except you're completely clueless as to the security clearance , as you submit an YT video, that is probably only 5 minutes.
this is comical.
Is NASA Lying about the Levels and Nature of Space Radiation?
- Thread starter FatFreddy
- Start date
- Status
this is comical.
and demand proof that is impossible for the opponent to come by (it may exist, but not be at his disposal, ...
---------------------------------------------------[/QUOTE]
so you're an actual scientist with actual field experience, and not simply clicking experience. or is this all clicking on links and pretending ?
i'm going with clicking.
---------------------------------------------------[/QUOTE]
so you're an actual scientist with actual field experience, and not simply clicking experience. or is this all clicking on links and pretending ?
i'm going with clicking.
The rocket I saw was close enough to see but too far away to hear. It was making zero noise.
It's very plausible. The US and France both have control over several remote islands in the south Pacific. Both countries cooperate. A launch from one of those islands during the day would only be noticed by a few people on boats. The media wouldn't report anything they tried to tell them.
There are plausible scenarios that would explain everything you put forth. The anomalies in the footage have already proven the hoax so this is a moot discussion anyway.
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=144487
The viewers can look at the info and decide for themselves.
The guy that made that video is a known obfuscator who doctors videos. Check this out.
http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=362999&page=12&p=1065076608#post1065076608
That guy can't be trusted. We have to wonder if he changed the speed of his video to make the numbers add up. Anyway, this doesn't make the mountain of other proof go away. Start reading at post #1 of the above thread.
Here's a video about kicked sand.
http://theconspiracyzone.podcastpeople.com/posts/27709
(excerpts)
---------------------------------------------
Q: Why do prominent astronomers like Sir Bernard Lovell and Patrick Moore support the Moon landings if they were faked?
A: Scientists and astronomers around the globe know full well that the Moon missions were faked, but rely on NASA to gain access to the vital data beamed back to Earth from the Hubble space telescope. They cannot slag off NASA otherwise NASA would deprive them of this essential information, which they so much require.
Then you have never been close to a large rocket launch. They are impossible to "not notice."
There are all kinds of plausible scenarios that would explain it. They could have announced that it was a satellite launch. It could have been launced from an island in the South Pacific.
Something with plausible alternative scenarios can't be used as proof. Anyway, this doesn't make the anomalies which prove the hoax go away.
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=144487
Ah, so now you are giving up on the "not many people noticed it" and switched to "they probably claimed it was something else?"
Given that you have changed your story now, what else are you going to change?
[/QUOTE]
Your very sad response would get you laughed out of the debating hall! You saw a rocket did you? Where, when, which launch, how big, how high? Moon rockets need to be extra big to carry the fuel to get the craft to the Moon and landed. They are massive.
Bilge. You know nothing about this whatsoever. You aren't remotely qualified to offer theories plausible or otherwise. There are launch windows and trajectories to put these rockets where the Apollo missions landed on the Moon, you just pull something out of your butt and hope it works. It doesn't.
These rockets are massive and take huge teams to assemble them, order the parts, deliver the parts, launch them and all the other tasks associated with landing them on the Moon. That is a considerable number of people and a paper trail the size of your internet café! Not one person has ever spoken about these magic huge rockets? Not even to a friend? What now, your even more pathetic dirge about how it's career suicide and they'd all be killed!
Bull! You don't know what plausible means. The only anomaly I have ever seen is the Apollo 15 flag, almost certainly caused by a bit of kicked soil and subsequent contact with his elbow. Your abject failure to respond to tough interrogation means you spew out your spam line about it being a moot point! How the laser reflectors got on the Moon and all the peer reviewed rocks obtained is moot?
Comedy. How can you possibly follow that simpleton and his joke claims? None of the rocks have any terrestrial weathering at all, every single geologist will know how to tell if a rock is from Earth. Your video series is ignorant crap.
There are dozens of videos like this, your ad-hominem is used because you can't answer this or any of the other ones! Video is linear, if you speed it up and get a result x, when you slow it down the ratio of the new gravity will correspond to the change factor.
The Apollo 15 video shows dust being kicked and footprints being made! So does this one, that looks ridiculous when the regolith falls at Earth speed:
You're misrepresenting my position. Of course it would have been obvious to people withing a hundred miles or so. I was in the West Palm Beach area and I saw it by chance. There was no noise and no smoke. They could have announced a satellite launch to deal with the people who saw it.
One of the Surveyor missions could have really been a mission to collect rocks and soil.
http://www.sciforums.com/threads/is...ature-of-space-radiation.152731/#post-3332087
It's also plausible that they're simply lying about the rocks and none were collected. Maybe they're all meteorites from Antarctica or rocks made in a laboratory.
None of the footprints we see being made have any detail. The ones that have detail aren't seen being made.
MoonFaker - Project Sandbox
The speed of videos can be manipulated to make the numbers come out the way one wants.
There's a ton of proof that the missions were faked.
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=144487
Nothing any of you has said makes this go away.
That is a lie and you are a liar.
There is nothing to go away as there is nothing that can substantiate any ridiculous claim that we never went to the Moon.
Buzz should have got a medal for that effort!
You don't have a position. You saw a rocket - I laugh out loud at your dismissal of how difficult to launch rockets quietly in the right launch window and trajectory with nobody noticing. Because you saw a rocket. Comedy.
Impossible. The launch weight is massively prohibitive on returning the craft from the Moon, let alone the number of people to carry it off. Even today this is not possible to do with that number of rocks!
Ludicrous statement. You don't even know what the word plausible means. You spout a quite ridiculous claim that is clearly and provably crap. Meteorites are all subject to weathering by the Earth. None of the Apollo samples have any evidence of this, They also have no fusion crusts and have evidence of stronger helium 3 on the outside from solar wind exposure. There are numerous other reasons why these cannot be meteorites but sadly we won't be having this discussion because you will just avoid it and make the repeat spam claim -
Even the spam video you post about Apollo 15 shows clear dark prints, that are impossible with dry sand. Wet sand doesn't behave that way. Busted.
No it cannot! The time component in the gravity equation is directly proportional to the speed of the video.
NONE of that is proof. Every bit of it has been debunked ad nauseum. Without videos and links, list 10 items of evidence.[/quote]
Did you read that, or did you examine the rocks yourself?
That's funny. I don't see that when I look at the video.
Apollo 15 flag, facing air resistance; proving the fraud of alleged manned moon landings.
Please point out an exact time mark.
The evidence can be seen in the videos. This is a ridiculous request.
People can look at the evidence and decide for themselves.
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=144487
Just to be clear, even if the videos were faked, that is not "proof" that the moon landings were faked. You might as well say that if trumped-up evidence is used in court, that "proves" that the crime didn't occur.
That's a good point. The anomalies only prove that the footage NASA made public was all filmed in a studio. I suppose we can't rule out the possibility that they really went and showed us fake videos. That does seem kind of ridiculous though; if they really went, why don't they show us some real footage? Why would they show us faked footage if they really went?
There could be any number of reasons. Maybe the real pictures just didn't turn out. NASA needed something to show the public for all the money they were spending.
If you want to pretend that the moon landings didn't happen, you're going to need much better evidence than a few minor complaints about the pictures.
exchemist
Valued Senior Member
You are utterly shameless! Even the youtube picture marker shows clear dark footprints. The whole video and the ones before that you have never even watched show this. You do know this piece of footage is part of a large continuous piece don't you?
Coward. Just itemise 10 of the undebunkable points. In your next response. The viewers re waiting!
You do not expect anything better do you.
Just as is his coward mate Bart Sibrel, he probably also is a criminal.These type are incapable of any logical sensible discussion.
- Status