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

Jarrah White - The Leading Expert in the Moon Hoax Debate

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.

Jarrah White's new Moonfaker website!

Postby Scepcop » 21 Aug 2011, 10:33

Check this out. Jarrah White's new website is up and running! It has an intro too.

http://www.moonfaker.com/

Here is his extensive FAQ page that answers key questions about the moon hoax with scientific factual precision and logic.

http://www.moonfaker.com/faqs.html

Interviews with Jarrah White that you can download:

http://www.moonfaker.com/interviews.html

Here are some funny comic strips from his site.

Image

Image

Jarrah's YouTube Channel:

http://www.youtube.com/WhiteJarrah
“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Scepcop
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29






Re: Jarrah White's new Moonfaker website!

Postby ProfWag » 21 Aug 2011, 11:00

Scepcop wrote:Check this out. Jarrah White's new website is up and running! It has an intro too.

Wow! It has an intro too! Unbelievable. Oh look, it has a convenient tab to make a donation too!
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Jarrah White's new Moonfaker website!

Postby Craig Browning » 21 Aug 2011, 23:03

ProfWag wrote:
Scepcop wrote:Check this out. Jarrah White's new website is up and running! It has an intro too.

Wow! It has an intro too! Unbelievable. Oh look, it has a convenient tab to make a donation too!


That does it, I'm starting a church

What hypothetical Conspiracy thingy do you guys think would be the most profitable for a non-profit organization. . . :mrgreen:
User avatar
Craig Browning
 
Posts: 1526
Joined: 13 Feb 2010, 05:20
Location: Northampton, MA

Re: Jarrah White whips NASA reps in Moon Hoax Debate!

Postby Arouet » 22 Aug 2011, 01:44

Maybe get a bio of L. Ron Hubbard? He had it down pat!
User avatar
Arouet
 
Posts: 2544
Joined: 07 Aug 2010, 03:07

Re: Jarrah White - The Leading Expert in the Moon Hoax Debat

Postby Scepcop » 19 Oct 2011, 20:33

Unexplainable questions:

1. The moon has about 1/6 the Earth's gravity. So how come the astronauts in the Apollo footage were moving so slowly and couldn't jump very high? Shouldn't they be moving faster than if they were on Earth and be able to jump much higher as well?

2. NASA today cannot put a man safely in space above 1000 miles from the Earth's surface. So how could it have sent men 240,000 miles to the moon six times with no casualties? It doesn't make sense.

3. How could that little LEM possibly have enough fuel to go 240,000 miles to the moon and all the way back? A 747 airliner doesn't even have a fraction of the fuel that would be required, and the LEM is barely the size of two standard cars! WTF? NASA has never explained that. All it said was "The LEM had enough fuel" and the sheep take it as gospel truth and fact. So dumb. It's like NASA's words create fact and reality and authority=truth. Big major fallacy. Even if it could get to the moon by a miracle, there is no way it could ever go all the way back to Earth. Werner von Braun, former Nazi and NASA's chief rocket scientist, said in his book "Conquest of the Moon" (1953) that the rocket to the moon would have to be taller than the Empire State Building! Yet the LEM is about the size of two cars?! WTF?

4. When the top half of the lunar module blasted off from the moon's surface (with no exhaust), how did it re-dock with the command module orbiting the moon, which was moving at about 4,000 mph? NASA has never really explained that. The chances of docking with it were astronomical. And if they missed the dock, they were dead meat. Plus, in the footage of the lunar module's ascent from the moon, the camera pans up as it ascends. Who was panning the camera on the surface? Or was it remote controlled? Very odd and conspicuous.

5. If we had gone to the moon, there would be flights there everyday now, and moon bases as well. That's how history goes. It's simple logic. So the fact that we haven't gone in 40 years is very suspicious indeed, to any rational thinker with common sense, not the sheep who consider themselves rational but take on faith anything they are told by official sources.

Of course NASA has its convenient copout explanations for not returning to the moon - too expensive, not necessary, no motivation, etc. But the problem is that the pro-Apollo believers harbor the logical fallacy that whatever NASA says MUST be the truth. This is the "authority = truth fallacy". The problem with this is that words are easy and cheap. Anyone can give any convenient excuse for anything. For example, a woman can refuse sex with her husband with the excuse that she has a headache, but that doesn't mean that it's the real reason. Likewise, a woman can turn down a date by saying that she is "busy" or "needs time to herself" as a polite excuse to mask the real reason - that she is not attracted to him. Anyone can make excuses, but that doesn't mean that the excuse is the full truth and that nothing is hidden. Those who commit this fallacy are biased. They badly WANT the moon landing to be real, so they will only see what they want to see, and be unable to examine the evidence objectively without bias.
“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Scepcop
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29

Re: Jarrah White - The Leading Expert in the Moon Hoax Debat

Postby ProfWag » 19 Oct 2011, 20:43

Scepcop wrote:Unexplainable questions:

1. How could that little LEM possibly have enough fuel to go 240,000 miles to the moon and all the way back? A 747 airliner doesn't even have a fraction of the fuel that would be required, and the LEM is barely the size of two standard cars! WTF? NASA has never explained that. All it said was "The LEM had enough fuel" and the sheep take it as gospel truth and fact. So dumb. It's like NASA's words create fact and reality and authority=truth. Big major fallacy.

Please oh please tell me you're not serious with this question Winston. If you or Jarrah don't know about this simple explanation then you have absolutely no business discussing this subject at all. Since you don't appear to have a grasp on space flight, I see no reason wasting my time explaning the other points you attempted to make.
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Jarrah White - The Leading Expert in the Moon Hoax Debat

Postby craig weiler » 19 Oct 2011, 21:53

Answers to questions:

1. You need fuel only to accelerate and decelerate. There is no friction in space so most of the distance was achieved by coasting.

2. You need earth gravity to run like you're on earth. With less gravity comes less traction. Any move you make will have an equal and opposite reaction from your body and without full gravity quick movements of the body will throw a person's balance off. Those were big, bulky suits that did not allow a lot of freedom of movement either.

3. Amazing things happen when people are completely focused on a goal.

4. If you plan very carefully, you can use a minimum of fuel to dock. American space craft have always been quite maneuverable. It's not by chance.

5. The moon flight was very expensive and the result of basic research. Basic research in general has been on a steep decline in the United States for several decades. (Remember the Supercollider in Texas?) We apparently prefer to just give the money to wealthy corporations. We can thank conservative politics for that. Perhaps the discovery of helium isotopes and titanium on the moon will change that. They might be valuable enough to go get them.
A ship in harbor is safe, but that's not what ships are for.
User avatar
craig weiler
 
Posts: 386
Joined: 03 Sep 2011, 12:08
Location: San Francisco Peninsula

Re: Jarrah White - The Leading Expert in the Moon Hoax Debat

Postby Arouet » 20 Oct 2011, 00:27

Scepcop: just curious: why did you think these were unanswered questions? they seem pretty basic for people who know about this stuff.
User avatar
Arouet
 
Posts: 2544
Joined: 07 Aug 2010, 03:07

Re: Jarrah White - The Leading Expert in the Moon Hoax Debat

Postby Craig Browning » 20 Oct 2011, 03:27

1. How could that little LEM possibly have enough fuel to go 240,000 miles to the moon and all the way back? A 747 airliner doesn't even have a fraction of the fuel that would be required, and the LEM is barely the size of two standard cars! WTF? NASA has never explained that. All it said was "The LEM had enough fuel" and the sheep take it as gospel truth and fact. So dumb. It's like NASA's words create fact and reality and authority=truth. Big major fallacy.


My first problem with this question is what does the LEM have to do with the trip and landing, it only had to travel from the Command Module to the lunar surface, it then separates at launch and returns to the Command Module and is jettisoned just prior to re-entry and separation from the life support section behind the capsule of the Command unit. So where do you get the 240,000 miles of fuel concern? Too, the LEM only held two pilots at a time, it was about the size of a VW Bus if I recall properly (there used to be a full sized on on exhibit at the Write Patterson AF Museum you could get inside of. I've spent many a long minute in it and an Apollo capsule mock-up back in the day).

Maybe you need to buy a decent model of the Saturn V and LEM and see how it all went together and worked together vs. hypotheticals? Then again, actual research into this kind of thing would pretty much rain on your parade, wouldn't it? :roll:
User avatar
Craig Browning
 
Posts: 1526
Joined: 13 Feb 2010, 05:20
Location: Northampton, MA

Re: Jarrah White - The Leading Expert in the Moon Hoax Debat

Postby ProfWag » 20 Oct 2011, 20:52

I was acdtually hoping after my post that Winston would look something up on his own in a site other than moonf^ker.com.
To further expand on the 240k mile trip since you two already covered it pretty good, the craft didn't need fuel for that trip. Once the rocket got the craft out of the atmospher, a little blast from an engine set it on it's course and in space, there's no friction to slow it down so it pretty much just "floated" to the moon.
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Jarrah White - The Leading Expert in the Moon Hoax Debat

Postby Craig Browning » 21 Oct 2011, 05:49

ProfWag wrote:I was acdtually hoping after my post that Winston would look something up on his own in a site other than moonf^ker.com.
To further expand on the 240k mile trip since you two already covered it pretty good, the craft didn't need fuel for that trip. Once the rocket got the craft out of the atmospher, a little blast from an engine set it on it's course and in space, there's no friction to slow it down so it pretty much just "floated" to the moon.



Technically speaking it "fell" to the moon requiring little fuel outside of maneuvering thrusters and the final nozzle blast to soften the landing. Once out of lunar gravity on the way back to the command module we have the same limited need for heavy thrust; especially when most of the docking procedure is done by the main command pilot. So exceptionally little fuel was needed by LEM.
User avatar
Craig Browning
 
Posts: 1526
Joined: 13 Feb 2010, 05:20
Location: Northampton, MA

Re: Jarrah White - The Leading Expert in the Moon Hoax Debat

Postby ProfWag » 21 Oct 2011, 20:42

Craig Browning wrote:
ProfWag wrote:I was acdtually hoping after my post that Winston would look something up on his own in a site other than moonf^ker.com.
To further expand on the 240k mile trip since you two already covered it pretty good, the craft didn't need fuel for that trip. Once the rocket got the craft out of the atmospher, a little blast from an engine set it on it's course and in space, there's no friction to slow it down so it pretty much just "floated" to the moon.



Technically speaking it "fell" to the moon requiring little fuel outside of maneuvering thrusters and the final nozzle blast to soften the landing. Once out of lunar gravity on the way back to the command module we have the same limited need for heavy thrust; especially when most of the docking procedure is done by the main command pilot. So exceptionally little fuel was needed by LEM.

I'm pretty sure we said the same thing Craig, but in any event, as we mentioned, it didn't need 240k miles of fuel to get there so his comparison with a 747 was extremely off-track and apples to oranges.
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Jarrah White - The Leading Expert in the Moon Hoax Debat

Postby Craig Browning » 21 Oct 2011, 22:37

:lol: we do need to be kind and not confusion him with logic or 6th grade science :twisted:
User avatar
Craig Browning
 
Posts: 1526
Joined: 13 Feb 2010, 05:20
Location: Northampton, MA

Re: Jarrah White - The Leading Expert in the Moon Hoax Debat

Postby Scepcop » 11 Feb 2012, 02:34

Interview with Jarrah White, the world's leading expert on the Apollo Moon Hoax Theory, on Truth News Radio in Australia.



Jarrah is a master in point by point debate. He is so good that NASA's hired debunker, Phil Plait, ran away from him in fear at the Amazing Meeting in Las Vegas (see Jarrah's YouTube Channel below for proof on video).

At that meeting, Jarrah also shamed Mythbuster Adam Savage, of the Discovery Channel, by pointing out his botched experiments on Mythbusters. Since Savage was an actor, not a debater or scientist or intellectual, he became overwhelmed and bowed out, admitting that he was just an entertainer.

During an interview with Astronaut Buzz Aldrin, who allegedly walked on the moon, Jarrah appeared and asked Buzz why the moon rock that they gave to the Queen of Holland turned out to be a fake, which was reported on the news. He had no answer, was embarrassed and politely avoided the topic. You can see the video of this embarrassing moment on Jarrah's YouTube Channel (linked below)

Obviously, media celebrities are all about image. They are not intellectuals or truth seekers. That's why when confronted by genuine intellectual truth seekers, such as Jarrah White, they are outmatched and run away in fear.

The stupid media should stop giving all their expensive overpriced air time to stupid people, and instead give more airtime to intellectuals with more substantive and important things to say, such as Jarrah White and me.

Watch Jarrah's YouTube Channel to see proof of the above and hundreds of moon hoax videos, at:
http://www.youtube.com/WhiteJarrah

Visit Jarrah's website at:
http://www.moonfaker.com

If you have any questions about the Moon Hoax, see Jarrah's FAQ page at:
http://www.moonfaker.com/faqs.html
“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Scepcop
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29

Re: Jarrah White - The Leading Expert in the Moon Hoax Debat

Postby ProfWag » 13 Feb 2012, 08:52

Scepcop wrote:The stupid media should stop giving all their expensive overpriced air time to stupid people, and instead give more airtime to intellectuals with more substantive and important things to say, such as Jarrah White and me.

Curious Winston, is this a serious statement or were you just joking?
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

PreviousNext

Return to Conspiracies / Cover Ups

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests