PDA

View Full Version : The Disclosure Project



tardis
2007-Mar-15, 01:24 AM
I trust many of you are familiar with this group of reputable former Air/Space/defense professionals who disclose various encounters with UFOs or other worldly creatures, including testimony from Buzz Aldrin about an apparent alien craft(s) that he saw.
Well, I'll give you a dollar if this group isn't funded by a U.S. intelligence agency, who's aim is to divide conspiracy types or 'cover-up' investigators, or to conquer, in some way, people with open minds, or other subculture groups.
I have no evidence of coarse, and I believe that; most likely aliens exist, just not that they're visiting us via spaceship.

Tinaa
2007-Mar-15, 01:47 AM
tardis unless you are willing to backup your statements with evidence, I will have no recourse but to shut down this thread. Please follow up with your evidence within 48 hours or I close this thread.

PhantomWolf
2007-Mar-15, 02:02 AM
including testimony from Buzz Aldrin about an apparent alien craft(s) that he saw.

You mean the SLA Panel that he saw. It was one of the Spacecraft Lander Adaptor Panel that was jetisoned from the Saturn IVB before the LM was extracted. Because they remained in a similar orbit to the CSM/LM Stack and rotated as they did so, they are the prime suspect, and match all the descriptions of the unknown that the crew observed.

Tinaa
2007-Mar-15, 02:07 AM
:think:

Seems harsh for an expression of opinion.

13. Alternative Concepts and Conspiracy Theories

If you have some idea which goes against commonly-held astronomical theory, or think UFOs are among us, then you are welcome to argue it here. Before you do, though READ THIS THREAD FIRST. This is very important. Then, if you still want to post your idea, you will do so politely, you will not call people names, and you will defend your arguments. Direct questions must be answered in a timely manner.

People will attack your arguments with glee and fervor here; that's what science and scientists do. If you cannot handle that sort of attack, then maybe you need to rethink your theory, too. Remember: you came here. It's our job to attack new theories. Those that are strong will survive, and may become part of mainstream science.

Additionally, keep promotion of your theories and ideas to only those Against the Mainstream or Conspiracy Theory threads which discuss them. Hijacking other discussions to draw attention to your ideas will not be allowed.

If it appears that you are using circular reasoning, depending on long-debunked arguments, or breaking any of these other rules, you will receive one warning, and if that warning goes unheeded, you will be banned.

As with the other sections of the forum, we ask you to keep your topics about space and astronomy. We will close down any thread which doesn't have anything to do with space and astronomy immediately.

A.DIM
2007-Mar-15, 02:12 AM
13. Alternative Concepts and Conspiracy Theories

If you have some idea which goes against commonly-held astronomical theory, or think UFOs are among us, then you are welcome to argue it here. Before you do, though READ THIS THREAD FIRST. This is very important. Then, if you still want to post your idea, you will do so politely, you will not call people names, and you will defend your arguments. Direct questions must be answered in a timely manner.

People will attack your arguments with glee and fervor here; that's what science and scientists do. If you cannot handle that sort of attack, then maybe you need to rethink your theory, too. Remember: you came here. It's our job to attack new theories. Those that are strong will survive, and may become part of mainstream science.

Additionally, keep promotion of your theories and ideas to only those Against the Mainstream or Conspiracy Theory threads which discuss them. Hijacking other discussions to draw attention to your ideas will not be allowed.

If it appears that you are using circular reasoning, depending on long-debunked arguments, or breaking any of these other rules, you will receive one warning, and if that warning goes unheeded, you will be banned.

As with the other sections of the forum, we ask you to keep your topics about space and astronomy. We will close down any thread which doesn't have anything to do with space and astronomy immediately.

Right.

Still seems harsh when tardis claims "no evidence" and states the opinion is belief.

But OK.

tardis
2007-Mar-15, 02:16 AM
Tinaa Tinaa is online now
Moderator

"tardis unless you are willing to backup your statements with evidence, I will have no recourse but to shut down this thread. Please follow up with your evidence within 48 hours or I close this thread."


I'll try to dig up some things I've read about counter intelligence functions of U.S. Intelligence, but I don't think I should have to defend my suspicion that The Disclosure Project is a suspect organization, after all, they're compiling people's personal opinions that aliens visit earth regularly via craft......Is that science fact?? Counter intelligence is fact, right?

Tinaa
2007-Mar-15, 02:20 AM
What part of defend your arguments do you not understand?

tardis
2007-Mar-15, 02:23 AM
"What part of defend your arguments do you not understand?"

Well I just started to in my previous post. ^


It seems like there was a post deleted here.

Am I just missing something?

Tinaa
2007-Mar-15, 02:25 AM
A DIM deleted his own post would have been #4.

tardis
2007-Mar-15, 02:27 AM
To clarify, what I'm saying is that I think possibly some testimony from astronauts(and others) may have been manipulated for counter intelligence purposes.

Tinaa
2007-Mar-15, 02:29 AM
Ok. Now is the time you'd post the reasons you believe this and evidence to back up your belief.

R.A.F.
2007-Mar-15, 02:39 AM
Still seems harsh when tardis claims "no evidence" and states the opinion is belief.

If his opinion is based on belief and not evidence, then what purpose does it serve to post it to a science board??

Personal beliefs that cannot substantiated with evidence are a waste of time.

The Backroad Astronomer
2007-Mar-15, 02:40 AM
one dollar that is all you offer, they gave me alot more then one dollar.:D

Ok now serious you think the government has nothing better to do then try to discredit the CTers.

PhantomWolf
2007-Mar-15, 02:41 AM
To clarify, what I'm saying is that I think possibly some testimony from astronauts(and others) may have been manipulated for counter intelligence purposes.

To clarify, what I'm saying is that I know some testimony from astronauts(and others) may have been manipulated for woowoo "there are aliens OMG they're all out to get us" purposes.

R.A.F.
2007-Mar-15, 02:43 AM
Ok now serious you think the government has nothing better to do then try to discredit the CTers.

Heck the CTers discredit themselves without any "help" at all. :)

JayUtah
2007-Mar-15, 02:43 AM
I trust many of you are familiar with this group of reputable former Air/Space/defense professionals...

