rocky
Earth
BANNED
Posts: 212
|
Post by rocky on Mar 3, 2007 7:21:25 GMT -4
|
|
|
|
Post by nomuse on Mar 3, 2007 8:34:21 GMT -4
Rocky...
Do you know how to frame an argument? Can you write a paragraph? Was writing ever part of your curriculum?
How about if I post back a video link of Richard M. Nixon or Bill Clinton consciously lying? Maybe a video in which someone claims Al Pacino is consciously lying? How about a picture of Terry Schivo, unconciously lying?
No-one here is that interested in a war of videos.
To quote from Monty Python; "I came here for an argument!"
|
|
|
|
Post by Grand Lunar on Mar 3, 2007 9:15:30 GMT -4
Lying or just plain tired from being in a confined space for more than a week, using plastic bags for a bathroom, and preforming dirty geological work?
|
|
|
|
Post by sts60 on Mar 3, 2007 10:33:24 GMT -4
Of course this is just circumstantial evidence but it's pretty strong circumstancial evidence.
Your personal opinion means nothing; this is not even "mere evidence" unless you can cite your credentials in the relevant psychological field. Go ahead, tell us what makes you an expert.
I see the pattern, though. You don't know anything about the science or technology or programmatics or the history of Apollo or spaceflight or physics or engineering in general, so you look for videos which allow you to wave your hands because they're easier to apply subjective claims.
For anything that's not a video, you simply say "They're all wrong or lying!"
I have actually met, and worked with Apollo, and Apollo-era, astronauts. Have you? I doubt it; that would be getting perilously close to being informed by something other than YouTube and conspiracist web sites.
|
|
|
|
Post by JayUtah on Mar 3, 2007 11:46:47 GMT -4
I told you guys he'd lay low for a while to let the old arguments die away, then be back with a whole new set of hogwash.
You don't know what circumstantial evidence is. What you posted is innuendo. That's not evidence at all. Rejected.
|
|
|
|
Post by JayUtah on Mar 3, 2007 12:15:55 GMT -4
Of course this is just circumstantial evidence...
No, it's Bart Sibrel trying to make a buck. Rocky, you seem to want to question us very closely in order to detect our possible biases. Before this discussion continues any farther, I demand you post evidence of your already having questioned Bart Sibrel to detect, if possible, his biases before you decided to advocate his claims. Or did you do with Sibrel what you did with David Percy? Namely, "Oh, I just watched his video and it made sense to me."
I asked Jay what he thought of the astronauts' behavior in those videos in another thread and he didn't want to go off topic...
Specifically I did not want you to employ the standard conspiracist tactic of quickly changing the subject to distract from having abandoned your previous failed arguments about visor reflections. Starting a new thread for a new topic is okay as long as you continue the old discussions as well. Remember, you don't get to start discussions on eleventy new points and then complain that you don't have time to address them all.
|
|
|
|
Post by sts60 on Mar 3, 2007 12:43:57 GMT -4
Speaking of which, rocky needs to go back and answer the rebuttals in the Reflection of Sun... thread. Don't think you can escape that by starting a new round of handwaving. |
|
|
|
Post by twinstead on Mar 3, 2007 12:52:30 GMT -4
CT credo:
When knocked on the head, start a new thread.
|
|
|
|
Post by BertL on Mar 3, 2007 13:03:37 GMT -4
Rocky, let me just sum up what you just said. "Here's a video. Here's another video. I think the astronauts are lying. This is pretty strong evidence. What does Jay think? What does everyone else think?" Do you get my point? EDIT: I suggest you address the points in the Reflections thread before discussing this. |
|
|
|
Post by gillianren on Mar 3, 2007 16:10:46 GMT -4
You do realize that accusing someone of lying when they're not is libel, right, David?
Oh, the Apollo astronauts won't sue you. Sad but true. They have better things to do with their time, like watching paint dry. Then again, you'd just claim that the court that convicted you was another tool of the Man.
|
|
|
|
Post by Obviousman on Mar 3, 2007 16:47:49 GMT -4
I've looked at David's threads, and I think he is consciously lying. You can just tell because of the way the syntax is used, phrases employed, spelling accuracy, etc. He can't choose any other videos he uses because those ones are specifically crafted to support his lies, and he knows that if he moves from them his deception will be discovered.
Hey, it's just circumstantial evidence but it's strong circumstantial evidence.
How come David hasn't made an affirmation that he truly believes what he says, and that there is no deception on his part? That's even more circumstantial evidence.
|
|
|
|
Post by svector on Mar 3, 2007 17:07:47 GMT -4
|
|
|
|
Post by Grand Lunar on Mar 3, 2007 17:28:14 GMT -4
I bet that Rocky will claim the video is just "damage control", "a product of disinfo agents", or "mere evidence that has alternative explainations". He may use any of those or any other excuse to ignore the video.
|
|
|
|
Post by svector on Mar 3, 2007 17:31:33 GMT -4
I bet that Rocky will claim the video is just "damage control", "a product of disinfo agents", or "mere evidence that has alternative explainations". He may use any of those or any other excuse to ignore the video. Oh, according to rocky and his cohorts, I'm the biggest "damage control" agent out there. I've been accused of working for any number of "black ops" agencies, as well as NASA and even the FAA. ;D ;D |
|
|
|
Post by Grand Lunar on Mar 3, 2007 17:35:13 GMT -4
I have yet to be called that. In fact, I'm surprised I haven't, given that I'm former navy.
Know anyone else here that is former military?
|
|
