Jump to content
The Education Forum

Question for Duane.


Guest Stephen Turner
 Share

Recommended Posts

Guest Stephen Turner

Duane, to your knowledge has ANYONE connected to the Soviet space programme in the 60s, 70s and 80s ever voiced doubts about NASA's ability to conduct the moon landings, Cosomonauts, engineers, ground crew, mission controllers, anyone? If they have this, IMO, will add weight to your claims for the simple reason they were attempting to do the same thing at the same time, and must have known whether it was technologically possible or not. I for one have always found the achiviement of the Soviet space station a more impressive accomplishment, from an engineering point of view, than the Apollo moon landings. Just my opinion folks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 54
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Steve ... Good question but I don't know if I can give a you good answer .

As you know, most people believe that the Apollo moon landings were real ... and the 6 to 20 percent ( numbers vary depending on the poll ) of the population who believe Apollo wasn't real , are constantly ridiculed and insulted , by those who defend the Apollo Program ... This fact can even be seen right here on this forum .

I just noticed a thread by John Simkin asking that the insults by certain members stop , on the political conspiracies forum ... But unfortuantley , after being insulted repeatedly , the usual response ( even though not a very mature one ) is to insult those who have insulted me , in return .

I also see that he is asking for members opinions as to who should possibly be banned because of these insults ... I haven't as yet had time to reply to his inquiry , but I have no doubt that other members here have ... and I also have no doubt that I will be the one to blame for the insults and that I will be the one eventually banned ... That's how things work in a system where the majority rules ... and the reason I went off on this particular tangent is to make a point and a comparison of the majority 'winning' and the underdog usually being the one suppressed and then banished ... After all , the majority is always the loudest and is also always 'right' .

There are literally millions of people from all walks of life , including scientists , astronomers and physicists, who believe without a doubt that nasa faked the Apollo moon landings ... And their evidence is both technical and photographic ... But unfortunately, thanks to nasa defenders such as Phil Plait and Jay Windley , these millions of hoax believers and conspiracy researchers are made to look like ignorant fools and have been forced to endure constant ridicule and personl insults , under the old school program of using ad homs , by attacking the messenger to stop the message ... And the reason for this program is to suppress the hoax claims and evidence by any means necessary .

I'm sure that most people who defend Apollo really do believe that nasa pulled off this amazing and technically impossible feat of soft landing six manned missions on the moon 38 years ago ... And I also believe that they feel it's their civic duty to defend either their country or their strong belief in what they have been led to believe by nasa and it's many defenders .... Some people can not conceive of the type of government and military that would conduct such a monumental hoax or perpatrate such a tremendous lie ... And then of course there are the nasa defenders who know very well that Apollo was a scam but are part of the cover-up because of their government positions or military duties .

But what has this to do with Russia not blowing the whistle on the faked American moon missions ? .... Possibly everything .... If Russia had tried to expose nasa's moon hoax , America would have just claimed it was sour grapes on Russia's part , and that they were lying because of their own failed manned lunar space program .....And who would have believed the Communists anyway, especially during the cold war ? .... No one likes to be insulted , ridiculed or possibly threatened ... Or in Russia's case, have their own possible bogus moon space program exposed .... We all know how the Russians lied about everything ... At least according to the American propaganda machine in place during the cold war .

There are several theories as to why the Russians never exposed the bogus Apollo Program .... There is the possibility that the Soviet Union was bribed into silence with either food supplies to a starving nation or lots of money .... There is also the possibility that Russian scientists and rocket engineers knew very well that manned space flight to the moon was an impossibility , but were part of the hoax .... I always found it strange that as soon as the Apollo missions came to an abrupt halt , that nasa and Russia became fast friends , even sharing the space station and working together in LEO ... What happened to that cold war mentality ? .... Maybe even the entire cold war was a scam, blown all out of proportion, just to fool the masses ... With corrupt political structures that lie and conspire to control the masses , I guess anything is possible .... The military/ industrial complex extends to the CIA , FBI , NSA, black ops programs and nasa .... and they control everything .

The nasa defenders will have you believe that Russia had the deep space tracking capabilities to track the various Apollo craft to the moon because they were able to track their own unmanned missions to the moon .... but that is simply not true .. For the Russians to have tracked the Apollo craft they would have needed the tracking coordinates ... And of course there is the possibilty that even the Russian moon missions were faked ... and in that case , they wouldn't have been able to track any deep space missions at all ... Especially those of a foreign country .

Here is a paragraph from a web site that defends the Apollo missions , and even they admit that it wouldn't have been possible for Russia to track Apollo ....

"Bart Sibrel said, in response, that "the Soviets did not have the capability to track deep spacecraft until late in 1972, immediately after which, the last three Apollo missions were abruptly canceled."[61]

However, the Soviet Union had been sending unmanned spacecraft to the Moon since 1959.[62] and "during 1962, deep space tracking facilities were introduced at IP-15 in Ussuriisk and IP-16 in Evpatoria (Crimean Peninsula), while Saturn communication stations were added to IP-3, 4 and 14",[63] the latter having a 100 million km range.[64] This does not prove they could track foreign spacecraft, but as they had the ability to track their own it is likely they could at least receive radio transmissions from Apollo. "

http://www.answers.com/topic/apollo-moon-l...oax-accusations

So as you can see, there is no proof that Russia could have tracked Apollo ... Even the members on such forums as Bad Astronomy and clavius have admitted to this fact .

So why do I believe the Russians didn't blow the whistle on Apollo ? .... Because I believe that part of the corrupt Soviet government and the Russian space program rocket scientists were probably part of the hoax .

I saw a documentary once where a Russian rocket scientist and a Russian cosmonaut were interviewed and they both admitted that it was impossible for humans to survive deep space travel ... They discussed the fact that several of their cosmonauts had died while trying to fly through the Van Allen radiation belts and know for a fact that the Americans had never landed men on the moon because of this intense radiation .... I have watched so many documentaries on the Apollo hoax , so I'm not sure which one they were interviewed on ... It may have been Conspiracy Theory : Did We Land on the Moon ? ... Or maybe it was 'A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Moon ' or 'What Happened on the Moon' or possibly 'Secret Space ' ... I will try to see if I can find this interview again though , so I can answer your question better by posting their names here ... I remember them both saying that one cosmonaut survied the belts but returned to earth literally burnt black from radiation poisoning , and died shortly after his space flight .

Yet nasa allows us all to believe that deep space radiation is not dangerous , that it is no problem at all to send humans into the Van Allen belts and that it's perfectly safe to travel to the moon in space craft with only some tin foil for radiation protection ... Right .

Edited by Duane Daman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As you know, most people believe that the Apollo moon landings were real ... and the 6 to 20 percent ( numbers vary depending on the poll ) of the population who believe Apollo wasn't real

Please provide a citation for higher percentage of “hoax believers” 6 percent is about the same percentage of the population that believes Elvis is still alive, I imagine there is significant overlap.

I also have no doubt that I will be the one to blame for the insults and that I will be the one eventually banned ... That's how things work in a system where the majority rules
Well if you continue to label people who disagree with you geeks, Nazis, sociopaths and dog $#!& banning would hardly be unjustified.
There are literally millions of people from all walks of life , including scientists , astronomers and physicists, who believe without a doubt that nasa faked the Apollo moon landings ... And their evidence is both technical and photographic

Please cite the “scientists , astronomers and physicists” who believe this.

But unfortunately, thanks to nasa defenders such as Phil Plait and Jay Windley , these millions of hoax believers and conspiracy researchers are made to look like ignorant fools and have been forced to endure constant ridicule and personl insults , under the old school program of using ad homs , by attacking the messenger to stop the message
That’s quite ironic coming from someone who tells us any information presented Plait and Windley are to be disregarded out of hand because they are NASA defenders
But what has this to do with Russia not blowing the whistle on the faked American moon missions ? .... Possibly everything

Nothing

Here is a paragraph from a web site that defends the Apollo missions

<snip>

http://www.answers.com/topic/apollo-moon-l...oax-accusations

So as you can see, there is no proof that Russia could have tracked Apollo ... Even the members on such forums as Bad Astronomy and clavius have admitted to this fact .

Did you actually look at the page you linked? If so how did you fail to notice it was drawn from a Wikipedia page? Once again you’ve failed to produce evidence to back your claims.

