OT. Where they really on the moon?

DavidG · #1 March 6th, 2003, 05:25 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Aloofi:

quote:
Originally posted by DavidG:
So does anyone here believe the moon landings were fake? Gees I read this whole thread looking for just one example of why people belive they were fake. Other than the radiation belt that was it. Is that all you moon hoax believers have?

Here it goes, unedited, for all of you that missed the link.

"RESPONSE TO MICHAEL MEDVED'S USA TODAY ARTICLE BY BART W. SIBREL

< snip >

Well I'd be happy to point out what is wrong with this article when I get off work but my point was what does the SE4 comunity think? I could care less what Bart Sibrel thinks.

kalthalior · #2 March 6th, 2003, 05:33 PM

The moon landings could not possibly have been faked -- HBO did a docudrama miniseries about them!

Wyvern · #3 March 6th, 2003, 07:13 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by QuarianRex:
Let a generation or so pass and look how that one little event has so impacted the national psyche. Most of the people who were there are dead now so who is to say ant different?

Like who? Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin are still alive, as far as I know. So's Jim Lovell (the guy Tom Hanks played in Apollo 13.) I'm sure there are lots of other people still alive who were "there", I just can't name them. Can you name any that are dead?

Alpha Kodiak · #4 March 6th, 2003, 07:58 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Wyvern:

quote:
Originally posted by QuarianRex:
Let a generation or so pass and look how that one little event has so impacted the national psyche. Most of the people who were there are dead now so who is to say ant different?

Like who? Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin are still alive, as far as I know. So's Jim Lovell (the guy Tom Hanks played in Apollo 13.) I'm sure there are lots of other people still alive who were "there", I just can't name them. Can you name any that are dead?

The sad thing is that eventually they will be, as will everyone who was around when the landings occured. Then it will be easier to assert that they didn't happen, just as it is becoming easier for those who deny the occurence of the Holocost. "Gee no one is around that saw it, so it must not have happened."

Wyvern · #5 March 6th, 2003, 08:01 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Aloofi:
Could a fuzzy black-and-white television image be used to fool the public? Let's look at history. In the mid 1950's Time Magazine had on its cover "The Smartest Man in America" who was the latest winner on the popular TV game show The Sixty-four Thousand Dollar Question. It was later proven in a court of law that the man knew the answers in advance.

Completely irrelevant. Proving that a guy can lie on national television and get away with it (for a while) isn't remotely close to proving that you can fake a moon landing.

Quote:

Originally posted by Aloofi:
It isn't an "utterly uncredentialed journalist" who is asserting that the Apollo 1 fire of January 27, 1967 that killed what would have been the first crew to walk on the moon just days after the commander, Gus Grissom, held an unapproved press conference complaining that they were at least ten years, not two, from reaching the moon.

Read this sentence carefully and you'll notice a funny thing; he doesn't actually say what Grissom's son is "asserting". We can infer what he means from context, but the fact that he trails off without finishing his sentence shows that either a) he's being deliberately misleading or b) he's a lousy writer. Of course, it could be both.

Quote:

Originally posted by Aloofi:
It is the dead man's own son, who is a seasoned pilot himself, and who has in his possession forensic evidence personally retrieved from the charred spacecraft (that the government has tried to destroy on two or more occasions), who is making this accusation.

What accusation? What kind of forensic evidence?

Quote:

Originally posted by Aloofi:
Mr. Medved, have you personally retrieved evidence from the space capsule to support your theory that this credible first hand assertion is unfounded?

*What* credible first hand assertion? And what makes it credible? The fact that Sidrel believes it? No, that just makes *him* credulous.

Quote:

Originally posted by Aloofi:
Anyone with the slightest open mind and truly objective thinking can conclude that when the assassin of President Kennedy was assassinated himself three days later, that something was awry.

In other words, if you're not a conspiracy theorist like Sibrel, you're close-minded and unobjective. Sorry, don't buy it. Of course, that's just the sort of thing we would *expect* a conspiracy theorist to say, isn't it? It must be evidence of a sinister conspiracy by conspiracy theorists to dupe the unsuspecting public into buying their stupid books and videotapes!

Quote:

Originally posted by Aloofi:
The moon landings cover-up is even grander, yet, obviously, not the first, and it is certainly not the first time, or the Last, that the press at large was completely wrong.

And I doubt it's the first time, nor the Last, that Bart Sibrel has been completely wrong.

Quote:

Originally posted by Aloofi:
I sent a copy of this lost footage to every United States Senator and Congress Member (five hundred thirty-five), plus the president and the current director of the General Accounting Office. I have heard back from only four.

Maybe that's because they have better things to do than waste their time trying to argue with attention hounds like Sibrel.