|
Post by grashtel on Aug 21, 2008 1:26:37 GMT -4
Only reference to neutronium I know was in "The Doomsday Machine". Where else is it referenced? Dragon's Egg
|
|
raven
Jupiter
That ain't Earth, kiddies.
Posts: 509
|
Post by raven on Aug 21, 2008 2:46:14 GMT -4
Yeah, I agree with most of the posters here, 'magic cavern' is a beautiful case of the gentle art of 'bullsh*t'. If someone in an actual conversation told me that that was how they thought they did it, I would probably laugh in their face. The only moon hoax I would want to be at all true, is the Alexia Leonov/Apollo 20 hoax. From what I know of it, it is the only conspiracy that says anything nice about humanity. Sure, the badly done crapola of ancient alien artifacts is same-same. But sending the first space walker to be a moon walker, even though the respective countries are technically enemies, sounds just swell to me. All the others conspiracy theories I know of seem to go on the evil government, evil cooperation, evil evil evil, tangent.
|
|
|
Post by ineluki on Aug 26, 2008 7:09:54 GMT -4
For non hoax believers, what hoax argument was the most challenging for for you to dispel? It's not exactly convincing but pretty impossible to dispel - the total reality loss of a Worldwide Conspiracy.
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Aug 26, 2008 11:26:38 GMT -4
The "magic cavern" theory reminds me of an old joke. A lawyer, and accountant, and an economist are afloat in a rubber raft. They don't have any oars and they can just barely see the shore on the horizen. They debate how they are going to get there. "I'll get us there," says the lawyer, "even if I have to sue every raft company around." "No, I can get us there," says the accountant, "just get me the distance to the shore and I'll work down the numbers until we're there." "I've got a better plan," says the economist, "to begin with, let's assume we have a motor..."
|
|
|
Post by smlbstcbr on Aug 30, 2008 21:53:26 GMT -4
And how exactly does Uranium negate gravity....? It wouldn't negate gravity per se, but if a material much denser than earth's crust was above the cavern, it would reduce the depth at which the cavern would have to be to experience 1/6 * g by accelerating the cavern's occupants in an upward direction. Since otherwise this whole theory would be just plain unlikely. ;D Err... and how that cave managed to sustain that amazingly dense material without collapsing? Another dumb thing has just died ;D PS, not referring to you...
|
|
|
Post by smlbstcbr on Aug 30, 2008 22:13:19 GMT -4
For me, the least convincing hoax supporter is David Groves. I almost run out of air when I saw that YouTube video of him. First states that the luminosity of the moon is too weak to illuminate objects in the shadows, and he presents as a proof... drums please, the photographs taken on the moon. He did not even recalled the fact that he said it WAS NOT THE MOON! And here's another explanation of the boot's hot spot: the diagram shows that the light source comes from... Armstrong. As it is supposed, the suit reflected a very large amount of light, thus proving that they were very well protected from the sun. Certainly, if I go to England, I won't hire this guy because he knows nothing about REAL PHOTOGRAPHY.
|
|
vq
Earth
What time is it again?
Posts: 129
|
Post by vq on Sept 3, 2008 1:09:18 GMT -4
Another dumb thing has just died ;D PS, not referring to you... The smiley sufficed to dispel any worries, but I appreciate the feelings-protective postscript. I'm actually a little disappointed at the quality of the material HB's have come up with. I guess claiming that Apollo was a hoax isn't something that people with solid scientific backgrounds do. Edit: Fixed the quote.
|
|
|
Post by smlbstcbr on Sept 3, 2008 13:36:55 GMT -4
Another dumb thing has just died ;D PS, not referring to you... The smiley sufficed to dispel any worries, but I appreciate the feelings-protective postscript. I'm actually a little disappointed at the quality of the material HB's have come up with. I guess claiming that Apollo was a hoax isn't something that people with solid scientific backgrounds do. Edit: Fixed the quote. Yes, it is outrageous. I was watching a video on YouTube, I believe it was Armstrong interrupted. It shows Sibrel offering Armstrong 5000 dollars or so, to swear on the Bible. Armstrong obviously rejected and I believe to know why: it's Armstrong. He was chosen to be the first human on the Moon because he sees a situation from every point of view and does what he thinks is right. Until now, he has been right all the time. Should Armstrong accepted, he would have given Sibrel the chance of accusing him of saying/acting or do any sort of things in exchange for money. Surely we would be seeing Sibrel shouting that Armstrong says anything for money and so on... Grrr, I hope Sibrel has no children, he might spoil precious human beings...
|
|
|
Post by JayUtah on Sept 3, 2008 14:37:23 GMT -4
Armstrong obviously rejected and I believe to know why...
