A question concerning the government conspiracy

  • 62 Replies
  • 12500 Views
?

Mrs. Peach

  • Official Member
  • 6258
Re: A question concerning the government conspiracy
« Reply #30 on: May 03, 2007, 02:01:44 PM »
Just off the top of my head, I'd think there was no blast crater because there was no blast. 

*

Roundy the Truthinessist

  • Flat Earth TheFLAMETHROWER!
  • The Elder Ones
  • 27043
  • I'm the boss.
Re: A question concerning the government conspiracy
« Reply #31 on: May 03, 2007, 02:03:57 PM »
I'd think the reason why no dust settled on the craft is the same as the reason why that first footprint is still there.  There's no atmosphere.
Where did you educate the biology, in toulet?

*

sokarul

  • 19303
  • Extra Racist
Re: A question concerning the government conspiracy
« Reply #32 on: May 03, 2007, 02:04:03 PM »
Quote
I am not saying I believe in a Flat Earth but I don't believe we went to the moon which is in space and space is presented in this thread. I feel NASA DID pocket the billions and billions of dollars for the Space Projects. Think about the budget they had. The Soviet Union had a far more advanced Space Program than the US but feared going to the moon because they knew it was far too dangerous for humans. We faked the moon landing for moral boosts. We were afraid of a nuclear war so to give us a moral boost we faked the moon landings.

Unfounded claims with nothing to back them up. Some might say absence of evidence is evidence of absence in this case.


Oh there is plenty of evidence we did not go to the moon... I want evidence that we DID go to the moon...


Fake Moon Landing evidence (only 3 for now because I don't want to waste time listing them all)

-No Blast Crater from landing. Explain.

-If the moon's surface is in fact "powdery" why did no dust settle on the craft that landed?

-We have PERFECT pictures... even though the guy who designed the suits said the astronauts could not have seen the picture and yet every single picture is perfect... the astronauts must have been some of the best photographers ever... I am not saying that it's impossible to have perfect pictures... just not that many and all perfect when they couldn't aim it at all.
I think its time to take a nap.

http://www.braeunig.us/space/hoax.htm
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.

*

cmdshft

  • The Elder Ones
  • 13149
  • swiggity swooty
Re: A question concerning the government conspiracy
« Reply #33 on: May 03, 2007, 02:16:08 PM »
I chose to believe in FE because many things are unexplainable in RE. For example:

- How did the axis of the earth become tilted in its rotation around the sun? Why doesn't the gravity from the sun tilt it back into place? Clearly there is an imbalance if every ounce of mass in the sun and earth are attracting one another at all moments while the earth rotates.

- What property of matter causes it to bend space-time?

- Why do Dr. Rowbotham's experiments suggest that water is flat?

- Why are the magnetic field lines vertical throughout the entire Arctic and Antarctic circles? What caused the core to become a dipole?

- How did the man who claimed to make a transcontinental journey across Antarctica over the pole do it if compasses don't work there?

- Why is the North Star visible from 231/2 degrees beyond the equator?


Axis: It's thought to be tied into the creation of the moon. But then again, that could be wrong, but hey try this. FET only believes that the earth is flat, and that the other planets can be round. Then look at Uranus. It's axis is completely titled to a near 90o angle. How did it get that way? No one knows, but it's like that regardless.

Property of matter for gravity: Who knows. What causes the universe to expand at near light speed (or even FTL), and cause the earth to accelerate in your theory?

Rowbotham for water: He's wrong. Using a test tube, you can see that water creates a meniscus, and bends when contained. Water is therefore not flat. (Granted, the larger the container, the harder it is to see the meniscus, but it is still there). Plus, Rowbotham did his "tests" back when there weren't accurate tools for telling such things. Everything was done by eye, and well, that just isn't good enough. Sorry.

Core as dipole: It's made of iron, the most fundamentally natural magnetic material known. Heat can cause magnetism in the core and excite the electrons in the metal atoms to all become aligned, causing a magnetic field to occur. As for the magnetic line's being vertical, look at a bar magnet and spread iron shavings around it on paper. It shows the same formation. So it doesn't matter.

Transcontinental Journey: Follow south... till the compass kinda spins, keep going, then go opposite of south. A map and a hand compass (the cartographic instrument) can also help.

North Star: Polaris is not at the true north axis. In fact, in 2006, it was noted to be 42' off from directional North. In 3000AD Gamma Cephei will gain the title of "North Star", and will be at the greatest proximity to axial North in 4000AD. Then it will pass the title off to Iota Cephei some time around 5200AD. in 14,000AD, Vega will become the North Star. This will be caused by the Procession of the Equinoxes. This is why you can see it past the 231/2o mark.

*

cmdshft

  • The Elder Ones
  • 13149
  • swiggity swooty
Re: A question concerning the government conspiracy
« Reply #34 on: May 09, 2007, 09:24:29 AM »
And again, another thread abandoned by Tom when I have won.

Re: A question concerning the government conspiracy
« Reply #35 on: May 09, 2007, 02:12:02 PM »
And again, another thread abandoned by Tom when I have won.
Hey I drove him off first, with my Engineer-like answers! Get rid of him on your own thread!
Quote
Can the FAQ...
Yes, it can.

Re: A question concerning the government conspiracy
« Reply #36 on: May 10, 2007, 11:11:13 AM »
Got the time!

Re: A question concerning the government conspiracy
« Reply #37 on: May 10, 2007, 06:18:27 PM »
Got the energy!  ;D
Quote
Can the FAQ...
Yes, it can.

*

Franc T., Planar

  • 1051
  • Leader of the Planar Army, Republic of Canada
Re: A question concerning the government conspiracy
« Reply #38 on: May 10, 2007, 07:30:55 PM »
I already explained this stuff like five times.
Broadcasting live from the Republic of Canada!
 
They say death and taxes are the only two absolutes. Actually, they're only half right.


Re: A question concerning the government conspiracy
« Reply #39 on: May 10, 2007, 07:39:50 PM »
I already explained this stuff like five times.
Yeah, but no one took you seriously back then.
Quote
Can the FAQ...
Yes, it can.

*

sokarul

  • 19303
  • Extra Racist
Re: A question concerning the government conspiracy
« Reply #40 on: May 10, 2007, 08:36:49 PM »
I already explained this stuff like five times.
Yeah, but no one takes you seriously at all.
Fixed
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.

?

Amroth

  • 708
  • Third in command of The Planar Army. MIA
Re: A question concerning the government conspiracy
« Reply #41 on: May 14, 2007, 05:56:25 AM »
I'd think the reason why no dust settled on the craft is the same as the reason why that first footprint is still there.  There's no atmosphere.

But there still is gravity otherwise the astronaughts wouldn't be able to keep steady. I don't think an atmosphere would have much of an effect that would benefit your side of the arguement.



Also there is no noise from the engine when he lands... people who made it said it would be impossible to not hear it.
Nothing is impossible. Improbable. Unlikely. But never impossible.

Re: A question concerning the government conspiracy
« Reply #42 on: May 14, 2007, 07:15:34 AM »
Maybe they cut it out.

?

Amroth

  • 708
  • Third in command of The Planar Army. MIA
Re: A question concerning the government conspiracy
« Reply #43 on: May 14, 2007, 10:19:17 AM »
I don't think they did but,

How come the craft seemed to just float off like it was lifted by strings?
Nothing is impossible. Improbable. Unlikely. But never impossible.

Re: A question concerning the government conspiracy
« Reply #44 on: May 14, 2007, 01:12:04 PM »
A very steady acceleration.  Shuttle look like they just float off, but with huge flames.

?

Amroth

  • 708
  • Third in command of The Planar Army. MIA
Re: A question concerning the government conspiracy
« Reply #45 on: May 16, 2007, 05:05:42 AM »
The shuttle seemed unsteady to me.

Why didn't the astronaughts get affected by the radiation in space? They would have either died or become ill.

Maybe I should stay on one question and debate that one.
Nothing is impossible. Improbable. Unlikely. But never impossible.

*

Chris Spaghetti

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 12744
Re: A question concerning the government conspiracy
« Reply #46 on: May 16, 2007, 05:10:55 AM »
The shuttle seemed unsteady to me.

