Xtra Smileys
[Open]
Flame Damnation
August 23, 2017, 10:31:39 am
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:   
 
 
  Home Help Arcade Gallery Links Login Register  

Did Man Walk on the Moon in 1969?


Pages: [1] 2   Go Down
  Reply  |  New Topic  |  Print  
Author Topic: Did Man Walk on the Moon in 1969?  (Read 175 times)
caskur™
Swing Voter
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 10990


Tortured Artist


« on: September 17, 2010, 06:11:08 am »
Reply with quoteQuote

Let’s see…. The Americans want the world to believe, 3 men lifted off from the USA, travel not 500 miles up to a space station, but rather 250,000 miles to the moon through 10,000 ks  (6,250 miles) of radiation, land safely, get out, play golf, collect tonnes of rocks, get back in their rocket, lift off, fly back another 250,000 miles through 6,250 miles of Van Allen’s radiation belt, totally unharmed and land safely in the Pacific ocean….(haw, haw)

Yeah right folks….I bought it for years until I took a second look… after all, I was only 9 when they trotted all us little dumb school kids off to watch it in black and white on a TV at school. They wouldn’t lie to us would they?

The rocks are evidence they say and the photos and film footage…. Lol… the rock is a rock from my state, Western Australia… in fact, I have some of it in an aquarium myself…… All the rocks from the moon are also found on our very own planet, people….

What did the moon probe prove recently about the moon‘s surface? It was covered in dust? That was all it found and wouldn’t they have already KNOWN that if they’d been there before?

Many people believe it’s a hoax. I also believe it was hoax and I encourage people to do their own investigation, but not just that, when you find the sites that raise the issue, click on every link they give and keep digging. Some of the concerns were dealt with by NASA and given satisfactory explanations, but NOT all of them.

There is one thing to send something to the moon, and another thing to return it home safely. I have no trouble believing they’ve sent unmanned rockets to the moon…. But I do have a huge problem believing man went there and returned safely in 1969, no less.

And for other sceptics like myself… do NOT let them shout you down, or rope you into believing you’re some sort of “Flat earth society” nutball… keep them on the issues in front of you.

NOT ALL conspiracies are rubbish …. Sometimes, someone gets it right.

Antarctica has a surface that resembles the moon…and the people involved in the Apollo project visited there 2 yrs before man landed on the moon… SURPRISE!!!

open for discussion...

prove me wrong
Report Spam   Logged

Social Buttons

caskur™
Swing Voter
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 10990


Tortured Artist


« Reply #1 on: September 17, 2010, 06:52:46 am »
Reply with quoteQuote

Hmmm, says "contains commands manipulating the view"  so bare with me... I have another way..

I shall post it out for you.. its quite thorough and I shall need to post it in 2 posts, ok?

______________________________

Apollo Investigation

By Jack White

I have great admiration for many achievements of NASA. I admire the courage, dedication and sacrifice of the astronauts who died in their pursuits of new frontiers proposed by President John Kennedy in 1960 when he pledged to put a man on the Moon by the end of the decade. I am saddened by the deaths of the Columbia and Challenger scientists who trusted NASA with their lives. On my office television in 1986 I saw the live explosion of the Challenger. And I watched in horror that bright February morning as the space shuttle Columbia broke apart in a smoky trail over my Texas home in 2003. I am saddened by the deaths on a launchpad in Florida in 1967 of Apollo 1 astronauts Gus Grissom, Ed White and Roger Chaffee, who may have known too much for their own security.

I marvel at the achievement of the Hubble Space Telescope, which brings us dream world images from the infinity of outer space. And the images from Mars also help us understand our universe.

But the thousands of honorable workers at NASA will be shocked and saddened to learn of the dark secrets of forty years ago...the Apollo Moon missions. Examination of NASA records reveals a terrible skeleton rotting away in their own files, a monumental deception. Very few NASA employees knew about the ruse, although it continues to be covered up to this very day by some secret keeper of the "national security" keys. Most likely this was a TOP SECRET political/military project.

This skeleton in the NASA closet is documented by the space agency itself. And the facts provided are indisputable. As Shakespeare might have said, the agency is "hoist with their own petard"...that is, blown up by their own devices.

What is this dirty secret?

Grave doubt exists that the Apollo missions to the Moon were anything more than the most incredible hoax of all time. Did astronauts actually go to the Moon? I do not know. But NASA's own evidence shows that all photos of the Apollo feats had to be forgeries. They were likely made in a secret Earthly studio somewhere as a top secret military project. And if all the "Moon photos" of all the "Moon missions" were fakes, the question is 'why?'.

Report Spam   Logged
caskur™
Swing Voter
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 10990


Tortured Artist


« Reply #2 on: September 17, 2010, 06:55:00 am »
Reply with quoteQuote

Real missions should have produced real photos.

To understand the "why" of faking "landing a man on the Moon by the end of the decade" that had been promised by JFK in his first speech to Congress, one must go back to the Cold War with the USSR and the much-touted "space race". In the early 60s, the Soviets were ahead of the US in space exploration. Sputnik and other Red successes evoked a US political crisis. But the Soviets likely knew that sending a man to the Moon was an immensely difficult task and that JFK's rhetoric was a hollow promise.

However, after Lyndon B. Johnson succeeded the assassinated Kennedy he likely came up with a brilliant (and evil, in my opinion) idea. He must have thought, "...the experts say we can't go to the Moon like Kennedy promised, but I say we can! We can FAKE IT!" If LBJ could pull it off, to simplify a very complex Cold War situation, it would be a great propaganda coup and establish US superiority over communism. So I theorize that LBJ conspired with his successor Richard M. Nixon and OTHERS to carry out an elaborate plan to fool the world by "flying to the Moon". It was a brilliant plan, executed in strict military secrecy, and it has fooled the world for more than 40 years. But it has been undone by its own excesses, as now revealed from NASA records for the first time.

Anyone with even elemental math skills and common sense can look at the facts, do the calculations, and come to their own conclusions about the alleged MASSIVE VOLUME of lunar surface photography in such a LIMITED TIME.

Here is my conclusion: IT COULD NOT BE DONE.

