A FAIR DEBATE

[JayUtah]

- to complain about being called a seagull and then spend the next few days acting like a seagull

Indeed.  This "debate" has generated four pages of discussion without the input of its instigator.  Clearly not interested in a serious debate.

[ka9q]

But at least the rest of us are learning...

[pzkpfw]

The most interesting thing (to me) is trying to "limit" the debate* by saying "only Apollo 11" and then a) flinging a whole bunch of claims at the wall and b) making half those claims not particularly specific to Apollo 11.

(* which in itself is not a bad idea if it's about focussing on some aspect so it can dealt with properly)

[slang]

Yeah, clear, consistent, and effective writing is something one learns at school/university/(whatever it's called in your country). But who needs education, eh?

[gillianren]

Clear, consistent, and effective writing was something I learned in high school.  But of course, that was mostly after ninth grade!

[Glom]

The most interesting thing (to me) is trying to "limit" the debate* by saying "only Apollo 11" and then a) flinging a whole bunch of claims at the wall and b) making half those claims not particularly specific to Apollo 11.

(* which in itself is not a bad idea if it's about focussing on some aspect so it can dealt with properly)

It was informative that request because it revealed a lack of understanding of the fundamentals.

[Not Myself]

Yeah, clear, consistent, and effective writing is something one learns at school/university/(whatever it's called in your country). But who needs education, eh?

Not sure to which country you are referring, but if it is the one I have in mind (and which I was very glad to leave a few years back), then learning about writing and many other things does occur, sometimes at very high levels, in the schools and universities.  However, it is strictly optional.  University graduates who can barely read and write are quite common.

[Rob260259]

But at least the rest of us are learning...

Yep. I'll have to 'thank' DakDak for his few comments. Many of them resulted in overwhelming answers and explanation on a myriad of things. I guess it's a bit like the hoax theory on YT; it made me look deeper and deeper into Apollo and the massive amount of scientific data, documents, pictures, film and engineering.
 

[Glom]

But at least the rest of us are learning...

Yep. I'll have to 'thank' DakDak for his few comments. Many of them resulted in overwhelming answers and explanation on a myriad of things. I guess it's a bit like the hoax theory on YT; it made me look deeper and deeper into Apollo and the massive amount of scientific data, documents, pictures, film and engineering.
 

And also to Lunar Orbit for allowing us to use the seagulling as the spark for greater debate.

[JayUtah]

The most interesting thing (to me) is trying to "limit" the debate* [...]
* which in itself is not a bad idea if it's about focussing on some aspect so it can dealt with properly.

I agree here.  When I first started reading his proposal, it sounded like a good-faith effort to debate.  I completely agree with focusing on one topic until a concession or impasse is reached, then (and only then) moving on to a new topic.

But no, I don't agree with trying to limit it to a specific mission.  That serves only to artificially limit the domain of information that can be brought to the debate, which makes it not a fair debate.  A claim fails if valid information exists anywhere to refute it.  Saying that exculpatory information can only come from some arbitrary domain in order to be valid is just a thinly-veiled attempt at muzzling your critics.  Shame!

[nomuse]

And also extremely common among the Apollo Deniers (if rarely presented so nakedly.)

"Why are you talking about the ISS?  I asked why the astronauts didn't burn up from the temps on the Moon."

"What do Harrier jump jets have to do with the lack of a crater left by the LEM (sic)?"

*  Not real quotes.

[slang]

Not sure to which country you are referring,

It was a general your, referring to the reader.

[RAF]

I don't know what a Seagull Poster is...

A "seagull" poster is one who posts "crap", then fails to respond to any criticism

...but I don't believe that I am one.

Well, you obviously ARE, since you haven't bothered to respond to ANY criticism in this thread in the last 5 days.


If you don't want to be "labled" a seagull, then stop behaving like one.

[DAKDAK]

T

[Laurel]

You only need to click on Quote when you're quoting someone else's post in your reply.