I've just invited a fellow from another BB to bring his comments over to this forum. I suggested he have a chat with Jay and you guys. Here's one of his latest comments:

Re:Moon Landing
« Reply #8 on: April 28, 2004, 03:56:32 PM » by storm

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Let's factor in the point that the chances of a successful moon landing expedition were calculated by NASA prior to the so-called landing and were many thousands to 1. All of the Apollo missions were faked. The US Govt. has had anti-gravity saucer technology since the end of WWII when they adopted the technology from the Nazi saucer program.

NASA is a front, a sham, a joke".

He goes by the handle "storm" over on LEMUR

http://users.boardnation.com/~shadow...y;threadid=186

__________________
An open mind is like an open window...without a good screen you'll get all sorts of weird bugs!

Let's factor in the point that the chances of a successful moon landing expedition were calculated by NASA prior to the so-called landing and were many thousands to 1.

No. They were allegedly calculated by Rocketdyne (according to conspiracy theorist Bill Kaysing, who has never produced the claimed report), and in 1959. Of course it would seem impossible then and there.

The US Govt. has had anti-gravity saucer technology since the end of WWII when they adopted the technology from the Nazi saucer program.

So why couldn't they use that saucer to fly to the moon?

NASA is a front...

... for ... ?

__________________
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams
Clavius Moon Base

Amazing isn't he? Jay, did you look at some of the other posts he's made? I wonder if he'll pay Lunar Conspiracies a visit?

__________________
An open mind is like an open window...without a good screen you'll get all sorts of weird bugs!

No, I have no desire to revisit the LEMUR forum. If he believes his claims can stand up to educated criticism, let him come here.

__________________
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams
Clavius Moon Base

I don't blame you one bit! That's why I invited him here.

I wonder what the odds are of him actually showing up?

__________________
An open mind is like an open window...without a good screen you'll get all sorts of weird bugs!

Ahhh! LEMUR! Run away!

__________________
Hwæt! We Gardena in geardagum,
þeodcyninga, þrym gefrunon,
hu ða æþelingas ellen fremedon.

If you can be the "voice of reason" over there, then there's nothing that can drive you to distraction anywhere in the universe!

__________________
An open mind is like an open window...without a good screen you'll get all sorts of weird bugs!

I visited there during the 'smokestacks' on the moon period and the way that forum is run left a bad taste in my mouth. I doubt I would ever desire to be the voice of anything there, as my will power would surely run out quickly.

__________________
Hwæt! We Gardena in geardagum,
þeodcyninga, þrym gefrunon,
hu ða æþelingas ellen fremedon.

The way I see it is that I (and a couple of others) calmly give out the rational point of view. If irrational folks become "upset" then that's not my problem. At least the rational side of things gets posted and maybe it does some good...who knows?

__________________
An open mind is like an open window...without a good screen you'll get all sorts of weird bugs!

Yeah, then it is probably a good thing I don't post there. I would have trouble controlling my temper and then I would just make the 'good' side look bad, probably.

__________________
Hwæt! We Gardena in geardagum,
þeodcyninga, þrym gefrunon,
hu ða æþelingas ellen fremedon.

A little over a year ago I corresponded with a professor at the University of Florida who had worked on Apollo reliability studies prior to the moon landings. Below is a snippet of what he wrote:

For those who don't know, 0.9 in this case means 90%. Apollo actually performed slightly below this figure with a 85.7% success rate (6 of 7).

With that small a sample, the difference is not statistically significant.

__________________
Everything I need to know I learned through Googling.

LEMUR is to woo-woos what church is to Christians. I don't say that to be mean; LEMUR is a mutual support agency for people who believe in the paranormal. It's considered bad taste there to question it.

__________________
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams
Clavius Moon Base

=D>

__________________
Hwæt! We Gardena in geardagum,
þeodcyninga, þrym gefrunon,
hu ða æþelingas ellen fremedon.

Also, we should take into account the fact that there were two successful Apollo missions that didn't land on the moon--although we can't count them fully, as the criteria included a successful landing, we could still count them in Apollo reliability data for the successful flights to the moon, and, in the case of Apollo 10, successful testing of the LEM.

__________________
--Doug

"When your statics problem becomes a dynamics problem, you're in trouble." --me

Moor's Law: "As you go from freshman engineering to Ph.D., the amount of work required per credit hour doubles approximately every 18 months." --me, inspired by Prof. Scott Moor

That and why didn't anybody use them during the War?

For some that's exactly what the BB is used for but not for others. There is a group that just likes to speculate about odd things but still stays grounded in reality. LEMUR itself practices at least some skepticism. I've never heard any of the LEMUR guys say they have "proof" of anything, just that they are interested in strange phenomena. Here's a quote from their mission statement:

"This is quite self-explanatory. We are interested in any and all occurrences which defy the explanations of conventional science.

Remember, at one time, almost everything could be considered "paranormal." There was a time when the sun or lightning bolts were worshipped as Gods. Now, we have a completely familiar and natural explanation for these things.

The L.E.M.U.R. team does not believe in "magic" and "supernatural" activity. We simply believe in "technology" that is not yet understood by the conventional sciences. Of course, this includes the possibility of detecting an aspect of humans which continues to exist after the death of the physical body."

It's the more "out there" elements on the BB that tend to cause the disruption and confuse "wild speculation" with "proven facts". It's nice to have a forum to use one's imagination and speculate. It's a shame that some confuse this with objective reality.

I don't think the moon hoax believer I invited here for debate will be showing up. I guess his/her case wasn't as "air tight" as they were boasting it was.

__________________
An open mind is like an open window...without a good screen you'll get all sorts of weird bugs!

One has always to remind the Twinkies of the fact, that a 90% success rate for a moon landing and safe return doesn't means that in one of ten flights the crew is dead. Apollo 13 had no landing, but a return. So, it is not in the 90% from above.

Harald

__________________
"Flying in space is risky business, but just staying on this planet is risky business too." - John Young, astronaut

Darn! I want to hear about the "anti-gravity saucer technology."

You mean like this one?

Harald

__________________
"Flying in space is risky business, but just staying on this planet is risky business too." - John Young, astronaut