It boils down not to just studying the photographs for signs of fakery, though I have examined every available Apollo photo for more than three years (and discovered many fakes). Very simply, it amounts to a study known to many businesses...A TIME AND MOTION STUDY. The elementary question is: was it possible to take the known number of photos (from NASA records) in the amount of time available (from NASA records)? But before you read my study, to understand it you need to know some basic information about the Apollo missions:

1. Of seven Apollo missions to put "men on the Moon", six were claimed to be "successful". (Apollo 13 was "aborted".)

2. Each of the six successful missions landed two astronauts "on the Moon" in a flimsy craft NASA originally had called the Lunar Excursion Module (LEM, later shortened to LM), an unproven craft which never had an opportunity for a lunar landing test flight. But it landed and then took off six times with spectacular "success" on Apollo missions 11 and 12, and 14 through 17...once even landing within 200 feet of a pre-selected target.

3. Two astronauts rode each LEM to the Moon surface while one remained in the orbiting Command and Service Module (CSM) awaiting their return.

4. During their Extra-Vehicular Activity (lunar surface exploration) each of the two wore a bulky inflated spacesuit with clumsy gloves, greatly limiting mobility. On their backs they wore a huge and heavy Life Support System (PLSS) backpack containing an oxygen tank and circulating water air conditioning system which pumped refrigerated water throughout the suit to counteract the 200+/- degree heat (and cold) of lunar conditions. Pumps circulated both refrigerated air and water to the liquid cooling undergarment, as well as dehumidifying, removing carbon dioxide, and providing all other functions needed to survive harsh conditions in the confining suits.

5. The principal objective of all six missions was SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH projects to be carried out by the two astronauts. Most of the projects, which numbered about a half dozen each mission, were remarkably similar on all six missions. All of these science experiments involved unpacking equipment from stowage bays, assembling it, transporting it to its location, setting it up, and then doing the experiments. As you might imagine, each of these research projects would require a major portion of the TIME of the two men for each experiment.

Report Spam   Logged
caskur™
Swing Voter
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 10990


Tortured Artist


« Reply #3 on: September 17, 2010, 06:56:34 am »
Reply with quoteQuote

6. Another major project besides operation of the packaged experiments was the Geological Study, which involved searching for different specimens of rocks and soils in various locations, documenting and collecting samples to return to earth. This obviously occupied much of their TIME.

7. Considerable TIME was needed for "housekeeping chores". After landing, the LEM had to be inspected to make sure it had not been damaged. Communications equipment to put them in contact with Earth had to be set up and operated, including radio and television antennas and TV cameras. The US flag was planted in the moondust on each mission. All of this was done before any experiments were initiated. Oh, and don't forget the "ceremonial" chat with President Nixon during Apollo 11.

8. The first three missions required the astronauts to walk to each experiment location. The last three missions were supplied with a Lunar Roving Vehicle (LRV) to travel to distant locations miles away from the LEM. The partially pre-assembled LRV was attached to the outside of the LEM. The rover floor served as a pallet which was hinged to the outside of the LRV. The wheels were folded under. The "pallet" was lowered by hand to the lunar surface, and the wheels rotated into position. After the wheels were down, the vehicle had to be outfitted with all of its considerable equipment from various storage bins of the LEM. Oddly, not a single photo exists in the public domain (at least that I could find to date) of the astronauts assembling and equipping the LRVs. The battery-powered rovers had a top speed of about 8 mph, only slightly faster than walking...much like a golf cart. During the LRV travels ("traverses"), both men rode, and when moving, had no opportunity for photography. Also, the time taken in assembling the rover was not used for any photography. Though I could find no time given by NASA, surely it is reasonable to guess that it took at least an hour to unload, assemble and equip and test a rover?

9. Almost incidental to the main astronaut tasks was PHOTOGRAPHY. Each astronaut had his own camera. (Apart from the Apollo 11 EVA.) It was a square-format specially-built Hasselblad. It was mounted on a chest-plate for the astronaut to operate. The astronaut had to manually set the shutter speed and apertures while wearing bulky, pressurized gloves and without being able to see the controls. The cameras had NO VIEWFINDER, so the astronaut could only guess at what was being photographed. Each camera had a bulk film magazine holding more than a hundred exposures. The film (mainly Ektachrome color film) had a very narrow exposure range, which required PERFECT aperture and shutter settings, because according to NASA, the cameras did not have automatic exposure capability.

10. It is important to know that although each man had his own camera, they ALMOST NEVER USED THEM AT THE SAME TIME. Usually one of them was photographing the other doing some task. Therefore having two cameras DID NOT TRANSLATE TO TWICE AS MUCH TIME FOR PHOTOGRAPHY, as one might surmise. Now that you understand the missions, here is my discovery of NASA overzealousness, which has been successfully hidden till now.

A TIME AND MOTION STUDY

For more than three years I have been collecting and analyzing nearly all the significant photos from the Apollo missions. These official photos are readily available on multiple NASA websites for downloading. Recently I noticed they were taking up many gigabytes of memory on my computer's external hard drive, so I began organizing them and deleting duplications. I did a rough estimate of the number of Apollo photos, and was amazed that I had thousands!

I visited several official NASA websites to find HOW MANY PHOTOS WERE TAKEN on the surface of the Moon. Amazingly, NASA AVOIDS THIS SUBJECT almost entirely. Two days of searching documents and text were fruitless. But Lunar Surface Journal, one of the sites, lists every photo with its file number. So I undertook to make an actual count of every photo taken by astronauts DURING EXTRA-VEHICULAR ACTIVITY (EVA), the time spent on the surface out of the LEM.

Here is my actual count of EVA photos of the six missions:

Apollo 11........... 121
Apollo 12........... 504
Apollo 14........... 374
Apollo 15..........1021
Apollo 16..........1765
Apollo 17..........1986

Report Spam   Logged
caskur™
Swing Voter
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 10990


Tortured Artist


« Reply #4 on: September 17, 2010, 06:57:58 am »
Reply with quoteQuote

So 12 astronauts while on the Moon's surface took a TOTAL of 5771 exposures.

That seemed excessively large to me, considering that their TIME on the lunar surface was limited, and the astronauts had MANY OTHER TASKS OTHER THAN PHOTOGRAPHY. So I returned to the Lunar Surface Journal to find how much TIME was available to do all the scientific tasks AS WELL AS PHOTOGRAPHY. Unlike the number of photos, this information is readily available:

Apollo 11........1 EVA .....2 hours, 31 minutes......(151 minutes)
Apollo 12........2 EVAs.....7 hours, 50 minutes......(470 minutes)
Apollo 14........2 EVAs.....9 hours, 25 minutes......(565 minutes)
Apollo 15........3 EVAs...18 hours, 30 minutes....(1110 minutes)
Apollo 16........3 EVAs...20 hours, 14 minutes....(1214 minutes)
Apollo 17........3 EVAs...22 hours, 04 minutes....(1324 minutes)

Total minutes on the Moon amounted to 4834 minutes.
Total number of photographs taken was 5771 photos.

Hmmmmm. That amounts to 1.19 photos taken EVERY MINUTE of time on the Moon, REGARDLESS OF OTHER ACTIVITIES. (That requires the taking of ONE PHOTO EVERY 50 SECONDS!) Let's look at those other activities to see how much time should be deducted from available photo time:

Apollo 11..........Inspect LEM for damage, deploy flag, unpack and deploy radio and television equipment, operate the TV camera (360 degree pan), establish contact with Earth (including ceremonial talk with President Nixon), unpack and deploy numerous experiment packages, find/document/collect 47.7 pounds of lunar rock samples, walk to various locations, conclude experiments, return to LEM.

Apollo 12..........Inspect LEM for damage, deploy flag, unpack and deploy radio and television equipment (spend time trying to fix faulty TV camera), establish contact with Earth, unpack and deploy numerous experiment packages, walk to various locations, inspect the unmanned Surveyor 3 which had landed on the Moon in April 1967 and retrieve Surveyor parts. Deploy ALSEP package. Find/document/collect 75.7 pounds of rocks, conclude experiments, return to LEM.

Apollo 14..........Inspect LEM for damage, deploy flag, unpack and deploy radio and television equipment and establish contact with Earth, unpack and assemble hand cart to transport rocks, unpack and deploy numerous experiment packages, walk to various locations. Find/document/collect 94.4 pounds of rocks, conclude experiments, return to LEM.

Apollo 15..........Inspect LEM for damage, deploy flag, unpack and deploy radio and television equipment and establish contact with Earth, unpack/assemble/equip and test the LRV electric-powered 4-wheel drive car and drive it 17 miles, unpack and deploy numerous experiment packages (double the scientific payload of first three missions). Find/document/collect 169 pounds of rocks, conclude experiments, return to LEM. (The LRV travels only 8 mph*.)

Apollo 16..........Inspect LEM for damage, deploy flag, unpack and deploy radio and television equipment and establish contact with Earth, unpack/assemble/equip and test the LRV electric-powered 4-wheel drive car and drive it 16 miles, unpack and deploy numerous experiment packages (double the scientific payload of first three missions, including new ultraviolet camera, operate the UV camera). Find/document/collect 208.3 pounds of rocks, conclude experiments, return to LEM. (The LRV travels only 8 mph*.)

Apollo 17..........Inspect LEM for damage, deploy flag, unpack and deploy radio and television equipment and establish contact with Earth, unpack/assemble/equip and test the LRV electric-powered 4-wheel drive car and drive it 30.5 miles, unpack and deploy numerous experiment packages. Find/document/collect 243.1 pounds of rocks, conclude experiments, return to LEM. (The LRV travels only 8 mph*.)

Let's arbitrarily calculate a MINIMUM time for these tasks and subtract from available photo time:

Apollo 11....subtract 2 hours (120 minutes), leaving 031 minutes for taking photos
Apollo 12....subtract 4 hours (240 minutes), leaving 230 minutes for taking photos
Apollo 14....subtract 3 hours (180 minutes), leaving 385 minutes for taking photos
Apollo 15....subtract 6 hours (360 minutes), leaving 750 minutes for taking photos
Apollo 16....subtract 6 hours (360 minutes), leaving 854 minutes for taking photos
Apollo 17....subtract 8 hours (480 minutes), leaving 844 minutes for taking photos

So do the math:

Apollo 11.......121 photos in 031 minutes............3.90 photos per minute
Apollo 12.......504 photos in 230 minutes............2.19 photos per minute
Apollo 14.......374 photos in 385 minutes............0.97 photos per minute
Apollo 15.....1021 photos in 750 minutes............1.36 photos per minute
Apollo 16.....1765 photos in 854 minutes ...........2.06 photos per minute
Apollo 17.....1986 photos in 844 minutes ...........2.35 photos per minute

Or, to put it more simply:

Apollo 11........one photo every 15 seconds
Apollo 12........one photo every 27 seconds
Apollo 14........one photo every 62 seconds
Apollo 15........one photo every 44 seconds
Apollo 16........one photo every 29 seconds
Apollo 17........one photo every 26 seconds

So you decide. Given all the facts, was it possible to take that many photos in so short a time?

Any professional photographer will tell you it cannot be done. Virtually every photo was a different scene or in a different place, requiring travel. As much as 30 miles travel was required to reach some of the photo sites. Extra care had to be taken shooting some stereo pairs and panoramas. Each picture was taken without a viewfinder, using manual camera settings, with no automatic metering, while wearing a bulky spacesuit and stiff clumsy gloves.

The agency wants the world to believe that 5771 photographs were taken in 4834 minutes! IF NOTHING BUT PHOTOGRAPHY HAD BEEN DONE, such a feat is clearly impossible...made even more so by all the documented activities of the astronauts. Imagine...1.19 photos every minute that men were on the Moon –- that's one picture every 50 SECONDS!

The secret NASA tried to hide has been discovered: The quantity of photos purporting to record the Apollo lunar EVAs could not have been taken on the Moon in such an impossible time frame. So why do these photos exist? How did these photos get made? Did ANY men go to the Moon? Or was it truly the greatest hoax ever?

© 2005 Jack White

Report Spam   Logged
caskur™
Swing Voter
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 10990


Tortured Artist


« Reply #5 on: September 17, 2010, 07:00:01 am »
Reply with quoteQuote

Editor's Notes: *According to Andrew Chaikin, author of A Man on the Moon the LRV averaged only 5 to 7 miles per hour, which would reduce even further the time available for photography.

Timing Out
Taking the Apollo 11 mission as his example, and the Apollo 11 Lunar Surface Journal (1) consulted by Jack White in this Skeleton article, an 'apollogist' or critic, has posted a long refutation of the above time and motion study. This critic asserts that a shot rate per mission calculated on time available over number of photos taken is inappropriate, since some pictures took longer than others, and that the pictures were taken during the tasks over the whole EVA period.
This is not a point that Jack White is disputing.

