At 10:56 p.m. EDT, American astronaut Neil Armstrong, 240,000 miles from Earth, speaks these words to more than a billion people listening at home: “That’s one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind.” Stepping off the lunar landing module Eagle, Armstrong became the first human to walk on the surface of the moon.
It is my sincere desire to provide readers of this site with the best unbiased information available, and a forum where it can be discussed openly, as our Founders intended. But it is not easy nor inexpensive to do so, especially when those who wish to prevent us from making the truth known, attack us without mercy on all fronts on a daily basis. So each time you visit the site, I would ask that you consider the value that you receive and have received from The Burning Platform and the community of which you are a vital part. I can't do it all alone, and I need your help and support to keep it alive. Please consider contributing an amount commensurate to the value that you receive from this site and community, or even by becoming a sustaining supporter through periodic contributions. [Burning Platform LLC - PO Box 1520 Kulpsville, PA 19443] or Paypal
-----------------------------------------------------
To donate via Stripe, click here.
-----------------------------------------------------
Use promo code ILMF2, and save up to 66% on all MyPillow purchases. (The Burning Platform benefits when you use this promo code.)
The American effort to send astronauts to the moon has its origins in a famous appeal President John F. Kennedy made to a special joint session of Congress on May 25, 1961: “I believe this nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on the moon and returning him safely to Earth.” At the time, the United States was still trailing the Soviet Union in space developments, and Cold War-era America welcomed Kennedy’s bold proposal.
In 1966, after five years of work by an international team of scientists and engineers, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) conducted the first unmanned Apollo mission, testing the structural integrity of the proposed launch vehicle and spacecraft combination. Then, on January 27, 1967, tragedy struck at Kennedy Space Center in Cape Canaveral, Florida, when a fire broke out during a manned launch-pad test of the Apollo spacecraft and Saturn rocket. Three astronauts were killed in the fire.
Despite the setback, NASA and its thousands of employees forged ahead, and in October 1968, Apollo 7, the first manned Apollo mission, orbited Earth and successfully tested many of the sophisticated systems needed to conduct a moon journey and landing. In December of the same year, Apollo 8 took three astronauts to the dark side of the moon and back, and in March 1969 Apollo 9 tested the lunar module for the first time while in Earth orbit. Then in May, the three astronauts of Apollo 10 took the first complete Apollo spacecraft around the moon in a dry run for the scheduled July landing mission.
At 9:32 a.m. on July 16, with the world watching, Apollo 11 took off from Kennedy Space Center with astronauts Neil Armstrong, Edwin Aldrin Jr., and Michael Collins aboard. Armstrong, a 38-year-old civilian research pilot, was the commander of the mission. After traveling 240,000 miles in 76 hours, Apollo 11 entered into a lunar orbit on July 19. The next day, at 1:46 p.m., the lunar module Eagle, manned by Armstrong and Aldrin, separated from the command module, where Collins remained. Two hours later, the Eagle began its descent to the lunar surface, and at 4:18 p.m. the craft touched down on the southwestern edge of the Sea of Tranquility. Armstrong immediately radioed to Mission Control in Houston, Texas, a famous message: “The Eagle has landed.”
At 10:39 p.m., five hours ahead of the original schedule, Armstrong opened the hatch of the lunar module. As he made his way down the lunar module’s ladder, a television camera attached to the craft recorded his progress and beamed the signal back to Earth, where hundreds of millions watched in great anticipation. At 10:56 p.m., Armstrong spoke his famous quote, which he later contended was slightly garbled by his microphone and meant to be “that’s one small step for a man, one giant leap for mankind.” He then planted his left foot on the gray, powdery surface, took a cautious step forward, and humanity had walked on the moon.
“Buzz” Aldrin joined him on the moon’s surface at 11:11 p.m., and together they took photographs of the terrain, planted a U.S. flag, ran a few simple scientific tests, and spoke with President Richard M. Nixon via Houston. By 1:11 a.m. on July 21, both astronauts were back in the lunar module and the hatch was closed. The two men slept that night on the surface of the moon, and at 1:54 p.m. the Eagle began its ascent back to the command module. Among the items left on the surface of the moon was a plaque that read: “Here men from the planet Earth first set foot on the moon–July 1969 A.D–We came in peace for all mankind.”
At 5:35 p.m., Armstrong and Aldrin successfully docked and rejoined Collins, and at 12:56 a.m. on July 22 Apollo 11 began its journey home, safely splashing down in the Pacific Ocean at 12:51 p.m. on July 24.
There would be five more successful lunar landing missions, and one unplanned lunar swing-by, Apollo 13. The last men to walk on the moon, astronauts Eugene Cernan and Harrison Schmitt of the Apollo 17 mission, left the lunar surface on December 14, 1972. The Apollo program was a costly and labor intensive endeavor, involving an estimated 400,000 engineers, technicians, and scientists, and costing $24 billion (close to $100 billion in today’s dollars). The expense was justified by Kennedy’s 1961 mandate to beat the Soviets to the moon, and after the feat was accomplished ongoing missions lost their viability.
OMG! I think HsF just shit his pants.
Hard Farmer ,has been drinking alot of maple syrup lately so give him a break.All that sugar has his head spinning.
I have been looking at this event from HSF’s perspective and have come to the conclusion the moon landing might have been a staged production.
Even NASA says they have never figured out how to get humans through the radiation belts. So HSF musr be correct.
Bullshit.
So the same NASA that we don’t trust in going to the Moon, we DO trust in their statements and readings of the Van Allen Radiation Belts? Got it!
And here’s the video of the NASA scientist making the admission.
NASA Engineer Admits They Can’t Get Past the Van Allen Belts (now a shelved project)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NlXG0REiVzE
I was on the beach that morning and saw the launch. Did I actually see the astronauts enter the capsule? No, but I believe it happened. Maybe someone who is obviously much more intelligent than I am(Maggie) explain how a fake landing could be pulled off. Thousands of people involved would have to go along with this fraud and I just don’t see that as possible. Or maybe it was really the Russians that landed on the moon 48yrs ago?
ragman- You definitely saw them launch into LOW orbit, and there they stayed. Can’t get through the belts dude.
Bullshit.
I previously worked at NASA Langley.
Spacecraft and satellites use aluminum and polyethylene for radiation shielding.
Dutchman- Good to know, I’ll keep a extra roll of aluminum foil on hand in case of nuclear attack. Seems strange they use lead shields against radiation applications in hospitals when they could have just used aluminum.
Should I spring for the heavy duty foil or get regular?
BL, you apparently don’t know jack about radiation.
Hospital radiation – mostly X-rays, for imaging, and gamma rays for certain cancer treatments. These types are both electromagnetic radiation (photons) and can only be stopped by heavy shielding like lead or thick concrete.
In space, most of the radiation is solar wind and that consists of high energy electrons (beta radiation) as well as alpha particles, other particles, relatively little X-ray or gamma ray radiation, and the occasional cosmic ray. Beta and Alpha particles can be stopped with thin shielding like metal foil. Cosmic rays require large amounts of shielding but are rare and unpredictable, and for a few days in space you’re just rolling the odds of not being hit with one.
The reason this is an issue for Mars travel is the duration – 6 months of travel each way, compared to a few days exposure in the Moon trips. Also that radiation was not as well understood in the 1960’s and there may have been greater risks taken than today’s bureaucratic NASA is OK with.
https://www.space.com/21353-space-radiation-mars-mission-threat.html
https://spaceflight.nasa.gov/spacenews/factsheets/pdfs/radiation.pdf
lots of risks-haven’t most of the astronauts lived into their 80s?
You either get cancer or you don’t.
Lots of people in the astronauts’ generation have lived well into their 80’s, including a bunch of my relatives. Think of how far above average a man had to be in health, physical fitness and intelligence* to be considered for the astronaut program. (*high intelligence is strongly correlated with longer lifespan.) Then think of all the extra medical attention they had beforehand and for decades after their space travel.
It’s really no stretch to think that 99th percentile men given medical care orders of magnitude above normal would live to a 60th or even 80th percentile age, despite being exposed to several types of all-or-nothing health risks. In fact, due to the nature of those risks, it wouldn’t be hard to imagine those same men living to 99th percentile ages.
“These types are both electromagnetic radiation (photons) and can only be stopped by heavy shielding like lead or thick concrete.”
I usually stop photons by closing my window shades.
Your window shades aren’t going to stop gamma rays…
Geez, does anyone here know the electromagnetic spectrum? This is literally elementary-school level science knowledge.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photon
Snick- Two links from NASA…….Jeebus H. Krist.
These are the lying arseholes we are calling out.
Hey, I simply said the moon landing “might” have been a staged production. I have been doing a LOT of thinking about how large a role perspective plays when assessing information in a simplistic “seems legit” or “smells like bullshit” sort of way. Most people are not able to view certain things from another perspective, a phenomenon commonly called “sacred cows” syndrome. Once you identify your own “sacred cows” it is a fairly simple matter to start recognizing the possibility that you might be wrong.
Therefore, in the attempt to examine my own knee-jerk reaction to anyone questioning so-called “scientific leapfrogging in front of mankind” evidence viewed and discussed on the evening news from time to time just because I saw a bunch of rocks at the Smithsonian when I was a kid that CAME from the moon… well, rocks really do just look like rocks.
So, if I truly allow my mind to shift perspective and see through another’s point of view, the things pointed toward as evidence of the scenery being staged do support that idea IF you look at it with a photographer’s understanding of lighting and shadow. Did I say I definitely believe it staged; no, I’m not there yet, but I am glad to find my mind not completely frozen into rigid disbelief.
Ragman, only the people actually directly involved on what I consider a film would have to be aware. Nobody else would have to be involved. Perhaps the people in Mission Control thought what they were hearing and seeing was real.
There exists many debunks to the moon landings but the simplest one is this. Assuming that the moon is a real physical object, with thousands of impact craters, no atmosphere and no surface water, its surface condition should consist of many feet of pulverized moon rock. Nixon was president during all of the moon landings. An event as big as this certainly deserves a national holiday. Even TPTB don’t have the cajones to take it that far. If like me you saw it on TV, you know it happened. But I sure can’t explain how.
I don’t agree with your assertion regarding the dust. Is it not possible that the debris from a high-energy impact is simply ejected out to space?
No. Even with no atmosphere the moon dust must coat the surface. Try to land in it and you disappear much like quick sand. Landing is not possible. Debunked.
Too many assumptions in your “debunking”.
&f=1[/img][img]https://images.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Ftse4.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DOIP.XRWlvLlvR6Pw8mb_KnWWYwEOEs%26pid%3D15.1&f=1[/img]
The “quicksand” moon dust idea was actually seriously considered in NASA circles early on; but the earliest moon missions had landers too, and when they failed to disappear beneath several feet of moon dust, the idea was discarded.
Now, I know you can say, “All lies, start to finish” but consider this:
BEFORE they even tried to land men, probes impacted on the surface, and even soft landings (with the lander sending back data) were accomplished. BOTH BY THE US AND THE SOVIET UNION. Was everybody lying? Why? How was such a collusion accomplished during the height of the Cold War?
BE sceptical. But be reasonable, not EVERYTHING is a lie or conspiracy.
Just 99.999%. /s
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_missions_to_the_Moon
[img
And can you believe that the Apollo capsules returned to earth at free-fall speed? Obviously fake!!!
I always wondered how they carried enough fuel in that tiny capsule to get back home. How much fuel would be needed?
Not that much, considering that the amount needed was enough to overcome the (relatively weak) Moon gravity. Once you leave the Moon’s “gravitational well” (and are pointed in the right direction, TOWARD the Earth and not out into random space) then the Earth’s gravity PULLS you to it; the problem then becomes (as Persnickety suggests) how to SLOW DOWN enough to land safely.
%23&f=1[/img]
Well then, how was it done?
There were “retro rockets” that would slow down the capsule a little, but were mainly for “attitude adjustment” on the way down; you wouldn’t want to be upside down for any length of time during re-entry, or you WOULD burn up. The main device was called a HEAT SHIELD, a layer of composite materials on the BOTTOM of the capsule that was designed to selectively and slowly BURN AWAY during the descent, dissipating enough heat to preserve the passengers (astronauts) while preventing the rest of the capsule from failing due to the high heat of atmospheric friction during re-entry. Once the capsule had reached a low enough altitude, PARACHUTES were deployed from the top of the capsule to slow it further; and finally, the capsule landed in the ocean to dissipate the last of the velocity it still had.
Really, I know I’m old as dirt, but am I the only one here that remembers Apollo capsules landing in the ocean, being picked up by helicopters and landing on a Navy carrier?
[img
Looking at subsequent events such as 911 and sandy hoax I’m now inclined to think it was staged. I also look at what happened to the space shuttles with much more advanced technologies. I believed it then but now, I’m just not seeing it.
The increase in technology slows things down, as does the increased value put on individual lives. These days the loss of a dozen marines in a helicopter crash is news. In WWII, they dropped thousands of men onto Omaha beach and marched them into German gunfire. They built Hoover Dam much faster than would be done now. The Apollo program wasn’t slowed by an explosion on the launch pad, while today it would prompt five years of congressional hearings. The incremental increase in energy needed to go to the moon (and to initiate a return flight) isn’t much more than that needed to achieve earth orbit. That the necessary calculations were done by old mainframes and slide rules makes sense given the attitude that they didn’t expect perfect safety for the astronauts. They went with what they had because they had the Soviets to show up. The array of earth-orbiting and geosynchronous satellites we’ve had for 30+ years makes it seem perfectly believable that we sent guys to the moon in relatively rickety crafts. That’s how I look at it.
Mad Dog Meathead is right again .Damn Mad Dog this is the second day in a row I agree with you.
Progress… how’s Trixie these days beebs..
Times are tough. The going rate went to $8/BJ, but regulars like Beebs only pay $7.
$7.50 if the cat gets to watch.
Dawg- That price is with the truckers discount, you could not get that deal cat or no cat.
Noted.
lol
That’s just not right, guys. I’m watching you.
Come on Maggie.
We are just having some fun. You know and I know that this thread is going to turn into a shit show…
a shitty burrito
[img
[/img]
If you wanna watch, it’s $0.50 extra, as indicated above.
Has our government ever told the truth?
My trust in the government compels me to at least question the truth of this story.
google “post moon landing press conference”. Ask yourself “is this the demeanor of men who JUST LANDED ON THE FUCKING MOON?”
Anecdotal bullshit. Scientists are weird.
Y’all believe what you want to. Next you’ll be telling us that Santa and the Easter Bunny are a hoax.
Rdawg- You have now declared bullshit twice in this thread with regard to the Van Allen Radiation Belts. You must have information as to how humans can pass through ultra high radiation for two hours and not turn into a crispy critter. Please share this info with us and NASA in detail, we need to know.
http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm
BL what say you?
That is precisely the link I was going to provide; well done Rob!
Bea – Blow me. You post statements as fact all the time, and then demand detailed evidence if anybody dare challenge you. And by the way, transit time through the VAB was about 53 minutes. Read the link Rob gave you. You won’t understand any of it, but you can look at the pictures and read the summary at least.
RiNS and Ratty
That is complete disinfo even though the maff looks impressive, looks like it works for you guys. Good try, no cigar.
Yep conprehensive maff analysis by Bea. Impressive.
RiNS- Robert A. Braeunig, what can you tell me about him? He just sort of appeared out of the blue when people start getting intense about the NASA BS.
Can you provide anything about him that is credible?
BL
Check the math. It is either right or wrong. I really dont give two shits to the wind who this guy is.
Anyways Gotta say your retort in response, the first one, was awesome. You should really consider submitting it to peer reviewed science magazine for publication. I really like the part about cigar.
Compelling stuff!
Oh yeah! 100 bitchez!
RiNS
It matters greatly who that guy is and it also matters that in this case the narrative is controlled completely by one entity, NASA.
Rob, I wouldn’t waste another second of your life trying to appease Bea. You could find a complete bio of the aforementioned guy, and Bea would say it’s fabricated. You know, “disinfo”. That’s how you win the argument, by the way. It’s Logic 101: first make your assertion “it’s disinfo”. No reason. No facts to back up the claim. Typical of 99% of the shit he spews. Then a quick dig: “looks like it works for you guys. (you’re too stupid to see through the lies, but I am not)”
He’s got his mind made up already, and no link, citation, photo, video, interview, or anything else will satisfy him. He will always find a little bit to pick at.
So fuck it. He doesn’t think we went to the moon, who cares? Time to move on.
Nothing the government EVER says or does should be taken on face value. EVER. Far too many questions NASA REFUSES to answer. EVERYONE working on Apollo was in their own little compartment with virtually nobody seeing the total picture (for national security reasons of course). A coverup would have taken a FAR SMALLER conspiracy than most imagine. Of course there was a rocket, of course it lifted off, of course stuff fell back to earth, of course billions were spent and thousands were employed. That’s what “jobs programs” are all about.
My father in law was head engineer at Rockwell for part of their work. Unfortunately I never got the chance to seriously talk to him or any of his co-workers about their thoughts as he died before my eyes were opened to all of the “inconsistencies” in NASA’s story that they simply wont address.
One of the greatest films ever (for its subject matter) is Capricorn One. Hollywood actually got this one right. And the muderous O.J. Simpson plays a role too.
A simi-copy and paste.
Since the late 2000s, high-definition photos taken by the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) of the Apollo landing sites have captured the lander modules and the tracks left by the astronauts. In 2012, images were released showing five of the six Apollo missions’ American flags erected on the Moon still standing; the exception is that of Apollo 11, which has lain on the lunar surface since being accidentally blown over by the takeoff rocket’s exhaust.
A simi-copy and paste:
Since the late 2000s, high-definition photos taken by the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) of the Apollo landing sites have captured the lander modules and the tracks left by the astronauts. In 2012, images were released showing five of the six Apollo missions’ American flags erected on the Moon still standing; the exception is that of Apollo 11, which has lain on the lunar surface since being accidentally blown over by the takeoff rocket’s exhaust.
Sure, whatever.
We went, they just used fake photographs to capture the real event.
Makes sense.
Below is a photo from NASA that purports to capture the astronauts on the Moon. It is alleged to be real.
[img
?w=640[/img]
How many directions can shadows fall when the only source of light is from the Sun? If the Sun light is hitting the astronaut on his left shoulder, why is his shadow falling directly to his front? If his shadow is falling directly to the front of him, why is the shadow of the LEM at a 90 degree angle to the shadow of the astronaut?
We could go on, but I don’t want to trigger anyone or send them for the fainting couches.
IF we went- and that’s a big if- then you have to concede all the fakery and false data presented in order to prop up reality. And that hasn’t happened, which leads any reasonable person to conclude intentional deception on at least the level of physical evidence. People who willfully conceal or distort reality in the face of their own evidence are not particularly reliable as witnesses to any event, especially the one in question.
Again, it isn’t up to us to prove we didn’t go, it’s up to them (those who make the unsupportable claim) to prove that they did.
3 down votes and not one person with an explanation of the multiple shadow angles.
I hope I beat my old record on the flat Earth thread.
lol wait it is early innings on this one. The only thing working against you is it is summer and most folks are outside enjoying the good weather. Good Luck though. I will do my best to help this thread along..
I’m enjoying my siesta hour. It’s above 90 and we cut wood all morning so I have nothing but time right now to engage in my second favorite hobby, taking a hammer to feet of clay.
It’s fun.
Maybe the feet are your own.
Pretty sure Mythbusters took this on.
Yeah, just like they “took on” the JFK assassination and came to……wait for it…..the same conclusion as the government did. No shock that their show DEPENDS on access to government bomb ranges for their explosions, the government-owned Pressidio military base in S.F., and countless other government “favors.” Sorry, follow the money.
The face shield is not flat silly. The shadows and light are all correct, sun is at subjects back, and those things he sees, (the reflection you are looking at in his shield) is front-lit.
Where is the fraud in the photo? I cant find it
If the sun is at the photographer’s back why are all the shadows in the pic going off to the left of the image and why is the arm/suit of the astronaut brightly lit on his left side?? Sorry, the pic has massive fails that you are simply ignoring because you aren’t willing to face the truth that your government has lied to you since you were born and that you believed all of them.
That’s because they can’t give an explanation. But I can. Lights for the movie. The moon never happened.
I dunno man. Looks to me caused by distortions from the curve of his face shield. Ever been to the carnival and looked at yourself thru the curved mirrors?
After looking at it again, I am convinced that is exactly what is going on. The shadows all point to the center of the face shield because of the curvature of it. Imagine pulling the sides back until it were a flat plane. The shadows would bend as well until they were all pointed in the same direction.
Of course the picture still could be from a set, but there is nothing wrong with the shadows.
[img
[/img]
Triggered whatever…
At least the shadows are all going in the same direction.
And not that it matters, but that photo doesn’t show anything even remotely resembling proof of a manned Moon landing. That could be anywhere, it could be photo-shopped, it could be remotely placed…you get the idea.
The photos of the astronauts are the ones that are rife with fakery. They need someone to explain away the inconsistencies, not offer up alleged satellite photos of blotches too small to be deciphered by the human eye. And while we’re at it, that’s what they’re doing with taxpayer dollars these days? Sending up lunar surveyors to takes shots that might convince the rubes in flyover country that we really went to the Moon because decades of BS has left them doubtful as to the integrity of the government narrative? Sounds like the cheating spouse that doctors receipts to cover their tracks. We don’t doubt them because we’re stupid, we doubt them because they lie all the time. You think I wouldn’t prefer to believe that what I watched on our little black and white TV in the Summer of ’69 was real? That we actually had the drive, tenacity, competence and grit to go to the Moon? I’m beyond heartbroken by all the horrific and capricious acts of wanton cupidity our government has showered upon us over the intervening decades, but I haven’t lost my cognitive ability to recognize a load of manure when I see it.
Let me know when you’ve got a plausible explanation for the multiple shadow angles cast by the Sun and I’m all ears.
There are plenty of photos I’ve seen with the astronauts walking next to the capsule and the flag and the rover and the shadows are all over the place, going this way and that.
Also, no astronauts can agree on whether you can see stars from deep space. Some say yes, some say no. I would think that would be easy to answer.
We’d have to define terms first. What do you or the astronauts consider to be deep space? No astronaut has ever been to what I consider deep space. In visual astronomy terms deep space is generally considered outside of our solar system.
I got to spend a day with Story Musgrave. He was probably the best educated astronaut to ever fly. He related a story that day that perplexed him. He had a few minutes to kill on a space walk one day. He was attached to the robotic arm at the time, flying on the dark side of Earth and asked to be extended as far away from the Shuttle as possible into a position where there was absolutely nothing in his field of view except the interior rim of his visor/helmet and space beyond.
He was perplexed that he could not see any stars. However he had been on numerous other missions where he clearly remembered seeing stars and constellations. He could even see a few deep sky objects that are naked eye visible. He saw stars while servicing the HST.
I used to watch NASA TV during docking operations between the Shuttle and MIR and ISS. Quite often I could see stars and entire constellations beyond the object being docked but sometimes no stars were visible at all.
I suspect that scattered gas, dust & ice in the near earth space environment and beyond could have been the reason why Dr. Musgrave couldn’t see stars. Gegenschein and Zodiacal light are two common phenomena easily seen from Earth that do indeed reduce or eliminate the visibility of stars beyond.
We have to continually remember that NEWS from the government and its’ agencies are for public’s perception of reality … just check with cnn (don’t deserve to be capitalized) … congress (same word for a bunch of monkeys) passed a law allowing government to advertise on news shows without identifying the ads as such … when the leaders of the nation can’t be trusted always remember ‘no government has ever outlived its’ people’ …. insanity of the leaders …………………….
You know, I guess I am not being fair, let’s just go and look at the original Moon landing tapes that NASA made back in 1969…
What?
Moon landing tapes got erased, NASA admits
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-nasa-tapes-idUSTRE56F5MK20090716
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The original recordings of the first humans landing on the moon 40 years ago were erased and re-used, but newly restored copies of the original broadcast look even better, NASA officials said on Thursday.
NASA admitted in 2006 that no one could find the original video recordings of the July 20, 1969, landing.
Since then, Richard Nafzger, an engineer at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center in Maryland, who oversaw television processing at the ground-tracking sites during the Apollo 11 mission, has been looking for them.
The good news is he found where they went. The bad news is they were part of a batch of 200,000 tapes that were degaussed — magnetically erased — and re-used to save money.
They found good copies in the archives of CBS news…Lowry, best known for restoring old Hollywood films, has been digitizing these along with some other bits and pieces to make a new rendering of the original landing. Nafzger does not worry that using a Hollywood-based company might fuel the fire of conspiracy theorists… “The conspiracy theorists are going to believe what they are going to believe,” added Lowry Digital Chief Operating Officer Mike Inchalik.
Well there you go. They may not be the original version, but they are a much better, cleaned up and re-digitized version produced by the same Hollywood company that did Star Wars.
But as the NASA spokesperson told Reuters- “It mattered not to me where the company was from,” Nafzger said.
Dag Gammit he is right. Why did I wait so long to find out the truff..
Sez the guy who thinks the earf is flat…
[img
[/img]
[img]https://qph.ec.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-93cd0b8fc2d34f8e393ac9329526c3dc-c[/img]
Hey, at least NASA didn’t erase this photo to save money.
(and what’s a little photoshopping when it comes to photos of the Earth, know what I mean?)
I don’t even know what this is. Proof. Of what.
Geeze if there are inconsistencies it can likely easily be explained as being a composite photo. Anyways how do you like my photo of turtle. It is an actual real deal view from space!
They are composite photos. Good catch. They are released by NASA in order to portray the Earth in a particular way without acknowledgement of their manipulation of the images. If we are sending up spacecraft above the Earth, why can’t we get a simple photograph of it without using mocked up chunks that aren’t even done well enough to conceal their poorly copied C&P? Doesn’t this point to both a lack of ability and a decided carelessness that underlies the entire program? And if what you are passing off isn’t important enough to be done correctly or with reliability, how does that reflect on the rest of their operation? And how confident can anyone be in the veracity of any of the other aspects where most people could never figure out the facts, like complex astrophysics.
I just can’t quite grasp why you don’t find such behavior at least questionable.
Farmer
I am not a photo analyst just a rebar detailer. Here is my best shot college try.
There are two things that need to be weighed when taking a picture.
Resolution and scope.
You can’t have both.
Yet folks out there demand both. So what the folks at NASA do is stitch them together so that guys like you can see the big picture. I don’t know why they bother. Seems to me a waste of time.
I’d rather they play a bit loose so that I can see the more of the wonders and beauty.
[img
[/img]
Would you rather this
or this?
[img
[/img]
I see greater beauty in second photo shoot.
You on other hand look for flaws in the photoshop.
Not saying either of us are wrong. We just look for different perspectives.
I’m not looking for flaws, I’m looking for honesty.
If you want to sell a car and you C&P a photo of a new model off the showroom floor but you are really trying to unload a beater, people would call that false advertising.
[img
[/img]
I see your point. I am not saying it isn’t valid but what would make ya happy. A disclaimer under all photos. State that it is a composite. Geeze tell me how that helps. The tinfoil hatters would have a field day. They would be running around with hair on fire saying shit like..
I knew it all along and now they finally admitted it..
They can’t win for losing.
I like the turtle. That’s a Florida box turtle
HSF, what a coinkydink. I just caught the opening sequence of Idiocracy with that exact same image minus the boxes and circles. Not sure if you can find the intro to the movie online but it appears at about the 1:30 mark. I had it paused for several minutes comparing yoir image with that in the film and they look identical to me.
The body cams were off, the cops said….
I knew this thread would be a doozy.
Always a lot of fun Admin. 🙂
Reminds me of the Norm McDonald bit.
If I believed in and had faith in the american government I would believe we went to the moon. There are Lots of major events our government has lied about. This looks like another. Remember the maine.
RiNS- Can you prove without aid of CGI from NASA that HSF is wrong as to the shape of the Earth?
NASA= NEVER A STRAIGHT ANSWER
Do you trust NASA, if so why? I am not advocating flat Earth but at the same time don’t buy the images from NASA completely.
BL
Not biting on retarded. Besides if HSF sez so and who dare question St. Farmer. As for the proof I sent email last year to NASA. You remember that shit show. I actually had conversation via email with guy running some sort of deep space photo shoot. Or as the farmer sez photoshop.
