Sigh. Yup. Not enough time. I was about to attack the video when Mr. Abrams told me we were out of time. Yikes.
So I learned something: given an hour, Sibrel can get in details I may not be familiar with (like in the radio interview). Given 20 minutes I can nail him. Given 5 minutes everyone looks bad. Feh.
So, I'm disappointed, of course. But there were some interesting points. For one, I believe I can now legitimately call Bart Sibrel a liar. He said I am a NASA employee and get my checks from them. That is not true, and either he knows it's not true or has not done enough research to know that I am not a NASA employee. Either way, he is lying.
I have never been a NASA employee. I was a contractor for several years, and I have NASA grants. This is a substantially different beast than being a NASA employee, though I'm sure if I confront him about it he'd poopoo the difference. I defy him or anyone to find record of a paycheck, anywhere and at any time, from NASA to me. It won't happen. I have been paid by Hughes, by ACC and by Sonoma State University since leaving college, and that's it (besides writing and lecture payments and the like, none of which are from NASA or even from the government).
Also, he mentioned the Earth shots were taken from an unmanned probe. What? He says in the video that the astronauts were in low Earth orbit, so he's contradicting himself there. He also said in the interview the astronauts were fiddling with the transparency. Again, which is it? Unmanned, or manned in LEO?
I talked a lot with Andy Chaikin last night, and if I get a chance this weekend I'll try to write up some of the arguments against Sibrel's video claims. I have to think about it; the last thing I want is to give him any more publicity.
|