ApolloHoax.net
Apollo Discussions => The Hoax Theory => Topic started by: BDL on July 31, 2018, 08:50:40 PM
-
Xavier Pascal has gone to the question/answer site Quora.com.
Now, I know that Xavier Pascal has no valid evidence against the moon landings... but, others don’t know that. He’s turned to “answering” questions people have about the Apollo Program with nothing but his own ignorance and I find this very troubling since it seems people actually started believing him. Fortunately, however, Quora.com is also home to many NASA employees, scientists, engineers, technologists, space enthusiasts, etc. This has put him at odds with many people.
I feel that people should receive actual information about the Apollo Missions and not the poisoning nonsense hunchbacked likes to answer with. I wonder if there’s something we can do or should we just ignore him? https://www.quora.com/profile/Pascal-Xavier
-
If he starts with his nonsense, someone will likely step and destroy him. I know ka9q has tried in vain to turn him onto science instead of his beliefs on YT, to unavail.
-
If he starts with his nonsense, someone will likely step and destroy him. I know ka9q has tried in vain to turn him onto science instead of his beliefs on YT, to unavail.
I think we have spoken before bknight about pascal. even though I may struggle to debunk some his more intricate claims due my lack of knowledge he did have 1 video called Apollo 11 BullShit. the very first claim on this claimed that in 1 video Buzz Aldrin saluted the flag with his right hand even though it was perfectly obvious to anybody with eyes it was his left. obviously the phot showed his left and he was trying to claim it was different. myself and another guy called John called him out on this and all he could do was deny the obvious. I have asked a couple of questions here about his claims and they have been shown to be incorrect quite easily.
am I correct in saying there is a thread here where somebody actually got him to admit he was wrong (power in the batteries I think)
-
I'm not sure, as I've only been around here for 3 years, Abaddon, or some of the others especially ka9q, since he tried so hard to educate the man, may have more memory about such items.
Personally I believe he would never venture here, so many people could destroy him. He is visually challenged for sure. I haven't watched the video, but I know Buzz saluted with his right hand, being from a military back ground.
-
If he starts with his nonsense, someone will likely step and destroy him. I know ka9q has tried in vain to turn him onto science instead of his beliefs on YT, to unavail.
I think we have spoken before bknight about pascal. even though I may struggle to debunk some his more intricate claims due my lack of knowledge he did have 1 video called Apollo 11 BullShit. the very first claim on this claimed that in 1 video Buzz Aldrin saluted the flag with his right hand even though it was perfectly obvious to anybody with eyes it was his left. obviously the phot showed his left and he was trying to claim it was different. myself and another guy called John called him out on this and all he could do was deny the obvious. I have asked a couple of questions here about his claims and they have been shown to be incorrect quite easily.
am I correct in saying there is a thread here where somebody actually got him to admit he was wrong (power in the batteries I think)
Yeah, that sounds like him. From what I’ve gathered from hunchbacked’s character, his ignorance is astoundingly vast. He also constantly uses recycled and previously debunked arguments. He’s never accepted that he’s wrong about anything, despite being proven wrong on multiple occasions.
-
If he starts with his nonsense, someone will likely step and destroy him. I know ka9q has tried in vain to turn him onto science instead of his beliefs on YT, to unavail.
I hope so. Unfortunately, however, that doesn’t seem to be the case. From what I’ve been able to observe, most people don’t really respond to him anymore and more and more people seem to actually believe the things he says. In fact, he’s constantly promoting his site “angelfire.com.”.
-
If he starts with his nonsense, someone will likely step and destroy him. I know ka9q has tried in vain to turn him onto science instead of his beliefs on YT, to unavail.
I hope so. Unfortunately, however, that doesn’t seem to be the case. From what I’ve been able to observe, most people don’t really respond to him anymore and more and more people seem to actually believe the things he says. In fact, he’s constantly promoting his site “angelfire.com.”.
He owns angelfire? Really?
Surely, he only has a site hosted there?
-
If he starts with his nonsense, someone will likely step and destroy him. I know ka9q has tried in vain to turn him onto science instead of his beliefs on YT, to unavail.
I hope so. Unfortunately, however, that doesn’t seem to be the case. From what I’ve been able to observe, most people don’t really respond to him anymore and more and more people seem to actually believe the things he says. In fact, he’s constantly promoting his site “angelfire.com.”.
He owns angelfire? Really?
Surely, he only has a site hosted there?
I’m 90% sure he owns angelfire. I could be wrong though. I’ve only known he existed for about a month and a half and only knew angelfire existed since this last week.
On Quora.com he’s constantly promoting the site as “evidence” against Apollo. When he does so he sometimes says it’s his own private site. Sometimes, however, he talks about it as if he “studied” there or is merely a contributor but I think he probably does own angelfire. I think I can find some quotes from him there.
-
I’m 90% sure he owns angelfire. I could be wrong though. I’ve only known he existed for about a month and a half and only knew angelfire existed since this last week.
angelfire.com goes waaay back, and was one of the early web site services on the internet. It's owned by Lycos, who also own tripod.com, another blast from the past :o
So if Hunchedbacked is claiming he owns angelfire, rather than just saying he has a site hosted there, he's being dishonest.
-
I’m 90% sure he owns angelfire. I could be wrong though. I’ve only known he existed for about a month and a half and only knew angelfire existed since this last week.
angelfire.com goes waaay back, and was one of the early web site services on the internet. It's owned by Lycos, who also own tripod.com, another blast from the past :o
So if Hunchedbacked is claiming he owns angelfire, rather than just saying he has a site hosted there, he's being dishonest.
That’s good to know. Is there even anything worth talking about on angelfire? I presume it’s probably not really worth talking about because it’s mostly likely debunked BS.
But - I mean, since hunchbacked is using it as his main source of research there must be something about it? It’s hard to get a reading on hunchbacked. He’s an odd character.
-
That’s good to know. Is there even anything worth talking about on angelfire?
Angelfire is a web hosting service. He might have a web-page hosted there, but he doesn't own the hosting service. The service itself is host to many thousands of websites.
-
Oh gawd. I've written a lot of stuff for Quora.com, enough to get me a nice tote bag and windbreaker. Guess it's time to jump back in.
-
That’s good to know. Is there even anything worth talking about on angelfire?
Angelfire is a web hosting service. He might have a web-page hosted there, but he doesn't own the hosting service. The service itself is host to many thousands of websites.
Ah, that would explain it.
He was saying something about his own “private site.” I guess I got confused and thought he was claiming the entire site was his own private site. Whoops! Thanks for the information.
-
Hunchbacked is merely a member there among many thousand members. It is owned by Lycos. Hunchbacked merely rents a tiny amount of space there.
I say "rents" but he is actually on the free scheme.
I will say that his site is worth a quick look if you are curious what websites looked like in the 1990s.
http :/ /www. angelfire. com/mo on2/xpa scal/Moon Hoax/Mars Curiosity/Mar sCuriosity F.HTM
(link intentionally borked. No promotion for him)
-
He posts this picture...
(https://s.hswstatic.com/gif/mars-rover-curiosity-a.jpg)
And claims the following...
Finally, to conclude, with an atmosphere as rarefied as that of Mars (if it exists!), The sky could not appear so clear, it should be much darker.
Duh, that is an artists impression, not a photograph, hunchbacked, you abject moron.
That is his level of thought.
-
Xavier Pascal has gone to the question/answer site Quora.com.
Now, I know that Xavier Pascal has no valid evidence against the moon landings... but, others don’t know that. He’s turned to “answering” questions people have about the Apollo Program with nothing but his own ignorance and I find this very troubling since it seems people actually started believing him. Fortunately, however, Quora.com is also home to many NASA employees, scientists, engineers, technologists, space enthusiasts, etc. This has put him at odds with many people.
I feel that people should receive actual information about the Apollo Missions and not the poisoning nonsense hunchbacked likes to answer with. I wonder if there’s something we can do or should we just ignore him? https://www.quora.com/profile/Pascal-Xavier
This is a problem with any site that relies upon its membership to be the primary source of knowledge, be it Quora or Stack Overflow or whatever. Unless they implement and enforce some minimum standard of expertise before anyone can participate, than people like Pascal can put their nonsense out there and have it on the same footing as any actual NASA engineer.
Frankly, if people want actual information about Apollo, they should start with NASA's web pages and go from there. If they aren't willing to do that for whatever reason, then they're not really interested in actual information about Apollo.
-
Xavier Pascal has gone to the question/answer site Quora.com.
Now, I know that Xavier Pascal has no valid evidence against the moon landings... but, others don’t know that. He’s turned to “answering” questions people have about the Apollo Program with nothing but his own ignorance and I find this very troubling since it seems people actually started believing him. Fortunately, however, Quora.com is also home to many NASA employees, scientists, engineers, technologists, space enthusiasts, etc. This has put him at odds with many people.
I feel that people should receive actual information about the Apollo Missions and not the poisoning nonsense hunchbacked likes to answer with. I wonder if there’s something we can do or should we just ignore him? https://www.quora.com/profile/Pascal-Xavier
This is a problem with any site that relies upon its membership to be the primary source of knowledge, be it Quora or Stack Overflow or whatever. Unless they implement and enforce some minimum standard of expertise before anyone can participate, than people like Pascal can put their nonsense out there and have it on the same footing as any actual NASA engineer.
Frankly, if people want actual information about Apollo, they should start with NASA's web pages and go from there. If they aren't willing to do that for whatever reason, then they're not really interested in actual information about Apollo.
Good point. I just get concerned when people are exposed to hunch’s toxicity outside of YouTube, because it usually ends in the increase of the HB population.
-
Note that you can downvote and report answers on Quora.com.
One of the reporting options is "Factually Incorrect: Substantially incorrect and/or incorrect primary conclusions" I suggest invoking that on all of Pascal's answers that qualify. Note: not all of his stuff is total garbage, though most of it is. Be selective.
-
Note that you can downvote and report answers on Quora.com.
One of the reporting options is "Factually Incorrect: Substantially incorrect and/or incorrect primary conclusions" I suggest invoking that on all of Pascal's answers that qualify. Note: not all of his stuff is total garbage, though most of it is. Be selective.
Thank you. I will.
-
Xavier Pascal has gone to the question/answer site Quora.com.
Now, I know that Xavier Pascal has no valid evidence against the moon landings... but, others don’t know that. He’s turned to “answering” questions people have about the Apollo Program with nothing but his own ignorance and I find this very troubling since it seems people actually started believing him. Fortunately, however, Quora.com is also home to many NASA employees, scientists, engineers, technologists, space enthusiasts, etc. This has put him at odds with many people.
I feel that people should receive actual information about the Apollo Missions and not the poisoning nonsense hunchbacked likes to answer with. I wonder if there’s something we can do or should we just ignore him? https://www.quora.com/profile/Pascal-Xavier
The quality of the answers there are rather depressing
-
Xavier Pascal has gone to the question/answer site Quora.com.
Now, I know that Xavier Pascal has no valid evidence against the moon landings... but, others don’t know that. He’s turned to “answering” questions people have about the Apollo Program with nothing but his own ignorance and I find this very troubling since it seems people actually started believing him. Fortunately, however, Quora.com is also home to many NASA employees, scientists, engineers, technologists, space enthusiasts, etc. This has put him at odds with many people.
I feel that people should receive actual information about the Apollo Missions and not the poisoning nonsense hunchbacked likes to answer with. I wonder if there’s something we can do or should we just ignore him? https://www.quora.com/profile/Pascal-Xavier
The quality of the answers there are rather depressing
The quality of the questions is more worrying.
-
Good point. I just get concerned when people are exposed to hunch’s toxicity outside of YouTube, because it usually ends in the increase of the HB population.
Last gasps. From what I can tell, hoax belief is dying.
-
Last gasps. From what I can tell, hoax belief is dying.
Phil and I had this discussion a few months ago. The Flat-Earthers seem to be the astronomy guffaw of the decade. However we both noted that these theories tend to come and go cyclically. By "these theories" I mean conspiracy theories in general. After they are debunked and lay fallow for a number of years (10-15, we guesstimated), someone else rediscovers them and gives them a new coat of paint. Bennett and Percy did little more than rejuvenate what Bill Kaysing and Ralph Rene had done a decade previous. And now we're seeing people pick up Percy et al. as if they were newly discovered. I may live to see Clavius.org become relevant again, in which case I will definitely have to refresh the 1990s era hand-coded HTML.
-
Good point. I just get concerned when people are exposed to hunch’s toxicity outside of YouTube, because it usually ends in the increase of the HB population.
Last gasps. From what I can tell, hoax belief is dying.
hold that thought Gillian.
i'm not sure where your based but did anybody here from the UK watch the TV show 'This Morning' on Wednesday. A guy by the name of Martin Kenny who appeared there not too long ago with 2 of his flat earth friends, was on spouting the Moon Landings. he was up against a woman from a university. I haven't watched it but I messaged This Morning and asked if they would be up for a Live TV Debate. I also messaged Martin asking him the same question.
is there anybody here from the UK (I know Jason is) who would be up for a TV show on ITV debating this.
-
hold that thought Gillian.
i'm not sure where your based but did anybody here from the UK watch the TV show 'This Morning' on Wednesday. A guy by the name of Martin Kenny who appeared there not too long ago with 2 of his flat earth friends, was on spouting the Moon Landings. he was up against a woman from a university. I haven't watched it but I messaged This Morning and asked if they would be up for a Live TV Debate. I also messaged Martin asking him the same question.
is there anybody here from the UK (I know Jason is) who would be up for a TV show on ITV debating this.
It's available on YouTube - not sure if forum rules allow me to post a link - search This Morning and Moon Landings and it will show up. It's a pretty poor piece, the usual uninformed arguments put forward by Kenny with Dr Bosman shaking her head in disbelief. Perhaps more concerning were the results of the online poll that indicated the majority of those responding believe the landings were a hoax. With the 50th Anniversary approaching I just hope we see some quality documentaries about the Apollo programme that will ensure the general public are better informed.
-
Hrm. Cycles. I think Moon Hoax may have made a lean towards "Moon Landings were real but what did they find there that they are covering up?" but it doesn't seem to have extended into a full-length lunge.
In psuedoarchaeological circles, the go-to for hyperdiffusionism was "Aliens!" for a while, but in the past decade or so seems to have drifted back into an older and more generalized "gods/demons" sort of thing. This more-or-less paralleling the way UFOs shifted a decade or so before that from physical craft visiting from physical extrasolar planets to immaterial energy beings/spirits from a higher plane.
Flat Earth, on the other hand....the largest remaining collection of Moon Hoax around is just one chocolate in a whole big box of space denialism, science denialism, and the pretty-much required anti-vax, climate change denialism, alternate medicine/homeopathy woo ball.
(Sorry, posting on a full set of meds so expect I'm rambling even worse than usual).
-
hold that thought Gillian.
i'm not sure where your based but did anybody here from the UK watch the TV show 'This Morning' on Wednesday. A guy by the name of Martin Kenny who appeared there not too long ago with 2 of his flat earth friends, was on spouting the Moon Landings. he was up against a woman from a university. I haven't watched it but I messaged This Morning and asked if they would be up for a Live TV Debate. I also messaged Martin asking him the same question.
is there anybody here from the UK (I know Jason is) who would be up for a TV show on ITV debating this.
It's available on YouTube - not sure if forum rules allow me to post a link - search This Morning and Moon Landings and it will show up. It's a pretty poor piece, the usual uninformed arguments put forward by Kenny with Dr Bosman shaking her head in disbelief. Perhaps more concerning were the results of the online poll that indicated the majority of those responding believe the landings were a hoax. With the 50th Anniversary approaching I just hope we see some quality documentaries about the Apollo programme that will ensure the general public are better informed.
There’s a new documentary about Apollo 11 that’s been announced.
The release date isn’t known but I’m just happy it exists.
http://www.collectspace.com/news/news-072018a-apollo11-documentary-neon-cnnfilms.html
-
hold that thought Gillian.
i'm not sure where your based but did anybody here from the UK watch the TV show 'This Morning' on Wednesday. A guy by the name of Martin Kenny who appeared there not too long ago with 2 of his flat earth friends, was on spouting the Moon Landings. he was up against a woman from a university. I haven't watched it but I messaged This Morning and asked if they would be up for a Live TV Debate. I also messaged Martin asking him the same question.
is there anybody here from the UK (I know Jason is) who would be up for a TV show on ITV debating this.
It's available on YouTube - not sure if forum rules allow me to post a link - search This Morning and Moon Landings and it will show up. It's a pretty poor piece, the usual uninformed arguments put forward by Kenny with Dr Bosman shaking her head in disbelief. Perhaps more concerning were the results of the online poll that indicated the majority of those responding believe the landings were a hoax. With the 50th Anniversary approaching I just hope we see some quality documentaries about the Apollo programme that will ensure the general public are better informed.
Since UK polls delivered Brexit and "Boaty McBoatface" clearly a late number people in the UK when faced with a poll decide to do a piss take. I don't think they say anything. The first reaction of many in the UK people towards the ESA naming competition for the for the ExoMars rover (which has substantial UK contribution) was the same.
-
is there anybody here from the UK (I know Jason is) who would be up for a TV show on ITV debating this.
Count me out. Firstly, there is no 'debate' to be had: these clowns are simply wrong. I'm not about to put myself on to a TV show that will inevitably present it as some even-handed, two-sided issue. Secondly, I wouldn't trust the editors. Thirdly, as the discussions here show, their side is based on asking questions and sowing doubt, and fixing that is much harder in a live TV debate than sitting here with plenty of material to debunk them at my fingertips. The format doesn't support a sensible conclusion.
-
is there anybody here from the UK (I know Jason is) who would be up for a TV show on ITV debating this.
