Discussion in 'Conspiracies' started by Ryndanangnysen, Mar 4, 2015.
Isn't there footage of the reflectors being placed by the astronauts?
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
If there is, how do you know it wasn't taken in a studio? The anomalies prove the hoax.
So Fat thinks we had the technology to send all this equipment to the moon, perform soft landings by remote control, the ability to position all this equipment at various locations around the landing site, but did not have the technology to send up a manned craft? There's more than a little illogic in Fat's alleged mind.
I don't believe that at all.
You're not considering the theory of space radiation's being stronger than we're told.
It's hard to believe we still have morons that believe such nonsensical conspiracy issues.
When we see such arrogant criminals such as the following ratbag, [Sibrel] so eagerly pushing their nonsensical cause, it can be compared to the religious ratbaggery and extremism we are sometimes accustomed to in this day and age.
It appears mental instability is still amongst us...
"The recent Fox TV show, which I saw, is an ingenious and entertaining assemblage of nonsense. The claim that radiation exposure during the Apollo missions would have been fatal to the astronauts is only one example of such nonsense." -- Dr. James Van Allen
It's truly amazing how in a world where conspiracies rule, such as the Moon landings, 9/11, Kennedy assassination, etc etc, that people such as our obese friend Freddy, is game enough to even get out of bed in the mornings! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Ah yes, the Van Allen Belt conspiracy. [Facepalm]
Prove to me you aren't simply some computer somewhere designed to argue with people.
You are forgetting the "reasonable" part of reasonable proof...
The idea behind this article is that Van Allen started working for NASA and, from then on, didn't say what he really believed.
The Clavius site is a disinfo site. The posters on its forum are paid sophists. Anyone who reads its threads in which they debate with hoax-believers can see the sophistry.
Here's some info on Clavius.
The links in post #6 are dead. Here's a page that has the live links.
I debated with Jay Windley a few times. Here's a sample.
I said this.
He responded with this.
Those posters from Clavius post at several forums. The can have a measure of success when they just talk to each other in front of a group of people who haven't seen the hoax proof. When the viewers are shown the proof they're discussing and they have to answer real questions from truthers, they have to say some pretty lame things to maintain their positions.
Do you understand that anomalies are subjective? Plenty of scientists see the same photos and videos and don't recognize the so-called anomalies that you do. I don't see anything unusual either. How do you feel that your whole argument is based on your personal feelings that something looks odd?
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!One more conspiracy after another and another and another etc etc etc.Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
You mean as opposed to the crazy impressionable conspiracy web sites you obtain your nonsense from?
In essence that's all you have...claims of one conspiracy after another after another, to obviously try and deride the overwhelming convincing evidence and the fact that we did go to the Moon, at least 9 times with 6 landings.
And no amount of conspiracies and irrational denials will ever change fact.
Buzz Aldrin should have been awarded a medal for his tremendous right cross to Bart Sibrel's jaw.
You're ignoring the hoax proof.
The viewers can check it out and decide for themselves whether it's irrational. You're also ignoring the lame things that Jay Windley* said in the posts I posted in my last post.
The Gish Gallop is the debating technique of drowning an opponent in such a torrent of small arguments that the opponent cannot possibly answer or address each one in real time. More often than not, these myriad arguments are full of half-truths, lies, and straw-man arguments — the only condition is that there be many of them, not that they be particularly compelling on their own. They may be escape hatches or "gotcha" arguments that are specifically designed to be brief, but take a long time to unravel. Thus, galloping is frequently used in timed debates (especially by creationists) to overwhelm one's opponent.
It's just a summary of hoax info. There are about fifteen pro-Apollo sites for every hoax-believer site which makes the hoax info hard to come across. I just sifted through and found the hoax stuff as a favor for the viewers so that they wouldn't have to look for it.
Anyway, we can talk about just one anomaly at a time if you want. Here's some info on the flag anomaly.
Initial Apollo 15 Flag Movement
Most of the pro-Apollo people I've debated insist that the astronaut brushed the flag with his elbow which caused the flag to move. The above video shows that the flag had already started moving before he got close enough to touch it.
Wrong I ignore nothing including the diatribe from you, the trumped up conspiracies that you obtain from crank websites, the impressionable nonsense, the anti establishment crap, the observational evidence of the factual Moon landings, and then I logically dismiss all that obviously is nonsensical, crazy and irrational, along with most reasonable, sensible people and conclude we did go to the Moon 9 times.
But you keep telling yourself we didn't...you may even convince yourself of that. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
I don't think there's ever been a conspiracy nut who's been dissuaded from believing in his pet theory.
There are no anomalies except those in your own mind and driven by your own irrational outlook on the world.
We might be able to spot what we deem as anomalies in him. To him the rest of us are probably anomalies.
Separate names with a comma.