Comments on: MSNBC “debate” with Moon hoaxer Bart Sibrel

By: Darren

Darren — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 10:08:34 +0000

Wow. Out of 27 comments, only 1 guy can is willing to consider the evidence. Hats of to Harvey. Phil, at least in this short interview Bart got out 2 VERY important points, that any doubters can verify on their own if they’re not too afraid, and you got out NOTHING. The reason you got out nothing is that you had nothing. The cat is out of the bag Phil and it’s really hard to refute or ‘debunk’ pictures, videos and audio from the horses mouth or should I say ass.
WW1, WW2, Vietnam, 911 were all based on lies and were supposed to just gloss over this too. WTFU people.

By: Harvey

Harvey — Fri, 19 Dec 2008 16:55:30 +0000

You are right about one thing, Phil: your performance on that video was appalling.. Sibrel wiped the floor with you. But it had nothing to do with your appearance (I didn’t even notice you clenching your teeth) and nothing to do with the format of the debate. The reason you were so bad was because you didn’t put up anything resembling an argument. Just saying “It’s just wrong” over and over again is not going to convince anyone of anything.

You are right to be embarrassed.

By: Lugosi

Lugosi — Sat, 03 Nov 2007 14:30:32 +0000

I have long believed that if the moon landing had truly been faked, then the special effects would have been much better.

By: Truenorth

Truenorth — Thu, 01 Nov 2007 12:33:04 +0000

I thought you handled yourself just fine considering the time constraints Phil

By: Dianne

Dianne — Thu, 01 Nov 2007 04:11:25 +0000

That is some old footage…

Phil, you didn’t have anywhere near enough speaking time compared to Sibrel. It was pretty poor journalism by the crew of the show. A real interview would give equal airtime to each person being interviewed, but I am sure that most logical people realize that Sibrel is a fool by now. Folks just need to be encouraged to look at the facts without bias. BTW, I think you handled the argument well considering the circumstances.

By: Jack Hagerty

Jack Hagerty — Thu, 01 Nov 2007 03:43:26 +0000

forrest noble says: “These guys better get a lot of play now because whoever goes back to our previous landing sites first (or gets current photos other than us) will have the goods.”

They could always claim that the new mission is faked as well, except that the reality of the situation (see my previous post) will be overwhelmingly convincing since it will take a decade for us to do it.

Just like before.

- Jack

By: forrest noble

forrest noble — Thu, 01 Nov 2007 01:40:40 +0000

Trick or Treat, Trick me once shame on you…………….

I’m a skeptic too concerning many theories in science today– but all of our moon landings a hoax? Just the first one? What? There’s nothing wrong with looking at their “evidence”, maybe we did a little “enhanced” photography but it’s a rediculous theory in general. As Spock might say, completely illogical!! These guys better get a lot of play now because whoever goes back to our previous landing sites first (or gets current photos other than us) will have the goods. I believe everyone that openly ascribed to this hoax will then have egg on their face and will look very foolish.