In Case You Needed More Proof that Bart Sibrel is a Nut
August 14th, 2009
|
| Share |
You may know Bart Sibrel as the Apollo conspiracy theorist who got a well deserved punch in the face from Buzz Aldrin a few years ago. If you live in Nashville, you may also know him as the guy who drove you home from the bar, because his actual day job is driving a taxi cab there.
The first thing Sibrel said after being punched was “did you get that on tape?” to his camera man. Apparently he felt that the punch would make Buzz Aldrin seem like a dishonest or hot-headed person. Of course, it’s worth nothing that this happened after Subrel had been following Aldrin for much of the day, repeatedly getting in his face and refusing to listen to Buzz’s initially polite requests to leave him and his granddaughter alone.
But it seems that Sibrel himself has some issues with his temper. In his case, the thing that set him off wasn’t being stalked all day by a creepy guy with a video camera but a parking space.
Inside Story: Apollo Conspiracy Theorist Arrested After Tirade
The world just celebrated the 40th anniversary of America’s landing on the moon. But a local man has a problem with the official story — and now he’s also got a problem with the law.Bart Sibrel is a well-known conspiracy theorist whose made a bit of a career out of ambushing America’s astronauts, trying to make them look like hot-headed fakes.
Sibrel, who calls himself an investigative journalist, has produced videos questioning whether the moon landing ever happened.
His 2001, widely discredited documentary called it “the greatest government coverup of all time.”
…
But Sibrel, who moonlights as a Nashville cab driver, apparently lost control a few months back over his own landing of sorts.
Court documents show he was arrested after another driver refused to pull out of a parking space he wanted. She was waiting for her car engine to warm up.
The arresting officer wrote, “A few moments later, the parking space in front of the victim opened up and [Sibrel] drove into it and parked.”
Sibrel “then walked up to the victim’s car and jumped onto the hood, and then jumped up and down several times.”
The report says he caused about $1,431.33 in damage.
Last month, according to the court’s website, Sibrel pleaded guilty to vandalism and was placed on probation.
But, as you might have guessed, that’s one outburst you won’t see in his videos.
Sibrel did not respond to an email from NewsChannel 5 Investigates.
You can read the arrest affidavit on the News Five website.
It’s just too good.
This entry was posted on Friday, August 14th, 2009 at 1:25 pm and is filed under Bad Science, Conspiracy Theories, Humor, Just LAME, Misc, Space, media. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
View blog reactions
August 14th, 2009 at 5:50 pm
Wow. What I wouldn’t have done for that guy to jump on my car’s hood. I don’t think I’d recognize him, but if I did it would be great. My car is definitely worth less than $1,431.33, and so if I got restitution then I’d probably be able to get a slightly better car. (my car is just slightly above complete POS) It’s well insured anyway. Even if I lost the money it’d be worth it because if this happened I’d just start driving. Either forward if I could or I’d back up with my foot on the gas and do one of those wicked J-turns. (I’ve done them before) and fling the dude across the parking lot. Man that would be fun. I’m pretty sure I could get away with it. I mean, it’s a crazy dude jumping on my hood and I’d just be trying to protect myself.
Quote Comment
August 14th, 2009 at 9:19 pm
What do you expect from a guy like that?
I wonder if he claimed that this is a conspiracy to deny him a good parking space.
Quote Comment
August 15th, 2009 at 1:51 am
Jumping on someone’s car hood accomplishes nothing and will all but guarantee you’ll pay for the damages and get arrested, especially if you do it in a mall parking lot with plenty of people around. You lose the confrontation by a huge amount in this kind of thing. It’s an idiotic thing to do and a crazy thing to do. It makes no sense. It’d ridiculous to the point of being downright insane. He’s lucky the cop didn’t assume he was probably really high on something and TASER him.
This is about what you’d expect from an Apollo hoax wackjob.
I would never ride in that man’s taxi.
Quote Comment
August 15th, 2009 at 2:46 am
I really didn’t need any more proof that he was a nut.
Quote Comment
August 15th, 2009 at 4:25 pm
It’s hilarious that the guy that actually went up there hears this crazy talk coming from someone who probably doesn’t even have a pilot’s license or science-related degree (=not qualified to know if it’s actually possible to pilot a craft to the moon)! I wouldn’t claim against the geocentricists that the Earth orbits the sun, without having a heck of a lot of good evidence and precise reasoning, so why would I claim that it’s impossible to get to the moon and back? Next thing you know, they’ll be claiming that Enigma was broken not by computers and mathematicians, but by psychics since there’s no way a computer could exist in WWII since you need ICs to build a current one. Der oops wrong again.
At least he was a holocaust denier in front of a crowd of 1940’s German/Hebrew immigrants… Imagine they’d be even more ticked off by revisionists!
Quote Comment
August 15th, 2009 at 9:46 pm
I have heard people say that Buzz Aldrin reacted in a way that was kinda crazy or he really lost his temper when he punched Bart Sibrel. I really do not think that is the case. Bart Sibrel has hounded Buzz Aldrin before and really got threatening.
Buzz Aldrin was leaving some kind of event that he had been part of and he was walking out of the hotel lobby where it was held when Bart Sibrel started harassing him. He was with his granddaughter. They tried to cross the street and Bart Sibrel physically blocked their way. Buzz Aldrin didn’t punch him, he turned around and went back into the hotel. The doorman at the hotel told Sibrel not to go in and informed him that they were calling the police because he was trespassing and harassing and threatening people.
He pushed aside at least one hotel employee and tried to get to Buzz Aldrin who told him a final time to get away from him before Sibrel got in his face and really asked for one.
See a portion of the confrontation here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UUFO8AGMwic
It might have been a slight over-reaction by Buzz Aldrin, but really, I can see how someone would feel threatened and really want the guy to just go away. Buzz Aldrin said afterward that he wanted them to leave his granddaughter alone and they were harassing her as well. When they came back into the lobby he was hoping for the cops to arrive so he could just continue to walk out.
Quote Comment
August 17th, 2009 at 10:40 am
IIRC, Sibrel pressed charges against Aldrin, and the judge basically agreed with what you’ve said, Engineering Edgar, right before dismissing the charges. It was beautiful.
Quote Comment
August 18th, 2009 at 5:39 am
Seeing that video, which I hadn’t seen before, removes any doubt from my mind that Buzz Aldrin didn’t do anything wrong. Here you have a man in his late 70’s with his granddaughter, who is physically blocked from crossing the street, almost being pushed. He tries to avoid the confrontation by going into the hotel, but this bastard muscles his way past the doorman who tells him he can’t enter and they’re calling the police to remove him, then he again gets all in Aldrin’s face. This man has no shame. None. We already knew that, but he just doesn’t care about the law or basic civility. He thinks he is so great, going with a whole camera crew and trying to shove around an old man and his granddaughter when they’re just trying to get back to their car or whereever.
I hope there’s a strong restraining order on him to keep him the hell away from any astronauts or former NASA employees. This is the kind of scum who would be banging on the door at all hours if he found out someone was a retired Apollo technician or something. He’s so full of himself and his stupid little investigation, you’d think he was more than a ****in taxicab driver.
Quote Comment
August 28th, 2009 at 12:39 pm
What a pathetic psychopath. I hear Neil Armstrong has a restraining order against him. Now that I saw the video Edgar posted, I can 100% see why Buzz Aldrin punched him. He wasn’t just in his face, he was physically blocking him and following him after he was told not to by the hotel. He more than asked for that.
Quote Comment
February 11th, 2010 at 12:30 pm
Here is footage of the Apollo
11 crew faking part of
their alleged mission to the
Moon back in 1969… Enjoy!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xUGRngAhBI
the money shot of the fakes is between 7:00 and the
end of the clip.
Why would they be faking anthing if they really went to the Moon anyway?
Quote Comment
February 11th, 2010 at 5:06 pm
Rory Snyder said:
It’s already been addressed here. It’s a stupid damn accusation. That looks nothing like LEO flight and besides, in LEO flight, the image of the earth moves as the spacecraft orbits.
Use the search feature. Already been shreaded to pieces:
http://depletedcranium.com/apollo-conspiracy-proof-fail/
Oh yeah, also contains several glaring factual errors. The networks DID NOT show the footage as shot on a projection screen. That seems to be some kind of misunderstanding of how the scan conversion equipment worked. It was not nearly that crude.
That video was avaliable to the news stations live – another false statement. Many didn’t air it completely, but it was not hidden nor was the transmission in any way scrambled or encrypted.
The thing that the astronauts were “preoccupied with” was not faking anything. The camera being used was a field-sequential color television camera that has a spinning disk in it. The system was a bit buggy. The video looks good when the disc is spinning at the proper speed, but it had a tendency to lose sync and that makes the image flicker. There was also some noise on the vidcon.
What the astronauts were doing was messing with the camera trying to get the best picture.
The camera was handheld, but fairly large by today’s standards and It thus blocked the view of the entire window even when it was a few inches back, which is how it had to be held. The used a small black and white television as a viewfinder.
Quote Comment
February 11th, 2010 at 5:21 pm
Here’s the Apollo 13 crew also faking part
of their mission, just like the other Apollo astronauts. Here again, the
astronauts are supposed to be over 100,000+ miles from Earth en route to the
Moon at the time this picture was taken. However, once again you can see the
bright, nearby Earth shining through the windows of the craft meaning that they
were merely orbiting the Earth a few hundred miles up…
http://www.flickr.com/photos/46300084@N05/4255963810/
Apollo 13 was the simulation of a crisis in space rather than
a real crisis in space!
Quote Comment
February 11th, 2010 at 5:34 pm
Here’s the Apollo 16 crew also faking part of their mission. You can actually see the stagehands helping the phony astronauts on the phony Moon soundstage! You NASA employees/shills are too funny!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fFs-iNNfU1I
The stagehand appears at 1:40 of the clip. D’oh!
Quote Comment
February 11th, 2010 at 9:07 pm
Noting that my tearing apart the first video goes unmentioned
Rory Snyder said:
Uh… well, I’ll admit that there’s not much I can refute there, but that’s because there’s nothing to really say about a black and white scan of a small photo
Rory Snyder said:
First of all, that’s about the worst video of Apollo-16 I’ve ever seen. Apollo 16 used the RCA J-series lunar television system, which returned excellent video. That looks like it’s over-compressed and captured by a bad video card off of an old VHS. Please next time find some descent source of the video – it’s not even that hard to find it.
That, by the way is one of the astronauts. The idiot who put together the video didnt bother doing any basic research. Nobody was working the camera. It was remote controlled. The J-series missions all used an RC pan/tilt/zoom camera system mounted on the rover.
Also, they only used one tv camera. There would have been no point in hauling a second to the moon – the TV system occupied all the bandwidth of a dedicated S-band transmitter. If they wanted to have two, they would have needed an entire additional camera, transmitter, antenna and batteries. They didn’t bring stuff to the moon that wasn’t necessary.
All the apollo landings has one and only one TV camera. The television system was one of the biggest technical hurdles and used a lot of bandwidth. Apollo 13, 14 and 15 carried a second TV camera – the Westinghouse SSTV camera used by Apollo-11, but this was never used. It was carried as a backup because of what happened on Apollo-12. It wasn’t carried by Apollo 16 or 17 because by that time they were very confident in the durability of the RCA system, which had been designed with an automatic protection system to prevent a tube burnout.
So:
One camera
Operated By Remote by a guy in Houston
Crappiest video I’ve seen of apollo 16
Also, conversation misslabled and taken out of context.
FAIL
Quote Comment
February 11th, 2010 at 9:20 pm
If you had a legit answer it would take 2 sentences. Boring a reader to death with minutiae doesn’t unfake the Apollo 11, 13 & 16 fakes I presented. You didn’t even bother trying with the Apollo 13 stuff, either…
I wish they had truly gone to the Moon, myself, but they didn’t.
Quote Comment
February 11th, 2010 at 9:23 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SvZrWvEHPK8&translated=1
Watch Buzz Aldrin run like a bitch and threaten lawsuit when confronted with
the footage he helped fake on Apollo 11!
The action starts around 4:30 or so in the clip…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=znzoVcjS2IA
Here is a clip of the director Bart Sibrel
(the guy who found the Apollo 11 faked footage) confronting Neil Armstrong and
asking him to swear that he walked on the Moon. Watch Neil Armstrong cower and
tremble like a leaf in fear…
http://video.yahoo.com/watch/190444/602720
Here is video of filmmaker Bart Sibrel
confronting Michael Collins, (the third Apollo 11 crew member along with Aldrin
and Armstrong) over the faked footage from Apollo 11.
Collins was allegedly orbiting the Moon while Armstrong and
Aldrin were allegedly on the Moon’s surface. Like Aldrin and Armstrong before
him, Collins had no legitimate answers when confronted…
None of the 3 eyewitnesses to Apollo 11 were able to explain that faked Apollo 11 footage(just like you) when confronted with it.
Quote Comment
February 11th, 2010 at 9:25 pm
Rory Snyder said:
Two sentences:
Your “proof” proves nothing. That’s an astronaut who was not behind the camera because Houston runs it by remote control.
Quote Comment
February 11th, 2010 at 9:30 pm
They should have you NASA employees/shills apologizing to the American public on a daily basis for the Apollo frauds, instead of propping up the phony Moon landings with all these websites.
Quote Comment
February 11th, 2010 at 11:28 pm
Rory Snyder said:
Wow. You must REALLY hate to read, eh?
Rory Snyder said:
In general, astronauts won’t dignify this bull**** with a response. Neil Armstrong i a very private and humble man and they recognize this nonsense as insulting to everyone who worked on the program. The other thing is that most of these guys are now in their 80’s and despite being some pretty tough and badass fighter pilots, there’s good reason for them to stay away from a much younger man who’s clearly very mentally unstable and possibly violent.
Rory Snyder said:
Oh? Am I a NASA employee too? I still haven’t gotten any checks!
Quote Comment
February 17th, 2010 at 6:04 am
Reading, thinking, questioning, don’t have time for that – just give me what I want to hear. I want to believe that no one ever went to space, and that the Earth is flat like a pancake.
Do the Apollo conspiracy theorists have any idea how hard it is to keep any kind of secret for 40 years in Washington, even military ones?
Quote Comment
May 1st, 2010 at 5:20 pm
Joe Whitehead said:
What, like the JFK assassination or 9/11?
Quote Comment
May 1st, 2010 at 11:41 pm
Gus Grissom said:
I suppose. I mean the JFK assassination didn’t stay a secret for long. Even though there was only one guy, it only took a couple hours before the police had concluded that it was Lee Harvey Oswald – he was the only employee missing from the TSBD and he matched the description of the man seen leaning out the window with a gun.
With 9/11 Al Queda was suspected immediately but it took about a week before the names of all those involved had been found and it was determined that they had ties back to Al Queda and the basics of the plot were made public.
Quote Comment
May 2nd, 2010 at 9:24 am
86% of Americans don’t believe the Lee Harvey Oswald lone gunman theory. They did forensics tests to see if he had fired a rifle on the day of the JFK assassination. He hadn’t!
I’ll believe the official 9/11 theory when they explain why WTC 7 fell after not being hit by a plane! ‘Pull it!’
Quote Comment
May 2nd, 2010 at 10:59 am
Gus Grissom said:
86% of Americans are wrong. Reality does not work by democracy. The fact that many of most believe something does not make it true.
Gus Grissom said:
That’s not true. They preformed a residue test known as “the paraffin test” on Oswald. This test is not very good by modern standards but was the standard for the time. It was preformed on his hands and on his cheek. The reason it was preformed on his cheek is the idea that how one holds a rifle might cause residue to be on the cheek.
His hands tested positive. Only his cheek tested negative, but that’s not a shocker. In a rifle the chamber is sealed so little or no gun powder residue can come out from the bolt. So the results are actually not in any way unexpected for someone who fired a gun. They strongly support the fact that he fired the gun.
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/factoid2.htm
Gus Grissom said:
Had it been a conspiracy involving the government, military, airlines, major league baseball and whoever else, it would have made no sense to drop the tower afterward, as if it were taken down when the main towers fell nobody would have even noticed. But that’s not the point..
WTC 7 was severely damaged by debris during the fall of the two main towers. There was a raging fire in the lower floors. This was partially fueled by diesel tanks in the basement, which were there to power auxiliary generators. The sprinkler system did not work because of the damage to the water mains of the area.
Fire can and will weaken structural steel to the point of a building collapsing. This is all the more true when much of the structure is compromised by the physical damage it had received from the collapse of the main towers.
Steel is protected by material called fireproofing. However “Fireproofing” is something of a deceptive term. It doesn’t make the steel impervious to fire or heat. What it does is insulate it from the heat for a while. The fireproofing just buys some time. In any normal circumstance the fire department would be on the scene in minutes and dowsing the structure in water to cool the steel and put out the fire in short order.
WTC 7 was an unusual case. A raging fire was allowed to burn without anyone doing anything to suppress it. This was for a reason. Earlier a team of firefighters had cleared the building floor by floor. There was nobody there. It was empty. Rescue teams were working to see if there could be any survivors in the debris of the main towers and to get those who had been injured by falling debris to help. They had just lost hundreds of fellow firefighters, the local water mains were in shambles.
Saving tower 7 was just not a priority. I really can’t blame them.
Quote Comment
May 2nd, 2010 at 11:53 am
The kill shot that got JFK came from the front, Oswald was behind JFK, your version does not hold up.
No steel building has ever collapsed from fire. How do 2 planes implode 3 buildings anyway?
No one this naive/oblivious should be in any intellectual leadership position.
Quote Comment
May 2nd, 2010 at 12:43 pm
Gus Grissom said:
I actually used to believe this before I did quite a bit of research on the subject. The fact of the matter is that the documentary and forensic evidence says otherwise. For one thing, the front offered no cover for a shooter and would have been a poor choice for a location. There were people in the area who were quite sure that the shots did not come from that close to them. We also have photographs and films from the area at the time and shortly after. It is remotely possible that an assassin could have avoided ever being photographed or filmed, but I doubt it and it would be a huge risk in any case.
Some of the claims come from the fact the Kennedy’s head appears to go back and to the left. Actually it goes forward first and then back. This was a counter-reaction which was caused by both the body bouncing back after being pushed forward and a muscle spasm.
Look closely at the Zapruder film and you’ll notice that it’s not the kind of reaction from being pushed. It’s a limp jerk. His arm flies up. Head injuries often produce sudden jerks.
The injuries are sometimes characterized as being “the back of his head was blown out.” This is just not true. What actually happened is that the bullet entered the back of the head, which was leaning forward and exited the top. If blew out the entire cranium in the process.
This was a very powerful bullet and it shattered the head like a china plate. Here’s a good picture: http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/dox2big.jpg
Gus Grissom said:
That is simply not true. There are many examples of steel structures that have fallen or partially fallen due to fire. Many bridges have been destroyed by fire. The McCormick Palace in Chicago was destroyed by a fire in 1967. Just a few years ago, the Windsor building in Spain, a 32 story high-rise collapsed due to a fire.
Each fire is different, each structure is different and the success of the fire department in controlling it matters a lot. Some buildings have sustained severe fire and not collapsed but others have.
Structural steel can lose most of its strength well before melting.
I can’t give you any examples of towers that collapsed in the same manner as the WTC on the scale and under those exact conditions, especially after being hit by a plane.
How many large passenger ships can you think of that were sunk by hitting an iceberg? I’d like to hear two examples.
Quote Comment
May 2nd, 2010 at 12:57 pm
Here is the Zapruder film. See the killer shot from the front with your own lying eyes.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I-cri43ttTo
This, and Dr. Buzz’s commentary, are why the media and government are so distrusted by the vast majority Americans(86% and 80% respectively)! Hopefully both will be out of business soon and America will be an honest place!
Quote Comment
May 2nd, 2010 at 3:51 pm
Gus Grissom said:
Do you really think I haven’t seen the Zapruder film? I’ve seen every frame of it individually and together in the highest resolution you can get from 8mm film. I’ve seen it slow and fast, stabalized, cropped, zoomed, uncropped, with sprocket holes, denoised, sharpened – damn near every variation out there. I’ve also seen the Nix, Hughes, Pascall, Dorman, Jeffers, Muchmore, Towner, Bronson, Atkins, Couch and Weigman films. I bet you didn’t even know that many films were taken of the shooting or minutes before or after.
I’m not one to generally trust the government or media. Hell, I criticize the media constantly. However, this is still what it is. By the way, the media is the one who has helped fuel the conspiracy theories. The whole conspiracy pushing movement comes down to a lot of dishonest people who are making money selling their book or television series or whatever.
You really think the media is pushing the lone gunman fact? For Christ sake, Hollywood made a multi-million dollar movie that has done more for conspiracy theorists than almost anything.
You, sir, are buying the media hype.
Quote Comment
May 2nd, 2010 at 3:57 pm
Gwad, these people are pathetic.
I believe that you cannot hate your own country for the stupid reasons they do, and not hate yourself as a prerequisite.
Quote Comment
May 2nd, 2010 at 5:14 pm
That’s just being honest. There are some honest ones of us left in the USA. Not many though. We are fighting an unnecessary war in Iraq based on WMDs that weren’t there by the way. What a waste!
Quote Comment
May 2nd, 2010 at 8:26 pm
Gus Grissom said:
So that’s it then? You’re accusing me of being dishonest? Which, I assume, means that you’re presuming that I actually believe that there was a big conspiracy to kill JFK but that I am lying about it anyway?
Look, I have no doubt that you believe there was. You’re wrong, but I’m not calling you a liar. Plenty of people have bought that whole media story.
I once did. I have to admit that on first impression it does look suspicious that Oswald was killed so quickly after being caught and thus could never give complete testimony or account for his whereabouts. On the surface it looks kinda weird, but a closer look – there’s nothing there.
Gus Grissom said:
And this has what to do with the events in Dallas 47 years ago?
It’s amazing that the conspiracy theorists don’t see a hole in this. There were no WMD’s and that’s a big reason why the Bush administration was so criticized. Now apparently the government can pull off any kind of conspiracy no matter how large and involved. Apparently they can take down buildings with a complex play of explosives, remote controlled aircraft, missiles, holograms, thermite, lasers etc..
Yet despite this they can’t manage to plant a few WMD’s! Howe much better would Bush and the Iraq war have come off looking if they had found a couple big cashes of nerve gas and weaponized anthrax?
Apparently fabricating a few chemical weapons filled shells was beyond the capabilities of the NWO?
Quote Comment
May 2nd, 2010 at 9:52 pm
I guess you’re just naive then. America died in the 1960’s with the JFK, RFK & MLK assassinations, Vietnam, the start of unlimited 3rd world immigration and the Phony Apollo Moon Landings. We just haven’t fully grasped it yet.
Quote Comment
May 2nd, 2010 at 10:18 pm
Don’t you just love it when these types question OUR grip on reality.
You want to know what your real problem is “Gus Grissom”? You are an absolute nobody, so you construct these complicated fantasies to make you feel like you are special in that you know ‘The Truth,’ and salve your ego with the belief that makes you better than those that don’t buy into these silly theories.
You’re as pathetic as those Christians that comfort themselves with the belief that everybody else is going to Hell except them.
Quote Comment
May 2nd, 2010 at 10:23 pm
Facts are facts.
Quote Comment