Fetzer/Burton Moon Landing Debate Finale

[Peter Dawson]

The link he posted was one of two provided by me. You may not have seen it as I edited my post a couple times as I added links.

Ah, I see. So he's quite prepared to slander the Hubble scientists as well as the LRO scientist - the Hubble scientists really haven't ever pointed the Hubble at the Apollo landing sites, according to Professor Fetzer.

Peter, it wasn't "slander". It was a stated understanding. A wrong one as it turns out, as Mathew has shown.

And for the record you cannot slander a thing (the "Hubble Space Telescope"). It can only be slander if you defame a person.

You simply cannot continue to make statements like this. Your anxiety to discredit Jim Fetzer keeps leading you to utter things that only damage your case.

I wish you wouldn't.

Can we, therefore, please keep this thread free of these personal slurs and attacks in the future and stick to discussing the evidence - otherwise we're in serious danger of turning everybody else off what should be an interesting discussion (not to mention slowly transforming this forum into a replica of the bruised knuckle tactics of the EF).

PS, in the event that you haven't read our forum Rules, I am linking them now and recommend you read them carefully.

Prof. Fetzer was saying in the post in question that the LRO images were "photoshop" jobs. And do you understand (given that he is still trying to suggest to us that men have never gone to the moon) that he is still at this point in time maintaining that the LRO images of Apollo sites are fakes? Who else besides the scientists who produced the LRO images are we supposed to think are responsible for the alleged photoshopping of the LRO images?

After consulting a dictionary, I see that the only mistake I made was calling his position "slanderous" as opposed to "libelous."

He also doesn't seem willing to accept that photos of the moon published by the Hubble people are true and accurate representations of what would be seen if the Hubble was trained upon the Apollo 17 landing site. I'm not claiming he's defaming the telescope, I'm pointing out that he is [well on the road to] defaming the scientists who produced the published Hubble telescope images.

That said, I'd be more than happy to stick to discussing practical examples of alleged evidence of hoaxing from now on, because I'm well tired of the current merry-go-round we're on.