I trust them. Why not. Not up to me to dismiss spurious claims. Up to those wearing the
[img
[/img]
Besides summer is better spent watching baseball even though the Jays suck this year. I’m blaming that on the Turtle.
RiNS- Check out a guy on youtube- Richie From Boston
He calls NASA all the time and broadcasts the conversations, never a straight answer to any of his questions. Richie has credentials.
Nothing retarded about my request, there is not one scientific study that I can find as to measurements done with today’s electronics and satellites to prove the curvature of a planet that is roughly 25,000 miles in circumference. Please post if you know of some.
Did you even bother reading paper on Van Allen Belt. Get back to me with your response. Tell me how the math is wrong.
Show work!
RiNS,
Impressive paper, certainly looks scientific. Let’s assume that every bit of the data and math in this paper is correct. Now all I would ask is that someone show proof that this indirect flight path around the Van Allen Belts is in fact the path that the Apollo module took. That shouldn’t be too hard; surely they still have the flight data. Oh, wait…
Flight Director Gene Kranz says Apollo 11 Video & telemetry gone.
He proves it can be done. Are you suggesting they didnt know this 50 years ago. There is no end to the stupid. Folks make claim that VAB cannot be crossed. This guy proves its possible and instead of refuting the math folks want to move along, whack a mole, and say lookie over here.
Focus people.
Prove that guy wrong…
Bea, just go to 45,000 feet and the curvature of the earth is right there in front of you. Any private or military jet can cruise at that altitude. I’m sure you could just Google and find a zillion pictures.
Star, here’s a simple home experiment. Take a beach ball and look across it an inche above it tangentially. Rotate that view and from that proximity and perspective the globe appears flat. Same thing from 45,000 feet. You would have to get above the Earth’s atmosphere in order to directly observe any curvature. This has never been done. The moon is still a virgin untouched by man.
Dan, hard to believe any of this growing up in Florida. We toured the Cape as schoolchildren. Watched the rockets lift off. My dad’s friends included lots of NASA guys. I met Frank Borman and got to hear his perspectives several times. Do conspiracies exist? Sure. But they are never big. Virtually every conspiracy brought up falls apart within two or three wuestions.
As a kid I visited Disneyland and probably encountered more honestly than you did at Cape Canaveral. “Virtually every conspiracy falls…..” dumb or meant to be funny, I’m not sure.
So you have the same field of view with your face pressed up against a beach ball as you do looking at a panorama from 8+ miles up?
Jesus Christ. Dumbest. Experiment. Ever.
You don’t even have to do the experiment. Tangents near the surface of a sphere when scribed in a full circle write a flat appearing planar circle. The ratio of 45,000 feet to 8,000 miles compared to 12 inches is what? Jeesh! Scale man,scale. You don’t have to rent a jet.
Dan, I can tell you this. When they lit off a Saturn five, even at the viewing station a couple of miles away, the fucking ground shook. I never was close to a shuttle lift off, people have told me it was even more intense. On a clear day you could see either one lift off with your naked eyes from Ft Lauderdale, 200 MILES south. They were doing something really big. The most plausible answer is that they were going to the moon
Star- Help me out, I searched on Startpage, no photos at 45,000 feet .
Bea, I searched. Every picture had comments saying fisheye lens. I fold on the pics. edit: here, Bea. I’ve been on this exact plane a bunch of times. Curvature clearly visable around 2:08.
Star- I found one at 45,000 but it did not show any curvature at all.
Star- At 2:04 that does not show curvature.
Bad news. Your eyes are far worse than you thought.
I don’t know whether flat earth or round earth is true. I’m not a scientist, I’ve never gone to space, and I’ve never been higher than the Empire State Building.
But on one website I looked at, the flat-earth guy gave this example. If you’re at the beach and see a ship at the horizon, you can only see the top of the ship so you think it’s looks like there’s a curve to the earth. But if you use a telescope to look at the ship, the entire ship is visible. So he says it’s not curvature but the inability to see clearly that far away with the naked eye.
But it doesn’t really matter to me. If it’s flat, fine. If it’s round, fine. But then again, I don’t believe anything the government says.
Well I went to bed last night when comment count was 100. Now 50 or so more. Gotta say I am impressed.
St. Farmer of NH must be well pleased this am.
Props to ya Vic starting out a comment with…
I don’t know whether flat earth or round earth is true. I’m not a scientist, I’ve never gone to space,
You take time to admit
That you don’t know shit
Yet then go on to say
It doesnt matter anyway.
And the icing on the cake
is you never went to space.
A compelling argument you see
While doing all the work for me
Your ignorance and bliss
A great retort not soon missed.
RiNS,how could nobody have upvoted poetry like that?You missed your calling.
As far as flat vs curved,hell,drive a little-hell,the road dips,comes back up,goes into a valley-no way it’s flat.
Jay Weidner has done lots of research on Stanley Kubrick’s involvement with the studio photos of the moon landing. Maybe they were for “backup” in case the “real” landing went haywire?
[img
[/img]
Once again, not proof of anything, but troubling to say the very least.
Last night I had a conversation with another poster here about hills worth dying on. Whether we went to the Moon or not is of little or no concern to me. I wish it happened, but as I have laid out in meticulous detail previously I simply no longer have any trust whatsoever in the Government or any of its agencies. I didn’t start out that way, I once worked for Uncle Sam with great pride and devotion. My family has sacrificed more blood and treasure over the course of the last two hundred and fifty years than most and I consider that proof of my loyalty to the Nation itself, but the government has proven that is not only capable of deception and calumny, thievery on a scale unimaginable to most and a decided cant towards corruption and criminality unseen in all but the most obscure corners of world history. To trust anything that they say or claim is a form of Stockholm Syndrome which I am simply unable to participate in voluntarily.
Again, it doesn’t affect me one way or the other. I don’t care if we went or we didn’t.
I just don’t believe the official narrative and that if they say it happened, the smart money is on the ‘no we didn’t’ stance.
The earth is vesica picis shaped. Because it’s full of Lucys & Charlies. “A Renegade History of the United States” has quite a bit on dc’s Hollywood propaganda arm.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=055wFyO6gag
Amazon products (the book costs between ~$800-$1,500:
[An interesting comment from one of the Amazon book reviews:
“Think hard on these facts:
1. SIX perfect trips to the moon. No accidents and no deaths. 230,000 miles from earth in totally hostile environment.
2. Space Shuttle. 14 deaths. 200 miles in low earth orbit. Finally scrapped as unsafe.
Which one is fake?
Also, NASA says we can’t redo the moon for 20-30 years because they lost the blueprints for the Apollo rocket.
An excellent book.”
But the reviewer missed Apollo 13–certainly THAT wasn’t a perfect trip!]
[img
[/img]
[img
[/img]
Rise up, three guys died in Apollo one. Apollo program, 12 missions, one accident, crew of three, all died. Shuttle program, 135 missions, two accidents, crew of seven, both times, all died. Rockets are risky business.
My question about the moon has been around for centuries, why is it possible on occasion to easily see stars THROUGH the moon as though it were transparent? If it is a solid body, how could that happen?
Anyone?
Yeah. Your eyes are shit, that’s why. You said so yourself earlier this month when you sadly told us you were not going to visit TBP much anymore.
You know, that was about 250 posts ago.
