Is that a type of pasta?
Is that a type of pasta?
nope. you know, there are houses houses have yards. appartments have a balcony ( un balcon in french ).
for me, a balcony is the equivalent of a yard but much much smaller... but on a 6th floor...
im not treating you as if u were an r-tard.... i was just being sarcastic
for me, a balcony is the equivalent of a yard but much much smaller... but on a 6th floor...
im not treating you as if u were an r-tard.... i was just being sarcastic
Oh, balcony! I see 
If the whole moon operation would have been fake, the sowjets were the first to know. They listened to all radio transmission between the astronauts and NASA, and should have reacted if these transmissons came from somewhere else than the moon. Even back then they could test the transmissions on interferences from the velocity of the Apollo capsula.
The fine powder on the surface is actually the dissolved remains of ancient cities millions of years old. The inhabitants were neanderthals, who populated earth with various life forms (including us humans) to study them and the effects of terraforming.
But unfortunately for them, the Gorkons, the sworn enemy of the neanderthals, found out about the project and vaporized the surface of the moon, leaving a few neanderthal scientists stranded on the surface of earth. Acknowledging their impending doom, the scientists imbued the humans with basic knowledge of fire and tools, and a recessive gene to one day go forth and continue their campaign against the evil Gorkons.
Some say that the moon will one day be discovered to be the vessel to return us to neanderthal space. The US government obviously found out about this and it's why we never went back to the moon, because the US government doesn't like the idea of going back and bowing to our creators.
... I think it could get syndicated.
But unfortunately for them, the Gorkons, the sworn enemy of the neanderthals, found out about the project and vaporized the surface of the moon, leaving a few neanderthal scientists stranded on the surface of earth. Acknowledging their impending doom, the scientists imbued the humans with basic knowledge of fire and tools, and a recessive gene to one day go forth and continue their campaign against the evil Gorkons.
Some say that the moon will one day be discovered to be the vessel to return us to neanderthal space. The US government obviously found out about this and it's why we never went back to the moon, because the US government doesn't like the idea of going back and bowing to our creators.
... I think it could get syndicated.
To moonwalk you do not necessarily have to be ON the moon 
Actually it would be more impressive to perform a moonwalk on the moon.
Breakdancing on the moon
'Bullseye' contestants: When asked by the production company, give your address as The Moon. Then, if you lose and Jim Bowen gives you 'your bus fare home', this will amount to several billion pounds.
Viz letter page?
If not, it should have been!
In science there is a general principle called Occam's Razor which essentially boils down to "the simplest explanation tends to be the correct one".
It has actually been used to argue that the moon landings didn't happen. ie Wouldn't it have just been easier to do it in a studio than actually involve 400,000 people in a project to get man on the moon?
Based in part at least that it would be relatively easy to have the handful of people involved in the faking of the landing to keep quiet.
But think about it for a minute. Flip that idea on it's head. You have NASA claiming that hundreds of companies and their employees provided services and parts as part of the project and the "studio hoax" would mean none of those companies/people had any need to be involved. So what would NASA have to do in order to fool the world? Well for starters it would have to persuade all those companies and their employees in some way to go along with the "hoax" and say that yes they did provide services etc to NASA and produce, (ie fake), all the documentation to prove it. So all of a sudden we're left with the situation where if the landings were fake hundreds of thousands of people would have to be keeping quiet about it, (or at the very least a few hundred ex top execs and senior managers from the companies involved). Plus of course the couple of hundred NASA employees themselves. Likely that in 40 years not one of them has ever spoken out to the media about it??
But of course, the project was real, the world saw the launch on TV, it was witnessed live. There is footage of the earth from space, (which would have been found out by now as being fakes). So clearly NASA did put 3 guys in a rocket and blast them off the earth. What do the "hoax" theorists propose they did for 4 days up there?? They circled the earth right? Well what about the "moon" rocks they brought back? Fake? So all the scientists and geologists etc that have analysed those rocks in the last 40 years are either dumb, or in on the hoax?? Maybe they went there but never landed? So what about the reflectors they placed on it? Well they could have just dropped them on to the moon. Sure, but how many attempts at doing that at several thousand mile per hour and at a height of a few hundred miles are going to result in a perfectly aligned reflector pointing directly back at the earth??
Then lets get to the actual act of creating the fake. Are we all meant to believe that NASA has the capabilities to fake such things when the best special effects departments in the film industry were clearly unable to at the time?? For evidence of that inability, I give you every 60's and 70's space film ever made.
