|
|
Post by frenat on Jul 30, 2005 15:37:23 GMT -4
If those are your reasons then you really haven't done any research.
So if the government lies about something it automatically means they are lying about everything else? The Russians and the Chinese believe the US went to the moon. Are they lying too?
|
|
|
|
Post by twinstead on Jul 30, 2005 15:39:14 GMT -4
Hello Twinstead, see my reply to Kiwi above. In my opinion not a personal attack but an educated observation. You may take it as you wish. |
|
Bob B.
Bob the Excel Guru?
Posts: 3,072
|
Post by Bob B. on Jul 30, 2005 15:43:51 GMT -4
Hello Twinstead, see my reply to Kiwi above. Twinstead and Kiwi have arrived at their conclusions based on your actions here. Their comments are not insults; they are observations. If you want them to think differently of you, then give them a reason to. If you want respect, then start earning it. |
|
|
|
Post by margamatix on Jul 30, 2005 16:31:58 GMT -4
Hello Twinstead, see my reply to Kiwi above. Twinstead and Kiwi have arrived at their conclusions based on your actions here. Their comments are not insults; they are observations. If you want them to think differently of you, then give them a reason to. If you want respect, then start earning it. OK, got that. I believe we went to the Moon then. |
|
Bob B.
Bob the Excel Guru?
Posts: 3,072
|
Post by Bob B. on Jul 30, 2005 18:50:48 GMT -4
OK, got that. I believe we went to the Moon then. I'm sure you're just trying to be facetious, but even if you are serious, such a sudden reversal in your position isn't going to earn you respect either. It's not what you believe as much as how you arrived at your conclusions. Even though I may disagree with a person, I can at least respect them if they've arrived at their conclusions through rigorous investigation and reason. You just seem to have swallowed Bart Sibrel's hogwash hook, line, and sinker without really giving it much thought, and then you stick you fingers in your ears and refuse to listen to anyone who challenges your beliefs. Had you reasoned your way to your conclusion then you’d be able to explain how you got there, you’d support your explanations with evidence, and you wouldn’t be constantly contradicting yourself. You show all the signs of a person who jumped straight to the conclusion and are now trapped and unable to defend it because there is no logical basis for the belief. All you can do is state over and over again what you believe but not why you believe it. This won’t earn you much respect around here no matter what you believe. |
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Jul 30, 2005 22:56:30 GMT -4
All you can do is state over and over again what you believe but not why you believe it. This won’t earn you much respect around here no matter what you believe. Good time to post this. |
|
|
|
Post by twinstead on Jul 30, 2005 23:50:44 GMT -4
margamatix, in my opinion your reputation can only be salvaged if you enjoy a good pint of ale. Anybody who loves a good pint can't be all bad, therefore if you do, you can't be all bad. Regardless of that whole toast and Thames thing.  |
|
|
|
Post by margamatix on Jul 31, 2005 5:21:16 GMT -4
OK, got that. I believe we went to the Moon then. You just seem to have swallowed Bart Sibrel's hogwash hook, line, and sinker without really giving it much thought, In fact, I had ceased to believe in the moon landings long before I had ever heard of Bart Sibrel. |
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Jul 31, 2005 6:37:34 GMT -4
You just seem to have swallowed Bart Sibrel's hogwash hook, line, and sinker without really giving it much thought, In fact, I had ceased to believe in the moon landings long before I had ever heard of Bart Sibrel. The problem isn't that you believe that the landings were hoax, but that you can't objectively provide a logic path for that belief. You state your beliefs as if they are fact, without supporting evidence. You make assumptions based on an observation, then claim that the conclusion based on the assumption must be right. You assign motives to people's actions without evidence of what their actual motives were. You just say that your assumption is good enough. When your assumptions are challenged you either ignore the challenge, repeat the previous claim as if that'll make it stronger, or just handwave. When it's pointed out to you that your behaviour is exactly like all other Hoax Believers that have come here, you claim we are insulting you. The simple thing, however, is that if you held the belief because of real evidence then you would be able to defend it in a logical manner based about evidence that wasn't circular in nature. As of yet you haven't. The mere fact that you base your arguments on fuzzy images and the ramblings of a shown lair and fraud show that you really aren't interested in the truth, merely in hearing what you want to believe, that "The Government" (whichever it happens to be) lies and therefore NASA faked it. By the way, since you are English one assumes that it was the English Government which you worked for whenever, and thus it was the English Government that lied. The obvious question then is how can you determine from that, that the US Government under Kennedy and Johnson lied, or is it merely an argument of guilt by association? |
|
|
|
Post by skinbath on Jul 31, 2005 6:40:15 GMT -4
margamatix, in my opinion your reputation can only be salvaged if you enjoy a good pint of ale. Anybody who loves a good pint can't be all bad, therefore if you do, you can't be all bad. Regardless of that whole toast and Thames thing. It seems to me that margamatix enjoys lots and lots of "good pints"!
|
|
|
|
Post by TaeKwonDan on Jul 31, 2005 7:42:29 GMT -4
If I was required to answer this is one sentence, I would say Because in the second half of my life, I have learned that the government of the United States is prepared to lie to me. Yes, but do they lie all the time? I've told little white lies to my wife and friends in my life, but I don't lie all of the time. Otherwise you would get paradoxes such as: 1. I apparently didn't pay my taxes this year. The government told me that I did, but since they always lie I must still have that money in my account. 2. We have no troops in Iraq. The government tells me they are over there, but how do I know that the images and the photos and personal testimony of friends that have been stationed over there isn't all false. The government always lies so that can't be true. Has the fact that the US government lied in the past and the present hurt its credibility with the individual and the world? Yes, it has, but that only a fool takes that to mean that everything they say and do must be a lie. It's just as foolish as taking everything they say and do at face value. What must be done is to take each action and weigh the physical and logical evidence to ascertain its validity. And the evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of the US having landed men on the moon. |
|
|
|
Post by margamatix on Jul 31, 2005 7:47:09 GMT -4
Whereabouts in my posting is the word "always"?
Fabricating and falsifying others' statements in an attempt to discredit an opposing view is typical Moon Delusionalist (MD) behaviour, but don't think I'll let it go unmentioned.
|
|
|
|
Post by RAF on Jul 31, 2005 8:13:39 GMT -4
Oh come on... You brought up government lying as a justification for your views. You implied "always" here... What we're still waiting for is for you to explain why. If I was required to answer this is one sentence, I would say Because in the second half of my life, I have learned that the government of the United States is prepared to lie to me. The government is prepared to lie... so what. There is a great "LEAP" between that and saying that they HAVE lied about something "specific". I can see why you would want to ignore that fact, but posting in that manner makes your reasoning look sillier, and sillier... |
|
|
|
Post by Data Cable on Jul 31, 2005 8:14:50 GMT -4
Whereabouts in my posting is the word "always"? If not always, then how do you know that Apollo, in particular, was a lie? And can you point to a known lie on the part of the US government for which a veritable mountain of supporting evidence has been provided which compares to that of Apollo? |
|
Bob B.
Bob the Excel Guru?
Posts: 3,072
|
Post by Bob B. on Jul 31, 2005 8:52:48 GMT -4
In fact, I had ceased to believe in the moon landings long before I had ever heard of Bart Sibrel. Funny because when you were asked to give your reasons for believing the landings were a hoax you seemed to quote many of your reasons verbatim from Bart Sibrel. It therefore seems likely those aren't the real reasons you've accepted the moon-landing hoax as fact. Why don't you try again and give us the reasons you believe in the hoax without quoting any of Bart Sibrel's arguments. |
|
