← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Roger Bannister
Thread ID: 6824 | Posts: 19 | Started: 2003-05-21
2003-05-21 04:22 | User Profile
Apparently Birdbrain Bryant has jumped on the 'America never went to the moon' bandwagon.
[url=http://www.thebirdman.org/Index/Index-DailyReads.html]http://www.thebirdman.org/Index/Index-DailyReads.html[/url] (Scroll down the page) - or you can go straight to the Pravda story itself with the following link. [url=http://english.pravda.ru/science/19/94/377/9994_moon.html]http://english.pravda.ru/science/19/94/377.../9994_moon.html[/url]
Most people intelligent enough to join Mensa, don't. Now we know why. Just how much of a dummy is Birdbrain Bryant? He's busy telling everyone how smart he is, then I show this type of thing to people that worked on the space program, and they tell me that Mensa better re-test this mouth breather. What's the real story on Bryant? And does anyone here side with Bryant on this? Seems like sour grapes from Pravda and crew.
[img]http://www.thebirdman.org/JBryant2.jpg[/img]
2003-05-21 07:44 | User Profile
So far as I can tell, Bryantââ¬â¢s problem is that in his effort to appear learned on every conceivable topic under the sun it is quiet likely he has become the proverbial master of none. No doubt he is proficient in certain areas but the more you spread your wings, if you will, the more vulnerable you become to those whoââ¬â¢ve made life-long commitments to the field that is your hobby of the month. Just as the eyes are often hungrier than the stomach so can the appetite for knowledge outrun the capacity for its acquisition, optimal wiring notwithstanding. So while generalists are to be preferred over specialists, knowing when to defer to the latterââ¬â¢s expertise is one hallmark of intelligence.
As for the moon landings, Iââ¬â¢m 99% certain that the events occurred as reported. I hedge ever so slightly because Iââ¬â¢ve come to believe in far too many things that as a younger man I would readily dismiss as products of an insane mind.
Here is one specialistââ¬â¢s take: [url=http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html]http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html[/url]
Also, the two standard deviations and a flake margin required to gain seat at Mensa is, frankly, nothing special. Obviously the skills needed to be a decent puzzle solver have wide ranging applicability, possibly including superior truth discerning, but they are no guarantee of anything. One thing that the Mensa designation is guaranteed to cater to out of proportion is people who regard quantification of an intangible quality as something worth purchasing. Add the fact that the test is a reasonably reliable means of picking out persons who care little for social conventions and are prone to pursue unconventional paths and you have fair amount of the ingredient requisite for a decent vanity website.
2003-05-21 11:57 | User Profile
John's my man. Click on "Commentators" and see my smiling face.
Most high IQ folks march to the tune of a different drummer, because they ATR DFFERENT. They have more brains than the rest of us.
Two of my six are MENSANS.
The photo's by NASA ARE strange. This is a highly debated topic all over the world. My own belief is that we did land on the Moon, and I base that on the fact that there are 3 radar reflector bench marks placed there by Astronauts. Surveyors from all over use them.
He has a great website, infomative and entertaining. I'm a frequent contributor.
John is ONE OF US, and I see no point in knocking him. He has done more for "the cause" than anyone here.
2003-05-21 20:02 | User Profile
re:"My own belief is that we did land on the Moon, and I base that on the fact that there are 3 radar reflector bench marks placed there by Astronauts. Surveyors from all over use them."
The reflector is OPTICAL not radar based. It is an array of corner reflectors ( 3 prisms or mirrors joined at the apex at 90 degrees ) which sends any incident light back parallel but in the opposite direction. Such a reflector could have been delivered to the moon by an unmanned vehicle. Radar targets ( on a sail boat for example ) use metallic corner reflectors to alert other boats and ships as to their position.
BTW, it is not easy to use. A large aperture telescope must be aimed at the site and a laser used to send a pulse from the earth and then a detector in the telescope must be able to see the reflected pulse. Not many photons make it back as the beam diverges given the distance from the earth to the moon and back and the trip through the atmosphere two times. Thirty or so years ago an article in Scientific American explained how difficult the detection proved to be at the McDonald Observatory in Texas. It is not a trivial task to use the array that is on the Moon and some scientists doubt it is there.
That NASA went to the Moon is likely a myth much as the Big Bang is a myth.
2003-05-21 23:23 | User Profile
John "Birdbrain" Bryant denied my figures documenting cowardice by Jews in American wars. When asked what specifically he did not accept, he did not answer except in generalities that made no sense. He talks much, but when asked to confront the enemy he turns his back and walks (or runs) away. The little he has done must be limited to the neanderthals amongst us. I have little use for this gutless loudmouth.
2003-05-21 23:51 | User Profile
I think Atlantin might be Bryant himself, alerted to this thread. The array is not as difficult to use as Atlantin claims. JPL hasn't had all that much trouble using it. Oh wait - the array was placed there by secret, unmanned probes. BTW, the array worked fine the very first time it was tested, way way way back in those dark days. Sisyfos pretty much hits the nail right on Birdman's pointy head.
Well, if the whole moon landing thing is a sham, then they paid my father a lot of money, and wasted a lot of his time and engineering skills on a scam that was kept secret from so many for so long. The Fox program that hypothesized the moon landings were faked was picked apart top to bottom, in rather easy fashion.
Edward Gibbon, I've read some of the excuses Bryant used regarding jewish no-shows in wars (which they fomented in some cases). The one claiming few jews were hurt on the battlefield because they are smart took the cake. Smart enough to have uncle Abe pull some strings or lay out some greenbacks to keep them out of uniform is the real story.
Ed, I don't know if Mensa is that big a deal. I would bet that a fair number of OD members could pass their 'intelligence' test(s). As for the 'different drummer', again, that's something that most OD members march to, or they wouldn't be here. Being smart doesn't mean you're always right. Bryant might take shots at the jews, but he also hedges his bets on occasion.
2003-05-22 00:10 | User Profile
When someone "naming the Jew" starts descending into kooky madness they only facilitate Jewish attempts at smearing everyone who sees them for what they are as nuts and kooks. How one can believe that moon landing never happened when the Soviets would have been the first to point that out if there had been any credible evidence, and how secrecy could be held when so many people were involved in the project?
2003-05-22 00:27 | User Profile
I always thought the appeal of the Far Right was it seemed to be the umbrella under which a lot of uniquely individual individuals gathered. Unlike the Left, Middle and Fake Right, there is little if any compulsory cookie-cutter consensus imposed among us.
If that means there are a fair share of 'eccentrics' under the tent, then so be it. There isn't a one of us who wouldn't be considered 'eccentric' - or worse - by the workaday world for our interests, opinions and approaches. Probably several of us already are.
But how invigorating, how liberating, to have no party platform shoved down my throat. How salutary the environment of the freedom to say exactly what I mean to say without tip-toeing around my internal censor first...and the freedom to disagree, even vehemently, with 'comrades' and even 'komissars' in this sort-of 'movement'.
I don't demand that John Bryant - or Edward Gibbon, for that matter - adhere to my worldview in all particulars. That leaves me free to agree or disagree with each point they make on a case-by-case basis. To me, all of this is a good thing. So Bryant, who occasionally posts stuff prefitted for a Reynolds-wrap chapeau like Fake Moon Landing and Planet X Will Destroy All Life On Earth (I believe the world was scheduled to be pulled off orbit last Wednesday) still has enough worthy info on his site to make him worth bookmarking. He ain't perfect, but neither am I.
2003-05-22 00:40 | User Profile
I think it boils down to whether or not you believe what you present. Most of the guys at OD actually appear to believe what they write. Bryant seems to be either looking for controversy - to garner some kind, any kind, of publicity - or desperately trying to make himself seem smart, by making outlandish statements, and then claiming that if one doesn't believe them, it's because you aren't intelligent enough "to understand". Same tactic used by jr. high schoolers and jewish "intellectuals". There are a number of kooks under all the tents in the country. But he's inconsistent, even for a kook.
2003-05-22 01:00 | User Profile
Who cares about the moon landings? What about the girl of the day! :lol:
2003-05-22 04:51 | User Profile
re:"I think Atlantin might be Bryant himself, alerted to this thread. The array is not as difficult to use as Atlantin claims. JPL hasn't had all that much trouble using it. "
No, I am not Birdman although I am near his age. I am not a member of Mensa but have something better: Ivy League University Doctorate and four year Post Doc/Lectureship in a hard science. I was working in Santa Barbara County near Vandenberg for two years in the mid 70s and had a friend (electrical engineer) who worked for GE Re-entry Systems on the Minute Man II development and who considered the Moon landings pure Hollywood as he told me that there was no possible way the guidance systems available in 1969 could have pulled it off.
Here is a report from McDonald Observatory {http://almagest.as.utexas.edu/~rlr/dda.html}:
**The MLRS laser pulse contains 3 x 1017 photons. In lunar mode only a few return to pass through the receive system. A typical lunar return rate is a few signal photons per minute. **
The following is from a 1994 posting by NASA {http://sunearth.gsfc.nasa.gov/eclipse/SEhelp/ApolloLaser.html}:
Corner cubes reflect a beam of light directly back toward the point of origin.
"Lunar ranging involves sending a laser beam through an optical telescope," Dickey said. "The beam enters the telescope where the eye piece would be, and the transmitted beam is expanded to become the diameter of the main mirror, then bounced off the surface toward the reflector on the Moon."