I am but I do keep my ID away from these idiots I’ve got one now desperately trying to find out who I am. I have received various threats from these morons. One person on YouTube (who we partially converted from the dark side) received death threats against himself and his wife, he was the subject of a video with a hangman’s gallows. He got the video removed with a court injunction, but when the threats continued a subsequent action awarded him 15,000 Canadian dollars and an injunction against the perpetrator.
-
I think a live debate is a highly risky operation, especially if the debater is not used to speaking in front of the camera. It is incredibly easy to screw up and say something stupid, and once you do, it's out there, with your name on it. A great opportunity to look like an idiot on YouTube forever. It's also incredibly easy to say things in a way that makes it easy to change their meaning by taking them out of context, which can be done deliberately, or just out of carelessness by the producer.
A prepared statement or video shoot, with the opportunity to redo it if you stuff it up, is in my opinion the much safer option. There's a reason why politicians who are trailing in the polls want to have debates, and politicians who are leading prefer to avoid them - the debate is an amazing opportunity to stuff things up.
I recall watching an American news presenter "debating" someone who (while the South African government still had apartheid) wanted to partition South Africa along racial lines. The American, as nearly as I can tell, seemed to have assumed that his opponent was going to have horns growing out of his head and talk like a raving lunatic. Unprepared, underestimating his opponent, who turned out to be quite smooth and well-spoken, the American made several extremely foolish mistakes during the debate and ended up looking like a complete idiot.
Debates are risky. When you have the facts on your side, it's best to have a controlled environment to the extent possible. When all you've got is bull****, the chaos and volatility of a live debate are your friends.
-
is there anybody here from the UK (I know Jason is) who would be up for a TV show on ITV debating this.
Count me out. Firstly, there is no 'debate' to be had: these clowns are simply wrong. I'm not about to put myself on to a TV show that will inevitably present it as some even-handed, two-sided issue. Secondly, I wouldn't trust the editors. Thirdly, as the discussions here show, their side is based on asking questions and sowing doubt, and fixing that is much harder in a live TV debate than sitting here with plenty of material to debunk them at my fingertips. The format doesn't support a sensible conclusion.
I'm in full agreement with Jason on this.
-
is there anybody here from the UK (I know Jason is) who would be up for a TV show on ITV debating this.
Count me out. Firstly, there is no 'debate' to be had: these clowns are simply wrong. I'm not about to put myself on to a TV show that will inevitably present it as some even-handed, two-sided issue. Secondly, I wouldn't trust the editors. Thirdly, as the discussions here show, their side is based on asking questions and sowing doubt, and fixing that is much harder in a live TV debate than sitting here with plenty of material to debunk them at my fingertips. The format doesn't support a sensible conclusion.
I'm in full agreement with Jason on this.
no that's cool. I just thought it was both a bit risky having these people on there pushing their side and also what worried me Is that ITV didn't seem to be allowing the other side of the story to be pushed very well.
-
is there anybody here from the UK (I know Jason is) who would be up for a TV show on ITV debating this.
Count me out. Firstly, there is no 'debate' to be had: these clowns are simply wrong. I'm not about to put myself on to a TV show that will inevitably present it as some even-handed, two-sided issue. Secondly, I wouldn't trust the editors. Thirdly, as the discussions here show, their side is based on asking questions and sowing doubt, and fixing that is much harder in a live TV debate than sitting here with plenty of material to debunk them at my fingertips. The format doesn't support a sensible conclusion.
I'm in full agreement with Jason on this.
no that's cool. I just thought it was both a bit risky having these people on there pushing their side and also what worried me Is that ITV didn't seem to be allowing the other side of the story to be pushed very well.
ITV would trade it's soul for ratings.
-
what worried me Is that ITV didn't seem to be allowing the other side of the story to be pushed very well.
ITV is the UK equivalent of FOX. You don't have to be a moron to watch it, but it sure helps.
-
LOL, it's on my toxic list like Aulis.
-
LOL, it's on my toxic list like Aulis.
Being across the pond, I've never heard of ITV. Nor Have I watched any programming from it., so its new to me.
-
I agree a lot of it is nonsense but there are still a lot of people who watch it and the post on FB has had a few thousand posts to it. most saying what crap it is but still if you throw enough you know what some of it sticks.
-
most saying what crap it is but still if you throw enough you know what some of it sticks.
Indeed. See: Brexit and the Trump presidency.
-
ka9q posted a wonderful thought, just report Pascal's post as being factually incorrect. When you do, if you haven't already, the forum gives you the opportunity to enter why Pascal's posts are incorrect.