Taking the Apollo 11 EVA of 151 minutes, the critic would prefer that the photos are evaluated according to his own calculations which split the EVA into 9 segments of 'about 15 minutes each' (2). Working from the Apollo 11 Lunar Surface Journal, this critic has estimated the number of photos taken for each segment.

According to these criteria there are variable averages of 7.5 minutes (segment two) to 2.5 minutes (segment six) or 31 seconds (segment seven). However, when studying the actual mission elapsed time line we can see that this is not a reflection of the time allowed for photography at all. Nor is the approximate 15 minute segment a true reflection of the time taken by each bundle of tasks that this critic has allocated per segment. Further, while taking Jack White to task for not listing the EVA tasks in the correct order, the critic splits single EVA tasks (such as the flag ceremony) across two separate 'segments' and also splits multiple panorama shots across 'segments'. As it turns out, this critic's method simply demonstrates that at some points in the mission fewer shots were taken than at others.
Not a point Jack White is disputing either.

Nor is the critic's argument the same. He proposes that there was plenty of time for photography since it was spread across the mission. Jack White proposes that given the workload, the number of photographs to be taken, and the conditions under which they were taken, there was not enough time to achieve the standard of photography revealed within the official Apollo record. Not to mention the anomalies!

Workload
Jack White's critic demonstrates that he is in a muddle about what he is trying to prove by recommending the ideal method for ascertaining accurately the time available for photography. While not doing it himself, due to the amount of time it would take, he thinks is necessary to note each shot relative to the mission elapsed timings. Taking this advice to heart and also checking the tasks of each astronaut against their individual EVA timings (3) does indeed take hours.
It also produces the following result:

The Apollo 11 EVA workload was ............2hrs 03 minutes
The time allocated to photography was........... 28 minutes
The average time to point-and-shoot .......121 photos was 13.88 seconds
The average time to point-and-shoot .......122 photos (2) 13.77 seconds

These figures demonstrate two things:

a) The role of astronaut photography in this mission was minimal, and most of it was of the point-and-shoot variety. Which begs the question regarding those carefully composed shots.

b) There is a difference between a time and motion study as per Jack White, demonstrating the time available for photography within a mission, and the dissenter's demonstration of the moment within that mission during which that photography took place.

Using the second demonstration as a response to the first is to merely demonstrate these differences, and saying that "White suggests in his study that the work load was such that there should have been two hours with no photography" is a false premise. Yet this statement turns out to be virtually correct when it comes to evaluating the amount of time required for the EVA workload. It would appear that this critic may have done all these calculations and then muddled his paperwork.

As a result of the foregoing, it is clear that Jack White's conclusion of a reserved time of 31 minutes for the Hasselblad still photography across the Apollo 11 EVA, was virtually spot on. We are down to 28 minutes.

In any event, the crux of the matter is that on average across all missions, one photograph had to have been taken every 50 seconds even if Apollo astronauts were doing nothing but photography while allegedly on the Moon.

NOTES:
(1) Lunar Surface Journal reference: http://history.nasa.gov/alsj/frame.html used by White, critic and Aulis editor in this matter of the Apollo 11 EVA.
(2) Critic's posting: 'Bad Apprentice': Wed Apr 20, 2005 10:28 pm on badastronomy.com. His segments are 'approx. 15 mins', his total photos is 122:
1. 0 photos; 2. 20 photos; 3. 2 photos; 4. 4 photos; 5. 17 photos; 6. 25 photos; 7. 29 photos; 8. 19 photos, 9. 6 photos.
(3) The Apollo 11, NASA Mission Report volume 3 (complied from the NASA archives, Edited by Robert Godwin) pp 145/174.

"Apollo debates are usually dominated by physics arguments which can be confusing for most people. Jack White's new analysis is breath-taking in its simplicity: now anyone can understand the evidence and come to their own conclusion."

John P. Costella PhD
Dr. Costella is a physicist living in Australia

Report Spam   Logged
caskur™
Swing Voter
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 10990


Tortured Artist


« Reply #6 on: September 17, 2010, 07:02:30 am »
Reply with quoteQuote


Quote from: IDOLGIRL on 14 September 2010, 22:48:49
See, I was thinking you could actually state what, precisely, convinced YOU they were faked photos. If I wanted to know why Joe-Schmoe thought such a thing, I would be glad to click the link. I (foolishly) was curious as to what YOU thought.

I actually expected more/better from you than "Cause he said so!!!" as your reasoning.
My bad 




reading every single link offered to all the points raised, thoroughly..... A Braedenton - Florida man brought the subject up in a Philosophy group of mine, initially.... I decided to investigate all the points raised one by one, ..but at my group, I had a poster who was also a pro-moon landing expert.... so he claimed. He was also a real life friend of ours and so while I was reading the issues raised with the photos one at a time, he was trying to divert me with “the moon rocks“. It was annoying at the time because he was hell bent on convincing me man walked on the moon…. Offering nothing but NASA cut and pastes…. I read his cut and pastes better than he did and then proceeded to unspin them…. I like using people’s own articles the best…He was shoving things in my face from scientists, that were actually supporting what I was already coming to realize.. When msn closed that group down, I made another and brought up the subject again…. Each group closing, saw me investigating more…. What amazed me though was, due to losing groups, I also lost valuable media releases. The moon hoax was gaining momentum around the world. Over 50% of people looking into it and actually using their scones (heads) were starting to put two and two together…

Also, a dear friend Brent  (who still is a dear friend) invented NASA’s computer programs and worked at NASA for 23 years…. He was mortified that I was questioning it at all. He was 16 when Neil Armstrong supposedly wallked on the moon…it was Brent’s birthday, 20 th July and that event cause him to want to become an aerospace engineer, and he became one… yes, there really are rocket scientists on the net…lol  He concedes though, he wasn’t old enough to work at NASA when man allegedly walked the moon…so what he witnessed was what the rest of the world witness and that was the filming of the landing…..meanwhile, NASA’s film mysteriously was lost…. Our state in Western Australia in Carnarvon, 7-8 hrs  north of me was a relay station …(OTC)  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OTC_Satellite_Earth_Station_Carnarvon

The moon landing is a big deal in my country as it assisted NASA back then and we have our fair share of dreamers….lol

At the same time, my sister groups were also doing the conspiracy on the 9/11... There was a poster called “Horse” there and he had the Aussies and some Americans dealing with his conspiracy theory debunking… his opposition won their debates in my view and that is why I dropped interest that subject. …but he raise the issue at every group he went to.

I remember technology back in 1969.… I know what telephones looked like and were made of and how cumbersome cameras and anything technical looked like… and on a side note, when my husband was in Russia in 1975 he visited their museum on their space program and they had the dog who was launched into space, taxidermied…..lol… that dog never made it back to earth….it exploded in a million bits… so some other poor mutt was killed and stuffed and put on for display… my husband  only realized it must have been a fake dog, he saw stuffed after reading the net and the story behind her.

The photos were fake, and most people know that now…and the technical stuff I just reposted puts it in simple logical terms….especially in the 10 point paragraphs…. If you don’t believe me, next time you have a pair of boxing gloves, try taking your camera around and take pictures with them on… also, change the film in the camera…. Let me know how you get on.

Report Spam   Logged
caskur™
Swing Voter
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 10990


Tortured Artist


« Reply #7 on: September 17, 2010, 07:03:27 am »
Reply with quoteQuote


Let me ax you a question, cakur. First of all, you know why we went to the Moon, right? It was to beat the USSR there. They beat us, no, embarrassed us by sending the first human into space as well as the first satellite into orbit and Kennedy responded by raising the stakes to the Moon. The Soviets didn't just roll over, they spent billions in the space race themselves to get to the Moon FIRST. That is a historical fact.

After the USA landed on the Moon, the Soviets abandoned the idea because they really didn't give a **** about collecting moon rocks and bringing them back to Earth; they just wanted to beat the USA there as much as the USA wanted to beat them in an international juvenile pissing contest about who has the better society between two super powers.

Now, with this in mind, with the Soviets having the KGB all over this, communication tracking stations across all of the USSR and their allies monotoring every radio transmission from the source and probably every telescope available aimed at the Moon, do you honestly think for one second that if there were even a HINT of a hoax that the USSR would not have been all over it like you on cheesecake?

Or do you think that the USA hoodwinked every country in the world with an elaborate Hollywood stunt including the USSR, 17 times because once was not enough?

Child pleeze..

Report Spam   Logged
caskur™
Swing Voter
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 10990


Tortured Artist


« Reply #8 on: September 17, 2010, 07:04:37 am »
Reply with quoteQuote

The Russians beat America to space.... The Russians went broke…but give the Russians credit… they already saw what happened to an animal in space after shooting the poor thing there…..and she was only in space for 2 hours before she melted and died.

Your post is asking me to answer every single space travel event.... I am dealing with the Apollo 11. I like to start at the beginning. Note the question of my thread title…. 1969 should be a big clue for you.

I watched NASA's rebuttal to all that conspiracy theory doing the rounds a few years back  and they didn't answer all the questions that were raised... they answered the easiest ones about flag wavings in low to none atmospheres  and playing golf which even I thought wasn't relevant when the conspirists raised it... anyway... I have to re-read everything, drag it from the recesses of my mind...so you're just going to have to wait... I once had everything at my finger tips and that is no longer the case. And sites have been censored...SURPRISE!!!

They don’t even have the technology today to go 3 miles down to see what is at the bottom of our oceans… and yes, I absolutely DO believe they hoodwinked not only American people, but the whole planet.  Before the expedition, they came to my state and went to Antarctica…. The rocks probably came from my state and filming probably happened in Antarctic.a..but that is just from my own calculations. And another SURPRISE, the Japanese went down to Antarctic on secret missions on Australian Antarctic territory and they’re the next ones to go for a trip to the moon…Why are they down there? Hmmm? Maybe they’ve already filmed their trip too…lol

Did you read the Physicists writings about the Time and Motion and how it was impossible to take all those photos in the time they claimed to have taken them… Hmmm?

Report Spam   Logged
caskur™
Swing Voter
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 10990


Tortured Artist


« Reply #9 on: September 17, 2010, 07:06:28 am »
Reply with quoteQuote

Absolute garbage of a response and factually incorrect. The Soviets went broke in the late 1980s and early 90's, not the 50's 60's and early 70's when they had the top space program in the world for most of that time period. Stop sidestepping my points with musings and tangents about space monkeys and stick to the topic when dealing with me.

WTF, you dopey twat! Are you suggesting that every other Apollo mission was real except for 11? Or are you conveniently wanting to ignore the other 16 Apollo missions and pretending they never happened?

Even if you want to take your stupidity to that height, that would not change a thing about my premise or question which is - dont you think the Soviets would have pounced on it if there were the slightest hint of a hoax? Whether it is one mission or 17, the same thing with the Soviets and other countries hostile to the USA back then applies.

Are you too ignorant to realize that they can track radio communications from space and pinpoint them as coming from the Moon or from Earth? And if it was all staged why the **** would they continue to have more missions when all they needed was once to win the space race? Why risk everything 6 more times after Apollo 11?

Dont you know that it would be exponentially more difficult to perpetuate such a hoax on the Soviets and the rest of the world's scientific community and keep it a secret for 40 years than actually going to the Moon? ANSWER THE QUESTIONS DIRECTLY (without any dopey tangents about poor space monkeys)!

^^ Load of filler crap detailing your mental deficiencies more than anything and adding nothing to the discussion.

Oh really? Well I guess it will be news to you that right now there is an expedition mapping the Titanic nearly 3 miles under the sea..

[twitacc]@RMS_Titanic_Inc[/twitacc]

Regardless of that, your assertion is as asinine and irrelevant as your beliefs. If the US Government spent 10 years, 100's of billions of dollars and employed the brightest minds to work on the exploring the oceans, they would be explored. It's too bad the pea-brained simpletons like you forget to consider that bit of detail.

 
I'm already getting bored with your nonsense so let me cut to my finisher. If we didnt walk on the Moon then how do you explain and account for several reflectors left exactly at the Apollo landing sites which various independent observatories around the world use to measure the distance of the Moon to the Earth via lasers?

How do you account for Moon rocks which are confirmed by scientist to be 100's of MILLIONS of years older than any rocks found on Earth?

And how do you account for the images from 2009 taken by current missions to the Moon which detail the Apollo landing sites exactly in the place on the Moon where they are suppose to be?



