Craig Lamson Posted December 31, 2007 Author Share Posted December 31, 2007 Jack White and David Percy....An examination of their errors in the matter of the Apollo offset shadow images. http://www.infocusinc.net/apollo.htm Jack White: "I AM A FOREMOST ADVOCATE OF TRUTH. IF I HAVE MADE A MISTAKE, I AM ANXIOUS TO CORRECT IT." Here is a perfect chance to for you to make your above statement the truth...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Daman Posted December 31, 2007 Share Posted December 31, 2007 (edited) When all else fails , Craig enjoys his favorite hobby .... Edited December 31, 2007 by Duane Daman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted December 31, 2007 Author Share Posted December 31, 2007 When all else fails , Craig enjoys his favorite hobby .... I'm glad you AGREE that Jack should admit his error n this instance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Burton Posted January 1, 2008 Share Posted January 1, 2008 But it will never happen. He has not done so previously, so why expect him to change now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Daman Posted January 1, 2008 Share Posted January 1, 2008 No matter how many times the Conspiracy Cowboys shoot the Apollo Apologist Clowns , they just keep shooting back with their trick arrows . *written copyright permission given Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted January 1, 2008 Author Share Posted January 1, 2008 No matter how many times the Conspiracy Cowboys shoot the Apollo Apologist Clowns , they just keep shooting back with their trick arrows . *written copyright permission given Just to understand your position, are you saying Jack is correct and the rest of us are wrong? And if so, have YOU ever bothered to do the simple experiment yourself to check Jack's work? (you told us months ago that you were going to test this) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Burton Posted January 1, 2008 Share Posted January 1, 2008 Good point - Duane, you have tested Jack's claim? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Daman Posted January 1, 2008 Share Posted January 1, 2008 Jack .... Did you know that Evan is really an admirer and defender of yours ? ....We are all familiar with the term "Apollo apologist" right ? .... And the meaning of that term is that someone who is an APOLOGIST is someone who supports something . Well look at what Evan's badge of honor is on Jay Windley's Apollo Hoax forum .... He claims to be a "Jack White Apologist " !! ... It seems you have a secret admirer that you didn't know about Jack ... Or maybe Evan doesn't really understand the meaning of the word APOLOGIST !?!? http://apollohoax.proboards21.com/index.cg...ge=1#1199151897 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted January 1, 2008 Author Share Posted January 1, 2008 Jack .... Did you know that Evan is really an admirer and defender of yours ? ....We are all familiar with the term "Apollo apologist" right ? .... And the meaning of that term is that someone who is an APOLOGIST is someone who supports something .Well look at what Evan's badge of honor is on Jay Windley's Apollo Hoax forum .... He claims to be a "Jack White Apologist " !! ... It seems you have a secret admirer that you didn't know about Jack ... Or maybe Evan doesn't really understand the meaning of the word APOLOGIST !?!? http://apollohoax.proboards21.com/index.cg...ge=1#1199151897 It appears you have plenty of time to try and deflect the subject AWAY from White's failed position, so how about using some of that ample time to answer this, as it was asked of you upthread: Just to understand your position, are you saying Jack is correct and the rest of us are wrong? And if so, have YOU ever bothered to do the simple experiment yourself to check Jack's work? (you told us months ago that you were going to test this) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Daman Posted January 2, 2008 Share Posted January 2, 2008 (edited) Why are you asking my position about Jack's study ? ... According to you , I am completely "ignorant" about photography , so it obviously doesn't matter what I think . Here .... Now it's all fixed ! Thanks ginnie ! Edited January 2, 2008 by Duane Daman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Burton Posted January 2, 2008 Share Posted January 2, 2008 Please stick to the question Duane - have you tested Jack's claim, as asked of you by Craig 6 months ago? If so, where can we find the results? If not, why not? How can you defend a claim without testing it - especially as it is well within your capability to test? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gavin Stone Posted January 2, 2008 Share Posted January 2, 2008 Please stick to the question Duane - have you tested Jack's claim, as asked of you by Craig 6 months ago? If so, where can we find the results? If not, why not? How can you defend a claim without testing it - especially as it is well within your capability to test? I think the problem here Evan is that you are expecting a hoax believer to do actual research! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted January 2, 2008 Author Share Posted January 2, 2008 Why are you asking my position about Jack's study ? ... According to you , I am completely "ignorant" about photography , so it obviously doesn't matter what I think . Here .... Now it's all fixed ! Thanks ginnie ! You are but the testing will at least show you have the ability to learn. And I would think you would want to know if your buddies were telling you the truth rather than just believing them out of hand. You just recently got burnt by St. Mark writing you a little fib in an email and you posting said email, only to have St. mark admit he was not honest. Why take that chance again? Why not just fiind out for yourself? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Burton Posted January 2, 2008 Share Posted January 2, 2008 Point Craig and Gavin. Duane - give us demonstrable and repeatable proof that we are wrong and Jack is right. Isn't that a fair request? To ask for proof? If we are not going to ask for proof, then all sorts pf claims can be made involving all sorts of people. That ends up being little more than innuendo or even slander from any and all sides. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Daman Posted January 2, 2008 Share Posted January 2, 2008 Point Craig and Gavin. Duane - give us demonstrable and repeatable proof that we are wrong and Jack is right. Isn't that a fair request? To ask for proof? If we are not going to ask for proof, then all sorts pf claims can be made involving all sorts of people. That ends up being little more than innuendo or even slander from any and all sides. Apparently you are having some difficulty reading my replies ... So here is it again .... This was to Lamson but applies to you as well . Why are you asking my position about Jack's study ? ... According to you , I am completely "ignorant" about photography , so it obviously doesn't matter what I think . I have already posted in the past that I don't agree with all of Jack's studies ... If that's not a good enough answer for you , then too bad . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now