|
Post by fiveonit on Mar 6, 2010 1:22:25 GMT -4
You know, I'd settle for just one who could write coherent sentences. Can't they be educated about something for once? Yes! I don't pretend to have perfect sentence structure, but I find blackbriar1's criticisms of others' use of English quite comical. Did he even bother to read his own posts? I wouldn't describe it as the Pot calling the Kettle black. It's more along the lines of the pot calling the other pot... well... a pot!!! Anyway, me thinks that blackbriar1 start of this thread was a "Dine and Dash." I doubt we'll hear much more from him.
|
|
|
Post by blackbriar1 on Mar 6, 2010 1:54:54 GMT -4
Gentlemen, It certainly has been some interesting, Well ? acumen, to say the least, to hold the young children up to look through the THICK glass. ...Chess...
Wave your hand and say Bye Bye!
|
|
|
Post by fiveonit on Mar 6, 2010 2:52:24 GMT -4
Gentlemen, It certainly has been some interesting, Well ? acumen, to say the least, to hold the young children up to look through the THICK glass. ...Chess... Wave your hand and say Bye Bye! You take care now!
|
|
|
Post by gillianren on Mar 6, 2010 4:24:39 GMT -4
And ladies!
|
|
|
Post by hplasm on Mar 6, 2010 4:52:39 GMT -4
Gentlemen, It certainly has been some interesting, Well ? acumen, to say the least, to hold the young children up to look through the THICK glass. ...Chess... Wave your hand and say Bye Bye! Time to go back to la-la land?
|
|
|
Post by tedward on Mar 6, 2010 5:38:48 GMT -4
Tedward, No i would disagree with your statement greatly , i would love more than anything to be on the side of Hip Hip Hooray we landed on the Moon !! I remember watching the landing being in a Cub Scout meeting of all things, and i appreciate all that NASA and all the difficult engineering over the years have done, not only for the US but all over the world. Yet i have a real difficult time with the complexity of the actual LM and it`s feats for 1969, more over the higher technical communications and accuracy of capability , then there is the whole embroiled political discussion of either being pseudo in front of the world, given it`s push to go and were we really advanced enough and ready to do that with out having to deceive our way to it. Nasa has shown an a copious amount of substance that has been brought into question and under great scrutiny...all over the world....not just here on this post. No? I am a very open minded person, i enjoy examining things in detail, and don`t particularly care whether i am right or wrong, it does nothing for my libido, i would rather understand the truth though if there is great doubt, and there is great questionable doubt surrounding Apollo in it`s infancy. I have nothing to claim here for myself her Tedward, just expressing a different view of question. Sorry, it was bed time in blighty. What part of the world are you from? Russia or South Africa by any chance? Just some of the terms you have been using. Anyway, others have picked up on this reply. With respect your stance in this answer your questioning would say otherwise. For example, I have never been to the bottom of the Mariana Trench. Yet I caan find information on how it was done. I can ask more knowledgeable people on constructing the Trieste. I can investigate and find out. I will not put my fingers in my ears and say "if I cannot do it, no on can". I was quite happy with the landings until I heard about the hoaxers so I investigated to back up my belief, or destroy it. Guess what? Very knowledgeable people here will explain. There are sites I can look at for information, Apollo was in the open not hidden away as it was in the USSR. I took the sciences in school, rockets and how they work I can understand, basics and such. So I can see that bit will work. There and back (bit more investigation that the basics but you get the picture). Computers needed to add and subtract a lot to break down sums and get results. The UK did the same in World War II breaking Enigma. No need for fancy graphics, sound cards or game controllers etc. Work out what 01+01 is please but do it a lot. So that part passes scrutiny and you can delve into that. TV. No issues there and I believe Dwight has a tome out shortly on the topic which I will be investing in. I work with transmission of the stuff so I can see no problem there. Your reference to the Nasa has shown an a copious amount of substance that has been brought into question and under great scrutiny...all over the world....not just here on this post.. You right, much scrutiny over the years. Apart from denizens of CT forums, who has said it was fake? Not even the USSR government and that would have been outed. The Cold War was real and deadly serious. So why not ask, listen, investigate the answers. Are you a member of the pravda forums?
|
|
|
Post by BertL on Mar 6, 2010 7:07:35 GMT -4
You know, I'd settle for just one who could write coherent sentences. Can't they be educated about something for once? I've been meaning to ask, gillianren. I know you've got a degree in English (though I'm not sure in what subject specifically), but are you a teacher? EDIT: Yes, I know it's off-topic, but the 'opposing team' seems to have gone away so I thought a hijack would be appropriate.
|
|
|
Post by dwight on Mar 6, 2010 7:44:26 GMT -4
Is this the new standard in the HB approach now, is it? Come onto a debate guns-a-blazing shouting and yelling the moral injustices and high level government corruption pertaining to hoaxing something on the scale of Apollo, and promptly get snarkey when you are told you haven't even gotten the name of the spacecraft right - and promptly leave the debate flipping the bird and telling everyone else they don't know what they are talking about? Heck in the day of Bill Kaysing, he at least got the terminology correct (for some part anyway)!!
|
|
|
Post by echnaton on Mar 6, 2010 7:50:51 GMT -4
You know, I can't even be sure what blackbriar1 was claiming. His posts were so vague and full of misunderstanding that all I could discern is that he thought something was fishy. It would be easier have a discussion if the posts more specific so replies could be less based on guesses of what he really meant.
|
|
|
Post by Mr Gorsky on Mar 6, 2010 7:56:22 GMT -4
Sometimes being British on these boards sucks ... I checked this thread last evening to find only the OP. This morning, I come back to find it has grown to five pages and the debate (such as it was) seems to already have run its course, so I only get to read it in hindsight.
|
|
|
Post by brotherofthemoon on Mar 6, 2010 8:03:38 GMT -4
Gentlemen, It certainly has been some interesting, Well ? acumen, to say the least, to hold the young children up to look through the THICK glass. ...Chess... Wave your hand and say Bye Bye! Scratch another kamikaze HB.
|
|
|
Post by BertL on Mar 6, 2010 8:06:55 GMT -4
Sometimes being British on these boards sucks ... I checked this thread last evening to find only the OP. This morning, I come back to find it has grown to five pages and the debate (such as it was) seems to already have run its course, so I only get to read it in hindsight. Haha, I know what you feel. I had the exact same thing happen to me though I saw it when it had reached four pages.
|
|
|
Post by grashtel on Mar 6, 2010 8:19:49 GMT -4
You know, I can't even be sure what blackbriar1 was claiming. His posts were so vague and full of misunderstanding that all I could discern is that he thought something was fishy. It would be easier have a discussion if the posts more specific so replies could be less based on guesses of what he really meant. I think it boiled down to something along the lines of despite his spending whole minutes researching it he couldn't figure out how Apollo was done so it must have been faked.
|
|
|
Post by scooter on Mar 6, 2010 10:27:29 GMT -4
You know, I can't even be sure what blackbriar1 was claiming. His posts were so vague and full of misunderstanding that all I could discern is that he thought something was fishy. It would be easier have a discussion if the posts more specific so replies could be less based on guesses of what he really meant. I think it boiled down to something along the lines of despite his spending whole minutes researching it he couldn't figure out how Apollo was done so it must have been faked. Boy, step out for a while, and the thread goes from "how does it..." to all out implosion. I think that assessment is right on...I can't understand it so it must be impossible. A survey was done recently asking kids what would be the one thing they would die without. The main response was "cellphone". Not food, not water, not shelter. They have all the benefits of (and total dependancy on) this amazing technology, yet have no inkling of how, or why, it works. They cannot function without it, and cannot imagine a society (or space program) that could. It's a new world, and it somewhat frightens me...
|
|
|
Post by banjomd on Mar 6, 2010 10:46:33 GMT -4
Leonov reiterates: Don't know if this is old hat but, beginning @ 11:54, he gives his opinion on the lunar landing hoaxers. "That is ignorance, total ignorance on the part of those who say so. These people don't know anything about technology. Or they just seek popularity."Quoted from: RT.com rt.com/Top_News/2009-07-21/I_could_see_Armstrong_bouncing_on_the_moon.html?fullstory"I could see Armstrong bouncing on the moon"; Published 21 July, 2009, 22:51
|
|