Wednesday, October 7, 2009

Wagging The Moondoggie - David McGowan

I love this guy's stuff!

David McGowan's blog, The Center for an Informed America, has some of the best political and satirical analysis ever posted. I don't know how the guy does it. Dave...I am planning to order one of your books - I'll want an autograph.

He produced a posting a number of years ago, titled Wagging The Moondoggie, which at the time, explained the ensuing events of the time (this link is no longer active). Well, he wasn't satisfied, and so, he has expanded the piece to a five-part posting, and it is fantastic. Dear readers...I present to you, for your reading pleasure, Dave's updated diatribe of what did or didn't happen some decades ago:

Wagging The Moondoggie - Part 1
Wagging The Moondoggie - Part 2
Wagging The Moondoggie - Part 3
Wagging The Moondoggie - Part 4
Wagging The Moondoggie - Part 5

Not to be outdone, Dave also smashes the entire Peak Oil agenda - this is at the end of WTM Part 5, so I don't wish for you to overlook it:

Before bidding adieu, I have one final note to add: a certain Dr. Thomas Gold was an early skeptic of the feasibility of landing on the Moon. He made headlines prior to the alleged flight of Apollo 11 when he predicted that any attempt at a Moon landing would be disastrous. NASA, of course, purportedly proved the good doctor wrong.

Longtime readers will remember that Dr. Gold was America’s most prominent proponent of the abiotic theory of oil and gas production, and that he went and dropped dead just before the ‘Peak Oil’ propaganda started to heat up. Dr. Gold was recently proven to be correct on the origins of so-called ‘fossil fuels.’ The article, curiously enough, refers to the research as “revolutionary” – which it is, I suppose, if you ignore the fact that the Soviets and Ukrainians did the same research and drew the same conclusions some fifty years ago.

We all know that that can’t be true, however, because it would be impossible to keep a secret of that magnitude from the entire Western world … right?

I brought this up because the Chimp-Gone-Wild, George Walker Bush, gave his oil buddies a going-away present before his term of office expired back in 2008 - maybe you remember it.

It was in the form of OIL GOING FOR $147 A GODDAMNED BARREL.

Remember the loopy predictions offered? We're going to have oil prices of $200 per barrel in 2009? It was TOTAL BULLSHITE. Remember the huge profits reported for those companies? All part of Georgie-Boy's going-away present to his A-oil buddies.


kevinwparker said...

McGowan's Apollo hoax diatribe is loaded with errors and misunderstandings from beginning to end: Hubble doesn't have the resolution to see the landers, things do fall more slowly on the Moon, stars aren't significantly brighter from space than they are from Earth, the lunar module was tested thoroughly and repeatedly before Apollo 11, some version of all the moonwalking footage is still available, etc. Need I go on?

hANOVER fIST said...

Let's attempt to take this in order:

The Hubble Telescope: Hm...what about this link?

Things falling more slowly on the moon: I have to say, since I've never been to the moon, as, I'm sure, YOU'VE never been to the moon, that you can NOT absolutely say that you know for certain that things fall slower on the moon. Remember, no air means no air friction. So, all of that footage seems to lend itself to being really stupid nonsense.

Stars not being "significantly brighter": sounds like an equivocation to me...

Lunar Model: Tested by NASA...that's like the LAPD determining that they did a good job protecting Robert Francis Kennedy...especially when, instead of tackling Sirhan Bishara Sirhan, or holding Thane Eugene Caesar, they tacked Jamie Scott Enyart, and TOOK HIS CAMERA.

Moonwalking footage: You REALLY don't have any problem with NASA "misplacing" ALL of that footage?

700 BOXES?

Let's spell that out...SEVEN HUNDRED BOXES?!?

You're like Richard Pryor when he freebased and didn't know his hair was on fire.

kevinwparker said...

Hubble - yes, Hubble can take photos of the Moon, but not with sufficient resolution to make out the landers.

Falling slowly - I haven't been to the Moon, but I do know basic physics.

Stars - The stars will be a few percent brighter from the Moon, but not "many times the luminosity", as McGowan says.

Lunar module - look up Apollo 9 for photos of the LM in Earth orbit

Lost footage - Yes, that's embarrassing, but it's a small quantity out of the tens of thousands of boxes in all.

And those are just a few examples of McGowan's mistakes. There are probably at least a half-dozen per page, but I don't want to clog up your blog by listing every single one.

hANOVER fIST said...

"And those are just a few examples of McGowan's mistakes. There are probably at least a half-dozen per page, but I don't want to clog up your blog by listing every single one."