Author Topic: Jack White passed...  (Read 14916 times)

Offline Noldi400

  • Jupiter
  • ***
  • Posts: 627
Re: Jack White passed...
« Reply #30 on: July 11, 2012, 03:50:16 PM »
Quote
The best you could probably hope for is to find someone willing to take on a position, a devil's advocate, for purposes of discussion.
A while back, I tried to approach the Hoax as if I had been assigned that side in a debate competition, but the more I thought about it, the less 'traction' I seemed to be able to get.

It might be possible to pick at a few anomalies in the official record (any event of this size inevitably produces some), but even the claims the HBs consider to be their strongest arguments are easy to explain for someone with even a basic understanding of the subject matter. And, if nothing else, the sheer size and scope of the operation it would take to simulate the moon landings would be more difficult (and probably more expensive) than going to the moon in the first place.

So I don't know how someone could even act as Devil's advocate unless they were also willing to simulate a lack of functional brain cells.
"The sane understand that human beings are incapable of sustaining conspiracies on a grand scale, because some of our most defining qualities as a species are... a tendency to panic, and an inability to keep our mouths shut." - Dean Koontz

Offline Rob260259

  • Earth
  • ***
  • Posts: 102
Re: Jack White passed...
« Reply #31 on: July 11, 2012, 04:55:24 PM »
And here's an example of the damage this crap does...

OK, they're airheads. But this stuff sticks in young minds. Astrobrandt, myself and others have pointed them to Clavius and ALSJ and urged them to look around with their eyes open before they come to conclusions, but who knows?

This is one of the major reasons why I'm participating YouTube.

Offline Noldi400

  • Jupiter
  • ***
  • Posts: 627
Re: Jack White passed...
« Reply #32 on: July 11, 2012, 07:59:24 PM »
Quote
those poor girls got atleast 3 detailed explanations by 3 different people :P (me included)
though it's "better to scare them straight" ;)
Maybe pt1gard will come along and "scare them straight" ;)
"The sane understand that human beings are incapable of sustaining conspiracies on a grand scale, because some of our most defining qualities as a species are... a tendency to panic, and an inability to keep our mouths shut." - Dean Koontz

Offline Peter B

  • Jupiter
  • ***
  • Posts: 712
Re: Jack White passed...
« Reply #33 on: July 11, 2012, 09:34:45 PM »
Quote
The best you could probably hope for is to find someone willing to take on a position, a devil's advocate, for purposes of discussion.
A while back, I tried to approach the Hoax as if I had been assigned that side in a debate competition, but the more I thought about it, the less 'traction' I seemed to be able to get.

It might be possible to pick at a few anomalies in the official record (any event of this size inevitably produces some), but even the claims the HBs consider to be their strongest arguments are easy to explain for someone with even a basic understanding of the subject matter. And, if nothing else, the sheer size and scope of the operation it would take to simulate the moon landings would be more difficult (and probably more expensive) than going to the moon in the first place.

So I don't know how someone could even act as Devil's advocate unless they were also willing to simulate a lack of functional brain cells.
As Charlie Duke says at the end of "In the Shadow of the Moon", "We’ve been to the moon nine times. If we faked it, why did we fake it nine times?"

I forget whether it was on the old board or on the BAUT Forum, but someone posted how they'd run Apollo if they were going to fake it - fewer missions, one landing mission, no TV, no live access to Mission Control, few photos released, no rocks released. In other words, about as different from Apollo as a Moon landing program could be.

Offline ka9q

  • Neptune
  • ****
  • Posts: 2853
Re: Jack White passed...
« Reply #34 on: July 12, 2012, 02:25:32 AM »
You're making the same mistake I used to make: you're expecting the hoaxers to think logically and to examine the necessary consequences of their claims. They're fundamentally unable to do either.

« Last Edit: July 12, 2012, 02:37:45 AM by ka9q »

Offline Obviousman

  • Mars
  • ***
  • Posts: 333
Re: Jack White passed...
« Reply #35 on: July 12, 2012, 06:55:19 AM »
Correct. White even used to say that he'd examine evidence that proved his hoax theories wrong... but since the landings were faked, any evidence saying otherwise were also faked and therefore should be ignored.

Circular reasoning anyone?

Offline ka9q

  • Neptune
  • ****
  • Posts: 2853
Re: Jack White passed...
« Reply #36 on: July 12, 2012, 07:51:36 AM »
Circular reasoning anyone?
Of course it's circular. That's the original meaning of "begging the question", though nowadays people seem to interpret that phrase as meaning something different, i.e., "strongly suggesting the question".

They also take everything very personally. In my one and only interaction with Jack White, pointing out the problems with his analysis of the "flag" in the window of the Apollo 11 LM, he reacted as though I'd insulted his mother and invited him to a gay sex orgy or something. It was truly remarkable. That I would have the barefaced audacity to even think of emailing him -- the one and only Jack White! -- to question his interpretation was simply unforgiveable.

It made me wish I could see video (or at least hear audio) of him getting keelhauled by the counsel for the House Subcommittee on Assassinations.

 
« Last Edit: July 12, 2012, 07:57:12 AM by ka9q »

Offline scooter

  • Venus
  • **
  • Posts: 72
Re: Jack White passed...
« Reply #37 on: July 12, 2012, 11:24:34 AM »
Circular reasoning anyone?
It made me wish I could see video (or at least hear audio) of him getting keelhauled by the counsel for the House Subcommittee on Assassinations.

Just reading the text of that testimony was quite damning in itself....they just shredded his claim of any credibility or expertise. I almost felt sorry for him. Almost.

As to those girls and their video, sometimes the internet does more harm than good, it seems it spreads ignorance and knowledge equally. Middleschoolers...wish they'd come to our launches so we could teach them some science (ala the TARC program).

Offline JayUtah

  • Neptune
  • ****
  • Posts: 2708
    • Clavius
Re: Jack White passed...
« Reply #38 on: July 12, 2012, 12:11:03 PM »
...though nowadays people seem to interpret that phrase as meaning something different, i.e., "strongly suggesting the question".

Indeed, but that's due to a legitimate overlap.  Consider this:

Kevin:  It's going to cost $1,225 to ship the cabinets from fab [fabrication] to Livermore.
Jay:  We could have the cabinets drop-shipped to Livermore and bring the equipment with us.
Kevin:  But that begs the question of dry-fitting the rackup.

In this case Kevin meant to raise the question of how we would test the layout of the equipment in standard cabinets, to make sure cable harnesses would fit, etc.  But in a more esoteric sense, he means that I'm assuming that certain unknowns would magically resolve themselves in a favorable way.  And that's the essence of the logical fallacy of circulus in demonstrando.

Quote
That I would have the barefaced audacity to even think of emailing him -- the one and only Jack White! -- to question his interpretation was simply unforgiveable.

Yes, that was indeed Jack White.  He thought he was pretty hot stuff.  And ironically a lot of that came from his HSCA gang-up.  He spun it to say he must really be onto something if "the government" was going to work so hard to discredit him.
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams