|
Post by Count Zero on Jan 9, 2008 3:21:28 GMT -4
I'll take your word for it. No, really...
|
|
|
Post by ineluki on Jan 10, 2008 5:29:37 GMT -4
Oooh. David C says Jack White is a plant. Duane considers himself a JW successor. Both are adamant in their views. Both are firm HBs. ! Well, Duane will probably cook up some theory, that David is some sort of undercover debunker and his banning was just a ploy to infiltrate the Hoaxers.
|
|
|
Post by Obviousman on Jan 10, 2008 19:39:33 GMT -4
I'm think David C will also claim Duane is a disinfo agent.
After all, he'll accept any cockamamie theory from anyone, and never bothers to check any of the details they have told him. That means his version of the truth gets weirder and weirder, more & more complex in order to maintain his fantasy. I think there are things that even David C won't swallow... unlike Duane.
|
|
|
Post by Obviousman on Jan 10, 2008 23:23:43 GMT -4
Oh boy, and isn't Jack going bananas today? I guess they stopped his medication.
(Hi Duane!)
|
|
|
Post by craiglamson on Jan 11, 2008 0:14:14 GMT -4
Oh boy, and isn't Jack going bananas today? I guess they stopped his medication. (Hi Duane!) Someone suggested White was being deliberately obtuse. As someone who has researched his past dealings I'm inclined to think it's genetic.
|
|
|
Post by Obviousman on Jan 11, 2008 0:57:11 GMT -4
Or perhaps geriatric.
|
|
|
Post by craiglamson on Jan 11, 2008 7:59:00 GMT -4
Na, go back and read his stuff from years ago. He was just as much of a kook then as he is now.
|
|
|
Post by BertL on Jan 11, 2008 17:09:42 GMT -4
Talking about classics... This post, posted by Duane Daman on the Education Forum board, shows to me a typical tactic I've seen used by HBs far too often. A user named "Gavin Stone" created and posted a video debunking some of the claims made by Percy ( link). While the video makes a number of quite valid points considering the flawed-ness Percy's arguments, Duane responds to it with this. (Note: by "watchdogs" he means two other debunkers, nicknamed "MID" and "postbaguk" on other forums.) So, when the debunker brings up a number of points regarding how Percy's arguments are wrong, the HB completely ignores the points and denies them (without going in depth), and then accuses two people who were thanked in the end of the video of being employees from NASA hired to defend the landings. When valid points are brought up, they are ignored and responded to with ad hominems. I far too often see this happen, and this "tactic", in turn, makes me seriously question the integrity of the side who ignores and makes ad hominems. If something as straightforward and obvious as "this glint was caused by the antenna" is being put off as "it proves nothing", it makes me imagine someone closing his eyes, putting his fingers in his ears and saying "Lalala I can't hear you I can't see it!"
|
|
|
Post by JayUtah on Jan 11, 2008 17:47:21 GMT -4
Yes, that is the classic ad hominem fallacy. Arguments ad hominem are too often believed only to be abrasive personal attacks or insults. That's true, but not complete. An ad hominem fallacy is committed any time a personal property of the proponent is taken wrongly to be the basis of an argument's strength. Duane wrongly believes that characterizing the presenter demonstrates that the argument presented "must" therefore somehow be invalid, regardless of how based it might have been on objective fact or testable lines of reasoning.
In short, yes -- attacking the messenger is what people generally resort to doing when they have no response for the content of the message. They hope that tainting the messenger will somehow taint the message.
|
|
|
Post by Ginnie on Jan 11, 2008 18:53:48 GMT -4
It seems that since no HB is posting here anymore, we are increasingly referring to other forums and their posts, eh? ;D And entertaining reading it is, once you skip over the childish banter. Reasons that HB don't post here anymore? 1. They are already banned 2. We don't tolerate rudeness and insults. 3. They are outnumbered hundreds to one. There are some excellent, straightforward and informative videos on Gootube made by this fellow uk.youtube.com/profile?user=SpeakerForBoskoneI wish Rocky would come back, I almost think that if he ever got over his 'sand' issues, he could actually see Apollo in a different light.
|
|
|
Post by Data Cable on Jan 12, 2008 1:36:28 GMT -4
...he could actually see Apollo in a different light. A nearby spotlight, no doubt.
|
|
|
Post by Trinitrotoluene on Jan 12, 2008 18:08:47 GMT -4
Talking about classics... This post, posted by Duane Daman on the Education Forum board, shows to me a typical tactic I've seen used by HBs far too often. A user named "Gavin Stone" created and posted a video debunking some of the claims made by Percy ( link). While the video makes a number of quite valid points considering the flawed-ness Percy's arguments, Duane responds to it with this. (Note: by "watchdogs" he means two other debunkers, nicknamed "MID" and "postbaguk" on other forums.) So, when the debunker brings up a number of points regarding how Percy's arguments are wrong, the HB completely ignores the points and denies them (without going in depth), and then accuses two people who were thanked in the end of the video of being employees from NASA hired to defend the landings. When valid points are brought up, they are ignored and responded to with ad hominems. I far too often see this happen, and this "tactic", in turn, makes me seriously question the integrity of the side who ignores and makes ad hominems. If something as straightforward and obvious as "this glint was caused by the antenna" is being put off as "it proves nothing", it makes me imagine someone closing his eyes, putting his fingers in his ears and saying "Lalala I can't hear you I can't see it!" That would be my video I plan on making more! Thing is, that video wasn't aimed at people like Duane. I know that nothing will convince him. It's more for the people who are sitting on the fence. He, of course, will never deal with the issues that I raised in my video. MID (one of the most intelligent guys I have met) provided me with the weight for the PLSS fully loaded as NTRS was down; and Posty reviewed the video. That was the extent of their involvement. Obviously Duane won't believe this. He often refers to MID as the head Apollo disinformationist and the best liar on the internet. If anyone has any suggestions for videos then please forward them to me. It's hard to cover a lot of things in ten minutes, but I'm welcome to suggestions.
|
|
|
Post by Ginnie on Jan 12, 2008 19:37:40 GMT -4
So you're Gavin? Nice video BTW. It's funny how so many of the comments to it from HB still mention the 'no stars in the sky' issue. I would have thought these basic issues were dealt with, explained in detail, and done with. Yet they still bring it up. Don't you find it frustrating answering HB would just insult you or ignore your explanations?
|
|
|
Post by JayUtah on Jan 12, 2008 22:09:24 GMT -4
Have no fear, Gavin. Reasonable people are quite able to spot people whose only story is to call everyone else liars.
|
|
|
Post by Obviousman on Jan 12, 2008 22:54:26 GMT -4
He really is a classic example of "projection", isn't he? So many things that he claims other people do when he himself is the guilty party.
My favourite is that he is the most abusive poster on the forum... but accuses everyone else of insulting behaviour.
Quite amazing!
|
|