Author Topic: Is the Scientific Process, Standards of Proof ignored by NASA Supporters?  (Read 224789 times)

Offline Chief

  • Venus
  • **
  • Posts: 84
Re: Is the Scientific Process, Standards of Proof ignored by NASA Supporters?
« Reply #225 on: February 03, 2015, 12:37:48 AM »
No not a sock puppet, but I do have a sister in the Navy.

How have I attacked you, I thought I was being nice.

I actually started another thread a few days ago because I wanted to know about Jarrah White.

I have had plenty of experience with Conspiracy Theorists though, and you could probably suffice for two or three bingo cards, except you keep pulling out the same two numbers.

I was getting bored of your ranting and decided to placate you by giving you a nickname Rommy.

Offline Romulus

  • Earth
  • ***
  • Posts: 224
  • BANNED
Re: Is the Scientific Process, Standards of Proof ignored by NASA Supporters?
« Reply #226 on: February 03, 2015, 12:38:09 AM »
Rommy, it's a term of endearment my little cherub.

I believe you're a 'sock puppet' for another user here, probably Windley. You want to be able to say things that support him but do not degrade his credibility any worst than it already has been. 14 posts? You registered the account to attack me.

Yeah, he registered two months ago in anticipation of the gem of a thread JUST to attack you.

Facade still cracking......
Well, yeah, you should have fabricated the date of registration too.


Offline JayUtah

  • Neptune
  • ****
  • Posts: 3787
    • Clavius
Re: Is the Scientific Process, Standards of Proof ignored by NASA Supporters?
« Reply #227 on: February 03, 2015, 12:41:28 AM »
Mr. Windley, you will have to excuse me for being blunt, but you are a horrible liar. The "surface journal" was required to be attributed to Armstrong because if it didn't exist the hoax would be obvious.

Circular reasoning.

Quote
Armstrong resigned from NASA a few years after the 'moonlandings" and refused to discuss the moon landings with ANYONE.

Everyone except for the people he did talk to about it, which enabled them to publish the statements that conspiracy theorists interpret to be confessions.

Quote
He was virtual recluse who valued his privacy...

As he did before Apollo, or even indeed before becoming an astronaut.  That makes it hard to attribute to fake Moon landings.

Quote
...and when he did make public appearances he didn't discuss Apollo.

Except, of course, when he did.  Such as the aforementioned Apollo 11 40th anniversary.  And to his biographer.

Quote
He worked as a professor and didn't allow his students to treat him any different than anyone else. He abhorred the attention and showed all the signs of being a man with integrity unwilling to participate in a lie.

But according to you he did participate in a lie.  Which is it?
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams

Offline Romulus

  • Earth
  • ***
  • Posts: 224
  • BANNED
Re: Is the Scientific Process, Standards of Proof ignored by NASA Supporters?
« Reply #228 on: February 03, 2015, 12:43:10 AM »
No not a sock puppet, but I do have a sister in the Navy.

How have I attacked you, I thought I was being nice.

I actually started another thread a few days ago because I wanted to know about Jarrah White.

I have had plenty of experience with Conspiracy Theorists though, and you could probably suffice for two or three bingo cards, except you keep pulling out the same two numbers.

I was getting bored of your ranting and decided to placate you by giving you a nickname Rommy.

I do not theorize about conspiracies publicly. By the time I speak of them publicly I am beyond the "theory" stage. For instance the biggest conspiracy of all is so immense and so all encompassing, few can ever  comprehend the scope of it. JFK spoke of it , Lincoln too. What else do they have in common?

Offline Sus_pilot

  • Mars
  • ***
  • Posts: 337
Re: Is the Scientific Process, Standards of Proof ignored by NASA Supporters?
« Reply #229 on: February 03, 2015, 12:45:54 AM »

That is simply not true. Armstrong was a recluse who appeared to be highly reluctant to represent NASA, and he very seldom spoke of being on the moon.

That's according to one conspiracy author who complained that Armstrong was reluctant to see him.

Quote
Site a reference to Armstrong pontificating about the moonlandings

The Apollo Lunar Surface Journal.

Mr. Windley, you will have to excuse me for being blunt, but you are a horrible liar. The "surface journal" was required to be attributed to Armstrong because if it didn't exist the hoax would be obvious. Armstrong resigned from NASA a few years after the 'moonlandings" and refused to discuss the moon landings with ANYONE. He was virtual recluse who valued his privacy and when he did make public appearances he didn't discuss Apollo. He worked as a professor and didn't allow his students to treat him any different than anyone else. He abhorred the attention and showed all the signs of being a man with integrity unwilling to participate in a lie.

Or, just maybe, he wasn't an egomaniac looking for praise.  Maybe, just maybe, he wanted an orderly classroom environment that benefited his students, without the distraction of his fame.

I am curious about you, though.  Why is this so important to you? And, please, because I'm really interested in your motives, why Jay in particular? 

Finally, give me, as a pilot, just one piece of evidence that will help make your case, or at least begin building it.  Anything at all.

Offline DD Brock

  • Earth
  • ***
  • Posts: 182
Re: Is the Scientific Process, Standards of Proof ignored by NASA Supporters?
« Reply #230 on: February 03, 2015, 12:46:02 AM »
Rommy, it's a term of endearment my little cherub.

I believe you're a 'sock puppet' for another user here, probably Windley. You want to be able to say things that support him but do not degrade his credibility any worst than it already has been. 14 posts? You registered the account to attack me.

Yeah, he registered two months ago in anticipation of the gem of a thread JUST to attack you.

Facade still cracking......
Well, yeah, you should have fabricated the date of registration too.

