Chatroom
 

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Bad Astronomy and Universe Today Forum > Space and Astronomy > Conspiracy Theories
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

   

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 04-March-2005, 06:59 PM
Daryl71 Daryl71 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 245
Default Woah, hold on a minute!

Something just hit me like a ton of bricks!
As we know, HBs are almost universally paranoid and distrustful of the United States government. Everything is a lie, no one can be trusted, so on. They waste their time looking for anomolies and smoking guns in photographs that all sane people know are real. According to them, these photographs were faked by the United States government.
Hold on, the United States Government! If HBs are so rabidly mistrustful of the US government, why do they willingly interpret Apollo imagery as proof of a coverup? The photographs had to have been produced by the same nefarious, astronaut-killing people they hate so much! So why do they let up the paranoia and accept the photos as evidence?
Bah, flat-foreheaded hypocrites! [-X
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 04-March-2005, 07:04 PM
cyswxman's Avatar
cyswxman cyswxman is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Cheyenne,Wy - Like no place on Earth!
Posts: 1,566
Default

Whatever fits their belief! [-(
__________________
"It's time to receive our missions from The Head."
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 04-March-2005, 08:18 PM
JayUtah's Avatar
JayUtah JayUtah is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,890
Default

Jack White is notorious for this. He can use NASA materials to make his case (usually by quoting from them selectively). But if anyone else uses NASA materials to refute him, then the "obvious" response to the refutation is that we (the "provocateurs") are "just quoting from NASA lies".

In some specific White cases, however, it is a matter of referring to NASA in order to clarify what NASA's claims are and to answer whether they are consistent. White, for example, believes that photographs on the moon show the rover deployed from the wrong side of the the lunar module and/or at the wrong time. In other words, he poses the problem that NASA records for Apollo are inconsistent.

The real problem is that White is wrong about where the LRV was attached to the LM, and he won't entertain any discussion about it that refers to "NASA lies" in their documentation. So he expects his critics to prove that the LRV was attached in a certain place on the LM without referring to any NASA materials. Right. The point to be made is that NASA is fully consistent about where the LRV was and when it was deployed; Jack White is simply wrong, and he proposes motions in limine that prevent his error from being generally revealed.
__________________
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams
Clavius Moon Base
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT. The time now is 09:12 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
LinkBacks Enabled by vBSEO 3.0.0
©  2006 Bad Astronomy and Universe Today