Recent Posts

51

The Hoax Theory / Re: Charlie Duke (Legend) meets Bart Sibrel (I have nothing polite to say)

« Last post by TimberWolfAu on December 04, 2025, 05:26:16 PM »

One of the counters to Bart's completely fabricated story was the use of the term "Operarion slam dunk", and when it originated.

I mean I'm in agreement with the view that the footage being played may not actually be the footage for the audio being played. I've dropped some emails to both the channel, and the other channel they thanked for help, seeing if either has original sources for the time code in question.
Who know, maybe I'll get a hit and a source, and the whole thing can be put to bed. Hey, maybe we can get Oxford Dictionary updated too! Wouldn't be the first time someone from this forum has had 'official' pages/reports updated 

52

The Hoax Theory / Re: Watching the detectives...

« Last post by onebigmonkey on December 04, 2025, 02:23:25 PM »

Yesterday. stray posted a claim that these statements were made by Apollo 17 astronauts, claiming that they had repeatedly made statements about Earth being 60 or 65 degrees.

Here's what he claims was said:

Source: Apollo 17 Lunar Surface Journal
Key Excerpt:
EVA-1, 12 Dec 1972, 22:36:51

Cernan: “The Earth is hanging high—it’s almost in the zenith over there, probably about 60 degrees or so.”

EVA-2, 13 Dec 1972, 12:20:00

Schmitt: “The Earth’s about 65 degrees high now—it’s a beautiful sight.”

(Note: These are paraphrased from mission transcripts, but the general range is supported in the official logs.)

He now claims that AI made him do it, and the figures are false, but is still insisting that Stellarium puts the Earth up to 70 degrees high during the mission, which is absolutely not the case. He's an idiot.

53

The Hoax Theory / Re: Charlie Duke (Legend) meets Bart Sibrel (I have nothing polite to say)

« Last post by Jason Thompson on December 04, 2025, 03:58:28 AM »

I remember interacting with Bart on a message board ran by Fox after they aired a Moon hoax program back in 2001. He hasn’t come up with any new material since then. What a pathetic loser.

The sad thing is he doesn't even need any new material. Every year people come to his crap for the first time and believe it must be new or original because, if it wasn't, he wouldn't still be going on about it. They either get suckered in by it because they just don't know any better, or at least don't know where to find the rebuttals, or it appeals to them and they don't want to know any better. He can get a steady stream of attention and revenue from the same crap he's been peddling for decades because there is always someone new to find it.

How often on this board have people come along with 'new' arguments, only to be told we'd debunked them when they were still in school?

54

The Hoax Theory / Re: Charlie Duke (Legend) meets Bart Sibrel (I have nothing polite to say)

« Last post by onebigmonkey on December 04, 2025, 02:44:36 AM »

One of the counters to Bart's completely fabricated story was the use of the term "Operarion slam dunk", and when it originated. The operarton never existed in the first place, so Jarrah dying on that hill is moot. He'd be better off examining all the other gaping holes in Sibrel's fiction.

55

The Hoax Theory / Re: Charlie Duke (Legend) meets Bart Sibrel (I have nothing polite to say)

« Last post by TimberWolfAu on December 04, 2025, 01:18:24 AM »

Speaking of Jarrah, in the same thread the "slam dunk" origin has been brought up and Jarrah's shown the highlight video.
Looks like he's been challenged on it, as it sounds like the commentator has named two basketball players who weren't in the same team until 1969. Jarrah's response was 'well the video said it was from 1962, so that's all that matters', like he can't even consider the simple point that some of the audio, or even footage, might be from outside the range noted by the video.

He hasn’t come up with any new material since then.

Well he does have his "whistleblower" footage now, but even that story keeps changing every time he tells it. First he added that the father "murdered" someone (who? no idea, who cares, stop asking questions!!!!), and now it's the house "burnt down".

56

The Hoax Theory / Re: Charlie Duke (Legend) meets Bart Sibrel (I have nothing polite to say)

« Last post by LunarOrbit 🇨🇦 on December 03, 2025, 08:05:48 PM »

I remember interacting with Bart on a message board ran by Fox after they aired a Moon hoax program back in 2001. He hasn’t come up with any new material since then. What a pathetic loser.

57

The Hoax Theory / Re: Watching the detectives...

« Last post by onebigmonkey on December 02, 2025, 11:12:50 AM »

I believe the Stellarium evidence has been pointed out to him, and he claims it to be figures dervied from orbit, not the ground, because he has no idea how it works.

He is stubbornly resisting everything that contradicts him, no matter what the source, because he prefers the exaggeration of a seasoned anecdote teller when it matches his preconceptions.

58

The Hoax Theory / Re: Charlie Duke (Legend) meets Bart Sibrel (I have nothing polite to say)

« Last post by beedarko on December 02, 2025, 09:57:23 AM »

This is painful to watch at times - they clearly take advantage of an old man's fading memory and occasional confusion.

That fact undoubtedly played a role in Bart's decision to participate in this "debate".  He avoids sharp, well-informed Apollo experts at all costs because he knows he'd quickly become piranha food.

Bloated coward.

59

The Hoax Theory / Re: Watching the detectives...

« Last post by TimberWolfAu on December 02, 2025, 08:40:33 AM »

Wait, is he saying that the Earth 'rose' over the landing site? Last time I checked, the Earth doesn't 'rise' for any location on the lunar surface, except for the very far edges where it's already 'kissing' the horizon, then the moon's wobble and such will have the Earth' rise and set.

Amusingly, I also happen to have the sun's position for the EVA starts (from a different discussion). They line up with the chart you've linked, just like the Earth positions do too, to my Stellarium shots. How strange...

60

The Hoax Theory / Re: Charlie Duke (Legend) meets Bart Sibrel (I have nothing polite to say)

« Last post by TimberWolfAu on December 02, 2025, 08:30:17 AM »

Yeah, I've watched a bit, don't think I'll finish it.

Not sure what speaking Duke would do in regards to any analysis of lunar samples, Duke's not a geologist, he hasn't performed any tests or measurements with the rocks. He was given a crash course in geology to be able to identify good samples to collect, things that people back on Earth might find interesting. And as far as "recreating" Apollo samples using the accelerators Jarrah linked too, the results were isotropic (like meteorites are), if I've read the paper correctly, whilst lunar samples aren't. So if you took say a meteorite, to try and change it's appearance to a surface sample, it's the existing markers that need to be removed/erased that would be the impossible part, at least as far as I know (and a quick conversation with Randy Korotev a year or two ago now). Of course, I'm neither a geologist or a chemist, so I could be way off