Some day soon, either the Americans or Chinese or Japanese will be back to Moon and provide everyone with more compelling evidence of the Apollo missions. The sad part is that without doubt, there will probably still be dumbshits like caskur who say that is faked too.

The Chinese and Japanese will then be acting in concert with the USA governments from the 60's and 70's spanning 3 Presidents, two political parties and 10's of 1000's of NASA workers, to perpetuate a hoax which was exposed, not by a former NASA exec or some former Astronaut who wants to clear his conscious on his death bed, but by conspiracy theorists and crackpots like caskur on the internet!


lol, dipshit.... flag? half of half a dozen pixel changes... do not proof make...

and you're discussing Apollo 17  :lol:

off topic...

I said its a lot easier to send something to the moon....it probably crash landed and those 3 pixel changes are a bit of debris....if they're real.

if this is how you're going to be, your big physics assignment argument.... looks like I have my work cut out for me... when the aunty leaves.... I'll be on to your post..


Well there goes one of Bra1n’s claims…. I have only just started

The stagnation which would consume the last years of the Soviet Union was caused by poor governance under Leonid Brezhnev and inefficiencies within the planned economy. When the stagnation began is a matter of debate, but is normally placed either in the 1960s or early 1970s.

^^^^^^^^

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

And supports my claim…. :lol:

I should know, Australia has been feeding the Russians forever.... America too...


Lambchop, I haven’t suggested anything. So I will now. I suggest that all the so called MAN MOON LANDINGS are indeed crap… However I do not claim expertise on them. My NASA friend Brent though was in Germany and translates Russian and that was one of his jobs for NASA. Even if they did object how are we to know with a language barrier?…like how many journalists back in the 1960’s and 70’s could translate Russian? THEN make that public knowledge? What a dumb question you ask of me…


I am not too ignorant to know that anything returning to our atmosphere is burned up including tool bags flying out of astronauts hands while repairing their bits and pieces on satellites and other space junk out there coming down. And you want people to believe men lifted off the moon and sailed safely back through space, the Van Allens radiation belt, enter back in our atmosphere (when everything else is fried to a crisp when doing so) and do so safely in 1969 and the early 70’s…? Even a moron can understand what I am saying here.

So you base your WHOLE reasoning on what the Russians would and wouldn’t say and leave it there?… where is the science in that? That is smoke screen propaganda designed to make a lesser person run for the hills… not me though. :tongue:


China is in Antarctica. I charge they’re down there not to explore for minerals, but to film their next moon mission….lol

I charge they’re down there in Antarctica to film the next moon landing propaganda movie to drug the masses…and NOT drill for minerals… they’re in Australian territory too..


http://www.smh.com.au/world/science/china-has-antarctica-in-its-sights-20100903-14uc1.html



^^^ that was reported on the 4th September 2010

VVV ealier in 2009 VVVV

http://www.abc.net.au/foreign/content/2009/s2506516.htm


http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2005-11/04/content_491424.htm


China plans moon landing around 2017
(Reuters)
Updated: 2005-11-04 22:00

China, which launched its first manned space mission just two years ago, plans to put a man on the moon around 2017 and investigate what may be the perfect source of fuel, a newspaper reported on Friday.





Quote from: The Scoundrel on 15 September 2010, 16:53:35
Your "friend" Brent must have lived a very disappointing life thinking that his employers have been lying to him throughout his career as a "rocket scientist" don't you think?





He is a staunch insister that men went to the moon...


I'm not fooled.

 And I to, can take more then 5,000 photos of my moon landing in less than a 1 minute per image without a view finder and get an exact image EVERY time...collect rocks, play golf and  move around in my moon buggy, return to earth through 250,000 miles of space and 6,250 miles of radiation without burning to a cinder and vaporizing...








Supports your claim? You said that the "Russians (sic) WENT BROKE" immediately before going off on a tangent about a poor space monkey. When in fact they did not go broke and the article does not state they went broke.

It talks about STAGNATION which is not going broke. Do you understand what STAGNATION is? Obviously not. It is what the USA has been going through for most of the past 3 years and means little to no economic growth as Cookie can also tell you. It is not going "broke".

It goes on to mention that when STAGNATION started in the USSR is a matter of debate but that it is generally regarded in the early 70's and late 60s (by that time the space race was over). Perhaps spending money on military and their space program was a major reason for the STAGNATION.

Can we agree then that STAGNATION is not "going broke"? Can we also agree then that (1) they did not go broke and that (2) the article does NOT in fact support what you stated and (3) even if it did, it does not change a single thing about them having the top space program in the world throughout most of the 50's and 60s and them having a vested interest throughout that decade to beat the USA to the Moon?  

:hammer:


That is right… caskur speaks plain friggen English and doesn’t beat around the bush….they went broke….B. R. O. K. E…., broke… If you chose to use words like “stagnate” as Wikipedia does, that is just splitting hairs or diplomatic language. I shoot from the hip.

2.… the animal that the Russians sent up was a dog, lamb chop…not a primate like you, Tarzan.


I’m not switching to your economy which some of your bleaters who come on our ABC news say is indeed flat busted broke…obviously you missed the memos getting out there telling you that plain fact.


Yes, their space programs indeed contributed to going broke and I vividly recall ALL the documentaries and news shows spelling it out EXACTLY as it was. I use to talk to the US visiting military guys in the early 80’s and was totally, totally SHOCKED that they still thought the USSR was a threat…..lol… In Russia at the time there were lines MILES long at Supermarkets and supermarkets would only carry 2 or 3 types of veggies the woman had to stand in line for, for hours and hours…. And NO, I do not agree that stagnation replaces broke.

I NEVER denied the Russians had a top notch space program…never, not once…. They beat the Americans to space and they beat the Americans in putting a man in space. Australia has NEVER felt anti Russian like the USA has, NEVER.. Australia always had much empathy for Russians starving…. Before their coup d'état and the slaughter of their Royal family….. Russia has always needed food imported from Australia and we have been a trading partner with them forever…. In fact Gough Whitlam a former PM and his relations with Russia was made into a movie in the USA,…..He wanted to throw the Americans out of Pine Gap.  The movie was, "The Falcon and the Snowman"….  Two American men saw their USA government plot to overthrow our Whitlam government….

Whitlam was responsible for free Medibank, later renamed Medicare and also free tertiary education,…..


They did not go broke, you torpid tard. No matter what kind of learning disability you suffer from or what husky hip you shoot from, it does change the fact that the USSR was nowhere near broke in that time period.

The simple facts that they continued to build up the world second largest military and nuclear arsenal for another 20 years after that and invaded Afghanistan a decade later should clue in even a recalcitrant dolt like you. Broke counties aren't able to do that.

By insisting that article states something which it clearly does not, and maintaining that they went broke when clearly they did not for another 20 years, it shows how pigheaded and incapable of reasoning you truly are.

Regardless of your going broke red herring, it does not change anything dealing with my point and premise which is about the considerable amount of money, effort and resources that the USSR devoted to their space program before 1970.

I have conclusively shattered your "going broke" and "this Wiki article supports me" assertions to the point of leaving you babbling about shooting from your flabby hips and long lines at the supermarket so I am not going to belabor that point. That was another collateral issue to hit you with a cluebat over as any reasonably intelligent person can see I did.

For the sake of argument, let's say that the USSR (not just Russia, you idiot) indeed went broke. How does that change anything about my premise in bold above? Can you explain to everyone how "going broke" makes my premise about the Soviets wanting to reach the Moon before the Americans and that they had every reason to pounce on and expose anything irregular about the US mission, invalid and a nullity?


Here we go again, Australia, The Falcon and the Snowman and Medicare.... try harder to stick to the points we are discussing, butterball.


Without question they were out in front in the 50's and early 60's and were at least neck and neck with the USA after that until the USA kicked it in gear with the Apollo missions in the late 60's.

Here is a list of accomplishments from Wiki. The rest of their accomplishment since 1970 to the disintegration of the USSR barely evens amounts to half of what is on this list supporting my statement that they were all in to beat the USA to the Moon. That was the primary objective of their space program as it tacitly was for the USA to beat them.

Now who wants to make the case that with all their intelligence, space tracking stations, satellites, space listening devices and 10+ year national goal of beating the US to the Moon that they had their head in the sand and were oblivious to the USA moon landing being a hoax until some clod from the internet raised it?

..........................

Notable firsts
Two days after the United States announced its intention to launch an artificial satellite, on July 31, 1956, the Soviet Union announced its intention to do the same. Sputnik 1 was launched on October 4, 1957, beating the United States and stunning people all over the world.

The Soviet space program pioneered many aspects of space exploration:

    * 1957: First intercontinental ballistic missile, the R-7 Semyorka
    * 1957: First satellite, Sputnik 1
    * 1957: First animal to enter Earth orbit, the dog Laika on Sputnik 2
    * 1959: First firing of a rocket in Earth orbit, first man-made object to escape Earth's orbit, Luna 1
    * 1959: First data communications, or telemetry, to and from outer space, Luna 1.
    * 1959: First man-made object to pass near the Moon, first man-made object in Solar orbit, Luna 1
    * 1959: First probe to impact the Moon, Luna 2
    * 1959: First images of the moon's far side, Luna 3
    * 1960: First animals to safely return from Earth orbit, the dogs Belka and Strelka on Sputnik 5.
    * 1960: First probe launched to Mars, Marsnik 1
    * 1961: First probe launched to Venus, Venera 1
    * 1961: First person in space (International definition) and in Earth orbit, Yuri Gagarin on Vostok 1, Vostok programme
    * 1961: First person to spend over 24 hours in space Gherman Titov, Vostok 2 (also first person to sleep in space).
    * 1962: First dual manned spaceflight, Vostok 3 and Vostok 4
    * 1963: First woman in space, Valentina Tereshkova, Vostok 6
    * 1964: First multi-person crew (3), Voskhod 1
    * 1965: First extra-vehicular activity EVA, by Aleksei Leonov, Voskhod 2
    * 1965: First probe to hit another planet (Venus), Venera 3
    * 1966: First probe to make a soft landing on and transmit from the surface of the moon, Luna 9
    * 1966: First probe in lunar orbit, Luna 10
    * 1967: First unmanned rendezvous and docking, Cosmos 186/Cosmos 188. (Until 2006, this had remained the only major space achievement that the US had not duplicated.)
    * 1969: First docking between two manned craft in Earth orbit and exchange of crews, Soyuz 4 and Soyuz 5





Report Spam   Logged
caskur™
Swing Voter
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 10990


Tortured Artist


« Reply #10 on: September 17, 2010, 07:11:07 am »
Reply with quoteQuote

DUNK!

Caskur, if you want to continue to have a discussion about this then put on those cheap faux spectacles of yours, go back and read post #73 and see if somehow you can manage to formulate some kind of lucid response to it and the questions I asked you in the previous posts.

Otherwise, I'll be coming back for you with the tard restraints and throwing you into your gimp box until someone else finds you and lets you loose to listen to every random thought which crosses your mind. I sure don't.


I should imagine that it was everyone’s dream back then to go to the moon and that the Russian did beat the yanks to space… However… I don’t know if the Russians wanted to go to the moon…. Did they? How the **** would I know if they wanted to go to the moon or not?…. I wasn’t born in the 1950s and most of the people posting on the groups were either infants or young children at best in the 1950s.  You’re asking hypothetical’s and I want to deal with the science behind what I have come to reason is that the manned moon landing was a hoax. And you’re the one who wanted to divert things that I write on about your political agendas. In case you’ve forgotten, I posted 10 points that were raised by an Australian Physicist. You know, one of your peers and not some dumb Christian fundy that you love to disparage at regular intervals because they‘re flat earth and flat headed contenders.

Since Oz was highly involved with the USA space program which is basically a war program headed by a war criminal from Nazi Germany.. Its NOT nullity at all. Americans couldn’t communicate unless they had Australia’s support at that time.

Look up wiki and see The Falcon and the Snowman, and scroll down to where it says, the CIA wanted Gough Whitlam gone….Pine Gap is where the Americans carried out their secret war business on Australian soil…its not side tracking at all. Gough Whitlam wanted a socialist world and of course the stop to the Viet Nam war…. Btw, Socialism and Communism are two different things and I don’t think Americans really know the difference.

If you decide to bin this thread, I will still write in it..in the pen, or in the bin, by myself… either way, I won’t let this subject drop. I found NASA’s rebuttal to the moon landing, wanting…. I now have the time to explore the subject again. On doing so, I have encountered problems as sites have shifted since I last broached this subject. The fact that I am doing so, shouldn’t scare you and it shouldn’t cause you to mock people who do want to challenge it…. There is fraud in science like ALL the other branches of mankind’s interests. You should be bloody happy I am taking time to write anything at all.

If the Russians had/have knowledge of exposing a fraud, then I am sure they would say something. You and I have NO factual knowledge of them either 1. Actually knowing a fraud happened or 2. What would be a reason they would keep it to themselves assuming they actually have knowledge?  Didn’t the supposed relays from the moon go to Australia first then to the USA? And not directly to the USA

from the moon? Do you know for sure?  That is why Australia was able to supply Americans with an original version of the moon landing that Americans had allegedly lost..


come on Bra1n.... get your sexy self in here and start writing...

Pine Gap...

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

Australia had a huge interest and part to play in the space program..



No English speakng astronaut is going to attempt another moon trip. They're going to film archives trying to work out how they did it the first time and are now realizing it was probably a hoax.....

All other missions are just plans now....lol.... and people are made to think its possible by various means... science fiction movies contribute to lot of it. The Chinese astronauts better learn English real quick like and get themselves a PC so they can investigate.... they're the next poor bastards to be sacrificed in space to show the world who has the more advance technologies....the Easterners or the Westerners.


And now NASA is planning another giant step - Project Outreach, a 1 trillion dollar manned mission to Mars. "Think what they'll be able to mock up with today's computer graphics," says Rene Chillingly. "Special effects was in its infancy in the 60s. This time round will have no way of determining the truth."



Report Spam   Logged
caskur™
Swing Voter
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 10990


Tortured Artist


« Reply #11 on: September 17, 2010, 07:53:52 am »
Reply with quoteQuote

Seems the Dutch are a little perturbed by their piece of Moon rock sent to them by Richard Nixon…

Lol


[blink]Fake Dutch 'moon rock' revealed [/blink]

Read more
VVVVV
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8226075.stm


A treasured piece at the Dutch national museum - a supposed moon rock from the first manned lunar landing - is nothing more than petrified wood, curators say.
It was given to former Prime Minister Willem Drees during a goodwill tour by the three Apollo-11 astronauts shortly after their moon mission in 1969.
When Mr Drees died, the rock went on display at the Amsterdam museum.


Take note of the picture…. I’ll be showing my moon rock soon enough.



* _46281213_007855037-1.jpg (15.63 KB, 226x282 - viewed 40 times.)

* DSCF0032.JPG (319.27 KB, 1280x960 - viewed 2 times.)
Report Spam   Logged
caskur™
Swing Voter
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 10990


Tortured Artist


« Reply #12 on: September 17, 2010, 08:12:24 am »
Reply with quoteQuote

I've been to the moon, damnit...

I have photos and rocks to prove it...



* DSCF0033.JPG (318.51 KB, 1280x960 - viewed 2 times.)
Report Spam   Logged
caskur™
Swing Voter
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 10990


Tortured Artist


« Reply #13 on: September 17, 2010, 01:41:13 pm »
Reply with quoteQuote

Starting from around 1,000 miles above earth, and 500 miles above our satellites are Van Allen’s radiation belts and these deadly belts go on for 25,000 miles… yes folks, there are two… an inner one and a less lethal, but still lethal outer one… Every space mission before and after Apollo 11 were carried out below these lethal belts… space mission Mercury, Gemini, Soyuz, Skylab, and Space shuttle all missions carried out well below the  ascent of Van Allen’s radiation belts... all except Apollo 11 that is..

If anyone doubts how nasty these belts are, they should go outside and stand in our full sun all day and see what happens to them here on this very earth…. You don’t last very long..  in fact if you survive it, you later develop skin cancer that will kill you anyway. The belts of radiation called Van Allen’s Belts are much worse.

And they would have the masses believe that the astronauts on Apollo 11, lifted off our planet, sailed right on through them… travelled another 250,000 miles to the moon ( and not 500 miles to a space station, I want to emphasize that point ), dance around playing golf and goofing generally, collecting a tonne of rocks that are incidentally made of the very same stuff on our very own planet, taking endless movie quality snapshots  in cumbersome spacesuits on the dark side of the moon, in under a minute per shot, without a view finder….get back on board the craft, travel back through 250,000 miles of space, including the 25,000 miles of “2” deadly radiation belts, enter our atmosphere, without burning to a crisp and vaporizing and then land safely in the Pacific ocean, totally unharmed to live the rest of their lives in paid luxury? And all this took place in 1969 assuring that President Kennedy’s vow that the Americans would have a man on the moon before the decade was over, eventuated….lol

No folks, this isn’t a conspiracist’s rant…hardly…. A conspiracist believes that aliens are among us and the government keeps us ignorant of that fact, that is a lame brained conspiracy…. No, no, this is hard science.

How do you keep the astronauts quiet and not confessing to the fraud? It isn’t too hard to do, -  money bribes is an obvious one but it goes beyond money really. The astronaut’s government’s security depends on their secrecy as the Viet Nam war was in full swing back then. No military personal is going to spill any beans if their own families lives are in danger so they can take a moral high ground here.. Loose lips sink ships and all that.  People are waiting for someone to confess to the fraud. I don’t think they ever will… If I had a secret that powerful, I would take it to my grave and I believe they will too… so you must do your own investigating on the history while we still can debunk it. The further away history from the Apollo mission gets, the less likely of having real proof…. People die, technology changes and advances, so its easier for younger people who weren’t born in 1969 to accept what the NASA propaganda machine writes about 1969 and there is your main problem.

Does it really matter if it was a fraud or not? Not really to me personally but to people investing money in it, yes…future astronauts yes as they risk their lives going as human guineapigs. And risking your life for a hoax isn’t a good enough reason to die, I wouldn‘t think. How about you?










We did go to the moon you faithless fucks.... and we never faked any god damned photos... no way. Wink

Report Spam   Logged
caskur™
Swing Voter
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 10990


Tortured Artist


« Reply #14 on: September 20, 2010, 06:44:48 am »
Reply with quoteQuote

Exploring Mars: If we're going to go to all the effort and expense of sending people to Mars, why bring them straight back again?, says Buzz Aldrin.

Credit: NASA


^^^^


that is very funny stuff... I wonder how many idiots actually swallow it?



* 20081027_mars_astronaut.jpg (93.34 KB, 300x303 - viewed 28 times.)
Report Spam   Logged
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up
  Reply  |  New Topic  |  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by EzPortal
Bookmark this site!
Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines