Hoax? - Flag moves without being Touched

[najak]

I've been told by the Master Overseers of this forum that I haven't sufficiently addressed the objections to my thesis.

To be clear, my thesis here is ONLY THIS:
I believe there has been no fully viable hypothesis presented here that can explain all 8 motions of the flag, that happened over 175 seconds, including the minutes that preceded these movements.

If I've missed such a hypothesis, please tell me what it is.

If you'd like to present such a hypothesis, please do so now.

Otherwise, what else is there to do with this thread?   It's time to pause it, until someone steps forward to propose a viable hypothesis.

[ApolloEnthusiast]

Have you ever heard, "Agree to Disagree". 

Have you? Claiming that the thread is over because your poorly supported conclusion is unrefuted is not "agreeing to disagree".

As I see it, no hypothesis proposed so far - truly satisfies the requirement of explaining all 8 flag movements.

If you disagree, please tell me at least One Hypothesis that truly satisfies this requirement. 

Again, this isn't how intelligent debate works. You're the one making an extraordinary claim so you are the one with the burden of providing extraordinary evidence.

You're creating a false dichotomy where things can only fall into one of two categories: 1) things that behave according to your expectations, 2) things that are physically impossible. Anything you can't neatly put into the first box gets tossed into the second. This is extremely poor reasoning as it relies on a primary assumption that your expectations are always correct and completely ignores the possibility that you don't have all the information.

Something on the Moon moved the flag. I don't know what it was and frankly, don't care. If you do, look into it more thoroughly. But you don't get to conclude that the only way it could have been moved was if it was on Earth, despite all of the overwhelming evidence it wasn't. The obvious conclusion for any reasonable person is that a force they are unaware of acted on the flag. Find an answer that satisfies you or don't, but either way, your current conclusion is ridiculous.

[najak]

You're creating a false dichotomy where things can only fall into one of two categories: 1) things that behave according to your expectations, 2) things that are physically impossible. Anything you can't neatly put into the first box gets tossed into the second. This is extremely poor reasoning as it relies on a primary assumption that your expectations are always correct and completely ignores the possibility that you don't have all the information.

Something on the Moon moved the flag. I don't know what it was and frankly, don't care. If you do, look into it more thoroughly. But you don't get to conclude that the only way it could have been moved was if it was on Earth, despite all of the overwhelming evidence it wasn't. The obvious conclusion for any reasonable person is that a force they are unaware of acted on the flag. Find an answer that satisfies you or don't, but either way, your current conclusion is ridiculous.

My thesis here is that we have a hypothesis in the Earth's atmosphere that can explain these movements.  But as of yet, there has been no hypothesis that fully explains these motions in the context of the Moon.

Conclude from that what you will.   This specific thesis remains Un-Refuted.  You are free to explain this as "surely something reasonable happened, because I know Apollo landed men on the moon because of A, B, C... X, Y, Z".  That's your prerogative.

[ApolloEnthusiast]

My thesis here is that we have a hypothesis in the Earth's atmosphere that can explain these movements.  But as of yet, there has been no hypothesis that fully explains these motions in the context of the Moon.

Conclude from that what you will.   This specific thesis remains Un-Refuted.  You are free to explain this as "surely something reasonable happened, because I know Apollo landed men on the moon because of A, B, C... X, Y, Z".  That's your prerogative.

This is the problem with cherry picking at minutiae. The fact that this occurred on the Moon 100% refutes your hypothesis that the flag moved because it was on Earth. In order to substantiate your hypothesis that air currents on Earth are responsible for moving the flag, it is your burden to disprove all of the evidence that indicates the flag was on the Moon. You don't want to do that. You want to conclude that, because you can't find a reason for the flag to move on the Moon, that a dozen eyewitnesses, hundreds of corroborating support staff, thousands of engineers, hundreds of thousands of other employees, all worked together to fake hours of video, hundreds of pounds of lunar material, hundreds of hours of radio signals and telemetry, and countless other necessary components to secure the hoax. It would be laughable if it weren't so sad that you seriously believe this is a logical and rational thought process.

[Mag40]

Have got any rebuttal to the video I posted or are you going to agree with it?  If you don't agree, what physics do you present in this case?

When is he going to answer this? It's the same mission and pretty much a slam dunk as he puts it.

[bknight]

He is ignoring it hoping it will go away, but that is not going to happen. Thanks for bumping it.

[najak]

When is he going to answer this? It's the same mission and pretty much a slam dunk as he puts it.

Make a new post for this, and we can address it.  This is off-topic from the thesis that is my conclusion.  You can say "this PROVES WE WERE ON THE MOON" and in your thread, we can discuss it.

My conclusion is merely that:
My thesis here is that we have a hypothesis in the Earth's atmosphere that can explain these movements.  But as of yet, there has been no hypothesis that fully explains these motions in the context of the Moon.

I withdraw my conclusion from this thread that "this specific lone instance proves it was faked".  You win on this point.  I concede.  Let's move on.

[Mag40]

Make a new post for this, and we can address it.  This is off-topic from the thesis that is my conclusion.  You can say "this PROVES WE WERE ON THE MOON" and in your thread, we can discuss it.

My conclusion is merely that:
My thesis here is that we have a hypothesis in the Earth's atmosphere that can explain these movements.  But as of yet, there has been no hypothesis that fully explains these motions in the context of the Moon.

No! Answer it here. There's way too many threads as it is and you're failing in every one of them.

[najak]

No! Answer it here. There's way too many threads as it is and you're failing in every one of them.

It's a separate topic.  And you find it compelling - so why not make a whole thread of it?   You find it to be "slam dunk proof against MLH" - but you don't want a thread to cover this specifically?

This thread here is complete, or at least "paused" until an Apollogist comes forward with a viable hypothesis to explain all 8 movements.

[LunarOrbit]

No! Answer it here. There's way too many threads as it is and you're failing in every one of them.

It's a separate topic.  And you find it compelling - so why not make a whole thread of it?   You find it to be "slam dunk proof against MLH" - but you don't want a thread to cover this specifically?

This thread here is complete, or at least "paused" until an Apollogist comes forward with a viable hypothesis to explain all 8 movements.

You are being asked questions about things you brought up in this thread. You will answer them in this thread. My patience with you is razor thin.

[bknight]

When is he going to answer this? It's the same mission and pretty much a slam dunk as he puts it.

Make a new post for this, and we can address it.  This is off-topic from the thesis that is my conclusion.  You can say "this PROVES WE WERE ON THE MOON" and in your thread, we can discuss it.

My conclusion is merely that:
My thesis here is that we have a hypothesis in the Earth's atmosphere that can explain these movements.  But as of yet, there has been no hypothesis that fully explains these motions in the context of the Moon.

I withdraw my conclusion from this thread that "this specific lone instance proves it was faked".  You win on this point.  I concede.  Let's move on.

You have failed to consider all possibilities, that is your problem, they were on the Moon now consider everything in that vien.

[Mag40]

It's a separate topic.  And you find it compelling - so why not make a whole thread of it?   You find it to be "slam dunk proof against MLH" - but you don't want a thread to cover this specifically?

Stop evading things that disprove your claims.

This thread here is complete, or at least "paused" until an Apollogist comes forward with a viable hypothesis to explain all 8 movements.

Spamming the same claim and ignoring all responses. Your concept and understanding of physics has been shown to be very poor. Your familiarity with activity in vacuum is not cause for you to doubt perfectly valid reasons.

[najak]

Stop evading things that disprove your claims.

Read my thesis:
"My thesis here is that we have a hypothesis in the Earth's atmosphere that can explain these movements.  But as of yet, there has been no hypothesis that fully explains these motions in the context of the Moon."

Your article does not provide a hypothesis to explain these 8 flag movements.  So it's a NEW TOPIC.   Make a new thread -- why are you scared to do so?  Do you think you won't win that debate?

[najak]

You are being asked questions about things you brought up in this thread. You will answer them in this thread. My patience with you is razor thin.

It's off-topic, and has nothing to do with my thesis.

If you think it's slam-dunk - create the new thread -- see where it leads.

Lets do the APPROPRIATE THING and create a NEW THREAD for this NEW TOPIC-- which has nothing to do with these 8 Flag waves.

[Mag40]

Read my thesis:

What? Your "thesis"?

"My thesis here is that we have a hypothesis in the Earth's atmosphere that can explain these movements.  But as of yet, there has been no hypothesis that fully explains these motions in the context of the Moon."

Yes there has. You just don't know what you are doing.

Your article does not provide a hypothesis to explain these 8 flag movements.  So it's a NEW TOPIC.   

1. It isn't mine.
2. It's a video not an article.
3. Yes it does, by rendering your claim moot as to being on Earth.

Make a new thread -- why are you scared to do so?

Already answered, there's far too many of these dumb threads already. 

Do you think you won't win that debate?

Define win. If you mean convince anyone who has honest objectivity and logic, yeah, I'll win. If you mean convince somebody prepared to make up any old bollocks to avoid admitting defeat, probably no.

You have shown yourself to be firmly in the latter of those two camps.

After all the hoohah about "agreeing to disagree" you seem to be afraid yourself. I await what is likely to be evasive obfuscation/ diversionary rebuttal to the video.