![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
John Beadles wrote:
The trend is that they are willing to disregard or misrepresent the available evidence in favor of the landings, but are totally unable to present ANY evidence supporting their own theories. A moon hoax proponent with a valid argument should be able to show positive proof showing how the hoax was executed. I was curious to see if you were going to have anything original, but no, no luck. In any case, this particular example is directly falsifiable ....snipped... John - You're missing the point. The problem with Michael and all the other crypto-conspiracists is nothing they present is subject to being falsifiable; they don't use the rules of scientific evidence and logic. They are right. Everyone else is wrong. If you try and demonstrate they are wrong by bringing up "falsifiable", they will either ignore your facts and evidence, claim it's not true, or claim you're part of the cover-up. They're not working on a logical level, and nothing you can ever so or do will convince them otherwise. If you want proof, just ask Michael (or any other person of his type) exactly what evidence, if presented, they would accept as proof they were wrong. See what response you get. And even if on the off chance they do provide such a list, and you demonstrate anything on the list to them, they will then recant and find a reason to not accept that, either. Just view it as the Internet equivalent of tilting at windmills. A Reformed Tilter |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|