The latest moon hoax documentary

Discussion in 'Conspiracies' started by FatFreddy, May 25, 2020.

  1. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    25,570
    Someone must have two...you couldn't get that silly pulling one.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. FatFreddy Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    618
    That's simply not true. I've been to the beach enough times to see how large-grained dust-free sand behaves. If there's no wind, it simply falls just like a rock would. These's no billowing.

    MoonFaker: Project Sandbox.

    (4:08 time mark)

    Of course it doesn't but that's not what we're talking about. We're discussing the issue of whether it's possible to transport and place large-grained dust-free sand on a moon set without causing enough erosion to create enough dust to cause a dust cloud when the sand is driven over. There are no dust clouds behind the rover in the Apollo footage. The pro-Apollo posters at the Clavius forum maintain that this is evidence that the missions were filmed in a vacuum. I pointed out that large-grained dust-free sand wouldn't form clouds when kicked up by a vehicle. Jay Windley* replied that it would be impossible to transport and place the sand without creating enough dust to cause a dust cloud. All of the pro-Apollo posters at the Clavius forum agreed with him.

    (see posts #25 and #26)
    http://www.apollohoax.net/forum/index.php?topic=1118.15

    I maintain that this is so clearly wrong that those posters can't even believe it themselves which shows that they are not objective truth-seekers. They seem to be sophists and the Clavius site seems to be a disinfo site. I think all of them know the moon missions were faked.


    I want all of you pro-Apollo posters to state whether you agree with Jay Windley on this issue. If you just tap dance around it instead of addressing it directly, you won't look like objective truth-seekers. The viewers are watching and judging.



    *
    http://www.clavius.org/about.html
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,313
    I don't give a flying F what Jay Windley thinks.

    The motion of the regolith thrown up on the Moon by the wheels of the rover is consistent with motion of fines in a vacuum. Period. I don't care if you think Jay Windley is wrong about something, or if you think it's really talcum powder, or you think that rocks in a truck will make a grating noise when driven over a steel bridge. Doesn't matter. What matters is that the video is consistent with driving on an airless body with much less gravity.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. FatFreddy Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    618
    Do you think it's also consistent with large-grained dust-free sand being thown up in Earth atmosphere shown in slow-motion?

    Whether Jay Windley and the rest of those pro-Apollo posters at the Clavius forum are objective truth-seekers, or paid sophists who know Apollo was faked is a serious Apollo-related issue. I put forth what I consider to be proof that they are not sincere truth-seekers. If you tap dance around and avoid the issue, it looks like you aren't an objective truth-seeker.

    What about the rest of you pro-Apollo posters who have posted on this thread? I want to hear from all of you.
     
  8. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    14,618
    It doesn't matter how many imaginative explanations it might match.

    Look:
    The Earth's motion around the sun is consistent with known physics.

    The fact that it's also consistent with the magic powers of a genie in a lamp does not cause a silly explanation to rise to the level of serious consideration.
     
  9. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,313
    It's not a tap dance around. It is completely ignoring him because what he says isn't relevant - any more than what Mad Mike said about the shape of the Earth before he died.
     
  10. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    25,570

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    The viewers have concluded long ago that you are a troll.
    Sure! You are crazy...you are a troll. Is that factual enough?
     
  11. FatFreddy Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    618
    I think it's pretty clear to the viewers that I was asking you all to address this.

    (from post #62)

    You people seem to be checkmated by this issue. Sincere objective truth-seekers don't get checkmated. They address everything directly and when they see that they're wrong about something, they modify their positions. They don't ignore the arguments made by the other side. Whether Jay Windley* and the rest of the pro-Apollo posters at the Clavius forum** are sincere truth-seekers, or a bunch of paid sophists*** who know Apollo was faked is a serious Apollo-related issue. Your brushing it off as irrelevant is not the behaviour of sincere truth-seekers.

    I might as well just declare victory here and your not recognizing it won't have any effect on what the viewers end up thinking. Even staunch Apollo-believers can see that you're avoiding serious issues because you have to either agree with Jay Windley and look silly, or say he's wrong which will pretty much expose him as a liar. His taking that position on the issue has already exposed him as a liar.

    There's really no sense in continuing to talk about this with you people as you've pretty much destroyed your credibility by refusing to address this issue. You're obviously not serious truth-seekers. No one with an ounce of sense who's read this thread is going to take any of you seriously.



    *
    http://www.clavius.org/about.html

    **
    http://www.clavius.org/

    ***
    http://www.whale.to/m/disin.html
    http://www.whale.to/b/sweeney.html
     
  12. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 70 years old Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,308
    Ask away - ask denied

    So no need to return? - great

    Turns to Moon landings believers

    "Ladies and gentlemen we all have a win here

    FF will no longer be compelled to sprout his nonsense and we no longer need to worry about his mental health"

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    foghorn, sideshowbob and paddoboy like this.
  13. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 70 years old Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,308
    Currently watching Apollo 13 return to Earth

    Re the no stars in the background nonsense

    This is showing astronauts used visual sightings of the stars to orientate the damaged craft (the computer and guidance systems had been turned off to save power)

    Part of the problem with stars - there were to many in view along with - debris from the explosion still traveling with the craft

    Course correction was needed via firing Landers motor and visual sightings

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    Last edited: Jun 8, 2020
  14. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    14,618
    Michael 345 likes this.
  15. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    34,574
    Why are you still here, then? Don't let that door hit you on your way out!
     
  16. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    34,574
    Why don't you discuss it with Jay Windley? Wait... haven't you already done that? He's debunked you comprehensively, over and over again, hasn't he?
     
  17. FatFreddy Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    618
    On this particular issue he showed himself to be a sophist who doesn't even believe his own arguments. Look at post #26 on this page.
    http://www.apollohoax.net/forum/index.php?topic=1118.15

    Tell us whether you agree with him.
     
  18. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,313
    If you think he's a stupid sophist - I like him more already.
     
  19. CptBork Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,323
    You'd need a light source placed extremely far away in order to fake the moon landings, it wouldn't work in a closed studio without modern computer effects.

    I can't blame people for being skeptical about the moon landings though. People keep telling me about these things called bears and how they supposedly hibernate all winter, but I have yet to see a single shred of evidence. How come I've never seen one going through my trash?
     
    DaveC426913 likes this.
  20. FatFreddy Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    618
    Start watching the video at the 59:40 time mark.


    https://www.bitchute.com/video/eZramDBFkXRU/


    They make a good point. Before Apollo the official stand on the Van Allen belts was that they were dangerous. During Apollo they said they weren't that dangerous. Now they say they are dangerous again.

    Any objective person with common sense would be suspicious on seeing this. What do you pro-Apollo people say?
     
  21. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    25,570
    You would really need to pay me a good sum of money Freddy, to even begin to watch any of your videos or any video from your tin foil hat brigade. In realty, you all really need to be locked up and certified, so damn silly is the nonsense you attempt to push as fact.
    What are you bunch going to hang your hat on when NASA finally returns to the Moon??
    How much wringing of hands and idiotic denial will come from your direction when we finally go to Mars?
    Sad, so very sad that such psychotic delusional maladies exist and so badly affect some gullible people as yourself.
     
  22. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,929
    I am suspicious about why you are into this stuff..do you have a book that you are trying to sell?
    Let us for a moment go with you...all I can say is..so what...great con.
    911 is an inside job..so what who cares?
    Those in control no doubt do things for our benefit so why worry?
    Alex
     
  23. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    25,570

Share This Page