Actually the Disclosure Project involves many people of all walks of life, telling many different stories. Unfortunately a number of his star witnesses have been discredited. The disreputable ones clearly ruin it for the rest of them.

These groups have come and gone since the 1950s. Go dig out the newsreels and watch them. I'm sure that people in 2060 will get a hoot out of watching the more entertaining Disclose Project witnesses on their version of YouTube.

...including testimony from Buzz Aldrin about an apparent alien craft(s) that he saw.

Last I checked, Aldrin did not actually affiliate with the Disclosure Project and does not actually claim to have seen an alien spacecraft. That apparently hasn't stopped people from trying to ride his coattails.

Well, I'll give you a dollar if this group isn't funded by a U.S. intelligence agency, who's aim is to divide conspiracy types...

Or it could be run by a guy who's trying to scam honest but gullible people out of their money. When Dr. Greer started selling alien-contacting lessons, my worst fears about him were confirmed.

...or 'cover-up' investigators

If the project had any experienced investigators, I would worry about cover-ups.

...or to conquer, in some way, people with open minds

There's a difference between open-mindedness and pure credulity. One can be open-minded without having to believe in alien spaceships and little gray aliens stealing cow lips.

In any case you seem to have this strange notion that the government has nothing better to do than sneak around stamping out all signs of improper thinking. Fascinating worldview, but not for me.

I have no evidence of coarse...

Of course not. That would give us something to talk about.

I believe that; most likely aliens exist, just not that they're visiting us via spaceship.

I believe aliens likely exist, and that they aren't visiting us in any way.

tardis
2007-Mar-15, 02:48 AM
"If his opinion is based on belief and not evidence, then what purpose does it serve to post it to a science board??

Personal beliefs that cannot substantiated with evidence are a waste of time."



If science has debunked the 'Apollo hoax', why are there these forums oon this board?

VPCCD
2007-Mar-15, 02:53 AM
"If his opinion is based on belief and not evidence, then what purpose does it serve to post it to a science board??

Personal beliefs that cannot substantiated with evidence are a waste of time."



If science has debunked the 'Apollo hoax', why are there these forums oon this board?

To inform people who still belive that they were faked (such as yourself) of the truth.

Occam
2007-Mar-15, 02:54 AM
Aldrin (and the other crew) only reported an object, which at the time was unidentified. No more, no less. It was later identified as a protective panel from the SIVB stage.

JayUtah
2007-Mar-15, 02:54 AM
If science has debunked the 'Apollo hoax', why are there these forums oon this board?

Because people still stubbornly cling to the debunked ideas and insist on talking about them.

AGN Fuel
2007-Mar-15, 02:56 AM
To clarify, what I'm saying is that I think possibly some testimony from astronauts(and others) may have been manipulated for counter intelligence purposes.

Would these be the same astronauts that you claim in your earlier thread never went to the moon? I only ask for clarification.

The Backroad Astronomer
2007-Mar-15, 03:03 AM
It is kind of hard to get a fix on what tardis is thinking about the moon landings.

Maksutov
2007-Mar-15, 03:06 AM
Would these be the same astronauts that you claim in your earlier thread never went to the moon? I only ask for clarification.Sure was some weird stuff flying around in that studio and out there in the desert back in the late 1960s and early 1970s.

I remember hitchhiking through the Painted Desert back in 1970 and seeing a horse with a name. Thought it looked kind of alien. Probably was a prop though, since its name included the letter "C".

Meanwhile, this and the other thread by the OP have to have, combined, one of the largest ratios of claims to evidence in the history of the BB. That is, if one is permitted to divide by zero.

:rolleyes:

The Backroad Astronomer
2007-Mar-15, 03:20 AM
May we can get tardis to disclose his thoughts on the whole situation.

Paul Beardsley
2007-Mar-15, 08:37 AM
A DIM deleted his own post would have been #4.
I thought that wasn't allowed? It's certainly annoying.

Paul Beardsley
2007-Mar-15, 08:42 AM
Would these be the same astronauts that you claim in your earlier thread never went to the moon? I only ask for clarification.
It's hilarious, isn't it? I've often noticed that the people who believe we didn't go to the moon (coz of the van Allen belts and so on) believe that aliens have no trouble dealing with the same problems when they come to visit us.

Let me see. Aldrin's actual testimony that he went to the moon is invalid. But Aldrin's imagined testimony that he saw an alien spacecraft on his way to the moon is hard evidence.

Gentlemen, we are through the looking glass.

Serenitude
2007-Mar-15, 09:23 AM
I thought that wasn't allowed? It's certainly annoying.

Yes, it is ;)

On tardis' statement: It's simply a cheap excuse to get out of the burden of proof. Stating "I believe...", "I suspect...", or "It's my opinion...", in this context, attempts to give the impression that you can spout off nonsense without being accountable for facts and evidence. Bullhockey. It's a coward's way out.

Van Rijn
2007-Mar-15, 10:53 AM
I thought that wasn't allowed? It's certainly annoying.

A.Dim's deletion comment was "irrelevant to OP." It's weird, but you can see if people have deleted posts if you aren't logged in. It's up to the mods to decide if it is reasonable in a particular instance. Every now and then I'll delete a post, almost always due to accidental double posting, but there have been a very few times where I've looked at a post and thought better of it immediately after posting, either as being quite off topic, or perhaps not the best thing to post on an emotional subject.

Van Rijn
2007-Mar-15, 11:01 AM
It's hilarious, isn't it? I've often noticed that the people who believe we didn't go to the moon (coz of the van Allen belts and so on) believe that aliens have no trouble dealing with the same problems when they come to visit us.

Let me see. Aldrin's actual testimony that he went to the moon is invalid. But Aldrin's imagined testimony that he saw an alien spacecraft on his way to the moon is hard evidence.

Gentlemen, we are through the looking glass.

I'm guessing that the thought process here is that NASA is part of one big conspiracy, and this (the incorrect report that Aldrin says he saw an alien ship) is just another part of the grand conspiracy.

Nicolas
2007-Mar-15, 12:23 PM
I trust many of you are familiar with this group of reputable former Air/Space/defense professionals who disclose various encounters with UFOs or other worldly creatures, including testimony from Buzz Aldrin about an apparent alien craft(s) that he saw.
Well, I'll give you a dollar if this group isn't funded by a U.S. intelligence agency, who's aim is to divide conspiracy types or 'cover-up' investigators, or to conquer, in some way, people with open minds, or other subculture groups.
Let me tell you what I heard first hand from Buzz. They were on their way to the moon, they saw a light moving against the stars. Stars don't do that, so it wasn't a star. but they didn't immediately tell Houston about it because they didn't want to appear like... (buzz stops the sentence here but his expression tells it all. When you think you see movement in the most desolated place ever visited, you do appear a bit confused, even if it turns out you look at something very mundane without realizing what it is :)). They thought it might have been the rocket stage that somehow came within sight again, even though being intentionally diverted from them. So when they finally contacted Houston, they asked the innocent question "Houston, do you know where the rocket stage is now", without giving further context. Houston replied after a while it was 6000 miles away from them, so they concluded (in the privacy of their craft) it likely wasn't that. The logical conclusion was then that they were seeing one of the 4 cover panels. Because they didn't know which of the 4 panels it was, indeed they saw an unidentified object, UFO. Only at the debriefing after the mission, they explained why they asked that tiny innocent question and what they concluded from the answer. (and they were correct in their assessment; the status quo indeed is that it is one of the 4 panels)

That's right, Buzz himself laughs about the UFO status of that object they saw.

If the US counterintelligence is funding a group that should give Buzz's UFo encounter some alien ring to it, they'd better stop the man himself from traveling the globe and claiming the exact opposite!

On a sidenote, he also said there were no little green men on the moon. Buzz really should be a quite annoying individual if they would be trying to sell his stories as alien encounters at the same time... The accusation makes no sense.

Now "the government" may possibly have helped turning some specific mishaps or sightings of secret military craft into wild UFO stories because it suited them well, but without any evidence, it has no place on this board, just like your claim that the Disclosure Project is indeed such a government funded intentional spreading of (false) UFO stories for whatever reason that suits them.

re open minds: note my signature :). And be careful not to confuse open minds with being gullible.


*-----------
On a more interesting note, did the 4 panels pose any danger of colliding with the craft again, or were they pushed far away by their release mechanisms?
(btw theoreticlly speaking, if fuel budgets an mission profile would have allowed for it and they felt like going on a field trip, Buzz would have been able to rendez-vous with the panels as he was the guy who developed unaided rendez-vous techniques :). Though I don't know wether his techniques would work in any situation.)

Kelfazin
2007-Mar-15, 03:40 PM
<snip>
On a more interesting note, did the 4 panels pose any danger of colliding with the craft again, or were they pushed far away by their release mechanisms?


It is my understanding that the release pushed the panels far enough away that would not pose a threat to the CSM/LM.

I wonder, would all the panels from all the flights have impacted the moon or are they now in heliocentric orbits?

ineluki
2007-Mar-15, 05:20 PM
If science has debunked the 'Apollo hoax', why are there these forums oon this board?

To enlight those, who honestly base their opinion on some kind of "evidence".
This "evidence" may be simply misunderstood, incorrect etc but the opinion was formed on some basis which can be discussed.

OTOH your opinion is based on nothing, therefor any discussion is pointless.

Swift
2007-Mar-15, 05:39 PM
Originally Posted by tardis
If science has debunked the 'Apollo hoax', why are there these forums oon this board?
To enlight those, who honestly base their opinion on some kind of "evidence".
This "evidence" may be simply misunderstood, incorrect etc but the opinion was formed on some basis which can be discussed.

OTOH your opinion is based on nothing, therefor any discussion is pointless.
I should also add that we occasionally do get someone who is genuinely unsure about the moon landings (after seeing the Fox program, for example) and has come to learn more. They will often ask specific questions (about the flag, or the shadows, or something else), get their questions answered, and leave knowing the real truth about Apollo. IMHO, this forum is most important for those people, and for the lurkers with the same questions.

Donnie B.
2007-Mar-15, 06:29 PM
Also, we just enjoy talking about the Apollo missions, and the people and machines that made it happen.

Paul Beardsley
2007-Mar-15, 07:15 PM
Also, we just enjoy talking about the Apollo missions, and the people and machines that made it happen.
Indeed my appreciation of the sheer achievement has been greatly enhanced by reading the posts of Jay and the other well-clued-up engineers. In fact I've gained a greater appreciation of engineering in general.

Contrast that with a few grumbling know-nothings who are trying to denigrate the most awesome endeavour in human history. Sorry HBs, but humans made it to the moon. It makes me proud to be human.

sts60
2007-Mar-15, 08:22 PM
"If his opinion is based on belief and not evidence, then what purpose does it serve to post it to a science board??

Personal beliefs that cannot substantiated with evidence are a waste of time."

If science has debunked the 'Apollo hoax', why are there these forums oon this board?

Because there are HBs who at least try to present evidence against the reality of the Apollo program. It's always flimsy and almost always has already been debunked a thousand times, but at least they sometimes try.

But saying something is a government disinformation operation, or engineers are liars, or whatever, without presenting any evidence, serves little purpose other than to publicize an unfounded bias.

Swift
2007-Mar-15, 10:02 PM
Indeed my appreciation of the sheer achievement has been greatly enhanced by reading the posts of Jay and the other well-clued-up engineers. In fact I've gained a greater appreciation of engineering in general.

Contrast that with a few grumbling know-nothings who are trying to denigrate the most awesome endeavour in human history. Sorry HBs, but humans made it to the moon. It makes me proud to be human.
I've said this to Jay, but the beauty of his logic and writing, as he takes apart an HB argument, should be classic examples in a technical writing course.

Paul Beardsley
2007-Mar-15, 10:30 PM
I've said this to Jay, but the beauty of his logic and writing, as he takes apart an HB argument, should be classic examples in a technical writing course.
Agreed.

I've had one novel, eight short stories and sixty book/film/game/play reviews published, but I still marvel at Jay's writing skills. He knows his subject, but he also knows how to make it humorous or penetrating or both!

JayUtah
2007-Mar-15, 10:48 PM
Thanks guys. My dad encouraged me to write a book, he having written or edited himself about two feet of shelf space on his expertise. So that's what I'll be doing as soon as I can.

Paul Beardsley
2007-Mar-15, 11:13 PM
Thanks guys. My dad encouraged me to write a book, he having written or edited himself about two feet of shelf space on his expertise. So that's what I'll be doing as soon as I can.
I wish you the very best of luck with it. In an ideal world you wouldn't need luck, but the publishing world is far from ideal!

Orion437
2007-Mar-16, 12:05 AM
STEVEN GREER

Reportedly plagiarizes the UFO work of others and sells as his own, sells do-it-yourself ET contact kits - now you too can steer in extraterrestrial spacecraft with a flashlight and never record them just like Doc Greer does. Made claims of contacting extraterrestrials through meditation. Claimed that U.S. military forces attacked a Colorado ET base inside a mountain using nerve gas, no evidence to back claim. Had dinner with CIA Director and spun tale of having briefed CIA Director about ETs for hours. Hosted press conference with credible UFO witnesses on Capitol Hill - ruined it and his own credibility by selling the work of others with his name on it and using bogus witnesses. Allegeldy attempted to charge Washington State MUFON members $2500.00 each to demonstrate how he can vector in UFOs - Greer got to choose the location and the time...mmmmmm.


SEE: Doc Greer Sells The Truth,


http://www.ufowatchdog.com/hall3.html


Greer: UFOlogy's Own Worst Enemy,

http://www.ufowatchdog.com/greer.html


CSETI,

http://www.ufowatchdog.com/greer_seti.html


Greer's claim of military attacking ET underground base with nerve gas

http://www.gaiaguys.net/MtBlanca.htm


and a refutation of Greer's claims of having briefed the CIA on UFOs.


http://www.ufowatchdog.com/greer_letter.html





http://www.cseti.org/programs/Trainings2004.htm

Ambassador to the Universe Trainings

Opportunities for 1-week expeditions with world-renowned

CSETI International Director, Steven M. Greer, M.D.

Each training provides the skills for anyone to form their own research team capable of contacting extraterrestrial life forms within the framework of Universal Peace. The foundation of the work is the understanding and experience of remote viewing and remote vectoring of ET spacecraft into a research site. Participants will also train with ET communication systems including lasers and electronics as well as thought interaction with machines. These systems allow ET technologies to interface directly via the framework of universal consciousness, thus negating the limitations of linear time and space. We frequently have very close encounters with ET craft during these trainings and expeditions.

Registration Fees :

# $700 if this is your first week-long CSETI training, $650 if you have already attended one.This fee includes tuition and training materials. Note: First-timers with the training kit or Dr. Greer's ET Contact book get $25 to $50 discount. Read about the Working Group Training Kit (or order separately) here.


And there goes down the toilet one of my lasts hopes of a credible and genuine UFO research...

PhantomWolf
2007-Mar-16, 12:10 AM
And there goes down the toilet one of my lasts hopes of a credible and genuine UFO research...

Hmmm, wasn't that pointed out to you back in this thread (http://www.bautforum.com/showthread.php?t=53852)?

JayUtah
2007-Mar-16, 12:28 AM
And there goes down the toilet one of my lasts hopes of a credible and genuine UFO research...

Unfortunately he is only one of a number of charlatans who have lied and cheated their way into the hearts (and pocketbooks) of gullible people on a number of pseudoscientific topics over the years. And that activity keeps away legitimate researchers who understandably don't want to be mistaken for one of these people.

Skeptics don't fear the unknown. They don't fear the unexplainable. They don't fear the extraordinary. They fear the known, explainable, and ordinary deceitfulness of some human beings.

The Backroad Astronomer
2007-Mar-16, 12:33 AM
Well I wish that the real seti group could sue over any misuse of their name or likeness of there name like above in Orions posr.

tardis
2007-Mar-16, 01:22 AM
I find it very odd that reputable people from our government would Stand behind Greer's association. I also find it very odd that a respectable Virgina doctor thought he could do better if he researched ridiculous UFO claims.

DogsHead
2007-Mar-16, 01:54 AM
I find it very odd that reputable people from our government would Stand behind Greer's association. I also find it very odd that a respectable Virgina doctor thought he could do better if he researched ridiculous UFO claims.
I have a feeling (and it may have even been quantified) that the more outrageous the supernatural claim, the more likely wonks will throw wads of cash at it. It seems that Greer is just practicing that good ol' capitalism...
In a fit of forum rubbernecking over at UM, I watch two people flame each other for claiming that either one could "flare a Psi-ball" Neither was claiming that the production of a light emitting ball of mental energy was impossible, just that it was impossible to "flare" one after only 2 months!
Mind -> Boggle.
and close to OT....

The Backroad Astronomer
2007-Mar-16, 02:10 AM
I find it very odd that reputable people from our government would Stand behind Greer's association. I also find it very odd that a respectable Virgina doctor thought he could do better if he researched ridiculous UFO claims.
Well they are people in the government who back the discovery institute it does not mean the discovery institute is credible.

Orion437
2007-Mar-16, 02:22 AM
And there goes down the toilet one of my lasts hopes of a credible and genuine UFO research...

Hmmm, wasn't that pointed out to you back in this thread (http://www.bautforum.com/showthread.php?t=53852)?

Yes, finally some witnesess are hard to believe / liars.

tardis
2007-Mar-16, 02:26 AM
I'm sensing some sarcastic humor in this thread, at my expense, the rules clearly state that this is no good.

I find it telling that so many anti conspiracy people lecture about being rational, and seeking truth through 'close' examination of the facts. Ha... notice my use of punctuation.

Science is in it's infancy, Facts are subjective, The human mind can't possibly have knowledge of a fraction of the details of something involving many studied minds.


Why is it such a stretch to think that DP is friendly to intelligence, it certainly puts aliens back on the CT's table. There's my circumstantial evidence.

Maksutov
2007-Mar-16, 02:44 AM
It is my understanding that the release pushed the panels far enough away that would not pose a threat to the CSM/LM.

I wonder, would all the panels from all the flights have impacted the moon or are they now in heliocentric orbits?Might be a combination of the two, plus perhaps a free return Earth-Moon figure-eight. Post Apollo 7, it was decided to jettison the panels to eliminate any possibility of a panel/CSM collision during LM removal. The velocity imparted by the jettison springs was about 5 MPH. This and the orientation of the panels vis-a-vis the overall trajectory would determine their ultimate fate. All this was done before the final evasive burn of the S-IVB to prevent any possibility of collision with the CSM/LM stack.

BTW, the S-IVBs from Apollo 8 through 12 are in solar orbit. Apollo 13's probably is, and the ones from Apollos 14 through 17 impacted the Moon.

Of course, according to our ATM friend Jerry, there is no way to correctly derive the resulting change in trajectory due to spring constant variation, variable G, variable C, etc., etc., all of which were responsible for the horrible failure of the Huygens probe at Titan.

http://img137.imageshack.us/img137/566/iconwink6tn.gif

Maksutov
2007-Mar-16, 02:51 AM
Well I'm out gunned and out numbered here as my only technical expertise is in media production and even at that I'd prefer to be more of an artist.


[edit]Science is in it's infancy, Facts are subjective, The human mind can't possibly have knowledge of a fraction of the details of something involving many studied minds.Do you perhaps notice just the slightest contradiction between these statements?

PhantomWolf
2007-Mar-16, 03:00 AM
the S-IVBs from Apollo 8 through 12 are in solar orbit

12's is a little strange. It actually went into a Lunar/Earth Orbit for a number of years, then into solar orbit. It has been back since (in 2002-3), when it did a few orbits before being thrown back out into solar orbit and is projected to return back to earth orbit in a few years time to do the same.

Apollo 13's probably is

Apollo 13's booster impacted the moon at latitude 2.75&#176; south and longitude 27.86&#176; west, 35.4 n mi from the target point.

tardis
2007-Mar-16, 03:01 AM
Do you perhaps notice just the slightest contradiction between these statements?


No

AGN Fuel
2007-Mar-16, 03:02 AM
On a more interesting note, did the 4 panels pose any danger of colliding with the craft again, or were they pushed far away by their release mechanisms?

The SLA's had a spring release mechanism which ejected them (roughly orthoganally) at ~1.5 metres/second. There was no risk of them colliding with the CSM/LM stack once they had cleanly separated.



Why is it such a stretch to think that DP is friendly to intelligence, it certainly puts aliens back on the CT's table.

Sorry - I've missed something somewhere. What is DP?

Maksutov
2007-Mar-16, 03:03 AM
That's what I get by going from memory. Therefore Apollo 12 was the S-IVB mistaken as a new asteroid? That would seem to work out.

Yeah, just Googled on it and that's the one.

AGN Fuel
2007-Mar-16, 03:04 AM
Apollo 13's probably is

Apollo 13's booster impacted the moon at latitude 2.75&#176; south and longitude 27.86&#176; west, 35.4 n mi from the target point.


Thereby prompting [Lovell's?] wry observation that at least something had worked on the mission! (http://www1.jsc.nasa.gov/er/seh/pg15.htm)

Maksutov
2007-Mar-16, 03:19 AM
Originally Posted by tardis http://www.bautforum.com/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.bautforum.com/showthread.php?p=948407#post948407)
Well I'm out gunned and out numbered here as my only technical expertise is in media production and even at that I'd prefer to be more of an artist.

Originally Posted by tardis http://www.bautforum.com/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.bautforum.com/showthread.php?p=948407#post948407)
[edit]Science is in it's infancy, Facts are subjective, The human mind can't possibly have knowledge of a fraction of the details of something involving many studied minds.

Do you perhaps notice just the slightest contradiction between these statements?
NoWell, let me help you out then, since you're here to learn.

In the first statement you say your technical expertise is limited to media production. This by definition excludes you from the ranks of scientists and probably most engineers.

Then in the second statement, despite having admitted to having little if any knowledge of the subject matter (i.e., science, specifically spaceflight, astronomy, etc.), you then proceeded to lecture us on science's limitations, that objective evidence is somehow subjective, and something in the last sentence that appears to mean one human mind can't understand something that many human minds understand.

The contradiction is someone criticizing fields of which they have little or no knowledge.

This isn't an insult nor should it be construed to be; instead, it's to help you avoid getting yourself painted into a corner, knowledge and discussion-wise.

The best thing for you to do, if this whole area of subject matter is really of interest, would be to get some introductory texts on science and math. The two can't be separated once one gets at a certain stage of 101. Then branch off into physics, astronomy, mechanics, thermodynamics, and all the related engineering fields.

Not long into this experience, you'll find yourself answering a lot of your own questions, and formulating new ones that are really meaningful.

Good luck!

Gillianren
2007-Mar-16, 03:36 AM
I've had one novel, eight short stories and sixty book/film/game/play reviews published, but I still marvel at Jay's writing skills. He knows his subject, but he also knows how to make it humorous or penetrating or both!

Under your own name? (Translated, would I be able to find a copy of your novel?)

tardis
2007-Mar-16, 03:44 AM
Well, let me help you out then, since you're here to learn.

In the first statement you say your technical expertise is limited to media production. This by definition excludes you from the ranks of scientists and probably most engineers.

Then in the second statement, despite having admitted to having little if any knowledge of the subject matter (i.e., science, specifically spaceflight, astronomy, etc.), you then proceeded to lecture us on science's limitations, that objective evidence is somehow subjective, and something in the last sentence that appears to mean one human mind can't understand something that many human minds understand.

The contradiction is someone criticizing fields of which they have little or no knowledge.

This isn't an insult nor should it be construed to be; instead, it's to help you avoid getting yourself painted into a corner, knowledge and discussion-wise.

