Gavin Stone

What insults? You are posting on behalf of Jarrah because he doesn't dare show his face, for one reason or another. This makes you a puppet. The orbital tracking I did of Proton 4 is the first I've seen on the web that's publicly accessible. I came to the conclusion that it was Proton 4 on my own. All the data fits to it being Proton 4. Finally, we're getting somewhere. You admit that there is no evidence that it's Apollo 11. You agree with Jarrah according to yourself, so how is this (Direct Quote) "No question: Apollo 11 was in Earth orbit". It doesn't show any cover up Duane, at all. Where is the evidence of a cover up? There is no evidence that what we are seeing is Apollo 11.

Aussie "Jarrah White" is kicking nothing but an empty bucket and is simply hand waiving as per usual. I did not attack a film I have not seen, which is an absurd idea since I use footage from both of his videos in mine. I watched "Unidentified Flying Apollo" and then started work on my video. While I was working on the video, I noticed he had made a response to his own video, so I watched that and changed a few thing in the video. Note, and I quote myself "He failed to show in his FIRST video" Now stop the blatant ignorance of the real issue of the video. I have proved, incontrovertibly, that it was Proton 4 which re-entered the atmosphere to the west of Australia on July 24th 1969, showing that Jarrah's video is a sham and based on incorrect facts. What do you have to say about this? Oh, and Jarrah, instead of hiding in the shadows lurking on this board, why don't you email the admin and register an account so you can do your hand waiving first hand instead of through a puppet like Duane.

Duane "Truth Seeker" Daman in his true light, ladies and gentleman, showing his never ending ability to not deal with the facts AT ALL! Has Duane "Truth Seeker" Daman refused to view the evidence that would prove he is wrong? YES Has Duane "Truth Seeker" Daman ignored every single thing presented in the video? YES Does this make Duane "Truth Seeker" Daman hypocritical? YES Has Duane "Truth Seeker" Daman resorted to petty insults because he can't actually debate anything factual? YES Is this a common trait of Duane "Truth Seeker" Daman? YES Moderators note (Burton) : Gavin - Saying someone is hypocritical is acceptable, but use of the other words is not (even if they are similar in meaning). First warning about maintaining civility.

It's going to be option 'C' Craig, ignore the evidence and attack the poster instead (me) based on something irrelevant, an almost text book perfect case of the Ad Hominem logical fallacy.

I have never once said that the Apollo 11 CM would not have been visible in LEO, that is an outright lie. So let me get this straight, just so we're on the same wavelength (hell who am I kidding you will never be on my wavelength but we can pretend). 1) You agree with Jarrah's video. 2) You agree with the contention that Apollo 11 was in Earth orbit and it was seen over Australia on July 24th 1969 3) You, Duane "Truth Seeker Only looks at evidence when it's in his favour" Daman refuse to investigate and research something before you go off on one of your patented rambles about how Apollo is fake and we are all sheep. I won't even go into the fact that one of Jarrahs videos suggests that the CM was dropped out of plane by the way, because that really would make him look silly wouldn't it!

It's FALSE statements and uncalled for comments like that one which shows how little you know about me, or anyone else who wants to expose government lies , conspiracies and cover-ups . How about stop being a parrot for lying disinformation agents like your mentor Jay Windley and try posting something original for a change ? So then, Duane "Truth Seeker" Daman; have you plotted the orbital elements yet? It's quite easy. A simple yes or no will suffice. Good luck, I'm still wating for him to take a few photographs to check a claim..... Don't hold your breath, lol!

It's FALSE statements and uncalled for comments like that one which shows how little you know about me, or anyone else who wants to expose government lies , conspiracies and cover-ups . How about stop being a parrot for lying disinformation agents like your mentor Jay Windley and try posting something original for a change ? So then, Duane "Truth Seeker" Daman; have you plotted the orbital elements yet? It's quite easy. A simple yes or no will suffice.

A Conspiracy Theorist knowingly ignoring the content of the video, and instead focussing on one small INCONSEQUENTIAL thing? It can't be! Unlike some I will admit when I am in error. How about dealing with the content of the video Duane? If you think that me admitting Apollo 11 would be be noticeable in the sky means that it was actually Apollo 11 in LEO over Australia, you are even more buried in your deep hatred of NASA and the government that I originally though. So come on Duane, address the facts for a change. Download orbitron, get the Keplerian data elements, put the time in, and calculate the trajectory. Tell me what happens.

Jarrah's Video: My New Landing Apollo video: http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=R6koNryx9ow I wonder if he will retract his claims?

