|
Post by rocketdad on Sept 1, 2005 13:29:23 GMT -4
/quote]
Of they're perfectly composed! Didn't you know that most of the moon's landscape is naturally crooked, out of frame, and overexposed?[/quote]
I have evidence the moon landings were photographed by tourists! Really!
Rotating thru my current screensaver slideshow is a picture of an astronaut with an antenna sticking out of his head. He's standing, back the camera, in front of the rover. One of the major mistakes that pros learn to avoid is the old "tree growing out of Gramma" shot.
(I don't have a time/date stamp of the image or link to it, but I found it on the web the other day. I googled for moon rover images and plucked ripe fruit off the tree.)
|
|
|
Post by turbonium on Sept 1, 2005 20:15:29 GMT -4
I know this is a good place to ask - what is Jack White getting out of his "studies"? Does he make money from books or other products? Is he seeking fame of some sort? Again, I'm not an Apollo believer, but after looking at his photo studies (especially the Pentagon 9/11 study), he kinda gives me a headache!
|
|
|
Post by frenat on Sept 1, 2005 21:04:09 GMT -4
He's got a small following that thinks anything he says is gospel. As far as I know he isn't getting anything monetary out of it. It may be similar to most on GLP where he is showing his severe distrust of the government.
|
|
|
Post by JayUtah on Sept 1, 2005 22:13:22 GMT -4
Is he seeking fame of some sort?That is my guess. I have encountered several people -- not just conspiracists, but people in general -- who seem to thrive on publicity, even if it's bad publicity. For some it seems that obscurity is a fate worse than death. ...he kinda gives me a headache! Jack White simply has below-average spatial reasoning skills. It's nothing to be ashamed of, unless one is trying to portray himself as a photographic analyst.
|
|
lenbrazil
Saturn
Now there's a man with an open mind - you can feel the breeze from here!
Posts: 1,045
|
Post by lenbrazil on Sept 1, 2005 22:32:10 GMT -4
He wrote 2 books about Apollo that are out of print. So he made some money in the past I imagine. The 1st conspiracy he latched on to was the JFK assassination. He is a contributing author to 3 books of low merit about that which are in print I do not know if he is making money off of that. He might be getting money as a paid speaker. He is of course a self proclaimed expert. He worked in advertising did a lot of studio photography. I don't think he has any training as a photo analyst. You can read his bio at www.clavius.org/jackwhite.html . You might think the bio a bit biased but read his testimony before the US Congress to see what a buffoon he is [there is a link in the bio]. He makes basic mistakes like not being able to figure out that the surface of the moon reflects light and spreads false information like saying the Apollo Hasselblads did not have motor drives and that all the moon shots were perfectly composed. He also lies about his credentials saying he appeared as an "expert witness" before the US Congress and was an technical advisor to Oliver Stone on JFK. Reading his testimony should reveal what a lie the 1st claim is, as for the2nd he is not listed on imdb's JFK full credits page. www.imdb.com/title/tt0102138/fullcreditsI think his main motivation is stoking his ego. I know this is a good place to ask - what is Jack White getting out of his "studies"? Does he make money from books or other products? Is he seeking fame of some sort? Again, I'm not an Apollo believer, but after looking at his photo studies (especially the Pentagon 9/11 study), he kinda gives me a headache!
|
|
|
Post by turbonium on Sept 2, 2005 3:05:36 GMT -4
I have encountered several people -- not just conspiracists, but people in general -- who seem to thrive on publicity, even if it's bad publicity
If so, he probably loves that he is being discussed quite often here - like the egotist's saying goes, "Love me or hate me, just don't ignore me".
|
|
|
Post by dwight on Sept 2, 2005 5:24:01 GMT -4
There is one major point often overlooked when dealing with people who persue notoriety at all costs, and that is the ruined lives that their windmill chasing leaves in its wake. While not related to Apollo, I personally know one gentleman who has been virtually ruined because of blatantly false claims linking him to Mohamed Atta. The man behind these claims has mounted lie after lie, and substantially profited from them via book sales and an online website. Despite all evidence vindicating the person I know, they are still carrying the stigma which the false claims have imposed on them. As such I have absolutely no patience nor respect for the type of person that knowingly spreading falsehoods and claiming it is done for the greater good.
|
|
|
Post by sts60 on Sept 2, 2005 6:16:31 GMT -4
I'm happy I don't know anyone in such a bad situation. But what irritates me is that such an incredible achievement, which was accomplished by so many dedicated people (some of whom I am privileged to have known and worked with) who worked so hard, is denigrated by such small, useless individuals as White, Sibrel, Kaysing, etc.
Fortunately, most people recognize them for the crackpots and liars they are. But as Apollo recedes into history, we need to keep calling them on their fraud so newer generations aren't swindled out of their predecessors' accomplishment.
|
|
|
Post by JayUtah on Sept 2, 2005 10:14:06 GMT -4
I don't think he has any training as a photo analyst.
Obviously none.
You might think the bio a bit biased...
Well, I wrote the bio so I don't think it's biased. :-) It's not necessarily a bio so much as a summary of the only significant attempt he had made previously at photo analysis. I contacted a number of other JFK researchers of different persuasions to have them review that summary for accuracy. I made a number of changes based on their comments.
