Rector publishes book of comic verse (From Southend Standard)

Hasn't he got souls to save?

He deals in fantasies every day so he should be good at making up stories...

Souls?...yet another fantasy...

Truth Will Prevail wrote:
Souls?...yet another fantasy...

Some on here might have sold theirs to the devil!

The devil?! Who's he? Yet another fantasy. Do you have a single grain of evidence that your stupid gods and devils exist? Thought not.

Yes! The former will have me the latter you!

Wouldn't surprise me in the least if an old hypocrite like you believes in the fantasy fairy in the sky, bet you believe in the Loch Ness monster and UFOs too don;t you? Ha ha ha!

Truth Will Prevail wrote:
Wouldn't surprise me in the least if an old hypocrite like you believes in the fantasy fairy in the sky, bet you believe in the Loch Ness monster and UFOs too don;t you? Ha ha ha!

" fantasy fairy in the sky " not heard that one before unless you mean men pretending to walk on the moon.

Sure i believe UFOs exist...dont you?

Or are you saying everything thats been in the sky has always been identified?

I dont like to mention it, but would seem when you laugh you...erm...actually type yourself laughing...at yourself... typing questions!

Laughable! If you have lived round here for a while, as you claim, you'd know there were loads of UFO sightings reported in the Echo in the late eighties / early nineties. Every single one was a hot air balloon launched by me or my friends to wind the UFO crowd up, and oh boy did they work! One elderly couple even described one as 'huge with portholes all around', ho ho! Hot air balloons are classic UFO 'substitutes', they hang in the sky until the burner flame goes down and then they descend. This looks exactly the same as a n object of constant light output accelerating away towards the horizon, ha ha! I could write a book about this subject but suffice to say that no astronomer ever reported seening a 'UFO', that is until the mid nineties when a kid from Glastonbury got a 'scope and claimed he had seen a UFO, and if you fall for that you are even dafter than I thought. Astronomers see the same lights, if they are actually real, but they know what they are.
.
I could have guessed you'd be a lunar landing sceptic too (the only people I have ever met who didn't believe they landed on the moon were a dustman and a chap who was later admitted to Runwell, neither of course had a science degree). I actually watched Apollo 11 leave earths orbit through my first astro 'scope, the Russians monitored them all the way, and we even have pics of the landing site, complete with footprints etc, taken from a recent lunar flypast mission. If you don't believe all that you are crazy. Like those crazy gullible fools who believe the bible is true and there really is a god!

Laughable! If you have lived round here for a while, as you claim, you'd know there were loads of UFO sightings reported in the Echo in the late eighties / early nineties. Every single one was a hot air balloon launched by me or my friends to wind the UFO crowd up, and oh boy did they work! One elderly couple even described one as 'huge with portholes all around', ho ho! Hot air balloons are classic UFO 'substitutes', they hang in the sky until the burner flame goes down and then they descend. This looks exactly the same as a n object of constant light output accelerating away towards the horizon, ha ha! I could write a book about this subject but suffice to say that no astronomer ever reported seening a 'UFO', that is until the mid nineties when a kid from Glastonbury got a 'scope and claimed he had seen a UFO, and if you fall for that you are even dafter than I thought. Astronomers see the same lights, if they are actually real, but they know what they are.
.
I could have guessed you'd be a lunar landing sceptic too (the only people I have ever met who didn't believe they landed on the moon were a dustman and a chap who was later admitted to Runwell, neither of course had a science degree). I actually watched Apollo 11 leave earths orbit through my first astro 'scope, the Russians monitored them all the way, and we even have pics of the landing site, complete with footprints etc, taken from a recent lunar flypast mission. If you don't believe all that you are crazy. Like those crazy gullible fools who believe the bible is true and there really is a god!

Laughable? An Unidentifiable flying object is just that..unidentifiable
...after investigation had decreed it so.

There have been many all over the world...dont mix them up with 'Aliens' or humans in spaceships!

Sending up hot air balloons?..Oh you are a wag, the vicar would love you...

" ho ho"

You are typing your amusement again!


" but suffice to say that no astronomer ever reported seening a 'UFO' "

Thats not true is it? Many have stated they have.

So while you dont believe in UFOs you believe man, flying in a spaceship, landed on a satellite..

I wonder what Van Allen would say about that.

" a dustman and a chap who was later admitted to Runwell"

Strange company you keep, but i suppose you have to take friendship where you can find it...Btw which was your bestest friend out of those two?


Did the russians do anything like you say they did?

Its been stated that Russia couldn't even track their own Luna probes to the moon never mind the Americans!


As for the picture proof...now you are having a laugh, and just to get back onto the topic, perhaps the Vicar can write a comic book..."The moon landing for dummies"

Pathetic.

Truth Will Prevail wrote:
Pathetic.

Really Liked to expand on that?

I didnt think so...now go away and when you have a better argument to present come back and try again...till then...hahahahaahaha *deep breath* hohohohohoho *snort* hehehehehehe


Sometimes posting to you is like trying to get a sensible answer from an upturned watering can.

You really don't understand the first thing about assessing your sources do you? Next you'll be trying to tell me about the flag flapping (low gravity vacuum) and wrong angles on the photos (suit cameras). Laughable. Go take a physics degree then maybe we could have a meaningful conversation, until then you keep reading your loonie-tunes conspiracy theorist websites and swapping fantasy anecdotes with your low brow friends and I'll stick to more intelligent people. Sad.

" You really don't understand the first thing about assessing your sources do you"

Who knows what that is supposed to mean...it is so vague it could be in regards to anything


There is no need for any degree in anything but common sense.

Try getting that degree and then perhaps answering the points raised in the post made before by me, the one you ignored.

Strange how they only jumped as high as they would of done if they had been on earth. LOL

Conspiracy truth is more appropriate!

"Sad" just about sums your

contribution to the'debate'


" An Unidentifiable flying object is just that..unidentifiable
...after investigation had decreed it so.

There have been many all over the world...dont mix them up with 'Aliens' or humans in spaceships!

" but suffice to say that no astronomer ever reported seening a 'UFO' "

Thats not true is it? Many have stated they have.

So while you dont believe in UFOs you believe man, flying in a spaceship, landed on a satellite..

I wonder what Van Allen would say about that.

Did the Russians do anything like you say they did?

Its been stated that Russia couldn't even track their own Luna probes to the moon never mind the Americans! "

I'd say your comments are childish but that would be an insult to most children. I'm surprised you haven't tried the old negative evidence argument on this yet, that's what children do.
.
""You really don't understand the first thing about assessing your sources do you". Who knows what that is supposed to mean...it is so vague it could be in regards to anything". Ha ha!
.
If you had a brain you'd know exactly what that means. It means just what it says, that you don't trust unknown sources or your dozy mate down the pub, you only trust top grade proven reliable sources because there are lots of people out there trying to fool you, me included with the hot air balloons. The fact is there is not a single case on record of a verifiable UFO sighting unless you believe the biased old nonsense on your funny web sites. In truth I have never known anyone of any intelligence who believes this old nonsense, because it is nothing more than wishful thinking.
.
There is not a single case on record of any astronomer amateur or professional sighting a "UFO" prior to the nineties, until a certain long haired hippy UFO enthusiast from Glastonbury tried to refute this negative evidence by buying a scope and claiming he'd seen one. Fact. UFOs are only UFOs if no-one can identify them, your rubbish web site reports count for nothing.
.
Van Allen? Ha, you wouldn't know anyhting about the Van Allen belt if it bit you. So do tell me about the belt, its composition, the maths required to calculate exposure etc. (not hard, just long) Bet you can't, unless you copy and paste. Fact is Apollo 11 was only in the VAB for an hour or so as it passed through it which resulted in less exposure to harmful radiation than the safety limit for any nuclear workers for a year. I believe the chances of long term cancer was calculated as one in a thousand, which was deemed acceptable. Got that dumbo?
.
Do you even have the slightest idea how many pre landing probes the US and Russia sent up to 'test the water' before they actually went? Thought not. Look it up, it will surprise you.
.
No point talking to a scientific illiterate like you about this, you need a good five years intensive education before you can even begin to say you have a basic understanding of the real facts, and that';s about as likely as you apologising for your many and repeated errors.
.
I never knew people as stupendously stupid as you really existed in this country, until now, but then you didn't go to school did you. And you expect people to take you seriously? On your bike bozo. But thanks for the laugh.

Should have added that the US physicist Carl Sagan spent years looking at the evidence for UFOs to try and clear this issue up once and for all, but all he found was rubbish. The deeper he dug the more dirt he found, so-called reliable witnesses turned out to have histories of mental disorder (bit like you) or there were other witnesses present who said they hadn't seen what was claimed at all etc etc etc. In the end CS gave up in disgust and concluded that UFOs are like religion, pure nonsense, imagination, speculation and wishful thinking, ie NOT REAL! Btw if they were real how come none have ever been observed on the net of radar stations looking out for close earth asteroid/meteor encounters which are sensitive enough to detect objects much smaller than a car approaching the earth? Answer, because there aren't any, ho ho ho!

"Its been stated that Russia couldn't even track their own Luna probes to the moon never mind the Americans!"
.
That's odd because they HAVE managed to do that very well, check the facts for yourself. So who "stated" that? UFOs-R-Us? Certainly not anyone bona fide.

Truth Will Prevail wrote:
I'd say your comments are childish but that would be an insult to most children. I'm surprised you haven't tried the old negative evidence argument on this yet, that's what children do.
.
""You really don't understand the first thing about assessing your sources do you". Who knows what that is supposed to mean...it is so vague it could be in regards to anything". Ha ha!
.
If you had a brain you'd know exactly what that means. It means just what it says, that you don't trust unknown sources or your dozy mate down the pub, you only trust top grade proven reliable sources because there are lots of people out there trying to fool you, me included with the hot air balloons. The fact is there is not a single case on record of a verifiable UFO sighting unless you believe the biased old nonsense on your funny web sites. In truth I have never known anyone of any intelligence who believes this old nonsense, because it is nothing more than wishful thinking.
.
There is not a single case on record of any astronomer amateur or professional sighting a "UFO" prior to the nineties, until a certain long haired hippy UFO enthusiast from Glastonbury tried to refute this negative evidence by buying a scope and claiming he'd seen one. Fact. UFOs are only UFOs if no-one can identify them, your rubbish web site reports count for nothing.
.
Van Allen? Ha, you wouldn't know anyhting about the Van Allen belt if it bit you. So do tell me about the belt, its composition, the maths required to calculate exposure etc. (not hard, just long) Bet you can't, unless you copy and paste. Fact is Apollo 11 was only in the VAB for an hour or so as it passed through it which resulted in less exposure to harmful radiation than the safety limit for any nuclear workers for a year. I believe the chances of long term cancer was calculated as one in a thousand, which was deemed acceptable. Got that dumbo?
.
Do you even have the slightest idea how many pre landing probes the US and Russia sent up to 'test the water' before they actually went? Thought not. Look it up, it will surprise you.
.
No point talking to a scientific illiterate like you about this, you need a good five years intensive education before you can even begin to say you have a basic understanding of the real facts, and that';s about as likely as you apologising for your many and repeated errors.
.
I never knew people as stupendously stupid as you really existed in this country, until now, but then you didn't go to school did you. And you expect people to take you seriously? On your bike bozo. But thanks for the laugh.

Im sure you not above insulting children!

"You really don't understand the first thing about assessing your sources do you".

Which you state means

" you don't trust unknown sources or your dozy mate down the pub,"


Are my sources unknown or public house tittle tattle? (i dont frequent pubs) If that isn't the case then isn't most of your post redundant?

How do you now your 'sources' are reliable? Are they independent? it would seem there was no independent proof that there was ever any moon landings only evidence provided by those responsible for the 'landings'

They said so you believe...you smugly suggest your beliefs are worth more than mine because they are yours...wow!

"The fact is there is not a single case on record of a verifiable UFO sighting"

Verificable by whom?

If you mean unidentified flying objects as in a flying object that cannot be identified for whatever reason, then there are many of those verified by the MOD.

If you mean UFO as in extraterrestrial, then many many scientist believe in and of them...trying to pretend the only people who believe in either forms of UFOs are mad/bad/sad or paid for actually makes you the conspiracy theorist.


" I have never known anyone of any intelligence who believes this old nonsense "

That again would seem to reflect the company you keep!

But here have a look at these people with no intelligence.

Professor Clyde Tombaugh
(discoverer of the planet Pluto)

Carl Mitchell, physicist

Seymour L. Hess, meteorology and astronomy

W. Gordon Graham, astronomer

James Bartlett, astronomer

H. Percy Wilkins, astronomer.

Marcos Guerci, meteorologist.

H. Kleyweg, meteorologist.

Frank Halstead, astronomer.

Henry Carlock, physicist.

Jacques Chapuis, astronomer.

R. J. Villela, meteorologist

All less intelligent than you!

And theres more!

My web site? What web site is this you constantly refer to?

" UFOs are only UFOs if no-one can identify them"

I think you will find it was i who informed you of that on this thread! Duh!

Do not be so dismissive of copy and paste for that is all people do from the day they start to learn. They copy what they see/hear/are taught and paste it.

You obviously think of yourself as super educated and yet your posts show you to be nothing but a smug @rse

I of course do know about the Van Allen belt and in fact mentioned it...perhaps you can explain how our own "spacemen" managed to get though this radiation belt not once but twice each trip without fatal exposure?

Heres what NASA Chief Dan Goldin thought about the matter when interviewed by UK TV journalist Sheena McDonald in 1994. He said that mankind cannot venture beyond Earth orbit, 250 miles into space, until they can find a way to overcome the dangers of cosmic radiation.

Oh dear! wasn't he briefed that man had already done this...many times?

Can they cant they? Who knows until they try...which to date they havent.

BTW you know that Nassa lost the original tapes...probably sold on a bootfair along with disney tapes.

You believe...yes you do but your ego-driven beliefs dont make it fact does it?

My level of education shouldn't stop your proving what you state should it?

There are others reading this or do you think its just me and you here, alone as on the moon. To date you have not given any proof of what you insist just stated you are right and i am wrong etc etc with the odd name calling in between to make you feel secure.

You seem to think someone having a different opinion from you is "stupendously stupid" but i would say anyone believing what you say without asking proof of, would be just that. For all your education you are without a doubt a mindless sheep (le) believing everything he is told because he is told it by someone he rates higher than himself...

My lack of schooling hasn't stopped you taking me seriously has it? As evidenced by your posts, which would seem to undermine your own contention people wouldn't take me seriously..Your not a well man are you?

You think I take you seriously? You're a comedian ET, You talk absolute total nonsense - can't go 250 miles from earth? better tell that to the half dozen missions that went to the moon and we'd better not go to Mars. You have absolutely no idea what bona fide means, it's not about opinions, it's about the verifiable, justifiable, peer-reviewed truth you moron. You quote lunatics and crazy websites and repeat lies but you are so thick you don't even realise how stupid you are being. You are the perfect example of a tiny little bit of knowledge being a dangerous thing. You really ought to see a Doctor about your messianic complex before you do yourself, or more likely others, a mischief. No point discussing anything with you, orangutans and algebra.

Mark my words, Apollo 11 will still be recognised as one of man's greatest achievements a thousand years from now. Fact! Go look at the pics taken from the last lunar fly past.

Truth Will Prevail wrote:
You think I take you seriously? You're a comedian ET, You talk absolute total nonsense - can't go 250 miles from earth? better tell that to the half dozen missions that went to the moon and we'd better not go to Mars. You have absolutely no idea what bona fide means, it's not about opinions, it's about the verifiable, justifiable, peer-reviewed truth you moron. You quote lunatics and crazy websites and repeat lies but you are so thick you don't even realise how stupid you are being. You are the perfect example of a tiny little bit of knowledge being a dangerous thing. You really ought to see a Doctor about your messianic complex before you do yourself, or more likely others, a mischief. No point discussing anything with you, orangutans and algebra.

You miss the questions in the post again...take a deep breath before you ost and read and you might find...the questions asked.

You stated

" There is not a single case on record of any astronomer amateur or professional sighting a "UFO" prior to the nineties"

I have provided a list of those who have which proves whoever your source is ( drinking buddy?) is wrong and indeed so are you!

You stated

"In truth I have never known anyone of any intelligence who believes this old nonsense, because it is nothing more than wishful thinking

The same list I provided applies. Wrong again?

" can't go 250 miles from earth "

Hey take it up with the NASA CHIEF repeat NASA CHIEF Dan Goldin...he seems to think thats the case!

Unless you are better positioned, with your superior education, to contradict him, perhaps some might think him a trustworthy source?

Is Nasa not a trustworthy source in your opinion?

Btw we were talking about manned-flight, why pretend we are now talking about unmanned? ie Mars.

It would seem the things you accuse me of you are in fact guilty of.

When does something become "bona fide" When you say it is?

I have provided lists of scientist among others who state they have observed UFOs...Bona fide?

A Nasa chief who says man cannot venture beyond Earth orbit until they can find a way to overcome the dangers of cosmic radiation....Bona fide?

You are the perfect example who is told something and runs with what they are told...you are a 'flat earther' and would be screaming for those who said it was flat to be burnt as Morons.

I have countered all your contentions and provided proof to do so yet you have stated things on this thread and not offered one iota of proof other than your say so... and then you allude to my messianic complex?

Hubris Syndrome anyone?

I have always said you might be a concern with your delusions of grandeur, and fantasies of fast cars and faster planes, taking off from one of your many fields, as horse reared in them and your adoring family waved from outside your oft mentioned mansion, pining for your return already!

You need to be a bit more civil and gracious and face facts and accept that i beat you every debate we have...

You are little more than plum on a rather small tree... easy to pick.

Come back when you think you can do the job...oh btw... LOL

"you are a 'flat earther' and would be screaming for those who said it was flat to be burnt"

Read instead "for those who siad it was sphere to be burnt"

Truth Will Prevail wrote:
Mark my words, Apollo 11 will still be recognised as one of man's greatest achievements a thousand years from now. Fact! Go look at the pics taken from the last lunar fly past.

Yes...Im sure if mankind is still around, and if such things matter in that far of time, that people will believe such things.

They might even believe Neil Armstrong flew to the moon without the aid of a space craft to change water into wine....

The real evidence is all on the moons surface so one day conspiracy theorists like you will have to eat your words. Your evidence is lies but you don't know how to tell the difference, in the world of science Peer reviewed evidence means evidence that has been checked and double checked by a panel of the top specialists in the field. Trumps your nonsense any day. Your self belief is incredible, ever tried walking on water?

I bet you're a Creationist too. And believe in the Bermuda Triangle, Bigfoot, Nessie etc etc etc! Ho ho ho!

Truth Will Prevail wrote:
The real evidence is all on the moons surface so one day conspiracy theorists like you will have to eat your words. Your evidence is lies but you don't know how to tell the difference, in the world of science Peer reviewed evidence means evidence that has been checked and double checked by a panel of the top specialists in the field. Trumps your nonsense any day. Your self belief is incredible, ever tried walking on water?

Things on the moon were landed there and not put there by hand...Wakey Wakey!

" so one day conspiracy theorists like you will have to eat your words."

You mean when we are able to holiday on the moon?

I can tell the difference between lies and truth which is why i know there was no man on the moon.


My evidence is lies because you say it is? EEK!... No evidence needed then to show that is the case.. just you saying it is enough...dont you realise how you come across on these posts?

You mention peer reviewed evidence?

Is this where you got this contention

" There is not a single case on record of any astronomer amateur or professional sighting a "UFO" prior to the nineties"

WRONG!


Were the moon landings peer reviewed? It would seem many peers would say the moon landings were faked....Or are you trying to distract away from the fact that everything you have claimed on this thread so far in regards to man on the moon has been disproven or been wrong..have you been right about anything on this thread...that you have given evidence to back up what you say? Errr. No!

I think its clear to all you are all bluster and nothing else.

Im sure Neil Armstrong is your hero, strange how he avoided talking, as much as he could, about landing on the moon...he always spoke very cryptically about it didn't he?

Ever watched Capricorn One?

Have a peek, seems someone was trying to tell the world something!

Truth Will Prevail wrote:
I bet you're a Creationist too. And believe in the Bermuda Triangle, Bigfoot, Nessie etc etc etc! Ho ho ho!

Is believing in such things, which i dont, any worse than believing man travelled 384400 km in a tin can, through cosmic radiation to land on a satellite, all with the technology less than a basic calculator?

You wasted your money on the little telescope you bought at the time...your belief system might be shattered but dont worry, when they land a man on Mars you will get it all back again.

That is the most ridiculous intellectually void point of view I have ever heard. You clearly have no idea whatsoever what peer reviewed actually means and if there was a single claim of a UFO sighting by any astronomer prior to the nineties then prove it! There wasn't (your list of names from a fantasists website mean nothing). As for the Apollo 11 technology, it only took Newtonian equations to navigate to the moon for which the average pocket calculator would suffice, as you'd know if you knew anything at all about navigation and Newtonian maths, which you don't. You have also just proven that you know nothing whatsoever about the Van Allen Belt, I'm still waiting to hear your description and calculations of the radiation in the VAB as you clearly know more about this subject than NASA, ha ha, not! In truth you are one of those pitifully gullible people who believed that our hot air balloons were UFOs which makes you a fool of the highest order. I'm surprised you don't believe in Nessie and Bigfoot too, most people like you believe in any old rubbish. How about psychic healing and spiritualism, how about god and the devil? Ho ho I bet you believe it all. You think you are being clever but all you are really doing is proving what a brainless moron you really are. And as I said before but you misunderstood (you do that a lot) the proof of the Lunar landings (don't forget there have been half a dozen) is still on the Moons surface as was photographed by a recent lunar orbiter. No doubt in your warped twisted imagination you believe NASA must have faked the photos, which is laughable, but one day we'll be back on the moon and you'll have to eat your words. Won't you feel a fool then sunshine?

ps If what you are saying about the technology is right how come both the Russians and the US managed to send dozens of unmanned lunar orbiters and landers plus the US sent half a dozen manned orbiters (all of which had to pass through the VAB) prior to the Apollo 11 lunar lander? How did we do that if we didn't have the technology and how come the orbiter astronauts didn't perish when they passed through the VAB? Explain that if you can numb nuts!

Just been showing my little grandson your ranting and raving as you are a perfect example of a little bit of knowledge being a dangerous thing and guess what? Even he saw straight through your assertion about the space suits. He asked me how heavy they were and when I told him the best part of 200 lbs he immediately said you couldn't jump around in them anywhere on earth, which is true, and even on the moon you would jump very carefully. From the mouths of babes! So a ten year old boy is more intelligent than you matey, always said your level of logic and understanding reminded me of junior school kids and there's the proof! Ha ha ha, ho ho ho, he he he!

What on earth are you all talking about...right off the subject. Well done for writing a book of poems.Wish you every success.

Truth Will Prevail wrote:
That is the most ridiculous intellectually void point of view I have ever heard. You clearly have no idea whatsoever what peer reviewed actually means and if there was a single claim of a UFO sighting by any astronomer prior to the nineties then prove it! There wasn't (your list of names from a fantasists website mean nothing). As for the Apollo 11 technology, it only took Newtonian equations to navigate to the moon for which the average pocket calculator would suffice, as you'd know if you knew anything at all about navigation and Newtonian maths, which you don't. You have also just proven that you know nothing whatsoever about the Van Allen Belt, I'm still waiting to hear your description and calculations of the radiation in the VAB as you clearly know more about this subject than NASA, ha ha, not! In truth you are one of those pitifully gullible people who believed that our hot air balloons were UFOs which makes you a fool of the highest order. I'm surprised you don't believe in Nessie and Bigfoot too, most people like you believe in any old rubbish. How about psychic healing and spiritualism, how about god and the devil? Ho ho I bet you believe it all. You think you are being clever but all you are really doing is proving what a brainless moron you really are. And as I said before but you misunderstood (you do that a lot) the proof of the Lunar landings (don't forget there have been half a dozen) is still on the Moons surface as was photographed by a recent lunar orbiter. No doubt in your warped twisted imagination you believe NASA must have faked the photos, which is laughable, but one day we'll be back on the moon and you'll have to eat your words. Won't you feel a fool then sunshine?

Strange you keep telling me what i dont know while ignoring the request for the source of what you say you do know?

I have provided the list of scientists and astronomers, which you said didn't exist, who have seen UFOs now there is your evidence. Go take a look at them and there find your proof. They exist and they have said what they have seen. You are wrong in what you stated..man up and admit it...if your warped ego can allow you to.

You have no idea what i know or dont know but i know that wont stop you stating that you do. You really are strange!

The VAB is still relatively a mystery

Van Allen made several statements about the belts named after him. In an earlier quote he said (paraphrased): "Steps would need to be taken to protect astronauts travelling through the belts".

"The main concern is that to this day, the size, consistence and height of the belts is still being wrangled out. If someone were building a rocket and wanted some figures on the radiation risk for the belts he'd have a whole series of various estimates to choose from. The belts are also theorized to fluctuate with the levels of sunspot activity. The matter was further complicated by the creation of an artifical third belt! This was caused by Operation Starfish Prime in 1962. An A-bomb was expoloded in low Earth orbit forming a temporary third belt that was even more intense than the two natural ones. I say "temporary"; it's still there. It will gradually decay, but not for several centuries!"

More learned people are involved than a little ego-driven pip squeak like you LOL.

Van Belt? Sham belt more like...they never went through it!

Im of course not " one of those pitifully gullible people who believed that our hot air balloons were UFOs" And why i should be because i dont believe man went to the moon isnt really explained by your alleging it.

But it would seem you, believing man went up in a tin machine, through and past space cosmic radiation, to land on a satellite and then lift off from the same, all without any independent evidence would be more likely to believe in such things as you oft quote. 'Big foot' living in the woods or man landing on the moon which is the more credible?

The old rubbish is you and your slavish adherence to something that year by year is becoming more unlikely...MAN DID NOT LAND ON THE MOON...ask REM. LOL.

What i believe in doesn't matter, but you have no moral high ground to rubbish anyones beliefs, even if that belief is the tooth fairy, because your belief in moon walking isn't any less credible.

The proof of the landing is not whats left on the moon or it could be said man has been on mars because of the stuff thats be landed on there! Stuff proves only that unmanned craft have been landed/crashed on both.

The photos are indeed faked for they would have to be...

Have you watched Capricorn one yet?

Man will never be on the moon in your or my lifetime...Why havent they gone back? Ever asked yourself that?

Truth Will Prevail wrote:
ps If what you are saying about the technology is right how come both the Russians and the US managed to send dozens of unmanned lunar orbiters and landers plus the US sent half a dozen manned orbiters (all of which had to pass through the VAB) prior to the Apollo 11 lunar lander? How did we do that if we didn't have the technology and how come the orbiter astronauts didn't perish when they passed through the VAB? Explain that if you can numb nuts!

The R and A did indeed have the technology to send things into space and did send things onto the moon!

One of the things they didn't do was send a man onto the moon. And there is no independent proof that they did.

Everything comes from those who say they did...not one independent picture or radio noise to prove they went where they said they went, no evidence than theirs!

And yet you believe because you bought a little 50p telescope at the time and saw the smoke LOLLOLLOLLOLOL

They didn't then and dont have the technology to do so even now. Why hasn't the Russians gone to the moon?

No astronauts passed through the VAB. And the suits they had would not of allowed them to walk on the moon. They never went beyond earths orbit.

You threatened to report me if im rude to you (you never said what you meant by rude, does that incude showing you up for being soooo wrong?)

if you keep using name calling to emphasis your posts i will take a leaf out of your book and pre-empt your complaint. Its your way of doing things.

Truth Will Prevail wrote:
Just been showing my little grandson your ranting and raving as you are a perfect example of a little bit of knowledge being a dangerous thing and guess what? Even he saw straight through your assertion about the space suits. He asked me how heavy they were and when I told him the best part of 200 lbs he immediately said you couldn't jump around in them anywhere on earth, which is true, and even on the moon you would jump very carefully. From the mouths of babes! So a ten year old boy is more intelligent than you matey, always said your level of logic and understanding reminded me of junior school kids and there's the proof! Ha ha ha, ho ho ho, he he he!

On the moon the suits would of weighed 17% of what they did on earth. NA should of been able to jump 10ft into the air, instead he hits the heights of about a foot, the same he would on earth. The 200 ilb he was carrying meant he couldnt jump so high in the rigged up studio.

You grandson only has the limited about of information you have and are using. if he was able to access the internet he would see what a lot of rot you talk.

You are truly gullible to believe man walked on the moon and even more so to take the word of those who had an agenda to perpetrate this hoax, and for ignoring there is not one shred of independent evidence to show the moon was walked... yet lots of independence evidence to prove it wasn't.

You dont believe UFOs exists, although all countries in the world accept they do, but you believe a 'UFO' (to any living organism outside of earths orbit) travelled to the moon and extraterrestrial's to the moon surface walked on it. Yes right...Santa claus and the Easter bunny must also be true. Else where did the presents and easter eggs come from? Duh.

Copying from the internet does not make you an expert (the grammar is much too good for you ha ha!), that just proves you don't actually know anything, probably why you get your science education from feature films (good source, not). Unmanned probes? You can even see the footprint trails in the orbiter photos you moron (that's not an insult, just the simple truth). Why didn't we go back? WE DID you twozzle, half a dozen times. Why did we stop going? Because it's expensive and American taxpayers didn't want to pay for it (little commercial benefit) all of which you would know if you had been alive to see it or you actually knew anything about it. In my experience the vast majority of people who don't believe we went to the moon know nothing about the sunject, are too young to remember it, are of sub normal intelligence and poorly educated and are usually what we refer to as nutters. Congratulations! You tick all the boxes! No point trying to teach you anything as you know it all (ha ha ha!), hope you enjoy wallowing in your sea of ignorance.

Truth Will Prevail wrote:
Copying from the internet does not make you an expert (the grammar is much too good for you ha ha!), that just proves you don't actually know anything, probably why you get your science education from feature films (good source, not). Unmanned probes? You can even see the footprint trails in the orbiter photos you moron (that's not an insult, just the simple truth). Why didn't we go back? WE DID you twozzle, half a dozen times. Why did we stop going? Because it's expensive and American taxpayers didn't want to pay for it (little commercial benefit) all of which you would know if you had been alive to see it or you actually knew anything about it. In my experience the vast majority of people who don't believe we went to the moon know nothing about the sunject, are too young to remember it, are of sub normal intelligence and poorly educated and are usually what we refer to as nutters. Congratulations! You tick all the boxes! No point trying to teach you anything as you know it all (ha ha ha!), hope you enjoy wallowing in your sea of ignorance.

Copying anything or saying anything that comes from you own head doesn't make you an expert either!


What post or comment are you referring to...i ask because i think you are giving me a compliment without knowing!

How can you in all seriousness say coping " proves you don't actually know anything" Every bit of information people have they have copied in one way or another! You really are the limit.

You post such rubbish and dont seem to get that it is really is written rubbish!

Footprints on the moon! Where Where?

Oh no! MORE pictures from Nasa!

Shall i ask? Shall i? Okay i will...any independent pictures not coming from Nasa?

But on pictures

One example that appears to be faked is the footage of Earth taken from the Apollo 11 when it was 130,000 miles away. This is the very first view ever taken of Earth on the mission and it seems strange that Buzz Aldrin would film the Earth when he was standing far away from the window. Surely you would want to get close to the window to get the best picture and also to eliminate light reflections.

But, we see the window frame come into view on the left of the shot. The camera isn't set to infinity either to get the closest shot. The window frame that comes into shot would have been out of focus if it was. Did the astronauts actually film a transparency of the Earth that was stuck to the window? You may think this odd, but a few minutes after filming the Earth, the cameraman adjusts his lens and focuses on Mike Collins inside the craft. What we see is what appears to be an exposure of the Earth taped to the window that is in the background to the right of him. That is the very same window that Aldrin was filming the Earth.

Then the camera pans left past Neil Armstrong towards the left hand side of the Apollo 11, and out of the left window, we see what appears to be another Earth. It must also be noted that the Apollo 11 at this point in the mission was supposedly half way to the Moon. The time elapsed was 34 hours and 16 minutes, but from the view of Earth in the right hand window it appears that they were not in deep space at all, but still in low Earth orbit!

Here have a look at this oh wise one..maybe after this you will stick to hunting big foot. LOL.

http://www.liveleak.
com/view?i=4fd_13459
57050&comments=1

So its not commercially viable to go to the moon but it is to go to Mars...LOL


" In my experience the vast majority of people who don't believe we went to the moon know nothing about the sunject, are too young to remember it, are of sub normal intelligence and poorly educated and are usually what we refer to as nutters. "

Well you experience is your little 50p telescope and all the guff spewed out by NASA.

Congratulations! You indeed have ticked all your own boxes!

Gullible to the extreme, while calling other that...

" 'er mister...wanna buy that there Big Ben? Gawing cheap to a toff like you is"


LOL pillock, no insult just fact!

Keep posting your thick stupid twisted poisonous tosh about the lunar landings, one day man will go back to the moon and find the landing site and then fools like you will have to eat humble pie. There was no controversy at the time or for years afterwards and not just because we saw it all happen live on TV, or through our 'scopes (which cost a lot more than 50p) but because we all saw the long hard slog of both America and Russia sending dozens of unmanned probes to orbit and then land on the moon first followed by the five manned missions that orbited the moon prior to the six missions that actually landed on the moon, all of which makes a complete nonsense of your claims that we didn't have the technology and that man can't survive travelling through the Van Allen belt. Bottom line is that I've never yet met a conspiracy theorist who was born at the time and I've never never met one who had any brains or a science degree, people with a decent education are not that stupid, only people like you ET.

Your belief in the moon walk is no different than those believing in

Nessie, Big foot, honest politicians, Aliens, Fairies, Santa, Jack frost, climate warming etc etc...the things you scoff at are no less believable than your ridiculous moon landing and walk...


Your post holds contentions i have never subscribed to but which you state i have to try support your nonsense.

The most relevant being I have stated that man did not have the technology to put a man on the moon...nothing to do with putting craft into space. yet you constantly pretend that is what i have stated.


Education has nothing to do with naivety and gullibility...you are the living proof of that, and the fact you state you have had an eilte education proves it doubly so.

The Apollo Program collected 382 kilograms (840 lb) of Moon rocks during the six manned missions. Analyses by scientists worldwide all agree that these rocks came from the Moon - NO published accounts in peer-reviewed scientific journals exist that dispute this claim.
.
The Apollo samples are easily distinguishable from both meteorites and Earth rocks in that they show a lack of hydrous alteration products, they show evidence of having undergone impact events on an airless body, and they have unique geochemical traits. Furthermore, most are more than 200 million years older than the oldest Earth rocks. The Moon rocks also share the same traits as samples retrieved from the Moon by Soviet lander missions.
.
Brave men died in the race to get to the moon. On 27 January 1967, a fire erupted in the Apollo 1 command module during a test on the launch pad, destroying the module and killing astronauts Grissom, White, and Chaffee. A test flight of the Block II CSM in Earth orbit, Apollo 7 was the first manned Apollo flight and the first manned flight of the Saturn IB. It was the only manned Apollo launch not from LC 39. It included the first live TV broadcast from an American spacecraft. Apollo 8 was the first manned CIRCUMLUNAR flight of the CSM (10 orbits in 20 hours) and the first manned flight of the Saturn V. The crew were the first humans to see the far side of the Moon and earthrise over the lunar horizon with their own eyes. LIVE television pictures were broadcast to Earth. During 10 days in Earth orbit, Apollo 9 conducted the first manned flight test of the Lunar Module, demonstrating its propulsion and ability to rendezvous and dock with the CSM. An EVA tested the Portable Life Support System. In this "dress rehearsal" for the lunar landing, Apollo 10's Lunar Module was flown manned around the Moon and descended to 8.4 nautical miles (15.6 km) without landing. If ET is right all these astronauts should have died from exposure to the Van Allen radiation but none did.
.
On July 20, 1969, the Apollo 11 Lunar Module performed the first manned landing on the Moon in the Sea of Tranquility, overcoming navigation errors and computer alarms. Astronauts Armstrong and Aldrin performed a single EVA in the direct vicinity of the LM. Following two lightning strikes on the spacecraft during launch, with brief loss of fuel cells and telemetry, Apollo 12 performed the first precise manned landing on the Moon in the Ocean of Storms near the Surveyor 3 probe. In two EVAs, the astronauts recovered portions of Surveyor and returned them to Earth. After docking problems, a faulty LM abort switch and delayed landing radar acquisition, Apollo 14's LM landed successfully at Fra Mauro. First color video images from the surface of the Moon, first materials science experiments in space, and two EVAs, in one of which Shepard performed a golf shot.Apollo 15, landing at Hadley-Apennine was the first "J series" mission with a 3-day lunar stay and extensive geology investigations. After a malfunction in a backup CSM yaw gimbal servo loop delayed the landing and reduced CSM time in lunar orbit, Apollo 16's LM landed in the Descartes Highlands. No ascent stage deorbit due to malfunction; 3 lunar EVAs and deep space EVA.The final Apollo lunar mission landed at Taurus-Littrow. Schmitt, a geologist, was the first professional scientist to go on a NASA mission. First night launch; 3 lunar EVAs and deep space EVA. But according to that ignorant know-nothing ET we didn’t have the technology to do any of this, ha ha!
.
Since 1969 the lunar landing sites have been detected by NASA, Indian and Chinese space missions and the A11 site is even visible in photos taken from low lunar orbit by the A11 team themselves. Mark my words, one day man will return to the moon and the A11 landing site will be revealed in all it’s glory and conspiracy theorists the world over will have to eat their brainless words. Btw according to the latest official stats only 6% of people doubt the lunar landings took place, and I bet not a single one of them even has a science A level never mind a science degree, which is why the correct technical description of moon landing conspiracy theorists is ignorant nutters, ha ha ha!

You will of course be aware that some of the rocks they handed out were FAKE! 'Good ole boys' Neil and Buzz palmed them off on Holland

http://www.telegraph

.co.uk/science/space

/6105902/Moon-rock-g

iven-to-Holland-by-N

eil-Armstrong-and-Bu

zz-Aldrin-is-fake.ht

ml

You keep harping on about "peer reviewed" but surely you are aware If you had a monkey review another monkeys work, which he is in agreement with, that it could be said the 1st monkeys work was "peer reviewed" clue up yourself man!


