Hey folks-- I thought you might like to know that on Friday between 3 and 4 Eastern time I will be on MSNBC opposite Hoax Believer Bart Sibrel. The show is the Abrams Report, and the segment will probably be 5-10 minutes long. Hopefully that's enough time for me to trash his "evidence". [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_wink.gif[/img]

Unfortunately, I don't receive MSNBC. Is there any way that a transcript of the interview might show up here?

I will ask for one, but probably, like the other stuff I have done, I'll have to pay a transcriptionist to take a hack at it. That means it'll be a while.

Take your time Phil...I'm sure it will be worth the wait.

I think it would be a lot easier just to link to the shows own online transcript. [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img] [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img]

For instance, this is the November 13 transcript


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Say_Cheese on 2002-11-14 19:38 ]</font>

[quote]
On 2002-11-14 19:36, Say_Cheese wrote:

Why yes, that would be easier. Thanks for the link and welcome to the board, Say_Cheese.

Phil, if Sibrel continues to insist that none of the astronauts wanted to swear on the bible, then remind him that www.edmitchellapollo14.com/_discgroup3/0000006e.htm+&hl=da&ie=UTF-8]Apollo 14´s Edgar Mitchell actually DID ![/url].

Jim McDade also quotes Ed Mitchell:

"I asked Apollo 14 Lunar Module Pilot Ed Mitchell about his own encounter with Sibrel. Mitchell answered, "Sibrel faked his way into my home with false History Channel credentials for an interview. After about 3-4 minutes, he popped the bible question. Realizing who he was, I maintained my cool enough to swear on his bible, then ended the interview and tossed him out of the house, with a boot in his rear."

Wow, I love the Abram's Report. At least Dan maintains some form of journalistic objectivity. Could be worse, could be on Donahue..... bleh....

Oh, Phil, I just came up with a few suggestions for anti-Bart Sibrel psyops ....

1. YOU bring a bible (if you are gonna be face-to-face, that is) and then ask Bart: "Do you swear on the bible that you have never stalked any astronauts ? Stalking is illegal, you know."

2. In the first few seconds of the segment, you say - with a straight face: "Hey, Bart ... That guy standing right behind you ... Isn´t that Jon Stewart ?"

3. Say as often as possible (like twice in each sentence !) the name "Neil Armstrong". Conduct a scientific experiment: See how fast you can make Bart´s blood pressure accelerate by saying multiple "Neil Armstrong"´s !! [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img]

Or Fox news, (2X)bleh.... Conservaitve T.V. who only reports sensationalism news.

__________________
GIYUL :-)
"It takes Thousands to fight a battle for a mile, Millions to hold an election for a nation, but it only takes One to change the world." - Dan Sandler 2002

Could be on the yet-to-be-invented horror show: "Science With Jerry Springer". (Would involve a lot of punching, I guess ! [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img] ..)

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Say_Cheese on 2002-11-14 21:16 ]</font>

I'm sure that if it comes up that Sibrel will say Ed Mitchell is lying.
Then they can introduce special guest...Edgar Mitchell! He can come out and punch Sibrel in the nose. No, wait, already been done. Sorry, I got a little carried away there.

It´s an interesting paradox though, the bible issue.

One of two things can happen:

1. Ed swears on the bible (again) - and then Bart merely says: "He is lying".

2. He refuse to swear on the bible - and Bart then says: "Aha ! He won´t swear on the bible. He must be hiding something !"

Then what, Bart, is Ed supposed to do ?! It´s "damn him if he does, damn him if he don´t" !

Then what, Bart, is Ed supposed to do ?! It´s "damn him if he does, damn him if he don´t" !

Welcome to the fascinating study of conspiracy theory "logic".

From the bad astronomy newsletter:
"1) Oops! Wrong time for interview in last newsletter

I blew it in my last newsletter sent this morning. The "Abrams Report"
is on at 3-4 p.m. Pacific time, not Eastern. It's on at 6-7 p.m.
Eastern time. Sorry about any confusion."


Just to update us easterners.

__________________
GIYUL :-)
"It takes Thousands to fight a battle for a mile, Millions to hold an election for a nation, but it only takes One to change the world." - Dan Sandler 2002

If Sibrel says "I'm willing to bet my life they didn't go," again. Then say "I'm willing to bet my life that they did go."

I've heard Bart say "I'd bet my life..." about several things. Still, the closest he's come to putting himself in harm's way to prove his point is to accost the elderly Aldrin. I've also heard him say, more than once, that his life has been mysteriously threatened by what he maintains are government agents. Strange that he is allowed to continue to hock his wares unhindered by a government who could surely make light work of disposing this nuisance.


I am looking forward to the segment, and hoping that specific points will be addressed, unlike the techtv piece.

(In reference to some of the above posts)
Nah -
The BA doesn't need to resort to "idiot tactics" to dispel Bart. (As funny as it is to think and joke about it, in actuality it will be counter-productive.) Let Bart resort to the "idiot tactics" (like it seems he does a lot), be calm and rational, keep the jabs to such comments as, "No, you do not understand basic physics," or "No, you do not understand the nature of an atmospheless environment," or such as that, and provide the needed facts and data to verify your statement, and let Bart's idiocy find itself out - which it will.
Give him a shovel, and he will dig his own grave, so to speak. (Think Bugs Bunny vs, Yosemite Sam!)

_________________
"Once again, we find that science is a two-headed beast. One head is nice, it gives us aspirin and other modern conveniences,...but the other head of science is bad! Oh beware the other head of science, Arthur, it bites!" - The Tick vs. Dinosaur Neil

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: nebularain on 2002-11-15 08:53 ]</font>

The line to Sibrel, as I've used effectively on people such as Stephen Greer and his UFO Disclosure project, who both allege evil forces ready to kill to keep their secrets, is 'Why aren't you already dead?'

Whatever they respond, a throwaway jab, 'Well, maybe being 'brain dead' is all the conspiracy has to do.' Then I ask them if it isn't obvious that they are PART of the cover-up conspiracy, paid muddiers, by making the case look so silly, they discredit it in the eyes of the public and the media.


An Air Force general once remarked that if he ever found his troops were 'in a fair fight', he'd fire his war planners. Ditto goes with these kinds of debates. You can't let them define the battleground, and you can't be derailed by responding to a barrage of throwaway distractions. You make your points, expose their weaknesses, and keep talking.

Works for me.

Just don't let him pull a Bible out on you.

BA, if you still read this in time, be careful what you do, don't insult him. That will make you look like the bad guy to the general public who don't understand what's really going on.

BTW, is this a face to face interview? If it is and you want to do something funny, ask him if he is being stalked by government agents lately. If he says yes, just move you chair away from him ever so slightly so as to avoid those "incoming bullets aimed at BS". [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img] (I don't think this would be insulting as opposed making fun of BS's "supposed paranoia".)

__________________
Isn't the fact that they don't visit us proof that intelligent life is out there?

The Confused Philosopher - RCAF

Thanks for all the advice, folks. I have been in situations like this, and I will do what I always do: I will be polite, but I will be persistent. I didn't let him get away with anything in the radio interview and I'm sure not going to let him get away with anything on national TV.

I won't insult him; it's not my style. However, that does not mean I will back off in calling 'em as I see 'em. If he's wrong, I'm not going to say "Well, really.." I'll say "You are completely and utterly wrong!"

If his sales go up on his video, I might write a more thorough page on it. I talked with Andy Chaikin (an Apollo expert) last night for a couple of hours, and we found evidence that totally blows Mr. Sibrel's video out of the water. His "secret reel" is actually in the public domain, for one thing, and has been available for a long time. He edits out important parts of the astronauts' footage which shows they truly are on their way to the Moon, for another.

Honestly, his video uses remarkably bad and transparent logic. And despite his claims, not everyone believes him: have you read the reviews on Amazon lately? [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img]

BA, after reading what you just wrote, I can't wait to see that interview. Unfortunately, I may miss it, will someone have it on streaming video?

__________________
Isn't the fact that they don't visit us proof that intelligent life is out there?

The Confused Philosopher - RCAF

Actually, the bad reviews are not as entertaining as the good reviews. Here's a sample:

You can guess which reviews were written by Sibrel himself. That style is Sibrel's to a tee.

Correcting ignorance always requires more effort and verbage than spreading it. And it's always worth it.

I'm not against people seeing Sibrel's evidence. In fact, I'm scrambling to two different sources to obtain it and make it available for free. I'm against people being able to only see the evidence as Sibrel has presented it -- heavily edited and overshadowed by and juxtaposed with his ignorant and unfounded interpretations.

If Sibrel is so confident in the strength of his evidence, why doesn't he just let people see the raw footage and draw the "obvious" conclusion themselves? Why must he carefully, over the space of nearly an hour, lead his viewers to the desired conclusion, and then show only bits and pieces of the evidence?

Andy Chaikin found Sibrel's "secret" footage on the Apollo 11 3-disc set available from SpaceCraftFilms.com. From what I can see, that footage has been in the public domain since the flight.

I listened to Sibrel's "documentary" (ack gag), went to the part Sibrel describes as his "smoking gun" and found astronaut dialogue that contained easy-to-search-for words so Andy could look for them easily in the flight dialogue transcripts.

For example, in one part of Sibrel's video you hear an astronaut describing weather on Earth. I gave Andy the key words and within a few seconds he found the right part of the transcript. The time mark for the dialogue led him to the correct video clip, and voila! The raw footage of the astronauts.

Just in case Mr. Sibrel is wily enough to come here and read this board, I'll hold off until later describing what we did from there. [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img]

Ah, but how would we know you didn't edit it to put a NASA spin on it? Or that NASA didn't just plant an altered version of Sibrel's "definitive proof" to dupe the gullible. Such is the nature of information today. If one has no confidence in the source, the veracity of the evidence itself can be challenged - at least it can be if you're a conspiracist who believes anything is possible (except for landing men on the Moon, of course).

Seriously, though, I'm looking forward to seeing the real thing. Let's hope you are able to get your hands on it. I'd even pay!

So that's 5:15PM Central Time -- good, I'll be home from work by then! I'm looking forward to seeing you champion sanity on the TV! [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_wink.gif[/img] Knock 'em dead, break a leg (ideally not your own), and may the Force be with you!

will it be live or previously recorded?

Ask him how his face is feeling if he starts to go for ad hominem attacks. [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img]

__________________
GIYUL :-)
"It takes Thousands to fight a battle for a mile, Millions to hold an election for a nation, but it only takes One to change the world." - Dan Sandler 2002