We all make mistakes, and there is one mistake from MoonFaker Exhibit D that I need to correct. During production of the said video, I picked up on a space.com article which carried the following statement: "About 40 or 50 scientists around the world are still investigating the moon rocks. They have to apply to the curators at JSC with a detailed explanation of how they plan to use the samples and what they hope to learn." I misinterpreted this statement and came to the conclusion that only 40 or 50 scientists have ever looked at these rocks. This oversight was rather embarrassing on part, as larger numbers of geologists are mentioned in my DVD collection of old NASA documentaries.
I acknowledge my mistake. But propagandists try to get as much mileage as possible out of it. Going for volume to falsely accuse me of logical fallacies, Webb scrolls through a long, long list of names of scientists who examined the samples between 1970 and 1975.
Reading through this list is quite revealing. While some names are absent, among the list are the names of many, many geologists who contradict his own claims. Claims like earth rocks and moon rocks have different proportions of the same elements, or that none of the non-lunar meteorites chemically resemble the moon rocks, or that none of the samples contain ferric iron or hydrated minerals. Names of such individuals include Mason, Melson, Friedman, Turkevich and then some. If Webb lists all these individuals and praises their honesty, he must have 100% trust in their respective authorities on lunar geology and subsequently the things they say that hurt his case. Otherwise he stands guilty of cherry-picking, quote-mining and misrepresentation.
Webb also tries to downplay just what steps a geologist needs to take before they can even think of studying an Apollo rock sample. The list of requirements is way too long to cover in any video, so viewers are directed towards the Lunar Sample Allocation Guidebook for more information: http://curator.jsc.nasa.gov/lunar/sam...
I acknowledge my mistake. But propagandists try to get as much mileage as possible out of it. Going for volume to falsely accuse me of logical fallacies, Webb scrolls through a long, long list of names of scientists who examined the samples between 1970 and 1975.
Reading through this list is quite revealing. While some names are absent, among the list are the names of many, many geologists who contradict his own claims. Claims like earth rocks and moon rocks have different proportions of the same elements, or that none of the non-lunar meteorites chemically resemble the moon rocks, or that none of the samples contain ferric iron or hydrated minerals. Names of such individuals include Mason, Melson, Friedman, Turkevich and then some. If Webb lists all these individuals and praises their honesty, he must have 100% trust in their respective authorities on lunar geology and subsequently the things they say that hurt his case. Otherwise he stands guilty of cherry-picking, quote-mining and misrepresentation.
Webb also tries to downplay just what steps a geologist needs to take before they can even think of studying an Apollo rock sample. The list of requirements is way too long to cover in any video, so viewers are directed towards the Lunar Sample Allocation Guidebook for more information: http://curator.jsc.nasa.gov/lunar/sam...
MoonFaker: Moonrocks Revisited. Episode 7, Lunar Geologists & Getting Apollo Samples. PART 2 lunarly | |
8 Likes | 8 Dislikes |
361 views views | 13.9K followers |
Science & Technology | Upload TimePublished on 14 Jun 2011 |
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét