13 September 2009

Another example of Jarrah's mistakes

An interesting sideline is where Jarrah has called Jay Windley a liar. This stems from a debate between Jarrah and Jay Windley, where Jay referred to an e-mail exchange he had with Dr Brian O'Leary. The exchange badly damaged Jarrah's claims, and he tried to prove the exchange never happened. Jarrah used typically poor logic, incorrect deductions and plain ignorance to determine that Jay Windley was lying about the e-mails and accused him of such.

Now new evidence has come to light which once again proves that Jarrah's claims are wrong. Dr O'Leary has a close associate by the name of Wade Frazier. Wade confirmed that Jay was accurate nd telling the truth... as always.

Details can be read here.

11 comments:

  1. Wow I turn my back for awhile and already there's a pile of new stuff. It'll take awhile to respond to all these messages. But I think I have time for this one.

    I contacted Brian O'Leary to ask him his stance on the moon landings and he told me: Hi,

    I really don't know...Fox TV has a way of distorting contexts. I think they did land but am not 100% sure. The condition of the world is such that we have more important questions to ask than that one.

    Brian o'L


    Obviously this is quite different to "It was real, Apollo happened. I knew the astronauts and thought they wouldn't lie even if there were a conspiracy."

    Shortly after I released my video with Brian's message used with his permission, Windley began running around stating that he had got in touch with O'Leary again and that O'Leary believed his quotes on Clavius were in context.
    I have asked Jay Windley repeatedly to see his emails from O'Leary, as Windley has a bad habit of quoting people out of context. Despite claiming he has permission to use them, Windley has never showed these emails.

    Anyway I asked O'Leary about this and his exact response was: "I really hate to get pinned down on topics I know little about and get caught in crazy cross-currents like this and then become humiliated by people saying I said this, no I said that, no I'm a fool to contradict myself. I'm too busy on other things. Look, I didn't go to the moon.
    Some of my collegues probably did. Much of what NASA does is also hoaxed. Otherwise, let's drop it, OK?"


    He sent this email to both Windley and Frazier: both of whom refuse to even mention it. I no longer have any doubts that Windley contacted O'Leary, what I question is the context that Windley is using.

    I can emphatically say that I have never called Brian O'Leary a fool, nor have I ever held him accountable for anything contradictory.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pnsVo_hFxO0

    ReplyDelete
  2. As usual, Jarrah twists his line. The fact of the matter is he accused Jay of lying, making a big song and dance about it at his YouTube Channel, knowing it would be bait for his attack dogs. Now he admits that he has no doubts that Jay contacted Brian O'Leary.

    So rather than offer an apology to Jay, he spins another angle to rubbish Jay in public. If everyone reading this wants to take at look at the IMDb boards, and you can all see what happened when Jarrah took on Jay.

    As usual, Jarrah fudged around the subject, tried to change it around and once Jay exposed him for what he is, Jarrah has not been seen since.

    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0446557/board/thread/133905495

    Jarrah has more back pedals than the Friday the 13th franchise has sequels. Oh dear, what's that grinding noise? Must be Jarrah finding reverse gear quickly.

    Jarrah, is it anbout time you gave Jay a public apology.

    TKW, United Kingdom

    ReplyDelete
  3. As usual, Jarrah twists his line. The fact of the matter is he accused Jay of lying, making a big song and dance about it at his YouTube Channel, knowing it would be bait for his attack dogs. Now he admits that he has no doubts that Jay contacted Brian O'Leary.

    Talk about cherry-picking my words. Try reading again what I said: "I no longer have any doubts that Windley contacted O'Leary, WHAT I QUESTION IS THE CONTEXT THAT WINDLEY IS USING."

    The fact remains that O'Leary told me, Fraizer and Windley that "Much of what NASA does is also hoaxed.

    Glad you posted that link to the IMDB. Because you'll notice multiple occasions I asked him about this email that O'Leary sent the two of us. He avoided it like the plague. I on the other hand took all his questions by the horns. And for the record I plan on replying Windley latest message shortly. As you can imagine, the preparations for a person's funeral plus one's own work life can be quite time-consuming.

    Jarrah, is it anbout time you gave Jay a public apology.

    There is nothing to apologize for. I'd sooner like an apology from Windley for constantly creating straw-man versions of conspiracy arguments, misrepresenting their source material, and outright lying about them.