Dawg- My eyes are shite. Glad to see you are keeping up with my comment count. Didn’t know you cared Ratdawg, I’m flattered bud.
That’s a legit question, do you have an answer?
I’ve no idea. I haven’t seen that phenomenon personally, nor have I heard about it before your post.
I assume poor vision or a mental disorder.
There is a star inside the crescent on the Muzzie flag but I have never observed a star shining through the moon. Have you got any pics?
EC- It used to be easy to find photos/video of that in non-eclipse, I’ll try to find you one. This is in eclipse but still shows what I am trying to relate. This question has been around for a very long time, I am a little surprised nobody seems to know about this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E-8XKCYg1vY
Wow. The guy found some dust on his photographic equipment.
Impressive.
Well no, He and many, many others and as I said 200 years ago men with basic telescopes were asking the same question.
The only way you could prove those are stars would be to match them to that part of the sky when the Moon is not present. I don’t KNOW what that guy captured but first guess would be dust on optics or hot pixels on the CMOS chip.
I/S- This is not just one guy who saw this, a multitude of people have captured this in their telescopes. Give it a try, you are a star gazer, look into the dark areas of the moon through your telescope on a night that is not a super bright moon.
People have been seeing this historically.
Already been their, done that including photographing three lunar eclipses over the years through my semi-apo refractor. I’ve also watched several occultations of planets and bright stars including in broad daylight. The International Occultation and Timing Association (IOTA) has thousands of mostly amateur members who spend tens of thousands of hours each year gathering occultation and timing data every clear night. Never heard a peep out of IOTA that the moon is transparent.
If the moon is transparent, what causes solar eclipses?
I/S……Just asking how numerous people get view of stars through the moon as if it is transparent. If I had the answer, would not ask.
There are examples of men sighting the same anomaly in past history.
Perhaps it is like natives who mentally refused to see the Spanish ship anchored off their shore….well they actually saw it but completely cog dissed it as it did not fit their belief of what exists.
I’m just raising a question here that has been asked for centuries, I don’t know the answer.
In astronomy we have a term for it….averted imagination. This is a play on the technique that visual astronomers use called averted vision which helps a person use the physical attributes of the human eye to see things that are at the limits of detection.
An example of widely known *averted imagination* would be the Canals on Mars. http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/space/solarsystem/solar_system_highlights/martian_canal
An example of averted vision would be the Spokes in Saturn’s Rings. http://www.skyandtelescope.com/about-us/stephen-james-omeara/
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/2007JAHH…10..148B
Another interesting thing regarding the moon is a group of people who for more than a thousand years have been observing the moon for religious purposes……the muslims (pig shit e upon them). They make a sport or pastime out of spotting the youngest moon possible. (A record held by the aforementioned Stephen James O’Meara.) They don’t report seeing stars in the darkened portions of the moon either. http://www.islam4theworld.net/contribution_muslims/muslim_contributions/muslim_moon.htm
https://www.alislam.org/library/articles/sighting-of-the-moon-crescent/
In short, people see what they want to see. I find it very interesting that amateur astronomers almost never report seeing UFO’s despite the fact that more than almost anybody else they are the ones staring at the sky day and night every year.
As with most things, the simplest explanation is usually closest to the truth.
Go try and leave a pristine boot print in a tray of talcum powder and see how that works out. If there is truly no humidity in the soil then I don’t see it supporting such a perfect impression of Armstrong’s boot. I’m not saying its impossible but at a certain point I just had too many unanswered questions to keep believing the lies.
Is this just another of many staged photos we are supposed to ignore while pretending that NASA has good reason for the chicanery?
Who knew the moon was covered in talcum powder?
The footprint is Buzz Aldrin’s, and in any case, the astronauts donned boots over their space suit boots for additional protection. You can see the over-boots in the moon landing photos as well.
Not many people have enough moon dust laying around to try my experiment so I took a guess as to what might be similar. But you knew that.
You must have a sharp eye to determine which moonwalker left which boot print. I guess it was not faked after all.
Yeah I did know that. My point is that talcum powder is not moon dust. Is it a good analog to moon dust at 1/6th earth gravity? I don’t know. So unless you know otherwise, maybe your example doesn’t mean anything.
I didn’t tell who made what footprint by eye. That information came from the astronaut who took the photo. But you knew that.
Was it faked? I don’t know; I wasn’t there. None of us were. But are your examples definitive in any way way to prove they were? No.
Agreed. I’ll never know the truth for sure.
Ladies and Gentlemen
There you have it.
RiNS rests his case but does not prove we went to the moon. So no, we don’t quite have it.
What proof what suffice, O wise one?
I mean, photos are no good. Interviews with the guys who went are no good. The hardware on display at the Smithsonian and elsewhere is no good.
Do we have to personally fly you and your Yorkies there before you’re satisfied?
LOL!
This place is brutal……..I love it!
Dawg brutal and effective. I got an idea. How aboot we start a gofundme page for Bea and his babies. Isn’t Elon Musk going on a road trip to Mars or something.
Yorkies in Space. It would be money well spent….
[img
[/img]
Just to see the look on his face when they cross the Van Allen Belt.
Droll. very droll……….
BL does not find humor in sissy drop kick dogs with clothing. BL also does not own pets of any type including space traveling Yorkies.
The stupid, it burns. Landing sites can be seen from earth. Thousands involved. Never debunked by Russia nor China, both of which would have monitored these launches exhaustively.
Makes me wonder about the sanity of some posters.
Re the curvature of earth – that was put to bed centuries ago. Geometry and all that.
I read in third grade that the curvature of the earth makes it so the horizon is no more than 30 miles away. Except in the cool morning air when the atmosphere refraction of light makes it possible for us to see things farther out, below the horizon.
I also read that the earth is almost a perfect sphere, with a bit of narrowing at the poles. The distance from the peak of the highest mountain and the deepest trough is around 12 miles.
If the earth is truly flat, what is the source of volcanic lava and underground heat? What keeps the oceans from draining?
Some lucky folks in the south will be able to witness a solar eclipse next month. If the earth was really flat, we could all witness the eclipse. That is, assuming the moon really is as big as advertised. Otherwise, going with the flat earth theory would mean the moon is only as big as a pizza pie.
— “What keeps the oceans from draining?”
Antarctica.
The fabled ice wall of Antarctica!
Don’t get too close, the UN blue helmets will shoot ya!
*shrug*
Birth and raise a little Rdawg in a large enough zoo with a big enough moat and the parking lot past the gift shop will be fabled too.
To consider it absolutely impossible for the human condition to NOT be a petri dish of some sort is kind of silly. It is entirely viable and comparing what we can do now vs what we could 200 years ago the technology to maintain the illusion up to this point isn’t even all that far fetched. It’s reasonable to come to the conclusion it’s not true… but pretty unreasonable to come to the conclusion it’s impossible.
The entire Antarctic situation is bizarre even under the best of “normal” interpretations.
Why do I get the feeling you don’t have much of a sense of humor?
I know, I know. You’ll tell me I’m mistaken; your wife says you’re really funny.
Not my wife, EC.
You weren’t trying to be funny, you were being the very definition of snide… which I do like a lot. But it’s why responding straight and clean is the best way to handle it cause it bothers you more than if were to be snide in return.
😉
BTW in that EC/Bea exchange above, they’re talkin’ trash ’bout ya. You gonna take that lyin’ down?
Oh, you’re the arbiter of the definition of snide versus funny?
Got it.
I’m about tapped out on this thread. It’s been loads of fun, but my son’s got a father/son scout camp today and I gotta get ready.
Toodles, everyone!
Llpoh, are you suggesting that Russia and China are not controlled by the same powers that control the rest of the world? Now that is naive. All governments collude to retain power. If they go off script they get JFKed. Saddam and Gaddaffi are recent examples. Thermodynamics alone debunk any possibility of leaving Earth’s atmosphere. We are captives of this planet and of TPTB.
Lunar retro-reflectors placed there during the moon missions are used by scientists all over the world, who bounce lasers off them to conduct various experiments.
But no doubt that’s faked too.
I dunno if you’ll have time to dig through it, but you can read a back and forth on the subject of the reflectors over here. There is some decent TBP level insulting and name calling to help you feel more at home to boot.
https://forum.tfes.org/index.php?topic=4971.0
It’s interesting to walk through the topic. I tell people that regardless of what they think they already know ahead of time… it is extremely valuable to take seriously the possibility of the earth being flat and trying to find ways to debunk the things that convince you it is round. Not debunk the flat earth claims but try to debunk your own beliefs. It’s how I came to far better understand the case in favor of round earth/heliocentrism despite having ample science and technical education growing up and as an adult…
…but it also convinced me that there are indeed some things that people taught the globe from birth take for granted that are about as conclusive as feminism being about equality.
Spend enough time on youtube and you’ll find someone able to make a case for every idea put out there being a psy-op. I’ve even made a post here demonstrating how TBP could be argued to be a controlled opposition psy-op. ZeroHedge is claimed to already be totally under the control of the deep state, etc. etc. etc.
My point in the previous post is that seriously considering the possibility and trying it on for size and putting it to the test can only have one effect: Improving a person’s critical thinking skills. If a person can be convinced the earth is flat that means they were only believing the earth was round based on more or less repeating what they had been told. However by making that jump, they’ve now actually moved *forward* because now their new beliefs are based on an attempt to test ideas and as time goes on (years perhaps)… they will forever be in the testing phase rather than the “faith” phase.
Using the reflectors as an example again: Unless YOU have done the experiment, you are indeed taking it on faith that the pages you are reading aren’t frauds. It may be well grounded faith, but it’s still a degree of faith.
You providing that link is an example of just repeating. It’s why I offered the link to the forum as it’s a back and forth as opposed to just repeating one person’s case. You can observe both people making their case.
I wasn’t trying to shut you down by posting that link. I found that link over on SGTReport.com, and it seemed like a reasonable place to pass it along.
Admittedly I should have provided some explanation to accompany it.
Didn’t feel shut down, just elaborating on the various forms of exchanges that tend to happen regarding this topic and the pros-cons of engaging in the idea at all. There is really no negative to considering the possibility… that’s the more scientific attitude to take.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WJ792G2dxuo
I think we landed on the fucking moon in 1969. Hooray for the American/German technology that made it possible. Hooray for Werner Von Braun, without whom it it not have been possible and achieving it was the realization of his childhood dream. What a lucky, God favored motherfucker that he sh0uld have such an unlikely childhood dream realized! I also believe that the fucking Zionist jew cocksuckers killed President Kennedy in collaboration with our own deep state cocksuckers. Where does that leave us now?
Uh, well, we got Tang out of the deal, no?
Don’t forget the multi-bazillion dollar space pen!
And memory foam mattresses.
That wasn’t from the space program.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/50-years-50-giant-leaps-how-nasa-rocked-our-world-879377.html
Z- Von Braun was just bloodline actor, see my post below.
You forgot Robert Goddard, American.
http://io9.gizmodo.com/how-robert-goddard-almost-killed-space-flight-1491135545
In the year or so I’ve been reading on this blog I’ve seen comments about deniers and thought it was a joke.
Hell,you guys are as insane over this as some are when a jewfest is going on.
That’s nothing. Did you know the astronauts were Masons?
If BL finds out, his fucking head will explode.
Hey Dawg,
BL is a trucker isn’t he?Does he know that Jimmy Hoffa and CW McCall were masons?
Here you go Dawg:
https://famouskin.com/famous-kin-menu.php?name=39698+buzz+aldrin
EDIT: Oh hell, here is the whole bunch of these mason assholes
https://famouskin.com/category.php?cat=18+space
Rdawg has fought valiantly, but it is to no avail against these stupid fuckers. They obviously got a D- grade in geometry class, but their teachers bumped it up to a C-, so they wouldn’t have to see them in their class ever again.
Llpoh summed it up: “The stupid, it burns”.
AP classes up through calculus, computer science + formal logic, went back and retook a calculus class long after entering the work force “just because”. Program for a living for a couple of decades.
I understand the classic arguments for a round earth/moon landing perfectly well. They are *good* arguments too, provided certain things are assumed to be true.
There are however alternative ways of explaining the same observed effects, and there are inconsistencies in the official evidence and stories that make challenging the blind assumption that it’s 100% solved no need to think further worthwhile.
The rejection of a stable earth happened specifically because a new way of interpreting the observable evidence was brought forth that was compelling but hard for most people at the time to comprehend how it could be possible.
The idea that humanity is being guided/controlled by organization above what we consider “the public idea of our governments” is standard fare here (the deep state). The stories of circumstances preceding current events with technology levels beyond what we currently have are standard fare. Therefore the idea that the earth is *not* what it seems is not an unreasonable concept.
Our capacity to simulate an environment that would fool any animal on up to simple/young humans is taken for granted as not only doable, but something we do for entertainment for children. Projecting forward with just the tech we have right now, seeing how it could be possible to create an environment capable of fooling most humans is well within comprehensible bounds.
The reason you are bothered by people who doubt the official story is because of the anxiety it raises in yourself… similar to how people who are unwilling to consider the possibility that the races really are different feel when they hear race realists talk.
Succinct and reasonable.
Here’s the thing. Knowing something comes only through experience. I can watch someone swing a hammer, learn the means to transfer D (length of swing) by force (f) to create the kinetic energy that will drive a nail, but until I actually pick one up and practice I will never have knowledge.
In this way we are all simply discussing beliefs or perceptions based on the communications of others who may or may not actually have true knowledge of the topic.
In others words we must trust in the veracity and truthfulness of those who claim to have knowledge of both the Moon landings and what Earth actually looks like from space.
We know that human beings lie, so you cannot rule that out. We know that data can be falsified, again, you cannot rule it out. We know about digital imagery, photographic and video manipulation, doctored evidence etc.
The only things we are left with to DEDUCE the truth of a thing is our powers of reason, logic and the observation of our own senses; what we can see with our own eyes, for example.
This Summer I have worked with some young men who have spent the better part of their lives in school. One of their chief complaints in our discussions- and they have repeatedly brought it up to me, not the other way around- is how badly misinformed they have been by their teachers, professors and others in the field of education about a wide variety of topics and how little they have been taught via experiential learning. In short they feel a deep sense of betrayal at having had to go into debt to be taught things that were either useless or in some cases false. They have learned firsthand real knowledge through their application of physical means on theoretical premises. They are currently on a path that will hopefully lead to wisdom. Their cynicism is palpable and it is justified.