You missed out the best part Dave! Newtonian gravity does not exist as the moon should fall into the sun. Cliffs should not exist There is no equatorial bulge Stars don't change shape The moon is also more reflective than can be as seen by the Apollo photos. Duane, on one hand you say that the Albedo is too low to prevent seeing stars, then you agree with Rene that the surface is too bright to be explained. Make your mind up The force that attracts all the planets together is based on coulombs law It goes on hahaha

Holy LOL http://ralphrene.com/ The funniest site I have ever read. Duane, why do you associate yourself with crackpots? Can you honestly read that page and tell me that you agree?

Duane, get on the phone to some physicist and tell them you've just broken the laws of physics. If this: Is a spotlight, then why is the light source (based on the shadows going from left to right) pointing to the left lol! If that was a spotlight then the light would be shining from RIGHT TO LEFT. The shadows go from LEFT TO RIGHT and there is quite blatantly only one light source.

Jack Quick question. You put "some of my unexplained Apollo Studies" indicating that a few have been explained. I take it you have removed the explained ones from Aulis?

I'm not worried about protection Duane, nor am I "immature". I'm not sure why you think this. I've already made one of your mates on there dig himself into a hole. First he says that electrostatic charge on the suit could not be responsible for moving the Apollo 15 flag, then he said that the electrostatic charge on the suit proved it wasn't an falcon feather. See the blaring contradiction? I've asked him four times or not whether this electrostatic effect exists and he hasn't answered! I'm more than willing to entertain reasonable discussion with anyone as long as they are polite. This is why I don't entertain reasonable discussions with you, as you are constantly rude, abbrasive and insulting. That said, Youtube is a crappy place for a debate. Infact, it's the worst. You can only post messages of a certain length, and you can't post links, or embed pictures. PS Duane: If you continue to insult me on youtube, I will simply block your ability to comment on my videos. It doesn't bother me. So far everyone on there has been polite (including the CT's) apart from you. Where I live is irrelevant to the discussion. If you want to debate about APOLLO on there or anything related then please do. If you want to chat about where I live being a "Slum" then please continue but you will find yourself quickly blocked on there; and you say I'm immature! EDIT2: If you are bothered about discussion being moderated I will happily setup a forum where there is no moderation at all. My only two caveats will be a) I will delete anything that is illegal I will review the progress of the board after one month. If it's turned into a flaming pile of rubbish and spam, I will delete it. (as in the entire board) EDIT3: Off away early tonight. Night all.

Duane, Nothing will ever convince you, the video is not there for you close minded, government hating lot. Top Apollo Defending Watchdogs; lol.

Well here's a video for you, and I guarantee you it will make a lot more sense than the conspiracy xxxx ones. http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=QmSroT3RkmQ I created this as a sort of "tester for the water". I don't have much, if any, experience using video production suites so I apologise for maybe the production value. Hopefully some open minded people will watch it and it will point them in the direction of the truth

I've never found Evan anything but polite and helpful when it comes to moderating. He is around a lot as well. I request publicly that Moderator Burton carry on his moderating!

The Chemtrail theory is even more retarded than the Lunar Hoax theory, and that's saying something If you really believe that the governments of the world are uniting as one in a secret venture to poison/medicated/whatever the entire population of Earth, then there is only one place for you. In a lunatic asylum. Jesus christ, do you guys hate authority/governments THAT much?

One is AS17-134-20387, I don't have time to look for the other one at the sec. Will update later. Also, (thanks to Atomicdog for pointing this out) Schmitt's was half kneeling in the picture. It is obvious, though, that he got the camera as low as possible to get Earth in the shot, and since it was pointing upwards, Gene's visor would reflect downwards and show the top of Schmitt's head.

Can't win if they do, can't win if they don't. According to you they either a) Faked the entire thing and forgot about the whip antenna or Faked it and then faked the documentation. You never consider option c) The HF Whip Antenna, was designed like that, from conception; that document was written around 40 years ago!!!

It was extended AFTER splashdown. See the documentation. Can we consider this issue closed now?

Duane, to supplement Evans question, I've taken a screen shot from the Gemini Familiarization Manual to help you I've highlighted areas that may be of interest

Good news! From: Gentry, G M. (JSC-AP)[TES] [g.m.gentry@nasa.gov] Image In full resolution and original file name: http://www.landingapollo.com/S66-40127(HiRes%20Scan).jpg

Based on your own logic you have debunked (by yourself) every picture on here. http://www.aulis.com/jackstudies_5.html As you have already stated, the lunar surface must be perfectly flat because Armstrong made a vague reference to it being relatively flat, thus the idea that there are craters at the Apollo landing site is flawed, thus these two analyses should be deleted.

Duane, Is this terrain flat. Yes or no will suffice: