Uh oh! Jarrah's mad at SG Collins!

[ejstans]

I'm glad you did. Made for an interesting discussion and we learned things in the process.

Yes, and for me, that's really the best part of the whole hoax farce: I usually end up learning a great many things

[Eastsider]

Isn't this previously filmed in slow motion theory shot down by the fact that the technicians in mission control were interacting with the broadcast images on screen in real time?

I saw at least one example where an astronaut was instructed in real time to pick up specific rock by someone in mission control.

I don't think the hoax believers have any idea how impossible it would be to synch pre-recorded video to people faking the audio broadcast to the numerous people in MC.

I would also think the fellow operating the camera on the rover would have noticed if his camera feed was "pre-taped."

But of course I'll get the default HB answer of "they were all in on it."

[dwight]

They were all in on it except the ones doing their compartmentalized jobs so as to limit the amount of folk who were in on it. Cue Yakety Sax.

[ka9q]

Sure, there are many reasons why slow-motion (or wires, or any other technique for faking 1/6 g) simply can't work. The Mythbusters did as good a job as anyone in explaining them.

But I've noticed that whenever we list our objections to their claims and methodically go through them one by one, the hoaxers often respond that we haven't proved beyond all possible doubt that this specific item, all by itself, could not possibly have been faked. And if this happens for any item on our list, they triumphantly point to it as the "smoking gun" that "proves" Apollo was faked.

This row between Collins and White is a perfect example. Collins chose to talk about the practicality of one very specific aspect of a hypothetical faked moonwalk -- using film to simulate slow motion -- because that's the subject he knows. I'm sure he also wanted to keep his presentation short, sweet and to the point.

White responded in very typical fashion. Not only did he bash Collins' credentials (which was actually pretty funny given their ages and experiences) but he went out of his way to contrive an ad-hoc way around each of Collins' very specific objections as if that's all he had to do to 'prove' Apollo was faked.

He does this on every topic he touches, and whenever he gets into trouble on one he'll Gish-gallop to another as though he wins by default every discussion he aborts.

[frenat]

Isn't this previously filmed in slow motion theory shot down by the fact that the technicians in mission control were interacting with the broadcast images on screen in real time?

I saw at least one example where an astronaut was instructed in real time to pick up specific rock by someone in mission control.

I don't think the hoax believers have any idea how impossible it would be to synch pre-recorded video to people faking the audio broadcast to the numerous people in MC.

I would also think the fellow operating the camera on the rover would have noticed if his camera feed was "pre-taped."

But of course I'll get the default HB answer of "they were all in on it."

Even better, DavidC/Rocky/Cosmored once said they did the slow motion for only certain part ON THE FLY.  Yes, he thought that in the hours long footage only some parts were slow motion and it was changed continuously throughout the footage.l

[Not Myself]

the hoaxers often respond that we haven't proved beyond all possible doubt that this specific item

Well, they're right.  If they still doubt it, it hasn't been proven beyond all possible doubt.  Whether such doubt is reasonable is another matter.

[Eastsider]

Even better, DavidC/Rocky/Cosmored once said they did the slow motion for only certain part ON THE FLY.  Yes, he thought that in the hours long footage only some parts were slow motion and it was changed continuously throughout the footage.l
[/quote]

If that kind of editing capability was available as early as '69, I can only imagine what kind of movies Kubrick could have made. 

The other aspect that seems to be commonly & conveniently ignored is that when the Mythbusters did the 1/6th gravity demonstration while flying parabolas, it looked absolutely perfect. One believer told me the whole thing was filmed on the Vomit Comet. Another told me it was all filmed in LEO. Another told me that there was a secret, giant vacuum chamber in the Nevada desert.

Serious face palming ensued.....

This is much more fascinating from a psychological point of view as some of the hoax belief seems to be almost faith based. (the rest I'll chalk up to good ol' ignorance coupled with an aversion to research)

I liked Collin's two videos and thought they were insightful & clever. His sarcasm was so subtle that I think it went over a few heads in the HB camp.

I wasn't able to bring myself to watch JWs entire response video as, much like Rene's geiger counters, my BS meter found itself oversaturated within 3 minutes. 

[Allan F]

I wasn't able to bring myself to watch JWs entire response video as, much like Rene's geiger counters, my BS meter found itself oversaturated within 3 minutes.

There is a technical solution to that. Just open the box, cut the wires between the sensor and the meter, and you might have achieved enough resistance to lower the readout to something tolerable.

Edit: You'll need to find the CommonSense and AdvancedKnowledge and disconnect those too.

[Mag40]

Maybe to entice the 'master' to the forum, somebody should start a thread detailing all his errors, downright lies and deliberate omissions. He is more concerned about not losing face and appeasing his army of trolls. I no longer think he believes in the hoax....I just think he's invested too much of his ego to suddenly proclaim that the penny has dropped. That and the little money earners he's setup on the subject.

[JayUtah]

Maybe to entice the 'master' to the forum, somebody should start a thread detailing all his errors, downright lies and deliberate omissions. He is more concerned about not losing face and appeasing his army of trolls. I no longer think he believes in the hoax....I just think he's invested too much of his ego to suddenly proclaim that the penny has dropped. That and the little money earners he's setup on the subject.

I doubt he really ever did, except as a springboard to appease his insatiable ego.  I for one do not expend a great deal of time in the appeasement of that ego.

[Mag40]

I wasn't able to bring myself to watch JWs entire response video as, much like Rene's geiger counters, my BS meter found itself oversaturated within 3 minutes.

There is a technical solution to that. Just open the box, cut the wires between the sensor and the meter, and you might have achieved enough resistance to lower the readout to something tolerable.

Edit: You'll need to find the CommonSense and AdvancedKnowledge and disconnect those too.

Normally I quite like Australian accents, but there is something about his intonation that just grates on my nerves. Even making basic statements, he still manages to add this weird inflection that makes them sound suspicious.

I've sat through all 4 videos......2 of them were informative and jovial, the other 2 less so.

[Echnaton]

I doubt he really ever did, except as a springboard to appease his insatiable ego.  I for one do not expend a great deal of time in the appeasement of that ego.

I, for one, will welcome out insatiable ego overlord, if he ever bothers shows up.

[JayUtah]

As RAF notes in the other thread, that's highly unlikely.  Jarrah has a hard time remaining civil in debate, and this undoes him more often than his patent incompetence in science and engineering.

He contacted me a few years ago via email, desiring to debate his latest drivel via email.  I told him for reasons of convenience and honesty that I don't debate via email -- too easy for one party to misrepresent the discussion later in public, and also because I dislike having to answer the same questions over and over privately.  When I answer a question in a public forum, it remains available for later readers who need it.  I don't have to repeat it.  I told him further that, given his history of incivility, I would debate him only under the auspices of a third-party moderator.

So he popped up unannounced at IMDb some weeks later and asked if that constituted a suitable forum.  Since IMDb enforces basic civil conduct, I agreed.  You can read the debate for yourself, so I don't need to characterize it here.  But as he was being backed into a corner regarding his awkwardly inexpert interpretation of space radiation data, he offered one morning a typical effluence of profanity and insults, which was promptly reported by another reader and removed by the moderator.  Although Jarrah has subsequently insinuated his post was "censored," and contained devastating arguments that I somehow caused to be removed, he knows exactly why it was removed:  he re-posted the same material later, with the insults and foul language removed.

This is what leads me to believe he will never again try to debate in a public forum that he cannot control, and which will require him to refrain from pointless trash-talking.

[Abaddon]

As RAF notes in the other thread, that's highly unlikely.  Jarrah has a hard time remaining civil in debate, and this undoes him more often than his patent incompetence in science and engineering.

Jarrah will not debate in any forum where he cannot delete posts he does not like.

He contacted me a few years ago via email, desiring to debate his latest drivel via email.  I told him for reasons of convenience and honesty that I don't debate via email -- too easy for one party to misrepresent the discussion later in public, and also because I dislike having to answer the same questions over and over privately.  When I answer a question in a public forum, it remains available for later readers who need it.  I don't have to repeat it.  I told him further that, given his history of incivility, I would debate him only under the auspices of a third-party moderator.

By removing insult from his armory, he found himself entirely disarmed. That is why he won't come here. Or any other honest forum.

So he popped up unannounced at IMDb some weeks later and asked if that constituted a suitable forum.  Since IMDb enforces basic civil conduct, I agreed.  You can read the debate for yourself, so I don't need to characterize it here.  But as he was being backed into a corner regarding his awkwardly inexpert interpretation of space radiation data, he offered one morning a typical effluence of profanity and insults, which was promptly reported by another reader and removed by the moderator.  Although Jarrah has subsequently insinuated his post was "censored," and contained devastating arguments that I somehow caused to be removed, he knows exactly why it was removed:  he re-posted the same material later, with the insults and foul language removed.

And I lurked that thread. Jarrah became more and more shrill. It was informative to watch how he had no self control, and could not help ramping up to the nonsense.

This is what leads me to believe he will never again try to debate in a public forum that he cannot control, and which will require him to refrain from pointless trash-talking.

I differ with you there. He would be entirely happy to engage in any public debate over which he has full editorial control. What does that tell you?

[smartcooky]

I've sat through all 4 videos......2 of them were informative and jovial, the other 2 less so.

While watching his videos, it occurred to me that he seems to be quite level headed... I could tell this because it was quite apparent that he dribbled out of both sides of his mouth at the same time.