Posted on 01/07/2024 5:46:51 AM PST by beejaa
Your website is a prime example of people getting the wrong answers.
It hasn’t improved since the last time you were flacking it ..
Lunch Bucket Joe’s regime apparently has a LOT of people who are unqualified to be in any position of authority... starting with him.
LOL. There are plenty of people with lots of education, and little common sense. These people spend a lot of time getting into extremely detailed analysis and explanation of what they claim to be "anomalies" or other supposed evidence that the Moon landings were all fake.
Just for laughs, I read this entire article: "Apollo 11 and the Slippery Slope Inexplicable 30% reduction in the shadows of Apollo 11 EVA" (https://www.aulis.com/reduction.htm)
I will highlight one line (arguably the only one that matters): "At the same time reviewer B stated that it was his personal opinion that the phenomena identified in the article were due to inaccuracies already present in the basic data used for analysis."
Yeah, this article is a perfect example. They spend a lot of time and ink talking about supposed "anomalies" in the length of the shadows in the photos. But despite all the bloviating (typical of academics), they ignore the most simple, and correct, conclusion: their data (camera positions and angles) are estimates (no one used a tape measure to determine the exact distance of the various cameras from the lander). So instead of accepting the simple explanation (the cameras were not where they assumed, or at the angles they assumed), they spend a lot of time "proving" there are anomalies using their own, incorrect assumptions.
This article goes on to claim that this mathematician's article was not published due to other's "vested interests" (in keeping up the "hoax" of the Moon landings):
Although seemingly bewildering to the general public, even if scientifically minded, Astrovestnik's ultimate refusal to publish is unsurprising, because notwithstanding the journal’s intentions or the qualities of the author (in this case, a well-known mathematician, a professor at a foreign university, a doctor of sciences of impeccable professional competence) all that counts for little when it comes to who and what gets published. The very process of peer review ensures that vested interests can be discreetly protected.
Again, they ignore the earlier point that the assumptions used to claim that there are some sort of anomalies in the shadow lengths are incorrect/inaccurate (they are ASSUMPTIONS, after all). Just because Korobkov is a great mathematician, doesn't change the fact that his assumptions may be incorrect, and that there is no way to know the precise positions and distances of the cameras relative to the lander. And as for vested interests, one could argue that a Russian might have a vested interest (or at least a bias) towards wanting to "prove" that the United States never landed on the Moon, as it was a major psychological and political victory for the arch-rival of his own country, the former USSR.
I am reminded of the old saying: If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullsh*t.
Or this one: What does PhD stand for? "Piled higher and Deeper."
See: Occam's Razor
If your argument is sound, name calling shouldn't be of any concern. If I am having a discussion/argument, and someone calls me names, it hardly matters if I can prove my point. I don't care about name calling - giving or receiving - I care about truth, reason, and logic.
Well, OK, I do enjoy name calling sometimes, but that's because it is what I grew up with. Getting all butt hurt about it doesn't do much to prove your point.
This is one of the problems we have today: everyone is so sensitive about everything, that no one has the balls to simply be honest and direct. If I think someone is an idiot (or that their opinion/position is ignorant or stupid), I'm going to say so. Truth and reason are more important than feelings.
I want to comment on just one item—because it is the most important and affects just about everything .gov does.
This happened to me—and had a major impact on my life.
Many decades ago I worked for the U.S. Census Bureau in their regional office in Dallas, TX.
I was good at my job and became a crew leader who trained my crews and other crews at the office.
We had standard training materials—and one of the mantras we were taught and taught others and told the public many times every day was the following:
“The U.S. Census Bureau has never released information we collect to other government agencies.”
My bosses at the Census Bureau believed it.
I believed it.
My trainees believed it.
The public believed it.
It was a lie.
The lie was known to thousands of people for decades.
Not one of them ever blew the whistle.
Not one.
Ever.
So—how do we know for certain that it was a lie?
A couple of academics were digging in obscure .gov archives in 2000 and discovered it.
Here are the details:
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/confirmed-the-us-census-b/
Why did everyone who knew about it at the time keep the secret?
—Patriotism
—Shame
—No-one wanted to become a social pariah
—No-one wanted to risk their career
etc etc etc.
People cover up stuff.
They do it a lot.
They do it for a lot of reasons.
But—thousands of people can do it.
For decades.
If these academics had not discovered it we might still not know about it.
Lies can be kept.
Again, it takes far more effort to believe the Moon landings were fake, than it does to look at all of the evidence that proves they actually happened, and believe that they did. Like I said before, Occam's Razor (and common sense).
It’s true: Stanley Kubrik filmed the moon landings ...
And he was so thoroughly dedicated to his authenticity in craft that he insisted on making his movies “on location”!
(It’s a joke ...)
“did not require the active participation of thousands of people in the cover-up”
That is not correct.
Read the article I gave you carefully—and think about all of the individuals who participated in the rounding up of Japanese citizens as well as the logistics of putting together and distributing that data in the early 1940s.
There were no computers—everything was done by hand—in writing—in hard copy documents and kept in hard copy files.
It was not just senior government officials who knew about it—it was a bunch of government managers from different agencies, their aides and secretaries, file clerks etc.
Remember—not one person ever spoke about it.
Not one.
Ever.
It should have been totally impossible to cover it up.
The Japanese Internment was very high profile—especially in the western United States.
Sleep on it.
Think about the process in all of its intricate detail.
Do some more research on how the Internment process worked.
Once you fully understand all the pieces you will “get it”.
OK.. we will have to agree to disagree
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.