PDA

View Full Version : Celebrity Justice and the Moon Hoax



The Bad Astronomer
2002-Dec-25, 10:38 PM
I am surprised this one got past me for so long: Celebrity Justice: Bart vs. Buzz (http://celebrityjustice.warnerbros.com/judge/02/09/buzzaldrin.html?=cj_buzzaldrin).

I found this by searching on Mr. Sibrel's last name. Interestingly, when you put "sibrel" into Google, the first two links are my page and JayUtah's. Woohoo!

cable
2002-Dec-26, 09:00 AM
On 2002-12-25 17:38, The Bad Astronomer wrote:
I am surprised this one got past me for so long: Celebrity Justice: Bart vs. Buzz (http://celebrityjustice.warnerbros.com/judge/02/09/buzzaldrin.html?=cj_buzzaldrin).

I found this by searching on Mr. Sibrel's last name. Interestingly, when you put "sibrel" into Google, the first two links are my page and JayUtah's. Woohoo!


that means Mr. Sibrel has googled the Internet /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif

2002-Dec-26, 10:09 AM
On 2002-12-26 04:00, cable wrote:

On 2002-12-25 17:38, The Bad Astronomer wr
so long: ice.warne
2:13 A.M. my intrerpation was? which program should be
used to view the German version of Rock Kicking
& whitch1 to view the Japanese 2?
{oh by the way where is that?} 2:15 A.M.
that means Mr. Sibrel has googled the Internet /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif
maybe its the other way around? maybe the Net Goofed Mr.S

SiriMurthy
2002-Dec-26, 06:42 PM
On 2002-12-25 17:38, The Bad Astronomer wrote:
I am surprised this one got past me for so long: Celebrity Justice: Bart vs. Buzz (http://celebrityjustice.warnerbros.com/judge/02/09/buzzaldrin.html?=cj_buzzaldrin).

I found this by searching on Mr. Sibrel's last name. Interestingly, when you put "sibrel" into Google, the first two links are my page and JayUtah's. Woohoo!


http://www.clavius.org/: Is this JayUtah's web site?

This is an excellent, well formed, very informative and easy to navigate web site.

I was aware of most of the arguments by HBs, however, I must admit, the hammer and feather experiment was new to me.

David Hall
2002-Dec-26, 06:50 PM
Yes, Clavius is Jay's site. And an excellent piece of work it is.

The hammerfeather thing almost has to come up sometime in the debates, since it's one of the clearest demonstrations of the lunar environment on record. The HB's have to find some way around it in order to have a case.

Speaking of which, the hammer thing was just brought up again here: http://www.badastronomy.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?topic=3328&forum=3&5

Check out the previous thread Ian R refers to in that thread for a good read on the subject.
http://www.badastronomy.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?topic=2035&forum=3

ToSeek
2002-Dec-26, 07:00 PM
On 2002-12-26 13:50, David Hall wrote:
The hammerfeather thing almost has to come up sometime in the debates, since it's one of the clearest demonstrations of the lunar environment on record. The HB's have to find some way around it in order to have a case.


Isn't there an online video somewhere of a man in a white coat (therefore by definition a scientist) dropping a feather and a hammer, which hit the ground at the same time? (Except that on close observation the "feather" bounces.)

SiriMurthy
2002-Dec-26, 07:02 PM
On 2002-12-26 13:50, David Hall wrote:
Check out the previous thread Ian R refers to in that thread for a good read on the subject.
http://www.badastronomy.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?topic=2035&forum=3


Thanks for the response, David Hall. Yes, this is where I learnt of this experiment. I have my own doubts of whether we can time the fall on our computers or our VCR/DVD players. Don't we have to be quite technical if not use sophisticated equipment for timing. After all, we are talking about 1.2 to 1.5 meters of free fall - a person's shoulder height.

I worked on Micro-Gravity simulation by free fall using experimental packages and drag shields when I was with space research and we used sensors on the deceleration spikes on the drag shields so that we catch the exact moment when the DS hits the ground (think foam surface in this particular case).

David Hall
2002-Dec-26, 07:26 PM
Cosmic Dave has the fake feather clip on his site: http://www.ufos-aliens.co.uk/cosmicapollo.html It's in the middle of the page somewhere.

Siri, I think that it's possible with normal computer equipment to get a pretty good estimation of the fall. If you read the whole thread you can see what we all thought about it. I tried it out myself somewhere there near the end. It wasn't that difficult.

Of course, if you want real accuracy you should get the best equipment possible, but you're still limited to the resolution and frame rate of the original film. The biggest difficulty is deciding just when and where the objects were released, and when they hit the ground. But that shouldn't account for more than a fraction of the total error bars.

honestmonkey
2002-Dec-26, 08:50 PM
The poll results (which are not scientific) are currently 70% for Buzz, 30% against. But then, the question is "Do you think Buzz was justified in hitting Bart?", so it's not really indicative of much, I suppose.

