[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

‘I Smell CIA/Deep State All Over This’ — RFK Jr. VP Nicole Shanahan Blasts Sanctuary Cities,

we see peaceful protests launching in Los Angeles” - Democrat Senator Cory Booke

We have no legal framework for designating domestic terror organizations

Los Angeles Braces For Another Day Of Chaos As Newsom Pits Marxist Color Revolution Against Trump Admin

Methylene Blue Benefits

Another Mossad War Crime

80 served arrest warrants at 'cartel afterparty' in South Carolina

When Ideas Become Too Dangerous To Platform

The silent bloodbath that's tearing through the middle-class

Kiev Postponed Exchange With Russia, Leaves Bodies Of 6,000 Slain Ukrainian Troops In Trucks

Iranian Intelligence Stole Trove Of Sensitive Israeli Nuclear Files

In the USA, the identity of Musk's abuser, who gave him a black eye, was revealed

Return of 6,000 Soldiers' Bodies Will Cost Ukraine Extra $2.1Bln

Palantir's Secret War: Inside the Plot to Cripple WikiLeaks

Digital Prison in the Making?

In France we're horrified by spending money on Ukraine

Russia has patented technology for launching drones from the space station

Kill ICE: Foreign Flags And Fires Sweep LA

6,000-year-old skeletons with never-before-seen DNA rewrites human history

First Close Look at China’s Ultra-Long Range Sixth Generation J-36Jet

I'm Caitlin Clark, and I refuse to return to the WNBA

Border Czar Tom Homan: “We Are Going to Bring National Guard in Tonight” to Los Angeles

These Are The U.S. States With The Most Drug Use

Chabria: ICE arrested a California union leader. Does Trump understand what that means?Anita Chabria

White House Staffer Responsible for ‘Fanning Flames’ Between Trump and Musk ID’d

Texas Yanks Major Perk From Illegal Aliens - After Pioneering It 24 Years Ago

Dozens detained during Los Angeles ICE raids

Russian army suffers massive losses as Kremlin feigns interest in peace talks — ISW

Russia’s Defense Collapse Exposed by Ukraine Strike

I heard libs might block some streets. 🤣


Miscellaneous
See other Miscellaneous Articles

Title: 'Moon rock' given to Holland by Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin is fake
Source: [None]
URL Source: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/sci ... g-and-Buzz-Aldrin-is-fake.html
Published: May 24, 2015
Author: The Telegraph
Post Date: 2015-05-24 13:11:54 by christine
Keywords: None
Views: 2535
Comments: 87

Curators at Amsterdam's Rijksmuseum, where the rock has attracted tens of thousands of visitors each year, discovered that the "lunar rock", valued at £308,000, was in fact petrified wood.

Xandra van Gelder, who oversaw the investigation, said the museum would continue to keep the stone as a curiosity.

"It's a good story, with some questions that are still unanswered," she said. "We can laugh about it."

The rock was given to Willem Drees, a former Dutch leader, during a global tour by Neil Armstrong, Michael Collins and Edwin "Buzz" Aldrin following their moon mission 50 years ago.

J. William Middendorf, the former American ambassador to the Netherlands, made the presentation to Mr Drees and the rock was then donated to the Rijksmuseum after his death in 1988.

"I do remember that Drees was very interested in the little piece of stone. But that it's not real, I don't know anything about that," Mr Middendorf said.

Nasa gave moon rocks to more than 100 countries following lunar missions in 1969 and the 1970s.

The United States Embassy in The Hague is carrying out an investigation into the affair.

Researchers Amsterdam's Free University were able to tell at a glance that the rock was unlikely to be from the moon, a conclusion that was borne out by tests.

"It's a nondescript, pretty-much-worthless stone," said Frank Beunk, a geologist involved in the investigation.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Comments (1-17) not displayed.
      .
      .
      .

#18. To: NeoconsNailed, Katniss (#11)

...but the supposed moon landings are barely even mentioned anymore, the "real" accomplishments they celebrate are mostly "diversity"-driven -- Brown vs. Board, Pettus Bridge and nauseam.

You might be on to something there, NN.

The mission control room was a sea of Whiteness. Maybe that has something to do with it?

StraitGate  posted on  2015-05-25   18:59:11 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#19. To: christine, 4 (#17)

nasa says the van allen radiation belt is impenetrable -

www.nasa.gov/content/godd...netrable-barrier-in-space

So who's kidding whom about US going to the moon and back?

“The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out... without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane, intolerable.” ~ H. L. Mencken

Lod  posted on  2015-05-25   19:07:51 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#20. To: StraitGate (#15)

Who were these several top German scientists who stated shortly before we supposedly went that we were nowhere close to going?

Are you serious that the reason you are so certain that man never made it to the moon is because the US government hasn't sent anniversary revisits, at least with unmanned vehicles? I really don't see how that proves that all the supposed moon landings were hoaxes.

I don't think anybody's saying it does prove it, but I and perhaps others are calling it smoking gun-shaped anomaly in the context of many other extreme weirdnesses and incongruities.

NeoconsNailed  posted on  2015-05-25   19:20:17 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#21. To: Lod (#19)

nasa says the van allen radiation belt is impenetrable -

Yeah, by electrons, but what kind of radiation is it? Alpha, beta, gamma, electromagnetic, what?

The light that burns twice as bright, burns half as long. - Dr. Eldon Tyrell

Godfrey Smith: Mike, I wouldn't worry. Prosperity is just around the corner.
Mike Flaherty: Yeah, it's been there a long time. I wish I knew which corner.
My Man Godfrey (1936)

Esso  posted on  2015-05-25   19:23:53 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#22. To: christine (#17)

Probably given to our "Good Ally" in the middle east.

The light that burns twice as bright, burns half as long. - Dr. Eldon Tyrell

Godfrey Smith: Mike, I wouldn't worry. Prosperity is just around the corner.
Mike Flaherty: Yeah, it's been there a long time. I wish I knew which corner.
My Man Godfrey (1936)

Esso  posted on  2015-05-25   19:25:56 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#23. To: Lod (#19) (Edited)

nasa says the van allen radiation belt is impenetrable - www.nasa.gov/content/godd...netrable-barrier-in-space

So who's kidding whom about US going to the moon and back?

Now you've brought up another hot anomaly. Beyond said belts, it's said that ubiquitous space radiation would have fried the crew long before they reached the moon.

People discuss all this at Snopes but the link on that one is dead -- click here.

Or were they talking about the belts? Wikipedia deals with them, but not any radiation pervading outer space at large:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moon_landing_conspiracy_theories

NeoconsNailed  posted on  2015-05-25   19:29:32 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#24. To: NeoconsNailed, 4 (#23)

Beyond said belts, it's said that ubiquitous space radiation would have fried the crew long before they reached the moon.

That's what I've come to believe.

“The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out... without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane, intolerable.” ~ H. L. Mencken

Lod  posted on  2015-05-25   19:43:42 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#25. To: Lod (#24)

Wow, some jam-packed stuff in that Weidner video around 38-39!

They're talking about the positive negatives of Kubrick's approach.... the biggest real negative is, of course, the same as Orwell's books, namely that they have nothing to say about race or, even worse, do so and get it exactly backward (Emanuel Goldstein the victim, pure-celtic Beethoven-loving Alex and his peachy-skinned droogs).

Yeah, it was either that or never get published.......... but but what if Burgess, Kubrick, Tolkien, C.S. Lewis and other towering fantasists had devoted all that talent and effort to openly shouting a warning to their fans (1930s to present) about the rising tide of color?

NeoconsNailed  posted on  2015-05-25   21:16:25 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#26. To: StraitGate (#18)

Lot of Moonbeams out tonight on 4um.

Cynicom  posted on  2015-05-25   21:42:54 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#27. To: StraitGate (#15)

Who were these several top German scientists who stated shortly before we supposedly went that we were nowhere close to going?

Are you serious that the reason you are so certain that man never made it to the moon is because the US government hasn't sent anniversary revisits, at least with unmanned vehicles? I really don't see how that proves that all the supposed moon landings were hoaxes.

This is something that I researched a good 10 years ago, maybe more, to ad nauseum.

There were a number of pivotal people that just months prior to the missions said that it could not be done and laughed it off.

Also, I think it was Armstrong that has pretty much gone into hiding as it were to avoid media appearances over it.

I also mentioned the three burned to death, you didn't mention them. Coincidence that it happened?

You can spend your time doing all the research I did, I don't have time (or desire) to do it again, I didn't save it or compile my findings. I approached it objectively and with an entirely open mind, and much as with 9II I came to the conclusion that it was hokey.

If they can pull off 9II, OKC, FF war starting things, a simple trip to the moon which is out of sight and unverifiable by just about everyone isn't out of the question by a long shot.

Also, Russians were astonished and said that they never could make it. They always copied us back in the day.

Anyway, sounds like a good project for you in your independent study.

This is the one link I saved for whatever reason;

http://shatteringthematrix.com/profiles/blogs/my-husband-directed-the-fake?xg_source=activity#.VWPctkbMKJ8

Here's a quick YT search of hoax documentaries;

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=moon+landing+hoax+documentary+

Here's the one I think I watched that got me thinking;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zj5r3jXhV2Q

Katniss  posted on  2015-05-25   22:45:39 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#28. To: christine, All (#16)

that, to me, is very compelling evidence that the moon landing was faked. why in the world would the astronauts be behaving in this manner if they had really accomplished a most exciting feat!

Exactly, and then to have all but a lifelong moratorium on discussing it personally?

Odd to the point of raising the bullshit flag.

Among many other things.

Katniss  posted on  2015-05-25   22:47:32 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#29. To: christine, StraitGate (#17)

and isn't just oh-so convenient that all of the film from the moon walk was lost?

Yeah, isn't it.

Ever see the footage of the men hopping around on the moon slowed down?

Also, just one of many of the hundreds if not thousands of vids out there, this one's new to me and hysterical;

Katniss  posted on  2015-05-25   22:55:48 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#30. To: Cynicom (#26)

Lot of Moonbeams out tonight on 4um.

And one pot-shotter.

NeoconsNailed  posted on  2015-05-25   23:03:01 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#31. To: Katniss (#29)

LOL. he's lifted up without the other astronaut even touching him!

Truth is still truth even if no one believes it. A lie is still a lie even if everyone believes it.

christine  posted on  2015-05-25   23:25:44 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#32. To: Katniss (#29)

In the video, it's pretty clear to me that the astronaut on the left is holding on to the right hand of the astronaut on the right, and gets a pull-up (and a pitch-up spin) from him (notwithstanding the video's assertion that the other astronaut isn't even touching him). The astronaut on the left also pushes himself up from the ground with his right hand. The moon's gravity is only 17% that of earth's, so that impulse, along with the hand hold pull-up from his partner, would easily allow him to get upright without violating any of the laws of physics.

I'm not saying that there isn't any evidence disproving a lunar landing; all I'm saying is this ain't it.

StraitGate  posted on  2015-05-25   23:46:34 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#33. To: Katniss (#27)

Anyway, sounds like a good project for you in your independent study.

Fair enough. I'll take a look at the links you supplied.

Thanks.

StraitGate  posted on  2015-05-25   23:49:14 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#34. To: christine (#31)

LOL. he's lifted up without the other astronaut even touching him!

And yet ...

LOL

Katniss  posted on  2015-05-25   23:49:33 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#35. To: StraitGate (#32)

The moon's gravity is only 17% that of earth's, so that impulse, along with the hand hold pull-up from his partner, would easily allow him to get upright without violating any of the laws of physics.

Why the struggle to get up initially and the request for help?

Think big picture here, not everything in its own little microcosm.

Also, I've been down this road before and why, when the astronauts seem to be leaping about on the surface, why they're not leaping 4, 5, or more feet into the air based on what you said.

Explanation: Packs weigh 200 lbs.

OK, something's not adding up somewhere.

Katniss  posted on  2015-05-25   23:51:31 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#36. To: StraitGate (#33)

Fair enough. I'll take a look at the links you supplied.

Thanks.

You're welcome!

I can't afford to spend tons of time on this, but if you need an assist or have a question, feel free to ping me.

Katniss  posted on  2015-05-25   23:52:20 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#37. To: Katniss (#35)

Explanation: Packs weigh 200 lbs.

That would be like wearing 24 gallons of water. Hard to imagine.

NeoconsNailed  posted on  2015-05-26   0:02:28 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#38. To: Katniss (#35)

why, when the astronauts seem to be leaping about on the surface, why they're not leaping 4, 5, or more feet into the air based on what you said.

A 4 foot leap into the air on the moon equates to an 8 inch vertical jump on earth. On earth, a man's normal walking gait leaves him with at least one foot on the ground at all times. Not so on the moon, with its less gravity. That's why the astronauts had to train to walk on the moon prior to the lunar flights.

While 4-5 foot leaps are possible on the moon, the astronauts avoided that, because it's not safe. The longer air time (compared to an 8 inch jump on earth) allows more time for the rotational forces (torque inducing pitch, roll, and yaw) to act on the astronaut's body, so that he risks being maloriented upon landing, and the risk of falling is high. If the astronaut lands on his feet, he will feel the same shock as if he jumped off of an 8 in tall step, but if he falls, it will feel more like rolling off of a 12-14 inch step because his body will have fallen 6-8 feet instead of only 4 feet.

StraitGate  posted on  2015-05-26   0:23:57 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#39. To: NeoconsNailed, StraitGate (#37)

That would be like wearing 24 gallons of water. Hard to imagine.

That's correct, and it's one among hundreds of data points making that even less plausible than 9II.

And while apologists for the OFT talk about how that was possible on the moon, what about inside the capsule and getting down that ladder? Doesn't look as if they have/had the same issues.

Another critical data point is that one money shot of "the earth" from the capsule, but then "unofficial" footage shows that it was simply a shot of the ocean while in orbit. Factor in all of the "green screen news" these days, and it's hardly a far-fetched notion that there was world-class hanky-panky going on.

Here's one link with the greater search link below it, and I've seen one where they remove everything and it's clear that there merely in orbit above the earth. But the main question is why? Why would they do this given that it was completely unnecessary if it were all real.

And let's not forget, that they could easily disprove a good chunk of "conspiracy-theory-ism" by simply sending an unmanned vehicle to the moon to rove around and take pics in hi-def for the world to scrutinize. I'm guessing that at best they'd look like the laughable footage of what they claim is a 757 hitting the Pentacon.

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=window+shot+of+earth+from+moon+rockets+fake

Katniss  posted on  2015-05-26   9:36:32 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#40. To: StraitGate (#38)

A 4 foot leap into the air on the moon equates to an 8 inch vertical jump on earth. On earth, a man's normal walking gait leaves him with at least one foot on the ground at all times. Not so on the moon, with its less gravity. That's why the astronauts had to train to walk on the moon prior to the lunar flights.

While 4-5 foot leaps are possible on the moon, the astronauts avoided that, because it's not safe. The longer air time (compared to an 8 inch jump on earth) allows more time for the rotational forces (torque inducing pitch, roll, and yaw) to act on the astronaut's body, so that he risks being maloriented upon landing, and the risk of falling is high. If the astronaut lands on his feet, he will feel the same shock as if he jumped off of an 8 in tall step, but if he falls, it will feel more like rolling off of a 12-14 inch step because his body will have fallen 6-8 feet instead of only 4 feet.

Say what you want, as the saying goes, talk (theirs) is cheap.

I've seen footage of supposedly a moon walk slowed down (slow motion), and it's quite clear that it could have just as easily been filmed on earth. In fact, if it wasn't, then it's a major coincidence, and a telling one, that the same gait, height off the ground, etc., could have possibly been accomplished in earth's atmosphere.