" If ET is right " Hey its got nothing to do with me...i wasn't part of the hoax!

Its people with the knowledge of the radiation involved who have said man could not go through the belt in the craft they are said to have done...have you looked at all the clear evidence of this on the internet? Or are you thinking only I think this is the case?
You are a minority in the civilised world in thinking man walked, jumped, played golf on the moon..They didn't but they pretended to.

Im just pointing out while there is much independent proof that man didnt go to the moon and land there the only evidence available they did is from those who had most to gain by stating man did...

As for all the flying around in space no one is saying space craft didn't do that what is being said is man didn't land on the moon...repeat didn't land on the moon....

"err.. Houston we have a problem, we cant get the film studio door open...over"

"Houston to astronauts, give it a good shake and then kick the bottom and it will open...remember not to go into the cantina...you're supposed to be playing golf on the moon...over"

The VAB is your red herring, it could be traversed through by men if the crafts were protected enough, but the crafts were not protected to cause man to survive because man didn't go through it.

Prattling on with Nasa reports as if they are proof as silly as the notion of men wearing space suits that wouldn't of fitted in or out of 'Eagle" leaping inches off the ground while the tape is run 505 slower than normal...It was all a trick..take your telescope and get your money back..you've been conned! LOL

You have complained about me to admin again about me being rude to you while you post comments like this?

" But according to that ignorant know-nothing ET"

You're going to get yourself banned and then what will Nasa do without you?

Merk you words...have you got a bet on with the bookies or something...if so you have lost...

Where is the link you are stating says only 6% of people doubt the moon landing...that must of been taken in your household.

I bet more than 75% of people on these threads , if they have given it a thought, believe man walked on the moon...

" which is why the correct technical description of moon landing conspiracy theorists is ignorant nutters,"

Is that a fact? Or a bit more of your "I thought it so it must be the case"

Other than posting Nasa information what have you posted that shows this walk took place...Nothing!

Have you had Nasa mess with my phone? Too many things appearing on my posts that shouldn't ..Typos? Or something more sinister...

* looks around suspiciously*

For 505 read 50%

For Merk read Mark

For I bet more than 75% of people on these threads , if they have given it a thought, believe man walked on the moon... READ
I bet more than 75% of people on these threads , if they have given it a thought, believe man didn't walk on the moon.

If i hear strange nosies and beeps coming from my shower head you know im going to blame you...now where is my tin foil helmet...

There were over 400,000 people involved in the moon landings. Do you honestly believe that not one of them would have said something by now? It's been over 40 years and not one of them has blown the whistle on it. To get 400,000 people to keep a secret for 40 years would be a far more impressive feat than using some simple Newtonian physics to put a man on the moon.

Chris Flunk wrote:
There were over 400,000 people involved in the moon landings. Do you honestly believe that not one of them would have said something by now? It's been over 40 years and not one of them has blown the whistle on it. To get 400,000 people to keep a secret for 40 years would be a far more impressive feat than using some simple Newtonian physics to put a man on the moon.

Of the 400,000 how many do you think were in the know? they would only know what they were doing not what the guy next to them was doing..

Anyway who cares if they did or didn't...its nearly half a century ago.

Old man moon walk (TWP) wants people to believe they did because he said they did...just teaching him a lesson in how to provide evidence of what he says rather than " it must be true because i said it" LOL.


* to the tune of old man river *

Old man moonwalk, that old man moon walk// he just keeps talking, talking and baulking
That old man moon walk, he just keeps bullshining along...

Its all a joke mate ( so is he btw)

Not quite sure how a fairly innocuous story about a vicar publishing a book of children's verse has managed to become a debate about UFOs, moon landings and conspiracy theories, but it has given me a huge amount of amusement.
Keep it up, jokers, we need laughs in these trying times!

I think the vicar has commented on here but his post was so...erm... controversial it was removed...ole man moonwalk might of complained.

E -Type wrote:
I think the vicar has commented on here but his post was so...erm... controversial it was removed...ole man moonwalk might of complained.

I think the Vicars next book should be entitled "Did man walk on the moon?". A sure fire best seller.

Nebs wrote:

E -Type wrote:
I think the vicar has commented on here but his post was so...erm... controversial it was removed...ole man moonwalk might of complained.

I think the Vicars next book should be entitled "Did man walk on the moon?". A sure fire best seller.

He better not let 'ole man moonwalk to proof read it or it will be a hundred pages of

"Yes they did, they say they did, i say they did so they did...moron, fool idiot...peer reviewed peer reviewed... i told you...i did i did i did..."

Sings

"theres a star man leapfroging on the moon// he is coming soon to see me because he knows i am a balloon// oh star-man tee offing on the moon// please come and take me with you// you know im a luna tune...luna tune"

maddriver wrote:
Not quite sure how a fairly innocuous story about a vicar publishing a book of children's verse has managed to become a debate about UFOs, moon landings and conspiracy theories, but it has given me a huge amount of amusement. Keep it up, jokers, we need laughs in these trying times!

Now you are learning what most of the regulars on this forum have learnt!

E-Types is:

1. King Of The Hijackers
2. A clown.

Oh! How we laughed!

Woops - sorry - meant E-Type (no 's', he has had to change his name again!)

Chris Flunk wrote:
There were over 400,000 people involved in the moon landings. Do you honestly believe that not one of them would have said something by now? It's been over 40 years and not one of them has blown the whistle on it. To get 400,000 people to keep a secret for 40 years would be a far more impressive feat than using some simple Newtonian physics to put a man on the moon.

Well said sir. According to that old alien ET none of the pre-landing manned orbits of the moon could have happened either as they would all have been irradiated to death as they passed through the Van Allen Belt. Ditto the half dozen missions that landed on the moon after Apollo 11 so thats a whole lot more people who would have had to be in on the conspiracy that never was. We even have photos of the landing site now showing the astronauts footprints etc but even that is not good enough for these lame brains but never fear, one day we will go back again and then these losers will have to eat humble pie, ha ha ha!

Truth Will Prevail wrote:

Chris Flunk wrote: There were over 400,000 people involved in the moon landings. Do you honestly believe that not one of them would have said something by now? It's been over 40 years and not one of them has blown the whistle on it. To get 400,000 people to keep a secret for 40 years would be a far more impressive feat than using some simple Newtonian physics to put a man on the moon.

Well said sir. According to that old alien ET none of the pre-landing manned orbits of the moon could have happened either as they would all have been irradiated to death as they passed through the Van Allen Belt. Ditto the half dozen missions that landed on the moon after Apollo 11 so thats a whole lot more people who would have had to be in on the conspiracy that never was. We even have photos of the landing site now showing the astronauts footprints etc but even that is not good enough for these lame brains but never fear, one day we will go back again and then these losers will have to eat humble pie, ha ha ha!

Perhaps E-Types has vestiophobia?

This is a fear of clothing, which can include a fear of belts.

Van Allen Belt.

Green Belt.

Now it makes sense!!!

President3 wrote:

Truth Will Prevail wrote:

Chris Flunk wrote: There were over 400,000 people involved in the moon landings. Do you honestly believe that not one of them would have said something by now? It's been over 40 years and not one of them has blown the whistle on it. To get 400,000 people to keep a secret for 40 years would be a far more impressive feat than using some simple Newtonian physics to put a man on the moon.

Well said sir. According to that old alien ET none of the pre-landing manned orbits of the moon could have happened either as they would all have been irradiated to death as they passed through the Van Allen Belt. Ditto the half dozen missions that landed on the moon after Apollo 11 so thats a whole lot more people who would have had to be in on the conspiracy that never was. We even have photos of the landing site now showing the astronauts footprints etc but even that is not good enough for these lame brains but never fear, one day we will go back again and then these losers will have to eat humble pie, ha ha ha!

Perhaps E-Types has vestiophobia? This is a fear of clothing, which can include a fear of belts. Van Allen Belt. Green Belt. Now it makes sense!!!

Nothing make sense to you... to do that you would need a brain and thats something you lack...you run on empty

President3 wrote:

maddriver wrote: Not quite sure how a fairly innocuous story about a vicar publishing a book of children's verse has managed to become a debate about UFOs, moon landings and conspiracy theories, but it has given me a huge amount of amusement. Keep it up, jokers, we need laughs in these trying times!

Now you are learning what most of the regulars on this forum have learnt! E-Types is: 1. King Of The Hijackers 2. A clown. Oh! How we laughed! Woops - sorry - meant E-Type (no 's', he has had to change his name again!)

Errr...ithink it you who have had to re-reg recently...resident3

Truth Will Prevail wrote:

Chris Flunk wrote: There were over 400,000 people involved in the moon landings. Do you honestly believe that not one of them would have said something by now? It's been over 40 years and not one of them has blown the whistle on it. To get 400,000 people to keep a secret for 40 years would be a far more impressive feat than using some simple Newtonian physics to put a man on the moon.

Well said sir. According to that old alien ET none of the pre-landing manned orbits of the moon could have happened either as they would all have been irradiated to death as they passed through the Van Allen Belt. Ditto the half dozen missions that landed on the moon after Apollo 11 so thats a whole lot more people who would have had to be in on the conspiracy that never was. We even have photos of the landing site now showing the astronauts footprints etc but even that is not good enough for these lame brains but never fear, one day we will go back again and then these losers will have to eat humble pie, ha ha ha!

What you have stated is according to me isnt the case is it? Are you trying to lie to people on the very same thread that they can look to see ywhat i said...

btw have you got ANY INDEPENDENT evidence of the moon landing or is it all true because 'old man moon walk' told you so?

Truth Will Prevail wrote:

Chris Flunk wrote: There were over 400,000 people involved in the moon landings. Do you honestly believe that not one of them would have said something by now? It's been over 40 years and not one of them has blown the whistle on it. To get 400,000 people to keep a secret for 40 years would be a far more impressive feat than using some simple Newtonian physics to put a man on the moon.

Well said sir. According to that old alien ET none of the pre-landing manned orbits of the moon could have happened either as they would all have been irradiated to death as they passed through the Van Allen Belt. Ditto the half dozen missions that landed on the moon after Apollo 11 so thats a whole lot more people who would have had to be in on the conspiracy that never was. We even have photos of the landing site now showing the astronauts footprints etc but even that is not good enough for these lame brains but never fear, one day we will go back again and then these losers will have to eat humble pie, ha ha ha!

Pictures released by NASA...lol...very independent...how does it go? "that ole man moon walk that ole man moon walk"...lol

Have you been drinking?

There's lots of independent verification of the lunar landings. For starters, what about the USSR? They closely monitored all of the Apollo missions and would have been the first to cry foul if there was any suspicion of falsification. Are you seriously suggesting they were in cahoots with NASA?

Then there are the recent independent lunar surveys:

Japan's SELENE lunar probe obtained several images with corroborating evidence.

India's Chandrayaan-1 probe recorded evidence of lighter, disturbed soil around the Apollo 15 site.

China's lunar probe, Chang'e 2, confirmed traces of the Apollo landings.

The hoax hypothesis just doesn't stand up anymore.

Chris Flunk wrote:
There's lots of independent verification of the lunar landings. For starters, what about the USSR? They closely monitored all of the Apollo missions and would have been the first to cry foul if there was any suspicion of falsification. Are you seriously suggesting they were in cahoots with NASA? Then there are the recent independent lunar surveys: Japan's SELENE lunar probe obtained several images with corroborating evidence. India's Chandrayaan-1 probe recorded evidence of lighter, disturbed soil around the Apollo 15 site. China's lunar probe, Chang'e 2, confirmed traces of the Apollo landings. The hoax hypothesis just doesn't stand up anymore.

That's all very well, but ET says no!

So, you pays your money and you takes your choice.

Who do you believe?

ET or NASA?

Oh! How we laughed!

So let's get this straight, ET claims that every Apollo mission from Lovell, Boorman and Anders' first manned orbit of the moon in 1968 (Apollo 7) to the last Lunar landing by Cernan, Schmit and Evans in late 1972 (Apollo 17) was faked despite the fact that every single mission was televised live as it happened and tracked every inch of the way by the Russians and anyone else with a 'scope big enough to see it. And then ET says WE have to prove they happened? Oh no matey, if you are going to make such fantastic claims then it is YOU who has to provide the proof except that you can't, can you, because there is no such proof, because your ideas are total fantasy like most of the mental diarrhoea you spew forth on these pages.

Truth Will Prevail wrote:
So let's get this straight, ET claims that every Apollo mission from Lovell, Boorman and Anders' first manned orbit of the moon in 1968 (Apollo 7) to the last Lunar landing by Cernan, Schmit and Evans in late 1972 (Apollo 17) was faked despite the fact that every single mission was televised live as it happened and tracked every inch of the way by the Russians and anyone else with a 'scope big enough to see it. And then ET says WE have to prove they happened? Oh no matey, if you are going to make such fantastic claims then it is YOU who has to provide the proof except that you can't, can you, because there is no such proof, because your ideas are total fantasy like most of the mental diarrhoea you spew forth on these pages.

Since when have ANY of ET's comments been based on fact or contained any proof?

But he does make us laugh, so humour him and wish him well in Clown College!

Chris Flunk wrote:
There's lots of independent verification of the lunar landings. For starters, what about the USSR? They closely monitored all of the Apollo missions and would have been the first to cry foul if there was any suspicion of falsification. Are you seriously suggesting they were in cahoots with NASA?

Then there are the recent independent lunar surveys:

Japan's SELENE lunar probe obtained several images with corroborating evidence.

India's Chandrayaan-1 probe recorded evidence of lighter, disturbed soil around the Apollo 15 site.

China's lunar probe, Chang'e 2, confirmed traces of the Apollo landings.

The hoax hypothesis just doesn't stand up anymore.

The Russian couldn't even monitor there own probes all the way to the moon ...read the threads before joining in with stuff already dealt with why dont you?

Japan's SELENE lunar probe showed nothing but craters which others have then interpreted as proof of landing sites or even buildings and alien ships?

All of which you have stated is interpreted... none of it deals with the proof man walked on the moon. Pointing to where man is supposed to have landed and saying yes it looks like some disturbance there is a joke..

There is no independent proof man walked on the moon and unless you are disputing that then thats the case.

President3 wrote:

Chris Flunk wrote:
There's lots of independent verification of the lunar landings. For starters, what about the USSR? They closely monitored all of the Apollo missions and would have been the first to cry foul if there was any suspicion of falsification. Are you seriously suggesting they were in cahoots with NASA? Then there are the recent independent lunar surveys: Japan's SELENE lunar probe obtained several images with corroborating evidence. India's Chandrayaan-1 probe recorded evidence of lighter, disturbed soil around the Apollo 15 site. China's lunar probe, Chang'e 2, confirmed traces of the Apollo landings. The hoax hypothesis just doesn't stand up anymore.

That's all very well, but ET says no!

So, you pays your money and you takes your choice.

Who do you believe?

ET or NASA?

Oh! How we laughed!

Your contribution to this thread is very telling of your intelligence level... not once od you offer anything in regards to issue in the way of proof but sit back like a fat slug scoffing...offer up proof or let others deal with the matter.

Truth Will Prevail wrote:
So let's get this straight, ET claims that every Apollo mission from Lovell, Boorman and Anders' first manned orbit of the moon in 1968 (Apollo 7) to the last Lunar landing by Cernan, Schmit and Evans in late 1972 (Apollo 17) was faked despite the fact that every single mission was televised live as it happened and tracked every inch of the way by the Russians and anyone else with a 'scope big enough to see it. And then ET says WE have to prove they happened? Oh no matey, if you are going to make such fantastic claims then it is YOU who has to provide the proof except that you can't, can you, because there is no such proof, because your ideas are total fantasy like most of the mental diarrhoea you spew forth on these pages.

Deal with LANDING ole man moonwalk...trying to avoid that by mentioning other things not posted or stated weakens your case as its an obvious ploy to distract away from your lack of evidence..

President3 wrote:

Truth Will Prevail wrote:
So let's get this straight, ET claims that every Apollo mission from Lovell, Boorman and Anders' first manned orbit of the moon in 1968 (Apollo 7) to the last Lunar landing by Cernan, Schmit and Evans in late 1972 (Apollo 17) was faked despite the fact that every single mission was televised live as it happened and tracked every inch of the way by the Russians and anyone else with a 'scope big enough to see it. And then ET says WE have to prove they happened? Oh no matey, if you are going to make such fantastic claims then it is YOU who has to provide the proof except that you can't, can you, because there is no such proof, because your ideas are total fantasy like most of the mental diarrhoea you spew forth on these pages.

Since when have ANY of ET's comments been based on fact or contained any proof?

But he does make us laugh, so humour him and wish him well in Clown College!

Have you proof of this? Or are you guilty of what you accuse? ie no proof?


This is all a bit beyond you as your posts show...so take a pill, put your feet up and rest your overly heavy head.

"The Russian couldn't even monitor there own probes". Who says? Your traveller mates or the funny websites? Idiot. The USSR made mistakes just as the US did on their first attempts BUT THEY LEARNT. (unlike you). Go read the FACTS!
.
So how did they all get through the VAB? Idiot. Landing on the moon with 1/6 earths gravity was only a tiny step compared to what it took to get into space, get to the moon etc. Do you never learn?
.
I give up, you are such an imbecile you don't even know when you're beat. You are either the biggest fool of all time or you are suffering from a serious mental health issue, probably the messianic complex, I suspect the latter.

Apollo 11, 12, 14, 15, 16 and 17 ALL LANDED ON THE MOON. Apollo 13 had to abort so Tom Hanks didn't make it as you'd know from your "history sources" (Ha ha !)
.
NASA employed over 35,000 people at the time of the Apollo landing plus sub contracters, 400,000 people in all. That is an awful lot of people to fool and NONE of them have ever cried hoax except in your imagination and on your fairy tale funny websites that are full of unsubstantiated schoolboy LIES. Will you never learn? Nah.

Truth Will Prevail wrote:
"The Russian couldn't even monitor there own probes". Who says? Your traveller mates or the funny websites? Idiot. The USSR made mistakes just as the US did on their first attempts BUT THEY LEARNT. (unlike you). Go read the FACTS!
.
So how did they all get through the VAB? Idiot. Landing on the moon with 1/6 earths gravity was only a tiny step compared to what it took to get into space, get to the moon etc. Do you never learn?
.
I give up, you are such an imbecile you don't even know when you're beat. You are either the biggest fool of all time or you are suffering from a serious mental health issue, probably the messianic complex, I suspect the latter.

Independent Proof ! Any?

Truth Will Prevail wrote:
Apollo 11, 12, 14, 15, 16 and 17 ALL LANDED ON THE MOON. Apollo 13 had to abort so Tom Hanks didn't make it as you'd know from your "history sources" (Ha ha !)
.
NASA employed over 35,000 people at the time of the Apollo landing plus sub contracters, 400,000 people in all. That is an awful lot of people to fool and NONE of them have ever cried hoax except in your imagination and on your fairy tale funny websites that are full of unsubstantiated schoolboy LIES. Will you never learn? Nah.

Landed on the moon..blah blah blah, Nasa said blah blah blah, Nasa showed blah blah blah, funky Nasa blah blah blah..

