|
Post by scooter on Jun 8, 2007 10:50:11 GMT -4
So, rocky, what was it that again that made Apollo impossible?
It seems that at least some of the "viewers" are questioning your position. Could it be that your arguments aren't getting traction because they are based on innuendo, ignorance and a large dose of paranoia? You don't understand any of the science, you don't understand the context of the 1960s, and you feel no shame proudly clinging to your twisted world view, injecting it randomly.
You are an unhappy person, aren't you?
|
|
|
Post by rchappo on Jun 8, 2007 12:42:49 GMT -4
Hi everyone, Lurker of a few months here. Saw this thread as an opportunity to say hi. This section of the board is provides great lunch break reading (well, ok, it's not always lunch break!) for me, being at once entertaining, educational and frustrating. I am constantly amazed at the sheer brassneck of some of the HBs and their tactics - moving goalposts, ignoring evidence and handwaving. I am also mightily impressed with the depth of knowledge and patience of the people here that attempt to educate them (or try to make them educate themselves!) and debunk their ridiculous claims. Working in science and having a science background I have always been in awe of Apollo and the people behind it. A shining example of scientific application and teamwork. But then again I could be a NASA stooge couldn't i?
|
|
|
Post by LunarOrbit on Jun 8, 2007 12:49:33 GMT -4
Welcome, rchappo. Now get back to work before your boss catches you!
|
|
|
Post by dexter on Jun 8, 2007 13:15:58 GMT -4
Hi all, I've been lurking here for a few mods and sts60 gave me a good excuse to register . - do you think Apollo happened Yes, without a doubt. No, his claims are ludicrous. Personally I think he is just a troll and would be best ignored/banned. If I am wrong and he is actually being serious.....well, I better not go there or I might get warning with my very first post. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Hypersonic on Jun 8, 2007 13:45:36 GMT -4
I wasn't very clear. I meant that I'd seen both Apollo's overhead, one outbound and one returning. I'm afraid it was too long ago and I was too young to remember which was which, just that it impressed the Cameroonians that lived in our neighborhood as much as it did me. I'm just jealous! I remember running out of the house and looking up to see if the Apollo would fly overhead. Living in Nebraska there wasn't much chance, so it's fun to hear that someone did see a couple.
|
|
|
Post by sts60 on Jun 8, 2007 13:47:49 GMT -4
Welcome, rchappo and dexter! I do not think rocky is a troll, at least not in the classic sense of someone just out to stir people up. I think rocky actually believes what he says. The problem is that he is simply incapable of approaching the notion that he is wrong. He will go to considerable trouble to insulate himself from reality in order to protect his beliefs. What he won't do is spend a fraction of the time he spends posting "they could by lying!" actually bothering to learn anything. That, to me, is unpardonable: determined ignorance should be a crime. That said, I personally don't think he should be banned. He doesn't hurl expletives and his insults are confined to unsubstantiated charges that we are liars and con men. This board gives lots of rope to such people; if you prefer a more focused discussion you'll find many of us on the Bad Astronomy/Universe Today conspiracy forum. Hey, rocky, the score is now 7-0 against you. Thank you for bringing up the "lurkers and viewers" thing and thereby suggesting this experiment. Too bad I had to perform it for you, huh?
|
|
|
Post by scooter on Jun 8, 2007 14:10:14 GMT -4
Incidently, if there are any lurkers out there who do believe that Apollo was a hoax, and may be put off with some of the vigorous responses towards rocky, please speak up. Rocky is very close minded, and does not examine evidence. Some hoax theorists don't fit this description, and can discuss topics and details intelligently. Questions are good, there is a lot about spaceflight that is counter-intuitive and may not "look right". Come on in, let's talk...
|
|
|
Post by AtomicDog on Jun 8, 2007 14:28:12 GMT -4
Rocky, I believe that you have said that you have shown your "evidence" to people and it has convinced them that Apollo is a hoax.
If that is so, why don't you invite them to join the forum? It would be a good way for them to put their new-found beliefs to the test.
|
|
|
Post by n0mad on Jun 8, 2007 17:14:15 GMT -4
I'm curious. Of all the things to doubt the validity of, why the Apollo project?
And does anyone have any theories why it seems that "belief" seems more and more to be trumping "fact" in arguments and discussions?
|
|
|
Post by hplasm on Jun 8, 2007 17:26:31 GMT -4
I recall it from the Vegians in "Doc" Smith's "The Vortex Blasters." Game set and match! ;D I owe you 10 point, plus 5 bonus points for the Vegians- I don't have the book at the moment, and it was bothering me as to what they were called as I was reading. Wandering minds, eh. Not seen mine for a while now...
|
|
|
Post by hplasm on Jun 8, 2007 17:31:37 GMT -4
As I recall, DaveCrocky, you have failed many of these 'tests' yourself, across the many fora you have repeated yourself upon... (now *that* does not look right.)
|
|
|
Post by tofu on Jun 8, 2007 17:54:27 GMT -4
7080 words in just the first post of that link. And the irony is, the following points from that list describe you perfectly: 2. Become incredulous and indignant. 3. Create rumour mongers. 4. Use a straw man. 5. Side-track opponents with name calling and ridicule. 6. Hit and Run. 7. Question motives. 11. Establish and rely upon fall-back positions. 12. Enigmas have no solution. 13. Alice in Wonderland Logic. Avoid discussion of the issues by reasoning backwards with an apparent deductive logic in a way that forbears any actual material fact. 15. Fit the facts to alternate conclusions. 17. Change the subject. 19. Ignore proof presented, demand impossible proofs. 20. False evidence. lol rocky, you are owned by your own link.
|
|
furi
Mars
The Secret is to keep banging those rocks together.
Posts: 260
|
Post by furi on Jun 8, 2007 18:08:14 GMT -4
There's a way to find out if these people are really lurkers and viewers, or just more of your friends would I have been asked to complete an objectivity (WTF) test if I happened to be in complete agreement, with you. even if the test in question is "what do you think of xxx?". I have decided to answer so don't post it again in reply to me. If I happened to have been in agreement to you regarding Apollo, but not in agreement regarding sep 11 or any other alleged CTs would that make my opinion any less valid. also as I sit and watch the preparations for the shuttle launch, is it the Apollo series you disagree with, or just specific missions that you consider BS. if specific series/missions why not post those details, or is it just NASA in General or ALL space travel, as I am curious do you believe that I am now watching a fake mission launch for example.. if not, Why Not, what proof can you offer that shows this current launch is real?
|
|
|
Post by VALIS on Jun 8, 2007 19:23:59 GMT -4
I've posted a few times already on the board but not in the Apollo Hoax area so I decide unilaterally that I qualify as a viewer/lurker ;D I'm a very long time lurker, I remember reading posts by Der Voron on the old board. - do you think Apollo happened Yes. I've seen no indication to the contrary. - do you believe or tend to believe rocky's claims that the engineers and scientists and technicians involved in Apollo are lying; that commercial and scientific spacecraft operators worldwide are lying and covering up the fact that their spacecraft are experiencing environments radically different than those claimed by NASA (and the Russian Space Agency, and the European Space Agency, and the Japanese...), and so on? And his insinuation (to be generous) that those of us defending Apollo are "con men", liars, government disinfo agents, etc.? Nope
|
|
|
Post by AtomicDog on Jun 8, 2007 19:24:46 GMT -4
I would add:
26: Transference: Accuse your opponent of that which you yourself are guilty of.
Describes rocky to a T.
|
|