Again, to start your search, watch this;

Much of this is coming back for me. The astronauts' interview is in that one too. Tell me you think that they're sincere. Then there's the pitch about the stars which is obvious hogwash.

I mean as usual with these FF cover-ups, people believe it "because they saw it on TV." As we now know, that's easy to fake.

More links on walking/hopping on the moon;

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=hopping+on+the+moon

Clearly possible to duplicate on earth, making one question why it was exactly the same on the moon.

This is easy stuff for any good analyst.

Also, let's not forget the most recent data point, that the rock given by these guys to Holland is fake. Why?

Again, it would be a relatively cheap exercise to send an unmanned rover to the moon to validate everything. Unfortunately it's mission impossible for the reasons that I said unless it's all computerized, and I'm pretty sure that in today's technological world that would be exposed right quickly, since there is no atmosphere on the moon but there is where they filmed this in the American Southwest rendering the "moonscape" impossible to duplicate as it should be fully in tact from nearly 50 years ago.

In fact, I can think of no better way to kill numerous birds with a single stone than to do this for the 50th in 4 years. Don't hold your breath.

Also, remember all the talk of colonies on the moon? Don't you really think, given our national pride, that for no other reason we'd send some stuff up there to at least build a station of some sort? I do. It's ridiculous, given the money we spend as a nation on bullshit, that they wouldn't have done it, merely "because we could."

Again, problem is that we cannot. If we cannot today, how much less so nearly 50 years ago.

In your search, keep in mind the reasons why having "gone to the moon" would have benefited our nation from the establishment's perspective. Immense, just as 9II was, just as the "Holocaust"® has been to our nation's handlers.

Katniss  posted on  2015-05-26   10:00:25 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#41. To: Katniss (#40)

Thanks for the excellent de-construction.

“The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out... without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane, intolerable.” ~ H. L. Mencken

Lod  posted on  2015-05-26   11:46:05 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#42. To: Katniss (#40)

WOW! A BBC documentary passionately taking down not only the moon fraud but the dead matter than makes up most of the US fedgov? Man, this is LIVING. Kudos Katniss -- and thanks!

NeoconsNailed  posted on  2015-05-26   11:56:15 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#43. To: Katniss, Neoconsnailed (#40)

Here's a whole book about the reason NASA never went back to the moon. From the book description, it appears that Paul Kersey believes that the U.S. space program died because NASA's mission was changed from the exploration of space to the celebration of diversity. I haven't read it; just passing on the info here. (You can find the book on Amazon.com; the link won't work for me here.)

'Whitey on the Moon': Race, Politics, and the death of the U.S. Space Program, 1958 - 1972 by Paul Kersey

***

Book Description Publication Date: July 22, 2014:

We went to the moon. This is a fact. Indisputable, except to those conspiracy theorists clinging to their belief some sinister plot was hatched by the US Government to conceal our inability to navigate to earth's natural satellite.

On July 20, 1969, man first stood on the moon; on December 18, 1972, man stood on the moon for the last time. What happened to end the dream of space exploration, left instead to the colorful imagination of Trekkies and science fiction fans believing some diverse band of humans could navigate the heavens in a utopian future?

The US Government neutered NASA by forcing a much different mission upon the space agency: diversity and the promotion of blacks. We went to the moon.

On multiple occasions. When NASA was nearly all-white, with an all-white astronaut team. But in 1972, the Apollo program was grounded, with the Space Shuttle program becoming a glorified experiment in social engineering and special interest group cheerleading. Each successive launch included women, blacks, and other racial minorities, not for the sake of exploration, but for the sake of gender and racial cheerleading.

The glory of NASA and mankind's great moments in space exploration were all milestones performed under the watchful of an almost completely white NASA, devoid of the hindrance of affirmative action programs and the shackles of Equal Employment Opportunity mandates.

The mandate then was to get the moon; the mandate soon after was the promotion of blackness and diversity, at the expense of the initial dream of exploring the stars.