There's more to the story.
Sibrel lured Armstrong to the interview on false pretenses, claiming to be from one of the well-known cable science-oriented networks. Armstrong knows full well who Sibrel is and has dealt with him before. Indeed it was Armstrong's complaint against Sibrel for trespassing that got Sibrel fired from his job at a television station.
Armstrong's response is, essentially, What! You again?
Should Armstrong accepted, he would have given Sibrel the chance of accusing him of saying/acting or do any sort of things in exchange for money.
Likely worse. When Sibrel made his statement to the Los Angeles prosecutor asking for battery charges to be filed against Buzz Aldrin in the famous altercation, he stated that his aim was to present Aldrin with an honorarium for his appearance, accuse him of taking money to talk about something "he never did," and get his response on camera. Shortly after the incident, the complaint was published to one of the legal document scavenging sites.
It appears Sibrel's intent in making Astronauts Gone Wild was to do whatever it took to embarrass them or make them seem dishonest or evasive.
|
|
raven
Jupiter
That ain't Earth, kiddies.
Posts: 509
|
Post by raven on Sept 3, 2008 14:49:41 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by JayUtah on Sept 3, 2008 15:47:07 GMT -4
True that.
Viewers are not likely to know the history between Sibrel and Armstrong. Thus they are likely to see Sibrel as an honest investigative journalist asking hard-hitting questions on a controversial question, and Armstrong as upset and evasive. It takes an external source to point out that Armstrong has had to deal with this guy before, and that Sibrel's public history is that of stalking and harrassing astronauts.
|
|
|
Post by smlbstcbr on Sept 4, 2008 12:11:18 GMT -4
Armstrong obviously rejected and I believe to know why...There's more to the story. Sibrel lured Armstrong to the interview on false pretenses, claiming to be from one of the well-known cable science-oriented networks. Armstrong knows full well who Sibrel is and has dealt with him before. Indeed it was Armstrong's complaint against Sibrel for trespassing that got Sibrel fired from his job at a television station. Armstrong's response is, essentially, What! You again? Should Armstrong accepted, he would have given Sibrel the chance of accusing him of saying/acting or do any sort of things in exchange for money.Likely worse. When Sibrel made his statement to the Los Angeles prosecutor asking for battery charges to be filed against Buzz Aldrin in the famous altercation, he stated that his aim was to present Aldrin with an honorarium for his appearance, accuse him of taking money to talk about something "he never did," and get his response on camera. Shortly after the incident, the complaint was published to one of the legal document scavenging sites. It appears Sibrel's intent in making Astronauts Gone Wild was to do whatever it took to embarrass them or make them seem dishonest or evasive. Thank you for clarifying that part. It's a lot worse than I believed, seems that Sibrel has some sort of mental illness (trying to not use pejorative words...)
|
|
raven
Jupiter
That ain't Earth, kiddies.
Posts: 509
|
Post by raven on Sept 4, 2008 14:45:33 GMT -4
I don't think he has a mental illness, he just wants the moneys. Think about it, he had a job at affiliate TV station, now his name is known (both revered and cursed) by millions. His DVD's sell like hot cakes and he probably has quite a bit of spending cash. Capitalism wins again!
|
|
|
Post by Count Zero on Sept 4, 2008 14:53:09 GMT -4
I consider him a sociopath.
|
|
|
Post by smlbstcbr on Sept 4, 2008 22:11:47 GMT -4
I don't think he has a mental illness, he just wants the moneys. Think about it, he had a job at affiliate TV station, now his name is known (both revered and cursed) by millions. His DVD's sell like hot cakes and he probably has quite a bit of spending cash. Capitalism wins again! Only to demonstrate that the liver sells more than the brain... ;D
|
|