Comments on: Joe Rogan, me (and Penn), and the Moon Hoax: Take III

By: Ray

Ray — Wed, 20 May 2009 02:29:03 +0000

Was there a third debate?

There are vids on YouTube for MOON TALKS I and MOON TALKS II, but there’s nothing anywhere I can find on the net for a part III…

The links on this page don’t work, there aren’t any links on Penn’s websites. The podcast was removed, because Penn’s radio show was canceled right after the Joe Rogan debate..

???

By: Boston paranoia level about to go up a notch | Bad Astronomy | Discover Magazine

Fri, 12 Sep 2008 16:30:58 +0000

[...] Jillette’s radio show last year (twice), and while he had me a bit weirded out for a while the second time we talked, I recovered later and was able to show where he was being silly. In the first part I had him on [...]

By: aaron

aaron — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 18:13:16 +0000

I am sorry to burst your bubble, but Joe was very on point. You wanted to argue everything he said, with a sort of stuborn arrogance of a “Know it all”. When you are wrong about a point, you should just move on, and don’t let lack of knowledge get under your skin, and make the rest of your argument seem reaching. You WERE underprepared, plain and simple.

By: Tom Green is let in on the real secret - its all crap « Antiscience Cynic

Tom Green is let in on the real secret - its all crap « Antiscience Cynic — Thu, 14 Feb 2008 19:06:58 +0000

[...] real secret – its all crap I can’t believe that the first quote on this blog is of a moon landing conspiracy theorist, but other than that flaw, Joe Rogan seems a fairly rational guy. Joe Rogan makes a great point in [...]

By: marko

marko — Sun, 30 Dec 2007 12:34:38 +0000

emmarose, I hope there’s some common ground on which reality on one side and your opinion on the other side can rest on. Do you agree that Alan Turing’s decipherig effort on the Enigma codes of the Nazis (Godwin’s law, I know), Sputnik, Mir and SkyLab was real?
There are astronauts leaving ISS and the space shuttle in EVA suits, no? There currently are two unmanned Moon missions, Chang’e-1 and Kaguya, no? What makes you think mankind wasn’t able back then and isn’t able right now to visit Earth’s moon? After all, it’s all just a question of initiative and money, not technical complexity.
The question I keep asking is: Apart from the emotional experience, is sending men and women to the Moon (and to Mars) really necessary for the advancement of science, is it worth the additional complications to expect, and is it worth the risk of human lives?

By: emmarose

emmarose — Tue, 04 Dec 2007 14:27:10 +0000

i gotta say i thought joe had a lOT of compelling evidence and was simply good at presenting his side and phil had trouble keeping up. joe wasn’t spouting stuff that was so bizarre. he also wasn’t that aggressive at all. he just has a lot of FACTUAL information and is good at presenting it. there is nothing manipulative about joe and i found phil on his heels cause he simple could not refute a lot of what joe was saying which was true. now i’ll admit, i don’t believe we went to the moon and actually find bart sibrel not be a little annoying and kooky but on the money with his theories. he knows more than joe even and some stuff that he’s come up with……the amount of computer technology back then being of that of a calculator, stuff being run on car batteries and that’s supposed to keep things running ON THE MOON..a different dimension. no *&%$#@#$& way. we didn’t go. and russia and japan et.al. have always knows and have been blackmailing us forever. i love how japan in 2003?? sent camera up there and all FIVE camera simultaneously malfunctioned so no pictures of our “moonbuggies, flag..etc” could be photographed. now japan can make cameras and they all failed? bullsh*t. it’s a conspiracy and anyone with half a brain knows none of it adds up. we never went and we have no idea how to get there now. no idea.

By: marko

marko — Mon, 03 Dec 2007 23:11:00 +0000

Answer to self:

Part I was about Phil’s appearance on Bulls(*clap*)hit.
Part II was about TAM5 when Phill visited Penn at the Slammer.
Part III was when Rogan was at Penn’s, with Phil on the phone.

By the way, I really liked reading those other forum threads, it was really overwhelmingly pro-BA and anti-Rogan. Penn… well, let’s repeat one post at PennFans:

Penn said once or twice that the “debate” between Phil and Joe exemplified the “marketplace of ideas,” but he seems to have forgotten that show he did a while back on “mandatory false dichotomies,” and how stupid it is to give every possible contrary statement airtime. Why is that? Because there are always possible contrary statements but most of them are completely worthless. Like the ones coming out of Joe Rogan’s mouth.

There’s the “marketplace of ideas” and then there’s encouraging inanity by giving voice to people who just want to drown out more reasoned opinions with loudmouthed, middle school level skepticism. “
(posted by Karma on PennFans, 2007/02/28 19:17)