Finally I give you all the rebuffs of the so called evidence of the faking of the landings. Some of examples of which have been linked to already.
Add it all up................ I give you Occam's Razor.
It has actually been used to argue that the moon landings didn't happen. ie Wouldn't it have just been easier to do it in a studio than actually involve 400,000 people in a project to get man on the moon?
Based in part at least that it would be relatively easy to have the handful of people involved in the faking of the landing to keep quiet.
But think about it for a minute. Flip that idea on it's head. You have NASA claiming that hundreds of companies and their employees provided services and parts as part of the project and the "studio hoax" would mean none of those companies/people had any need to be involved. So what would NASA have to do in order to fool the world? Well for starters it would have to persuade all those companies and their employees in some way to go along with the "hoax" and say that yes they did provide services etc to NASA and produce, (ie fake), all the documentation to prove it. So all of a sudden we're left with the situation where if the landings were fake hundreds of thousands of people would have to be keeping quiet about it, (or at the very least a few hundred ex top execs and senior managers from the companies involved). Plus of course the couple of hundred NASA employees themselves. Likely that in 40 years not one of them has ever spoken out to the media about it??
But of course, the project was real, the world saw the launch on TV, it was witnessed live. There is footage of the earth from space, (which would have been found out by now as being fakes). So clearly NASA did put 3 guys in a rocket and blast them off the earth. What do the "hoax" theorists propose they did for 4 days up there?? They circled the earth right? Well what about the "moon" rocks they brought back? Fake? So all the scientists and geologists etc that have analysed those rocks in the last 40 years are either dumb, or in on the hoax?? Maybe they went there but never landed? So what about the reflectors they placed on it? Well they could have just dropped them on to the moon. Sure, but how many attempts at doing that at several thousand mile per hour and at a height of a few hundred miles are going to result in a perfectly aligned reflector pointing directly back at the earth??
Then lets get to the actual act of creating the fake. Are we all meant to believe that NASA has the capabilities to fake such things when the best special effects departments in the film industry were clearly unable to at the time?? For evidence of that inability, I give you every 60's and 70's space film ever made.
Finally I give you all the rebuffs of the so called evidence of the faking of the landings. Some of examples of which have been linked to already.
Add it all up................ I give you Occam's Razor.
Not to mention your painful death upon reaching your destination.
i dont think you understand.... he means that he will give you several billion pounds IN CASH
How could you hoax the onboard footage of the Apollo 17 LM lifting off from the moon at the time, without a bloody huge crane and a studio several hundred foot high?
Watch from 52 seconds
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v ... yMOJM&feature=related
How would you fake the onboard footage of the landing as well?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v ... c-388&feature=related
Watch from 52 seconds
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v ... yMOJM&feature=related
How would you fake the onboard footage of the landing as well?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v ... c-388&feature=related
I have a question for the non-believers out there...
What do you fear? Why can't it be true?
What do you fear? Why can't it be true?
no he wont, hows he going to get on bullseye in the first place?
Marvin
Damn, the voice of logic appears!
ok...here goes
turkish handhair monsters making pizzas
possibly the realisation that our fathers and grandfathers were a damm site better at getting things done and taking risks.
as one of the apollo astonauts said this week (paraphrased) " what the hell hapened to us to become such a risk averting society ? they almost didn't do the last hubble service mission because there was no way of getting form that orbit to the ISS if there was a problem, did you see the apollo astronauts and enginears or the russians worrying because there was no rescue service ? now everyone on the ground is scared of failure even though the astonauts accept the risks"
The reflectors are made up of many triangles so that no matter where the light source is coming from, it always bounces back via the path of origin. Like a bike reflector.
Fact: The Moon is gay, lets blow it up.
http://www.petitiononline.com/156840/petition.html
WTF?
I did'nt know this
must mean warewolfs are gay too
http://www.petitiononline.com/156840/petition.html
WTF?
I did'nt know this
must mean warewolfs are gay too
ROFL!
Over 1600 anti-lunists. Lunartics perhaps?
Over 1600 anti-lunists. Lunartics perhaps?
1) theyre retroreflectors so alignment doesnt matter much
2) there were plenty of soft lander probes (ie ones that landed softly and upright) sent to the moon before and during the apollo missions... taking a reflector on board wouldnt have been much of an issue
as neat as those reflectors are they dont work as an argument for proving the moon landings
lunar facts
(82 posts, started )
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG