Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts

Old April 22nd, 2020 #21
Sartt
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: planet filled with brainwashed fools
Posts: 541
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by T.Garrett View Post
Why are black folks always insisting that whitey never went to the moon?
i never said people never went to the moon, i said they lied about how they got there.
 
Old April 22nd, 2020 #22
Sartt
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: planet filled with brainwashed fools
Posts: 541
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike in Denver View Post
There was an excellent documentary made in 1953 called "Cat Women of the Moon." It taught that the aliens are all supermodel beautiful women, all over 6 feet tall, all with very large breasts. They wear skin tight leotards.

When they come to Earth...Oh! let it be soon...they will take the strongest and most handsome men, such as myself, to be sex slaves.

The rest of you will dig ditches and eat bugs.

Mike
There are Human races that are blonde haired and blue eye. The major problem with this planet and the way how you all think is that you think you are the only form of life or the only humans in existence, that there are no other forms of evolved life like for example bird people, lizard people, cat people etc. You all have essentially forgotten your own history, you've forgotten the previous civilizations that existed in the past, which theres plenty of evidence of them all over the planet, as some of their ruins still stand.


https://exemplore.com/advanced-ancie...-in-Tiahuanaco

Perfectly cut rock.
https://usercontent1.hubstatic.com/893292.jpg
 
Old April 22nd, 2020 #23
Sartt
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: planet filled with brainwashed fools
Posts: 541
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ray Allan View Post
Good question. Sartt shows up in every serious thread about space exploration and history with this secret space program and ancient astronaut garbage. There are other sub-forums for that. But that's obviously not what he's here for, is it?
You want space exploration, but don't want to find out who or what is actually stopping you from exploring space?

I even linked you articles where others including Ex NASA astronauts were admitting and talking about how the U.S Government is lying to you all. Should i relink them again?
 
Old April 22nd, 2020 #24
Ray Allan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 15,170
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sartt View Post
There are Human races that are blonde haired and blue eye. The major problem with this planet and the way how you all think is that you think you are the only form of life or the only humans in existence, that there are no other forms of evolved life like for example bird people, lizard people, cat people etc. You all have essentially forgotten your own history, you've forgotten the previous civilizations that existed in the past, which theres plenty of evidence of them all over the planet, as some of their ruins still stand.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6IQq0IoQeMQ

https://exemplore.com/advanced-ancie...-in-Tiahuanaco

Perfectly cut rock.
https://usercontent1.hubstatic.com/893292.jpg
I've reported your post to the moderators. Again, start another thread if you want to discuss this subject.
__________________
"Military men are dumb, stupid animals to be used as pawns for foreign policy."

--Henry A. Kissinger, jewish politician and advisor
 
Old April 25th, 2020 #25
joeylowsac
RaHoWarrior-SKINHEAD
 
joeylowsac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Shingletown, CA
Posts: 1,625
Blog Entries: 59
Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nikola Bijeliti View Post
If you're going to post stuff like this, make sure you know what you're talking about. The Lunar Module was highly reflective, so an astronaut standing right next to it could, depending on the angle, be illuminated by light reflecting off the lunar module. The reasons that the shadows are not the same length is that the moon is not flat; it has hills and valleys, but they're hard to notice in the photographs because we're not accustomed to spotting them in a vacuum, where the lighting looks different. The "backgrounds" look close because, on the moon, the horizon is much closer than it is on earth. If the mountains in the background looked very far away, that would be evidence that it may have been shot on earth.

All of this is VERY basic stuff.
The pics do not contain any links and when I click on them there is no porn, as you can see in the screenshot below.

I have never once encountered porn there in all the years I've used it and there doesn't appear to even be a way to find porn there. Perhaps you are getting a pop up.
I use that hosting site because they don't censor but they do have a 'SFW' version which is censored (for 'hate speech', nudity, advocacy against any individual, group or organisation, etc). I will use this one for any response to you. They do not censor common curse words (e.g., da*n, he**, sh*t, etc.) so its not SF level censorship. And of course no one can guarantee your sensibilities will be 100% insulated.
Outside of a direct exchange it would be safest, for obvious reasons, not to expect your feelings to be a consideration on my part. For that, since your influence does not extend further, you must resort to a method that relies on altering your own behaviour (e.g., a simple pop up blocker perhaps).

Back to the point
Yes it is very, very basic to suggest whatever sounds plausible in your head without even bothering to check the archive to see that it is contradicted by the historic record. Basic.
Not knowing what I'm talking about is implied by the fact that I have nothing but questions about this subject. I don't claim to have studied this matter with any great passion. I haven't an iota passion for this matter.
I am somewhat concerned that despite your bountiful knowledge you seem altogether unfamiliar with the historical material. But this is probably just an illusion caused by your presence in a vacuum..

I limited the examples to 2, confined to a single mission, both occur in places that can be examined in high resolution from many angles. If you've not been bothered to look into it why insist on offering what turns out to be inapplicable, improvised explanations based simply on not sounding explicitly impossible but which even a precursory examination of the archive will refute?
I have no wish to liberate anyone from their belief. Evidence is not the reason that anyone believes the Apollo story and it will not be why anyone stops believing. Little will change either way. There is not much at stake in this.

I will try to be brief.

Quote:
...illuminated by light reflecting off the lunar module.
The ladder is on the side of the LM facing away from the sun so there should be no sun reflecting off it. And other pictures show that to be the case. This 'illumination by reflection' should occur independently of its requirement to improve a photograph which would otherwise be unusable. Yet this illumination is not present in the video of Armstrong taking the photo, both he and Aldrin are in darkness. The area is only illuminated when it's the subject of a photograph when not area is dark -
hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a11/AS11-40-5874.jpg
hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a11/AS11-40-5916.jpg
hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a11/AS11-40-5900HR.jpg
In fact, in one of only a couple of images that show Armstrong, he is standing next to the ladder in the left of the picture. Even in the white suit he can hardly be seen in the shadow of the LM. Aldrin would have appeared very much the same coming down the ladder without the use of the secondary light source.
hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a11/AS11-40-5894.jpg
Your assertion that the side of the lunar module facing away from the sun is illuminated by light reflected off itself is demonstrably unfounded.

Quote:
...hills and valleys...
We needn't wonder about this. The example occurred in a very well know and well documented place i.e., the Apollo 11 landing site, the so called "Sea of Tranquillity'. So called due to the absence of hill and valleys. Apart from rocks and craters the landscape is featureless, the hill backgrounds are not used (though you can still see no further into the horizon than when there are hills). This was said to be one of the main reasons why they choose that site and why I choose that example.
hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a11/AS11-40-5883.jpg
hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a11/AS11-40-5884.jpg
hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a11/AS11-40-5940.jpg

We can be sure there are no hills or valleys located within the several feet between where the flag was placed and the Lunar Module.
Further, if geography and not light were the cause it would be no less likely to see a shadow shorten even when moving toward the light source, if the light source is the sun. But that never happens. Never.

Quote:
...a vacuum, where the lighting looks different.
??? No. This is just nonsense. Electromagnetic radiation is not altered by nothing and that's what a vacuum is, nothing, emptiness. There is no scientific basis for claiming that hills and valleys or video and photos of them look different in a vacuum. NASA has never made such a claim nor has anyone else that I can find. Now I suspect you are just making things up as you go.

Quote:
...the horizon is much closer than it is on earth. If the mountains in the background looked very far away, that would be evidence that it may have been shot on earth...
I said 'when there is action in the scene' they look close. But at least the excuse in this case is more reasonable. Still, there are a few good reasons why NASA doesn't use it. First, it would be completely out of character. More importantly, since it is not sufficient to explain the problems with scale they stand to gain nothing from mentioning it. I think the main reason is because it would leave them with no way to explain the utterly vast landscape that those cramped settings can metamorphose into. As with Apollo 17 where the typical small hills a mere stones throw away in the background turn Everest in scale despite now being a day's journey in the distance.


The LM is completely dwarfed by what becomes an immense landscape! The landscape at this scale is perhaps more realistic or would be if it were consistent but it is only occasionally seen in a still images.
The most consistent aspect of the Apollo Program are the inconsistencies. Mind you this doesn't scratch the surface, the inconsistencies occur throughout the whole of the Apollo Program. The landscape doesn't just change in scale.
The video and audio of the first moon landing are available from NASA or you can even experience it as it happened at https://apolloinrealtime.org but spare the 15 minutes for the actual descent and landing. It is remarkable, nothing like it has ever been seen outside of Apollo. They are in that small craft directly above a rocket with thrust of almost 10,000psi firing without causing the slightest vibration of the LM or sound in the pressurised craft. Has a rocket ever been used for any purpose that quietly. A bottle rocket doesn't operate that quietly! I only wish my laptop could fire up as discretely as that.
Of the few things I am a denier of this one I could not careless about. Apart from Apollo I like NASA. Apollo was long before I was born and NASA has done much since then all without any of the issues of Apollo. I can only lose by my own country not accomplishing it. But here we are.
__________________
卐 White ⊕ Power 卐
 
Old April 25th, 2020 #26
Nikola Bijeliti
fluxmaster
 
Nikola Bijeliti's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: The Parallel Flux Universe
Posts: 1,491
Blog Entries: 32
Default

A simple examination of the photo of Aldrin you posted clearly shows that the sun is at his back. In the other photo where the shadows are of different lengths, you can clearly see a slight elevation in the middle, perhaps not what you'd call a "hill," but enough of an elevation to cause the shadows to be of different lengths. This is all very simple to see; it's not rocket science.

I'm not going to waste any time commenting on the other things, as they are all baseless.

There is one aspect in which the Apollo moon landings were a hoax. The hoax is that they were presented as a great American achievement. In fact, going to the moon proved to be too difficult for Americans, so they had to fake it by hiring Germans to do it, and not just any Germans, but Germans who had worked for Adolf Hitler. That was the moon hoax, passing it off as an American achievement, when, in fact, it was a German achievement.
__________________
All these ideas…are chained to the existence of men, to who[m]…they owe their existence. Precisely in this case the preservation of these definite races and men is the precondition for the existence of these ideas. --Adolf Hitler
 
Old April 26th, 2020 #27
Sartt
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: planet filled with brainwashed fools
Posts: 541
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ray Allan View Post
I've reported your post to the moderators. Again, start another thread if you want to discuss this subject.
Let me ask you a question If i post a screenshot of me typing a few years ago, with the date and time included

there may be a massive terror attack in america in a week..... " may be "
don't say you got it from me
since i knew there was going to be an attack in Las Vegas/ Major American South/Western City

How would you re-act?
 
Old April 26th, 2020 #28
T.Garrett
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: TriState
Posts: 7,208
Post advice?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sartt View Post
Let me ask you a question If i post a screenshot of me typing a few years ago, with the date and time included

there may be a massive terror attack in america in a week..... " may be "
don't say you got it from me
since i knew there was going to be an attack in Las Vegas/ Major American South/Western City

How would you re-act?
Sartt, why are you trying to push buttons here?

I think if you really wanted to discuss the things in your posts you would start your own thread, no?

I for one like reading your posts (even though I don't agree with everything you write ) why don't you follow our guidelines and start a thread or two and see what happens?
 
Old April 27th, 2020 #29
Sartt
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: planet filled with brainwashed fools
Posts: 541
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by T.Garrett View Post
Sartt, why are you trying to push buttons here?

I think if you really wanted to discuss the things in your posts you would start your own thread, no?

I for one like reading your posts (even though I don't agree with everything you write ) why don't you follow our guidelines and start a thread or two and see what happens?
Im not trying to push buttons, i've actually had these same discussions with other people on other sites over the years, and it usually ends up with people calling me a conspiracy theorist or having the mods ban me ( STORM FRONT ) some people actually know what im talking about, but its a small population of people, but i guess i'll try anyways.
 
Old April 28th, 2020 #30
joeylowsac
RaHoWarrior-SKINHEAD
 
joeylowsac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Shingletown, CA
Posts: 1,625
Blog Entries: 59
Lightbulb

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nikola Bijeliti View Post
A simple examination of the photo of Aldrin you posted clearly shows that the sun is at his back. In the other photo where the shadows are of different lengths, you can clearly see a slight elevation in the middle, perhaps not what you'd call a "hill," but enough of an elevation to cause the shadows to be of different lengths. This is all very simple to see; it's not rocket science.

I'm not going to waste any time commenting on the other things, as they are all baseless.

There is one aspect in which the Apollo moon landings were a hoax. The hoax is that they were presented as a great American achievement. In fact, going to the moon proved to be too difficult for Americans, so they had to fake it by hiring Germans to do it, and not just any Germans, but Germans who had worked for Adolf Hitler. That was the moon hoax, passing it off as an American achievement, when, in fact, it was a German achievement.
I know you're just guessing about the rocket science. At any rate, being able to distinguish between propulsion dynamics and geography doesn't indicate knowledge of either field.

I know it looks like the sun is at his back, that's my point. We know that when Aldrin descends the LM ladder the sun was not at his back. As this photo titled 'Aldrin descends the LM ladder' from the Apollo archive makes clear.

The pic I used didn't show the ground but several in the archive do as well as the video and all show the sun is not at his back. There are no pictures of Aldrin descending the ladder with the sun at his back, none exist.

There is no change in the elevation which can account for his shadow doubling in length. If there were a significant depression his shadow could not extend past Aldrin. No matter where they are, whenever they move toward the light their shadows change accordingly.


Our Government tried to white wash the connections of the scientists (around 1,600 of them) with the German government because they would not have been allowed in but there was no concealing that they were German. Von Braun was always credited with Apollo's Saturn V rocket and later the earlier V-2. He was very well known, had written a number of books and become a citizen before NASA even existed. The only deception occurred a decade and a half earlier and the moon certainly had nothing to do with it. His role in the space program was not down played. Where was the hoax? You do know what the word 'hoax' means?
Von Braun was famous in his time. If it is not widely recognised today it is not because people have been duped, it is merely the general ignorance that pervades the public at large.
__________________
卐 White ⊕ Power 卐
 
Old April 28th, 2020 #31
Nikola Bijeliti
fluxmaster
 
Nikola Bijeliti's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: The Parallel Flux Universe
Posts: 1,491
Blog Entries: 32
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by joeylowsac View Post
I know you're just guessing about the rocket science. At any rate, being able to distinguish between propulsion dynamics and geography doesn't indicate knowledge of either field.

I know it looks like the sun is at his back, that's my point. We know that when Aldrin descends the LM ladder the sun was not at his back. As this photo titled 'Aldrin descends the LM ladder' from the Apollo archive makes clear.

The pic I used didn't show the ground but several in the archive do as well as the video and all show the sun is not at his back. There are no pictures of Aldrin descending the ladder with the sun at his back, none exist.

There is no change in the elevation which can account for his shadow doubling in length. If there were a significant depression his shadow could not extend past Aldrin. No matter where they are, whenever they move toward the light their shadows change accordingly.


Our Government tried to white wash the connections of the scientists (around 1,600 of them) with the German government because they would not have been allowed in but there was no concealing that they were German. Von Braun was always credited with Apollo's Saturn V rocket and later the earlier V-2. He was very well known, had written a number of books and become a citizen before NASA even existed. The only deception occurred a decade and a half earlier and the moon certainly had nothing to do with it. His role in the space program was not down played. Where was the hoax? You do know what the word 'hoax' means?
Von Braun was famous in his time. If it is not widely recognised today it is not because people have been duped, it is merely the general ignorance that pervades the public at large.
Regarding the shadows being different lengths, if you don't accept that there was a change in elevation, why do you believe that the shadows are of different lengths? You do realize that, if multiple lights were used, there would be multiple shadows. Since there are not multiple shadows, only a single light source was used. If the ground were flat, then the shadows would be the same length regardless of whether the light source was the sun or studio lighting. Even if, hypothetically, they shot the whole thing on a sound stage, there would have to have been a change in elevation for the shadows to be different lengths. So what's your point?

