MOON LANDINGS 'FAKE': Shock video shows 'Stanley Kubrick' admit historic event was 'H

Discussion in 'Moon Landing' started by Destroyer of illusions, Dec 12, 2015.

You are viewing posts in the Conspiracy Theory forum. PF does not allow misinformation. However, please note that posts could occasionally contain content in violation of our policies prior to our staff intervening.

  1. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    5,102
    Likes Received:
    779
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Repeat spam. The imaginary "viewers" who never agree with your stupid and gullible claims?

    Debunking The Apollo Moon Hoax (debunking-a-moron.blogspot.com)

    Cosmored/Fatfreddy88/Drifty/Scott/Rocky has a whole series of evasion tactics :-

    1. For images or video: "Nothing that's fakable can be used as proof as it might be fake."

    He will never apply this moronic circular logic to his own images and videos. He will never actually prove it is faked or offer the number of people involved in such.

    2. For websites: "It's possible that your sites are genuine and it's possible that some public-relations agency created them to help fool the public. Something that may or may not be bogus can't be used as proof." Source.
    or
    "That's a disinfo site."

    He will never apply this moronic circular logic to his own appallingly inept websites. He will never address any website that solidly refutes his claims. He never offers any proof that any website is "disinfo" or "public-relations".

    3. For Expert Testimony: "Only a person with a high background in photography would be able to deal with it "

    For "photography" insert anything. He is a layman on everything associated with space travel so uses this evasion tactic frequently. Basically if he doesn't understand it, it is ignored and of course the person providing the information must automatically be in on the moronic hoax.

    4. For Rebuttal: "...so we already know what you posted is sophistry. "
    or
    "I can't say I'm one hundred percent sure he's a paid disinfo agent but his behavior fits the profile perfectly."

    This enables him to completely ignore any response, which he routinely does anyway, but throws this in for effect. Needless to say, he will never offer anything to backup his ad hominem statement.

    5. Miscellaneous: ".anyone who sees it will see that he's just a paid sophist."

    This is probably the worst one of all. For this enormous diversionary statement, he gets to ignore every single thing written by an expert in almost every aspect of the Apollo Missions. He gets to ignore a concise website detailing debunks for almost all his total crap. He gets to ignore every post made where he always get his ass handed to him. The basis for this is his "credibility test".

    6. Credibility Test: "This calls for a credibility test. XXXXXXX maintains that the Chinese spacewalk was real and not faked in a water tank. Do you agree with him?

    This is where the spammer uses one of his pre-determined idiotic conspiracies or erroneous claims as the yardstick for a credibility test. He is the arbitrator of its provenance therefore anyone who disagrees with it can now be referred to as "discredited" and all their rebuttal can be ignored.

    7. When all else fails: "I think the rest are moot now that you`ve been discredited and there are a lot of clear anomalies that prove the footage ...."

    So when he routinely gets his claim debunked, it is "moot" because of "all the others". It never occurs to him that all the other evidence has been debunked and was also "moot" when it was addressed. When pushed to provide a list of items to address, at all costs he will not do this because it can be seen where they have all been debunked.

    8. Just deny everything: "I've never seen it debunked. I've seen people try to obfuscate it and then consider it to have been debunked." or "I can't see what you're referring to."

    He's never seen ANYTHING debunked? An utterly ludicrous statement that he uses based on his own inept layman understanding. His ignorance apart, he seeks to pigeon hole every single debunk into responses that he says are diversion, because he says so. Or, he simply denies seeing something that is completely irrefutably obvious.

    9. Idiotic Closes: "You'd get laughed out of the debating hall ..."

    or

    "you're about as impressive as the Black Knight in this video"


    The sheer irony of this is always lost on him. If ever there was somebody who behaved like the Black Knight - as his arm gets chopped off it's a "moot point" it would be this serial forum spammer. There is not a debating environment on this planet where this person would show up to. He knows more than anyone that he would get the floor wiped with his drivel.

    10. Divert/Obfuscate/Re-spam: This is where he avoids the item completely and gish-gallops away with repeated spam. Almost certainly he will keep avoiding the original claim.


    11. Never mind that - look over here: When this hopeless individual has exhausted his inept repertoire of responses comes his most used spam. He resorts to spamming his wall of crap and ignoring the main issue!

    "Anyway, there's a ton of proof that the missions were faked and zero proof that they were real."

    What a sad, sad liar this person is. They have been humiliated completely on dozens of subjects, thousands of times on Apollo, yet they spew this cut and paste hogwash almost every time.
    This person has been doing all of the above across 100's of forums for (best guess) coming up to 17 years. He cuts and pastes duplicate posts, responses, key phrases and dismissal videos. He determines any one or more of the above and posts them out, then slams a huge post with repeated and debunked bullshit. There is simply no level of response that can get through to somebody who has terminal Dunning and Kruger syndrome.


    You aren't the spokesperson for "anyone". You are the most ignorant layman possible, your opinion is of zero value.

    You are the most ignorant layman possible, your opinion is of zero value. The imaginary "viewers" who never agree with your stupid and gullible claims?
     
  2. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    5,268
    Likes Received:
    845
    Trophy Points:
    113
    (from post #199)
    The moderator closed the thread on February 16th.
    https://projectavalon.net/forum4/sh...tion-is-fake&p=1411426&viewfull=1#post1411426

    I started this thread on February 19th.
    https://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?114105-Are-the-unmanned-Mars-missions-being-faked

    Neither one of us got banned on the 16th. I was commenting on why he closed the thread. Tell us why you think he closed the thread. He didn't close this thread on the same subject.
    https://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?90692-Welcome-to-the-International-Fake-Station-ISS

    I think he probably closed it because I kept asking you pro-official version posters to comment on the Chinese spacewalk.
    https://projectavalon.net/forum4/sh...tion-is-fake&p=1411401&viewfull=1#post1411401

    You people kept ignoring my requests which was making you look like you didn't even believe your own arguments. He probably banned you when he banned me later to try to maintain the illusion that his forum was objective when he banned a truther. The disinfo program is pretty vast so I wouldn't be surprised if you two were in cahoots on this.

    Do you think it strange that he didn't close this thread...
    https://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?88934-A-2nd-picture-of-the-Mars-rodent-spot

    ...but he closed my thread (see second link above)?


    You claim victory even when you get exposed as a sophist so as not to attract too much attention to it. Here's an example.
    http://www.politicalforum.com/index...-they-are-on-the-moon.580330/#post-1072162665

    You're trying to sway those viewers who only scan the threads and don't see that you don't even believe your own arguments.
     
  3. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    5,102
    Likes Received:
    779
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I think you are actually mentally ill.

    That's an example of me kicking your ignorant butt.

    The viewers who never believe you and all think you are a nutcase.

    Debunking The Apollo Moon Hoax (debunking-a-moron.blogspot.com)

    Cosmored/Fatfreddy88/Drifty/Scott/Rocky has a whole series of evasion tactics :-

    1. For images or video: "Nothing that's fakable can be used as proof as it might be fake."

    He will never apply this moronic circular logic to his own images and videos. He will never actually prove it is faked or offer the number of people involved in such.

    2. For websites: "It's possible that your sites are genuine and it's possible that some public-relations agency created them to help fool the public. Something that may or may not be bogus can't be used as proof." Source.
    or
    "That's a disinfo site."

    He will never apply this moronic circular logic to his own appallingly inept websites. He will never address any website that solidly refutes his claims. He never offers any proof that any website is "disinfo" or "public-relations".

    3. For Expert Testimony: "Only a person with a high background in photography would be able to deal with it "

    For "photography" insert anything. He is a layman on everything associated with space travel so uses this evasion tactic frequently. Basically if he doesn't understand it, it is ignored and of course the person providing the information must automatically be in on the moronic hoax.

    4. For Rebuttal: "...so we already know what you posted is sophistry. "
    or
    "I can't say I'm one hundred percent sure he's a paid disinfo agent but his behavior fits the profile perfectly."

    This enables him to completely ignore any response, which he routinely does anyway, but throws this in for effect. Needless to say, he will never offer anything to backup his ad hominem statement.

    5. Miscellaneous: ".anyone who sees it will see that he's just a paid sophist."

    This is probably the worst one of all. For this enormous diversionary statement, he gets to ignore every single thing written by an expert in almost every aspect of the Apollo Missions. He gets to ignore a concise website detailing debunks for almost all his total crap. He gets to ignore every post made where he always get his ass handed to him. The basis for this is his "credibility test".

    6. Credibility Test: "This calls for a credibility test. XXXXXXX maintains that the Chinese spacewalk was real and not faked in a water tank. Do you agree with him?

    This is where the spammer uses one of his pre-determined idiotic conspiracies or erroneous claims as the yardstick for a credibility test. He is the arbitrator of its provenance therefore anyone who disagrees with it can now be referred to as "discredited" and all their rebuttal can be ignored.

    7. When all else fails: "I think the rest are moot now that you`ve been discredited and there are a lot of clear anomalies that prove the footage ...."

    So when he routinely gets his claim debunked, it is "moot" because of "all the others". It never occurs to him that all the other evidence has been debunked and was also "moot" when it was addressed. When pushed to provide a list of items to address, at all costs he will not do this because it can be seen where they have all been debunked.

    8. Just deny everything: "I've never seen it debunked. I've seen people try to obfuscate it and then consider it to have been debunked." or "I can't see what you're referring to."

    He's never seen ANYTHING debunked? An utterly ludicrous statement that he uses based on his own inept layman understanding. His ignorance apart, he seeks to pigeon hole every single debunk into responses that he says are diversion, because he says so. Or, he simply denies seeing something that is completely irrefutably obvious.

    9. Idiotic Closes: "You'd get laughed out of the debating hall ..."

    or

    "you're about as impressive as the Black Knight in this video"


    The sheer irony of this is always lost on him. If ever there was somebody who behaved like the Black Knight - as his arm gets chopped off it's a "moot point" it would be this serial forum spammer. There is not a debating environment on this planet where this person would show up to. He knows more than anyone that he would get the floor wiped with his drivel.

    10. Divert/Obfuscate/Re-spam: This is where he avoids the item completely and gish-gallops away with repeated spam. Almost certainly he will keep avoiding the original claim.


    11. Never mind that - look over here: When this hopeless individual has exhausted his inept repertoire of responses comes his most used spam. He resorts to spamming his wall of crap and ignoring the main issue!

    "Anyway, there's a ton of proof that the missions were faked and zero proof that they were real."

    What a sad, sad liar this person is. They have been humiliated completely on dozens of subjects, thousands of times on Apollo, yet they spew this cut and paste hogwash almost every time.
    This person has been doing all of the above across 100's of forums for (best guess) coming up to 17 years. He cuts and pastes duplicate posts, responses, key phrases and dismissal videos. He determines any one or more of the above and posts them out, then slams a huge post with repeated and debunked bullshit. There is simply no level of response that can get through to somebody who has terminal Dunning and Kruger syndrome.
     
  4. JET3534

    JET3534 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2014
    Messages:
    13,350
    Likes Received:
    11,517
    Trophy Points:
    113
    False analogy fallacy plus an ad hominem fallacy.

    So when exactly do you think we will see the next man on the moon?
     
    Scott likes this.
  5. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    5,102
    Likes Received:
    779
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Bolding mine. The seventh and next manned landing will be Artemis 3. NASA had no commitment (before Artemis) for its funding, that required another lunar landing.

    This post (which is far from an exhaustive one) was made about a dozen times on a different forum and ignored in every single instance. It was ignored here too:

    The following assumptions are completely required for the ultimate "moon landings were faked" theory to be true:

    1-The photos are all faked.
    and

    2-The videos are all faked.
    and

    3-Several people faked the photos and kept that secret.
    and

    4-Several people faked the videos and kept that a secret.
    and

    5-The physical evidence, i.e. rock and soil samples are all faked or were retrieved using robotic missions.
    and

    6-A large group of people faked the rock and soil samples and kept that a secret.
    and

    7- It was possible with 1960's era technology to fake hundreds of pounds of rocks and soil to make it appear to have come from the moon or it was possible with 1960's era technology to secretly bring back hundreds of pounds of soil.
    and

    8- Several people organized and coordinated these separate processes and they kept secret.
    and

    9- All of the astronauts are lying and in on the conspiracy.
    and

    10- All of the telemetry and systems data coming into the consoles at mission control were faked 24 hours a day for the duration of the missions in a manner good enough to deceive hundreds of NASA technicians, or the hundreds of NASA technicians were all in on it.
    and

    11-All of the thousands of people who have studied the samples brought back and all of the people doing peer-review on the scientific papers were either fooled by the perfectly faked rocks or in on it too.
    and

    12- All of the radio buffs, amateur astronomers and other non-govermental witnesses to the signals and spacecraft in flight didn't notice any anomalies, and/or kept quiet about it.
    and

    13- The Soviet Union actively participated in the hoax, and all the radar/radio technicians, astronomers, etc. that might have been able to figure out that the US was faking the multiple flights were told to be quiet.
    and

    14- Everybody told to be quiet has kept quiet even on their deathbed or every single one of the confessions has been covered up. (this includes the geologists studying the faked samples too).
    and

    15- The people assigned to monitor and/or threaten everybody who had first hand knowledge of this also keep quiet.
    and

    16- The pictures from subsequent missions to the moon in which clear pictures of the landing sites showing artefacts exactly as NASA claims happened are faked.
    and

    17- The people that worked in all the subsequent missions were either duped by these faked pictures being snuck into the data streams, or in on the conspiracy too.
    and

    18-The range-finding reflective dishes on the moon were placed by secret robotic missions.
    and

    19- These secret 1960's era robots placed these reflectors more accurately than any other robotic missions did at the time.
    and

    20- All of the people who built and tested the rockets and other equipment were either duped or were in on it too.

    The above series of "and" statements would adequately provide all the available evidence. Therein lies the problem.

    If ANY one thing in this long "and" statement is false, the whole thing is logically false.

    This actually isn't enough for some of the conspiracy theorists.

    They add to this a few things that aren't really quite necessary to fake the moon landings:

    21-Radiation above low earth orbit is so intense it will fry a human being who is exposed to it for even a short time.
    and

    22- All the data concerning that radiation is faked, showing that radiation levels are low enough for a human to survive.
    and

    23- Everybody who has designed electronics for satellites that uses this faked data didn't notice that their equipment was failing at much higher rates than it should have.

    The weakest links of course are the facts that no one has ever come forward to admit they actively took part in the faking/coverup, and that the most tangible evidence, namely the rocks, has been exhaustively studied for 40 years.

    Next to those gaping holes, another "I don't understand the video footage" youtube video is just another stone on the fail pile.

    Every single one of that big list has to be true in order for your theory to hold up. If even one link is broken, it falls apart like tissue paper in rain.


    The OP: I do find it quite ironic that EVERY time we get proven deception it comes from the conspiracy theorists. The interview was with a Kubrick lookalike. This entire line of reasoning comes from an April Fool's article. The conspiracy theorists didn't notice the giveaway line where it said Kubrick shot the footage "ON LOCATION".
     
  6. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    5,102
    Likes Received:
    779
    Trophy Points:
    113
    As usual with these ignorant threads, numerous attempts are made to drag them off topic into yet another generic "it was faked" mashup.

    Did Stanley Kubrick Fake the Moon Landings? | Snopes.com
    The man being interviewed simply doesn't look or sound like Stanley Kubrick when compared to a video of the real Kubrick accepting the D.W. Griffith Award in 1997:

    Furthermore, unedited versions of the interview contain hints that the "Stanley Kubrick" in the video is an actor. In a since-deleted clip, the interviewer called his subject "Tom" and instructed him on how to tell the next part of his story:
    "You don't say he said anything. You say what he says. Tom, I'm giving you directions. You don't have to imitate him (Richard Nixon). You're not reporting it. You're repeating it ... We're doing exposition here. That's how we're going to sneak it in."

    A spokesman for Kubrick's widow also proclaimed that "[t]he interview is a lie, Stanley Kubrick has never been interviewed by T.Patrick Murray the whole story is made up, fraudulent and untrue."

    T. Patrick Murray has not admitted that his interview with Stanley Kubrick is a hoax, but he certainly is banking the mystery's driving interest in his project:

    As is also usual, the ONLY fakery/deception comes from people claiming the six successful Moon landings were faked.
     
    Last edited: Jan 13, 2024

Share This Page