|
|
Post by photobuster919 on Jan 21, 2011 15:56:06 GMT -4
In the Nardwuar interview Kaysing said; "Well, the media doesn't fall for anything. The media is controlled by the government. The Dutch papers on July 21 [1969] said that the moon landing was a hoax, was a fake, and I have been unable to find any of those Dutch papers, although it's well documented that they did publish information, with proof, that the U.S. was spoofing everybody" I have one link that debunks this claim but I would love to see where this hoax story is documented; www3.telus.net/summa/moonshot/random.htmI think perhaps it was a misconception. Personally I believe the dutch papers didn't question the moon landings but I would love to hear where this information came from. |
|
Bob B.
Bob the Excel Guru?
Posts: 3,072
|
Post by Bob B. on Jan 21, 2011 16:05:44 GMT -4
Bill Kaysing had a habit of claiming things that could not be substantiated.
|
|
|
|
Post by lukepemberton on Jan 21, 2011 16:16:39 GMT -4
Bill Kaysing had a habit of claiming things that could not be substantiated. In a nutshell Bob... in a nutshell... |
|
|
|
Post by Jason Thompson on Jan 21, 2011 17:16:40 GMT -4
Well, the media doesn't fall for anything. The media is controlled by the government. One of kaysing's favourite claims, but if the media is controlled by the government, what is he using to spread his message if not... the media?! If it is well documented then he should have no trouble providing the documentation. A large number of kaysing's claims rely on his saying things are well-documented, or on anecdotes about un-named experts he or a friend of his have spoken to. Don't waste time trying to find out what the real story is. he had decades to substantiate his claims and never did. |
|
|
|
Post by lukepemberton on Jan 21, 2011 17:32:07 GMT -4
One of kaysing's favourite claims, but if the media is controlled by the government, what is he using to spread his message if not... the media?! That is an excellent point. And which particular media channel promoted his moonhoax claims? Fox. Am I correct that Fox was (or still is) owned by Murdoch, probably the most powerful media mogul on the planet. |
|
|
|
Post by photobuster919 on Jan 21, 2011 17:34:29 GMT -4
Well, the media doesn't fall for anything. The media is controlled by the government. One of kaysing's favourite claims, but if the media is controlled by the government, what is he using to spread his message if not... the media?! If it is well documented then he should have no trouble providing the documentation. A large number of kaysing's claims rely on his saying things are well-documented, or on anecdotes about un-named experts he or a friend of his have spoken to. Don't waste time trying to find out what the real story is. he had decades to substantiate his claims and never did. I actually don't spend much time on it. It just gets me now and again and is something I'm curious about. Even to know what would be the source of such a claim. Its probably the Dutch Papers that exposed some other hoax and some weirdo told Kaysing it had to do with Apollo, when it was something completely different. It might be something like that, otherwise it could have been just a sloppy statement. |
|
|
|
Post by gillianren on Jan 21, 2011 17:49:02 GMT -4
I find it more likely that he made it up or that someone else made it up to see if he'd use it.
|
|
|
|
Post by lukepemberton on Jan 21, 2011 17:54:24 GMT -4
It might be something like that, otherwise it could have been just a sloppy statement. I really would not pay too much attention to anything Kaysing said regarding Apollo. In the end he became like a Grandfather with a story to tell, sitting in his chair and telling a tall tale. I think much of what he said stemmed from his view of government and the corporate rat race. The Apollo hoax was an adjunct to his activism and wider beliefs. If it was not Apollo it would have been something else. That is my view, from what I have read and heard. I actually thought Bill had the courage of his convictions. He was probably a bit left wing in my view, and detested consumerism and capitalism. That his right to hold those beliefs, and I actually applaud him regarding his approach to living. He had compassion toward veterans and the homeless, and was certainly a caring man. I think the death of his 1st wife to cancer really affected him, and I can understand that. I think he was very different to Rene and some of the modern CTers. To me they are the ones who seem to have latched onto the hoax theory because they either have an axe to grind, or have some severe mental issues. My view is that hard core conspiracy theorists are what they are because they feel a collective belonging amongst their peers. Most are dropouts, have some baggage, are resentful, or are simply so stir crazy they believe will believe anything. By being part of the a group, they can feel belonging and aspire to be what they are not in reality - experts in their field. Sadly it's expertise in bulls**t. If you really want to understand the psychology of conspiracy, then Ralph Rene is the one to look at. Now there is one bitter man. |
|
|
|
Post by laurel on Jan 21, 2011 18:43:27 GMT -4
He had compassion toward veterans and the homeless, and was certainly a caring man. It seems like somewhat selective compassion. Several of the Apollo astronauts were combat veterans, and he accused them of being liars. |
|
|
|
Post by lukepemberton on Jan 21, 2011 21:17:20 GMT -4
He had compassion toward veterans and the homeless, and was certainly a caring man. It seems like somewhat selective compassion. Several of the Apollo astronauts were combat veterans, and he accused them of being liars. I think the point I was making was that in the bigger scheme of things, many of the 'ordinary' soldiers that came back from Vietnam were broken men, and he had a great compassion for them. I cannot condemn Kaysing for that. I guess Kaysing saw the Apollo astronauts held up in glory and the broken soldiers, and... well the rest is why we post on this forum. I take a view that his moral compass, while not pointing due north, probably pointed more north than Percy, Rene, Sibrel and Allen. Don't mistake me though, his ramblings on Apollo were very offensive, and as I said, towards the end he was like some old Grandfather telling his tale. He had not substantiated his claims, despite the passage of time, but carried on regardless. I think his morals probably loosened a little once the Fox cheque came in. |
|
|
|
Post by Halcyon Dayz, FCD on Jan 22, 2011 18:25:33 GMT -4
Probably just one of his many fibs.
I'm not at all convinced Kaysing actually ever believed Apollo was hoaxed.
If at the time any Dutch newspaper had published an article sceptical of the veracity of Apollo I'm sure Dutch hoaxies would be quoting it all the time.
IIRC in 1969 a newspaper published an op-ed making fun of Prof. George van den Berg (1890-1966), a law professor/politician and gifted amateur astronomer who had argued in the '50s that manned space travel would be impossible or too dangerous because of the re-entry problem.
Van den Bergh still got a moon crater named after him.
|
|
|
|
Post by captain swoop on Jan 28, 2011 13:19:50 GMT -4
This is a feeble claim.
Does he think that NASA has managed to remove all the original newspapers from the archives of a foreign country and bottoms of cupboards, old suitcases, attics and garages and replaced them with new copies with their own version of the headlines?
pathetic.
|
|
|
|
Post by twik on Feb 12, 2011 13:03:05 GMT -4
Funny thing - when my aunt died a few years ago, and we were cleaning out her house, we came across a newspaper from the day of the moon landing that she'd saved for posterity.
It said nothing about doubting its reality.
Even if the government tried, how could it find all those newspapers and clippings that surely millions of people around the world have stuffed into albums, and boxes, and so forth? (Not to mention how did they buy off/silence all the writers, editors, typesetters and so forth not to mention that their work had been changed over the years?)
|
|
|
|
Post by ka9q on Feb 13, 2011 0:47:08 GMT -4
Does he think that NASA has managed to remove all the original newspapers from the archives of a foreign country and bottoms of cupboards, old suitcases, attics and garages and replaced them with new copies with their own version of the headlines? Yes, this is obviously ludicrous when you're talking about the paper media. But I am somewhat concerned about where we're going as paper is displaced by online media. This is a good thing in general (especially for the forests) but it may become more difficult to document historical incidents after some time has passed. It's become a common sport to race to mirror someone's website or Facebook page after they're suddenly thrust into the national news by committing a serious crime. After last month's mass shooting in Tucson AZ of a US judge, a member of the US Congress and a dozen other people, a nationally known politician who had been criticized for her use of violent imagery quickly took down a website with the imagery in question. So far, attempts to send information related to high profile incidents down the electronic "memory hole" generally fail. They simply make those who try look comic. But what about less dramatic incidents that occur over much longer periods of time? A government agency might quietly delete an obscure but revealing report years before anyone realizes its importance. We need the electronic equivalent of the research library, independent archives that regularly collect, index and store everything available to the public so there can be a reliable, unalterable historical record. But the amount of data is vast, and there are also significant legal and privacy issues to consider. |
|
|
|
Post by Kiwi on Feb 13, 2011 8:41:42 GMT -4
...I am somewhat concerned about where we're going as paper is displaced by online media. Same here. I'm an amateur genealogist and historian. Getting off topic, but... For a start, we need a standard for storing electronic writing long-term in a way that can be easily accessed in the future. I don't agree with the Project Gutenberg way of everything in plain text and a return at the end of every line, especially if paragraphs don't have two returns between them. It's better than nothing at all, but not by a lot. We need the electronic equivalent of the research library, independent archives that regularly collect, index and store everything available to the public so there can be a reliable, unalterable historical record. But the amount of data is vast, and there are also significant legal and privacy issues to consider. At the very least, any such system should allow reasonable and common formatting such as bolding, italics, superscripts, subscripts, underlines, strikeouts, tabbing, indenting, different fonts and sizes, and all the ASCII characters. Colour changes, justification and a few other things should probably also be possible. In switching to Open Office and saving documents as Word 95 (a perfectly good and common standard), I lost all the special characters in my gazillions of documents -- pound and yen signs, fractions, degree symbols, etc. -- and I only found out after they had gone because I didn't expect that to happen. Bloody annoying! There's also "revisionism through ignorance" to consider. Quite a few times on TV I've seen Neil Armstrong supposedly stepping on to the surface of the moon and saying "That's one small step...", but in fact he is jumping down to the footpad the second time, over a minute before he took the first historic step off the footpad and onto the moon. I think that bit of footage and audio might have been pinched from "For All Mankind", which is a wonderful work of art with video and audio well mixed up, but it clearly mustn't be taken as a true record of how things happened. |
|
