Do tech writers really know the truth? (Was RE: Something a little more useful than: RE: Pet Peeves)

Subject: Do tech writers really know the truth? (Was RE: Something a little more useful than: RE: Pet Peeves)
From: "Poshedly, Ken" <PoshedlyK -at- polysius -dot- com>
To: "John Posada" <jposada01 -at- yahoo -dot- com>, "Chris Borokowski" <athloi -at- yahoo -dot- com>, <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2007 16:25:05 -0400

Last night I had the misfortune of watching how a supposed "expert" in
one field (tech writing) tries to carry that "expertise" over to another
area, in this case, Bill Kaysing who was (according to Wikipedia)
regarded as the father of the Moon landing hoax movement. (It's one of
those shows that you don't MEAN to watch, but you get hooked into it
because it is so ridiculous that you think it's GOT to get better - sort
of like today's version of "Saturday Night Live.")

Now deceased since 2005, Kaysing unfortunately can't be here to chime in
about truth and sue me, like in 1997 when he sued astronaut Jim Lovell
for libel after Lovell called Kaysing wacky; the suit was dismissed. (Or
is Kaysing really dead?)

The guy got his bachelor of arts in English in 1956, and worked at
Rocketdyne (a division of North American Aviation and later of Rockwell
International), where the Saturn V rocket engines were built. Kaysing
was the company's head of technical publications but was NOT trained as
an engineer OR as a scientist. He started at Rocketdyne in 1956, and
left in 1963 for personal reasons (it says).

One would think he learned enough to stay on the straight-and-narrow
with tech pubs, but I guess not. Instead, he used his "knowledge" to
practically found an entire fringe movement.

Critics say Kaysing lacked the technical knowledge to make an informed
opinion, and have denounced his conclusions.

The TV show I saw last night (Monday) was on the National Geographic
Channel and included interviews with a number of folks formerly involved
with the Apollo project; and the show's producers even carefully
assembled an outdoor set to prove or disprove Kaysing's accusations:

* NASA simply lacked the technical expertise to put a man on the Moon.
(Said "expert" Kaysing)

* The absence of stars in lunar surface photographs. (Except that the
camera exposures were severely stopped down so as to show detail from
the highly reflective lunar surface, thus not allowing starlight to
register on the negatives.)

* The film used by astronauts on the moon should have melted due to the
supposed high levels of radiation. (True, if you spent months within the
zone of radiation belts that encircle the Earth, said one of the former
Apollo scientists, but the film and crew passed right through the belts
in only a few minutes.)

* Unexplained optical anomalies in the photographs taken on the Moon.
(Reality: Shadowed areas were illuminated by light reflected from the
lander and other objects, the soil characteristics were such that the
landing pods were NOT covered up, the "springiness" of the astronauts as
they ran and jumped could NOT be duplicated on Earth at the
specially-built set, even by slowing the film down, etc. - all beyond
the grasp of "expert" Kaysing.)

* The undulating flags seen in video clips seem incompatible with a
vacuum. (The "fluttering" flag was the result of the springy metal
bracketry used to hold the flag up and stretched out after it was
forcefully planted into the lunar soil; note that the flag did NOT
flutter when the astronauts subsequently ran or jumped closely by it,
indicating the absence of any air.)

The lesson: stick with what you know. You folks who document computer
software will never hear me complain that you don't know what you're
doing. But maybe Kaysing could do it better.

Don't you just love this stuff?

-- Ken in Atlanta




-----Original Message-----
From: John Posada [mailto:jposada01 -at- yahoo -dot- com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2007 3:06 PM
To: Poshedly, Ken; Chris Borokowski; techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
Subject: RE: Something a little more useful than: RE: Pet Peeves

> Better yet, can we mandate that all advertising copy be truthful?
> (Double-Triple HA!!!! )

Truth is often based on perspective.

Example...how many of us claim to be FrameMaker experts because we've
been using it for 10 years and create some complex documents. We even
put it on our resume.

When read by someone who has been using FM for 2 years, that statement
is "Truth".

When read by someone who has been using FM since its first version and
holds an ACE designation, that statement is "Lie".

Don't get me wrong..I can be as critical of marketing hype as anyone.
I was listening to a radio commercial on the way into the office today
for the reality show where people learn how to ballroom dance.
They something about it being the "ultimate challenge" and I was
wondering how people just getting ready to climb K2 or Everest might
feel about that statement.

John Posada
Senior Technical Writer

"They say everyone needs goals. Mine is to live forever.
So far, so good."
__________________________

This e-mail message and any attachment contains private
and confidential information and is intended for the addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient (or responsible
for delivery of the message to such person), please do not read, copy, use or disclose this communication to others.
If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender by replying to this message, and then delete it from your system.

Attachments: Please use our "Send us a file" link on http://www.PolysiusUSA.com.

Thank you.
____________________
Polysius Corp.
Atlanta, Ga. USA
http://www.PolysiusUSA.com
Voice: 770-850-2000
Main Fax: 770-955-8789

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Create HTML or Microsoft Word content and convert to Help file formats or
printed documentation. Features include single source authoring, team authoring,
Web-based technology, and PDF output. http://www.DocToHelp.com/TechwrlList

Now shipping: Help &amp; Manual 4 with RoboHelp(r) import! New editor,
full Unicode support. Create help files, web-based help and PDF in up
to 106 languages with Help &amp; Manual: http://www.helpandmanual.com

---
You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-

To unsubscribe send a blank email to
techwr-l-unsubscribe -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
or visit http://lists.techwr-l.com/mailman/options/techwr-l/archive%40web.techwr-l.com


To subscribe, send a blank email to techwr-l-join -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com

Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- Visit
http://www.techwr-l.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.


Follow-Ups:

References:
RE: Something a little more useful than: RE: Pet Peeves: From: Poshedly, Ken
RE: Something a little more useful than: RE: Pet Peeves: From: John Posada

Previous by Author: RE: Something a little more useful than: RE: Pet Peeves
Next by Author: RE: Do tech writers really know the truth? (Was RE: Something alittle more useful than: RE: Pet Peeves)
Previous by Thread: RE: Something a little more useful than: RE: Pet Peeves
Next by Thread: Re: Do tech writers really know the truth? (Was RE: Something a little more useful than: RE: Pet Peeves)


What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:


Sponsored Ads