|
Post by tedward on Jul 10, 2011 4:54:32 GMT -4
Threads. Blast from the past, that was scary.
|
|
|
Post by randombloke on Jul 10, 2011 6:28:37 GMT -4
I never got to see the end of Threads. They were showing it in my "religion & politics" class in secondary school but some of the weaker-stomached kids complained about two thirds of the way through and it's basically never going to be on TV, nor is it still in print as far as I can determine.
|
|
|
Post by lukepemberton on Jul 10, 2011 6:40:16 GMT -4
Threads. Blast from the past, that was scary. Pun unintended I persume (blast from the past - as in nuclear blast). Yes, it was pretty scary. I had nightmares about WW3 before Threads was broadcast. Threads simply piled more onto my prepubescent 'end of the world' anxiety. The build up to the Soviet attack was very tense indeed, and then it all happened so quickly. I never got to see the end of Threads. They were showing it in my "religion & politics" class in secondary school but some of the weaker-stomached kids complained about two thirds of the way through and it's basically never going to be on TV, nor is it still in print as far as I can determine. It's on YouTube if you are interested. You can also buy it from Amazon at £4.49. The end is quite grim.
|
|
|
Post by twik on Jul 10, 2011 10:41:53 GMT -4
Their is no reason to conclude Borman's symptoms were related to taking seconal. When is taking seconal typically associated with feverishness and diarrhea? The conclusion said to have been reached as presented in some popular accounts such as Chaikin's features the angle that Berry and his colleagues decided this was viral gastroenteritis. If it was seconal, how was that decided? If it was viral gastroenteritis, how was that determination made? There is absolutely no evidence for a thoughtful evaluation. Not of Borman, not of Lovell and Anders. These are staged illnesses and and I dare say, woefully inadequate staged responses from the doctors. The obvious concerns about diarrhea in the cabin were never mentioned, let alone addressed. Borman got sick 18 hours into the flight. Take a look at the transcript from that point and moving forward. Any evidence for the astronauts having been appropriately been looked after? NO. Any discussion in the briefings? No. Diarrhea possibly containing bacterial or viral pathogens floating in a zero G environment, a mist of contagion adhering to everything, floating away, adhering again, a situation in which air filtering could not provide a solution , could not guarantee astronaut safety, was this issue ever discussed, ever addressed? NO. The point is that a differential diagnosis for the illness was never generated, the possibilities, all of the possibilities never considered. Appropriate precautions regarding the fallout from Borman's illness never taken. As such, we may conclude with certainty, the doctor patient encounter is staged. Apollo is an exploration of theater, or the power of television/media, not a genuine exploration of our Earth/moon system. You are not taking into consideration that (1) the patient was eating a prepared diet, not chowing down at the local E. coli Buffet, (2) he had been in quarantine specifically to prevent picking up infectious illness, and (3) the symptoms were minor. In any case, here is a direct question - why, if they decided to add an "interesting detail" by having an astronaut fall ill, would hoaxers fail to address it medically in the way you assume any competent doctor would have done? Surely, they would have consulted with a medical professional about symptoms, etc., so why would the doctor not have told them that "We are not allowed to graduate medical school if we don't do a ten-hour evaluation of patients with upset GI tracts"? Why are you the only "doctor" who noticed something wrong?
|
|
|
Post by JayUtah on Jul 10, 2011 12:03:06 GMT -4
...and (3) the symptoms were minor.Minor and self-correcting. What baffles me about "Doctor" Fattydash's approach is that doctors don't heal sickness. Doctors help the body heal itself. This is one of the fundamental tenets of medicine. This is why symptoms that go away by themselves and show no sign of recurrence typically provoke no further response from the physician. The physician does not generally want to meddle with a body that seems to be healing itself without his assistance. ...in the way you assume any competent doctor would have done? Surely, they would have consulted with a medical professional...This is why magicians never repeat a trick and why successful charlatans generally shy away from verifiable detail. Adding "color" to a lie simply hands one's critic a ready-made means of refuting it. Charlatans such as UFO claimants generally don't have access to the facts needed to concoct a believable story festooned with accurate color. However, as you note, NASA had unfettered access to medical expertise that would have helped them concoct a very believable story, had they chosen to do so. Hence to say that they committed an amateur, glaring error casts doubt instead on the claimant's expectations. Why are you the only "doctor" who noticed something wrong?Obviously because he's no doctor. He doesn't establish his qualifications in any verifiable fashion to make an expert analysis. And although the handwaves about "any medical professional" being able to see these egregious faults, he can't name any -- aside perhaps from his army of sock puppets at BAUT. He denounces the flight surgeon for following an allegedly improper diagnostic practice. But that doctor's credentials are not in question. Hence there is no argument. A layman's criticism (and that's all fattydash's is, until he elects to prove otherwise) has no value. Allegedly no differential diagnosis was performed. I disagree. Just because there is no record of Dr. Berry having articulated any at the time or later does not mean he did not formulate one in his mind. And since this patient is not simply a random soul presenting from off the street with gastrointestinal distress, but rather an individual with a very well known recent history and in a highly controlled environment, it is not inconceivable for Dr. Berry to have rapidly thought through the differential diagnosis. The question is about the propriety of diagnosis, the subsequent priopriety of treatment, and the contemplated propriety of a direct abort. Fattydash hasn't demonstrated any sort of qualification for reasoning more correctly on that subject than the professional and highly experienced flight surgeon who was attending at the time. He has simply waved his hands, demanded to be believed, and (apparently) now disappeared. The physicians I know would have some pretty harsh words for a colleague who dared pass judgment on the attending physician without having examined the patient themselves.
|
|
|
Post by nomuse on Jul 11, 2011 16:37:35 GMT -4
The actions following the evaluation, for example, what to do about a cabin contaminated with feces, are not actions consistant with the threat so presented. If an appropriate evaluation occurred, they would have done more than simply tried their best to pick the feces out of the air. They would have at the very least discussed doing a lot more. The assumption that all communications and discussions were documented in the sources you have read so far already guts your point. But I have noticed a certain repetition here of something I think you need to explore. To wit; WHAT SPECIFIC OPTIONS would or should have been discussed? Were there SPECIFIC measures to clean up the cabin or protect the astronauts that you think should have been addressed? You go on and on as if there was a laundry list of options available and only incompetence or sloth prevented them from being attempted or even discussed. Well, I'd like to hear about them. I'd like to hear even one! The only one you've suggested so far is to "turn the spacecraft around" (paraphrased from your post at BAUT), which would have been a short discussion indeed. (I fully expect the same detail of reply as you honored me with at the BAUT).
|
|
|
Post by nomuse on Jul 11, 2011 16:57:50 GMT -4
This reminds me not a little of that part of the "no stars" argument where the hoax believer claims that any astronomer could have looked at the painted backdrop and realized the stars were in the wrong places.
To paraphrase Jay Utah's famous reply, why didn't the hoax hire a doctor to make up a properly believable medical scenario for Apollo 8? What would possibly be the reason to let the astronomer and the physicist and the computer expert and the aerospace propulsion expert and so forth into the story conference, but bar the door to the doctor?
|
|
|
Post by blackstar on Jul 11, 2011 17:31:08 GMT -4
This reminds me not a little of that part of the "no stars" argument where the hoax believer claims that any astronomer could have looked at the painted backdrop and realized the stars were in the wrong places. To paraphrase Jay Utah's famous reply, why didn't the hoax hire a doctor to make up a properly believable medical scenario for Apollo 8? What would possibly be the reason to let the astronomer and the physicist and the computer expert and the aerospace propulsion expert and so forth into the story conference, but bar the door to the doctor? Well if you are going to insist on dragging logic into it you are being unfair on fattydash whose arguments have none.
|
|
|
Post by PeterB on Jul 12, 2011 10:55:57 GMT -4
Stutefish Patients who "look like Borman" with diarrhea, vomiting, chills get interrogated big time regardless of "familiarity". Some cases of infectious diarrhea must be reported to the local board of public health for obvious reasons. This is fairly significant stuff. What sort of assessment and recommendations would you give to a person who told you they’d had D&V yesterday, but they’re feeling better now? Any thoughts, fattydash?
|
|
|
Post by laurel on Jul 12, 2011 18:54:06 GMT -4
Fattydash, since you've been making so-called concessions today, was Apollo 8 authentic?
|
|
|
Post by blackstar on Jul 12, 2011 19:39:44 GMT -4
Fattydash, since you've been making so-called concessions today, was Apollo 8 authentic? I would second that question. Fattydash has suggested the illness was meant to be some sort authentic flourish added to avoid making the story of a faked mission look too perfect but if Apollo 11 landed on the moon there is no reason to suppose Apollo 8 did anything other than orbit it.
|
|
|
Post by laurel on Jul 14, 2011 16:26:47 GMT -4
Fattydash, you have a pending question in this thread, do you choose to answer it or not?
|
|
|
Post by Apollo Gnomon on Jul 16, 2011 0:30:34 GMT -4
Hans Schlegel became temporarily ill during STS-122, I guess that mission was faked too. Well, sure. The so-called "space" shuttle never left low earth orbit. Suspicious, don't ya think?
|
|