View Active Topics          Latest 100 Topics          View Your Posts          Switch to Mobile

In a Perfect World

Discuss Conspiracies and Cover Ups - e.g. 9/11 Truth, JFK Assassination, New World Order, Roswell, Moon Hoax, Secret Societies, etc. whatever conspiracy floats your boat.

Re: Moon Landing Hoax - Evidence, Logic and Common Sense

Postby Arouet » 21 Dec 2012, 21:33

Since it seems that the consensus seems to be to approach this topic haphazardly in a scattergun manner - I'm out. If you guys want to do it the way I suggested, let me know. This way will go nowhere.
User avatar
Arouet
 
Posts: 2544
Joined: 07 Aug 2010, 03:07






Re: Moon Landing Hoax - Evidence, Logic and Common Sense

Postby really? » 21 Dec 2012, 21:57

I'm walking too.
really?
 
Posts: 1009
Joined: 06 Mar 2010, 20:58

Re: Moon Landing Hoax - Evidence, Logic and Common Sense

Postby Arouet » 21 Dec 2012, 22:50

Holy shit 23! Your avatar is HUGE!
User avatar
Arouet
 
Posts: 2544
Joined: 07 Aug 2010, 03:07

Re: Moon Landing Hoax - Evidence, Logic and Common Sense

Postby The23rdman » 21 Dec 2012, 22:53

I know, I assumed the forum would shrink it. I've only just gotten back to my pc to sort it out. Is it giving you nightmares?
If you think you know what's going on you're probably full of shit - Robert Anton Wilson
User avatar
The23rdman
 
Posts: 97
Joined: 16 Dec 2012, 17:57

Re: Moon Landing Hoax - Evidence, Logic and Common Sense

Postby The23rdman » 21 Dec 2012, 22:55

Sorted. ;)
If you think you know what's going on you're probably full of shit - Robert Anton Wilson
User avatar
The23rdman
 
Posts: 97
Joined: 16 Dec 2012, 17:57

Re: Moon Landing Hoax - Evidence, Logic and Common Sense

Postby NinjaPuppy » 21 Dec 2012, 22:56

Arouet wrote:Since it seems that the consensus seems to be to approach this topic haphazardly in a scattergun manner - I'm out.

Consensus? As in CTers who want to discuss a CT in a CT based topic? OMG, the nerve! :lol:

Arouet wrote:If you guys want to do it the way I suggested, let me know.

Golly gee Arouet, this is the second time in 24 hours that I've noticed a request to do it the way that you suggest if the opposition want to play. However, if you feel that taking your marble and going home is what is best for you, I understand.

Arouet wrote:This way will go nowhere.

What way? Discussion of information on an internet bulletin board? The discussion of this information and these photographs can go anywhere the participants want. It all depends on the quality of the information.

The problem is not a scattergun manner. It's that we don't have sub-forums that would break down each item in it's own little compartment. We do the best we can with what we have and you can certainly take one bite of something and create a new topic designed and worded to keep any discussion more confined.
User avatar
NinjaPuppy
 
Posts: 4002
Joined: 28 Jul 2009, 20:44

Re: Moon Landing Hoax - Evidence, Logic and Common Sense

Postby NinjaPuppy » 21 Dec 2012, 22:56

Arouet wrote:Holy shit 23! Your avatar is HUGE!

Size IS everything. :lol:
Now it's not as impressive. The overall size of that pic made it more intense.
User avatar
NinjaPuppy
 
Posts: 4002
Joined: 28 Jul 2009, 20:44

Re: Moon Landing Hoax - Evidence, Logic and Common Sense

Postby The23rdman » 21 Dec 2012, 23:12

NinjaPuppy wrote:
Arouet wrote:Holy shit 23! Your avatar is HUGE!

Size IS everything. :lol:
Now it's not as impressive. The overall size of that pic made it more intense.


It made me feel a little self-conscious. :P
If you think you know what's going on you're probably full of shit - Robert Anton Wilson
User avatar
The23rdman
 
Posts: 97
Joined: 16 Dec 2012, 17:57

Re: Moon Landing Hoax - Evidence, Logic and Common Sense

Postby Arouet » 21 Dec 2012, 23:18

NinjaPuppy wrote:Golly gee Arouet, this is the second time in 24 hours that I've noticed a request to do it the way that you suggest if the opposition want to play. However, if you feel that taking your marble and going home is what is best for you, I understand.


heh, I suppose so, though for different reasons. I'm not much into conspiracy theories generally and decided to dip my toe into this one to try it out. Perhaps its unfair of me to say "I'll only discuss it if you do it my way!" But it only seems worth if we take a focussed approach. The scattergun approach is, imo, virtually guaranteed to lead nowhere productive. I'm not interested in having a ton of stuff thrown at me with the question: "so what do you think of all that? huh?" When too much information is thrown at once, the tendency is to really deal with non of it!


The problem is not a scattergun manner. It's that we don't have sub-forums that would break down each item in it's own little compartment. We do the best we can with what we have and you can certainly take one bite of something and create a new topic designed and worded to keep any discussion more confined.



That's a fair point! I'll start a new thread at some point today, focussing just on the radiation issue.
User avatar
Arouet
 
Posts: 2544
Joined: 07 Aug 2010, 03:07

Re: Moon Landing Hoax - Evidence, Logic and Common Sense

Postby The23rdman » 21 Dec 2012, 23:22

Arouet wrote:
NinjaPuppy wrote:Golly gee Arouet, this is the second time in 24 hours that I've noticed a request to do it the way that you suggest if the opposition want to play. However, if you feel that taking your marble and going home is what is best for you, I understand.


heh, I suppose so, though for different reasons. I'm not much into conspiracy theories generally and decided to dip my toe into this one to try it out. Perhaps its unfair of me to say "I'll only discuss it if you do it my way!" But it only seems worth if we take a focussed approach. The scattergun approach is, imo, virtually guaranteed to lead nowhere productive. I'm not interested in having a ton of stuff thrown at me with the question: "so what do you think of all that? huh?" When too much information is thrown at once, the tendency is to really deal with non of it!


The problem is not a scattergun manner. It's that we don't have sub-forums that would break down each item in it's own little compartment. We do the best we can with what we have and you can certainly take one bite of something and create a new topic designed and worded to keep any discussion more confined.



That's a fair point! I'll start a new thread at some point today, focussing just on the radiation issue.


I have to say that I agree about the massive info dumps some people post. Who really has time to sit and watch half a dozen youtube videos in a row? I like to watch the odd one, but they almost never share their sources or back their claims up so they can only ever be interesting entertainment or a point to begin proper research. To the guys who post videos as answers to skeptical questions I say that you are wasting everyone's time. You are NEVER EVER going to convince anyone with a brain that that is proof of anything at all.
If you think you know what's going on you're probably full of shit - Robert Anton Wilson
User avatar
The23rdman
 
Posts: 97
Joined: 16 Dec 2012, 17:57

Re: Moon Landing Hoax - Evidence, Logic and Common Sense

Postby NinjaPuppy » 21 Dec 2012, 23:35

Arouet wrote:
NinjaPuppy wrote:The problem is not a scattergun manner. It's that we don't have sub-forums that would break down each item in it's own little compartment. We do the best we can with what we have and you can certainly take one bite of something and create a new topic designed and worded to keep any discussion more confined.


That's a fair point! I'll start a new thread at some point today, focussing just on the radiation issue.

Feel free to define any of your discussion parameters in the OP.
[Example: For discussion of the radiation issue only. Please rebut with your personal commentary but also post links to your source information. YouTube videos will not be taken seriously]

Or whatever floats your boat when it comes to designing a topic thread that you feel will work best for you.
User avatar
NinjaPuppy
 
Posts: 4002
Joined: 28 Jul 2009, 20:44

Re: Moon Landing Hoax - Evidence, Logic and Common Sense

Postby NinjaPuppy » 21 Dec 2012, 23:49

The23rdman wrote:I have to say that I agree about the massive info dumps some people post. Who really has time to sit and watch half a dozen youtube videos in a row?

You mean that you have one of those things called, "a life"?

Yes, keeping up with the hours and hours (heck...days and days) it would take to watch the amount of various YouTube videos that can get slapped up in a mere matter of minutes around here would be impossible. They are put up for anyone who might be interested and as I'm sure you already know....not required viewing. I've watched many of them and I'd have to say that I find some of them very informative and some merely entertaining.

The23rdman wrote:I like to watch the odd one, but they almost never share their sources or back their claims up so they can only ever be interesting entertainment or a point to begin proper research. To the guys who post videos as answers to skeptical questions I say that you are wasting everyone's time. You are NEVER EVER going to convince anyone with a brain that that is proof of anything at all.

That only applies to video information that we don't know much about. If I were to slap up a video that contained erroneous facts about photography, you'd probably be able to pick it apart from word one.

I prefer it when a specific item is pointed out in a video by using the time stamps.
Ex: My question is about overexposure, it starts at 1min.44 seconds on this video with an example of the lunar blah blah and stars.
This way you can see the frame(s) in question for an actually look at what someone is talking about without trying to decipher it via a text explanation.
User avatar
NinjaPuppy
 
Posts: 4002
Joined: 28 Jul 2009, 20:44

Re: Moon Landing Hoax - Evidence, Logic and Common Sense

Postby The23rdman » 22 Dec 2012, 00:04

NinjaPuppy wrote:
The23rdman wrote:I have to say that I agree about the massive info dumps some people post. Who really has time to sit and watch half a dozen youtube videos in a row?

You mean that you have one of those things called, "a life"?

Well, I have a two year old so it would be fairer to say I had a life and I now have a dictator to serve.

Yes, keeping up with the hours and hours (heck...days and days) it would take to watch the amount of various YouTube videos that can get slapped up in a mere matter of minutes around here would be impossible. They are put up for anyone who might be interested and as I'm sure you already know....not required viewing. I've watched many of them and I'd have to say that I find some of them very informative and some merely entertaining.

The23rdman wrote:I like to watch the odd one, but they almost never share their sources or back their claims up so they can only ever be interesting entertainment or a point to begin proper research. To the guys who post videos as answers to skeptical questions I say that you are wasting everyone's time. You are NEVER EVER going to convince anyone with a brain that that is proof of anything at all.

That only applies to video information that we don't know much about. If I were to slap up a video that contained erroneous facts about photography, you'd probably be able to pick it apart from word one.

Of course, but the majority of videos are about contentious issues rather than easily verifiable facts. Saying that though, you should see the circular arguments you get about simple things like depth of field on photography forums. Some people will argue with their own reflection,

I prefer it when a specific item is pointed out in a video by using the time stamps.
Ex: My question is about overexposure, it starts at 1min.44 seconds on this video with an example of the lunar blah blah and stars.
This way you can see the frame(s) in question for an actually look at what someone is talking about without trying to decipher it via a text explanation.

That makes perfect sense and gives people a chance to dip in and contribute.

If you think you know what's going on you're probably full of shit - Robert Anton Wilson
User avatar
The23rdman
 
Posts: 97
Joined: 16 Dec 2012, 17:57

Re: Moon Landing Hoax - Evidence, Logic and Common Sense

Postby Arouet » 22 Dec 2012, 00:45

The other problem with videos is that they are really hard to discuss in a forum. With text you can cut and paste and link to the exact spot. You can read it as many times as you need to to make sure you understand it. You can search the documents. You can skim the parts you're not interested in. It's easy to stop and start.

Videos are just a pain to deal with, they are easy to misinterpret or misremember, and hard to quote.

I agree with the above: post videos just for people's general interest, they can be good primers to get ideas about further research, and they can be entertaining, but the serious discussion should revolve around published articles..
User avatar
Arouet
 
Posts: 2544
Joined: 07 Aug 2010, 03:07

Re: Moon Landing Hoax - Evidence, Logic and Common Sense

Postby The23rdman » 22 Dec 2012, 03:14

Arouet wrote:The other problem with videos is that they are really hard to discuss in a forum. With text you can cut and paste and link to the exact spot. You can read it as many times as you need to to make sure you understand it. You can search the documents. You can skim the parts you're not interested in. It's easy to stop and start.

Videos are just a pain to deal with, they are easy to misinterpret or misremember, and hard to quote.

I agree with the above: post videos just for people's general interest, they can be good primers to get ideas about further research, and they can be entertaining, but the serious discussion should revolve around published articles..


As Ninja pointed out you can now link to specific parts of a video on YouTube.
If you think you know what's going on you're probably full of shit - Robert Anton Wilson
User avatar
The23rdman
 
Posts: 97
Joined: 16 Dec 2012, 17:57

Next

Return to Conspiracies / Cover Ups

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests