|
Post by gillianren on Oct 17, 2010 23:27:26 GMT -4
Rodin, the only person to blame for you spreading yourself too thin is you. Instead of posting multiple claims at the same time, start with just one and focus solely on that. If you can't prove your case then just admit it. Somehow, it's even our fault that he starts multiple threads on multiple boards, all with multiple statements each, and then doesn't have the time to answer questions he should have thought of himself before making any claims.
|
|
|
Post by tedward on Oct 18, 2010 4:46:47 GMT -4
Rodin, it would be good if you could address these. I would rather see an attempt to reply with a bit of research rather than an attempt at death by Mod. Who knows, you might be on to something but you have to prove it. It means putting the effort in, showing due diligence and a correct approach. Getting banned does not do you any favours.
|
|
|
Post by lukepemberton on Oct 18, 2010 5:04:29 GMT -4
Rodin, it would be good if you could address these. I would rather see an attempt to reply with a bit of research rather than an attempt at death by Mod. Who knows, you might be on to something but you have to prove it. It means putting the effort in, showing due diligence and a correct approach. Getting banned does not do you any favours. Personally, I hope that Lunar Orbiter does not ban him, but just hides his posts until he has answered Jay's questions. It's a bit like managing a child. With respect to Jay, the questions are not rocket science. They are the basic tenets of reporting results that most undergrad and advanced high school students would also ask. I recall that when I was studying O-level physics (14-16), we got introduced to the basic ideas of estimating errors of measurement. By the time I was studying A-level (16-18) I was conducting basic analysis of experimental errors. The concept is straight forward enough. If Rodin fails to see it, then I, as a practicing physicist, cannot take his claims seriously.
|
|
Topher
Venus
I'm in yo' planet, abducting yo' farmers.
Posts: 31
|
Post by Topher on Oct 18, 2010 10:54:24 GMT -4
Well, I don't believe he will answer Jay's questions. He just keeps saying that you guys (and Apollo supporters in general) dare not answer his questions. He's ranting about cement brushed with a broom or something.
|
|
|
Post by tedward on Oct 18, 2010 11:09:31 GMT -4
Well, I don't believe he will answer Jay's questions. He just keeps saying that you guys (and Apollo supporters in general) dare not answer his questions. He's ranting about cement brushed with a broom or something. Neither do I and doubt he is capable but a running narrative is handy should he try to hold it up elsewhere. Sort of "I showed them AH peeps" when anyone can come and see the sum of showed was zero.
|
|
|
Post by echnaton on Oct 18, 2010 12:31:30 GMT -4
Well, I don't believe he will answer Jay's questions. He just keeps saying that you guys (and Apollo supporters in general) dare not answer his questions. He's ranting about cement brushed with a broom or something. Agreed. We have once again succeeded in the goal of letting conspiracy theorist expose themselves to solid, close questioning. Once again, rational answers supporting a hoax are not forthcoming and the proponent simply declares a imaginary victory somewhere else.
|
|
Topher
Venus
I'm in yo' planet, abducting yo' farmers.
Posts: 31
|
Post by Topher on Oct 18, 2010 14:02:46 GMT -4
Well, I don't believe he will answer Jay's questions. He just keeps saying that you guys (and Apollo supporters in general) dare not answer his questions. He's ranting about cement brushed with a broom or something. Agreed. We have once again succeeded in the goal of letting conspiracy theorist expose themselves to solid, close questioning. Once again, rational answers supporting a hoax are not forthcoming and the proponent simply declares a imaginary victory somewhere else. He did post something on the David icke forum regarding this subject, though: " Just since this post less the 12 hours ago
www.davidicke.com/forum/showp...postcount=1324
on this page
www.davidicke.com/forum/showt...25988&page=133
the following posse have showed up
zeta39reticuli recent thread participant - under surveillance
truegroup a decent sort actually - just IMO mistaken
lunarorbit new poster. Representin' AH.
Quote: 'you're playing the same old HB games: posting claim after claim and ignoring our questions'. Its a ploy – ask questions that you know will be difficult to fully answer in the time scale of the case you are making - like
Quote: How did they control independent observations – and set it up as a road block before addressing further evidence of the hoax. You end up wading through a treacle of challenges and the momentum of investigation gets destroyed. Plus there's a bunch of people over there seem to be online all the time – how can they afford this? I can only spend an hour or so a week on that particular board.
To address the independent observations question I would say the 'organatzya' have more than one arrow in their quiver
They can use agents. After all its not everyone who had the equipment to detect anything with directionality
They can fake signals so people without directionality but radio reception can hear 'Doppler' effects and time delays. The company Eventide Clock Works with NASA ties benefitted or undertook development of electronics to do just this and released it in a commercial product later
They can indeed eliminate awkward witnesses.
These answwers though are not enough – I have to PROVE they did this or no show for
www.davidicke.com/forum/showp...postcount=1324
Showing something is possible is not enough. I must show how everything was done – exactly.
AH as a board support the natural collapse of WTC7. I posted over there ages ago and hit a brick wall of denial. While I still remain open minded about Apollo I know for sure WTC7 was demolished. AH are physicists – yet they regard a symmetrical collapse at freefall speed as being perfectly natural
apollo_gnomon resident establishment position since May 2010. I think OK actually. I will try to open his mind (why do I think its a he?)
wanaknow what is commony termed an 'HB'er. Watch out wanna – these sharks have sharp teeth
frenat establishment position, but long term DIF poster gotta respect that
all in all a lot of respect shown to a 'no hoper' thread " Apparently, I'm "under surveillance".
|
|
|
Post by lukepemberton on Oct 18, 2010 14:17:00 GMT -4
Apparently, I'm "under surveillance". Cripes, if you are under surveillance, then I guess that means Jay and Lunar are being hunted down by the Crab People, and will be taken to the bowels of Earth for sacrifice to the Lizard Men. ;D Don't worry Jay and Lunar, all you need do is purchase an industrial sized crab cracker, and you'll be fine.
|
|
|
Post by tedward on Oct 18, 2010 14:44:53 GMT -4
Can I be under surveillance? I have a mac and dark glasses and can write my name backwards.
My handlers said this might happen at one point but no one suspects me.
|
|
|
Post by echnaton on Oct 18, 2010 15:20:20 GMT -4
I keep company with those who frequent this board for a reason. Those posts are creepy.
BTW the links don't function.
|
|
|
Post by Apollo Gnomon on Oct 18, 2010 15:37:41 GMT -4
He thinks I'm "OK." How special.
I guess I've mastered the art of being politely abrasive while effusively informative. I blame Jay.
|
|
|
Post by carpediem on Oct 18, 2010 16:02:25 GMT -4
Topher, your URLs are broken.
|
|
|
Post by JayUtah on Oct 18, 2010 16:10:08 GMT -4
Everyone else blames me for everything, so jump on the bandwagon.
Momentum is something real investigations avoid like the plague. The only reason an investigation would need momentum is if it planned to whiz right past things without paying them too much attention. Things like exculpatory evidence.
I suppose if Rodin wants to admit to a Gish Gallop, I won't stop him. But the fact remains that he talks the talk, but clearly won't walk the walk. So he'll avoid ApolloHoax for as long as he thinks he can get away with it.
|
|
|
Post by JayUtah on Oct 18, 2010 16:12:40 GMT -4
He just keeps saying that you guys (and Apollo supporters in general) dare not answer his questions. Since when has speculation devoid of evidence qualified as a question? From what I can determine, he can't tell the difference between speculation and fact, or between hypothesis and conclusion. He announces that he thinks something "could possibly" have been done a certain way, and for some reason considers that sufficient proof that Apollo missions were somehow faked. He's still mired in the "You have to prove I'm wrong," fallacy.
|
|
|
Post by Halcyon Dayz, FCD on Oct 18, 2010 16:26:09 GMT -4
[redacted]!
I'm not sure it is a good thing or a bad thing that didn't get mentioned.
|
|