I always found it strange that as soon as the Apollo missions came to an abrupt halt , that nasa and Russia became fast friends
I might be mistaken but I believe there was a gap of several years between the last moon landing and cooperation
I saw a documentary once where a Russian rocket scientist and a Russian cosmonaut were interviewed and they both admitted that it was impossible for humans to survive deep space travel

Until you come up with a citation your claim that they said this that or whatever is useless

Yet nasa allows us all to believe that deep space radiation is not dangerous , that it is no problem at all to send humans into the Van Allen belts and that it's perfectly safe to travel to the moon in space craft with only some tin foil for radiation protection ... Right .

That isn’t NASA’s position as you should be well aware

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks very much for your typical trolling post ... and I have no doubt you have already written to John Simkin with your wishes to have me banned for insulting those who have constantly insulted me .

But if the truth be known , if anyone should be banned from posting here it should be you and lamson and Burton ... Especially for the way you have treated Jack White ... but like I said in my post , the majority always wins because they are the loudest .... and in your sad case , the most obnoxious .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I might be mistaken but I believe there was a gap of several years between the last moon landing and cooperation

Well, kinda but the co-operation actually started much earlier.

NASA Administrator Tom Paine actually started dialog with the Soviet Academy of Sciences in 1969. By 1970, there had been discussion about a co-operative effort in space, mainly for the purposes of 'space rescue'. After Paine had resigned, the talks continued and by late 1970 a US delegation was in the USSR to study the feasibility of a mission and an agreement for co-operation had been reached. By the end of 1972, a mission had been agreed upon.

The ASTP actually flew in July 1975.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By your post information then the time line of the Americans working with the Russians could have meant that they were in on the Apollo hoax ... and this would be a very good reason for not blowing the whistle on the Americans ...

There could even have been a possible trade off ... American got the manned moon landings and Russia got the space station ....

I know you don't believe that Apollo was a hoax but regardless of that , you have just provided evidence that it's very possble that the Russians and Americans were working together much sooner than most people realize and that Russia could very well have in on the pretense of landing on the moon .. It also shows that the 'cold war' might not have been exactly what we were told it was .

Edited by Duane Daman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

“Thanks very much for your typical trolling post”

Oh yeah I forgot you define:

1) being asked to back your claims with credible sources and

2) having your false claims pointed out

as trolling.

And that you result to insults when you don’t have a good reply.

Most people however would define

1) making unsourced and/or false claims

2) refusing to provide citation when asked

3) refusing to admit error when shown to be wrong

4) insulting your critics when they haven’t does so to you because they call you on this type of behavior as “trolling”

Perhaps you explain why you think my post above and the other one you labeling trolling qualify as trolling and why your post above and the one where you called Craig dog$#!& don’t.

“... and I have no doubt you have already written to John Simkin with your wishes to have me banned”

Well then you guessed wrong. I have never privately complained to the administrators or moderators of this or any other forum about the conduct of another member. I have IIRC complained in posts about the conduct of about half a dozen members here over the years only in two of those cases were my complaints addressed to a moderator. I did exchange a few e-mails with John about one of those members but he initiated the exchange. [i politely request John and/or Andy confirm the veracity of this paragraph if they read this post]

But as long as we’re being frank I think you are the member most worthy of banishment.

“…for insulting those who have constantly insulted me .

But if the truth be known , if anyone should be banned from posting here it should be you and lamson and Burton ... Especially for the way you have treated Jack White ... but like I said in my post , the majority always wins because they are the loudest .... and in your sad case , the most obnoxious .”

No Duane, currently the most obnoxious member of the forum is you. Perhaps you can point to a post where I have so abused Jack or you.

"By your post information then the time line of the Americans working with the Russians could have meant that they were in on the Apollo hoax ... and his would be a very good reason for not blowing the whistle on the Americans"

This doesn't explain why we have no verifiable reports of people who have spoken out since the fall of the USSR

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Len .... Here's my reply to you ... I just posted this on the forum under 'Member's Behavior' .... You have a lot of nerve posting the lies you did there after I apologized for postings insults on this forum .... This will be my last post to you , so don't bother to continue with your insulting , dishonest post comments to me .

........................

