I'm trying to complete a crossword. The only clue I can't get is "Descriptive of a self-taught engineer (11)" and the letters I've got are

U_Q_A_I_I_D

Seriously, though...

I recorded a moon-hoax programme that was shown on the Discovery Channel last week, thinking it was the infamous Fox one. When we sat down to watch it, my wife told me I was not allowed to get all angry and spend the day moaning about the perpetration of bad science.

As it turned out, there was no need. It was the good one - the one that showed Kaysing and Rene making claims, then immediately demonstrating how wrong they were. Most amusing was the, "Nowhere on Earth will you find shadows that aren't parallel," followed by some pictures of non-parallel shadows on very ordinary parts of Earth. By the end, the entire HB claim was shown up as the lame duck it is. Rene pretended to be amused when he was told he'd been described as a "cultural vandal", but he obviously knew he'd been slaughtered.

Anyway, the reason I bring it up is, I can't find much discussion about it here. I did a search for Channel 5 Documentaries, and found a couple of passing references to it as being the "other" one (as opposed to the Fox one which was broadcast on Channel 5 here in the UK). To save me spending the day searching, can anyone point me to a more dedicated discussion? And if there isn't already a dedicated discussion, perhaps we could start one?

If it's the one I'm thinking of (they had Jay Utah on there explaining about the HasselBlad camera on the fake moon set) then there was a thread a while back at http://www.badastronomy.com/phpBB/vi...sc&start=0. It was a pretty good documentary and wasn't really biased to either side. It let the conspiracy nuts point out their 'anomolies' and then let the scientists/engineers/etc explain how it was normal.

Thanks very much Dummy - that was indeed the one I meant.

Having read through the discussion, one particular issue struck me - the talk of bias. If somebody states that there is an elephant permanently stationed in my kitchen, and I state that there is not, and a documentary-maker has a camera sweep around every nook and cranny of my kitchen to reveal no elephant, is the documentary-maker biased?

The thing that really struck me about that documentary was that I had read Rene & Kaysing, but I had never actually seen them speak before. They probably should have left it like that, because neither of them make convincing witnesses for the prosecution....

Right from the outset where the narrator stated that Kaysing had several attempts on his life and was 'hiding out' in a cat refuge in the desert, my (neutral) brother-in-law burst out laughing, observing that the CIA must be more like the Keystone Cops if they couldn't track him down, especially after that reference! Frankly, they reminded me of nothing more than Walter Matthau & Jack Lemmon in 'Grumpy Old Men'.

Incidentally Jay - you did a very nice job. Looked like you were having a good time! =D>

__________________
"I'd take the awe of understanding over the awe of ignorance any day." - Douglas Adams

"Certainly, in the topsy-turvy world of heavy rock, having a good solid piece of wood in your hand is often useful." - Ian Faith

So the CIA, FBI, ATF, state police, or whatever, can't find him, but the guys who filmed the show can?

Quite! Well, let's be fair to the CIA et al. There are just so many cat refuges in the US deserts that it is proving hard for them to pin him down.... I guess the film crew just got lucky! :roll:

__________________
"I'd take the awe of understanding over the awe of ignorance any day." - Douglas Adams

"Certainly, in the topsy-turvy world of heavy rock, having a good solid piece of wood in your hand is often useful." - Ian Faith

Hey, I have a "cat refuge" right here in my own home!

This is funnier than the Joke thread on the babbling board!

I did hear Kaysing mention the death threats, but I just edited it out because it was too silly. So thanks everyone for reminding me!

I was also pleased to get confirmation that the man called Jay was indeed the celebrated contributor to this board.

It's even better than that - they weren't just threats. The narrative stated (verbatim):

I do love the idea of keeping a low profile by appearing in a documentary seen around the world. #-o

__________________
"I'd take the awe of understanding over the awe of ignorance any day." - Douglas Adams

"Certainly, in the topsy-turvy world of heavy rock, having a good solid piece of wood in your hand is often useful." - Ian Faith

If that is the only evidence they give then yes they are biased. If they give the opposition equal time and resources to make their case then no they are not biased. The bias happens when one side is not given chance to rebut the case. After all the elephant could be out for his morning walk with the giraffe next door, he has to go to the bathroom sometime.

(edited to correct grammer)

__________________
Based on the condition that you are incapable of moving at a high velocity with large animals of the canine species, then you shall be required to remain in a location that is in the general vicinity of the front door of your domicile.

Ah, but he clearly understands the concept of hiding in plain sight, as in E.A. Poe's The Purloined Letter.

Alternatively he might just be an idiot. Unlikely, though. After all, could an idiot train himself to be an engineer?

An idiot can often convince himself he is an engineer based on his lack of understanding of what it takes to be an engineer.

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

I take your point, but I was careful with my phrasing - "permanently stationed" as opposed to, say, a bed-and-breakfast lodger with a part-time job at the local circus (where he works as a secretary).

A better example would be a claim that an elephant sleeps in my kitchen between 10pm and 7am - he's always punctual with the times, and he never gets up in the night to go to the bathroom or to use the telephone to make trunk calls.

It the camera crew said, "It's midnight, so he should have been asleep two hours according to the claims. Let's see if we can get a shot of him..."

Of course, if the claim was that the elephant almost always sleeps in the kitchen, then yes it would be only fair to get the claimants to carry out a similar investigation. Then again, if the claim is clearly and precisely worded, then anybody - not just the claimant - should be able to carry out an adequate investigation. The "no non-parallel shadows on Earth" is a case in point.

The upshot is, if someone makes a claim which is wholly without basis, then an honest effort to investigate the truth of the claim is going to appear biased against the people who made the claim.

Very nicely put!

(I hope it was obvious that I was posing the original question ironically.)