How would I do that, I'm just a junior memeber here?

I was wondering when paranoid delusion would emerge....

Offline Chief

  • Venus
  • **
  • Posts: 84
Re: Is the Scientific Process, Standards of Proof ignored by NASA Supporters?
« Reply #231 on: February 03, 2015, 12:48:26 AM »

I do not theorize about conspiracies publicly. By the time I speak of them publicly I am beyond the "theory" stage. For instance the biggest conspiracy of all is so immense and so all encompassing, few can ever  comprehend the scope of it. JFK spoke of it , Lincoln too. What else do they have in common?

Oh my, we do have delusions of grandeur don't we. Tell me how long have you been feeling this way?

Actually I am fascinated. Please divulge the details of this big conspiracy.

Offline Bob B.

  • Jupiter
  • ***
  • Posts: 819
  • Bob the Excel Guru™
    • Rocket & Space Technology
Re: Is the Scientific Process, Standards of Proof ignored by NASA Supporters?
« Reply #232 on: February 03, 2015, 12:48:46 AM »
http://www.daytondailynews.com/photo/news/photos/e56866f3aa6aecf8701aaae4759de1ff/pYh5q/

Quote


Astronauts Edwin "Buzz" Aldrin, left, Neil Armstrong, right, the first man on the moon, talk about the Apollo 11 mission and the upcoming 40th anniversary of the historic event on July 20, 2009. Aldrin and Armstrong were participating in the National Aviation Hall of Fame President's Dinner Friday evening, July 17 at the National Museum of the U.S. Air Force in Fairborn, Ohio.
« Last Edit: February 03, 2015, 01:35:27 AM by Bob B. »

Offline Romulus

  • Earth
  • ***
  • Posts: 224
  • BANNED
Re: Is the Scientific Process, Standards of Proof ignored by NASA Supporters?
« Reply #233 on: February 03, 2015, 12:55:35 AM »


But according to you he did participate in a lie.  Which is it?

Mr.Windley, I am done with you...for now.           

I'll leave you with this final word..There seems to be a disturbing history of untimely deaths for people who become problematic to NASA and the larger conspiracy in general. 15 astronauts died in '"accidents" during the "space race". Armstrong was smarter than you, and aware of the reality of the situation.

Offline Chief

  • Venus
  • **
  • Posts: 84
Re: Is the Scientific Process, Standards of Proof ignored by NASA Supporters?
« Reply #234 on: February 03, 2015, 12:57:30 AM »
Don't leave Rommy. I want to know about the bigger than big all encompassing world conspiracy!

Offline Luke Pemberton

  • Uranus
  • ****
  • Posts: 1823
  • Chaos in his tin foil hat
Re: Is the Scientific Process, Standards of Proof ignored by NASA Supporters?
« Reply #235 on: February 03, 2015, 01:00:53 AM »
I'll leave you with this final word..There seems to be a disturbing history of untimely deaths for people who become problematic to NASA and the larger conspiracy in general. 15 astronauts died in '"accidents" during the "space race". Armstrong was smarter than you, and aware of the reality of the situation.

Yet they never managed to silence Bill and Ralph? Quite inept for an organisation that has covered up a multi-billion dollar swindle for over 40 years.
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former - Albert Einstein.

I can calculate the motion of heavenly bodies, but not the madness of people – Sir Isaac Newton.

A polar orbit would also bypass the SAA - Tim Finch

Offline JayUtah

  • Neptune
  • ****
  • Posts: 3787
    • Clavius
Re: Is the Scientific Process, Standards of Proof ignored by NASA Supporters?
« Reply #236 on: February 03, 2015, 01:03:03 AM »
Mr.Windley, I am done with you...for now.

But I'm not done with you.  You lit into Armstrong and then left it hanging while you changed subjects.  Earlier you were complaining that it was all too much for you and that you were outnumbered and the cards were stacked against you.  Now you're Gish-galloping from radiation to Armstrong to yet another of the same hoax claims everyone always brings up.

Let's stay on Armstrong until we're satisfied we've covered the topic in sufficient depth for you to prove your superiority.
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams

Offline Chief

  • Venus
  • **
  • Posts: 84
Re: Is the Scientific Process, Standards of Proof ignored by NASA Supporters?
« Reply #237 on: February 03, 2015, 01:10:48 AM »
Well he's still here reading this topic.

So Romulus, how about it?

Give your best evidence on Armstrong, and Armstrong alone, and Jay will counter, or possibly agree. I'm sure he would be more that willing to concede to factual information, if there is any.

Aaand GO!

Offline dwight

  • Jupiter
  • ***
  • Posts: 685
    • Live Tv From the Moon
Re: Is the Scientific Process, Standards of Proof ignored by NASA Supporters?
« Reply #238 on: February 03, 2015, 01:15:35 AM »
Sorry to weigh in, but talk of Astronauts being bumped off reminded me of the barbeque Im having Wednesday week. It is the annual "Im glad to be alive because I live the lie" bbq and the usual secret handshake is required. This year's venue is, surprise, surprise, Moonbi, Nsw.
"Honeysuckle TV on line!"

Offline Bob B.

  • Jupiter
  • ***
  • Posts: 819
  • Bob the Excel Guru™
    • Rocket & Space Technology
Re: Is the Scientific Process, Standards of Proof ignored by NASA Supporters?
« Reply #239 on: February 03, 2015, 01:18:38 AM »
The following is a transcript to an interview that Armstrong gave in 2001.  During the last part of the interview he talks at length about his Apollo 11 experiences.

http://www.jsc.nasa.gov/history/oral_histories/ArmstrongNA/ArmstrongNA_9-19-01.pdf