2002-Dec-27, 01:54 AM
I saw someting in the news today which reminded me of all these moon hoax sayers.

Remember Jerry "The King" Lawler and Andy Kaufman's appearance on David Letterman and that whole surrounding mess? Well, Lawler has just fessed up that it was all fake from beginning to end and agreed to by Kaufman and Lawler... the whole thing. It was all a sham: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/12/26/entertainment/main534362.shtml

If this is possible, how do we know if the moon hoaxers are just pulling our leg or not?

The web master of http://www.ufos-aliens.co.uk/ is littlegreys@hotmail.com < littlegreys@hotmail.com> and I just sent him this email:


Nice web page about Apollo. I have studied it completely. It might shock you to know just how much we have been lied to. Not only were the moon missions a hoax but so was World War II. Just go to http://www.badastronomy.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?topic=3251&forum=3&24 and see for yourself.

David Hall
2002-Dec-27, 04:48 PM
On 2002-12-26 20:54, Bill Thmpson wrote:

The web master of http://www.ufos-aliens.co.uk/ is littlegreys@hotmail.com < littlegreys@hotmail.com> and I just sent him this email:


Cosmic Dave has 'graced' us here with his presence before. Do a search for cosmicdave and you'll see just what we think of him here. Even after forcing him to admit being wrong on at least on occasion, he has never bothered to change his page or correct anything he's said.

Personally, I wonder just how much of this he really believes. His "Apollo hoax" stuff seems to be just a sideline to his real Alien Conspiracy stuff. I mean, even from his Hoax page, he has a link to "secret Apollo conversations" showing alien activity. Talk about hypocritical. /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_rolleyes.gif

JayUtah
2002-Dec-30, 03:42 PM
The hammer drop video on Dave Cosnette's site belongs to Aulis. "Cosmic" Dave has left a public record here which unequivocally demonstrates (a) that he has almost no idea what he's talking about, and (b) that he has little interest in the facts.

Honestly I've never found the hammer and feather experiment particularly valuable as proof of a lunar environment. It wasn't really intended that way. In order to prove it was in the lunar environment you have to take Scott's word for it that he's holding a real, unaltered feather. I do, but I can't expect conspiracists to. Scott was trying to prove Galileo, not the lunar environment. When you recognize that this was his intent, you understand that his standing on the lunar surface is a premise for that argument, not its outcome. Galileo works because the lunar environment eliminates confounding effects that make it hard to prove empirically on earth. But by the fallacy of inverse implication we can't rigorously argue the truth of the premise from the observation of the conclusion without further work.

Irishman
2003-Jan-02, 09:45 AM
What Jay just said is that on Earth, the atmosphere affects the feather's fall and thus makes Galileo's demonstration difficult to do. But without atmosphere on the moon, the two objects can neatly show equal falling rate.

The last statement is something to the effect that the demonstration is not enough to conclusively prove it occurred on the Moon.

----
Decyphered for your reading enjoyment. /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_wink.gif

Irishman
2003-Jan-02, 09:51 AM
I was going to reply on the Lawler/Kaufman thing. Andy Kaufman was big on "jokes" that involved elaborate hoaxes on the audience. One I recall reading about, he made up a character that involved using heavy makeup and disguise, and went TV as the character. Then the character made lots of TV appearances, and got into a running gag on how he was not Andy Kaufman. Turns out it wasn't. Andy's friend was wearing the costume and making all the appearances, and was telling the truth when he denied being Andy Kaufman, but nobody believed him.

calliarcale
2003-Jan-02, 07:30 PM
Actually, as a slight correction to that, Andy Kaufmann *did* perform that character (name escapes me right now) almost always. People figured it out, but Andy didn't want it to be so easy for them, so he decided to finally give them the proof they wanted -- except that he proved it really wasn't him. And for that appearance, he had his best friend disguised as the alter ego. Was he faking that he wasn't the other guy? Or was he faking being the other guy to begin with? Nobody knew, and that was the point of the prank. It pissed off a lot of his fans, because it made it highlighted just how impossible it was to tell when Andy was being serious. The same kind of thing got him in trouble with network executives either. They realized that it was virtually impossible to negotiate with him because you could never tell when he was being himself. Or even *if* he was ever being himself.

That bit him on the butt years later. He contracted cancer and became very very ill, eventually giving up on doctors and trying a progression of "alternative" treatments that obviously didn't work either. Throughout all this, many of his friends didn't believe he was really sick. Even when, at the end, he found himself confined to a wheelchair because he was so weak, many people would not believe that he really was on death's door. Until he died of the cancer, that is.

Geo3gh
2003-Jan-02, 09:52 PM
Even when, at the end, he found himself confined to a wheelchair because he was so weak, many people would not believe that he really was on death's door. Until he died of the cancer, that is.


And I think some still think he faked his death.

Both Kaufman and his friend Bob Zmuda played Tony Clifton, the boorish, inept Las Vegas lounge singer.