Jarrah White - The Leading Expert in the Moon Hoax Debate

[Scepcop]

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.





Jarrah's YouTube Channel:

http://www.youtube.com/WhiteJarrah

[ProfWag]

[Craig Browning]

[Arouet]

Maybe get a bio of L. Ron Hubbard? He had it down pat!

[Scepcop]

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.

[ProfWag]

[craig weiler]

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.

[Arouet]

Scepcop: just curious: why did you think these were unanswered questions? they seem pretty basic for people who know about this stuff.

[Craig Browning]

[ProfWag]

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.

[Craig Browning]

[ProfWag]

[Craig Browning]

we do need to be kind and not confusion him with logic or 6th grade science

[Scepcop]

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

[ProfWag]