Xtra Smileys
[Open]
Flame Damnation
December 02, 2021, 12:39:04 pm
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 359 times)
caskur™
Swing Voter
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 11002


Tortured Artist


« 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
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up
  Reply  |  New Topic  |  Print  
 
Jump to:  

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