Len ... I already apologized for my unkind behavior and insulting comments to some of the members who have insulted me ever since I joined this forum .... Too bad you are not big enough of a man to do the same thing ... Your treatment of Jack White and now me is completely out of line .... And I stand behind what I posted yesterday on the Political Conspircies forum .... If anyone should be banned for insulting conduct it should be you and Lamson ... Not only for your constant insults to Jack and me but now for your outright lies .. No one ever "politely" rebutted my Apollo evidence posted here ... but if you consider being called a crackpot , ignoramous, delusional , stupid , etc ., mostly by Craig Lamson as being "polite" , then you really do need a reality check ....

None of you will let up .... Your posts to me today on the Political Conspiracies prove that ... But I will not be dragged into another brawl by you , Lamson , or anyone else on this forum who defend Apollo with the most dispicable of tactics .

I didn't realize that you and Lamson and Ulman and Burton had come here from the Bad Astronomy forum until I read Jack's post here last night .... Now it all makes perfect sense why you are all so rude and insulting .... everyone on that pathetic forum acts the same way the four of you do when it comes to trying to debunk the hoax evidence ....

Sorry to dissapoint you but I will no longer play your game by answering your dishonest comments or your personal attacks .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

.

Your treatment of Jack White and now me is completely out of line .... .

No, its not. Jack is intelllectual dishonest with his photo work. A perfect example is the tread running right now where his "study" of Apollo shadows has been proven wrong with emperical evidence. Jack has had more than enough time to be a man and admit he is wrong...and yet we can expect the standard from Jack on this one..he will ignore it. I have seen people here state they respect Jack and I have to ask WHY? You repect a dishonest person? What does that make you?

The same can be said for you Duane. You have been proven wrong with irrefutable evidence and yet you still proclaim your silly claims to be correct. No Duane you are being treated EXACTYLY as your actions demand.

No one ever "politely" rebutted my Apollo evidence posted here ... but if you consider being called a crackpot , ignoramous, delusional , stupid , etc ., mostly by Craig Lamson as being "polite" , then you really do need a reality check ...
You have been politely rebutted time and time again. Give that, your own words show you fit all of the above to a tee.
None of you will let up .... Your posts to me today on the Political Conspiracies prove that ... But I will not be dragged into another brawl by you , Lamson , or anyone else on this forum who defend Apollo with the most dispicable of tactics .

Why sould we let up? You continue to avoid dealing with the error of your postings. And of course now you walk away, but the reason is your inability to deal with the truth that is being presented that refutes your postings.

Sorry to dissapoint you but I will no longer play your game by answering your dishonest comments or your personal attacks .

I am dissapointed. You are being given a chance to actually learn something instead you choose to wallow in your self proclaimed ignorance. Do something positve for a change Duane...open your mind and actually LEARN THE TRUTH!

Edited by Craig Lamson
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Len .... Here's my reply to you ... I just posted this on the forum under 'Member's Behavior' .... You have a lot of nerve posting the lies you did there after I apologized for postings insults on this forum .... This will be my last post to you , so don't bother to continue with your insulting , dishonest post comments to me .

........................

Len ... I already apologized for my unkind behavior and insulting comments to some of the members who have insulted me ever since I joined this forum .... Too bad you are not big enough of a man to do the same thing ... Your treatment of Jack White and now me is completely out of line .... And I stand behind what I posted yesterday on the Political Conspircies forum .... If anyone should be banned for insulting conduct it should be you and Lamson ... Not only for your constant insults to Jack and me but now for your outright lies .. No one ever "politely" rebutted my Apollo evidence posted here ... but if you consider being called a crackpot , ignoramous, delusional , stupid , etc ., mostly by Craig Lamson as being "polite" , then you really do need a reality check ....

None of you will let up .... Your posts to me today on the Political Conspiracies prove that ... But I will not be dragged into another brawl by you , Lamson , or anyone else on this forum who defend Apollo with the most dispicable of tactics .

I didn't realize that you and Lamson and Ulman and Burton had come here from the Bad Astronomy forum until I read Jack's post here last night .... Now it all makes perfect sense why you are all so rude and insulting .... everyone on that pathetic forum acts the same way the four of you do when it comes to trying to debunk the hoax evidence ....

Sorry to dissapoint you but I will no longer play your game by answering your dishonest comments or your personal attacks .

Perhaps you'd be willing to point out where I lied, perhaps you'd be willing to point out where you apologized, perhaps you'd be willing to point out where Evan, Steve or I insulted or "attacked" you beyond pointing out that you have repeatedly insulted other members of this forum and made false or unsupported claims, perhaps you'd be willing to point out where I insulted Jack, perhaps you'd be willing to provide citations for the claims I politely asked you to, perhaps you'd be willing to admit you were wrong when you labeled an article from Wikipedia as coming “from a web site that defends the Apollo missions”.

“No one ever "politely" rebutted my Apollo evidence posted here ... but if you consider being called a crackpot , ignoramous, delusional , stupid , etc ., mostly by Craig Lamson as being "polite" , then you really do need a reality check ....”

Yes it's true Craig wasn’t always very polite when replying to you. I didn’t he was always polite to you but he never sunk to the level of calling you dog $#!&, his post you were replying to when you made that unfortunate declaration was polite as you well know and you have been politely responded to by your other ‘critics’ and Craig wasn’t always rude.

I won't debate who has worse manners any more with you it's pointless. If you wish to continue pressing your claims go ahead but I and others will continue to point out when you are in error and ask you to back your claims. If that is too much for you to deal with it's your problem not ours, don't blame the messenger

Edited by Len Colby
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never called lamson dog$#!& ..... I said I stepped in something the other night that reminded me of him ... but luckily I was able to scape it off my shoe.... I only wish he was that easy to get rid of.

His and your sole purpose on this forum is to anger the members you disagree with .... That is what being a xxxxx and a flame baiter is.

Why don't you and the rest of your Bad Astronomy bullies just leave me alone , and leave Jack alone ?... None of you know how to discuss any subject without being completely insulting ...

lamson is like a ridiculous one trick pony with his constant usage of the words ... ignorant , ignorance , and ignoramous to describe those he disagrees with ..

Being called ignorant is the height of insults and you know it .. I don't care what kind of games you play with the word.

You and your "friends" make this forum a cesspit with your off topic ad homs and hateful comments.

Please just ignore my posts from now on and I will do the same with yours.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never called lamson dog$#!& ..... I said I stepped in something the other night that reminded me of him ... but luckily I was able to scape it off my shoe.... I only wish he was that easy to get rid of.

His and your sole purpose on this forum is to anger the members you disagree with .... That is what being a xxxxx and a flame baiter is.

Why don't you and the rest of your Bad Astronomy bullies just leave me alone , and leave Jack alone ?... None of you know how to discuss any subject without being completely insulting ...

lamson is like a ridiculous one trick pony with his constant usage of the words ... ignorant , ignorance , and ignoramous to describe those he disagrees with ..

Being called ignorant is the height of insults and you know it .. I don't care what kind of games you play with the word.

You and your "friends" make this forum a cesspit with your off topic ad homs and hateful comments.

Please just ignore my posts from now on and I will do the same with yours.

I guess yor hero Jack White thinks you are ignorant too! ROFLMAO!

Some here characterize the use of the word IGNORANT as a "personal attack".

Not so.

Those persons are etymologically ignorant.

The dictionary defines ignorant as:

ig·no·rant (ignr-nt)

adj.

1. Lacking education or knowledge.

2. Showing or arising from a lack of education or knowledge: an ignorant mistake.

3. Unaware or uninformed.

I would never call Lamson ignorant of photography; I can confidentallly call "Miller"

ignorant of photography. It is a proper adjective showing he is unaware about photography.

I am ignorant in many fields, such as math and physics. It is not an insult, but a description.

The discussion field is not level when the uneducated do not understand the words.

How can we have communication when some do not comprehend what is said?

Jack

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to agree with Jack and Craig re usage of the word "ignorant" - the context it's being used in is not pejorative (derogatory).

I have heard the expression used incorrectly as an insult - which ironically shows the level of ignorance of the person using the word in such a manner - etymologically ignorant as Jack rightly stated.

Duane - being labelled ignorant (about a subject) is not the same as being labelled stupid (which implies incapacity to learn). It merely infers lack of knowledge on a specific subject. As you freely admit to having little or no knowledge about photography, then Craig is right to say you are ignorant about photography. It is not an insult and you shouldn't take it that way.

I myself am ignorant about many things - antiques for example. Running an antiques business, it's a subject about which you undoubtedly know far more than me.

Chill :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...