TRUMP SCIENCE ADVISOR DENIES APOLLO MOON LANDINGS EVER HAPPENED

Discussion in 'Conspiracy Theories' started by Destroyer of illusions, Aug 14, 2017.

  1. Descartes

    Descartes Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2016
    Messages:
    286
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    18
    You left out the rest of the DK effect:

    "Persons of high ability tend to underestimate their relative competence and erroneously presume that tasks that are easy for them to perform are also easy for other people to perform."

    Who most suffers from illusory superiority on this forum?

    “The fool doth think he is wise,
    but the wise man knows himself to be a fool”
    William Shakespeare
     
  2. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    1,039
    Likes Received:
    23
    Trophy Points:
    38
    I have to actually laugh at your cognitive incompetence. Are you saying I have high ability and think that everybody should be able to understand? Because that is what that section means. Or maybe it ironically demonstrates that which it asserts!
     
    Last edited: Nov 19, 2017
  3. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    2,375
    Likes Received:
    80
    Trophy Points:
    48
    I debated him on several occasions. I gave up on this site because so many of my posts were getting deleted and I couldn't make my case.
    http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8135606&postcount=7907

    I want to debate him on neutral ground but that seems to be impossible.
    http://apollohoax.proboards.com/thread/1584

    Here's a thread on which I talked about debating with Jay Windley and other pro-Apollo posters at Clavius.
    https://forum.davidicke.com/showthread.php?t=125628

    If you have to log in to see it, click on the link in this post.
    http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8141778&postcount=7982


    I've been debating with you for years. No matter how clear it is that you're wrong, you handwave the facts away with rhetoric and invective and do the victory dance. I've learned that the only thing to hope for when debating with disinfo agents is to make them say lame things by dealing with the clearest anomalies as they have the attitude that they're winning the whole time they're discrediting themselves by saying lame things.

    Anyone who reads page #2 of this thread can see that the posters are a bunch of disinfo agents and so is the moderator.
    https://forum.cosmoquest.org/showth...racy/page2&s=ebd50d8b8a85b37acfd7c8ed8ddbbfc6

    You look pretty silly when you don't recognize the obvious.

    That's a damage-control site and the moderator uses his power to control the direction that debates take. That's always been the story with me when I try to debate on those sites. When I start winning too decisively, the moderator rides to their rescue and deletes my posts or closes the thread or warns me not to talk about certain things.
     
  4. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    1,039
    Likes Received:
    23
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Avoiding quoting the spammer who once again blows hot air, says nothing and make all sorts of irrelevant claims:

    You have not "debated" me for years. You run away from the tough questions and avoid answering complete threads. From the spammed threads from years ago, you so obviously do not debate anyone. You just re-assert your useless and ignorant opinion. You further proceed to claim that "everyone" can see it and these "viewers" agree with you. Of course they never do.

    You pretty much get your sorry ass kicked wherever you go and complain like a weasel when moderators delete your relentless spam. You label every one as a sophist, shill or disinfo agent every time you get your very foolish claims trashed. You don't ever win ANY debates. You are a very sad and pathetic individual who is bizarrely obsessed with a whole host of ridiculous conspiracy theories.

    You have nothing original to say.

    http://debunking-a-moron.blogspot.co.uk/?m=1

    That whole blog was made on this forum and pretty much completely ignored. The "truther" says he debates. Clearly he is a liar.
     
  5. Descartes

    Descartes Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2016
    Messages:
    286
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    18
    We WERE talking about rocks...
    There is not much difference in the age of the moon rocks vs the earth rocks - probably because they are both from the earth :smile:

    From Wikipedia:

    Rocks from the Moon have been measured by radiometric dating techniques. They range in age from about 3.16 billion years old for the basaltic samples derived from the lunar maria, up to about 4.44 billion years old for rocks derived from the highlands.[3] Based on the age-dating technique of "crater counting," the youngest basaltic eruptions are believed to have occurred about 1.2 billion years ago,[4] but scientists do not possess samples of these lavas. In contrast, the oldest ages of rocks from the Earth are between 3.8 and 4.28 billion years old.

    So they admit that some rocks on the moon are probably only about 1.2 billion. Here is a lunar meteorite that only tested at 2.9 billion:

    Researchers at the University of New Mexico have identified a 2.9 billion year-old lunar meteorite. The meteorite, found in Africa in 2000, was examined by a group of scientists in the Earth and Planetary Sciences department headed by Senior Research Scientist Lars Borg.

    more info:

    The aluminous, low-Ti mare basalts are the oldest
    mare basalts that have been dated directly. Clasts of
    these basalts in Apollo 14 breccias range in age from
    3.9 to 4.2 b.y. (Taylor et al., 1983). Photogeologic
    observations of the distribution of dark-halo craters,
    which have probably excavated mare basalt layers
    from beneath the ejecta of lunar basins, support the
    inference of widespread mare-type volcanism prior to
    3.9 b.y. (Schultz and Spudis, 1983). However,
    fragments of aluminous mare basalts from other sites
    are not so ancient; an Apollo 12 fragment is 3.1 b.y.
    old, and one from the Luna 16 site is 3.4 b.y. old.


    The moon rocks are from the earth...
     
  6. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    1,039
    Likes Received:
    23
    Trophy Points:
    38
    No. The Moon rocks are from the Moon.

    Your inept googling is just an example of you understanding none of what you cut and pasted. I don't even know what point you are making. I doubt you do. You know nothing about this and make lots of noise contradicting experts who know this subject inside out. It just doesn't occur to you to go and do something less stupid.
     
  7. Descartes

    Descartes Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2016
    Messages:
    286
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    18
    The point I am making is:
    Using the supposed ages of billion year old rocks for proof of anything is nonsense...
     
  8. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    1,039
    Likes Received:
    23
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Really, that is your point is it? The Apollo rocks gave veen analysed by experts in the field of geology for 50 years since they were brought back from the Moon. They conclude that lunar rocks show examples that were originally formed from 4.5 billion years ago. As has been painstakingly pointed out to you, the Earth rocks are subject to erosion from water, ice, sand and air. None of the first formed rocks exist anymore and is why the Earth date is deduced from incoming meteorites and Apollo samples.

    The fact is quite specific, Lunar samples have ages older than any known Earth rock and it is one of many indisputable reasons why these rocks are from the Moon. Of course when I say indisputable, I mean from logical and reasonably intelligent people. Feel free to carry on proving you have neither of those two attributes!
     
    Last edited: Nov 20, 2017
  9. Descartes

    Descartes Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2016
    Messages:
    286
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Why is it indisputable? Do you think radiometric dating is beyond challenge?
     
  10. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    1,039
    Likes Received:
    23
    Trophy Points:
    38
    When the same results are produced over and over and consistently fall within a narrow band, the accuracy ceases to be an issue. Decay of isotopes is a very exact science.

    You aren't even qualified to give your inept opinion on it! Let alone bumbling around Google trying to " challenge" geology.

    http://scienceline.ucsb.edu/getkey.php?key=2901

    I love the way you cowardly avoid all the other points on the geologist's list and concentrate (with idiotic conclusions) on just this one.
     
  11. Descartes

    Descartes Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2016
    Messages:
    286
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    18
    A narrow band? I think it's time to take another look at this table of minimum and maximum test results on the lunar rock samples. Notice the test results are all over the place. Sample #10084 using the same method for min and max gives 4.31 and 8.2 billion years respectively, kind of hard to explain 8.2 billion years since the solar system is said to be only 5 billion years old. And any test using low temp argon gives ridiculous numbers.

    And how about sample #10069 using cosmic ray exposure gives an age of 0.04 billion years - is this just an anomaly or is because the rock actually is an earth rock and would have been protected from cosmic ray damage by the atmosphere? I notice that they didn't try that test again for some reason. Sample #10060 using the same isotope gives 3.36 and 5.76 respectively, only a 2 billion year difference!

    Minimum and Maximum Moon Rock Ages

    Sample____Age (billion)________Method___________Source
    10003____<1.0________40Ar/39Ar low temp_______3
    ________4.025________207Pb/206Pb______________1
    10017__< 0.25________40Ar/39Ar low temp_______3
    _________4.67________208Pb/232Th______________4
    10020___3.765________206Pb/238U_______________1
    ________3.996________207Pb/206Pb______________1
    10022__< 0.75________40Ar/39Ar low temp_______3
    ______3.59 ± 0.06____40Ar/39Ar high temp______3
    10024___< 0.2________40Ar/39Ar low temp_______3
    ______4.050 ± 0.7____87Sr/87Rb isochron_______5
    10044___< 0.8________40Ar/39Ar low temp_______3
    ______3.74 ± 0.05____40Ar/39Ar high temp______3
    10045____4.17________207Pb/206Pb______________4
    _________4.17________207Pb/206Pb______________4
    10047____4.21________207Pb/206Pb______________4
    _________4.95________208Pb/232Th______________4
    10050___3.680________208Pb/232Th______________1
    ________4.051________207Pb/206Pb______________1
    10057____2.27________40K-40Ar unspiked________9
    ________4.173________207Pb/206Pb______________1
    10060___3.365________208Pb/232Th______________4
    _________5.76________208Pb/232Th______________4
    10061___4.594________208Pb/232Th______________1
    ________4.710________206Pb/238U_______________1
    10062___< 1.0________40Ar/39Ar low temp_______3
    ______3.83 ± 0.06____40Ar/39Ar high temp______3
    10069____0.04________Cosmic ray exposure______2
    _______4.9 ± 0.4_____40K-40Ar feldspar glass__2
    10071___3.374________208Pb/232Th______________1
    ________3.826________207Pb/206Pb______________1
    10072___< 0.6________40Ar/39Ar low temp_______3
    _________4.13________207Pb/206Pb______________4
    10084____4.31________208Pb/232Th______________4
    __________8.2________208Pb/232Th______________9
    10085____4.44________87Sr/87Sr________________2
     
  12. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    2,375
    Likes Received:
    80
    Trophy Points:
    48
    As I've said before, once a few clear anomalies have shown that the missions were a hoax to the satisfaction of a thinking person and you have been shown to be an insincere poster to the satisfaction of a thinking person, there's no point in wasting time on those vaguer points.

    You lamely maintain that the flag moved in this video...

    Apollo 15 flag, facing air resistance; proving the fraud of alleged manned moon landings.


    ...because the astronaut brushed it with his elbow even though these two videos show that the flag had already started moving before the astronaut got close enough to touch it.

    Initial Apollo 15 Flag Movement

    The flag that moved



    You tried to obfuscate the clear proof that the Chinese spacewalk was faked.
    http://www.apollohoax.net/forum/index.php?topic=1149.0


    You lamely agreed with Jay Windey's* analysis of the dust-free sand issue.
    http://www.politicalforum.com/index...-ever-happened.512081/page-29#post-1068254989


    You played dumb about Jay Windley's making a fool of himself on page #2 of this thread.
    https://forum.cosmoquest.org/showth...racy/page2&s=ebd50d8b8a85b37acfd7c8ed8ddbbfc6


    You can pretend all you want. You're all washed up.



    *
    http://clavius.org/about.html
     
    Last edited: Nov 21, 2017
  13. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    1,039
    Likes Received:
    23
    Trophy Points:
    38
    What a very dishonest weasel you are! Not only did you have this bullcrap answered before, you cite this report knowing that it uses MULTIPLE techniques for dating!

    In addition you don't understand English. The repetition of a test by numerous people on the same samples, consistently yields very accurate results within the same band by radiometric dating! I even quoted you an Educational professor detailing why!

    If lies and ignorance are the tools for you to prop up your belief, it speaks volumes about the type of person you are.
     
  14. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    1,039
    Likes Received:
    23
    Trophy Points:
    38
    You are not a thinking person. You are evasive and as dishonest as the troll. You spam this same crap over and over and avoid all responses. You continually insist you have responded to them, but you give answers that children would laugh at and question!

    You are a liar. Never once have I denied that there appears movement before he arrived. You continue to show totally inept understanding of responses. Numerous sources prove he was close enough to move it AFTER HE WENT BY! You always deny this because of the movement before. It is the height of stupidity to say he cannot have brushed it simply because it moved slightly beforehand. The major movement is from his elbow. The minor movement has numerous explanations that are all all feasible, that none of your useless responses dismiss.

    You insane spammer. The spacewalk wasn't faked and your clear "proof" is anything but!

    Yes but not lamely. He is the educated and fully experienced engineer. You are the uneducated and ignorant spammer. You are epitome of wrong.

    Liar. He didn't make a fool of himself and I didn't play dumb.

    Your opinion is completely worthless. You are an ignorant spammer who has been making the same posts for 10 years. Get a life.

    A colossal understatement. All of that spam answered literally dozens of times on this forum. You cowardly avoid responses under the guise of finding one instance of a false claim about credibility. You "truthers" truly are a disgusting group of individuals
     
    Last edited: Nov 21, 2017
  15. Descartes

    Descartes Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2016
    Messages:
    286
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    18
    You need to look up the difference between "accurate" and "precise".

    accurate3.jpg
     
  16. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    1,039
    Likes Received:
    23
    Trophy Points:
    38
    You need to look up the difference between ignorant and troll. Google the words shut and up. Then Google irrelevant. Finally Google the term "nothing useful to say". We've already done DK which you clearly have. You then claimed that I was very smart and thought all people should understand or be able to do what I can!

    The results for radiometric dating are very accurate. They don' t need to be precise, the whole point was that Moon rocks found on Apollo are older than known Earth rocks. Indisputable.
     
  17. Descartes

    Descartes Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2016
    Messages:
    286
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Whatcha smokin' Beta? :smoking:
     
  18. Descartes

    Descartes Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2016
    Messages:
    286
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    18
    The real reason the flag moved...

    turkey_moon.jpg
     

Share This Page