...but read his testimony before the US Congress to see what a buffoon he is....
That's obviously why I provided the raw testimony. The very words out of Jack White's mouth, under oath, undermine his credibility far more than any external source.
I think his main motivation is stoking his ego.
Most likely. And that's also why he defines his critics universally as paid disinformationists or government shills: he can think more of himself if he believes, and convinces others, that he has powerful "enemies".
|
|
lenbrazil
Saturn
Now there's a man with an open mind - you can feel the breeze from here!
Posts: 1,045
|
Post by lenbrazil on Sept 2, 2005 13:44:19 GMT -4
I contacted a number of other JFK researchers of different persuasions to have them review that summary for accuracy. I made a number of changes based on their comments
Just out of curiosity who were they and what changes did you make?
You might think the bio a bit biased...
I though the bio was pretty much on target but someone who "is not an Apollo believer" might think otherwise.
The very words out of Jack White's mouth, under oath, undermine his credibility far more than any external source.
He also lies about his credentials...
You could add the part about him lying about his credentials which would "undermine his credibility" even more
|
|
|
Post by rocketdad on Sept 2, 2005 14:17:38 GMT -4
This thread started with time/motion studies, and I'd like to point out that 1) this is normally done by trained professionals counting in milliseconds, and 2) a vast majority of the photos taken are, artistically speaking, crap. Every astronaut to the cliche "look- my shadow!" picture, a huge number of pictures have NO composition whatsoever, and some entire rolls are fogged.
Just another way reality deviates from groundless theory.
|
|
lenbrazil
Saturn
Now there's a man with an open mind - you can feel the breeze from here!
Posts: 1,045
|
Post by lenbrazil on Sept 2, 2005 17:15:29 GMT -4
I think his main motivation is stoking his ego.
Most likely. And that's also why he defines his critics universally as paid disinformationists or government shills: he can think more of himself if he believes, and convinces others, that he has powerful "enemies". |
This kind of thinking is pretty much universal among CT nuts. See this post from another forum by John Costella, who is perhaps the only person with a PhD in science who is a HB. He earlier complained that he was being kept under surveillance. When he past through an airport unnoticed with Jack White he seems to feel slighted. From: "johnpcostella" <jpcostella@...> Date: Sun Jun 8, 2003 2:59 am Subject: Being followed isn't the issue johnpcostella Well, let's look at it from this direction. On a flight from DFW to MSP you have Jack White and John Costella sitting next to each other. Jack White has accused the US Government of fabricating evidence in the JFK assassination, the Apollo moon landing, and the September 11 attacks, the last of which MUST make him stand out as a potentially subversive character. John Costella is a foreign national, who a decade earlier has been allowed visit the national Institute for Nuclear Theory, Stanford's Linear Accelerator centre, and Los Alamos National Laboratory, who has now made the same claims. Now the $64,000 question: does any agency of the US intelligence network have any interest in these two individuals? Tick, tock, tick, tock, tick, tock, ... your answer please? D'OH ... we were busy inspecting the shoes of the businessman from Oregon, and didn't notice those two. What surprised me wasn't the surveillance, it was the amateurishness of it. No doubt this guy was just the obvious decoy to keep us amused. John
|
|
|
Post by JayUtah on Sept 2, 2005 18:24:47 GMT -4
Just out of curiosity who were they and what changes did you make?
I don't recall their names. I'm sure I have them in my notes, but those will be packed away. Craig Lamson suggested them, since he is more familiar than I with JFK researchers, and he may be able to remember them easier.
The changes I made were mostly softening some of the language to reflect a more objective view.
This paragraph
was added at the suggestion of one of the reviewers.
This paragraph
vacillated quite a bit, with a compromise being reached at "his findings remain questionable," and "Some researchers...consider White something of a crackpot."
Basically, because Clavius isn't a JFK site, I didn't want to fight that kind of battle. I can be somewhat middle-of-the-road with White's JFK work because it doesn't materially alter the conclusions regarding Apollo. The bio is presented as an introduction to the controversial nature of White's previous work, in order to provide a framework for interpreting his Apollo work. If you notice, I do not hold back anything in the criticism of Apollo. That is where I am the expert, and he is clearly wrong.
You could add the part about him lying about his credentials which would "undermine his credibility" even more
I could; I was not aware that White claimed his testimony before Congress was "expert" testimony. I think it's clear from the transcript that he turned out not to be one.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Durnavich on Sept 2, 2005 23:54:24 GMT -4
I don't recall their names.
I know Craig asked at least all of us working on the Moorman piece. I suspect Gary Mack and Josiah Thompson provided you with the most help since they know White the best. (White and Mack "discovered" the Badge Man image.)
I could; I was not aware that White claimed his testimony before Congress was "expert" testimony.
If you do, make sure you find an exact quote from White making this claim. In Fetzers books, which he contributes articles to, he is listed as an advisor to the HSCA and to Stone.
|
|
|
Post by Obviousman on Sept 3, 2005 0:15:50 GMT -4
|
|