|
Post by margamatix on Jul 26, 2005 12:58:52 GMT -4
Apparently it was post-Communism "Pravda" (probably the most respected Russian newspaper) who released this information, and Aulis also contains this quote....
"Laura Whitlock of NASA’s Star Child Project (a NASA web site intended for children) has stated that her own research concurs with the claim that these three test pilots were indeed those named by Pravda and albeit spelling their names slightly differently, she adds more detail regarding dates, and for Ledovsky—the maximum height achieved in orbit"
|
|
|
Post by margamatix on Jul 26, 2005 12:39:56 GMT -4
I read this on the Aulis website.
"As 40 years have passed since Gagarin's flight, new sensational details of this event were disclosed: Gagarin was not the first man to fly to space.
Three Soviet pilots died in attempts to conquer space before Gagarin's famous space flight, Mikhail Rudenko, senior engineer-experimenter with Experimental Design Office 456 (located in Khimki, in the Moscow region) said on Thursday [12 April 2001].
According to Rudenko, spacecraft with pilots Ledovskikh, Shaborin and Mitkov at the controls were launched from the Kapustin Yar cosmodrome (in the Astrakhan region) in 1957, 1958 and 1959.
"All three pilots died during the flights, and their names were never officially published," Rudenko said."
Does anyone know if this is true? If so, why would the USSR do this, and why did the USA not blow the whistle on it before the Russians "fessed up"?
|
|
|
Post by margamatix on Jul 27, 2005 5:33:19 GMT -4
So, again, would you like to tell us why you think Apollo was faked? What would be your opinion on the quote below which I'm currently using as my signature?
|
|
|
Post by margamatix on Jul 26, 2005 12:51:24 GMT -4
No, I have asked you perfectly reasonable questions in a perfectly polite and civil manner. If this is the type of forum which only welcomes those holding one particular view, then just let me know and I'll be gone.
|
|
|
Post by margamatix on Jul 26, 2005 11:30:11 GMT -4
Hi Margamatix, Since you obviously know Apollo so well, here's a few questions for you that I'm sure you won't have any trouble answering. I have noticed that sarcasm and insult seem to be favoured tools among those who suggest that man has walked on the moon, and have no doubt that it is used for the usual reason.
|
|
|
Post by margamatix on Jul 25, 2005 18:22:44 GMT -4
. If I have to explain GET to you, You didn't.
|
|
|
Post by margamatix on Jul 25, 2005 18:18:27 GMT -4
I have very little doubt that many of the astronauts would swear on the bible, but imagine this scenario: You discover the cure for cancer, get some fame for it, and retire into a peaceful life. One day you get a call from the Discovery channel, they want to interview you about your amazing accomplishment. You agree and head down to the studio, next thing you know the host pulls out a bible and starts yelling at you, he calls you a liar, claims that you never cured cancer, does everything short of slapping you across the face. He then pulls out a bible, still calling you every name in the book, and demands that you swear on it. If you do he continues to yell at you and says you're going to hell, he then never shows the footage to anyone, if you say 'I've had enough of this' and leave he calls you a liar, states that you weren't prepared to swear it, and shows the tape to everyone. Now, you can see why that question is useless, should an astronaut swear it won't matter at all, and we'll never know, should he get fed up and leave then Bart tells everyone. Rather then base your opinion on Bart Sibrel attempting to get others to swear, base it on the evidence, and before you trust the evidence from Bart, or Jack, or any other, look at the other side of the issue. The posters here will be more then happy to address any questions you may have or any 'proof' that the landings were faked. All right, but would *you* swear on the Bible that you genuinely believe that doubters have no basis whatsoever for their suspicion and are simply delusional?
|
|
|
Post by margamatix on Jul 25, 2005 17:29:44 GMT -4
It does. How many astronauts were prepared to swear on the Bible that they had been to the moon? I would be prepared to swear on the Bible that having examined as much evidence as possible and having believed in the Apollo landings for all of my life, that I genuinely no longer believe that men have been to the moon. Would you be prepared to swear on the Bible that you genuinely believe that men have? Would you be prepared to swear on the Bible that you genuinely believe that those who raise the sceptical viewpoint as I do are simply "paranoid delusionalists"?
|
|
|
Post by margamatix on Jul 25, 2005 17:13:53 GMT -4
How many were prepared to swear an oath on the Bible and how many weren't?
|
|
|
Post by margamatix on Jul 25, 2005 16:45:44 GMT -4
I read that in the USA there is a researcher who has repeatedly tried to get Apollo astronauts to swear on the Bible that they have been to the moon, but they all refuse to do it, is this true?
|
|
|
Post by margamatix on Jul 27, 2005 5:27:13 GMT -4
So wait, we should beleive your video, but you don't have to beleive ours? You asked for video footage, as soon as you get it you say it's worthless. Why ask for it then? You can't pick and choose, you either accept all Apollo video (I mean the original stuff, from NASA, not the badly compressed soundless clips from the people who say it's all a hoax.) or you accept none of it, you can't have it both ways. You have not yet directed me to any piece of footage which could noteasily have been faked on Earth. I have directed you to footage which shows a person acting in a way which would be impossible to have happened without the intervention I have described. Anyone capable of viewing this footage and denying this has a mind so closed that it is pointless debating the matter further. Typo corrected
|
|
|
Post by margamatix on Jul 26, 2005 16:58:59 GMT -4
But that's the whole point Peter. It's pointless directing me to video footage, because I've seen a video of David Copperfield making the Statue of Liberty disappear.
In the footage I referred to, you can quite clearly see that the astronaut is hoisted up on a wire. Would it not be better simply to deny that it is genuine Apollo footage?
|
|
|
Post by margamatix on Jul 25, 2005 17:54:42 GMT -4
The Apollo 16 clip comes from Station 8: GET 147:32:34. On the original version of the SpacecraftFilms DVD set it occurs at about 0:47 in the Station 8 chapter. Duke is on the ground. Young offers his right hand. Duke takes it in his left. Thanks. I expect we'll see it online very soon.
|
|
|
Post by margamatix on Jul 25, 2005 17:32:42 GMT -4
Cosmic" Dave doesn't want you looking at better footage of his claims, Surely NASA publish it?
|
|
|
Post by margamatix on Jul 25, 2005 17:19:48 GMT -4
Your URL is not sufficient to allow someone to locate your clip in better-preserved footage. Ok, well I'm quite prepared to accept that- can you give me the url of the better-preserved footage?
|
|