|
Post by tedward on Dec 8, 2010 5:19:09 GMT -4
Here is my take on Mr Hagbard. If it's YOUR take then is anyone else qualified to comment on it? I think I've got good reason to doubt that the City of London America Company... sorry, United States of America... ever sent anyone to the moon using chemical rockets. You need to realize that the Illuminati are deceptive and manipulative beyond most people's capacity to even imagine! The world as we know it, is a lie! Sorry you don't like the HPANWO Forum. i'm rather proud of it. Skeptics are very welcome there. Take a look and see that we do have them. Then prove it.
|
|
|
Post by echnaton on Dec 8, 2010 7:49:48 GMT -4
Ive had years of experience with Hagbardceline and can say he will just throw out one claim after another and when the claim gets a bit sticky he just changes the subject. He uses stock responces like "its round my dads house" and "ive already covered that". Welcome to the forum, jd. Your experience with Hagbardceline certainly conforms with his behavior here. He is just another HB with nothing substantive to say.
|
|
|
Post by fiveonit on Dec 8, 2010 14:56:54 GMT -4
Ive had years of experience with Hagbardceline and can say he will just throw out one claim after another and when the claim gets a bit sticky he just changes the subject. ... All that means is that he's no different than any other Hoax Believer any of us has dealt with.
|
|
|
Post by echnaton on Dec 8, 2010 15:03:34 GMT -4
Ive had years of experience with Hagbardceline and can say he will just throw out one claim after another and when the claim gets a bit sticky he just changes the subject. ... All that means is that he's no different than any other Hoax Believer any of us has dealt with. He is, however, less entertaining than most of them.
|
|
|
Post by hagbardceline on Dec 9, 2010 16:20:40 GMT -4
I asked why on the one hand you suggested that the belts could have prevented manned travel to the Moon while simultaneously suggesting that the Moon landings were filmed in a studio on the Moon. I also asked more than once whether you believed that Gemini 10, Gemini 11 and the ISS were/are real. You never replied to my questions because you claimed to be pressed for time, but you had plenty of time to post long rants and complaints. Ranting and complaining is a lot easier and less time consuming! ;D OK, thanks for reminding me. The apparent contradiction in what I said comes from whether we're dealing with technology that is available to the public or that which is not. I'm sorry if I wasn't clear enough . I should have said that the Van Allen Belts could have caused a problem to astronauts using the technology that history tells us was available, ie: the Saturn V rocket and Apollo capsule. If the footage and photographs were filmed on the moon, or another similar airless heavenly body, then the producers of the charade would not be constrained by using the publically available technology. A good anaolgy would be if you chose to travel to Mexico to make a movie about the Cortez expedition then you could use modern jet airliners to fly there; it wouldn't be necessary to travel to Mexico in a 16th Century Conquistadors' ship! Realism is only necessary in front of the camera, not behind it. My main concern about the Van Allen Belts is that there is so much diverging and contradictory information about them. What is their real depth, their real height, their real intensity? We may well know now, but did we know in the 60's while the Apollo programme was being prepared? Of course the Apollo astronauts aparently went there and back without harm, so we can shrug our shoulders at the danger now, but it's easy to say that after the risk has been taken! I had a book as a child called The Young Scientists Guide to Spaceflight which was published in the eraly 1980's. I imagine by now it is long out of print. In it was a page about a spacecraft that contained something called a "storm cellar", a chamber within the hull of the craft with extra shielding which the astronauts could enter when passing through the Van Allen Belts. BTW: It's always worth looking at old books because they contain a lot of information that is edited out of newer publications (I learned some startling information about Harry Houdini from an old book that is absent from today's ones) This makes me doubtful of the government's pretext in the drive to take old school textbooks off the shelves, that the glue in the binding is poisonous!
|
|
|
Post by hagbardceline on Dec 9, 2010 16:22:02 GMT -4
Oops, Yes, I forgot the third man who stayed in the CM.
|
|
|
Post by hagbardceline on Dec 9, 2010 16:25:47 GMT -4
hagbardceline, You are clearly a troll. If you don't have anything of value to contribute to the forum just leave. I really don't know why you think that, except that I am an HB. I'm not a troll at all. I've had some decent conversations with some of the members here. I hope I'll continue to do so. If you think I'm a troll then I can't prove you wrong, and I really give any other suitable response except to disagree. Good day to you, Sir.
|
|
|
Post by hagbardceline on Dec 9, 2010 16:29:25 GMT -4
Ive had years of experience with Hagbardceline and can say he will just throw out one claim after another and when the claim gets a bit sticky he just changes the subject. He uses stock responces like "its round my dads house" and "ive already covered that". Ah, here's somebody I've met before methinks. Actually JD I do make every attempt to respond to your points when we cross swords elsewhere. If I say that some piece of evidence is round my dad's then it's because it is. i used to live there. As I said to Laurel above, some of my old childrens' books give an interesting spin on the subject matter of Apollo eh?
|
|
|
Post by hagbardceline on Dec 9, 2010 16:31:20 GMT -4
Do you have anything of substance to add here? We chose to wait, but you're using the time you could be compiling proper responses to complain and waffle about nothing of significance. Jason, I was just contributing to the informal jousting that seems to be the form here. I'm perfectly willing to make proper responses, as I always have.
|
|
|
Post by hagbardceline on Dec 9, 2010 16:33:03 GMT -4
All that means is that he's no different than any other Hoax Believer any of us has dealt with. He is, however, less entertaining than most of them. As the late, great Frankie Howerd used to say: "Please yourselves!" ;D
|
|
|
Post by gillianren on Dec 9, 2010 16:42:56 GMT -4
Oops, Yes, I forgot the third man who stayed in the CM. So having a third man in the CM doubles the number of astronauts?
|
|
|
Post by trebor on Dec 9, 2010 17:00:16 GMT -4
...What is their real depth, their real height, their real intensity?... Have you looked at the AE-8 / AP-8 models? They give good information on those during different solar output periods. They are certainly of use to the commercial satellite owners whose equipment orbits within the VABs. We may well know now, but did we know in the 60's while the Apollo programme was being prepared? Most likely, it was well studied at the time. With many satellites mapping the range of particles within, including several carrying living things including people. The impression I have from reading papers from the time is that it was solar flares not the VABs which were considered the main radiation problem. 'The Young Scientists Guide to Spaceflight' Are you certain the children's book was in any way accurate? The idea put forward in the book is actually useful however and something of the kind would certainly be needed for very long duration space missions to help protect from solar flares. As the chances of being in the firing line during a year long mission is a lot higher than a few days. Any permanently manned lunar base would require something of the kind as well. Out of interest was the book referring to solar flares? It would make more sense that way.
|
|
|
Post by laurel on Dec 9, 2010 17:05:31 GMT -4
I should have said that the Van Allen Belts could have caused a problem to astronauts using the technology that history tells us was available, ie: the Saturn V rocket and Apollo capsule. So you think they "could have" caused a problem, but you don't want to say what kind of problem or why you think so. No, the risk was taken before Apollo. Correct me if I'm wrong, but you don't seem to be familiar with Gemini 10, Gemini 11, or Zond 5. Maybe that's why you ignored my question about those missions.
|
|
|
Post by trebor on Dec 9, 2010 17:29:41 GMT -4
No, the risk was taken before Apollo. Correct me if I'm wrong, but you don't seem to be familiar with Gemini 10, Gemini 11, or Zond 5. Maybe that's why you ignored my question about those missions. And Kosmos 110 of course. I'm sure the two dogs on board would want the risk they took taken seriously.
|
|
|
Post by Ginnie on Dec 9, 2010 17:57:05 GMT -4
Ive had years of experience with Hagbardceline and can say he will just throw out one claim after another and when the claim gets a bit sticky he just changes the subject. He uses stock responces like "its round my dads house" and "ive already covered that". Ah, here's somebody I've met before methinks. Actually JD I do make every attempt to respond to your points when we cross swords elsewhere. If I say that some piece of evidence is round my dad's then it's because it is. i used to live there. As I said to Laurel above, some of my old childrens' books give an interesting spin on the subject matter of Apollo eh? So, if you're using old children's books from the eighties - will you accept information from the book I have, "The Encyclopedia of Space" from 1970?
|
|