Change the record and show the IND proof not what Captain Pugwash said about his ship.

Independent proof! Any?

YOU ARE THE ONE MAKING FANTASTIC CLAIMS SO YOU ARE THE ONE WHO HAS TO PROVIDE PROOF ... WHERE IS YOUR EVIDENCE? YOU HAVEN'T GOT A GRAIN OF VERIFIABLE EVIDENCE ... HAVE YOU?

But why would i have to prove man didn't walk on the moon if you hadn't insisted he did?

If you said man jitterbugged the night away on the Sun because Captain Pugwash told you so, would i then have to prove man didn't?

Its down to you to provide the proof...if man did then you will be able, quite easily, to provide independent evidence of that....to date you havent!

Why Mr Chewbacie-Anspliff

YOU SAID MAN DIDN'T GO TO THE MOON BECAUSE WE DIDN'T HAVE THE TECHNOLOGY AND WE CAN'T TRAVEL THROUGH THE VAN ALLEN BELT. LIES. LIES. LIES, AND YOU KNOW IT. ADMIT YOU ARE WRONG. YOU ARE A POOR EXCUSE FOR A MAN IF YOU DON'T.

Jeez, I did wonder why I saw this story near the top of the 'most commented' section but like a lot of threads, it has drifted way off topic.

Anyway, on that note...

I'm glad the subject has drifted away from religion and whether there is a God or not - if people choose to believe in God then that is their choice and as a general rule of thumb, they're not hurting anyone. To prove God's existence is impossible but that's what faith is about.

E - Type, you're clearly a proud man and will argue your corner admirably, however one thing that has bothered me going through this thread is that at both 18.25 and 20.08 on the 29th Sept, you quote ex-NASA chief Dan Goldin (although in 1994 he was still the administrator of NASA) as your credible and (very) well informed source when talking about the Van Allen belt and the unsurvivable levels of radiation (all Greek to me but I'll look it up on wiki later). However, later on you dismiss other evidence from NASA as they cannot be trusted due to them staging the 'hoax'.

E -Type wrote:

Chris Flunk wrote:
There's lots of independent verification of the lunar landings. For starters, what about the USSR? They closely monitored all of the Apollo missions and would have been the first to cry foul if there was any suspicion of falsification. Are you seriously suggesting they were in cahoots with NASA?

Then there are the recent independent lunar surveys:

Japan's SELENE lunar probe obtained several images with corroborating evidence.

India's Chandrayaan-1 probe recorded evidence of lighter, disturbed soil around the Apollo 15 site.

China's lunar probe, Chang'e 2, confirmed traces of the Apollo landings.

The hoax hypothesis just doesn't stand up anymore.

The Russian couldn't even monitor there own probes all the way to the moon ...read the threads before joining in with stuff already dealt with why dont you?

Japan's SELENE lunar probe showed nothing but craters which others have then interpreted as proof of landing sites or even buildings and alien ships?

All of which you have stated is interpreted... none of it deals with the proof man walked on the moon. Pointing to where man is supposed to have landed and saying yes it looks like some disturbance there is a joke..

There is no independent proof man walked on the moon and unless you are disputing that then thats the case.

For the first time, SELENE provided detailed 3D images of the landing sites. Strangely, these precisely matched the footage of the terrain from the lunar landings. NASA would not have been able to fake the terrain detail based on the lunar surface data available to them at the time.

So, how did they do that? How did they guess the topology of the landing sites to that degree of accuracy?

Also, the LRO (Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter) actually shows the tracks in the lunar surface made by both the lunar rover and the astronauts themselves. You can even see the shadows made by the flags they planted. Although the LRO was launched by NASA, the camera and image analysis was under control of independent academic groups.

In the face of the overwhelming evidence to the contrary, it seems an invalid argument to simply state that you can't prove something didn't happen therefore you don't have to defend your position. What evidence do you have for the landings being faked?

High five Chris.
.
I suspect no amount of proof will shake ETs beliefs as he is totally convinced he is right and unable to reassess his opinions in the light of new evidence - actually the definition of dementia, and chronic stupidity.
.
In my experience most people judge the world by their own standards by which I mean that, for example, honest people tend to think that most people are honest, dishonest people tend to think that most people are dishonest and so on. If ET thinks NASA and the rest of the scientific world is dishonest and scheming that says a lot more about him than it says about the scientific community.

Blind Haze wrote:
Jeez, I did wonder why I saw this story near the top of the 'most commented' section but like a lot of threads, it has drifted way off topic.

Anyway, on that note...

I'm glad the subject has drifted away from religion and whether there is a God or not - if people choose to believe in God then that is their choice and as a general rule of thumb, they're not hurting anyone. To prove God's existence is impossible but that's what faith is about.

E - Type, you're clearly a proud man and will argue your corner admirably, however one thing that has bothered me going through this thread is that at both 18.25 and 20.08 on the 29th Sept, you quote ex-NASA chief Dan Goldin (although in 1994 he was still the administrator of NASA) as your credible and (very) well informed source when talking about the Van Allen belt and the unsurvivable levels of radiation (all Greek to me but I'll look it up on wiki later). However, later on you dismiss other evidence from NASA as they cannot be trusted due to them staging the 'hoax'.

yes and there is the crux of the matter. Nasa and its staff ( hierarchy) cannot be believed. The guy in the shirt sleeves working next to the other guy in the shirt sleeves knows only what he is doing not what the rest are doing...Its all fake.

To deceive for a short period of time for a reason and then the con is left in the wake of that reason to linger on, with only those who cant believe anything else still waving Neil Armstrong scarfs at the moon once a month.

Chris Flunk wrote:

E -Type wrote:

Chris Flunk wrote:
There's lots of independent verification of the lunar landings. For starters, what about the USSR? They closely monitored all of the Apollo missions and would have been the first to cry foul if there was any suspicion of falsification. Are you seriously suggesting they were in cahoots with NASA?

Then there are the recent independent lunar surveys:

Japan's SELENE lunar probe obtained several images with corroborating evidence.

India's Chandrayaan-1 probe recorded evidence of lighter, disturbed soil around the Apollo 15 site.

China's lunar probe, Chang'e 2, confirmed traces of the Apollo landings.

The hoax hypothesis just doesn't stand up anymore.

The Russian couldn't even monitor there own probes all the way to the moon ...read the threads before joining in with stuff already dealt with why dont you?

Japan's SELENE lunar probe showed nothing but craters which others have then interpreted as proof of landing sites or even buildings and alien ships?

All of which you have stated is interpreted... none of it deals with the proof man walked on the moon. Pointing to where man is supposed to have landed and saying yes it looks like some disturbance there is a joke..

There is no independent proof man walked on the moon and unless you are disputing that then thats the case.

For the first time, SELENE provided detailed 3D images of the landing sites. Strangely, these precisely matched the footage of the terrain from the lunar landings. NASA would not have been able to fake the terrain detail based on the lunar surface data available to them at the time.

So, how did they do that? How did they guess the topology of the landing sites to that degree of accuracy?

Also, the LRO (Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter) actually shows the tracks in the lunar surface made by both the lunar rover and the astronauts themselves. You can even see the shadows made by the flags they planted. Although the LRO was launched by NASA, the camera and image analysis was under control of independent academic groups.

In the face of the overwhelming evidence to the contrary, it seems an invalid argument to simply state that you can't prove something didn't happen therefore you don't have to defend your position. What evidence do you have for the landings being faked?

They provided photos of places that might be considered as landings and it might even be the case there was landings but they show no evidence of manned landings... this is what the debate is about...independent evidence of man landing and walking on the moon...not pictures of landing sites. Things sent from the earth are indeed on the moon but not once thing shows man was there...

Its also not an argument that saying a company who sells cakes and says their cakes are the best in the world are correct and providing their adverts saying that isn't evidence that its the case. Ole moonwalker offers Nasa evidence as independent evidence of Nasas claims and yet doesn't understand how that isn't acceptable.

Idiot ET who else could provide proof of the lunar landing except NASA? There is no telescope on earth capable of resolving details of the landing site so who else could provide proof except NASA?
.
YOU ARE THE ONE MAKING FANTASTIC CLAIMS SO YOU ARE THE ONE WHO HAS TO PROVIDE PROOF ... WHERE IS YOUR EVIDENCE? YOU HAVEN'T GOT A GRAIN OF VERIFIABLE EVIDENCE ... HAVE YOU?

You have not addressed my question, please provide evidence of the faking of the moon landings. If there was a studio built, film crews assembled, video editing suites etc. then there should be evidence. Where is the evidence of the falsification of the moon landings?

The evidence previously provided is all independent and does corroborate manned lunar landings.

Every history book, every western government, every official body says we did go to the moon SIX times and there is not a single article in any peer reviewed publication, which means Doctorate Thesises, Nature, New Scientist, Science Today etc which has refuted any of your claims SO WHERE IS YOUR PROOF?
.
YOU ARE THE ONE MAKING FANTASTIC CLAIMS SO YOU ARE THE ONE WHO HAS TO PROVE THAT ALL THESE PEOPLE ARE WRONG AND YOU ARE RIGHT. WHERE IS YOUR PROOF???

Ooops typo, should have said "no publication ... has refuted the landing".
.
Talking of typos, if the landing was manufactured (as only schoolboys and idiots claim) you'd think they would have made sure that Neil Armstrong got his lines right.

Truth Will Prevail wrote:
Idiot ET who else could provide proof of the lunar landing except NASA? There is no telescope on earth capable of resolving details of the landing site so who else could provide proof except NASA?
.
YOU ARE THE ONE MAKING FANTASTIC CLAIMS SO YOU ARE THE ONE WHO HAS TO PROVIDE PROOF ... WHERE IS YOUR EVIDENCE? YOU HAVEN'T GOT A GRAIN OF VERIFIABLE EVIDENCE ... HAVE YOU?

