Jump to content

Moon landing


Guest Cybergenetic

Recommended Posts

Guest tensegg
Now we have a (War of the Words) going on between myidisbb with 180 posts and Cybergenetic with 7 posts

:bruce:  :chair:  :ninja:

Now I saw a documentry on FOX network providing reasons as to y the moon landing could have been faked....

They had quite solid evidences...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

In fact that programme had absolutely no evidence of any kind, never mind solid evidence, they even put a disclaimer at the start of the programme saying so. Solid evidence means what it says, evidence that is proven, and stands up to scrutiny, the fox programme or any other programme can produce none that cant be explained in other ways, and absolutely no solid evidence is available. It was an entertainment programme, not a factual programme, it couldnt be, cos they dont have any facts. :fear: :lol: :sneaky:

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 45
  • Views 19.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Guest Cybergenetic

We've had over 30 YEARS for some base ''type'' plans/structures for what could be a spacestation on the moon. :sneaky:

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Guest Cybergenetic

Infact i should of made this clear in my fist statement. Cerwin alledgedly stayed on the moon for 3 days on Apollo 17, 3 DAYS. :bruce: double the size of that Rather small Lunar lander could of been naturally made to stay for 2 weeks. and were debating why it's been so long to get a space station there. :sneaky:

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Guest tensegg

@ Cybergenetic

I deleted your double post above where you quote yourself and add nothing new, please use the 'edit' button to edit your posts and try not to double post them.

And please try to make some sense :ninja: :sneaky: :bruce:, we were debating that you said the moon landings were a load of crap, you later said that no-one had spoke about going back for 30 years, you accused myidisbb several times of not being able to debate with you, and reading your posts again, its hardly surprising, your not actually saying anything to debate, and your offering no argument to back up your statements. What exactly is your point/argument?

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Infact i should of made this clear in my fist statement. Cerwin alledgedly stayed on the moon for 3 days on Apollo 17, 3 DAYS.  :sneaky:  double the size of that Rather small Lunar lander could of been naturally made to stay for 2 weeks. and were debating why it's been so long to get a space station there.  :bruce:

we've had no reason to up until now, besides bragging rights..."look, we built a building on the freakin moon. beat that" :ninja:

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Guest Cybergenetic

Well it's like when you mentioned how you couldn't talk baout the london bombings without bringing up the war on terror, tenseg. I'm clealry doing that on the ''issue'' of the moon landings, ie ''a load of crap''. Which is making sense i might add. On the subject of myisibbd not debating with me, what i was implying/meaning was he can never say, for example nsane and yourself come at me with an ''attempt'' of what you indeed think of what you ''know''. he on the other hand comes at me with cheap lame sarcasm about me personally, :sneaky:

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Guest tensegg
It's a load of crap.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Wrong, unsubstantiated, unproven, and wrong. ^_^

Ask yourself why in over 30 years not a single word said about going back  :lol: , technology seems to have gone back, not forward, when associating the moon landings. And no, neither the Europeans, nor the Soviets would of said anything becuase the technology was there to go, (we have the technology to go to Mars, but we don't becuase of the risks) so therefore they couldn't, contradictory to that, we now have 30 years  more of technology and improved so much, except form going to the moon that is  :chair: If we did indeed go to the moon, wouldn't it be so much more technological advances in space travel, or naturally landing on the moon?  :fear:  .

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Wrong, unsubstantiated, unproven, and wrong. ^_^

Yet AGAIN, you contradict anything I'm talking about. Naturally I can understand why, seeing you know Nothing. All you do is TRY and attempt to patronize me  :lol: It's really childish, not to mention ignorant seeing you can't ACTUALLY say I'm wrong in what I say  :bruce:

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I can say that you are wrong, because you are, and you cannot prove that you are right, because you are not. ^_^

The only poeple who have said ANYHTING about the moon in over thirty years, is Japan (fact). They plan to send a probe there in 2012. That's it. You'll find there's a NASA spokesperson, in the mid 90's who said we'd get to the moon in a hundred years. I won't hold my breathe. The fact you said there's been USA, china, soviets and Japan tlkaing baout moon bases is absolute propganda.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

completely and totally wrong, its not a fact at all, if it is, point to the evidence that makes it a fact. ^_^

Maybe your associating the Moon and Mars for the same  :P  I'm not suprised, seeing your inability to talk/prove me wrong, other than TRYING to patronize me. On the contrary, your lame attempt to patronize me is childish and stupid  :sneaky:  And on the subject of China's plans of going to the moon, yet AGAIN, it's about sending a probe. Nothing More, nothing LESS. But i'm sure your ignorant enough to think just becuase China and USA TALK about the moon, it implys they're going to send a man there, which is clearly not the science there talking about  :ninja:

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

erm, I'm far from ignorant, and your still not saying anything other than thousands of scientists the world over are wrong, and you are right. They proved they are right through carefull study and analysis, you prove your right by saying you are, and thats nonsense. Point the any kind of evidence, or proof that the landings were a fake, you cant, because there is none. I can however point you too evidence that moon rocks were indeed brought back from the moon, you can go to the smithsonian intitute and hold them in your own hands and see. Where did they come from? It's accepted by thousands of scientists from all over the world, who owe nothing to nasa, or the usa, or any conspiracies or governments as proof of mans presence on the moon, now if your gonna tell me that you believe some theory by some freak about some shadows before you believe hard and fast evidence, you cant expect the rest of the sane world to agree with you, or him. Your accusing all of these people, and I mean thousands of eminent scientists, of being liars involved in a conspiracy to pretend we have been to the moon, for what reason will all these eminent scientisists be doing this, wheres the pay off.

point to the evidence to substantiate your theory, prove all those scientists wrong, and then you can say its a load of crap, but saying its a load of crap just because you say it is, is pretty poor reason for believing anything, or expexcting to be taken seriously in any debate. Put up, or , erm ....um.... :P :fear:

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Hmm, all these people who believe the conspiracy info about people landing on the moon a fake makes me wonder if they think people havnt even landed on Earth yet. :sneaky:

Link to comment
Share on other sites


excuse me. but i have posted why we left the moon and didnt contunie on and make a base there. the early 70's where not kind to nasa. we now can make a base. but still have the number one freaken problem WATER. water weighs 8 pounds per gallon. you can not ship even a small amount require into space to the moon. they are not going to mine a comet and get water either. now there might be water at that one northern carter that the usa military sat said there was. (they had the information for years but didnt beleive it until another sat back it up in data) that was 2-3 years ago when it was release to the public. and even if there is water there you can to get to it and clean it and still have a recycle system going. you can spend a trillion dollars on a moon base and still not going to work. i would love to go to the moon. i would even work there for free. but its not going to happen. WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER

to go to mars is over a year or two in space just to get there. and like the apollo landings someone has to stay in the ship that is orbiting in space. only 2 of the 3 landed on the moon. it would suck going to mars and being the ones that stay in orbit. each freaken shuttle mission crew train for that one flight 18 to 3 years out. over 50% of our astronauts have never been into space. very wasteful system we are using. and to land on mars for a week maybe and leave. thats it. who freaken steps off the ship and touches the soil first? that along would take the governments 10 years to approve.

we still have a radiation problem in going into deep orbit from earth and then traveling to mars. sky lab, ussr/russia mir (which they should not let burn up) to the international space statoins where/are in low orbits protected by the earths magentic field of the suns solar rays or radiation. even that it not safe. i believe it was 2 weeks to the moon. 2 or 3 days on the moon's surface and 2 weeks back. that was dangerous too because of radiation. there is no protection on the moons surface if the sun has a solar flare. a ship going to mars would have to be very very very large just for protection for the radiation. and god forbid a part made from russia fails on the ship. (come one you all know that will happen) you know the chinese would come. hopely their parts last longer then a year. they cant make a freaken hammer that doesnt fall apart from useage. (their heads come off) (not a racist remake on chinese. its because of their forced slave labor and use of prisioners to make stuff. there is little if any quality control. its all volume that counts over there)

scifi books make it seem so simple to do things. oh well . i got harry potter adio book 6 to listern too. its broken done into 150+ files so not sure how long it is. better be longer then back 5 of 26 hours.

btw we still have people in the usa that believe the moon landing was fake in order to keep believing the earth is flat. and these are NOT bible thumbers either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


test post. post 34 shows but not listed as last. im guessing server overload :sneaky:

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Guest Cybergenetic

Is your proof of us landing on the Moon, cheesy footage, mulit-spotlight photographs and tacky pasted backdrops on other pictures, so called ''Moon rock'' and some scientists saying ''we went to the Moon'', tensegg?

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I've kind of kept out of this "discussion" for several reasons, not least the insults being thrown to and fro from certain members.

However, I will attempt to settle this once and for all.

I watched a documentary a few weeks back on the Discovery Channel, looking into whether the moon landings were faked etc...

Anyway, the team trying to disprove the US Government went away and tried to recreate some of the settings, such as lack of shadows, sun glare not being where it should, the US flag waving in a supposed atmosphere where it wouldn't do such a thing.

Well, they set it up in the Nevada desert and started recreating all of the above scenarios using near-identical equipment including the spacesuits used in that era.

Simply put, all conspiricy theories were thrown out of the window.

If I find the video online, I'll be sure to upload it for everyone, but it was very interesting to say the least.

Can this please be the last post on this matter please (at least until I can get a video for everyone to watch) as it's seriously getting silly now.

Thank you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Guest tensegg

Admins are conpiring to close the thread before it exposes the truth ;) , theyre in on the plot :alien: , off to the vargas link :eekout:

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Admins are conpiring to close the thread before it exposes the truth  ;)    , theyre in on the plot  :alien: , off to the vargas link  :eekout:

i think you have the best post on tthe subject. 1st place for you

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Guest Cybergenetic

Let's leave it as this. Man went to the Moon, but all we have as proof... is cheesy footage, multi-spotlight photographs, tacky pasted backdrops and 98% of audio on the multimedia section of the apollo archive www.apolloarchive.com the 2%, is of video, which is rather short video (less than a quarter of the actual footage, if not less, the longest piece of footage is of the apollo 16 splash down which a WHOLE 6 minutes, wow :alien: ) HOWEVER the audio is the full deal, nothing cut ;) . So my emphisis is, if that's proof, WOO HOO :eekout:

Link to comment
Share on other sites


theres always gunna be conspiries about everything. Like who killed which president with what motives........... Does America really exist? Is the Matrix really real? etc etc etc. :eekout:

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Guest Cybergenetic

Well on the subject of JFK, he was got rid of becuase he wouldn't go along with the globlists. On the subject on wether America exists or not, well... yes, it does exist, that would be damn ignorant to so otherwise. On on the subject of wether the Matrix exists, well... the future of the net will mimic and be able to be compared to it in many ways, yet... the Matrix as it is on a role of film does not exist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Let's leave it as this. Man went to the Moon, but all we have as proof... is cheesy footage, multi-spotlight photographs, tacky pasted backdrops and 98% of audio on the multimedia section of the apollo archive www.apolloarchive.com the 2%, is of video, which is rather short video (less than a quarter of the actual footage, if not less, the longest piece of footage is of the apollo 16 splash down which a WHOLE 6 minutes, wow  :eekout: ) HOWEVER the audio is the full deal, nothing cut  ;) . So my emphisis is, if that's proof, WOO HOO  :alien:

sounds like you didn't check out the video i posted either ;)

you can lead a horse to water...

Link to comment
Share on other sites


sounds like you didn't check out the video i posted either  :eekout:

you can lead a horse to water...

unless you strap him to the freaken rocket he will not believe anything. even if he was there he would deny it. saying it was all a setup. no doubt in a past life he was a witch hunter. they didnt stand a chance against him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Guest Cybergenetic

Indeed i did watch the video, it was lame and proved nothing other than cheesy footage :eekout:

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...