Unmoderated Moon forum

[greigdempsey]

If anyone here believes they are capable of debating on a forum where the opposition isn't automatically banned please join here

groups.msn.com/Moonhoax/

[frenat]

If the opposition is automatically banned here as you imply, then why are you still here? Why are turbonium and spongebob still here? Why was Moonman allowed to make so many posts before being banned for a totally unrelated reason?

[LunarOrbit]

Ridiculous. I welcome opposing points of view. What I don't welcome are people who believe they can insult others without retribution. You came into this forum and immediately treated us to a condescending attitude. If you had been polite there would not be a problem.

There are other hoax believers here who have the ability to express their opposing views politely. If you took the time to look through the forum you would know that.

[AtomicDog]

This is the group that died because of infighting among the HBs.

[greigdempsey]

admin said:

Ridiculous. I welcome opposing points of view. What I don't welcome are people who believe they can insult others without retribution. You came into this forum and immediately treated us to a condescending attitude. If you had been polite there would not be a problem.

There are other hoax believers here who have the ability to express their opposing views politely. If you took the time to look through the forum you would know that.

I have been threatened with being banned by you three or four times and been told I would be banned three or four times from people who aren't even moderators. Banning is obviously part of the 'culture'.

The invitation remains open to all.

[LunarOrbit]

The warnings I gave you were based on your attitude not your beliefs. I really don't care if you believe the moon landings were faked, what I don't like is when someone comes along and insults me.

[nomuse]

Ha ha.

Throughout your time here, greig, you have applied a unilateral banning against me and the majority of other posters on the forum; you have simply decided that we are too unqualified to speak and thus can be safely ignored.

If that is what you offer in this new forum, what possible reason would I have to follow you there?

What possible reason would anyone have to follow you there? "Oh, I'm sorry, STS60. I don't really believe you work in the field. Oh, I'm sorry, LunarOrbit. You don't have the specific academic background to discuss this question. Oh, I'm sorry, Jay Utah; you are obviously a paid disinfo agent and everything you say must be discounted."

I think I'll stay in this open and democratic forum where where any banning and deletions are done publicly and the details are recorded and preserved for all to see.

[greigdempsey]

I believe if someone uses a scientific argument they must demonstrate they understand it or else there is no point. Especially when they refer to websites run by people who have close connections to NASA. In science it is highly unlikely someone will understand the debate unless they are properly qualified. This whole forum is dedicated to pouring scorn on the ignorance and stupidity of hoax believers. I am turning the tables.

There is a character called MID who haunts moon forums and has managed to convince a large number of people he worked on Apollo. He hasn't because he doesn't understand high school physics no matter his knowledge of the space programme.

[BertL]

I've joined.

[LunarOrbit]

I believe if someone uses a scientific argument they must demonstrate they understand it or else there is no point.

Yeah, well, how about instead of just assuming we won't understand something you give us the benefit of the doubt.

[BertL]

Oh - greigdempsey, are you sure one can debate over there? There hasn't been activity for one and a half months.

[nomuse]

greigdempsey said:

I believe if someone uses a scientific argument they must demonstrate they understand it or else there is no point.

How would one demonstrate?

A) "I understand perfectly because I have an advanced degree from Yale. Trust me; I understand."

B) "I understand your point but here is -- detailed technical discussion -- of something you have missed."

I understand now why you worked supervising technicians. No _technical_ person puts up with claims of competence. Among technicians, you prove you know the subject by Doing the Work.

[greigdempsey]

bertls said:

Oh - greigdempsey, are you sure one can debate over there? There hasn't been activity for one and a half months.

I just started a new thread but the forum is slow (Sunday maintainance no doubt) so not the best time unfortunately.

[hplasm]

nomuse said:

greigdempsey said:

I believe if someone uses a scientific argument they must demonstrate they understand it or else there is no point.

How would one demonstrate?

A) "I understand perfectly because I have an advanced degree from Yale. Trust me; I understand."

B) "I understand your point but here is -- detailed technical discussion -- of something you have missed."

I understand now why you worked supervising technicians. No _technical_ person puts up with claims of competence. Among technicians, you prove you know the subject by Doing the Work.

Those who can, do... ?

You forgot C), the standard at msn Moonhoax:-

I understand perfectly, but you are an idiot; because it's obvious.

[greigdempsey]

nomuse said:

greigdempsey said:

I believe if someone uses a scientific argument they must demonstrate they understand it or else there is no point.

How would one demonstrate?

A) "I understand perfectly because I have an advanced degree from Yale. Trust me; I understand."

B) "I understand your point but here is -- detailed technical discussion -- of something you have missed."

I understand now why you worked supervising technicians. No _technical_ person puts up with claims of competence. Among technicians, you prove you know the subject by Doing the Work.

You can demostrate you understand by discussing the issues involved and not just smugly pointing to Clavius. If you read Clavius Jay Utah goes to great lengths to show that science is often more difficult than lay people imagine. It is. Again much of the comment here is exactly of that nature. Hoax believers are ignorant and dumb.