Good books about the moon landings hoax?

[Andromeda]

A two-hour essay of twenty points made up out of your head is not a "thesis" nor something you would be awarded a degree solely on the basis of.

Which university does he claim to have attended?

[Jockndoris]

Here is my response to Burn's alleged physics thesis, from pp. 11-13 of Haunted by Neil Armstrong.

http://www.clavius.org/bibburnsthesis.html

None of these claims rests on a supernatural premise.  It is his recollection of a paper he wrote in 1963 for a physics degree, and which he still stands by as evidence the Moon landings must have been hoaxed because they were supposedly impossible.

JayUtay
Thank you very much for sending your comments on the Burns thesis  to the Clavius website.
This must have been most satisfying - Well worth a read although I only skimmed the 17 pages.  I am sure the experts there will all be most interested and probably want to buy the book to see the real thing!!
Jockndoris

[Jockndoris]

A discussion is not repeatedly claiming I'm a liar, Illiterate, and someone else in disguise, repeatedly and childishly no matter how many times I state otherwise. You're all attacking me and then feigning 'shock and disgust' when I call you all out on it.

Go back and read the first few pages of this thread where you were given a warm welcome, some friendly advice, references to materials you asked for -- even though we disagree with them -- and a promise for further help.  Can you explain why, after reading those initial posts, you would think that the accuracy and historical validity of books on this subject would not be the principal topic of discussion?

Things deteriorated only when your behavior became suspicious, for the reasons given.  Rather than address those reasons, you respond only with rapidly increasing indignation and by digging in your heels over your right to advocate in this forum any way you feel like it.

JayUtah
I see you have been having a rare old spat with skeptic_UK , while I was playing golf yesterday (not this time with astronauts but in a seniors’ match highly contested as always).  I have been keeping a tally on the points scored between you and it seems to me to be about even stevens at the moment. Jockndoris

[Jockndoris]

...why should I be bothered by something I don't care about just to satisfy you?

See my previous post...this is a discussion board, and if you don't want to participate, don't.

RAF
Do I infer from your user name that you may be part of the military in the UK ?
If so please send me an snailmail address by email and I will send you a complimentary copy of the book for you to enjoy .
Jockndoris

[Andromeda]

No-one here wants your book, Jockndoris.

Again, your are insisting on trying to sell your book and take potshots at contributors here - neither of which is appropriate.

Why?  What do you get out of it?  I don't think for a minute that you don't know Jay runs Clavius, or that he in any way liked your book.  Your assertions on that front just don't ring true and we all know it.  So why are you here?

[frenat]

Here is my response to Burn's alleged physics thesis, from pp. 11-13 of Haunted by Neil Armstrong.

http://www.clavius.org/bibburnsthesis.html

None of these claims rests on a supernatural premise.  It is his recollection of a paper he wrote in 1963 for a physics degree, and which he still stands by as evidence the Moon landings must have been hoaxed because they were supposedly impossible.

JayUtay
Thank you very much for sending your comments on the Burns thesis  to the Clavius website.
This must have been most satisfying - Well worth a read although I only skimmed the 17 pages.  I am sure the experts there will all be most interested and probably want to buy the book to see the real thing!!
Jockndoris

Do you try hard to be this delusional or does it come naturally?

[twik]

Here is my response to Burn's alleged physics thesis, from pp. 11-13 of Haunted by Neil Armstrong.

The funniest part for me is this:

"Coming up with a plan that everyone can get behind is hugely difficult."

That's pretty much what all accountants, following their country's version of "Generally accepted accounting principles" do, isn't it?

Well, I for one am glad that it's so difficult for  leaders of major countries to formulate plans that "everyone" can get behind, including the military and leaders of industry.

Because otherwise we'd be stuck having wars and stuff, and that would be awful.

[Dr_Orpheus]

Jockndoris since you are back could you clear up a couple of things?   Did you claim in your book to be writing programs in QuickBasic around the time Apollo 11 landed on the moon?   Why didn't you mention anything about your 1963 physics thesis in any of the posts you made on this board two years ago? 

[JayUtah]

Thank you very much for sending your comments on the Burns thesis  to the Clavius website.

I didn't "send" it.  I own the site.  That's where I put charlatans like you to the test to show whether or not they stand up to rigorous scrutiny.

This must have been most satisfying - Well worth a read although I only skimmed the 17 pages.

If you only skimmed it then obviously it's not "well worth a read" to you.  I would think you'd be more interested than that in page that proves to the world what a bald-faced liar you are.   Especially since, in your personal letter to me, you wrote that you had "expected some wonderful new breakthrough" that would allow people to travel to the Moon.  Now the whole world can see your dismissal when those breakthroughs are laid out right before your eyes.

I challenge you to defend your "thesis" here.  Put up or shut up.

I am sure the experts there will all be most interested and probably want to buy the book to see the real thing!!

I have to agree with my colleague:  are you seriously this delusional, or is this just some act?  No one wants your book, Burns.  It's nothing but lies, and you know it.

I am the expert at Clavius.  I can guarantee no one associated with my site wants the slightest thing to do with your books.

[theteacher]

Here is my response to Burn's alleged physics thesis, from pp. 11-13 of Haunted by Neil Armstrong.

http://www.clavius.org/bibburnsthesis.html

Really impressive. Do you never sleep? :-)

Burns here simply states the requirements a successful rocket must meet. That doesn't prove
that any given rocket won't able to meet them.

"be" missing?

Since Burns doesn't list his assumptions or provide any further information or calculations,
so we cannot determine where this absurd fatalistic prediction comes from.

Either "Since" or "so". Not both, I guess?

Far better it was to engineer the system to be operated either locally or remotely, then to use a hybrid method in practice to provide redundancy.

Then -> than

By 1963, American spacecraft had to operate autonously.

Autonomously?

[JayUtah]

I see you have been having a rare old spat with skeptic_UK , while I was playing golf yesterday (not this time with astronauts but in a seniors’ match highly contested as always).  I have been keeping a tally on the points scored between you and it seems to me to be about even stevens at the moment.

As if your judgment were worth anything.

I find it highly revealing that you gloss over and then subsequently ignore a documented, systematic dismantling of your claims to have earned a physics degree -- a claim you publish and sell for money.  But for some reason you take enough interest in my conversation with a total stranger to keep score.

Why is that?

[JayUtah]

Really impressive. Do you never sleep? :-)

Nope.  Nor proofread, apparently. 

[JayUtah]

Did you claim in your book to be writing programs in QuickBasic around the time Apollo 11 landed on the moon?

Yes, he does.

From p. 16, "Being interested enough to write my own programmes in Quick Basic, I became Chief Accountant and Company Secretary and had a fine office in Maitland and an even finer car."  He goes on at length about the car.  Then some tedious details about accounting practice.  Then two-thirds down the page:  "It was during this time early in 1969 that I was sent by my company ... to study their computer and accounting systems." (emphasis added)

Why didn't you mention anything about your 1963 physics thesis in any of the posts you made on this board two years ago?

I think that's fairly apparent.  He invented the story about the physics degree for the book, which he hadn't yet written when he appeared here earlier.

[gillianren]

I don't know why this point popped into my head particularly, but with that business about 'passing something between moving cars' (my paraphrasing) being impossible in Burns' mind... does he not believe in aircraft being refuelled in flight then?  Such a thing was done quite commonly by the time he claims to have produced his essay, so why would he be so sure that such and similar procedures were impossible?

Heck, both Dr. Strangelove and The Starfighters came out right around then, and both feature plenty of footage of jets refueling.  In one of them, the implied eroticism is even deliberate!

[JayUtah]

A two-hour essay of twenty points made up out of your head is not a "thesis" nor something you would be awarded a degree solely on the basis of.

Which university does he claim to have attended?

St. Andrews, ostensibly the one in Scotland.