|
Post by RAF on Dec 29, 2005 14:35:05 GMT -4
Come on, Ivan...all you've done is repeat what you've read on HB sites. That takes no thought whatsoever... If you believe the landings were faked, then show us evidence that they were (in fact) faked.
|
|
|
Post by RAF on Nov 22, 2005 18:35:16 GMT -4
Thanks, Jay... You know, I understood more of that than I probably have any right to. More than likely due to your ability to clearly express yourself.
|
|
|
Post by RAF on Nov 22, 2005 16:17:08 GMT -4
...I spent a great deal of time last week with NASA trying to help them understand how the liquid hydrogen in the space shuttle's fuel lines creates a certain kind of vibration that is dangerous. That is way cool! Can you elaborate on this a bit? I realize that this thread might not be the best place for that...but I am very curious.
|
|
|
Post by RAF on Nov 22, 2005 15:44:56 GMT -4
The last stage rocket that (supposedly) sent the Apollo craft out of earth orbit had only enough fuel for about a 6 sec blast. HUH??? Belt of resistance???It is as Jay posted...it's hogwash no matter who is telling the "story".
|
|
|
Post by RAF on Nov 22, 2005 15:35:16 GMT -4
I believe this is the thread LotR is referring to Thanks... I didn't make the connection. Neither did I...and the reason I didn't is because that story has an "urban legend" feel to it...the old FOAF (friend of a friend) source for information is useless when trying to determine the actual truth of the matter.
|
|
|
Post by RAF on Nov 22, 2005 13:51:06 GMT -4
Review the Rob Moore article I posted. What? Where?? Do I have to go looking for the post you mention? Why don't you simply post it here?? The old "they laughed at Galileo" argument does not impress me...actual evidence does.
|
|
|
Post by RAF on Nov 25, 2005 16:19:09 GMT -4
If Kiwi makes any further posting suggesting that another member holds the views he does because of alcohol or drug abuse... Hold on there, margamatix, just who said anything about abuse??Kiwi made it quite clear with the statement... The effect of drink or drugs? See that word... effect? Effect and abuse are 2 different things.
|
|
|
Post by RAF on Nov 20, 2005 14:11:03 GMT -4
Hey, LOTR...have a care...the images you've posted are causing big problems for dial-up users.
Why don't you just link to the images?
|
|
|
Post by RAF on Nov 19, 2005 8:01:42 GMT -4
The suits were leaking because when they do checks here and there the levels was lower. How does the level lower if it's not leaking..? Are you talking about consumables?? O2, water, that sort of thing?? Of course the levels "lowered"...they were being USED! How does this in any way demonstrate leaking??
|
|
|
Post by RAF on Nov 17, 2005 9:11:18 GMT -4
No where in the conversation log that I read does NASA check the astronauts heart rate, etc. emphasis mine... Must have been a pretty short "conversation log". ;D
|
|
|
Post by RAF on Nov 15, 2005 14:34:15 GMT -4
Do you believe that on a bright sunny day that there would be shadows cast from an astronaut..? Could someone kindly tell me what in the heck MM is talking about? ?
|
|
|
Post by RAF on Nov 15, 2005 14:28:11 GMT -4
Well, enjoy yourself now because I think your 15 minutes of "fame" are just about up.
|
|
|
Post by RAF on Nov 15, 2005 6:57:07 GMT -4
EVERYONE was told to wait until I was finished drafting my submission, but nope, they can't follow the simpliest instructions because they're trolls. This is an open board. Calling us names for any reason is "trollish" behavior. . Numerous have done so...you seem unable to accept the fact that folks here know what they are talking about! The batteries were no more than a few feet away. Maybe not two but no more then 3 or 4. You really don't know anything about Apollo except from what you have "gleaned" from HB sites. There is absolutely nothing "wrong" about not being well "versed' in Apollo... but those who would question the record of Apollo, should at least know "something" about what they are discussing. I agree with LunarOrbit...this has gone on long enough, thankyou.
|
|
|
Post by RAF on Nov 14, 2005 8:48:08 GMT -4
It is simply impossible for the batteries to have lasted this long as it is well beyond the 5-day life cycle of the batteries, and in particular, considering that the batteries were installed long before lift off on December 7. Ya know, this is really a silly argument. According to MM, NASA (trying to "cover-up" the non-Moon landing) released both the duration of the mission and the life of the batteries, and expected not to get "caught"... ... Come on... It's obvious to everyone that the "drain" on the batteries didn't start until the LM was on the surface of the Moon. Moon Man...this is a direct question...will you concede that you were wrong about the battery life???
|
|
|
Post by RAF on Nov 13, 2005 14:25:18 GMT -4
Saying "I don't believe it therefore it must not be true" isn't how you prove something wrong. Actually that's the problem. That's exactly the way MM's mind works. He's flat out said it himself a couple of times. You can see how this will make it difficult to establish any "common ground". ...though it should be real fun to watch...
|
|