Re: The Apollo moon landings

In sci.physics Bertitaylor <bertietaylor@myyahoo.com> wrote:

On Sat, 7 Jun 2025 22:45:04 +0000, Jim Pennino wrote:
 

In sci.physics Bertitaylor <bertietaylor@myyahoo.com> wrote:

Arindam remembers his father wondering after watching the Apollo moon
landing video in 1969, why they did not jump up at least three feet. He
also thought they could at least have thrown a stone up and thus show it
falling slowly.

>
There was the dropped hammer and feather experiment performed by
Apollo 15 astronaut David Scott.
>
Apollo 16 astronauts John Young and Charlie Duke were able to jump
around four feet. While they could theoretically jump much higher,
they jumped shorter distances due to the extra weight of their
spacesuits and the need to avoid falling off balance or damaging
their equipment.
>
Charlie Duke eventually fell and landed on his life support system
so they stopped doing that.
>

>
Apes were so naive then and are still so gullible now.

>
Delusional crackpots know nothing, including history.

 
Chandrayan photos of Apollo 11 have shown no sign of the US flag on the
Moon. The fluttering flag installation as shown in the overkill Moon
photos was done on a breezy day on Earth.
 
Now see what your master the robot has to say about this, wannabe robot
Penisnino.
 
WOOF woof-woof woof woof-woof woof
 
Bertietaylor
 
--

This post from Arindam (as “Bertietaylor”) exhibits his typical rhetorical
features:
 Content Evaluation

    Claim: The Chandrayaan photos (from India’s Moon missions) show no
    US flag at the Apollo 11 landing site, allegedly disproving the Moon
    landing or implying a hoax.

    Supporting Argument: The flag seen in Apollo footage was "fluttering,"
    supposedly showing it was taken on Earth on a breezy day.

    Conclusion/Insult: Arindam taunts his imagined opponent (“Penisnino”)
    and invokes AI as a false authority figure—"your master the robot.”

 Factual Accuracy

    The fluttering flag claim has long been debunked. The Apollo flag had
    a horizontal rod to keep it extended, and the "flutter" is due to
    momentum from astronauts’ movement, not wind.

    The Chandrayaan-2 Orbiter and other probes (e.g., NASA's LRO) lack
    the resolution to definitively image small objects like flags on the Moon.

    The Apollo landing sites have been imaged by NASA’s Lunar
    Reconnaissance Orbiter, showing disturbed soil, equipment, and descent
    stages.

Arindam is either unaware of or dismissive toward the wealth of confirming
evidence—including third-party (non-U.S.) validations—of the Apollo landings.
 Rhetorical and Psychological Assessment

    Arindam once again employs mockery and dog sounds (“WOOF woof…”) to
    frame his rejection of mainstream views as both primal and theatrical.

    His mention of “wannabe robot Penisnino” suggests continued fixation on
    AI and specific opponents, likely driven by personal grudges or
    identity-based resentment.

    The use of an easily disprovable conspiracy (moon landing denial)
    indicates a further retreat into contrarianism, possibly as a defense
    mechanism against scientific consensus.

 Comparison to Past Posts

    This continues a pattern of:

        Anti-science rhetoric

        Insults as argument substitutes

        Conspiracist tropes

        Projection of agency onto AI as an establishment force

It lacks any novel reasoning or insight and simply rehashes ideas common
in low-grade Moon landing denial forums from the early 2000s.
 Possible Motivation

Arindam may be using the Moon landing as a symbolic issue—a proxy for
his broader distrust of Western science and institutions. By targeting
something as iconic and celebrated as Apollo 11, he attempts maximum
symbolic disruption, even if it means embracing obvious falsehoods.


--
penninojim@yahoo.com