|
Post by cos on Dec 15, 2010 19:38:05 GMT -4
Of course the other thing is that they only looked at the footage, they didn't even begin to study the tonnes of evidence such as the lunar samples. They only look at a couple of seconds of footage. I have yet to meet a HB that has sat through a 5 hr EVA and maintained it was fake. The program was pretty moronic (well, at least to seasoned debunkers). I fear that as a species we are de-evolving.
|
|
|
Post by cos on Oct 27, 2010 17:27:13 GMT -4
I don't leave it because I feel I'm wrong, I leave it because I realize that a honest dialog on this site is totally impossible. A honest dialog requires objectivity, and you have none. Good bye! Nope you are leaving because you are a fraud and an intellectual pigmy who has just been handed his ars3 back on a platter. Thanks to Jay et all for all the fantastic posts especially the stuff on the LM controls. I am just reading Digital Apollo and it is helping me to understand a lot more (but then I am still actually keen on learning stuff.....)
|
|
|
Post by cos on Oct 4, 2010 18:52:56 GMT -4
Aaargh!!! I went to the Icke forum. I should have known better. So many ignorant people in one place and all unable to string a coherent argument together but aggressively convinced they are right. However, it seems that a few people are prepared to take them on in their own den (is it too quiet these days over here?). Amusingly this results in the HB's stomping off when they have been thoroughly humiliated. Nice to see their rubbish being countered wherever it is posted.
|
|
|
Post by cos on Sept 26, 2010 17:01:00 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by cos on Sept 22, 2010 9:13:22 GMT -4
As a Brit myself I'd rather Rodin didn't tarnish us any further by bothering the astronauts.I suspect that after having his posterior repeatedly handed back to him on a plate that there is no where for Rodin to go except to label us all part of the 'Jooish' global conspiracy.
|
|
|
Post by cos on Sept 3, 2010 9:27:27 GMT -4
Nothing but admiration sir. Whilst you won't get anywhere against the wilfully ignorant, it will be apparent to any fair minded person where the truth lies. Let them dig their hole!
|
|
|
Post by cos on Aug 29, 2010 21:33:20 GMT -4
Rodin, having watched all the Apollo footage and 2001, I can list numerous errors in the 2001 but that is acceptable because it is only a movie and I understand the limits this imposes. If something like this was ever presented as evidence for an actual mission it would have been ripped to shreds and exposed as a fraud instantly. How come HB's spend hours over a single Apollo frame looking for errors and then cite a piece of footage that doesn't hold up to the slightest scrutiny as evidence of how it could be done?
I seem to remember one HB claiming that the opening scene of Barbarella showed that zero g was easy to fake! If you can't figure that one out I'd give up on any more photo-analysis!
|
|
|
Post by cos on Aug 29, 2010 21:09:24 GMT -4
So amongst all the other pearls such as the whole Moon is apparently laser reflective, Rodin is suspicious of the Apollo footage because it doesn't look like a movie (2001) filmed on a set?
Surely this is a wind up?
|
|
|
Post by cos on Aug 27, 2010 16:49:01 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by cos on Aug 26, 2010 16:39:08 GMT -4
I was lucky enough to meet Al Shepard at signing of Moonshot. I asked him that very question, given his experience as a Naval aviator, landing on carrier decks, day or night, in all weather, surely after going all that way he would have attempted to land on something as large as the moon without the radar? He grinned a huge grin and said he agreed it was an awful long way to go to just to come home but we'd just have to keep guessing. And I suspect he never said anything different.
I really enjoyed meeting him and was left with the distinct impression that the casting for the film "The Right Stuff' was spot on in his case.
|
|
|
Post by cos on Aug 24, 2010 12:49:06 GMT -4
Now as to the Apollo reflectors - there are a number of ways this could be rigged. One is simply to fake the data. These relectors have been used thousands and thousands of times over the last 40 years and the vast majority of the people using them have nothing to do with NASA. I know people that have used them. Guess what? You can use them too. And guess what else? You don't have to tell NASA when you are going to use them! So they won't have any time to manoeuver their 'ultra secret satellite for faking laser photon reflections from he moon' into place. Can this get any more stupid? Yes I suppose it can as a HB will never admit to being wrong.
|
|
|
Post by cos on Jun 29, 2010 18:29:00 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by cos on Jun 16, 2010 13:34:42 GMT -4
Sometimes the fundamental misunderstanding HBs have about things eludes me. It never occurred that they could equate going to the moon and back with driving to another town and back, where one might reasonably expect to use the same amount of fuel each way. Understandable I suppose at some level but I would hope that once explained it would never be used in support of the hoax again. The fact that it is seems to confirm the absence of even a basic science education amongst HBs.
|
|
|
Post by cos on May 10, 2010 6:41:21 GMT -4
My hypothesis is: They did go to the moon, probably long before the 60's, using advanced energy and propulsion systems designed by scientists like Viktor Schauberger and Nikoa Tesla, and also back-enginerered from salvaged alien vehicles, but they didn't tell anyone. When it was necessary in the psychological media programme for people to see men on the moon they fabricated a fictional version that showed people travelling to the moon using conventional technology. Hagbardceline, you have an vivid imagination and perhaps you should be writing science fantasy books. However, you have no evidence for any of your ideas and cannot refute the evidence for Apollo. This evidence cannot be dismissed out of hand if your proposition is to have any validity, although some might say that you are neatly sidestepping the issue by claiming it was real but done secretly before with different technology (of which there is no evidence). Comparing the moon hoax to Watergate, dodgy dosier (Iraq War) should give you a clue how actual relatively simple conspiracies come apart all too easily. This is a Science/engineering based forum. We are not startled by the sun coming up each morning. We know how the universe works and what is and isn't possible. We deal in demonstratable reality. It must be strange to live in a world where you understand so little that it all seems like magic. Evidence please. Anything that just isn't in your imagination?
|
|
|
Post by cos on Apr 26, 2010 16:26:42 GMT -4
"Scot" is the proper term. "Jap" is not. Well I didn't know that either. Thanks for bringing it to our attention. This all depends on where you come from so you shouldn't take offence at the first use of such a phrase. For instance, here in the UK the term Paki is a racist slur but is common parlance in Australia (frequently used on television to describe the touring Pakistani cricket team). This is an international forum so we will of course strive to avoid offending anyone.
|
|