Discussion in 'Skeptiko Shows' started by Alex, Sep 19, 2017.
Definitely the travel outside his body guy to make art- that's on the front page of your website. I posted that opinion at the time on the forum. Obvious.
I think the We Are Change guy is a fraud just like Alex Jones. I posted that as well.
I need to go through a list of all your shows. Can't seem to find it. Gotta go to work. I also need to compile a list of spiritual frauds throughout history. Rather long list. Includes a lot of UFO cults. Blavatsky was a complete and total fraud and plagiarist who still gets defended by many in the new age crowd. Many of the big name spiritual leaders of our day I have serious doubts about. Remember Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh? He talked a very good game- great writer. Total fraud.
really like your show and your heart is in the right place...You did expose Tex Marrs and his scientology bullshit. Kudos. The FBI interview about NAMBLA was amazing.
Agree completely. I honestly expected that most listeners of this show would have already reached same conclusion. Calling Bart Sibrel a "wing nut"? Isn't that the same technique used to discredit say NDE researchers?
Touché Chefjames. The disconnect is quite bizarre.
Reminds me of deep state/conspiracy-aware Christians who rale against Magic even though Jesus raised a man from de grave and turned water into wine. While every Sunday the priest turns a piece of bread into Jesus.
Really Alex, if you can give two shows to Joe Atwill's rather thin assertions you could at least do one exposing the moon landing (at least). It's so juicy and sciencey. Fraud in science- what a great topic. Be a good follow up to Henry Bauer. And one to tearing up Darwinism- more fraud. It's the moon landings that hypnotized the masses into worshipping science. Most of our biggest problems from science- chemical pollution causing numerous diseases, nuclear annihilation, killer drones and constant surveillance...AK-47's, A.I. apocolypse, etc etc. Now with the iphone I guess the moon landings aren't needed. Siri will save us.
hey Chef... I hear you on some of the fake stuff surrounding the moon landing, but I'm conflicted about how much was faked. Edgar Mitchell doesn't seem like a shill to me. I mean, who knows, but he sure doesn't come across that way. Bart, on the other hand, seems like a bit of a wingnut. again, I don't know him, and I support his cause in terms of getting at the truth, but still...
here's one reason I'm unwilling to jump on the totally fake (as opposed to partially fake) moon landing thing:
THEY'RE WATCHING US
But there is a major stumbling block for Apollo skeptics; this was during the Cold War. The Russians and the Chinese were watching NASA's every move, and had the expertise, the technology and most certainly the motivation to call bullshit on any chicanery.
I have no doubt that every intelligence agency in the world was poring over every frame of imagery being released from these missions, since the idea of establishing missile bases on the Moon had a lot of currency at the time.
Exposing a faked Moonshot would be a propaganda coup like no other, especially given the fact that all of this was going on during the height of an extremely unpopular war that was in danger of making the USA an international pariah. Add the assassinations, the race riots and the general civil unrest, and a scandal over a faked Apollo mission might well have been a tipping point for a revolution in this country.
I'd really like to get a discussion going on this issue, But it would be best in a new thread - presumably in the "Why Science is Wring" section.
Reading your link, I felt uneasy (since I really loved watching those moon landings as a kid), and some of the points resonated, but others seemed a bit off.
The fact is that modern computer systems waste a lot of their cycles on inessentials. Thus it is not impossible that computers and software built solely for the purpose of landing on the moon, might be just be practical - though their reliability wasn't great back then!
Also, the point about the long distance to the moon isn't really fair. I mean once you get a vehicle up to escape velocity, it will continue to move because there is no atmospheric drag in space.
Clearly the moon is not being constantly hit by meteorites like rain falling, but of course the rocks on the surface of the moon have been there for a very long time, and thus do pick up damage over time.
On the other hand, the fact that all the video and most of the samples have been 'lost' sounds very suspicious, as does the fact (which I did not know) that a rock given to the Dutch (no doubt with much pomp) turned out to be a fake!
Alex also made an excellent point - why didn't any of the other countries call foul? Conceivably this could have been because this knowledge might be more useful for blackmail.
LoneShaman brought this subject up some time ago. I remember reading about the issue of the radiation levels in those belts. Then I found a website that was supposed to be about debunking the danger of those belts. It launched into a really elaborate mass of maths, that seemed to miss the point that all that was needed was some sort of average over time of the radiation levels that would be involved. Even skipping to the conclusion I didn't find what I wanted. From past experience with the global warming scam, that seems to be a common tactic adopted by those trying to uphold orthodox ideas - overwhelm the reader with technicalities in the hope that they will give up!
I do remember that at some point in all the furore over the election of President Trump, the Russians said that they might reveal some REALLY embarrassing information about America. That made me wonder if they were referring to this question.
Jurgen Ziewe? Would you please elucidate why you think hes an obvious fraud?
Your argument is somewhat compelling but it is kind of like saying that 911 couldn't have been an inside job because too many people would have had to keep the secret and it wouldn't be possible. It also sidesteps the main arguments for the idea that the moon landings were faked; the evidence. And when one painstakingly examines the evidence it's really hard to accept the idea that in 1969, when the spaceships had less computing power than my IPhone, that NASA flew several successful missions to the moon and back. For brevity, I won't go into the arguments, but Sibrel's contributions shouldn't be dismissed without a fair hearing. His video, A Funny Thing Happened On The Way To The Moon, is, imho, compelling. Have you watched it? You should!
Separate names with a comma.