The reflectors are too small to be seen from Earth, so even when the beam is precisely aligned in the telescope, actually hitting a lunar retroreflector array is technically challenging. At the Moon's surface the beam is roughly four miles wide. Scientists liken the task of aiming the beam to using a rifle to hit a moving dime two miles away.
Once the laser beam hits a reflector, scientists at the ranging observatories use extremely sensitive filtering and amplification equipment to detect the return signal, which is far too weak to be seen with the human eye. Even under good atmospheric viewing conditions, only one photon is received every few seconds."
Note the last sentence:"Even under good atmospheric viewing conditions, only one photon is received every few seconds."
I urge you to look up the Scientific American article from the early to mid 1970s. It is a difficult stunt at best.
2003-05-22 05:02 | User Profile
What does the rate of returning photons have to do with guidance systems? Landings on other planets were done several decades ago. What science were you in?
2003-05-22 05:34 | User Profile
Atlantin, your point is ...? This is amusing, it's a very small world, because my father (with his highest degree being a PHD in engineering physics, I'd say that's a hard science, wouldn't you?) worked at GE developing guidance systems, before moving on to DAC then MDD. Until he passed away a few years ago, he would laugh his ass off when we would show him things like this. Guidance system? Yes, primitive in the 1960's. Primitive to the point that the astronauts themselves were constantly monitoring, correcting. In simple terms, that's what they were there for. The computers in those days were woefully ineffecient by 1980's standards, never mind today. But to say the guidance systems weren't capable of handling the job, well, that's way off the mark.
JPL has been successful with the array since the first manned lunar landing.
[url=http://www2.jpl.nasa.gov/files/releases/lunlaser.txt]http://www2.jpl.nasa.gov/files/releases/lunlaser.txt[/url]
A perusal of Birdman's site has him screeching like a wounded ... duck. Aw, the world's smartest man is hurt. He's making fun of the names people choose for an internet forum, while calling himself The Birdman, complete with monk's hood and pigeon propped on his noggin. He then accuses the objects of his wrath of being losers, as name calling is the last refuge of a loser, blah blah, all this while he calls them names. Birdman closes his latest whine with; PS: I do not claim any independent knowledge that the Moon landing was fake. I only claim two things: (1) Governments lie and cover up like hell when it suits their purposes, and (2) serious criticisms of the Moon landing like Ralph's must be answered before the Orthodox Government Version can be believed.
Gee, none of us realized that governments lie. Maybe that will be the hot new topic of discussion on this and other forums. As to Ralph Rene's accusations and evidence of lying, read this short article from Wired:
[url=http://www.wired.com/news/culture/0,1284,20820,00.html]http://www.wired.com/news/culture/0,1284,20820,00.html[/url]
Then read this page that gives the background on some of the characters behind the "...moon landings were a hoax," warbling. [url=http://www.redzero.demon.co.uk/moonhoax/proponents.html]http://www.redzero.demon.co.uk/moonhoax/pr...proponents.html[/url]
Ralph Rene was a carpenter. Same was claimed for Jesus. Maybe Rene's background in carpentry is why he's above question.
I think there's too many thin skinned people in cyberspace, including Birdman. If you want to stir up controversy, expect a few shells lobbed your way.
The Apollo 12 astronauts landed awfully close to the Surveyor craft that had landed on the Moon years earlier, and brought back pieces for examination. Wait, that was fake too. I'll bet even Surveyor itself was fake. There's no way a guidance system from the 60's could have helped that craft land on the moon. Yeah, that's it ...
Our government has more important chicanery on its "mind" than fake lunar landings.
2003-05-22 12:31 | User Profile
It is said that there are two types of people considered 'smart': people of above-average intelligence who work really hard, and geniuses who drip intelligence but are lazy. Mensa members are almost entirely from that first group.
2003-05-22 15:41 | User Profile
Originally posted by Sisyfos@May 21 2003, 01:44 Just as the eyes are often hungrier than the stomach so can the appetite for knowledge outrun the capacity for its acquisition, optimal wiring notwithstanding. So while generalists are to be preferred over specialists, knowing when to defer to the latterââ¬â¢s expertise is one hallmark of intelligence.
Purple prose I like it...Registered with this forum just to thank you for expressing something I recognise in myself but have never properly been able to articulate...
I reached this forum from Birdman's site, so he's doing something right...
I think webmasters tend to be quite egotistical. I don't see a problem with that....
(Northern Bastion, Ed Toner recognise you from Stormfront [stevefreedom]- Hello fellas ! )
2003-05-22 18:11 | User Profile
il ragno has written:> **I don't demand that John Bryant - or Edward Gibbon, for that matter - adhere to my worldview in all particulars. That leaves me free to agree or disagree with each point they make on a case-by-case basis. To me, all of this is a good thing. So Bryant, who occasionally posts stuff prefitted for a Reynolds-wrap chapeau like Fake Moon Landing and Planet X Will Destroy All Life On Earth (I believe the world was scheduled to be pulled off orbit last Wednesday) still has enough worthy info on his site to make him worth bookmarking. He ain't perfect, but neither am I. **
Roy Batty wrote:> [color=red]Edward Gibbon, I've read some of the excuses Bryant used regarding jewish no-shows in wars (which they fomented in some cases). The one claiming few jews were hurt on the battlefield because they are smart took the cake. Smart enough to have uncle Abe pull some strings or lay out some greenbacks to keep them out of uniform is the real story. [/color] Ed, I don't know if Mensa is that big a deal. I would bet that a fair number of OD members could pass their 'intelligence' test(s). As for the 'different drummer', again, that's something that most OD members march to, or they wouldn't be here. Being smart doesn't mean you're always right. Bryant might take shots at the jews, but he also hedges his bets on occasion.
** il ragno **wants me in the tent pissing out, but I have so much bile and vinegar that I must relieve myself against those who proclaim solidarity with their betters such as the vile Polichinello. Birdbrain Bryant's excuses and lies about Jews dodging American wars were so lame that I deemed him much more of an idiot-savant (to use polite English) than a truly intelligent man. He may contribute by bringing new persons to the fold, but they will only stay after being confronted with intelligent posts.
2003-05-22 20:15 | User Profile
Wow! The Birdman mentioned me on his site! Well, he mentioned my handle. I take issue with him saying I run my mouth not very well. I never run my mouth here. I just type a lot. I still enjoy his site, especially the Daily Reads, even if the Birdman hates me, sniff sniff. Hey, Ed Toner is a contributor there, so that's a plus. I think Bryant doesn't really mind all of this. It probably gives him a little increase in traffic for his site, and likewise for OD. He might have been a little peeved at me for a second, maybe a little more at Sisyphos (who cares how he spells his handle?). He might be a little burned at Roy, who seems to show up for a day of posts, then disappears for a few weeks, and is probably only mad at good old Edward Gibbon, armed to the teeth with his facts on the armed forces. Madrussian's short post is so blunt and insightful I was laughing my arse off when I read it. Il Ragno and Roy both have good points, but so does Mr. Gibbon, whose posts I really enjoy. Where's NB in all of this?
Welcome aboard England! The Birdman knows that deep down we like most of what he's doing. He dished it out, and since I'm such a loser, I'll go and sulk in the corner with some J&B, and dream of the days when I used to run fast. On second thought, nah.
2003-05-23 07:00 | User Profile
England: Registered with this forum just to thank you for expressing something I recognise in myself but have never properly been able to articulate...
Youââ¬â¢re welcome. Curious, is it not, how recognition of shortcomings in others comes more easily when they mirror your own foibles. Of course, the accusation can rightly lend itself to a charge of projection, but you know youââ¬â¢re close to mark when the response is out of proportion and lacking focus.
I reached this forum from Birdman's site, so he's doing something right...
No question heââ¬â¢s doing something right--much valuable material there. Hell, if I were to do it again I would filch some of il ragnoââ¬â¢s stuff to use as dressing for my point. But the issue, I think, is how many dubious claims can we afford to make and still vie successfully for the minds of fellow goyim.
It actually does not matter to me as much as it may to others. Were I to add to my constellation of beliefs mere doubts about the moon landings, my character would hardly suffer for it in the minds of the vast majority of proximal Whites. But for those who take up recruitment of Nationalists on more than part-time basis and are bent on reaching nameless faces, assessing resources (namely websites) for ability to produce permanent conversions is key. The birdmanââ¬â¢s website is popular, true enough, but it may not always function as the ideal gatekeeper for all potential Nationalists, especially the straight arrow types where the first exposure to pro-White sources could do without the burden of being flanked by links to the likes of Mark Hazelwood.
Of course, a site reflects the interests of its owner and owes nothing to further the aims of others, no matter the congruence of their political outlook. Some people just like to comment on whatever comes their way. :D [list] [/list]
2003-05-23 14:13 | User Profile
The MENSA flap, where John Bryant enters the Jewish Question as the most controversial of the 20th century, is pretty funny. All the MENSA organization wanted was a nice, pompous, let's laugh at the superstitions of all the rubes, in house joke and the Birdman comes along and says "the JEWS!" Finally MENSA had to lock the thread on the discussion, pretty much proving the Jewish Question to be, at least, in the running for most controversial question, but the best part was watching the MENSA bags of wind run for cover-- a bit of fun meant to be at the expense of boobus americanus ended up being at the expense of history's most particular people.
So far as the moon landings go, if it was a hoax the astronauts never would have made it home. How do you assure that three men keep their mouths shut?
John Bryant probably competes with Rense, so there you go.