Guest James H. Fetzer Posted August 30, 2010 Share Posted August 30, 2010 Gary, There is no problem here. If I have a five-part post (because there are five photos that illustrate the same problem), then Evan can make a five-part response. But it is unnecessary to have FIVE SEPARATE POSTS AND EXCHANGES in relation to the same issue. Please confirm that we are ready to start, that Evan is a participant and not moderator, and that I can ask Jack to make the first post, which is in fact a five-part post about the moon rover photos. Thanks. Jim *sigh* Whatever. Just get on with it, please. ETA: If there are multiple images, I'll need to be allowed one post per image in some cases, to show the reasons each claim is wrong. Sometimes they can be dealt with as a group but sometimes each will need to be addressed seperately. I don't want to leave a loophole where people claim "...but you didn't show why they were all wrong..." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted August 30, 2010 Share Posted August 30, 2010 Gary, There is no problem here. If I have a five-part post (because there are five photos that illustrate the same problem), then Evan can make a five-part response. But it is unnecessary to have FIVE SEPARATE POSTS AND EXCHANGES in relation to the same issue. Please confirm that we are ready to start, that Evan is a participant and not moderator, and that I can ask Jack to make the first post, which is in fact a five-part post about the moon rover photos. Thanks. Jim *sigh* Whatever. Just get on with it, please. ETA: If there are multiple images, I'll need to be allowed one post per image in some cases, to show the reasons each claim is wrong. Sometimes they can be dealt with as a group but sometimes each will need to be addressed seperately. I don't want to leave a loophole where people claim "...but you didn't show why they were all wrong..." I have already posted ALL of the LRV photos. Burton removed them. He can move them back where they belong. Finding them again for me is a burdensome task when they have already been posted. Burton has them somewhere. Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Gary Loughran Posted August 31, 2010 Share Posted August 31, 2010 As soon as you can Jack can you create a new topic - perhaps subtitles first Apollo debate issue so folk understand they cannot post as they would in a regular topic. I know you have posted the Rover tracks before but would greatly appreciate your time in posting in this new topic. Jim, Evan will retain moderator status but will not be allowed to moderate any post in these debates - that is absolutely certain, understood by Evan and critical to the debates. I would like to also say that Evan has asked that I put him on moderation for the duration of the debate - which I have rejected as this places unfair restrictions on both what he can post elsewhere and his ability to perform other, critical moderator duties. Hope this is acceptable to everyone and I look forward to the first post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Burton Posted August 31, 2010 Author Share Posted August 31, 2010 I'm happy with that. Sometimes the same error or condition is repeated over a series, and can be addressed in a single post. A single exchange is all that is required. Sometimes I need to address the fault in each image (for instance it might be claimed that something cannot be seen, and I point out where it is in each image). It requires a post from me for each image, but the overall error is still the same. In some cases - probably rare - a series of images, purporting to be the same subject, might be posted but require different explanations and possibly requiring more than one reply to a rebuttal. In those particular cases I will notify all in advance, and have Gary decide upon the conditions to imposed. Gary, There is no problem here. If I have a five-part post (because there are five photos that illustrate the same problem), then Evan can make a five-part response. But it is unnecessary to have FIVE SEPARATE POSTS AND EXCHANGES in relation to the same issue. Please confirm that we are ready to start, that Evan is a participant and not moderator, and that I can ask Jack to make the first post, which is in fact a five-part post about the moon rover photos. Thanks. Jim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Burton Posted August 31, 2010 Author Share Posted August 31, 2010 A new site with a variety of great images and videos. http://nasaimages.org/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest James H. Fetzer Posted August 31, 2010 Share Posted August 31, 2010 (edited) If the next post is not Jack's five-part moon rover sequence (which Even should restore to this thread), then forget it. The procrastination here has been beyond belief. I can understand Gary's lack of interest at this point. It's now becoming terminal. Restore those photos and let's do it! I'm happy with that. Sometimes the same error or condition is repeated over a series, and can be addressed in a single post. A single exchange is all that is required. Sometimes I need to address the fault in each image (for instance it might be claimed that something cannot be seen, and I point out where it is in each image). It requires a post from me for each image, but the overall error is still the same. In some cases - probably rare - a series of images, purporting to be the same subject, might be posted but require different explanations and possibly requiring more than one reply to a rebuttal. In those particular cases I will notify all in advance, and have Gary decide upon the conditions to imposed. Gary, There is no problem here. If I have a five-part post (because there are five photos that illustrate the same problem), then Evan can make a five-part response. But it is unnecessary to have FIVE SEPARATE POSTS AND EXCHANGES in relation to the same issue. Please confirm that we are ready to start, that Evan is a participant and not moderator, and that I can ask Jack to make the first post, which is in fact a five-part post about the moon rover photos. Thanks. Jim Edited August 31, 2010 by James H. Fetzer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted August 31, 2010 Share Posted August 31, 2010 Jim...as I recall, there were MORE THAN 5 images I posted which Burton removed. I request that EVERY IMAGE I posted be restored. I want to make sure the BEST ones are included, and the discussion is not just about images Burton chooses. If necessary, I can again look up all the images and repost them. I am sure it was more than 5. I started with 15 (too many) and I think I narrowed it down to either 7 or 9. I will try to find them, since Burton is stalling on restoring them. Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted August 31, 2010 Share Posted August 31, 2010 I found the file of LRV trackless rover photos I posted to the forum in a folder so marked. There are SEVEN of them, not five. Here are the file names. 17besttracklessrover tracklessnumber1post tracklessnumber2post tracklessnumber4post tracklessnuber6and7postx tracklessnumber8post tracklessnumber12 If Burton refuses to restore these, I can repost them. Each one has a significance. They should be in the above order when posted. Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin M. West Posted August 31, 2010 Share Posted August 31, 2010 Jack, if they are restored, they will be out of order and a couple pages back in this thread. In the interest of getting this damn show on the road, here are the images you and Jim refuse to take 5 minutes to post. This will be my only post in this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted August 31, 2010 Share Posted August 31, 2010 In the interest of readers of this "debate" I offer this quote of moderator Burton on another forum: "It is Jack White who utters the lie, and with a total lack of logic. He claims he admires the achievement but then desecrates and denigrates the achievements of Project Apollo. He is a hypocrite of the first order." Readers are entitled to know of Burton's biased agenda. Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted August 31, 2010 Share Posted August 31, 2010 (edited) Jack, if they are restored, they will be out of order and a couple pages back in this thread. In the interest of getting this damn show on the road, here are the images you and Jim refuse to take 5 minutes to post. This will be my only post in this thread. Thanks for reposting the images which Burton had removed. I apologize for the lack of NASA file numbers on the reposted studies. They are the ORIGINAL studies from my files. When I submitted my studies to AULIS, David Percy insisted that I add file numbers to all studies. I did that on all the ones I sent to him, but those are all TIFF files, which this forum does not accept. After I added the numbers, I did not convert the files to JPGs. The studies ARE ON AULIS WITH THE FILE NUMBERS. To find the file numbers, go to: http://www.aulis.com/jackstudies_index1.html The file numbers ARE available, so do not accuse me of not posting file numbers for them. Claiming they are INVALID without file numbers is a silly excuse to avoid addressing them. Claiming I have altered them because no file numbers are on them is a specious excuse. Any serious student of the photos available KNOWS these are genuine photos. These studies were originally done for my own edification, not for public debate. Jack Edited August 31, 2010 by Jack White Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest James H. Fetzer Posted August 31, 2010 Share Posted August 31, 2010 (edited) Jack, Please repost these in the proper order. The title of this section ought to be: Part I: Jack White's Apollo Photo Studies Argument 1: The Moon Rover Photo Sequence These photos show the moon rover but not the tracks that it should have made, suggesting that it was lifted into place by using a crane rather than by making its way on its own. But if that is the case, then these photos are fake. Many thanks! Jim I found the file of LRV trackless rover photos I posted to the forum in a folder so marked. There are SEVEN of them, not five. Here are the file names. 17besttracklessrover tracklessnumber1post tracklessnumber2post tracklessnumber4post tracklessnuber6and7postx tracklessnumber8post tracklessnumber12 If Burton refuses to restore these, I can repost them. Each one has a significance. They should be in the above order when posted. Jack Edited August 31, 2010 by James H. Fetzer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Greer Posted August 31, 2010 Share Posted August 31, 2010 In the interests of getting this thing rolling, here are the image numbers and links to the images Jack used in his original studies. Gary, feel free to move this to the other thread if you deem it appropriate. http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/uploads/post-5621-023483100%201283279937_thumb.jpg Image number - AS17-137-20979 http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/uploads/post-5621-095921600%201283279948_thumb.jpg Image number - AS17-143-21933 http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/uploads/post-5621-036518400%201283279959_thumb.jpg Image number - AS17-140-21354 http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/uploads/post-5621-070676600%201283279984_thumb.jpg Image number - AS15-88-11902 http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/uploads/post-5621-089437100%201283280026_thumb.jpg Image number - AS15-85-11470 Image number - AS15-85-11471 http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/uploads/post-5621-018472200%201283280033_thumb.jpg Image number - AS15-85-11437 http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/uploads/post-5621-021770500%201283280041_thumb.jpg Image number - AS16-109-17797 I've changed the thumbnails of Jack's studies to links due to the limit on posting images, but they're pretty much in order as posted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted August 31, 2010 Share Posted August 31, 2010 (edited) OK...NUMBER ONE (separate numbered post for each study) Click on image for maximum size! Edited August 31, 2010 by Jack White Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted August 31, 2010 Share Posted August 31, 2010 (edited) Click on image for maximum size! NUMBER TWO. Edited August 31, 2010 by Jack White 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