|
Post by PhantomWolf on Nov 9, 2010 21:26:48 GMT -4
Sorry for the multiple postings, but one last thing to say. I think it's hilarious that these guys spend so much time looking for signs of fakery in the real Apollo footage, coming up with looney examples where they decide by their lack of physics the footage is flawed, but show them some obviously faked footage that has glaring errors in it, and they can't see them.
|
|
|
Post by AtomicDog on Nov 12, 2010 21:11:24 GMT -4
Could someone ask James Fetzer why would anyone record sound (picking up the sounds of a crashing light) on a set that is supposed to represent the airless Lunar surface?
Recording sound is an extra production cost, and the sound wouldn't be used anyway, considering that Armstrong's speech would have been a DUBBED-IN RADIO TRANSMISSION!
|
|
|
Post by gillianren on Nov 12, 2010 23:35:44 GMT -4
It's not as though you can read his lips on camera. If you could, no one would dispute whether the "a" was there or not.
And that's another thing. Wouldn't they just do it over so he got the line right?
|
|
|
Post by Obviousman on Nov 13, 2010 2:11:05 GMT -4
Stop using facts and logic in a Fetzer debate! They only confuse him.
|
|
|
Post by dickshane on Nov 13, 2010 11:54:22 GMT -4
Aside from what the comparisons with the real footage show, the viral is pretty obviously structured as a joke (and not a particularly funny one either): the fact the lights fall at the critical 'small step for man' moment; the fact they fall into shot to give a clear view of the 'accident'; the exaggerated gesture of the astronaut in response. Can they really not see all this? How can people with such poor perception of an obvious joke be expected to understand some of the more subtle reasons why the actual footage of Apollo is not a hoax?
I'm still amazed though at the amount of illogical reasoning and special pleading Jim Fetzer can produce to support his beliefs. Honestly, this guy could waffle for America.
|
|
|
Post by blackstar on Nov 13, 2010 14:09:33 GMT -4
And I see because someone posted in the wrong thread, and having realized they had done so asked the mods to move the post, Fetzer is screaming about abuse of position again, as well as apparently being oblivious to the numerous flaws in the spoof video.
|
|
|
Post by hplasm on Nov 13, 2010 18:46:35 GMT -4
Nope. Not my street. I have specially programmed paintball sniper sentry drones for that eventuality... Your chapter of the government shills club must be better funded than mine. ;D Your 'paintballs' have PAINT in them....?!? (Uranium yellow is not that dangerous)
|
|
|
Post by etac on Nov 14, 2010 20:05:42 GMT -4
I debated in high school and college and I have to say that Fetzer resorts to the cheapest tricks that even high school debaters disdain as evidence of an inferior opponent. Horns of the dilemma indeed. And supported with the weakest form of evidence: assertion. "Could have" being equated to proof. And if he wants to flaunt degrees he's welcome to put his doctorate in whatever against mine in Physics which has more relevance to the topic than his.
Frankly, he should pay some attention to the quote from Tweedledee in my sig. It Ain't.
|
|
|
Post by ineluki on Nov 15, 2010 11:01:14 GMT -4
Could someone ask James Fetzer why would anyone record sound (picking up the sounds of a crashing light) on a set that is supposed to represent the airless Lunar surface? As Fetzer answered before: Those Guys that made the film were not rocket scientists...
|
|
|
Post by gillianren on Nov 15, 2010 15:59:46 GMT -4
Basically, the idea is that no one competent was hired, yet they were so devious that they could fool everyone but a Special Few. Yeesh. Hoax belief, huh?
|
|
|
Post by chew on Nov 15, 2010 21:41:22 GMT -4
Could someone ask James Fetzer why would anyone record sound (picking up the sounds of a crashing light) on a set that is supposed to represent the airless Lunar surface? As Fetzer answered before: Those Guys that made the film were not rocket scientists... and not one of the thousands of scientists and engineers who studied the films and photos noticed anything that would indicate a hoax.
|
|
|
Post by lukepemberton on Nov 16, 2010 0:01:32 GMT -4
I think it's hilarious that these guys spend so much time looking for signs of fakery in the real Apollo footage, coming up with looney examples where they decide by their lack of physics the footage is flawed, but show them some obviously faked footage that has glaring errors in it, and they can't see them. It begs the question, how many hours do the likes of Jack White and Duane Daman spend pouring over the photos. The 'strange man without the PLSS' has to be the best one. I stumbled across the hoax about 2 years ago. I had heard of it before, but it never registered in my psyche. I never realised that it was so heated, and divided opinion as it does. The photography is not my area really, although my understanding has improved. Initially, it was is not obvious to me what was going on all the time, but I went away and read both sides of the argument and did not dismiss evidence out of hand from the hoax side. The 'Aldrin on the LM ladder' photo made it clear to me that the hoaxers would go to any lengths to prove their theory. At that point I simply questioned how impartial they were. Now I simply see them as Kaysing's cult followers. I have little time for their opinions. I'll be honest. If half of them actually listened to the counter arguments with some care then maybe they would not jump to the spurious conclusions. Some of the die hards are so entrenched in the theory that there is no way out for them. Too much emotional investment, and not enough balance.
|
|
|
Post by Daggerstab on Nov 16, 2010 8:13:27 GMT -4
Fetzer now has resorted to citing Metapedia's "Moon Hoax" article. I'd love to see someone point out to him the following: - Metapedia is a neo-Nazi site- their Moon Hoax article itself is the creation of "Lucho", former Wikipedia user Luchezar, who inflicts it on every open-access wiki on the Internet that will allow this kind of junk to go unchallenged. A brief glimpse at Lucho's Wikipedia user page will make clear the root reason for his doubt in the Apollo landings. (Hint: Bulgaria's flags no longer feature a prominent red star...) Of course, this doesn't say much the validity of the claims in the article (the generic fallacy, argument ad hominem, etc.), but it's another example of how clueless is Fetzer and how uncritically he will accept a source if it fits his preconceptions.
|
|
|
Post by Czero 101 on Nov 16, 2010 8:55:02 GMT -4
I'm sorry, but any person who sees and uses Duane "StupidDog" "StrayDog" Daman as a credible source of information needs to have their head examined, and probably needs to have any academic accreditation revoked.
Cz
|
|
|
Post by echnaton on Nov 16, 2010 12:08:11 GMT -4
I don't know if this is related but it is funny. The Urban Dictionary has an entry for "feltzer" with this definition.
The "soul patch" being a tuft of hair grown just below the lower lip.
|
|