YT debunker videos reference

[Andromeda]

Do these people actually know what irrefutable means?

To them it means "I'm right, and you're wrong - no matter how much you can prove your point".

But they(Allen, Percy, Sibrel etal) are in the business of selling DVD's, magazines etc. and can't very well say "well I guess I'm wrong" don't buy my videos or invite me to do anymore TV specials

I wonder if they have ever realised that they are wrong, but it's gone too far for them to stop.

Hasn't David Percy pretty much disappeared now?

[Luke Pemberton]

I wonder if they have ever realised that they are wrong, but it's gone too far for them to stop.

I think quite a few reach the point where they either (a) know they are wrong (b) have grown bored (c) have grown up and moved on. Either way they simply fade away and take no further part. Friends and I were really interested in the JFK conspiracy as teenagers, but then we discovered more grown up activities. It was soon forgotten.

It had its moment on TV with the Fox special, and was exploited for a quick buck. I think given the snake oil salesman that Percy is, he may have just moved on to pastures new given that no one seems to be talking about the hoax, he might have spun a good yarn about Apollo to make a few quid, but I don't think there's much return in it for him now, so why waste time?

[JayUtah]

Percy is all but gone.  Mary Bennett has reappeared at Aulis, however.

[JayUtah]

That's funny, the second Percy uttered that "small pinprick of light if it was the sun nonsense," I immediately thought of getting blinded by the sun reflecting off of cars in front of me driving home from work everyday.

My commute is north-south, so I get the sun through the side window.  But yes, years ago I posted pictures of the sun reflecting off windshields to show the expected effect.  Naturally Percy ignored it.  Mercenary wretch that he is, his answer to everything was that you had to buy all his materials and study them in order to understand his claims fully.

Do these people actually know what irrefutable means?

They know what they mean by it.  It's pure hyperbole, meant to intimidate.  They don't want fence-sitters going off and doing their own experiments or thinking critically about it.  I would say it's also self-delusion, but you can't convince me after all this that Percy actually believes even one iota of what he preached.

[JayUtah]

But they(Allen, Percy, Sibrel etal) are in the business of selling DVD's, magazines etc. and can't very well say "well I guess I'm wrong" don't buy my videos or invite me to do anymore TV specials

Sibrel charges too much for TV appearances.  Most independent production companies won't pay such exorbitant fees.  Thankfully I work pro bono for those purposes.

Percy has been invited twice by independent producers to defend his claims on television.  And he refused both times.  None of these people want a fair debate of their claims; they want attention to them and them alone, and will talk only when they control the environment and circumstances.

As I wrote above, I can't believe David Percy buys into anything he says about Apollo.  If you ask me, he knows full well he's been soundly refuted.  He first tried his photographic "analysis" in The Fortean Times.  You could argue that would have been a reasonably sympathetic argument, but according to their editors they received the most feedback ever for that article, overwhelmingly negative.  Photographers and others wrote in and shredded Percy's claims.

Undeterred, he reprinted his "photo rules" almost verbatim in Dark Moon, and expanded upon them in his video.  These were the rules Percy said genuine photos had to obey, and which Apollo photos allegedly broke.  At that time, aulis.com had a forum, and we once again shredded his claims on it.  Suddenly the forum was disabled "for maintenance," and after six months disappeared altogether.  I guess having all those rebuttals on his site was cutting into his sales.  But even though Percy made the criticism disappear, he cherry-picked a few statements from the deleted posts, from "Jay." to use as straw men in new posts at Aulis.

Aulis.com then instigated a moderated guestbook, ostensibly to let people leave encouraging messages.  Gradually the moderators began to allow "questions," which were generally those that could be answered by pat nonsense.  (Sibrel used this technique in his screenings; the audience could ask questions, each member limited to one question only with no followup, to which Sibrel would just spin a convincing-sounding nonsense answer.)  The guestbook moderator allowed followups only if it provided Percy a way to shine further.  The last question I managed to get posted at the guestbook asked why some of Percy's photos meant to be examples of photo rules actually broke some of the other rules they weren't meant to exemplify.  That question was up for a day or so, and then the entire guestbook disappeared without explanation.

David Percy (or anyone from Aulis) was invited by UK Channel 4 to be on the same program I was on -- the one where we went out to the desert and physically demonstrated how much of Percy's claims were nonsense.  The producers told me Percy declined.  But sure enough, a cherry-picked response appeared on Aulis a few days after it aired in the European market.  Obviously Percy had somewhat to say, but couldn't stomach having someone besides him control the presentation.

Over the years I and others thoroughly debunked Percy's nonsense, including the so-called "Una Ronald" story.  Obviously Percy didn't think through a lot of it when he invented it out of whole cloth -- which he almost certainly did.  Strangely enough, in the second edition of Dark Moon the revised Una Ronald story is all patched up to account for all his critics' claims.  Not really the kind of thing you can do credibly when you're allegedly relying on external witnesses.  Did the witness recant?  What's going on here?

[bknight]

But they(Allen, Percy, Sibrel etal) are in the business of selling DVD's, magazines etc. and can't very well say "well I guess I'm wrong" don't buy my videos or invite me to do anymore TV specials

Sibrel charges too much for TV appearances.  Most independent production companies won't pay such exorbitant fees.  Thankfully I work pro bono for those purposes.

Percy has been invited twice by independent producers to defend his claims on television.  And he refused both times.  None of these people want a fair debate of their claims; they want attention to them and them alone, and will talk only when they control the environment and circumstances.

As I wrote above, I can't believe David Percy buys into anything he says about Apollo.  If you ask me, he knows full well he's been soundly refuted.  He first tried his photographic "analysis" in The Fortean Times.  You could argue that would have been a reasonably sympathetic argument, but according to their editors they received the most feedback ever for that article, overwhelmingly negative.  Photographers and others wrote in and shredded Percy's claims.

Undeterred, he reprinted his "photo rules" almost verbatim in Dark Moon, and expanded upon them in his video.  These were the rules Percy said genuine photos had to obey, and which Apollo photos allegedly broke.  At that time, aulis.com had a forum, and we once again shredded his claims on it.  Suddenly the forum was disabled "for maintenance," and after six months disappeared altogether.  I guess having all those rebuttals on his site was cutting into his sales.  But even though Percy made the criticism disappear, he cherry-picked a few statements from the deleted posts, from "Jay." to use as straw men in new posts at Aulis.

Aulis.com then instigated a moderated guestbook, ostensibly to let people leave encouraging messages.  Gradually the moderators began to allow "questions," which were generally those that could be answered by pat nonsense.  (Sibrel used this technique in his screenings; the audience could ask questions, each member limited to one question only with no followup, to which Sibrel would just spin a convincing-sounding nonsense answer.)  The guestbook moderator allowed followups only if it provided Percy a way to shine further.  The last question I managed to get posted at the guestbook asked why some of Percy's photos meant to be examples of photo rules actually broke some of the other rules they weren't meant to exemplify.  That question was up for a day or so, and then the entire guestbook disappeared without explanation.

David Percy (or anyone from Aulis) was invited by UK Channel 4 to be on the same program I was on -- the one where we went out to the desert and physically demonstrated how much of Percy's claims were nonsense.  The producers told me Percy declined.  But sure enough, a cherry-picked response appeared on Aulis a few days after it aired in the European market.  Obviously Percy had somewhat to say, but couldn't stomach having someone besides him control the presentation.

Over the years I and others thoroughly debunked Percy's nonsense, including the so-called "Una Ronald" story.  Obviously Percy didn't think through a lot of it when he invented it out of whole cloth -- which he almost certainly did.  Strangely enough, in the second edition of Dark Moon the revised Una Ronald story is all patched up to account for all his critics' claims.  Not really the kind of thing you can do credibly when you're allegedly relying on external witnesses.  Did the witness recant?  What's going on here?

I'm very glad you did that show.  I grew up in the 60's and knew that Apollo happened.  Many of the anomalies I could not understand the logic to defeat them.  So I watched and really learned quite a bit about the mechanics of debunking.
Still they have seduced a number of people into their ideas.  Some as Luke said are novices that don't know the why's(like me) and the hard core that won't accept logic, reason and calculations because "they know they are right".
Keep up the good work to all and maybe some will be brought out of the darkness or perhaps never falling into the hole.

[Tedward]

I remember that Channel 4 program. The billing and teases had me suspicious, but the program was a relief when I sat down to watch it. I had to put away the rotten vegetables I had lined up for the TV.

[Luke Pemberton]

I remember that Channel 4 program. The billing and teases had me suspicious, but the program was a relief when I sat down to watch it. I had to put away the rotten vegetables I had lined up for the TV.

Did Neil Morrisey narrate the show or was that a different one?

[Tedward]

I remember that Channel 4 program. The billing and teases had me suspicious, but the program was a relief when I sat down to watch it. I had to put away the rotten vegetables I had lined up for the TV.

Did Neil Morrisey narrate the show or was that a different one?

Cannot remember.

More recently I fear, this channel would not do such a thing? Certainly the programming quality has dropped.

[JayUtah]

I remember that Channel 4 program. The billing and teases had me suspicious, but the program was a relief when I sat down to watch it. I had to put away the rotten vegetables I had lined up for the TV.

I had a few phone calls with the producers before I agreed to do the program.  Brian O'Leary's experience was fresh on my mind, and I certainly didn't want to end up being shanghai'ed on international television.  They gave me a list of other experts they would be consulting, among them James Oberg.  So I agreed.  Prior to shooting, we had a meeting to discuss the specific claims I would be asked to address, and to devise the experiments we could do with the equipment the producers had arranged for:  grip crews who worked on From the Earth to the Moon, a "standard" Hollywood grip truck and generator, a flag and flagpole, the Apollo-modified Hasselblad camera, and a space suit replica from Global Effects (Apollo 13 and From the Earth to the Moon).  It was at this time that the producers informed me David Percy had been invited to participate but had declined.  They were rather disappointed, as it would have been a very easy shoot for them compared to others.

Bart Sibrel is now claiming he was asked to be on the show, but that his arguments were so devastating that they edited out his part.  That is a bald-faced lie.  In the same meeting, the producers told me Sibrel had demanded an exorbitant appearance fee, which they had no intention of paying.  They were quite amused at his hubris in asking it.  But the gist of that part of the meeting was their worry that without the proponents themselves to present and defend their claims, their program would lack credibility.  That was one of the reasons they reached out specifically to me:  they believed I could fairly and accurately represent the hoax claims while at the same time providing a scientific explanation as well as a practical demonstration of their errors.

Did Neil Morrisey narrate the show or was that a different one?

Somewhere in my library I have a VHS NTSC copy of the program that they sent me, since it was unclear whether it would ever air in the United States market.  It has the original English narration, but I wouldn't know his voice.  (When they release a program in a U.S. market, they almost always re-record the narration with an American voice actor.)  The name sounds familiar, but I can't remember if it's for that reason.

More recently I fear, this channel would not do such a thing?

Not a chance.  As I've said before, I was involved with a long-term project with Lewis Black and a producer I knew for a debunking series on the former History Channel.  The project had been green-lighted and the pilot had been shot and edited.  But then History Channel changed hands and the project was canceled.  Eh, this is why a lot of us don't particularly care for the Hollywood system.

The same production team has gone on to produce several episodes of The Truth Behind..., and not all of them are as charitable to science as I would like.  But I do watch them, and I am quite pleased with the episode I helped them with.

[Tedward]

I did watch another show recently and it is rather telling that they will edit it for the watching. That is to say get them in and get the popcorn out, sod the reality. The air time was given to the usual suspects then rebuttals from others. It was on CH5 for the UK folk, about UFO. The content aside, it was no real work of art from either side but pandered to the ratings. Last few years this seems to be the case.

Still, we get Star Gazing live so on balance some channels are still doing the good stuff. Need to watch the pluto program on catch up.