    Among other things he claimed that John Mauldin claimed the Van Allen radiation belt is only 1rem/day. Mauldin did say that: he said it was 1rem/day when one was inside his craft with two meters of water shielding. I called Windley out on that blatant and deliverate quote-mine on IMDB and he never addressed it.

    And you want me to apologize to Windley?

    ReplyDelete
  4. "I no longer have any doubts that Windley contacted O'Leary, WHAT I QUESTION IS THE CONTEXT THAT WINDLEY IS USING."

    Just so that there are no misunderstandings. The reason I no longer doubt that Windley got in touch with O'Leary, is because he received a carbon-copy of O'Leary's email to me.

    Again, Windley refuses to comment on this message and refuses to show O'Leary's emails despite claiming he has permission to use them.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Why should Jay betray someone's confidence just to appease the curiosity of a fanatical conspiracy theorist who will simply dismiss any presented evidence anyway?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Jarrah. Yep considering your full-throttle launch against Windley since day one, you owe it to yourself to grow some hairs on your chest, be a man and formulate an apology. It is possible for Jarrah White esq. to be wrong.

    I can't see why you can't rise above the others you so despise. If you have trouble dealing with the repercussions of making yourself a vocal internet entity, then perhaps you might want to reconsider the manner in which you do things? You. Not Windley, not Svector, not anyone else, just you.

    BTW is there a particular reason you get your colleagues to voice-over quotes from your opponents in the manner in which they do? Care to explain?

    ReplyDelete
  7. Why should Jay betray someone's confidence just to appease the curiosity of a fanatical conspiracy theorist who will simply dismiss any presented evidence anyway?

    Well, well, if it isn't the troll.

    Unlike you I don't dismiss things out of reflex, I wouldn't have bothered analyzing the LRO photos if I were that kind of person.

    The fact remains, Windley (like you) has a bad habit of quoting out of context and claims he has permission to use his emails. So, if he has the permission he claims to have, let's see him to prove that he is keeping O'Leary in context by showing us those emails in full.

    Quoting an email in full - an email that you have permission to use - is hardly betraying someone's confidence.

    Yep considering your full-throttle launch against Windley since day one, you owe it to yourself to grow some hairs on your chest, be a man and formulate an apology.

    There will be no apology. I insist on an apology from Windley for quote-mining John Mauldin, neglecting to mention the dissimilarities between tarmacs and the lunar surface, and most recently dismissing the information of one of his prime supporters in an attempt to win an argument.
    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0446557/board/thread/133905495?d=147791881&p=10#147791881

    BTW is there a particular reason you get your colleagues to voice-over quotes from your opponents in the manner in which they do? Care to explain?

    What are you talking about? If you are referring to Tim Darby doing the voice of Windley, I casted Tim because his voice and Jay Windley's are strikingly similar. Have you recently heard the sound of Windley's voice?

    If I wanted to quote Elvis, I'd get someone who sounds like Elvis. If I wanted to quote Arnold Schwarzenegger, I'd get someone who sounds like Arnold Schwarzenegger. Since I'm quoting Jay Windley, I get someone who sounds like Jay Windley.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Doesn't sound like the Jay I've heard. let me guess - just another "mistake" on your part, right?

    ReplyDelete
  9. He's made his share of boners, that's for sure. Hey Jarrah, would you do the honors and refresh everyone's memory here about the details of a polar orbit? As I recall, you insisted that it consisted of a spacecraft doing tight laps above the north pole. :-)

    ReplyDelete
  10. "Have you recently heard the sound of Windley's voice?"

    Geeze. Come to think of it, no, I haven't. I know he is our leader and that, but golly jeepers. That's why I made a point of bringing it up - what never having heard him and all. Boy you caught me out alright. For joy, I'm now going to be privied to a 10 part YT dossier on how your voice actors sound like Windley. Oh great.

    "If I wanted to quote Elvis, I'd get someone who sounds like Elvis. If I wanted to quote Arnold Schwarzenegger, I'd get someone who sounds like Arnold Schwarzenegger."

    Are you saying that if you were to quote Elvis you'd have somebody who sounds like Elvis, and if you quoted Scharzenegger you'd get somebody who sounds like Schwarzenegger? Really? Cool.

    ReplyDelete
  11. All you guys are pathetic...Jarrah being the exception. Since there are only character assasinations being slung from Jarrah's opponents, I thought I'd return the favor.

    ReplyDelete