SCEPCOP Forum

Interesting presentation, especially concerning the plasticity of pseudoscep 'logic':

"Bart Winfield Sibrel has been making moving image productions for thirteen years. His national credits include work for NBC, CNN, The Nashville Network (TNN), The Learning Channel (TLC), and the Discovery Channel. His awards from the American Motion Picture Society include Best Cinematography, Best Editing, and two Top Ten awards. He has also won Videomaker's Magazine's Best Drama award. Only 10% of the population agrees. Investigative journalist Bart Sibrel will explain why, as well as why he is sure we never actually went. A portion of Mr. Sibrel's presentation to your audience will be a guided tour through his interviews and confrontations with nine Apollo astronauts: William Anders (Apollo 8), Neil Armstrong (Apollo 11), Buzz Aldrin (Apollo 11), Michael Collins (Apollo 11), Alan Bean (Apollo 12), Ed Mitchell (Apollo 14), Al Worden (Apollo 15), John Young (Apollo 16) and Eugene Cernan (Apollo 17). "

Evidence that we went:
1. Recent footage from Lunar missions shw the remains of the moon debris.
2. Every scientist who has examined the hundreds of pounds of moonrocks say they came from the moon. Show me evidence from any academic who has exhamined them who says the astronauts did not bring them back.
3. Scientists around the globe use the laser mirrors that were placed on the moon and they continue to use them for measurements. Show me any explanation as to how these mirrors got there without Apollo astronauts.

Quite frankly, the evidence that we went to the moon is more solid than most any other "conspiracy" out there.

Allright: why don't we pick one element from the moon debate and look into it in more detail?

There aren't any 'true experts' you can trust in this, and even when relatively well-meaning, 'experts' have been shown to be wrong time and time again in history. I say this to question ProfWag's discourse about 'expertism', not to address which of the supposed 'experts' he is referencing re Apollo, which is none of them. He hasn't looked anything up, he's just sitting back and trolling. I made my mind up when I looked at the evidence, the same evidence is arrayed before ProfWag but apparently he can't see anything in it.

Ok, ProfWag. Instead of Leggos how about Lincoln Logs? Just Kidding. Actually, it was Arouet who suggested taking one piece of evidence and running with it. My biggest contention with Apollo is the radiation issue. ProfWag, have you gone through White's "Radiation Anomaly" series?