a "show"? For diplomatic "good will", maybe. But, not a "show" in the sense of a scam or con job.

Nixon gives away moon rocks 1969 What a show it was

Did you forget about the hundreds of sample also sent to foreign scientists? No one "blew the whistle" on the samples, calling them "fake".

The "gifted" samples have gone missing, for the most part. This is an unfortunate reality of life, and they were gifts, after all. But, hoarding of unique items, art, jewelry etc is NOT new in Human history.....

Paul Fraser Collectibles

Upon being gifted, each Goodwill Moon rock became the property of the recipient - and therefore no longer subject to being tracked by NASA.

Whereas other lunar samples' locations are well documented by NASA to this day, as the years went by the gifted Apollo 17 lunar rocks started to go missing.

Today, of the 135 Apollo 17 rocks given away to other nations, the whereabouts of only 25 of them are known. An even vaguer fate befell the 134 distributed Apollo 11 rocks. The locations of fewer than a dozen are today recorded.

It is generally accepted that details surrounding the Moon rocks were so vague because nobody really expected Apollo 17 to be mankind's last lunar excursion.

What is really sad is this unhealthy obsession with Nixon that some of you seem to have. And, the fantasy that just ONE President has some sort of "ultimate power" in this alleged "hoax".

Yet, hated and ridiculed and disgraced as he eventually was ---- not ONE individual has ever come forward and made the same claims (with proof) that SayonarraJupiter and Ove38 are making regarding Nixon, and "fake" Moon rocks.

NOT ONE!!


What will you *believers* do in ten years, perhaps fifteen. What will do as every other country that mounts a Lunar mission, and that corroborates the existence of all the Apollo landing sites exactly as the historical records show, and exactly as the latest photos from th LRO show, announces with their photographic evidence as well?

You won't be able to claim that "NASA faked it".

Will you keep calling EVERYONE a liar???

There is probably a mental health term for that........

reply to post by ProudBird

Utter nonsense:

That's about the best rebuttal you ever come up with..

Seriously, it's no big deal if others are of the opinion that the landings were fake..

Everyone is entitled to an opinion and just to scream "utter nonsense" is well, utter nonsense...

And who's really to say what future missions may find?

It maybe you that are scared to show your face here again..
I certainly wont be scared regardless of what's found..
I haven't invested as much emotion into the debate as you seem to..

reply to post by backinblack


I edited.....but yes, my initial reaction (when considering not just that one post, but the full range of that member's assertions, throughout the thread).

The "utter nonsense" relates back to the ridiculous waste of time over the LM replica in the London Museum.

This allegation that Nixon somehow single-handedly was behind and orchestrating the biggest "deception" in Human history is also utter nonsense as well.

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by seabhac-rua

 

......that sounds hypocritical.....no it IS hypocritical.

Not really..
The thread is about Apollo, not Challenger or even JW's opinions regarding Challenger..

Errr read the title of this thread again backinblack........this actually has as much to do with the "Young Aussie" genius as it does the Moon Hoax.......in any case it is Jarrah himself that links Challenger with Apollo.
It's even in his series of videos entitled "Moon Faker".

It's funny just because Challenger makes many Jarrah supporters uncomfortable.....because they know deep down in that it is BS......they rather try to "bury" Jarrah's Challenger.....claiming it is not relevant.....even if Jarrah himself believes it is.

Originally posted by FoosM


Maybe you are new to this thread.
But I said very early on, I find much of JW's information compelling, however, he does not present strong arguments for all his videos. Some are weak, and highly questionable.

So you must find this argument of his pretty strong to keep harping about it. And after several posts, you have not given your own opinion on it. I think thats what they call flame-baiting or trolling.

Oh you said this earlier on........did you......fair enough I'll give you the benefit of the doubt......but the way you have been "harping on" about Jarrah videos you seem to be suggesting that what ever Jarrah says is better than the experts on the subject.

As for not giving my own opinion........do you not actually read my threads.......it's pretty clear what my opinion is
on the issue.

With reference to finding the Van Allen quotes once again......
Let's just settle this........just tell me what you think Van Allen says...instead of playing this silly......"look at Jarrah videos....and you will find the info" nonsense.
If you have a point to make about a Van Allen statement regarding radiation.....then put up or shut up about it.:

Originally posted by ProudBird
Did you forget about the hundreds of sample also sent to foreign scientists? No one "blew the whistle" on the samples, calling them "fake".

The 1969 scientists had nothing to compare the rocks with. They simply believed what NASA told them. When they later (1982) found meteorites that matched the Apollo rocks. They called the meteorites "Lunar meteorites" thinking they came from the moon, since they matched the Apollo rocks.