Evan Burton

That's why the USSR invaded them in 1979!

I'm another non-American who doesn't see what the fuss is about. Even so, I'm unsure why this issue keeps on getting raised.

There seems to be a birth certificate:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/51/BarackObamaCertificationOfLiveBirthHawaii.jpg

There seems to be the original record:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/26/1961_Hawaii_Certificate_Of_Live_Birth.jpg

So what is the problem?

I found out what the resizing issue was... it does not apply retrospectively. It only applies to new uploads.

I'm still working on the max number issue.

Test Post only

I'm not sure what is happening right now, but it is not doing what I think it should be doing.

The max number of images per post is 5.

The max number of media per post is 5.

Now I find I can add 5 attachments, so that is correct.

If I try to add 5 IMG tags, though, I can only use 2. I'll have to look at that one.

Next, the attachments should automatically "resize" to a thumbnail if greater than 400 pixels height or width, but the test posts I made still extend the full width / height of the attached image.

*sigh* I'll work on it.

Test post only

I'll check on that but I had the same problem last night though all the settings are for 5 images / media per post.

You should be able to load a maximum of 5 images per post.

... when you delete an attachment, does it disappear from the post where you attached it, and all the replies where others left it included??

That should be the case, but I'm not sure.

Then something's not right or there was a temporary glitch. When I tried to posted my latest reply on the OKC thread (PCs Forum) it told me I was trying to insert more than the allowed number. I kept removing image links until it allowed the message to post. At that it only had 2 links.

Has any one posted a message with 3 - 5 image links since the new format kicked in?

To change the way you see the Forum, instead of doing the above, go to the tabs at the top and select FORUMS. This will bring up all the Forum options. The first page you see has the view options. Use the TOPIC DISPLAY MODE to select the view you prefer.

To manage your attachments or change the type of Forum view you see, first go to your settings.

Go to the top right hand corner of the board where you see your name. To the right of your name will be a drop down arrow. Click on that and a list will appear. Click on MY SETTINGS.

A new view will appear with a set of options on the left of the page, and up the top of the page. If you want to mange your attachments, select MANAGE ATTACHMENTS.

You should be able to load a maximum of 5 images per post.

... when you delete an attachment, does it disappear from the post where you attached it, and all the replies where others left it included??

That should be the case, but I'm not sure.

I'm still waiting to see if Jack can defend his claims.

Greg,

Please do check out Jack's claims because I think you'll find that they do not stand up to scrutiny. Please let us know the results. Thanks!

Jack White posted a link to an interview with him which had already been posted on another sub-forum. I said that it was enough self-promotion, and that a link on one sub-forum was enough. The first thread Jack posted was left open, and discussion was free to take place. There were complaints and the thread on this sub-forum was re-opened, with non-JFK posts moved to the said thread on this sub-forum.

When Jack White did not post his complaints regarding the closure of the second thread on the complaint thread, but instead started new threads and posted complaints off-topic on other threads, I closed the additional threads / posts and made them invisible.

I feel that a moon hoax is not a sideshow, but an unexplored political area. A non-landing brings up NASA budget questions. What was the covert relation between NASA and the DOD? Was NASA a money launderer for Defense or intel projects? If they didn't spend it on the lunar surface...where did it go, and what other funding went with it?

David,

They're good questions. I'll try to answer...

NASA is a civilian agency. There are circumstances when they carry payloads which are in the interest of national security, but that is normally when a military launch vehicle is not available. This particular role is entirely limited to the Shuttle. I don't know if you have read any of the history of the Shuttle, but NASA had to get the DoD (specifically the USAF) to help finance the programme otherwise it would have died before ever flying. This forced NASA to make several changes to the Shuttle design to meet USAF requirements. During the Mercury / Gemini / Apollo programmes, military involvement was limited to the use of spacecraft as an orbital recon platform. The USAF had it's own programmes (X-20 / MOL) but rapidly moved towards unmanned space platforms and dedicated military launch vehicles.

The accounting of all the money spent is reasonably well documented. As a primer, can I recommend: Apollo By The Numbers.

The development of Apollo hardware and techniques took massive amounts of funding; they developed processes and techniques unheard of previously. Funding, though, reached a peak around 1965-66 and then entered a steady decline. the Mars project got canned. The Apollo Applications project - with the exception of Skylab - got canned. Next, the missions themselves got hit. Hardware for flights up to Apollo 20 were built but 20 got cut. Then 19 and 18 ran out of money.

The money was not spent on the lunar surface, but in developing the techniques, the hardware, and the infrastructure to get there - and back - safely.

And we still see no indication of the "personal attacks" that member Dave Greer has supposedly conducted.

Can anyone find evidence of such?

Wow. Try not to fall over yourself with thanks for doing what you asked for.

All credit should go to Andy.

Greer is entitled to his opinion. He is not entitled to continually make attacks on me.

Please point out where I continually attack you, rather than your studies.

As usual, the silence is telling.

Okay Michael - I'll re-open the thread and move all non-JFK discussion to that thread.

*sigh*

Okay - let's review the facts.

1. Jack posted a link to a site where an interview with him was published. He discussed JFK, Apollo and 9-11 amonst other things.

2. I posted my opinion of the content (full of bull and inaccuracies). At no time did I mention Apollo.

3. François Carlier asked about Apollo (amonst other topics), and where Jack stood on it.

4. Jack responded, saying quote All the photos "taken on the moon" are faked unquote.

5. I asked that if the astronauts claim opposite of what Jack says, stating they DID take the images, then is Jack saying they are lying or not.

6. Bill, Bernice, Craig, and Prof Fetzer all weighed in.

7. I clarified my position, clarified that you can call a non-member a xxxx if you so wish, and that the problem - IMHO - was Jack will not respond to those who dispute his claims.

8. Jack - as per normal - claimed it was a personal attack on him.

9. I submitted myself to the decision of the other moderators.

10. I gave numerous examples where Jack makes person attacks on people.

I did not steer the conversation towards Apollo. In fact, Bill Kelly and Jack made more posts on Apollo than me.

Next:

Jack posted another link to the same interview on another sub-forum. I said that it was enough self-promotion, and that a link on one sub-forum was enough.

The first thread Jack posted was left open, and discussion is free to take place.

Jack did not post his complaint on the complaint thread, but instead started new threads and posted complaints off-topic on other threads. I closed these and made them invisible, and make no apology for that.

Greg,

Have you tried to reproduce the images yourself?

Craig suggested it, and so do I.

If you'd like simple but detailed instructions, I'm happy to provide them.

This thread started off dealing with a Jack White interview but is moving more and more into an Apollo discussion. We have a few options:

- Split the thread, moving Apollo posts to the PC section;

- Start a new thread in the PC section;

- Resurrect an existing Apollo thread in the PC section;

- Move this thread to the PC section; or

- Leave the thread as it is.

I'm happy with the last option if people don't mind the discussion going off-topic (i.e. discussing Apollo).

Professor,

Stop the personal attacks. Attack people's evidence or claims by all means, but do not accuse people of being incompetent or corrupt, of needing professional help, etc.

The same goes for everyone else, not just the good Professor - if you can't debate without remaining civil then expect the moderators to step in.

Well, we'll see who caused it. The most important thing is to stop it happening again.