<body>
Hip and Thigh: Smiting Theological Philistines with a Great Slaughter. Judges 15:8

Monday, August 28, 2006

Tin-foil Hat Theology [pt. 2]

In part 1 of this series, I began a study in what I call tin-foil hat theology, or individuals who are suppose to be Bible-loving Christians who believe in and promote conspiracy theories as the "real deal."

I think I would be safe in saying that the bulk of these tin-foil hat theologians have a dispensational, independent fundamentalist background. I am unaware of any United Methodists or Missouri Synod Lutherans who are into promoting conspiracy theories on the same level as say, Texe Marrs. Though the dispensational- fundamentalist-conspiracy theory connection should be explored, it is a subject I need to take up in another post.

Additionally, tin-foil hat theologians promote their conspiracy theories with hideous, seizure inducing websites. Are there no Christian conspiracy people who can put together a decent looking website? Why must they all be bright, hi-liter yellow letters on a brown background with baby-blue flashing link titles and crude, rotating graphics?

So here we have two, broadbrushed generalities concerning tin-foil hat theologians: They are independent fundamentalists and lack the software and HTML abilities to generate pleasant appearing websites.

All levity aside, however, I am personally grieved when I hear of Christians who have succumbed to being influenced by tin-foil hat theologians and their conspiracies. The reason being is because such theology, if we can even call it that, is over all detrimental to a Christian's spiritual health.

In the last post, I began to point out the reasons why I believe tin-foil hat theology is harmful to a Christian. I had planned to address my points with just two posts, but I believe my 4th reason conspiracy theories are bad for Christians is worth a post all its own.

4) Conspiracy theories are based upon untenable, fanciful, and irrational scenarios

I believe Christians need to pause and ponder the importance God places upon the minds of his saints. In other words, how we as Christians think about the world is extremely important to our Lord.

The Bible describes fallen men as "walking in the futility of their minds" and "having their understanding darkened" (Ephesians 4:17,18); that he cannot know spiritual truth (1 Corinthians 2:14); and that even though they know God, they refuse to acknowledge the truth about God and instead dream up fanciful excuses to explain away what they know to be true(Romans 1:18-23).

Moreover, the spiritual war waged for the souls of men takes place on the battlefield of the mind. The godly weapons used to engage sinful men are designed to assail the fortress of the mind by pulling down strongholds, casting down arguments and every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God, and taking captive every thought to the obedience of Christ (2 Corinthians 10:4, 5). The imagery of spiritual warfare is connected to how men think: arguments being cast down, having the right knowledge about God and thoughts captive to Christ.

Christians, on the other hand, are described as having their minds freed to think God's thoughts after Him. The Bible declares, But you have not so learned Christ, if indeed you have heard Him and have been taught by Him, as the truth is in Jesus ... and be renewed in the spirit of your mind (Ephesians 4:20-21, 23). The Christian is to be no longer conformed to the way the world thinks, but he is to be transformed by the renewing of his mind and to be sober in his thinking (Romans 12:2,3). Thus, a Christian should never be marked out as thinking irrationally about reality. His mind must reflect the logical mind of God by being reasonable and having a high regard for the truth in all areas of reality.

Even with this brief overview, it is clear that God places a vital importance upon how we think. Christians, then, are not free to believe any truth claim as "true" even if the person has really strong feelings about what ever it is he believes. We are to be mindful of what we allow into our heads, because what we dwell upon - think about - can influence how we view reality.

Now I highlight this about the minds of men because a Christian obsessively indulging conspiracy theories does not demonstrate a sober minded believer whose thinking is being renewed daily. The reason being is because when fully critiqued, conspiracy theories dive into the realm of the utterly fantastic and are built upon illogical premises. A Christian who thinks they are real is a person who is noted by everyone else as being gullible and out of touch and does not witness the sobriety of mind that should be common of a believer.

I say this for a handful of reasons:

- Conspiracy theories are untenable. They are untenable because conspiracy theories are unworkable in real life. Probably the main reason they are unworkable is that the secrecy needed to maintain the conspiracy is next to impossible. There are way too many necessary variables to keep it from being exposed, and probably the most risky one is the human involvement. Humans are prone to general incompetence, as well as greed and other failures of the human condition, and the more people involved with the conspiracy, those human problems are compounded, and thus the greater the risk of exposure by either overall failure or by blabbermouths who are easily paid off to talk or just want to look like a big shot down at the bar. The Watergate scandal was found out due to human error. The fake CBS-Dan Rather-George Bush Air National Guard memos from October 2004 were exposed as frauds almost the very hour they went on-line at CBS, and again, due to human error.

Take for example those who claim the Apollo missions were hoaxed. Hundreds, if not thousands of people were intricately involved with the Apollo program. Engineers, technicians, government officials, civilians, and the astronauts themselves. Additionally, millions of people were eye-witnesses all around the world, including the Soviets with whom we were in a race to get to the moon first. The sheer number of people involved is enough to guarantee the Apollo moon missions were not hoaxed. More importantly, and this point is missed by conspiracy theorists, the Apollo program had a total of five missions to the moon during which men actually walked ont he surface of the moon. That means all of those hundreds of thousands of people had to hoax a moon landing a total of FIVE TIMES! There is no way they could have gotten away with it just once, let alone five times.

Conspiracies are just too difficult to keep secret even when there are only one or two people keeping the secret. There are a couple of fun examples of conspiracies being exposed from the Darwinian world. In 2000, Archaeoraptor was purportedly the "evolutionary find of the century," that proved bird-to-dinosaur evolution. The National Geographic Society claimed it was the true missing link that connected birds to dinosaurs and prominent paleontologists said archaeoraptor was the long sought key to the mystery of evolution. However, it was a terrific hoax. As science writer Dr. Jerry Bergman, states: "High-resolution X-ray CT work found 'unmatched pieces, skillfully pasted over.' The fraud was also determined to be 'put together badly-deceptively' involving 'zealots and cranks,' 'rampant egos clashing,' 'misplaced confidence' and 'wishful thinking.'

Even another example involved archaeologist Professor Reiner Von Zieten who allegedly found remains in a peat bog linking humans to Neanderthals. His career ended in disgrace after the revelation that he systematically falsified the dates on this and numerous other stone-age relicts. His deceptions were so serious that it may mean an entire tranche of the history of man's development will have to be re-written.

- conspiracies are based upon fanciful scenarios. One of the first questions I ask a tin-foil hat theologian is, "why does he think his conspiracy is needful?" "Why is there a need for a conspiracy with thus and such?" and "How exactly is this thing pulled off?" The reason behind the conspiracy is almost all the time ridiculous and defies all credulity and the explanation of how it was accomplished is almost even more unbelievable.

Gail Riplinger, the Queen of King James Onlyism, suggests that modern Bible versions like the NASB or NIV, are designed to corrupt the Christian churches so they will be more willing to embrace the new age and the Anti-Christ. How exactly does the new age movement and modern translations connect? Ms. Riplinger ties together all sorts of absurd ideas that make no sense and are unsupportable by any known historic fact. I won't rehash them here, but you can check out a couple of reviews of her claims here and here.

The current big conspiracy involves 9/11 and the destruction of the World Trade Centers and the Pentagon building. In spite of the fact that the government is nothing but a massive, bloated bureaucracy that looses my tax returns, many people believe they had the know-how to fake hijacking 4 airliners full of people, set off controlled demolitions to knock down the towers, while at the same time keeping it all hidden from the millions of eye-witnesses in the general public (except of course for the anointed few with the open minds and dot connecting capabilities).

Others suggest that the government used holographic missiles that only looked like 757s. Since when has the government had Star Trek like holographic technology? Am I to conclude that all those terrified passengers who called from the cell-phones were really on some holo-deck in a government facility? Yet tin-hat theologians will continue to buy into these fanciful scenarios because it apparently justify some religious reasoning.

- Conspiracies are based upon irrational scenarios. The fanciful ones are bad enough, but even more telling evidence showing how bogus conspiracy theories can be is how the ones with similar themes will contradict each other.

For instance, moon hoax conspirators are convinced that none of the Apollo missions went to the moon and the government is covering it up. Yet, other conspiracy theorists claim the Apollo missions did get men to the moon, but the government is attempting to cover over the fact that the astronauts saw giant building and other alien structures. Now, both of these scenarios cannot be correct. Which one is wrong and which one is right and why?

It would be good to remind ourselves of Ockham's razor, the philosophical principle developed by the philosopher Christian William of Ockham in the 14th century. Simply put Ockham's razor states: all things being equal, the simplest explanation is probably the correct one. What is the simplest explanation for the moon landing? Was it hoaxed and then systematically covered up over the last 35 years? Or did NASA really send up 17 Apollo missions with the last 6 (excepting #13) landing on the moon?

These are just a handful of examples of how conspiracy theories are detrimental to a Christian's spirituality. A Christian who gives himself to pursuing conspiracy theories or allowing them to shape his or her view of the world is in danger of putting his mind in subjection to futility.

Labels:

33 Comments:

Blogger Impacted Wisdom Truth said...

Only Apollo 1, and 7 through 17 were manned missions. The others were unmanned tests.

Apollo 1 never left the ground. The crew of Apollo 1 died tragically during a plugs-out test on a gantry at KSC and the mission was named Apollo 1 in their honor, posthumously.

Apollo missions 7 and 9 took place in Earth orbit and did not go to the moon. Apollo 7 was to prove out the Command and Service Module (CSM), and Apollo 9 was the first flight with both a CSM and Lunar Module (LM). Again, those two missions were in Earth orbit and did not go to the moon.

Apollo 8 was the first manned mission to go to the moon. Since the LM was not ready to go to the moon, Apollo 8 went to the moon only with the CSM and did ten orbits around the moon before returning.

Apollo 10 went to the moon with both a CSM and LM, and two astronauts took the LM on that mission down to within 50,000 feet of the lunar surface. Apollo 11, of course, was the first manned landing.

5:03 PM, August 28, 2006  
Blogger Fred Butler said...

Thanks for the clarification. You'd think that after watching From the Earth to the Moon, I would had been more precise. I guess in my thinking, I am more concerned with missions 11-17 sans 13, where men landed on the lunar surface and walked around.

Fred

6:11 PM, August 28, 2006  
Blogger surfer boy said...

Fred,
Please allow me to respond to some of the points made on your blog.

You say, "a Christian should never be marked out as thinking irrationally about reality. His mind must reflect the logical mind of God by being reasonable and having a high regard for the truth in all areas of reality." I agree. That's why I earlier said that a Christian can't deny that 2+2=4. But, do you have a high regard for the truth? Are you humble, teachable and able to learn?
You then say, "conspiracy theories dive into the realm of the utterly fantastic and are built on illogical premises." That may be true for some theories, it is also true that some things that you regard as being "utterly fantastic" or "illogical" are actually true.
Then you say, "the secrecy needed to maintain the conspiracy is next to impossible" and you talk about "human problems" and "blabbermouths." You talk about the difficulty in keeping a vast conspiracy secret. This is a very good point that you raise. It does seem that it would be impossible to succeed in a conspiracy due to the "blabbermouth" factor. There are a few reasons why conspiracies are kept secret.
1. The inner circle conspirators will never talk.
2. Others in the conspiracy are used and are kept on a "need to know" basis. They aren't aware of the general conspiracy, they only know what they need to. For instance, I believe (though I could be wrong) that the Enola Gay bombadier didn't know he was dropping an atom bomb.
3. Secret conspiracies often involve secret societies. Blood oaths have been taken assuring that silence will be kept under penaly of death or having your tongue ripped out with hot tongs. Enough "blabbermouths" have already been dealt with in this manner for those to know that this is no idle threat.
4. Many involved in the conspiracy are under mind control. They literally don't know what they are doing. They will deny any involvement because they aren't aware they are involved.
5. In addition, even if someone does want to blab, who will they blab to? The controlled police? The controlled intelligence agencies? To the completely controlled media? So a would-be blabber's testimony or witness is effectively nullified. To whom will he blab?
If some in the public do suspect a conspiracy, then the controlled media will attempt to smear those believers as kooks,etc.

You then state that you don't believe that the government with its "massive, bloated bureaucracy" has the know-how to pull something off and keep it secret. This is what they want you to believe. Our president is stupid and the government is incompetent. This is the same "incompetent" government that built and delivered the atom bomb. This is the same government that can potentially now track you everywhere you go all day long; the government that can know every financial transaction you make; and as some believe, the government that not only now has the ability to read your mind, but has the ability to plant thoughts in your mind. The government wants you to underestimate their ability.

You ask, "since when has the government had Star Trek like holograghic technology." There are some who say that everything that you see on Star Trek is existing technology. I don't know if we can "beam up" one another, but I do believe that the holographic technology is very advanced and will be used as part of an "endtimes scenario." I also believe that time-travel is a reality. Technology is far more advanced than the public believes. Hollywood has helped. to condition the public to accept these new technologies.

Vast conspiracies exist. And the public is largely kept in the dark for the reasons I've cited. Due to the controlled media, the general public will only know what they are told to believe and will disbelieve what they are told to disbelieve.

"There is nothing hidden that won't be revealed."

9:35 PM, August 28, 2006  
Blogger Highland Host said...

Were further proof needed, Surfer Boy has given it. Of course, if "Technology is far more advanced than the public believes" (probably true in one sense, although depending on which member of the public you ask) and the US government has time-travel technology (really?) then what's to prevent the moon landings from having been real?

2:54 AM, August 29, 2006  
Blogger Pickle Boy said...

Important!!!

The lost moon mission footage has been found! Hoax you say?! Conspiracy? Here's proof positive there was no hoax. Be sure to watch the first video.

http://moonlanding2.blogspot.com/


"Houston, this is Tranquility Base. The eagle has landed..."

11:05 AM, August 29, 2006  
Blogger Fred Butler said...

Ahh, so its been "found" has it? How do you know it hasn't been tampered with? Huh? Huh?

Fred

11:45 AM, August 29, 2006  
Blogger Highland Host said...

On the same note, if the government is into mind-control, how do the moonbats know that THEIR minds are not being controlled? Maybe the government is implanting fake conspiracy theories in their minds to cover up the REAL conspiracy? Or perhaps... no, perhaps not.

As for the 'Blabbermouth' factor, the internet (or is this government controlled too? Is there in fact already a totalitarian one-world government in place? Probably not) provides the perfect place for blabbermouths to blab.

12:24 PM, August 29, 2006  
Blogger Ransom said...

surfer boy said:

1. The inner circle conspirators will never talk.
2. Others in the conspiracy are used and are kept on a "need to know" basis. They aren't aware of the general conspiracy, they only know what they need to.


This proves too much, and what it proves is fatal to the moon-hoax theory.

If there are only a few in the know, then the thousands of engineers at Grumman, Boeing, and other contractors who designed the vehicles used in the Apollo project must have sincerely believed that they were supposed to be building a vehicle capable of carrying out its stated objective. Engineers are not stupid; they are very well-trained technicians who would know whether or not it was possible to accomplish their goals. To date, no one has blown the whistle and demonstrated that Grumman or Boeing were faking.

Even if I were to allow that the engineers doing the actual design work were sincerely duped (e.g. the dubious assumption that they were assigned one small part of the big project with little knowledge of how it fit into the big picture), that still means that managers, systems engineers, QA inspectors, and so forth would have been responsible for integrating all those individual parts into a working machine. Either they were brought in on the scam on a "need to know" basis, or they would have figured out on their own that the vehicle wouldn't work. Maybe that reduces the number of potential whistleblowers to hundreds rather than thousands, but that doesn't make the problem go away: someone would know that the moon program was a con, and no one has come forward with the evidence.

To make a long story short: If enough skilled, dedicated people didn't realize that the Apollo project was a fake, they would have genuinely succeeded.

1:13 PM, August 29, 2006  
Blogger Ransom said...

surfer boy said:

Technology is far more advanced than the public believes.

Except, apparently, when it comes to landing on the moon. [rolling eyes]

1:16 PM, August 29, 2006  
Blogger surfer boy said...

I said in Fred's earlier blog that perhaps we went to the moon secretly pre or post Apollo. I said although the Apollo project was hoaxed, we could have been to the moon secretly--utilizing more advanced technology.

Bill Kaysing worked for Rocketdyne at the time of the Apollo project. I believe that Rocketdyne made the Saturn 5 rocket. He has come forth at great risk to his life and career to blow the whistle.
People also are basically cowards and they keep their mouths shut for selfish reasons. They can't throw away a career with a wife, kids and a mortgage. Remember, this moon hoax is nearly 40 years old. Many involved are dead or don't care to speak even now that we have the internet.

It's been proven that the LEM could only carry a 5 foot long lunar rover, but the lunar rover was 10 feet long. This proves the lunar rover on the moon was hoaxed and it is probably true that some engineers spoke out about this.
That fact remains that some people have come foward about this conspiracy and their talk has been effectively neutralized by the media.

4:04 PM, August 29, 2006  
Blogger Ransom said...

Oh, come on!

If we went to the moon secretly before Apollo, why fake doing it openly?

5:03 PM, August 29, 2006  
Blogger Ransom said...

It's been proven that the LEM could only carry a 5 foot long lunar rover, but the lunar rover was 10 feet long. This proves the lunar rover on the moon was hoaxed and it is probably true that some engineers spoke out about this.

The only thing it proves is that you didn't bother to look up some well-known and easily discovered facts before you started spewing your wild-eyed theories.

The lunar rover's chassis was designed to fold so it could be stowed in one of the lunar module's storage bays. It was manually unfolded and deployed by the astronauts.

5:13 PM, August 29, 2006  
Blogger pilgrim said...

So it is either possible to believe anyhting, and make it sound airtight fact or some people have too much time on their hands and likes to bait people.

(Or maybe both)

5:47 PM, August 29, 2006  
Blogger Impacted Wisdom Truth said...

For those that like to dig into the details, the Lunar Rover Operations Manual can be downloaded here.

Indeed, it was folded. And the LM is large enough to handle the vehicle. Here is a photo of me standing next to a LM at KSC in 1971 for comparison.

The lower stage had plenty of room to stow the folded rover. Click here to see a folded rover being loaded into the LM. Here is a larger view showing the loading of the rover; the rover folded tightly enough that the wheels were adjacent to each other.

11:06 PM, August 29, 2006  
Blogger surfer boy said...

Ransom,
It can be explained why if we went to the moon secretly, it would be faked later. The answer is money. If we didn't go to the moon, then what happened to the supposed 300 billion dollars that it cost in 1960's money. Did it go to fund the government's "black projects?" Someone got very rich off this moon hoax.
Based on the following, I believed that the rover couldn't fit on the LEM. Though it does seem that it may have been able to fit while folded.
----------------------------------
Then my research turned to Grumman Aircraft in Beth Page, New York. Grumman built the Lunar Module (LM), that unwieldy looking craft that never flew on Earth but supposedly landed safely on the moon six times. I asked for blueprints detailing the scientific thought behind its design. Did it run by computer? If so, who built the computer? What made Grumman engineers think it could fly?

Grumman told me that all the paperwork was destroyed. I was stunned. The LM historical paperwork was destroyed!? Why!? They had no answers. I turned to Boeing Aircraft in Seattle. They built the Lunar Rover, the little car that NASA claims traversed the moon on Apollo missions15-16-17. NASA claims it was transported to the moon in a five-foot high by six-foot wide, triangular corner section of the LM.
(The LM's bottom section was basically a tic-tac-toe design with nine sections. Five sections were squares with the four corners being triangles).

But my research indicated that the Rover was at least six feet too long to fit into that corner compartment, thus making it impossible to ever get to the moon.
---------------------------------
I would like to see this man's research in detail to understand why he reached his conclusion.
Nevertheless, I believe that the evidence needs to be looked at in its totality. I still find it incredible that no stars were photographed; that there was only one shot of the earth; that there was no dust on the LEM, nor was there any disturbance under the LEM. I am troubled by the fact that 2 astroNOTS couldn't fit in the LEM, nor could one get through the hole to the command module. I don't believe that a footprint could be made where there is no water and I find it very suspicious that in all the "moon" photos, there is no horizon. Why? Why does the horizon stop after 200 feet? Also, the numerous shadow anomolies can't be disregarded, suggesting that there was artificial light; not to mention the supposed fact that Kodak film would melt in the high temps. And there are other factors such as Aldrin's breakdown and I've read that there was something strange about the radio transmissions from the "moon." I have also read that there is no way that men could return to earth in that capsule. They would be burned alive. That capsule afforded no heat protection at all. Notice the far greater protection given the space shuttle. I believe it likely that the capsule was dropped with parachutes from an airplane flying above the Pacific. That capsule was never in space. Not only that, but the subsequent quarantining of the astroNOTS was strange given that they were really not in any danger. Were they quarantined in order to prep them and condition them for a PR campaign? And lastly, why did some photos in deep space have a blue sky and remember my prior mention of sunstreaks in some of the photos suggesting an atmosphere.
Even if the rover could fit folded on the LEM, there are many other hurdles that need to be overcome before I can be convinced that the moon missions weren't hoaxed. I have presented some formidable obstacles to believing Apollo went to the moon.
Remember, gentlemen, I was responding to Fred's claim that these kinds of conspiracies don't exist. I simply mentioned 2 of many conspiracies--JFK and the moon hoax. And there are many suspicious things and unanswered questions surrounding the "moon mission."
IMT,
I do appreciate your ability to get those rover pictures. But there are many, many more questions unanswered. Can a footprint be made on the moon? AstroNOTS should perhaps be able to jump 6 or more feet high on the moon. Why did we never see this displayed?
Remember, this world is ruled through deception.

12:22 AM, August 30, 2006  
Blogger Impacted Wisdom Truth said...

The analogy given earlier of trying to see the sky in a well-lit stadium is a good one. Without an atmosphere, there is no filtering of sunlight on the moon. So the cameras were fitted with very dense light filters to make photography possible. The pinprick points of starlight could not penetrate the filters, but unfiltered sunlight could.

In fact, Alan Bean of Apollo 12 accidently destroyed a video camera by inadvertantly pointing it at the sun. At that time, the technology was in its infancy, and pointing the camera at the sun fried the imaging chip.

The visors on the spacesuits were coated with pure gold to filter the sunlight. Without the gold coating, the astronauts would be exposed to unfiltered solar radiation.

"I have also read that there is no way that men could return to earth in that capsule."

If you are referring to the LM when you say, "capsule," that is correct. The LM was never designed to return to earth. They were jettisoned and the crews reentered our atmosphere aboard the Command Module. If you would like to know where the Lunar Modules currently reside, click here. Interestingly, the LM from Apollo 10 is still in a solar orbit.

12:44 AM, August 30, 2006  
Blogger surfer boy said...

Highland Post,
I believe that it is possible that we have been to the moon as well as mars. I just believe that the evidence is overwhelming that Apollo was faked.

Many of the "conpiracy kooks" minds are controlled. They are known as double agents or agent provocateurs and their job would be to spread disinformation.
The government is allowing the internet to exist, in part, in order to "precipitate out" resistors and malcontents in order that they may be dealt with later. This is why those who have perpetrated a conspiracy will also form an organization or a committee that will "seek the truth" about it. This also enables them to identify resistors.

Surely you and others must believe that many conspiracies truly exist.

12:50 AM, August 30, 2006  
Blogger Fred Butler said...

A couple of thing Surfer, how exactly do you even begin to justify your beliefs about mind control and double agents apart from pure speculation, which is what you are doing here?

Then second, you still haven't answered why believing in conspiracies, such as yourself, is even relevant to the Christian faith. What spiritual significance is it with the Apollo program going to the moon? How is Christi denied and the faith destroyed if Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldren walked on the moon?

Fred

6:59 AM, August 30, 2006  
Blogger Highland Host said...

Oh, I believe that some conspiracies exist. Like the one to establish a world-wide Islamic state that Bin Laden and his cronies are up to. I just don't believe these vast and all-encompassine conspiracies they you guys love. For example, it has been stated that the barcode is the 'mark of the beast' because each barcode contains three sixes. On that token I could sday that Norwich taxicabs are part of a Luciferian conspiracy because each Norwich (England) taxi firm has three sixes in its telephone number.

Of course your claim that "Many of the 'conspiracy kooks' are mind-controlled" is very convenient. It means you can reject every conspiracy that conflicts with yours out of hand. But tell me, Surfer Boy, how do you know that YOU are not the one being mind-controlled and manipulated? How do you know that YOU are not the victim of a vast mind-control conspiracy being masterminded by a bored Psi-ops operative in Kalamazoo, who is boasting about it to his fellow Psi-ops blokes in the canteen at this very moment?
Or is it always the other fellow?

8:09 AM, August 30, 2006  
Blogger Hiraeth said...

Fred is right. What spiritual relevance hath the moon-shot? Say Buzz Aldrin et. al. went to the Moon and walked thereon. In what way does this compromise the faith.

And Highland Host is right (as my partner in crime, he has to be), how do you, O surfing one, know that you are not being mind-controlled? That you are not being fed all this data in order to conceal a real conspiracy?

Again, it is not a question of whether or not one believes in plots, plans and conspiracies. There are real ones, and there will always be so. It is a question of whether it is really credible that there is a hidden one-world Government just waiting to take everything over.

9:30 AM, August 30, 2006  
Blogger Hiraeth said...

Oh, and on reflection, I would note that surfer boy's reflection on why no blabbermouths has one problem.

Why would the top men never talk? Unless these folks are unanimous on everything, which is unlikely, then surely one person or more would have fallen out over the direction of the conspiracy.

The image of unanimous mysterious conspirators so popular on programmes like the X-Files is fiction. At some point someone will talk, whether in their cups, or simply out of a desire to protect a loved one who might get in the way.

Again, this is why political conspiracies so rarely succeed.

9:41 AM, August 30, 2006  
Blogger thomas4881 said...

Conspiracy theorys are of the carnal mind in most cases I believe.

2 Kings 19: 35 That night the angel of the LORD went out and put to death a hundred and eighty-five thousand men in the Assyrian camp. When the people got up the next morning—there were all the dead bodies! 36 So Sennacherib king of Assyria broke camp and withdrew. He returned to Nineveh and stayed there.

37 One day, while he was worshiping in the temple of his god Nisroch, his sons Adrammelech and Sharezer cut him down with the sword, and they escaped to the land of Ararat. And Esarhaddon his son succeeded him as king.

I think there were probably a lot of conspiracy theorist after this happened. Over there in assyria they probably had some wonderful science fiction type conspiracy theory to explain this event.

Psalm 33:10 The LORD foils the plans of the nations; he thwarts the purposes of the peoples.

I think the Lord is always doing things that conspiracy theorist always are blaming on "they".

Pslam 44:14 You have made us a byword among the nations; the peoples shake their heads at us.

Notice how many people have all these crazy conspiracy theorys about the Jews being the ones behind it all. I think God did such an increadible work with the Israelites bring them out of Egypt into the Land of Israel and people still have a phobia about it.

Isaiah 41:2"Who has stirred up one from the east, calling him in righteousness to his service ? He hands nations over to him and subdues kings before him. He turns them to dust with his sword, to windblown chaff with his bow...

I'm sure if America loses it's power that the conspiracy theoryist will blame it on the illuminati or some group of men known as "they". Notice how conspiracy theorys reject God and uplift man?

11:23 AM, August 30, 2006  
Blogger Ransom said...

surfer boy rattles off a catalogue of typical, easily answered, but bogus moon-conspiracy factoids:

I still find it incredible that no stars were photographed;

There is a perfectly good reason for this, which has been explained to you over and over again. The only reason you find this "incredible" is that either you have never bothered to ask even an amateur photographer how cameras work, or you have never bothered to even look up on a clear night from a brightly lit street corner.

that there was only one shot of the earth;

The number of photographs taken is a completely irrelevant factoid.

that there was no dust on the LEM,

There is no reason to expect there to be very much dust on the LEM, and probably not enough to show up on camera.

nor was there any disturbance under the LEM.

Error of fact. There are photos showing the lunar dust blasted away underneath the descent engine.

I am troubled by the fact that 2 astroNOTS couldn't fit in the LEM,

That would be very odd, considering that it was designed for two men, and in fact on Apollo 13 it held three men who used it as a "lifeboat."

It wasn't comfortable, but it wasn't impossible.

nor could one get through the hole to the command module.

The bulkier parts of the space suits were stored in the LEM, and there was no problem passing between the command and lunar modules through the docking tunnel.

I don't believe that a footprint could be made where there is no water

You obviously have never played around with a pile of flour, cornstarch, or talcum powder. Very fine powders such as these - or moon dust - retain prints quite nicely.

and I find it very suspicious that in all the "moon" photos, there is no horizon. Why? Why does the horizon stop after 200 feet?

So is the problem that there isn't any horizon, or that it's 200 feet away? Make sense!

On earth, for a 6-foot-tall person, the horizon is about 3 miles away. On the moon, it would be about a mile and a half.

In any case, in this picture the horizon sure looks like it's more than 200 feet away to me. Not that it's easy to tell how far away distant objects are without any atmospheric attenuation like we have on earth.

Also, the numerous shadow anomolies can't be disregarded, suggesting that there was artificial light;

You are forgetting that there was more than one light source: the sun was the only direct source of light, but there were plenty of indirect sources: a shiny spaceship, bright white spacesuits, camera flashes, and have you ever noticed how bright the moon is at night?

not to mention the supposed fact that Kodak film would melt in the high temps.

Since the film was inside the camera and out of direct sunlight, there was nothing to heat it apart from heat conduction through its minimal contact with the camera mechanism.

And there are other factors such as Aldrin's breakdown

Another irrelevant factoid.

and I've read that there was something strange about the radio transmissions from the "moon."

You have "read" there was "something strange." Wow, that's pretty specific.

I have also read that there is no way that men could return to earth in that capsule. They would be burned alive. That capsule afforded no heat protection at all.

Wrong again. It had a big heat shield strapped to the bottom.

Notice the far greater protection given the space shuttle.

A bigger, more complex spacecraft has far greater heat shielding. Imagine that!

I believe it likely that the capsule was dropped with parachutes from an airplane flying above the Pacific.

That's nice.

That capsule was never in space.

"You believe" that capsule was never in space.

Not only that, but the subsequent quarantining of the astroNOTS was strange given that they were really not in any danger.

Which is why they dropped the quarantine procedure after Apollo 14.

And lastly, why did some photos in deep space have a blue sky and remember my prior mention of sunstreaks in some of the photos suggesting an atmosphere.

Evidence, please? Links to photos would be nice.

11:54 AM, August 30, 2006  
Blogger The Green Man said...

The truth is known.

4:07 PM, August 30, 2006  
Blogger surfer boy said...

I still remain unconvinced that Apollo put a man on the moon.
I never said that a moon hoax had anything to do with Christianity. I believe that a soldier for Christ should not entangle himself with the affairs of this world.
Fred said that 12 men walked on the moon and I told him not to bet on that--that's how this began. Fred also said he didn't believe in conspiracies. But I also believe that a Christian needs to tell the truth no matter how unpopular it may be.
Fred has more than a tendency to dismiss everything as "conspiratorial nonsense" and there are indeed real conspiracies. And Fred is wrong when he denies that the church-growth movement is a conspiracy.
Those who don't believe in a one-world gov't are being very naive.
It's a true point, if I was mind-controlled, then I wouldn't know it.

7:32 PM, August 30, 2006  
Blogger Highland Host said...

Surfer Boy, if you are mind-controlled then all your statements about there being a vast conspiracy are to be discounted. Indeed, you don't know that I am not the bored Psi-ops chap in Kalamazoo! Why, for all you know FRED is that Psi-ops bloke. Or we all are!

Which is a quick way to lose your marbles.

And since you believe that there is a one-world government, I presume you think that all wars and such-like that go on are really just propaganda of that gov't.

4:05 AM, August 31, 2006  
Blogger The Green Man said...

There is no one world government, but The whole world is under the control of one supreme ruler. He sits enthroned in the heavens.

The truth is known to the Green Man.

4:26 AM, August 31, 2006  
Blogger Fred Butler said...

SB remains firm in his convictions:

I still remain unconvinced that Apollo put a man on the moon.

(Fred) And in spite of the overwhelming evidence to the contrary: Tangible moon rocks, hundreds of eye-witnesses, reflective mirrors placed on the moon by the astronauts to monitor any seismic activity that can be seen from the earth, Apollo space "debris" on the moon's surface and in orbit around the earth, etc, etc,. That is some pretty powerful faith. It is like the atheist who insists there is no evidence for ID in spite of the over whelming and damning evidence against his Darwinianism.

But I also believe that a Christian needs to tell the truth no matter how unpopular it may be.

(Fred) You mean like rebuking a moon hoax believer like yourself and telling him he is bats?

6:58 AM, August 31, 2006  
Blogger Nathan said...

"Telling him he is bats." Heh. See, when surfer hank visited my blog, I started there rather than wade through the preliminaries.

Fred, this is one of the best series you've ever done (even without the highly entertaining comments). Kudos.

1:57 PM, August 31, 2006  
Blogger surfer boy said...

Highland post,
All wars are for the purpose of consolidating power and control into the hands of the few.

Nathan,
You have some nerve showing up here. Will you still mock the truth that the ELCA is a UN-NGO? It couldn't be the the Lutheran church is dedicated to the UN agenda now could it--because this truth goes against your brainwashing. Is the ELCA a UN-NGO? Or will you continue to mock facts?

2:27 PM, August 31, 2006  
Blogger Highland Host said...

Surfer. I see that you love to accuse those who oppose you of being brainwashed and/or evil. What happened to the Biblical command not to speak evil of others? Or does that only apply to those who will not believe your wild accusations?

Yes, the ELCA is an apostate body that may well join forces with the Papal antichrist in future. But do you actually KNOW what a UN-recognised NGO is?

3:32 AM, September 01, 2006  
Blogger Ramin said...

Ransom said...
You are forgetting that there was more than one light source: the sun was the only direct source of light, but there were plenty of indirect sources: a shiny spaceship, bright white spacesuits, camera flashes, and have you ever noticed how bright the moon is at night?
....


---You are accusing others of not checking facts but you yourself are saying things that you have obviously not fact checked. No flashes were used on the moon. The camers made use of ambient light. Also it is true that when the camera aperture/speed is set for photographing a bright object, stars would not register on the film but the real question is ... since there were hundreds of photos taken on the moon, why didn't the astronauts decide (or were told) to take some photos from the stars??? Surely they could set the exposure and point the camera up? Astronimers were dying to see photos of the stars as seen on the moon so this would be a simple thing to do and it would also be an incredible scientific experiment. They spent time to get a picture of their "Jump/Salute", rocks, flag, etc but didn't have time for a couple of star shots?

4:52 PM, July 26, 2007  
Blogger Lockheed said...

Ransom, et al.

One of the first things you must realize about conspiracy theories is that they're unfalsifiable. No amount of evidence, proof, or scientific facts brought to bear will change the believer's mind. The example of surfer boy here shows how sadly true this is. As a photographer and amateur astronomer, all the facts you brought to bear are readily apparent to someone who has experience with matters in question. But none of that matters to the theorist, they're instant experts on everything because they -read it somewhere-.

I'm reminded of the fellow on FB who swore that the addition of flouride to water was a great government conspiracy to control our minds and get rid of an industrial pollutant... Not matter what the dentists, doctors and scientists said.

8:30 PM, July 23, 2012  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home