I could point out the reasons for my disbelief all day long, but they serve no purpose beyond the anecdotal. What I have endeavored to do for many years now is to build my reputation- as unimportant as it may be to anyone beyond myself and my family- by ensuring that I neither speak nor write anything that I do not firmly believe to be truthful. If I’m on the fence, if I have no experience, if it’s second hand, I shut my mouth. if I have done it, if it is the result of my actual life experience and it seems relevant to the topic, I share it gladly. Everyone who reads here knows enough about my past either through what I write or what has been written about me by others to judge for themselves my veracity. You may disagree with my conclusions and you may vehemently oppose my beliefs, but you know where I stand on these subjects and that I have been forthcoming about my process.
The topic of Moon landings and space exploration and all of the associated information that is either shared with the public or deliberately kept hidden from us is part and parcel of an agenda set by men and women in positions of power. Their budgets and their operations are dependent upon the tax dollars provided by the public and their work is the property of those same people.
When it has been demonstrated repeatedly that they routinely abuse their authority, neglect their sworn responsibilities, conceal their discoveries or motivations for whatever reason, prevaricate and falsify the data and evidence presented to the public they diminish their credibility.
There are people who would try to defend these behaviors by stating that their are security concerns and this may be valid to some extent. There are others who give them additional leeway because they are experts or have specialized training that makes their understanding of reality something greater than ours. But the fact remains that in theory we, as members of this body politic, as servants of the public treasury and as loyal members of the same nation that they are employed to protect and defend have a right to a truthful accounting of facts.
When we can show through the data presented by these agencies that they have deliberately falsified their findings, have conspired to conceal or mislead, fabricated images and settings for whatever reason and offered it to the public as reality when it is clearly not the case, we have got to have the maturity and the responsibility to begin to question our own deeply held beliefs.
Or not.
It is neither good, nor bad.
….and if a bear shits in the woods and nobody can find it, does it still smell?
“If a man says something in the woods and there are no women there, is he still wrong?”
~Steven Wright
With all the information available and all the time now to observe folks seem bent on living a life of
but this and but that
Over two thousand years ago a scientist was able to figure out the approximate circumference of earth. He was able to convince himself using empirical evidence and common sense. All done without the aid of modern satellites photoshopping images or high flying aircraft showing the curvature of the earf.
I wonder what Eratosthenes would say to these brave scientists at the vanguard of skeptic mob if he was alive today. I’d wager he would laugh his ass off at the amount of stupid loose in this world.
https://www.windows2universe.org/people/ancient_epoch/eratosthenes.html
Could it be time to repeat his experiment. Maybe Bea and the Farmer can band together. We could start gofundme for them to buy a couple of sticks and a few measuring tapes.
RiNS- Thanks for proving HSF’s point.
In the year 276 the Earth was not believed to be a round ball. Was he measuring the circumference of a flat disc (flat Earth) or the circumference of a globular body. The notion of a globular world has only been around for approx. six hundred years.
Hardly a surprise you keep those Yorkies around Bea. They have same size brain as you.
has any poor sob ever been right in the eyes of a woman?
Most women are lying, cheating, conniving, scheming, manipulative, abusers of men. I said most but not all of them. Your job is to find the good ones in the bunch of rotten apples.
polar bears only crap on the ice idiot-even a 3rd grader knows that–
touché Red touché
Looking for reasons to believe liars, for the times they may be telling truth, is sickly. Codependence. Mal or unformed identity…malinvested identity, the Austrians might put it. Manchurians vacationing, usually permanently, in Stockholm. Random reward schedule addicts. Boys who cry wolf, & the women who love them. Fooled once…more than that, you are sucker, which, of course, doesn’t, can’t, stop the carping.
I read “Looking for Mr. Goodbar” in the 70’s. She got slaughtered. I listened to “Lookin’ for Love in all the Wrong Places” in the 80’s. Mechanical bull in the human china shop was star of the movie…still is.
Clay feet is one thing. Claymation is something else. Claymores that hack, or explode, don’t do anything to that red Georgia stuff. Cassius Clay, also something else – & smarter, a whole lot smarter, than William Wallace, too.
Women need to be bent over frequently. The increased blood flow to their brain helps them think better.
Vodka- Loopey drops in to take a dump adding nothing to the conversation and RD has made some one line (Bullshit) comments and you declare them to be brilliant. You also drop in to take a dump and add nothing, we are completely underwhelmed.
Call us when you come up with something interesting.
Lloph has enough sense to stay out of this because it isn’t a conversation. It is an exercise in stupid. I provided the mathematical proof that VAB can be crossed and you dismiss it out of hand. I doubt you even glanced at the pictures. If anyone left a big steamer it was you with the cigar retort. And that Greek guy figured out earf was a sphere. Did you even bother reading that link. I doubt it.
Bea
If the earf is flat and everything revolves around it. How does the moon not come crashing into earf. For every action there is an opposite reaction. Gravity attracts, centrifugal force repells
Using these equations.
Gravity
[/img]
[img
and Centrifugal Force
[img
[/img]
Calculate how a moon orbits a flat earth.
Show work!
Bonus points for explaining the phases of moon.
RiNS- Did you know there is more than one light source other than the sun? No?
That is because there is a lot you/we all don’t know about this construct.
now you are back to the light source. I guess there will be no bonus points for you.
Focus just on the maff then. Don’t want to overwhelm you with tasks.
RiNS- Not referring to the moon or any other celestial body as a second light source. Noble gasses RiNS, Neon/ Argon etc. react with electromagnetism which produces light and the beautiful blue and other colors in our sky.
RiNS- This is totally cool, take 5 minutes to watch this and see what happens to Helium/ Neon/ Argon when they come in contact with a Tesla coil.
Look Bea
First off if you believe any of this shit. Hard to fathom. I’m sure the Yorkies have clearer understanding of Physics than you. But you do.
The moon is always in view somewhere on earth. It doesn’t go to the dark side.
lol
So if we both agree that the moon moves in relation to the earth what force is acting in opposition to gravity. When St. Farmer started that shit show over a year ago he brought how bubbles behave and seemingly are in opposition to gravity. I knew at the time what he was getting but couldnt be bothered engaging.
[img
?resize=600%2C600[/img]
I am happy that your ignorance gives you so much bliss. One more thing the ISS has been in orbit for several years. What is keeping that up. You can actually track it at night in sky with naked eye. Better still with telescope.
Bubbles will be your answer I presume.
Cant help but add, Whatta maroon!
RiNS- You call me dumb then ask a stoopid question. the ISS is in very low orbit.
What is your point? Who said anything about the dark side of the moon?
Coctail hour started early today?
My fuck you’re stupid. I wasn’t talking about the moon I was referring to the earf.
Let’s change the subject here slightly.
The satellite that disappeared when it was going to Mars a few years ago-did aliens get it?
Maybe. It bounced off Mars atmosphere and careened off into deep space because of a fucked up metric to english conversion. Really.
There’s a former NASA scientist who wrote a book that says aliens cause the rings of Jupiter.
If he is a scientist and it’s in a book it must be true.
They cushioned it with airbags, it bounced around some but not likely that it careened off to another planet. Your just spit-balling.