Pro Apollo Nutter: Pejorative Term or Badge of Ho

[raven]

I was perusing some hoax sites and you tube videos. I am loperspest by the way, I have lately been slamming people, anybody really, for using childish language when rebutting claims for or against the hoax theory. One of the terms I came across for our breed, was Pro Apollo Nutter. Though meant as an insult, I rather took to it. It makes a dandy acronym and it is so silly it is hard to really consider it insulting, or at least in my opinion. But what do you think? Have you ever been called a Pro Apollo Nutter? What was your reaction? Did you like it, hate it, couldn't care two ways to Broadway about it? Well this is what I want to know on this my first Thread on the ApolloHoax.net web-forum?

[nomuse]

I'm not sure I want a "Badge of Ho." Sounds a little kinky.

[BertL]

I am mostly indifferent when it comes to people calling me names. I don't like it, but that is simply because I don't like namecalling in general, not because I don't like the term "Pro Apollo Nutter". I didn't tolerate namecalling on my channel, and have ended up banning all 'known' HBers for a week at one point.

ETA: I'm also quite indifferent when it comes to personal insults. (There's a slight, but important difference between namecalling and personal insults IMO). In a way I feel that once a person starts namecalling or insulting you, they show their "true nature" or something like that. By that I mean that it shows that they are not up for reasonable discussion, and are simply out there to "be the rebelious martyr for the good cause", or whatever you want to call it.

[Obviousman]

It doesn't offend me at all. In fact:

[JayUtah]

Sam Colby coined "pro-Apollo nutter." I expect others have picked it up. In Sam's case it's just sad, because he generally has only two types of argument: pretend that training scenarios were actually fakery scenarios, and call everyone who disagrees with him names.

You've got to have a thick skin if you're going to debate a controversial subject. People are going to villify you. It would be nice if they did more than that, but it's going to happen even in the best of circumstances. Being called a paid shill or disinformation agent doesn't really affect me. The names themselves mean less than the apparent necessity to resort to them. It calibrates the nature of the argument.

I have to admit some emotional reaction at being called ignorant for not believing the conspiracy theory. Many hoax proponents naturally assume that objectors have only a casual understanding of space travel and Apollo history and that the hoax materials have given them special expertise. (That illusion is often why hoax believers believe.) I've worked hard to achieve a professional-level proficiency in space technology and in Apollo history. So I have to avoid an emotional reaction at the notion that my belief in Apollo's authenticity is uninformed.

Labels are necessary to facilitate discussion. We have to use words such as "hoax believers" and "conspiracists" to identify people who share certain traits. And it's understandable that labels will be applied to us, and that we will even invent some ourselves. I use "debunker" or "critic" to describe someone who disagrees with a conspiracy theory. And it's probably too much to ask to avoid attaching value judgments to even the most innocent labels. I use "woo-woo" infrequently because it has so much baggage. That makes it easier for someone to write off my criticism as ad hominem. But even a label as innocent as "critic" can be spun that way. You can't avoid the label, but you have to do your best to make an argument separate from the label.

[Jason]

There probably are some people who are pro-Apollo and are also "nutters", but not very many who are crazy about their support of Apollo.

[raven]

I'm not sure I want a "Badge of Ho." Sounds a little kinky.

heh heh it was meant to be 'badge of honour,' but alas, the the forum doesn't like such long titles.

[scubadude402]

I guess if it makes a anti apollo moron feel better by calling someone that knows that the mercury/gemini/apollo missions are extremely well documented historical facts above any suspicion feel better, then thats alright by me. If they think it was all faked in a studio sound stage despite all the evidence to the contrary, then they've got a lot bigger problems to worry about.

[gillianren]

Gods know there's name-calling on both sides of the issue. There's a certain immature and annoying individual on BAUT who's always referring to "Butt Sibrel" and saying she's put him into comic books as Darth Vader and such. It's childish, and it doesn't actually further the process of education. And surely the important aspect of this--according to either side, I should think--is education. (True, their education is miseducation, but still.)

As for PAN . . . well, I'll admit it's nice to have a shorthand of some kind to use for ourselves. Further, I can't really argue the "nutter" part for myself, and certainly I'm pro-Apollo, though not, I think, in the way the term implies. I think Apollo was a good idea that produced some really great science. I don't, however, just blindly support it. I'm sure there are people on our side who do, but I am not one of them, and I suspect very few people around here are.

[Bob B.]

I don’t particularly like being called names, but I don’t find Pro-Apollo Nutter to be especially offensive. After all, one of the definitions of the word “nut” is an enthusiast or buff, i.e. sports nut, movie nut, etc. In that regard, PAN is a reasonably accurate term and certainly nothing to get to upset about.

I suppose when the HBs use the term they more likely think it means we’re insane to support Apollo’s authenticity. In that case I just have to laugh at those who think they’re insulting us; they are really just demonstrating their own ignorance.

[nomuse]

The names are important because they are used to sum up the other's position. "Woo Woo," for instance, is a rather dismissive term implying "They'll believe in anything." I think most of us here find "Conspiracy Theorist" or "Hoax Believer" essentially neutral -- although the "belief" part of the latter can be taken as unthinking faith in an idea (as opposed to logical working out of an idea.)

I very much dislike "Pro-Apollo" (with or without the "Nutter." I do not consider that I argue to support the veracity of the Apollo Program, but that I argue that if discussion is to take place on that veracity, it should wherever possible be based on actual facts. It is the underlying science I am primarily interested in bringing out.

The term "PAN" casts the discussion in terms where two sides both "believe" in a certain story. Thus it legitimizes any form of argument from both sides, from ad homs to calls to emotion to lying about the facts. It creates, I strongly feel, a false parallelism.

Also, like the loaded term "Debunker" it ascribes ulterior motive.

Me, I'd prefer to be a Babbling BABB Maggot.

[Mr Gorsky]

For me, the term Pro-Apollo implies that we are in favour of Apollo, the flipside of which would be Anti-Apollo, in the sense of it being a bad thing that should be opposed, rather than a hoax. In a sense Dr James Van Allen was Anti-Apollo, in that he believed that human space travel is a waste of time and resources and distracts from the important science that could be done using unmanned vehicles.

He certainly never believed that Apollo was a hoax.

Having said all of that, I think it is difficult to put an accurate term on those who believe Apollo happened as advertised. Even "Apollo Supporter" doesn't work, because you don't have to believe that Apollo didn't happen in order to be a non-Supporter of it.

[JayUtah]

I'm not pro-Apollo, I'm pro-truth. The authenticity of Apollo missions are just one of many truths, and the one about which I am most qualified to speak. The distinction is important. Allegiance to the romance, nostalgia, and excitement of space travel is not at issue. Instead this is about how one goes about drawing conclusions and testing ideas. The Us vs. Them goes deeper than just Apollo.

[Grand Lunar]

I find it fun when HBs try to label me.

I suppose they ignore our terms for them as I do for their terms to us.

Off topic: Out of curiosity, which usage of the name "Raven" is your username, Raven?
The poem by Poe? The bird? The bird in the poem by Poe? The character voiced by Tara Strong? None of the above?

[sts60]

scubadude402 said:

I guess if it makes a anti apollo moron feel better by calling someone that knows that the mercury/gemini/apollo missions are extremely well documented historical facts above any suspicion feel better, then thats alright by me. If they think it was all faked in a studio sound stage despite all the evidence to the contrary, then they've got a lot bigger problems to worry about.

Heh. Anyone who has spent time in the firehouse is not about to get upset by such feeble attempted insults anyway...