Regarding the illumination in general, NVDIA did a simulation proving that the photos from the moon are exactly what they should have been.

__________________
All these ideas…are chained to the existence of men, to who[m]…they owe their existence. Precisely in this case the preservation of these definite races and men is the precondition for the existence of these ideas. --Adolf Hitler
 
Old April 29th, 2020 #32
Ray Allan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 15,170
Default

I didn't intend for this thread to become a big debate about the Moon landings being real or fake. But it always does, doesn't it? Merely a historical observance of Apollo 13.

The most basic proof the Apollo lunar landings were real are the laser reflectors left behind by the astronauts. Known as the Lunar Laser Ranging Retroreflector (LRRR), they are used all the time by scientists on Earth. Now unless every scientist that has ever fired a laser beam at them is a liar and in on the hoax I'd say it's pretty concrete evidence humans walked on the Moon. The other one is if NASA faked the whole thing and got Stanley Kubrick to film them on a soundstage, the Russians, who were following the Apollo missions quite closely and who had their own, unsuccessful manned lunar program underway at the same time in the 1960s, would have been the first ones to cry foul.



Apollo 11 LRRR deployed near the Lunar Module Eagle.



Apollo 11 landing site photographed by the Lunar Reconnaisance Orbiter in 2009 showing the LRRR in the same position as the first photo.

I say to joeylowsac and others: Do you think Whites weren't smart enough to figure out how to land men on the Moon, and had to resort to faking the whole thing?
__________________
"Military men are dumb, stupid animals to be used as pawns for foreign policy."

--Henry A. Kissinger, jewish politician and advisor
 
Old May 2nd, 2020 #33
Garrick Fenstad
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: why the FUCK am I still on moderation?
Posts: 245
Default

Whether the moon landing happened or not I don't give a shit. Those silver niggers shoulda hit the moon head on and exploded their guts all over the surface. All green niggers, blue niggers, and silver niggers should just fuckin die.



Ha! Ha! roasted silver niggers!
 
Old May 11th, 2020 #34
Sartt
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: planet filled with brainwashed fools
Posts: 541
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ray Allan View Post
I didn't intend for this thread to become a big debate about the Moon landings being real or fake. But it always does, doesn't it? Merely a historical observance of Apollo 13.

The most basic proof the Apollo lunar landings were real are the laser reflectors left behind by the astronauts. Known as the Lunar Laser Ranging Retroreflector (LRRR), they are used all the time by scientists on Earth. Now unless every scientist that has ever fired a laser beam at them is a liar and in on the hoax I'd say it's pretty concrete evidence humans walked on the Moon. The other one is if NASA faked the whole thing and got Stanley Kubrick to film them on a soundstage, the Russians, who were following the Apollo missions quite closely and who had their own, unsuccessful manned lunar program underway at the same time in the 1960s, would have been the first ones to cry foul.



Apollo 11 LRRR deployed near the Lunar Module Eagle.



Apollo 11 landing site photographed by the Lunar Reconnaisance Orbiter in 2009 showing the LRRR in the same position as the first photo.

I say to joeylowsac and others: Do you think Whites weren't smart enough to figure out how to land men on the Moon, and had to resort to faking the whole thing?
The question should be
"I say to joeylowsac and others: Do you think White Americans weren't smart enough to figure out how to land men on the Moon, and had to resort to faking the whole thing?
__________________

That answer would be... Jawohl
 
Old May 13th, 2020 #35
joeylowsac
RaHoWarrior-SKINHEAD
 
joeylowsac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Shingletown, CA
Posts: 1,625
Blog Entries: 59
Woodpecker

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sartt View Post
The question should be
"I say to joeylowsac and others: Do you think White Americans weren't smart enough to figure out how to land men on the Moon, and had to resort to faking the whole thing?
__________________

That answer would be... Jawohl
I am merely pointing out problems with NASA's record of the supposed event not critiquing racial intellectual capacity. My opinion regarding our racial superiority is not based on any single achievement (or lack of one).

__________________
卐 White ⊕ Power 卐
 
Old May 13th, 2020 #36
Nikola Bijeliti
fluxmaster
 
Nikola Bijeliti's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: The Parallel Flux Universe
Posts: 1,491
Blog Entries: 32
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by joeylowsac View Post
I am merely pointing out problems with NASA's record of the supposed event not critiquing racial intellectual capacity. My opinion regarding our racial superiority is not based on any single achievement (or lack of one).
All of the "problems" with the moon landing have been shown to be either (1) based on highly simplistic assumptions that anyone with even a little knowledge of physics could easily refute, e.g. the stars' not being visible in the photographs, or (2) highly technical critiques that the positor doesn't even understand himself and cannot offer any explanation for other than saying that it was faked, for which no one is going to bother to waste his time trying to figure out, e.g. at so many minutes into the video, I see something here that I don't know what it is, so it must be fake.

One can use the same type of arguments to prove, or cast doubt on, any past event. For example, if one wanted to prove that the Pony Express never existed, one could post a myriad of supposed facts that prove that it never existed, which no one would bother to do all the research to refute.
__________________
All these ideas…are chained to the existence of men, to who[m]…they owe their existence. Precisely in this case the preservation of these definite races and men is the precondition for the existence of these ideas. --Adolf Hitler
 
Old May 14th, 2020 #37
joeylowsac
RaHoWarrior-SKINHEAD
 
joeylowsac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Shingletown, CA
Posts: 1,625
Blog Entries: 59
Lightbulb

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nikola Bijeliti View Post
All of the "problems" with the moon landing have been shown to be either (1) based on highly simplistic assumptions that anyone with even a little knowledge of physics could easily refute, e.g. the stars' not being visible in the photographs, or (2) highly technical critiques that the positor doesn't even understand himself and cannot offer any explanation for other than saying that it was faked, for which no one is going to bother to waste his time trying to figure out, e.g. at so many minutes into the video, I see something here that I don't know what it is, so it must be fake.

One can use the same type of arguments to prove, or cast doubt on, any past event. For example, if one wanted to prove that the Pony Express never existed, one could post a myriad of supposed facts that prove that it never existed, which no one would bother to do all the research to refute.
I don't know what you're vaguely referencing that's simplistic and highly technical (if anything). I've not encountered anything bafflingly complex though most issues would necessarily involve aspects that are obscure enough to be missed.
(And I must have missed some part, I don't recall anything about stars.)
Complaining that an issue is too complicated or not complicated enough is in no way a refutation.

I don't know whether you actually believe the nonsense about the Pony Express being analogous to Apollo (I suspect you are equally knowledgeable about both) but to be clear, there is no argument about nonexistence. Whether or not a specific event took place as reported is not a question of existence. Surely, those highly simplistic and/or highly technical faults pertained to something material. NASA's record exists and is the only physical evidence which can support either belief or doubt.

Arguing against the existence of something requires proving a negative. Something that is notoriously not easy to do. An attempt to cast doubt on the Pony Express would be far less persuasive in reality than is is in your imagination.
It may not be impossible to prove (or at least reasonably substantiate) a negative but in no scenario is there a myriad of facts, supposed or actual, that proves one. If it doesn't exist you can only point to examples of absence of evidence, which is not evidence of absence.
__________________
卐 White ⊕ Power 卐
 
Old May 14th, 2020 #38
Nikola Bijeliti
fluxmaster
 
Nikola Bijeliti's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: The Parallel Flux Universe
Posts: 1,491
Blog Entries: 32
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by joeylowsac View Post
I don't know what you're vaguely referencing that's simplistic and highly technical (if anything). I've not encountered anything bafflingly complex though most issues would necessarily involve aspects that are obscure enough to be missed.
(And I must have missed some part, I don't recall anything about stars.)
Complaining that an issue is too complicated or not complicated enough is in no way a refutation.

I don't know whether you actually believe the nonsense about the Pony Express being analogous to Apollo (I suspect you are equally knowledgeable about both) but to be clear, there is no argument about nonexistence. Whether or not a specific event took place as reported is not a question of existence. Surely, those highly simplistic and/or highly technical faults pertained to something material. NASA's record exists and is the only physical evidence which can support either belief or doubt.

Arguing against the existence of something requires proving a negative. Something that is notoriously not easy to do. An attempt to cast doubt on the Pony Express would be far less persuasive in reality than is is in your imagination.
It may not be impossible to prove (or at least reasonably substantiate) a negative but in no scenario is there a myriad of facts, supposed or actual, that proves one. If it doesn't exist you can only point to examples of absence of evidence, which is not evidence of absence.
If I understand you correctly, you are not saying that the moon landings didn't happen, but that there are problems with NASA's account of them. Some of the techniques you use are similar to some of the moon hoaxers, such as analyzing photos and saying that something doesn't look right, a shadow, a reflection, an unidentifiable object, the lighting, something looks off to you. But you're not denying that the landings happened, so I'm not quite sure what your point is. You seem to suggest that NASA is hiding something, but you don't say what that is because you don't know. Are you suggesting that they are hiding the existence of aliens, because that is the only thing I can think of that they could be hiding?

I'm not saying that NASA has never covered up anything, but, if you're not stating that the landings were a hoax, then I don't know what all your reasoning is leading to.
__________________
All these ideas…are chained to the existence of men, to who[m]…they owe their existence. Precisely in this case the preservation of these definite races and men is the precondition for the existence of these ideas. --Adolf Hitler
 
Old May 17th, 2020 #39
Sartt
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: planet filled with brainwashed fools
Posts: 541
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by joeylowsac View Post
I am merely pointing out problems with NASA's record of the supposed event not critiquing racial intellectual capacity. My opinion regarding our racial superiority is not based on any single achievement (or lack of one).

https://www.the-star.co.ke/news/big-...ace-programme/

However, space activities in the country began in the 1960s, with the establishment of a Satellite Launching and Tracking Base in Malindi. It was a collaboration between Kenya and Italy.

Over 20 sounding rockets and nine satellites have been launched from the facility over the years.


But anyways, NASA has lied about the Apollo program, they have lied about the mars rover ( all of them actually ) and were caught lying on the first one by turning up the Tint coloration on the photos from mars from the 90s, i don't see how anyone can actually believe anything they say. I mean i have proof of NASA deleting 3 days of data on from Sun spots for no reason.

There are also other things that NASA goes out of there way at hiding. Hubble telescope pictures of star systems billions of years away from us, have entire planets strangely removed from the picture .

Last edited by Sartt; May 17th, 2020 at 09:43 AM.
 
Old May 17th, 2020 #40
Sartt
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: planet filled with brainwashed fools
Posts: 541
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nikola Bijeliti View Post
Are you suggesting that they are hiding the existence of aliens,
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/nasa-ac...ysterious-ufo/

https://www.independent.ie/world-new...-35400275.html

http://www.universityherald.com/arti...fo-spotted.htm

The I.S.S Live feed has been cut/ changes frames whenever a " UFO " enters the frame, https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_c...ature=emb_logo

As much as i hate using thing from this guys channel to make a point, i have to this time, because its obviously apparent that NASA ACTIVELY GOES OUT OF THEIR WAY TO HIDE THINGS.
 
Reply

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:41 AM.
Page generated in 0.47060 seconds.