Stop shouting or you are going to fuse your computer with spittle.

Now you have hit the nail on the head...other than what Nasa says there is no evidence. not a bit.. not a smidgen, nothing at all.

Google moon hoax and then dive in...all the independent evidence you want and none of it coming from only one source....as for the "idiot" you are out of sinc with what the majority think re" man and the duck walk...that being the case could it be that its you who is the idiot?

Chris Flunk wrote:
You have not addressed my question, please provide evidence of the faking of the moon landings. If there was a studio built, film crews assembled, video editing suites etc. then there should be evidence. Where is the evidence of the falsification of the moon landings?

The evidence previously provided is all independent and does corroborate manned lunar landings.

There is so much its like saying prove there is a beech there by showing me every grain of sand...goggle moon hoax and run in the sand dunes...theres 1000s of them...

Truth Will Prevail wrote:
Every history book, every western government, every official body says we did go to the moon SIX times and there is not a single article in any peer reviewed publication, which means Doctorate Thesises, Nature, New Scientist, Science Today etc which has refuted any of your claims SO WHERE IS YOUR PROOF?
.
YOU ARE THE ONE MAKING FANTASTIC CLAIMS SO YOU ARE THE ONE WHO HAS TO PROVE THAT ALL THESE PEOPLE ARE WRONG AND YOU ARE RIGHT. WHERE IS YOUR PROOF???

The internet is the ultimate in 'peer review' try goggling moon hoax and while there order some calming tonic of ebay.

Some of the "funny websites" are run by scientists and experts!

Whyy are you frightened to google them?

All the info came from NASA? What about astronomers, Doctors, materials scientists etc and all the specialists involved but not employed by NASA?
.
If you google "moon hoax" all you will get is imbeciles like you who know nothing about this subject, every schoolchild knows that. Your "scientists and experts" are all fake you twazzle, some of them are probably even people like me (flying balloons to wind up the UFO buffs) and they're probably laughing their socks off that people like you actually believe them.
.
Why don't you check out the proper bona fide sources like the peer reviewed journals, oh yes, you wouldn't understand all the big words would you?
.
Manned/unmanned whats the difference, the technology to get them there is almost the same, just add life support systems the same as subs. high altitude planes etc. Dumbo.
.
I find it hard to believe that any adult on earth can be as stupid and as gullible as you are, been quite an eye opener.

Truth Will Prevail wrote:
All the info came from NASA? What about astronomers, Doctors, materials scientists etc and all the specialists involved but not employed by NASA?
.
If you google "moon hoax" all you will get is imbeciles like you who know nothing about this subject, every schoolchild knows that. Your "scientists and experts" are all fake you twazzle, some of them are probably even people like me (flying balloons to wind up the UFO buffs) and they're probably laughing their socks off that people like you actually believe them.
.
Why don't you check out the proper bona fide sources like the peer reviewed journals, oh yes, you wouldn't understand all the big words would you?
.
Manned/unmanned whats the difference, the technology to get them there is almost the same, just add life support systems the same as subs. high altitude planes etc. Dumbo.
.
I find it hard to believe that any adult on earth can be as stupid and as gullible as you are, been quite an eye opener.

All the information on the 'moon landing and walk' came from NASA...are you denying that?

Working of the Premises...

The people on many of the sites are scientists, some of which you wouldn't be allowed in the same building as them never mind the same room...EXPERTS who present clear reasons why it was a fraud...you dont want to see the evidence...then okay live in your ignorance. LOL

" Manned/unmanned whats the difference, the technology to get them there is almost the same"

That sums the whole matter up...there are Deep-submergence vehicle which can go where a man cant! Are you suggesting that man going to the places they go is not much difference and only needs a bit of tweaking? Now that is the logic you use for the space walks and landings...

"I find it hard to believe that any adult on earth can be as stupid and as gullible as you are, been quite an eye opener."

Now that your eyes are open look in the mirror LOL...there is the most gullible person you'll ever know

You still havent mentioned or explained how they got in and out of the lander (The sparrow) with their back packs on? Back packs that COULDN"T work even if they did force their way in and out with them on...

I suppose you have a report on them...one that has never been released into the public domain...you can get those cant you? You being a man of importance! LOL...and a ho ho ho thrown in.

I feel sorry for you.

Truth Will Prevail wrote:
I feel sorry for you.

And I you but more so...have you considered looking at the sites run by eminent men and women who deal with the hoax? if not why not?

You should be locked up ET, anyone with the mentality and intellect of a child who believes he is more intelligent than everyone else is suffering from a serious mental health issue.

And have you considered looking at the REAL evidence and learning how to spot fake "emminent men and women"? Thought not, after all you don't want to shatter your deluded opinions do you.

If any of your so-called “emminent men and women” were the real deal (they’re probably my mate down the road!) they would publish their so-called “facts” in the right peer-reviewed journals because “publishing” makes their claims bona fide recognised fact the world over.
.
But peer reviewed journals only publish AFTER they have had articles/papers checked by a number of REAL proven independent experts from the same field, so if it’s the Van Allen Belt the experts would be people like senior University Professors and researchers specialising in space radiation etc, the sort of people who are ONLY interested in the real truth and will not be fooled by flimsy or fraudulant evidence.
.
So why is there nothing published in the PRJ’s that contradicts the history book version that we went to the Moon six times? Ah yes, you’ll be screeching conspiracy by now. Well if you’re right it would be the biggest conspiracy in the history of the world, involving everyone from the astronauts and 400,000 workers to completely independent Science journals and British University Professors. Fantastic.
.
The day that you or anyone else can produce anything published in a peer reviewed journal such as Nature, NS, ST etc that even vaguely questions the authenticity of the Lunar landings, I and a whole load of other people will take you very seriously indeed. Until then I blame the drink and the genes.

Truth Will Prevail wrote:
You should be locked up ET, anyone with the mentality and intellect of a child who believes he is more intelligent than everyone else is suffering from a serious mental health issue.

Anyone who says someone has stated this when its clear they havent is more in need of help!

Truth Will Prevail wrote:
And have you considered looking at the REAL evidence and learning how to spot fake "emminent men and women"? Thought not, after all you don't want to shatter your deluded opinions do you.

I would suggest that its you who suffer the fear of shattered dreams of maybe walking on the moon.

Your proof comes only from the people who claim the events not from one single independent source.

The sources you call independent have got their information from the same source as you ie NASA..not one bit of independent source and yet you refuse to look at scientists and others who have researched this without accepting NASA claims as fact!

You have become so narrow minded on the matter you cant see out of the spaceship.

Truth Will Prevail wrote:
If any of your so-called “emminent men and women” were the real deal (they’re probably my mate down the road!) they would publish their so-called “facts” in the right peer-reviewed journals because “publishing” makes their claims bona fide recognised fact the world over.
.
But peer reviewed journals only publish AFTER they have had articles/papers checked by a number of REAL proven independent experts from the same field, so if it’s the Van Allen Belt the experts would be people like senior University Professors and researchers specialising in space radiation etc, the sort of people who are ONLY interested in the real truth and will not be fooled by flimsy or fraudulant evidence.
.
So why is there nothing published in the PRJ’s that contradicts the history book version that we went to the Moon six times? Ah yes, you’ll be screeching conspiracy by now. Well if you’re right it would be the biggest conspiracy in the history of the world, involving everyone from the astronauts and 400,000 workers to completely independent Science journals and British University Professors. Fantastic.
.
The day that you or anyone else can produce anything published in a peer reviewed journal such as Nature, NS, ST etc that even vaguely questions the authenticity of the Lunar landings, I and a whole load of other people will take you very seriously indeed. Until then I blame the drink and the genes.

You insist that the only information that is worthy of belief has to go through "peer review" ignoring the fact that peer reviews are sometimes if not always connected or have a state in someway to what they are reviewing!

Has any of who you mention stated that man has gone through the VAB? or have they just stated it would be possible with the right protection?

Has those who say they can bee reviewed to see if they have had agenda to saying this?

As the very eminent people who have stated this has not happened nor has the moon walk been peer reviewed by those who have said it has and their mistake(s) exposed?

The number of those working on the fraud would of been very small...why you think the man who served the tea would know is beyond comprehension. They would all working of need to know..

As for "peer reviewed" you are like a jobs-worth record.. " its not in the book of my peers so it cant exist"

Show one piece of evidence that didn't source back to NASA

Then google moon hoax and see what you find!

Honestly, you haven't provided a single piece of empirical evidence for the moon landings being faked. Just saying it must be fake because there's lots of people on the internet who agree is not a valid argument.

Try searching on homeopathy, you'll find thousands of important and official sounding people providing 'evidence' that it works despite the fact it's basically a huge con. Or do you believe in homeopathy too?

E-Types will do anything rather than admit he is wrong. sad.

Chris Flunk wrote:
Honestly, you haven't provided a single piece of empirical evidence for the moon landings being faked. Just saying it must be fake because there's lots of people on the internet who agree is not a valid argument.

Try searching on homeopathy, you'll find thousands of important and official sounding people providing 'evidence' that it works despite the fact it's basically a huge con. Or do you believe in homeopathy too?

I dont need to do anything!

All you need to do is google 'moon hoax' and then fill your space boots with the reams of evidence available, its all there.

If you feel you cant do that nor want to the evidence has to use your keyboard to educate yourself then what can be said other than... beam me up scotty.

Aint it just the truth wrote:
E-Types will do anything rather than admit he is wrong. sad.

Im i correct in saying this might be Captain Duck-Walk banned once again?

Is there something you can post where i have been wrong and you can show that to be the case?

Quack Quack!

You just can't do it, can you? Just provide a single piece of empirical evidence for the moon landings being faked.