'Whitey on the Moon': Race, Politics, and the death of the U.S. Space Program, 1958 - 1972 tells the shocking story of NASA's demise from an angle never- before told: the racial angle.

Learn the story of Captain Ed Dwight, the black Air Force pilot the Kennedy Administration tried to force on NASA; learn about how General Curtis LeMay and Lt. Colonel Chuck Yeager demanded accountability and stood against what the latter deemed "reverse racism" in how the Kennedy Administration forced a black astronaut candidate on NASA just for the sake of having a black astronaut candidate.

Learn about the "Poor People's Campaign" (led by Rev. Ralph Abernathy), which protested the launch of Apollo 11 on July 16th, 1969, by showing up with a horse and buggy.

Rev. Abernathy demanded the money going to Apollo and space exploration be redistributed to fight poverty and starvation in America's inner cities...

And his vision won out.

The final chapters of the book deal not with the exploration and colonization of new worlds, but the redistributing of wealth to pay for EBT/SNAP Food Stamps cards and other welfare payouts.

We could have been on Mars, but we had to fund Black-Run American instead...

StraitGate  posted on  2015-05-29   21:47:29 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#44. To: StraitGate (#43) (Edited)

So you say we did it? Why the weirdorama interview etc?

NeoconsNailed  posted on  2015-05-29   22:00:29 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#45. To: NeoconsNailed (#44)

So you say we did it, huh.

I'll take that as a question, even though it's not like you to omit a question mark (or any other punctuation).

Yes, I think that the first moon landing was successful. That said, I do not doubt that the government had a contingency plan to lie to the people about it if it had not been successful.

One reason I think the first mission succeeded is because they went back -- five more times. If the first mission had been a dismal failure, I think they would have scrapped the program or at least delayed it for a few years.

None of the "scientific" evidence presented here -- photos, videos of moonwalking, etc. -- causes me to doubt that the lunar landings really happened. To date, the strongest controverting evidence has been that bizarre press conference. I saw that for the first time when you or someone else posted it here a few days ago, and I have to admit, it's really weird, and does raise some doubt.

I am a little astonished that you and some of the others here are so all-fired SURE that it never happened, especially when the evidence that has been cited is, in my view, not very convincing. I would think that you all would at least give a little space to the possibility that it might have happened. You know, assign something greater than a non-zero probability to it.

I'm not SURE man has been to the moon (so, technically, I do not "say that we did it"). But I am a little befuddled as to how some people are so SURE that he hasn't.

StraitGate  posted on  2015-05-29   22:45:18 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#46. To: StraitGate, Neoconsnailed (#43)

If you want to make progress in this or any level of truth that rivals the establishment version, I'd strongly suggest not using much less citing establishment sources.

Sounds to me as if you've already made up your mind. You won't find much if anything at all in the mainstream to uncover the truth if that truth is different from what the establishment claims it is.

That applies across the board.

This is the problem in America, the running joke is "I read it on the internet so it must be true," but the reality is that the greatest volumes of lies, half-truths, and red-herring propaganda is exactly from mainstream sources.

Katniss  posted on  2015-05-29   23:37:01 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#47. To: Katniss (#46)

That applies across the board.

Wheee! Bravo!!!

corruptissima re publica plurimae leges - Tacitus

Dakmar  posted on  2015-05-29   23:41:14 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#48. To: Katniss (#46)

It's you who have already made up your mind. You posted a video that you found on the internet that claims that an astronaut on the lunar surface could not have helped his partner up in the manner depicted without violating the laws of physics. I disputed that claim using knowledge that I learned not from the internet, but from an engineering mechanics class that I took many years ago. You never responded directly to that.

Then when I said I'm not sure man has been to the moon, but I don't understand how some people including you can be so sure that he hasn't, you say it sounds like I have already made up my mind?

I am as skeptical of the "establishment" as (almost) anyone I know. And I'm pretty sure that I haven't cited any establishment sources to support my belief that the Apollo program placed man on the moon. If so, please show me where I did, and explain why that "establishment source" should not be trusted. And please note that when I simply reported that NASA says that they went back to the moon 5 more times I wasn't citing that as evidence that they actually had.

StraitGate  posted on  2015-05-30   0:09:02 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#49. To: StraitGate (#45)

I'll take that as a question, even though it's not like you to omit a question mark (or any other punctuation).

Oh, but a 'huh' can obviate an eroteme and indicatify a plenary cessation. :-)

Did you, as I recall, comment on the radiation factor, StraitGate?

NeoconsNailed  posted on  2015-05-30   1:28:20 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#50. To: StraitGate (#48) (Edited)

It's you who have already made up your mind.

To the contrary, I once believed it and argued against people such as myself.

As soon as I took to research it entirely 100% independently and at great length and over much time, much as with 9II, I became convinced that they were both false.

Katniss  posted on  2015-05-30   14:07:45 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#51. To: NeoconsNailed (#49)

Did you, as I recall, comment on the radiation factor, StraitGate?

What radiation?

The only reports of layers of energetic charged particles surrounding the earth come from untrustworthy establishment sources.

Surely you don't buy into all that nonsense about Dr. Van Allen's work, the Explorer and Pioneer satellites that they say they launched, and all the telemetrically returned data that they say confirmed the existence of the alleged radiation belts?

You know they're all lying, don't you? ;)

StraitGate  posted on  2015-05-30   14:41:27 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#52. To: Katniss (#50)

...I became convinced...

Well, OK, then. You have already made up your mind.

StraitGate  posted on  2015-05-30   14:44:05 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#53. To: StraitGate (#48)

Hey strait, how come.their is no blast crater from the landing of.eagle one underneath the lander?

And why is it some photos depict differnt scenes in differnt lunar places but have the same exact backrounds??

______________________________________

Suspect all media / resist bad propaganda/Learn NLP everyday everyway ;) If you don't control your mind someone else will.

titorite  posted on  2015-05-30   14:50:20 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#54. To: StraitGate (#51)

It sounds like a "strait" answer isn't in the works on this one.

NeoconsNailed  posted on  2015-05-30   14:53:58 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#55. To: NeoconsNailed (#54)

It sounds like a "strait" answer isn't in the works on this one.

Well done! Props.to.you. lol

______________________________________

Suspect all media / resist bad propaganda/Learn NLP everyday everyway ;) If you don't control your mind someone else will.

titorite  posted on  2015-05-30   15:03:48 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#56. To: titorite (#53)

Hey strait, how come.their is no blast crater from the landing of.eagle one underneath the lander?

And why is it some photos depict differnt scenes in differnt lunar places but have the same exact backrounds??

I just searched "lunar module" on google images (I, know, google is arch- establishment), and several of the photos show a smooth area under the engine nozzle that appears to be relatively devoid of surface dust, as would be expected if the engine had blown the dust away. I am not a rocket scientist, so I'm not qualified to state just how large a "blast crater" the engine would have to create in order to safely land the LM. But I suspect that it wouldn't be very deep, especially if there was a horizontal component to the LM velocity on landing approach. Are you aware of any authoritative study of that question? If so, I would be interested in that info. Thanks.

With regard to photos of different scenes that have the exact same backgrounds: I haven't heard of that. Where can I see these photos? Thanks again.

StraitGate  posted on  2015-05-30   15:40:30 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#57. To: titorite (#55)

Let me rephrase that. Straitgate, have you offered an explanation of how the astronauts could have passed through the van Allen belts safely, and have I misplaced it? If it had aluminum shielding, would that be enough, and if lead, would that be light enough, and aren't there windows in each craft.

Being the king of the search box, I'm painfully 'umbled to ask, but searching doesn't work right in 4um.

NeoconsNailed  posted on  2015-05-30   15:47:16 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#58. To: StraitGate, 4 (#56)

Searching for Apollo 11 photographs, over 500K results were found including NASA sites.

“The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out... without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane, intolerable.” ~ H. L. Mencken

Lod  posted on  2015-05-30   15:58:59 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  



      .
      .
      .

Comments (59 - 87) not displayed.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest


[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]