ApolloHoax.net

Apollo Discussions => The Hoax Theory => Topic started by: BDL on July 31, 2018, 08:53:09 AM

Title: A Hoaxer’s Analysis of Apollo
Post by: BDL on July 31, 2018, 08:53:09 AM
Well, I’d like to note that “hoaxer” is not referring to me. I fully realize that Apollo really happened and was all authentic. But I’ve found an interesting hoaxer which apparently created an hour long list of things that supposedly “prove” Apollo never happened. I’d like to have your opinion on this.
Here:

Also, some more things by the same person. It seems the flag was waving a bit while it was not in contact with the astronaut. Are there any explanations for this?


In this, he compares the Russian Soyuz RCS Thrusters with that of Apollo’s Thrusters.


This person takes issue with a bunch of stuff I think. Some of this YouTube channel is in Russian but, with the stuff we’re able to understand, I think it would be both wise and beneficial to thuroughly refute/debunk his channel here. Thanks!

Title: Re: A Hoaxer’s Analysis of Apollo
Post by: BDL on July 31, 2018, 08:59:43 AM
Our site has been noticed.
And I really don’t think he’s very fond of us.


He’s also taken issue with Jay Windley (JayUtah):

Title: Re: A Hoaxer’s Analysis of Apollo
Post by: bknight on July 31, 2018, 09:59:32 AM
Jet Wintzer has been around for a couple of years.  A regurgitation of old HB's ideas and fully debunked.  We have debated the "orange/brown" smears on the film magazine.  No the magazine was not exposed to orange juice.  I personally contacted General Duke concerning the orange juice issue.  The magazine has most likely a smudge of lunar regolith that continued to smear on the images, too bad they take away from the really wonderful images taken on the Moon.


Ask yourself or any other HB, "Did you think of all the possibilities of what ever anomaly you describe, before declaring the image is fake or not taken on the Moon?"


Title: Re: A Hoaxer’s Analysis of Apollo
Post by: AtomicDog on July 31, 2018, 10:39:43 AM
Since he's aware of us, he's welcome to come here and debate the moon hoax if he wishes. I just hope that he brings some intellectual honesty with him.
Title: Re: A Hoaxer’s Analysis of Apollo
Post by: BDL on July 31, 2018, 10:53:56 AM
Since he's aware of us, he's welcome to come here and debate the moon hoax if he wishes. I just hope that he brings some intellectual honesty with him.

Fair point. To my knowledge, however, he’s been inactive on the internet for around a year.

The only thing he left us is a couple of videos. He also doesn’t seem very willing (or able) to debate from what I’ve seen of his comment section. Others have been able to provide explanations (in his comment section) and he doesn’t even try to fight back with actual arguments. In fact - whenever someone refuted his video he starts insulting the person and calls them either “retarded apollogist” or “propagandist.”

Obviously, he has a very regrettable, but common mindset among HBs.
Anyways, in my humble opinion, it would be wise to refute his channel in a way that is technical and detailed. I’d recommend to have it all organized so people can see and find it easily.
Title: Re: A Hoaxer’s Analysis of Apollo
Post by: gillianren on July 31, 2018, 12:36:16 PM
Since he's aware of us, he's welcome to come here and debate the moon hoax if he wishes. I just hope that he brings some intellectual honesty with him.


He'd have to have some first.
Title: Re: A Hoaxer’s Analysis of Apollo
Post by: bknight on July 31, 2018, 12:44:37 PM
Since he's aware of us, he's welcome to come here and debate the moon hoax if he wishes. I just hope that he brings some intellectual honesty with him.

Fair point. To my knowledge, however, he’s been inactive on the internet for around a year.

The only thing he left us is a couple of videos. He also doesn’t seem very willing (or able) to debate from what I’ve seen of his comment section. Others have been able to provide explanations (in his comment section) and he doesn’t even try to fight back with actual arguments. In fact - whenever someone refuted his video he starts insulting the person and calls them either “retarded apollogist” or “propagandist.”

Obviously, he has a very regrettable, but common mindset among HBs.
Anyways, in my humble opinion, it would be wise to refute his channel in a way that is technical and detailed. I’d recommend to have it all organized so people can see and find it easily.

So what handle does this guy go under and what internet forum?
Title: Re: A Hoaxer’s Analysis of Apollo
Post by: BDL on July 31, 2018, 01:04:04 PM
 :)
Since he's aware of us, he's welcome to come here and debate the moon hoax if he wishes. I just hope that he brings some intellectual honesty with him.

Fair point. To my knowledge, however, he’s been inactive on the internet for around a year.

The only thing he left us is a couple of videos. He also doesn’t seem very willing (or able) to debate from what I’ve seen of his comment section. Others have been able to provide explanations (in his comment section) and he doesn’t even try to fight back with actual arguments. In fact - whenever someone refuted his video he starts insulting the person and calls them either “retarded apollogist” or “propagandist.”

Obviously, he has a very regrettable, but common mindset among HBs.
Anyways, in my humble opinion, it would be wise to refute his channel in a way that is technical and detailed. I’d recommend to have it all organized so people can see and find it easily.

So what handle does this guy go under and what internet forum?

 He mainly operates on his YouTube channel “moonfakery” but his last video (which, fortunately, was already debunked by another Youtube channel) was posted around a year ago. I’m unsure of whether he’s ever made an account on apollohoax.net but he does know we exist.
Aulis.com mentions him but I don’t know whether he’s really a contributor there or not. http://aulis.com/moon_hoax_now.htm

People are saying he’s a filmmaker but I can’t be sure. I also don’t know how or where to reach him.
Title: Re: A Hoaxer’s Analysis of Apollo
Post by: BDL on July 31, 2018, 01:22:22 PM
“Jet Wintzer” is not his real name I just found out.
http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2015/01/leo-donofrio-natural-born-conspiracy-theorist/
Apparently his real name is “Leo Donofrio.”
He’s made quite the name for himself with conspiracies I guess.
Title: Re: A Hoaxer’s Analysis of Apollo
Post by: bknight on July 31, 2018, 01:23:04 PM
Yes Jet would trash talk anything that might debunk his videos.  And yes he would be a filmmaker at least in YT.  I watched the 1 hour video about 2 years ago and made notes of all his ignorant observations.  Those all are lost unfortunately and I won't set through another hour of stupidity.  To be associated or linked to aulis isn't a good thing, as they are all snake oil salesmen selling to the unwary.
Title: Re: A Hoaxer’s Analysis of Apollo
Post by: bknight on July 31, 2018, 01:26:28 PM
“Jet Wintzer” is not his real name I just found out.
http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2015/01/leo-donofrio-natural-born-conspiracy-theorist/
Apparently his real name is “Leo Donofrio.”
He’s made quite the name for himself with conspiracies I guess.

From that link, and thank you for the research.

Quote
I have never decided in my own mind whether Donofrio believes any of the stuff, or if he is just trying to prove how smart he is by fooling other people.

It is difficult to assess whether one believes the crap he spouts or just trying to fool others.  Only he can know for sure.
Title: Re: A Hoaxer’s Analysis of Apollo
Post by: AtomicDog on July 31, 2018, 04:53:43 PM
“Jet Wintzer” is not his real name I just found out.
http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2015/01/leo-donofrio-natural-born-conspiracy-theorist/
Apparently his real name is “Leo Donofrio.”
He’s made quite the name for himself with conspiracies I guess.


"Donofrio". I thought that name sounded familiar. He's one of the main proponents of the Obama Birther Conspiracy. Expecting intellectual honesty from him is a lost cause.
Title: Re: A Hoaxer’s Analysis of Apollo
Post by: smartcooky on July 31, 2018, 06:26:36 PM
Since he's aware of us, he's welcome to come here and debate the moon hoax if he wishes. I just hope that he brings some intellectual honesty with him.


Fat chance!

I have seen his lack of intellectual honesty first hand. If commenters question him, he abuses them or calls them NASA shills; if they post detailed, technical refutations of his video, he generally deletes the comments.

People like Jet Wintzer, and the Blunder are intellectual cowards. In places like like YouTube or GLP, he can control the debate by deleting inconvenient refutations of his BS. I doubt we will ever see Wintzer here because he knows he will not be able to control the debate.
Title: Re: A Hoaxer’s Analysis of Apollo
Post by: BDL on August 01, 2018, 09:28:04 AM
So I’ve found the explanation for the flag. It was static charge.https://www.quora.com/Why-did-the-flag-sometimes-move-when-the-astronaut-was-not-touching-it
Also, “Moon Hoax Now” was already talked about here on this site.
I’m still curious, however, about his problem with JayUtah and what that was all about. I’m also unsure of what he has against apollohoax.net in general.
Title: Re: A Hoaxer’s Analysis of Apollo
Post by: JayUtah on August 01, 2018, 12:07:30 PM
I've never paid attention to YouTube hoax claimants and I don't plan to start.  They're the only group I have ever felt honest categorically dismissing.
Title: Re: A Hoaxer’s Analysis of Apollo
Post by: BDL on August 01, 2018, 08:16:15 PM
I've never paid attention to YouTube hoax claimants and I don't plan to start.  They're the only group I have ever felt honest categorically dismissing.

Fair enough. YouTube is a breeding ground for these HBs and I find that part of YouTube toxic.
Title: Re: A Hoaxer’s Analysis of Apollo
Post by: JayUtah on August 02, 2018, 11:28:22 AM
Fair enough. YouTube is a breeding ground for these HBs and I find that part of YouTube toxic.

"Wretched hive of scum and villainy" comes to mind, but I know several of the other regulars here have been active and successful on YouTube for years.  Clearly it works for them.  Let me be more forthcoming:  the tenor of offerings at YouTube, especially where they concern me personally, have been extremely base and needlessly personalized.  It's as if they need to attack my character, appearance, manner, and so forth in a way I honestly haven't seen since fifth grade.  I simply will not dignify such childishness with my attention.  I know Phil Plait feels mostly the same way, because we've talked about it.  There are swathes of YouTube based on little more than calling me, him, and others names and slinging all manner of slander and filth.  "Toxic" is the right word.
Title: Re: A Hoaxer’s Analysis of Apollo
Post by: onebigmonkey on August 02, 2018, 12:45:41 PM
Fair enough. YouTube is a breeding ground for these HBs and I find that part of YouTube toxic.

"Wretched hive of scum and villainy" comes to mind, but I know several of the other regulars here have been active and successful on YouTube for years.  Clearly it works for them.  Let me be more forthcoming:  the tenor of offerings at YouTube, especially where they concern me personally, have been extremely base and needlessly personalized.  It's as if they need to attack my character, appearance, manner, and so forth in a way I honestly haven't seen since fifth grade.  I simply will not dignify such childishness with my attention.  I know Phil Plait feels mostly the same way, because we've talked about it.  There are swathes of YouTube based on little more than calling me, him, and others names and slinging all manner of slander and filth.  "Toxic" is the right word.

Pretty much my experience of it too. I think they like it that way - there's complete editorial control, no difficult setup or configuration to do as you'd have with a message board, no need to come up with reams of written content like a web site, and no hosting costs. Not only that they can even earn money if they know what they're doing with the monetisation part and can hoover in enough like minded suckers.

Expattaffy is fond of demanding that people make a video so he can go and vandalise it in the comments section or hijack the content under 'fair use' to ruin it on his own channel. It's typical of low attention span conspiratard laziness and in his case the height of egocentric cult of self - the embodiment of Rik Mayall's line from the Young Ones: "Everybody shut up and pay attention to me...".
Title: Re: A Hoaxer’s Analysis of Apollo
Post by: molesworth on August 02, 2018, 05:04:19 PM
"Wretched hive of scum and villainy" comes to mind...
I thought that particular epithet was reserved for the GLP forums  ;D  (and of course, Mos Eisley).

Certainly, there's a lot of really atrocious content on YouTube, but there's also a lot of really interesting, informative, entertaining stuff as well.  If you pick carefully, and as always, apply some critical thought, you'll find a lot of good things to watch.
Title: Re: A Hoaxer’s Analysis of Apollo
Post by: smartcooky on August 02, 2018, 08:05:22 PM
I know Phil Plait feels mostly the same way, because we've talked about it.  There are swathes of YouTube based on little more than calling me, him, and others names and slinging all manner of slander and filth.  "Toxic" is the right word.

In some ways this almost is a good thing. If they fell they have to resort to insulting you, its because they know they've got nothing. As a friend of mine once said...

"If I'm going to be somebody's boogeyman no matter what I do, then all I need to do is be the best person I can be, and wear people's hatred as a badge of honour"
Title: Re: A Hoaxer’s Analysis of Apollo
Post by: JayUtah on August 03, 2018, 11:21:08 AM
Certainly, there's a lot of really atrocious content on YouTube, but there's also a lot of really interesting, informative, entertaining stuff as well.

I'm a voracious consumer of YouTube content, especially resurrected documentaries.  I'm just not a participant in YouTube debate or culture.
Title: Re: A Hoaxer’s Analysis of Apollo
Post by: Glom on August 03, 2018, 12:19:27 PM
“Jet Wintzer” is not his real name I just found out.
http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2015/01/leo-donofrio-natural-born-conspiracy-theorist/
Apparently his real name is “Leo Donofrio.”
He’s made quite the name for himself with conspiracies I guess.


"Donofrio". I thought that name sounded familiar. He's one of the main proponents of the Obama Birther Conspiracy. Expecting intellectual honesty from him is a lost cause.
Isn't he the one from Full Metal Jacket?
Title: Re: A Hoaxer’s Analysis of Apollo
Post by: nomuse on August 03, 2018, 07:47:30 PM
Hard to resist an inappropriate quip about Full Canvas Jacket.
Title: Re: A Hoaxer’s Analysis of Apollo
Post by: AtomicDog on August 03, 2018, 09:52:08 PM
“Jet Wintzer” is not his real name I just found out.
http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2015/01/leo-donofrio-natural-born-conspiracy-theorist/
Apparently his real name is “Leo Donofrio.”
He’s made quite the name for himself with conspiracies I guess.


"Donofrio". I thought that name sounded familiar. He's one of the main proponents of the Obama Birther Conspiracy. Expecting intellectual honesty from him is a lost cause.
Isn't he the one from Full Metal Jacket?

"What is your major malfunction, numbnuts?"

It fits.
Title: Re: A Hoaxer’s Analysis of Apollo
Post by: ka9q on August 05, 2018, 06:01:35 AM
Certainly, there's a lot of really atrocious content on YouTube, but there's also a lot of really interesting, informative, entertaining stuff as well.  If you pick carefully, and as always, apply some critical thought, you'll find a lot of good things to watch.
Absolutely. Theodore Sturgeon must have had a time machine when he said "90% of everything is crap". He must have traveled forward in time and watched Youtube. (My corollary: "Sturgeon was an irrepressible optimist.")

But those few gems make it all worthwhile.

Some of my favorite channels include anything by Brady Haran (periodic videos, sixty symbols, numberphile, nottinghamscience, computerphile, etc). Smarter Every Day; TheRoyalInstitution; and Scott Manley. Scott is one of the very few Youtube space fans who really seems to know his stuff.

And in the non-technical areas, there's College Humor. Like all humor it can be very uneven, but they have some absolute gems like "Why Every New Macbook Needs A Different Goddamn Charger" and their "If Google Were a Guy" series. Hysterically funny.

Oh, and this one:


Title: Re: A Hoaxer’s Analysis of Apollo
Post by: twik on August 09, 2018, 01:16:03 PM
“Jet Wintzer” is not his real name I just found out.
http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2015/01/leo-donofrio-natural-born-conspiracy-theorist/
Apparently his real name is “Leo Donofrio.”
He’s made quite the name for himself with conspiracies I guess.


"Donofrio". I thought that name sounded familiar. He's one of the main proponents of the Obama Birther Conspiracy. Expecting intellectual honesty from him is a lost cause.
Isn't he the one from Full Metal Jacket?

No, that's Vincent D'Onofrio.

The apostrophe makes all the difference.
Title: Re: A Hoaxer’s Analysis of Apollo
Post by: smartcooky on August 09, 2018, 04:17:16 PM
“Jet Wintzer” is not his real name I just found out.
http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2015/01/leo-donofrio-natural-born-conspiracy-theorist/
Apparently his real name is “Leo Donofrio.”
He’s made quite the name for himself with conspiracies I guess.


"Donofrio". I thought that name sounded familiar. He's one of the main proponents of the Obama Birther Conspiracy. Expecting intellectual honesty from him is a lost cause.
Isn't he the one from Full Metal Jacket?

No, that's Vincent D'Onofrio.

The apostrophe makes all the difference.

... a brilliant and totally underrated actor.

His portrayal of the mildly autistic Detective Robert Goren in Criminal Intent was outstanding... and who could forget his Alien Cockroach character in MiB?
Title: Re: A Hoaxer’s Analysis of Apollo
Post by: Glom on September 17, 2018, 07:02:38 AM
Certainly, there's a lot of really atrocious content on YouTube, but there's also a lot of really interesting, informative, entertaining stuff as well.  If you pick carefully, and as always, apply some critical thought, you'll find a lot of good things to watch.
Absolutely. Theodore Sturgeon must have had a time machine when he said "90% of everything is crap". He must have traveled forward in time and watched Youtube. (My corollary: "Sturgeon was an irrepressible optimist.")

But those few gems make it all worthwhile.

Some of my favorite channels include anything by Brady Haran (periodic videos, sixty symbols, numberphile, nottinghamscience, computerphile, etc). Smarter Every Day; TheRoyalInstitution; and Scott Manley. Scott is one of the very few Youtube space fans who really seems to know his stuff.

And in the non-technical areas, there's College Humor. Like all humor it can be very uneven, but they have some absolute gems like "Why Every New Macbook Needs A Different Goddamn Charger" and their "If Google Were a Guy" series. Hysterically funny.

Oh, and this one:
There's also the ambitious The Great War, which is nearly finishing its project. There's Ben Eater who has the most brilliant tutorial on building a simple computer. Mentour Pilot is great for all things 737. Crash Course has some good stuff. I loved their history stuff. The science stuff tends to be a bit basic, but Hank Green's environment series was actually revision material for my masters module in sustainable development.

On light entertainment, there's of course RedLetterMedia. I love a good episode of Best of the Worst. Lindsay Ellis has some intelligent video essays on the field. The Unusual Suspect is good when he does actual reviews. There's some wonderful music channels like Insaneintherain which does jazz covers of video game stuff. Lot of talent there. And some lovely compilations of Legend of Zelda music that is great to have on at work if I think I can spare the data.
Title: Re: A Hoaxer’s Analysis of Apollo
Post by: nomuse on September 17, 2018, 08:38:09 PM
A second vote for the amazing Carlos.