Atheists Please Read!

[TempestTossed]

I am always suspicious of those who dwell too much on propabilities the way Hugh Ross does. I get especially suspicious when I see large numbers being overemphasized with analogies, such as quarters covering Texas or whatever.

Let me make an analogy of my own. I roll ten six-sided dice, and I get a sequence of ten numbers:

2-4-1-4-3-5-1-6-3-4

The probability of getting that exact sequence is 1/60466176, about 1 in 60 million.

That is an incredibly low probability, therefore the dice roll must have happened by design.

[nebula]

It's hard for me to understand how someone can live everyday and believe that there is a higher being.  It doesn't even make common sense.  I have to believe that those who do believe are simply scared.....scared that there is no God and that when they die they will cease to exist...that there is no one in control of my destiny beside me and that scares me.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

To that comment, I can only reply with a Monty Python quote (slightly paraphrased to conform to Board guidelines):

I blow my nose in your general direction!

Your belief in what we believe is so stupid!

[Guest jlo23_1214]

While I certainly beg to differ with your arguments,

Edited October 3, 2005 by jlo23_1214

[nebula]

Moon hoax - great!

Butero, I can direct you to places that tear apart all the "evidence" those sources you refer to give.

As for the shuttles, they are old. In fact they should have been retired a decade or so ago. But everyone thought it "cheaper" to keep them flying rather than build new craft with updated technology. Oh, and the technology of the shuttle? That was '60's-early '70's technology they were made with - because that's when the designs were drawn and construction began.

[nebula]

In addition, I saw a video called "Was It Only A Paper Moon" which had lots of evidence that what was shown on television and purported to be footage of the moon was actually created on a Hollywood set.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

OK, I brought your presentation to someone who's involved with debating the Moon hoax stuff.

Click here for source

James Collier's Was It Only a Paper Moon? makes the claim that "official" NASA footage shows astronauts in the exact same place on two different days, when it is claimed they were actually in a different place. In fact, Collier's "official" footage isn't official; it's the 30-minute film Nothing So Hidden produced by AV Films of Houston. It contains various clips from the Apollo 16 mission. AV Films mistakenly used two clips from one EVA, representing them to be from different EVAs. Collier simply used a convenient secondary source instead of verifying his "inconsistency" from primary material.

Home page - all about the Moon hoax by the man who gave me this info.

Please forgive my using someone else's quote, but my re-phrasing would't come out making any sense.

[nebula]

If Hollywood created the Moon landings -

How come all other sci-fi movies and TV shows that came out during that time period have the cheeziest graphics that don't even come close to the quality of the Moon landings?

And how come the videos from the astronauts on the Moon follow the principles of physics for a low gravity and no atmosphere environment - yet Hollywood then and even now can't get its physics right in these movies?

butero - you have no argument to stand on.

So sad.

[TempestTossed]

There is nothing wrong with doubting the moon landings. I say it is the first step on a path of skepticism. It has been said that you should have an open mind, but not so open that your brain falls out. So you are right to not make conclusions until you listen to the knowledgable critics. That is what it means to investigate thoroughly. My favorite maxim is, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." So claims of vast conspiracies, cover-ups, outer-space aliens, ghosts, monsters, psychic powers, prophetic claims, and everything else extraordinary must be held to a higher standard of criticism. For the moon hoax claim, the evidence has to be a huge smoking gun--a smoking cannon. That is not the same as a list of wierd anomolies that you can't explain from your detached perspective.

Start your investigation here:

http://www.redzero.demon.co.uk/moonhoax/

That is the site of the original moon-hoax debunker whose website I saw in the 90s. I was buying into a bunch of conspiracy theories at the time, and I might have bought into the moon hoax one had I not read that site. You can look here as well:

http://www.apollo-hoax.me.uk/homepage.html

http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html

[nebula]

If Hollywood created the Moon landings -

How come all other sci-fi movies and TV shows that came out during that time period have the cheeziest graphics that don't even come close to the quality of the Moon landings?

And how come the videos from the astronauts on the Moon follow the principles of physics for a low gravity and no atmosphere environment - yet Hollywood then and even now can't get its physics right in these movies?

butero - you have no argument to stand on.

So sad.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hollywood can't get its physcis right even in "normal" action movies. Contrary to popular belief, people don't fly backwards when shot with a hand gun, you of all people should know this contradicts newtons laws. In order for a pistol to knock the target back at all, it must do just as much work on the shooter. So when you see the guy go flying through the window....guess what? That is bad physic's 'cause the shooter should fly an equal distance in the opposite direction...

In other words, your hollywood argument is baseless

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You lost me, WSB.

I was stating that Hollywood can't get its physics right, and then you claim I'm saying it is? Huh?

The Moon walks from the Apollo missions displayed correct physics all the way around (and those that claim bad physics are continuously disproven in their allegations).

If Hollywood produced these - why can't it get it's physics right in every other movie they've produced?

[nebula]

The claim has been that NASA worked with Hollywood to produce the Apollo Moon landing.

If so - how did Hollywood get it so right then? And never again?

[RGR]

Butero and WSB,

Y'all sure present a good impression of Christians to non-believers! I wonder, do you believe George Washington existed? I mean, you never saw him, so maybe someone is lying about him as well? Maybe you don't exist? I've never saw you, so I doubt you exist as well! How's that for proof?