|
|
Post by LunarOrbit on Dec 18, 2011 22:49:16 GMT -4
Thank you for your responce. On this forum i do see a lot of intellectual snobbery and after being attacked and seeing others attacked i felt a need to point that out. The people here have had to put up with a lot worse from hoax theorists, and our patience has worn thin. We're not going to waste time arguing with people who are only interested in provoking anger. Bull. I've seen you insult the intelligence of people at Hagbard's forum (including Cheeb) many times, so I don't buy your sudden sympathy for him now. And compared to Hagbard's forum, this one is extremely polite. You can't go from insulting Cheeb at Hagbard's forum to defending him here without me wondering if all you're really interested in is having arguments. I mean, you posted Cheebs hoax claims here in the first place so that we'd all point and laugh at how ridiculous they are, so don't lecture us on "intellectual snobbery" when it's exactly what you wanted. Obviously you haven't read this forum enough then. Almost every single hoax theorist that joins this forum starts out saying "I don't believe the Moon landings were faked, but I have a few questions" or "I've got a friend with some questions that I don't know how to answer". Your first posts in this thread fit the traits of the common hoax theorist, so I don't blame anyone for doubting your story. I honestly don't care how it looks. The people outside this "club" think we're paid government agents any way, so obviously their view of us was already distorted. Have you noticed that I don't post there any more? Did you ever consider that maybe you're part of the reason why? On my side or not, no one there is the kind of person I want to associate with. I left after a short time because it's pointless arguing with people who are so seriously out of touch with reality. They need more help than I can give them. They will never say "you're right, the Moon landings really did happen" so trying to convince them is a waste of time. Let them keep their little corner of the internet, they can have it. Then why do you waste your time with them? Why surround yourself with people who would accuse you of such things? You're not forced to be there, you choose to be. And do you seriously think that we look worse than them just because we criticized Cheeb over his choice of font colours? If you walk into a burning building you're bound to get burned. There's nothing in that building worth saving, so why bother? Just walk away and let it burn. That was the choice I made months ago. |
|
|
|
Post by echnaton on Dec 18, 2011 22:49:38 GMT -4
On this forum i do see a lot of intellectual snobbery and after being attacked and seeing others attacked i felt a need to point that out. I was quite shocked how cheeb was spoken to by some members and alarmed by the paranoia aimed at myself. It dosent look good from the outside of the click club. It has been pointed out that the way you appeared on this forum is consistent with the way that a number of hoax believers have started. After reading LO's post I edited my post with strike though type in an attempt to retract what I said while not removing what I had written from the record. However since that time, you have followed another common hoax believer tactic by posting a series of comments about your distaste for the intellectual environment here. The point is you if come to a forum dedicated to the discussion of claims of an Apollo hoax and post in in ambiguous way, then people will reasonably think you are a hoax believer. This forum is here to respond to to hoax claims by presenting the reality of Apollo. That is not accomplished by being inclusive of everyone's feeling or letting everyone have an unchallenged say. Hoax proponents are vigorously challenged. We do that so that they can have the greatest opportunity to explain themselves in a way that would allow a proponent with a strong case to actually make a full argument. So if you want to talk about a Apollo hoax, get to the point. But please stop this tiresome whining about how people are treated. It won't help your claim of not being a hoax believer. |
|
|
|
Post by gillianren on Dec 18, 2011 23:04:49 GMT -4
If you don't like the intellectual environment here, avoid college. The fact is, there are certain places where there are standards. Here, the standards include writing as well as you can, presenting your arguments as well as you can, and being polite. If you can't do that, you can't have an intellectual discussion with adults. If that's snobbery, well, I'm honestly okay with that. The fact that I don't want to be in a free-for-all where you can insult people, not back up your claims, and so forth is why I'm here, not there.
|
|
|
|
Post by Glom on Dec 19, 2011 15:23:28 GMT -4
IMHO, I think all new arrivals should be greeted without prejudgement. Even if their behaviour fits the pattern, let it unfold. After all, if they come here to troll, you're giving them what they want if you immediately start becoming irate. Also, remember that it's not the HBs who post that are important, but the lurkers who are vulnerable but can be convinced by our fountain of knowledge. Anything that makes us look like dicks jeopardises that.
|
|
|
|
Post by sts60 on Dec 19, 2011 16:31:57 GMT -4
Agreed.
|
|
|
|
Post by nomuse on Dec 19, 2011 17:00:31 GMT -4
But it isn't just tone.
If you get the science wrong, you got the science wrong. There is no way to soften that. "Well, you have a point," is not usable if, in fact, the person's facts are wrong. "Many people think that," might be a possible ease-in but it opens the door to facts being fluid affairs that bow to majority opinion.
What is worse is that so often what the Apollo Denier of the day brings forward is not a simple error of fact. Very few come out with "The pressure of Earth's atmosphere at sea level is 512 lb per square inch." No; they come in with such gems as "What is our atmosphere made of, that it keeps your so-called 'vacuum' out?"
You can't just politely provide the facts there. Saying "Mostly nitrogen and oxygen by weight" is an answer to the question as stated but it doesn't address the underlying misconceptions. You are left either having to give a basic lecture on what pressure is, or say "You need to study -- here's some links to some basic science texts or a good introductory Wikipedia page."
There is no way, in short, of politely saying "You don't know enough about the subject to discuss it in a rational manner."
|
|
|
|
Post by gillianren on Dec 19, 2011 17:02:52 GMT -4
Sure, but that's why I am so determined that we keep it about the science and not the people. "Your facts are wrong" is better than "you're an idiot." Now, there have been several people here, quite recently, that I have wanted to call idiots, but that was after determining that they were incapable of learning anything.
|
|
|
|
Post by nomuse on Dec 19, 2011 18:52:12 GMT -4
Yah..I'm guilty of that. I use "you are an idiot" as shorthand for "you need to study." I don't believe I've met many actual idiots, in the medical sense. I believe everyone is capable of learning the material if they apply themselves. So what I react to is more of a "you are determined to remain ignorant, aren't you" among the common Apollo Deniers. But I should probably stop using "idiot" as shorthand.
It is hard. There's a very unclear line between "That was a stupid thing you said" and "You were stupid to say that thing." And since tone is notoriously hard to read in text...
|
|
raven
Jupiter
That ain't Earth, kiddies.
Posts: 509
|
Post by raven on Dec 19, 2011 19:24:33 GMT -4
We need to be on our best behaviour because, in many ways ,we are representatives of truth. Not only does the truth not need insulting and demeaning language to back it up, but, while the Truth is not any less true because of those who believes it, people are less inclined to agree with someone who is disagreeable about it.
Would you want to agree with someone who acted like a typical internet troll?
|
|
|
|
Post by gillianren on Dec 19, 2011 23:01:34 GMT -4
I'm not sure I've ever seen a conspiracist argument which wasn't stupid. However, that doesn't necessarily mean the people making the arguments are. They clearly don't know anything about whatever subject is under discussion, but "ignorant" and "stupid" aren't the same thing. Even "willfully ignorant" isn't the same thing. Frankly, I find willful ignorance even worse than stupid, but it's at least theoretically curable. Stupid isn't.
|
|
|
|
Post by inconceivable on Dec 20, 2011 23:25:19 GMT -4
wow1 A lot of HBs have claimed that this area of Hawaii is the place where a lot of the photos were taken. Because of the volcanic activity around the time of Apollo 17, comparing the photos to be exact to later photos would be faulted. Also the size of the Earth in the photos taken from the moon's surface shouldn't be the exact size of the moon taken from the surface of the Earth. So many HBs have claimed.
|
|
|
|
Post by gillianren on Dec 21, 2011 1:15:35 GMT -4
Who cares what they claim? What matters is what they can show evidence of.
|
|
|
|
Post by tedward on Dec 21, 2011 2:37:33 GMT -4
And I claim it was on the Moon. I can, with some confidence, back it up.
|
|
raven
Jupiter
That ain't Earth, kiddies.
Posts: 509
|
Post by raven on Dec 21, 2011 4:39:12 GMT -4
Some parts of Hawaii look somewhat lunar, at least compared to the buff, scrub covered hills of Groom Lake, AKA Area 51, another common area claimed as a filming site.
But compared to the imagery of Surveyor, Luna, and Lunokhod?
Not a chance.
|
|
|
|
Post by tedward on Dec 21, 2011 6:42:32 GMT -4
Yeah but no but yeah but....
Lunar or later someone will look at the detail. They can extrapolate the size from one image and see that perhaps there is an issue with saying it "looks like" (and other details). That and no atmosphere. And the angle of the sun. And the lighting. Not forgetting it would have to be at night. Then not forgetting that the atmosphere carries particles that would show up with a lit set at night so will need a vacuum sound stage..... ohhhh this hole is not finished in its excavation.
|
|
