Jack White Posted August 18, 2010 Author Share Posted August 18, 2010 (edited) Correct Jim! I have the images on my computer, and you cannot access them there. On Aulis they are harder to find by subject, because the studies there are in order by mission number. For instance, TRACKLESS ROVERS are all in one folder on my computer, but on Aulis are scattered by mission number instead of subject. Burton (and Lamson) just want to make a discussion difficult as possible for us. For some reason, they do not want to discuss my 15 examples of trackless LRVs. Jack Edited August 18, 2010 by Jack White Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted August 18, 2010 Share Posted August 18, 2010 Enough, Lamson. We all know you are a turkey breath. Jack has hundreds of studies on his computer. I am telling him which ones I want posted. I don't have time for you or for Burton, for that matter. It is obvious the one having his butt kicked is not me. He had to delete the evidence lest his incompetence be manifest at the initial exchange. There are very good reasons no one takes your posts seriously. They are cheap and shallow. Look the studies up yourself, and post the links. Quit being a child and act like an adult for once in your life. If you want Jack to play he can take part in the debate. Quit being a shill. Burton will destroy you on this, I can assure you. Neither you nor White has what it takes to win this one. White can't photo analyse his way out of a paper bag and you...do you even know how photgfrahic exposure wirks for example? If YOU want to discuss the Rover images....YOU post them. If you "don't have the time" to actually do your own bidding, then why don't you take a hike...no one will miss you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted August 18, 2010 Share Posted August 18, 2010 Burton (and Lamson) just want to make a discussion difficult as possible for us. For some reason, they do not want to discuss my 15 examples of trackless LRVs. Jack In case you have FORGOTTEN jack...YOU are NOT IN THE DISCUSSION. YOU are too busy. So why don't you just butt out and let jimmy do his own work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Burton Posted August 18, 2010 Share Posted August 18, 2010 I agree with Craig - why can't Jim link to the images on Aulis? I would be surprised if he didn't have the skills to find an image and link to it. If he is incapable of doing that, then I accept that Jack can post an image - ONE AT A TIME - for us to debate. When that has been discussed, then another can be posted. And Jack - your images were NOT deleted. Another "inaccuracy" by you. They were moved off the debate thread and placed on the discussion thread where everyone can see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Burton Posted August 18, 2010 Share Posted August 18, 2010 Gary, Perhaps I should not have acted in the thread, but Jack was already given the opportunity to participate and he declined. The agreement was already that one image would be discussed; Jack spammed the thread multiple images, all available at either Aulis or in their original format at The Project Apollo Archive. The thread should be kept clear so that members can clearly follow the debate without distractions, follow ONE issue at a time, decide for themselves as to the validity of the claim, then move onto the next contentious issue rather than get a firehose of information which they have to try and decipher. Comments from non-participants - including Jack - can be on a single thread. And Jack should use the complaints thread, when he has a complaint, like everyone else does. Lastly, despite my wanting to debate Jim, we have returned to all but the original format: Jack posts his image, I show why it is wrong, and Jim comments. Once again Jack does not have to defend his own work. If that is going to be the case, at least Jim should have to address my rebuttals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Dolva Posted August 18, 2010 Share Posted August 18, 2010 I obviously have indicated my position re the moon program. For me it is a peripheral issue, however looking at the studies and independently assessing them is of interest to me as photo analysis is something of of interest to me. I would really appreciate it if the images posted are with a link or code that gives ready access to the images in question rateher than have to search for them. Could this (providing linking to the original images) be a part of the process, please? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Burton Posted August 18, 2010 Share Posted August 18, 2010 That's up to Jack to provide, John, but I am happy to provide it if Jack doesn't. BTW, I think Jack should show a little respect to the Forum owner. If he want's to refer to John Simkin, then he should refer to him as John S, John Simkin, etc. Referring to John constantly as "Simkin" is disrespectful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest James H. Fetzer Posted August 18, 2010 Share Posted August 18, 2010 (edited) I agreed to the following format: One issue at a time, where I have listed the sources I will discuss. For each source, beginning with Jack's studies, I will initiate the exchange. In the case of his studies, Jack will post the images I have asked him to post, Evan will comment, and I will respond. Then we will move to the next argument. Links to images are not sufficient. They are premises of my arguments, which most readers will not bother to view. Unless they are posted, I cannot properly present my position. Jack has them and skilled at posting them. I am not. Without allowing him to post the images I request him to post, I am not going to bother. It is unacceptable for Evan to offer repeated rebuttals. He is the one who claims to be an expert. I am not. No posts offering rebuttals will be accepted after each of the exchanges. The audience can make up its own mind about who is right and who is wrong. But it will go on forever if more posts are allowed. Obviously, Evan has a massive conflict of interest in serving as a participant as well as a moderator. We must accept Gary's offer to manage this exchange. I cannot imagine why he would think that it is acceptable for him to serve in both roles. That is simply absurd, as we have already seen from what has already taken place on the thread. If these conditions are acceptable, we can proceed, but other wise, I am not wasting more time on this. Gary, Perhaps I should not have acted in the thread, but Jack was already given the opportunity to participate and he declined. The agreement was already that one image would be discussed; Jack spammed the thread multiple images, all available at either Aulis or in their original format at The Project Apollo Archive. The thread should be kept clear so that members can clearly follow the debate without distractions, follow ONE issue at a time, decide for themselves as to the validity of the claim, then move onto the next contentious issue rather than get a firehose of information which they have to try and decipher. Comments from non-participants - including Jack - can be on a single thread. And Jack should use the complaints thread, when he has a complaint, like everyone else does. Lastly, despite my wanting to debate Jim, we have returned to all but the original format: Jack posts his image, I show why it is wrong, and Jim comments. Once again Jack does not have to defend his own work. If that is going to be the case, at least Jim should have to address my rebuttals. Edited August 18, 2010 by James H. Fetzer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Dolva Posted August 18, 2010 Share Posted August 18, 2010 I think that sounds fair, The replies and accompanying comments by interested parties in the companion thread should make everything clear. Let the show begin,,, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted August 18, 2010 Share Posted August 18, 2010 (edited) I agreed to the following format: snip the bs ] Lets review. jimmy gets the first word, Evan can reply, jimmy gets the last word. Is that your idea of fair? Why not jimmy, Evan, jimmy, Evan? That not enough of a stacked deck for you? Edited August 18, 2010 by Craig Lamson 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