The best thing for you to do, if this whole area of subject matter is really of interest, would be to get some introductory texts on science and math. The two can't be separated once one gets at a certain stage of 101. Then branch off into physics, astronomy, mechanics, thermodynamics, and all the related engineering fields.

Not long into this experience, you'll find yourself answering a lot of your own questions, and formulating new ones that are really meaningful.

Good luck!


Hey, Well, I'm no scientist and you're no philosopher or anthropologist.

Serenitude
2007-Mar-16, 03:57 AM
Hey, Well, I'm no scientist and you're no philosopher or anthropologist.

Meaning?

And btw, I am formally trained in both a) Science (Anthropology and Nursing) and b) Philosophy (my minor in college and a lifelong love).

As both, I agree with Maksutov. Would you care to elaborate on your meaning?

Maksutov
2007-Mar-16, 04:08 AM
Hey, Well, I'm no scientist and you're no philosopher or anthropologist.Going OT again, eh? Knowledge of philosophy and/or anthropology isn't going to help you understand simple Newtonian physics or orbital mechanics.

BTW, didn't someone define "straw man" for this fellow some time back?

I'm getting the feeling you're here to argue rather than engage in a meaningful discussion that might help you understand a range of things from the differences among the universal gravitational constant (it's the Big G, I tell you! (paraphrase of Jonathan Winters)), the acceleration of gravity due to the presence of mass, standard gravity (has to do with something called the Earth) all the way to how exactly we went to the Moon from 1968 to 1972.

PS: Re not being a philosopher, well, Hegel and I might disagree with you there. Schopenhauer too.

Speaking of standards, unfortunately, this and the other thread are starting to resemble that good old CT carousel.

Oh well.

captain swoop
2007-Mar-16, 07:52 AM
cheese shop

Maksutov
2007-Mar-16, 09:10 AM
cheese shopwith all the spam you can eat!

If the Vikings left any, that is...

:lol:

Serenitude
2007-Mar-16, 09:12 AM
with all the spam you can eat!

If the Vikings left any, that is...

:lol:

I'm sure there's a hidden meaning there, but I've been assured from a credible source that you're no philosipher, so... :razz: :D

Maksutov
2007-Mar-16, 09:25 AM
I'm sure there's a hidden meaning there,That's right! (http://home.triad.rr.com/spamchef/spamskit.html)
but I've been assured from a credible source that you're no philosipher, so... :razz: :DOf course I'm not (http://orangecow.org/pythonet/sketches/cheese.htm). What I'm interested in is the synthesis of the Platonic philosophical thesis and the Socratic antithesis, combined with appropriate commentary and critiques by Nietzsche.

BTW, the transcriptions always seem to forget about the two men dancing to the bouzouki music.

;)

Whirlpool
2007-Mar-16, 09:29 AM
Shut that Bloody Bazuki Off!

:D

Serenitude
2007-Mar-16, 09:33 AM
hehe well put. 2 of my favorites, but...


NOBODY EXPECTS THE SPANISH INQUISITION!!!

Nicolas
2007-Mar-16, 09:40 AM
Science is in it's infancy, Facts are subjective,

To quote somebody in your other thread:

"Spock, is that you?"

That's the second time you make exactly the same kind of argument as that guy. I do hope for all of us your stay here will be more pleasant than his.

Whirlpool
2007-Mar-16, 09:41 AM
????... im thinking .. what you are thinking....and I saw david said that in the other thread......

?????......Spock ...is that you?

Paul Beardsley
2007-Mar-16, 09:54 AM
Under your own name? (Translated, would I be able to find a copy of your novel?)
Thanks for asking, Gillian!

All my fiction was written under my own name except for the novel. It's a Doctor Who spin-off called The Suns of Caresh, written under the pseudonym Paul Saint. (It was available on Amazon when I last looked - actually for another thread here. Don't take the blurb too seriously, though - it's a bit misleading.)

As it's you asking, Gillian, I'll mention an irritation I had at the editing process. Because of the house style, every instance of "on to" got changed to "onto" even though they are not the same word/phrase. ("After the wedding we went on to the reception where I climbed onto the table.")

Keeping this post a bit more on-topic (tho' more for tardis' other thread), it's an issue with me that wherever the TARDIS lands, when the Doctor and his companions step out, it's always Earth-normal gravity with "down" towards the bottom of the screen. It can be another planet, an asteroid, an alien spaceship, a derelict spaceship, a plastic tube between spaceships, or whatever. (Other media-originated space adventures are just as bad, of course, although they made some effort in Babylon 5.)

So, in Suns of Caresh, I've made some attempt to treat the universe as a physically variable place. Meanwhile, I do suspect that some HBs' opinions are affected by the misleading treatment of alien environments. "Why do the Apollo astronauts walk funny? Nobody walks funny in Doctor Who except in the Patrick Troughton episode The Moonbase which was set on the moon and they were all leaping about in a carefree manner."

Paul Beardsley
2007-Mar-16, 10:04 AM
To quote somebody in your other thread:

"Spock, is that you?"

That's the second time you make exactly the same kind of argument as that guy. I do hope for all of us your stay here will be more pleasant than his.
I did wonder this a while ago, but there are significant differences.

Tardis is making much more of an effort to answer questions than Spock ever did. Tardis seems to be posting at a regular time which is different to the time that Spock usually posted. Tardis has acknowledged points, which I don't think Spock ever did, and Tardis has (mostly) refrained from being offensive. (His one major faux pas - calling engineers liars - sounded as if he didn't realise there are a lot of engineers on BAUT.)

OTOH tardis has not answered the above question - but then, if he is not Spock's sockpuppet, it would probably make no sense to him.

Nicolas
2007-Mar-16, 10:45 AM
I didn't mean that as a literal question, but as a fear that at least the patten seen would be similar. I do not expect a reply on that question :).

And yes, there are quite a bit engineers on this board.

Serenitude
2007-Mar-16, 12:08 PM
Sigh. Nobody ever remembers me :evil:


Spock, is that you?

*sobs uncontrollably*

Gillianren
2007-Mar-16, 12:23 PM
Wait, who are you again?

Serenitude
2007-Mar-16, 12:45 PM
Wait, who are you again?

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Nicolas
2007-Mar-16, 12:49 PM
I did remember you, but didn't want to put a name on the quote, as I didn't mean it as accusation or real question.

JayUtah
2007-Mar-16, 01:16 PM
I find it very odd that reputable people from our government would Stand behind Greer's association.

Which people would those be? Names?

The only name you invoked was Buzz Aldrin, who didn't see an alien spaceship and isn't affiliated with the Disclosure Project.

I also find it very odd that a respectable Virgina doctor thought he could do better if he researched ridiculous UFO claims.

Not add at all if you research how "respectable" that doctor has been.

JayUtah
2007-Mar-16, 01:35 PM
I'm sensing some sarcastic humor in this thread, at my expense, the rules clearly state that this is no good.

So now you're a moderator? Why don't you let the moderators stick to moderating and you concentrate on presenting your arguments, such as they are.

And I'm sensing that you called me and my colleagues liars and have yet to put anything behind that except your expressions of belief.

I find it telling that so many anti conspiracy people lecture about being rational...

What's so telling about it? That's what separates us from witch-burners.

Science is in it's infancy, Facts are subjective, The human mind can't possibly have knowledge of a fraction of the details of something involving many studied minds.

Tell that to a doctor the next time he saves the life of a critically ill patient, or to the air crew then next time you fly in a modern airliner.

I frankly don't understand why people think they have to poo all over science in order to say they're open-minded. Many of these pseudoscience debates seem to boil down to left-brainers versus right-brainers.

Why is it such a stretch to think that DP is friendly to intelligence...

Because the Disclosure Project has pretty much shown its colors as a get-rich-quick scheme for some, a get-famous scheme for others, and a travesty of anything approaching reason.

I'm serious when I tell you to go look at the various UFO organizations from the 1950s and 1960s and evaluate their claims. History forgotten is doomed to be repeated. I gave Greer the benefit of the doubt when he first started, but now there isn't much doubt.

Gerrsun
2007-Mar-16, 02:02 PM
Hey, Well, I'm no scientist and you're no philosopher or anthropologist.

I'm an anthropologist! :P

Well.....that's what that expensive piece of paper says anyways.

As for philosopher

American Heritage Dictionary - phi·los·o·pher (fĭ-lŏs'ə-fər) Pronunciation Key
n.
1.A student of or specialist in philosophy.
2.A person who lives and thinks according to a particular philosophy.
3.A person who is calm and rational under any circumstances.

Definitions 2 and 3 do describe some of the posts here..... ;)

JayUtah
2007-Mar-16, 02:06 PM
Hey, Well, I'm no scientist...

Clearly. So kindly stop calling scientists liars, and kindly stop trying to educate everyone on the state of scientific understanding.

...and you're no philosopher or anthropologist.

Well, I studied anthropology under Dr. Michael Finnegan at Kansas State University. Not that I'm very good at it, and not that it's yet apparently relevant to this question, but if you want to make an anthropology argument, I'll do my best to follow it.

Scientists are consummate philosophers; science was once known as natural philosophy. The epistemology of science is a fascinating, rich topic in philosophy, in which I'm rather experienced. But I suspect you mean other branches of philosophy that don't involve investigation so much as contemplation. Those pursuits excel at wondering what might be. But when it comes to determining what actually is, philosophy leaves off and science begins.

sts60
2007-Mar-16, 03:06 PM
$700 if this is your first week-long CSETI training, $650 if you have already attended one.

I will train you to talk to ETIs for half that price, and you can do it from your computer. I absolutely guarantee that you will be able to talk to* ETIs after finishing my course.



*No guarantee that they will talk back.

Infinity Watcher
2007-Mar-16, 06:46 PM
Science is in it's infancy, Facts are subjective, The human mind can't possibly have knowledge of a fraction of the details of something involving many studied minds.


I wasn't going to post in this thread but then I saw this, facts are not subjective. Interpretations of facts may be but it doesn't matter what people believe, the universe won't alter itself for your, mine or anybody elses beliefs, the darwin awards are something of a proof of this, merely believing an action to be safe and/or sensible won't make it so. Methicillin won't do someone much good against MRSA whether they believe its MSSA or not, a piano dropped off a cliff hits the ground no matter how many people believe it will fly upwards.

To be honest I'm a bit puzzled by the belief that facts are subjective, opinions, yes, but a world with subjective facts would probably end up looking something like the Matrix films if belief and perception was all it took to change the world. Perhaps someone can enlighten me as to how this particular belief persists (for clarity I should probably point out that this isn't specifically aimed at tardis, just that tardis isn't the first person to be seen with such a belief and this thread jogged a memory).

hplasm
2007-Mar-16, 07:03 PM
As for philosopher

American Heritage Dictionary - phi·los·o·pher (fĭ-lŏs'ə-fər) Pronunciation Key
n.
1.A student of or specialist in philosophy.
2.A person who lives and thinks according to a particular philosophy.
3.A person who is calm and rational under any circumstances.



4. Is called Bruce.

Joe Durnavich
2007-Mar-16, 07:26 PM
Darnit. Now you have The Philosopher's Song running through my head...

Swift
2007-Mar-16, 11:20 PM
Darnit. Now you have The Philosopher's Song running through my head...
"I drink, therefore, I am"

Maksutov
2007-Mar-16, 11:36 PM
"I drink, therefore, I am"One evening the host asked his teetotaler guest if he'd like a drink.

To which the teetotaler replied, "I drink not." and promptly disappeared.

Serenitude
2007-Mar-17, 01:25 AM
Thanks. Now I'm singing this to myself...

"Immanuel Kant was a mean fireant who was very rarely stable..." :lol:

The Backroad Astronomer
2007-Mar-17, 02:01 AM
well A belated thanks from me too.

The Backroad Astronomer
2007-Mar-17, 02:34 AM
well A belated thanks from me too.
d'oh wrong thread, I guess this want happens when I post when it busy at work well repost in right thread.

Whirlpool
2007-Mar-17, 04:42 AM
I saw that , when you post something on the other thread...

;)

What were you doing anyway? Not looking on where you are posting. :p

The Backroad Astronomer
2007-Mar-17, 04:49 AM
I saw that , when you post something on the other thread...

;)

What were you doing anyway? Not looking on where you are posting. :p
I usually post from work, a call center making reservations at hotels in the US, tonight there is a major snowstrom in east coast which is moving into my area, St Patricks is tomorrow, so a lot of people calling in trying to get a room and a lot people here did not show up, or went home early because of the strom, and also one hotel sent out a promotional emal, back to our regular programming.

sts60
2007-Mar-17, 05:43 AM
Hey, Well, I'm no scientist...

...and you're no philosopher or anthropologist.

(Gerrsun and JayUtah mention anthropology backgrounds)

(Waves hand in me-too fashion) I have twin undergrad degrees in space physics and anthropology.
(Shuffles off to bed to wait for next call)

Serenitude
2007-Mar-17, 06:12 AM
Hey, Well, I'm no scientist...

...and you're no philosopher or anthropologist.

(Gerrsun and JayUtah mention anthropology backgrounds)

(Waves hand in me-too fashion) I have twin undergrad degrees in space physics and anthropology.
(Shuffles off to bed to wait for next call)

Heh, yeah. Tardis' statement kinda backfired, eh? :lol:

Maksutov
2007-Mar-17, 06:30 AM
Originally Posted by sts60 http://www.bautforum.com/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.bautforum.com/showthread.php?p=949454#post949454)
Hey, Well, I'm no scientist...

...and you're no philosopher or anthropologist.

(Gerrsun and JayUtah mention anthropology backgrounds)

(Waves hand in me-too fashion) I have twin undergrad degrees in space physics and anthropology.
(Shuffles off to bed to wait for next call)
Heh, yeah. Tardis' statement kinda backfired, eh? :lol:That statement was originally directed at me as a result this, uh, conversation:

Well I'm out gunned and out numbered here as my only technical expertise is in media production and even at that I'd prefer to be more of an artist.
[edit]Science is in it's infancy, Facts are subjective, The human mind can't possibly have knowledge of a fraction of the details of something involving many studied minds.
Do you perhaps notice just the slightest contradiction between these statements?
No
Well, let me help you out then, since you're here to learn.

In the first statement you say your technical expertise is limited to media production. This by definition excludes you from the ranks of scientists and probably most engineers.

Then in the second statement, despite having admitted to having little if any knowledge of the subject matter (i.e., science, specifically spaceflight, astronomy, etc.), you then proceeded to lecture us on science's limitations, that objective evidence is somehow subjective, and something in the last sentence that appears to mean one human mind can't understand something that many human minds understand.

The contradiction is someone criticizing fields of which they have little or no knowledge.

This isn't an insult nor should it be construed to be; instead, it's to help you avoid getting yourself painted into a corner, knowledge and discussion-wise.

The best thing for you to do, if this whole area of subject matter is really of interest, would be to get some introductory texts on science and math. The two can't be separated once one gets at a certain stage of 101. Then branch off into physics, astronomy, mechanics, thermodynamics, and all the related engineering fields.

Not long into this experience, you'll find yourself answering a lot of your own questions, and formulating new ones that are really meaningful.

Good luck!
Hey, Well, I'm no scientist and you're no philosopher or anthropologist.
Going OT again, eh? Knowledge of philosophy and/or anthropology isn't going to help you understand simple Newtonian physics or orbital mechanics.

BTW, didn't someone define "straw man" for this fellow some time back?

I'm getting the feeling you're here to argue rather than engage in a meaningful discussion that might help you understand a range of things from the differences among the universal gravitational constant (it's the Big G, I tell you! (paraphrase of Jonathan Winters)), the acceleration of gravity due to the presence of mass, standard gravity (has to do with something called the Earth) all the way to how exactly we went to the Moon from 1968 to 1972.

PS: Re not being a philosopher, well, Hegel and I might disagree with you there. Schopenhauer too.Philosophy was one of my favorite non-major subjects in school, and I continued to pursue learning about it after graduate school. Next to science and science fiction books, most of my library is well-worn books on philosophy.

Yup, another backfire and a really good prototypical example of a straw man.

:rolleyes:

Whirlpool
2007-Mar-17, 06:48 AM
Guys... be nice to sp...uhh.. tardis...

;)

JayUtah
2007-Mar-17, 04:09 PM
...I have twin undergrad degrees in space physics and anthropology.

Mine was only two classes, and they were in physical anthropology with a heavy emphasis on osteology. But Finnegan (http://www.ksu.edu/sasw/anthro/finnegan.html) was one of my all-time favorite professors. He was the Kansas state medical examiner and one of the scientists who later worked on the exhumation and identification of Jesse James. He also has a wicked, engaging sense of humor.

Serenitude
2007-Mar-17, 05:46 PM
I can remember being 8 or 9 years old, and visiting my Grandma. Got bored, wandered through her books. Found "History of Philosophy" (or something similarly titled) by Will Durant. 10 or 15 pages on just about everybody. Really whet the appetite. Didn't take long to get into Descarte, Voltaire, Hume, and Nietzche. In fact, I think the first two non-compilations I read were Ecce Homo and Thus Spake Zarathustra, at about 10 or so.

But yeah, what would we know? ;)

drage
2007-Mar-17, 10:04 PM
I'll believe the UFO thing once astronomers start seeing things in their telescopes. All those observatories and people with telescopes would be seeing alot more anomalous objects, if we were being visited at the kind of rate suggested by UFO proponents.

If i see one more bad Bob Lazar special i think i'll commit suicide - only kidding.

I do believe there is other life in the universe (from a carbon-centric perspective) i just dont think we've come across it yet.

Paul Beardsley
2007-Mar-17, 10:45 PM
I'll believe the UFO thing once astronomers start seeing things in their telescopes. All those observatories and people with telescopes would be seeing alot more anomalous objects, if we were being visited at the kind of rate suggested by UFO proponents.
And of course with so many people carrying mobile phones with the facility to record motion pictures, you'd think we'd have loads of footage of aliens by now. Funny how it's just not happening.