Why didn't the astronaughts get affected by the radiation in space? They would have either died or become ill.

Maybe I should stay on one question and debate that one.

Lead radiation shielding I'm guessing, without bothering to look it up

Re: A question concerning the government conspiracy
« Reply #47 on: May 16, 2007, 05:34:50 AM »
Isn't this what the suits are for?

?

DakaSha

  • 115
  • I'm so obviously gay
Re: A question concerning the government conspiracy
« Reply #48 on: May 16, 2007, 05:35:49 AM »
there is no sound because there is no atmosphere as far as i know...
and if you look it up youll see that the missions were planned to take advantage of times when the radiation belt thingie wasnt so strong. (or they took a certain course or something)

btw alot of those astronauts did recieve diseases that are commen when one comes into contact of that form of radiation ;)

you really dont need to ask here just look up the explanations. they make sense
« Last Edit: May 16, 2007, 05:37:46 AM by DakaSha »

I know the waterfalls shadow is wrong. Eat a dick you fuckin know-it-all :P
A Genius: PBF

?

Amroth

  • 708
  • Third in command of The Planar Army. MIA
Re: A question concerning the government conspiracy
« Reply #49 on: May 16, 2007, 05:41:16 AM »
The lead shielding was no where near enough protection. I haven't heard or seen any news about those astronaughts recieving radiation poisoning or any other form of the stuff.

I am not asking here Dakasha I am saying there are things that can't have happened.

I have read numerous articles about this topic. I feel we never landed on the moon and I had too much spare time...


P.S. They went when the radiation was strongest... one of the biggest solar things happened at the time we went.
Nothing is impossible. Improbable. Unlikely. But never impossible.

?

Amroth

  • 708
  • Third in command of The Planar Army. MIA
Re: A question concerning the government conspiracy
« Reply #50 on: May 16, 2007, 05:43:57 AM »
Also since there is no atmosphere wouldn't it be extremely cold (shadow) or extremely hot on the surface?
Nothing is impossible. Improbable. Unlikely. But never impossible.

Re: A question concerning the government conspiracy
« Reply #51 on: May 16, 2007, 05:44:41 AM »
Haha yea, there is no sound in space because there is nowhere for the sound to go.

?

Amroth

  • 708
  • Third in command of The Planar Army. MIA
Re: A question concerning the government conspiracy
« Reply #52 on: May 16, 2007, 06:13:07 AM »
again...
Some of the Eleven Apollo astronauts had non space related fatal accidents within a twenty two month period of one another, the odds of this happening are 1 in 10,000...coincidence?

James B. Irwin (Apollo 15) resigned from NASA and the Air Force on July 1, 1972.
Don F. Eisele (Apollo 7) resigned from NASA and from the Air Force in June 1972.
Stewart Allen Roosa (Apollo 14) resigned from NASA and retired from the Air Force in February 1976.
Swigert resigned from NASA in 1977
Why did they all resign from the 'successful' Apollo Program?


Edit: taken from a website
33 things that need answers


1)  Sceptics argue that the lack of stars on Moon photographs is acceptable, despite zero atmosphere to obscure the view. Yuri Gagarin, pronounced the stars to be "astonishingly brilliant". See the official NASA pictures above that I have reproduced that show 'stars' in the sky, as viewed from the lunar surface. And why exactly do you think there are hardly any stars visible on Apollo films taken from the Moon? The answers simple - Professional astronomers would quickly calculate that the configuration and distances of star formations were incorrect and so NASA had to remove them to make sure they could keep up the scam.

2) The pure oxygen atmosphere in the module would have melted the Hasselblad's camera covering and produced poisonous gases. Why weren't the astronauts affected? 

3)  There should have been a substantial crater blasted out under the LM's 10,000 pound thrust rocket.  Sceptics would have you believe that the engines only had the power to blow the dust from underneath the LM as it landed. If this is true, how did Armstrong create that famous boot print if all the dust had been blown away?

4)  Sceptics claim that you cannot produce a flame in a vacuum because of the lack of oxygen. So how come I have footage on this page showing a flame coming from the exhaust of an Apollo lander? (Obviously the sceptics are wrong or the footage shows the lander working in an atmosphere)

5)  Footprints are the result of weight displacing air or moisture from between particles of dirt, dust, or sand.  The astronauts left distinct footprints all over the place.

6)  The Apollo 11 TV pictures were lousy, yet the broadcast quality magically became fine on the five subsequent missions.

7)  Why in most Apollo photos, is there a clear line of definition between the rough foreground and the smooth background?

8) Why did so many NASA Moonscape photos have non parallel shadows? sceptics will tell you because there is two sources of light on the Moon - the Sun and the Earth... That maybe the case, but the shadows would still fall in the same direction, not two or three different angles and Earth shine would have no effect during the bright lunar day (the time at which the Apollo was on the Moon).

9) Why did one of the stage prop rocks have a capital "C" on it and a 'C' on the ground in front of it?

10)  How did the fibreglass whip antenna on the Gemini 6A capsule survive the tremendous heat of atmospheric re-entry?

11)  In Ron Howard's 1995 science fiction movie, Apollo 13, the astronauts lose electrical power and begin worrying about freezing to death.  In reality, of course, the relentless bombardment of the Sun's rays would rapidly have overheated the vehicle to lethal temperatures with no atmosphere into which to dump the heat build up.

12) Who would dare risk using the LM on the Moon when a simulated Moon landing was never tested?

13)  Instead of being able to jump at least ten feet high in "one sixth" gravity, the highest jump was about nineteen inches.

14)  Even though slow motion photography was able to give a fairly convincing appearance of very low gravity, it could not disguise the fact that the astronauts travelled no further between steps than they would have on Earth.

15)  If the Rover buggy had actually been moving in one-sixth gravity, then it would have required a twenty foot width in order not to have flipped over on nearly every turn.  The Rover had the same width as ordinary small cars.

16) An astrophysicist who has worked for NASA writes that it takes two meters of shielding to protect against medium solar flares and that heavy ones give out tens of thousands of rem in a few hours.  Russian scientists calculated in 1959 that astronauts needed a shield of 4 feet of lead to protect them on the Moons surface. Why didn't the astronauts on Apollo 14 and 16 die after exposure to this immense amount of radiation? And why are NASA only starting a project now to test the lunar radiation levels and what their effects would be on the human body if they have sent 12 men there already?

17)  The fabric space suits had a crotch to shoulder zipper.  There should have been fast leakage of air since even a pinhole deflates a tyre in short order.

18)  The astronauts in these "pressurized" suits were easily able to bend their fingers, wrists, elbows, and knees at 5.2 p.s.i. and yet a boxer's 4 p.s.i. speed bag is virtually unbendable.  The guys would have looked like balloon men if the suits had actually been pressurized.

19) How did the astronauts leave the LEM? In the documentary 'Paper Moon' The host measures a replica of the LEM at The Space Centre in Houston, what he finds is that the 'official' measurements released by NASA are bogus and that the astronauts could not have got out of the LEM.

20)  The water sourced air conditioner backpacks should have produced frequent explosive vapour discharges.  They never did.

21)  During the Apollo 14 flag setup ceremony, the flag would not stop fluttering.

22)  With more than a two second signal transmission round trip, how did a camera pan upward to track the departure of the Apollo 16 LEM? Gus Grissom, before he got burned alive in the Apollo I disaster A few minutes before he was burned to death in the Apollo I tragedy, Gus Grissom said, 'Hey, you guys in the control center, get with it. You expect me to go to the moon and you can't even maintain telephonic communications over three miles.' This statement says a lot about what Grissom thought about NASA's progress in the great space race.

23) Why did NASA's administrator resign just days before the first Apollo mission?

24) NASA launched the TETR-A satellite just months before the first lunar mission. The proclaimed purpose was to simulate transmissions coming from the moon so that the Houston ground crews (all those employees sitting behind computer screens at Mission Control) could "rehearse" the first moon landing. In other words, though NASA claimed that the satellite crashed shortly before the first lunar mission (a misinformation lie), its real purpose was to relay voice, fuel consumption, altitude, and telemetry data as if the transmissions were coming from an Apollo spacecraft as it neared the moon. Very few NASA employees knew the truth because they believed that the computer and television data they were receiving was the genuine article. Merely a hundred or so knew what was really going on; not tens of thousands as it might first appear.

25) In 1998, the Space Shuttle flew to one of its highest altitudes ever, three hundred and fifty miles, hundreds of miles below merely the beginning of the Van Allen Radiation Belts. Inside of their shielding, superior to that which the Apollo astronauts possessed, the shuttle astronauts reported being able to "see" the radiation with their eyes closed penetrating their shielding as well as the retinas of their closed eyes. For a dental x-ray on Earth which lasts 1/100th of a second we wear a 1/4 inch lead vest. Imagine what it would be like to endure several hours of radiation that you can see with your eyes closed from hundreds of miles away with 1/8 of an inch of aluminium shielding!

26) The Apollo 1 fire of January 27, 1967, killed what would have been the first crew to walk on the Moon just days after the commander, Gus Grissom, held an unapproved press conference complaining that they were at least ten years, not two, from reaching the Moon. The dead man's own son, who is a seasoned pilot himself, has in his possession forensic evidence personally retrieved from the charred spacecraft (that the government has tried to destroy on two or more occasions). Gus Grissom was obviously trying to make a big statement as he placed a lime in the window of the Apollo I spacecraft as it sat ready for launch!

27) CNN issued the following report, "The radiation belts surrounding Earth may be more dangerous for astronauts than previously believed (like when they supposedly went through them thirty years ago to reach the Moon.) The phenomenon known as the 'Van Allen Belts' can spawn (newly discovered) 'Killer Electrons' that can dramatically affect the astronauts' health."

28) In 1969 computer chips had not been invented. The maximum computer memory was 256k, and this was housed in a large air conditioned building. In 2002 a top of the range computer requires at least 64 Mb of memory to run a simulated Moon landing, and that does not include the memory required to take off again once landed. The alleged computer on board Apollo 11 had 32k of memory. That's the equivalent of a simple calculator.

29) If debris from the Apollo missions was left on the Moon, then it would be visible today through a powerful telescope, however no such debris can be seen. The Clementine probe that recently mapped the Moons surface failed to show any Apollo artefacts left by Man during the missions. Where did the Moon Buggy and base of the LM go?

 30) In the year 2005 NASA does not have the technology to land any man, or woman on the Moon, and return them safely to Earth.

31) Film evidence has recently been uncovered of a mis-labelled, unedited, behind-the-scenes video film, showing the crew of Apollo 11 staging part of their photography. The film evidence is shown in the video "A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Moon!". and appears above in the 'Why Did Apollo 11 Astronauts Lie About Being In Deep Space?' section.

32) Why did the blueprints and plans for the Lunar Module and Moon Buggy get destroyed if this was one of History's greatest accomplishments?

33) Why did NASA need to airbrush out anomalies from lunar footage of the Moon if they have nothing to hide?


« Last Edit: May 16, 2007, 06:15:28 AM by Amroth »
Nothing is impossible. Improbable. Unlikely. But never impossible.

Re: A question concerning the government conspiracy
« Reply #53 on: May 16, 2007, 07:41:47 AM »
Here's some stuff.
And some more stuff

If there are any unanswered questions, let me know.
« Last Edit: May 16, 2007, 12:27:01 PM by Agent_0042 »
Quote
Can the FAQ...
Yes, it can.

*

sokarul

  • 19303
  • Extra Racist
« Last Edit: May 16, 2007, 11:45:01 AM by sokarul »
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.

*

Roundy the Truthinessist

  • Flat Earth TheFLAMETHROWER!
  • The Elder Ones
  • 27043
  • I'm the boss.
Re: A question concerning the government conspiracy
« Reply #55 on: May 16, 2007, 01:10:56 PM »
again...
Some of the Eleven Apollo astronauts had non space related fatal accidents within a twenty two month period of one another, the odds of this happening are 1 in 10,000...coincidence?

James B. Irwin (Apollo 15) resigned from NASA and the Air Force on July 1, 1972.
Don F. Eisele (Apollo 7) resigned from NASA and from the Air Force in June 1972.
Stewart Allen Roosa (Apollo 14) resigned from NASA and retired from the Air Force in February 1976.
Swigert resigned from NASA in 1977
Why did they all resign from the 'successful' Apollo Program?


Edit: taken from a website
33 things that need answers


1)  Sceptics argue that the lack of stars on Moon photographs is acceptable, despite zero atmosphere to obscure the view. Yuri Gagarin, pronounced the stars to be "astonishingly brilliant". See the official NASA pictures above that I have reproduced that show 'stars' in the sky, as viewed from the lunar surface. And why exactly do you think there are hardly any stars visible on Apollo films taken from the Moon? The answers simple - Professional astronomers would quickly calculate that the configuration and distances of star formations were incorrect and so NASA had to remove them to make sure they could keep up the scam.

2) The pure oxygen atmosphere in the module would have melted the Hasselblad's camera covering and produced poisonous gases. Why weren't the astronauts affected? 

3)  There should have been a substantial crater blasted out under the LM's 10,000 pound thrust rocket.  Sceptics would have you believe that the engines only had the power to blow the dust from underneath the LM as it landed. If this is true, how did Armstrong create that famous boot print if all the dust had been blown away?

4)  Sceptics claim that you cannot produce a flame in a vacuum because of the lack of oxygen. So how come I have footage on this page showing a flame coming from the exhaust of an Apollo lander? (Obviously the sceptics are wrong or the footage shows the lander working in an atmosphere)

5)  Footprints are the result of weight displacing air or moisture from between particles of dirt, dust, or sand.  The astronauts left distinct footprints all over the place.

6)  The Apollo 11 TV pictures were lousy, yet the broadcast quality magically became fine on the five subsequent missions.

7)  Why in most Apollo photos, is there a clear line of definition between the rough foreground and the smooth background?

8) Why did so many NASA Moonscape photos have non parallel shadows? sceptics will tell you because there is two sources of light on the Moon - the Sun and the Earth... That maybe the case, but the shadows would still fall in the same direction, not two or three different angles and Earth shine would have no effect during the bright lunar day (the time at which the Apollo was on the Moon).

9) Why did one of the stage prop rocks have a capital "C" on it and a 'C' on the ground in front of it?

10)  How did the fibreglass whip antenna on the Gemini 6A capsule survive the tremendous heat of atmospheric re-entry?

11)  In Ron Howard's 1995 science fiction movie, Apollo 13, the astronauts lose electrical power and begin worrying about freezing to death.  In reality, of course, the relentless bombardment of the Sun's rays would rapidly have overheated the vehicle to lethal temperatures with no atmosphere into which to dump the heat build up.

12) Who would dare risk using the LM on the Moon when a simulated Moon landing was never tested?

13)  Instead of being able to jump at least ten feet high in "one sixth" gravity, the highest jump was about nineteen inches.

14)  Even though slow motion photography was able to give a fairly convincing appearance of very low gravity, it could not disguise the fact that the astronauts travelled no further between steps than they would have on Earth.

15)  If the Rover buggy had actually been moving in one-sixth gravity, then it would have required a twenty foot width in order not to have flipped over on nearly every turn.  The Rover had the same width as ordinary small cars.

16) An astrophysicist who has worked for NASA writes that it takes two meters of shielding to protect against medium solar flares and that heavy ones give out tens of thousands of rem in a few hours.  Russian scientists calculated in 1959 that astronauts needed a shield of 4 feet of lead to protect them on the Moons surface. Why didn't the astronauts on Apollo 14 and 16 die after exposure to this immense amount of radiation? And why are NASA only starting a project now to test the lunar radiation levels and what their effects would be on the human body if they have sent 12 men there already?

17)  The fabric space suits had a crotch to shoulder zipper.  There should have been fast leakage of air since even a pinhole deflates a tyre in short order.

18)  The astronauts in these "pressurized" suits were easily able to bend their fingers, wrists, elbows, and knees at 5.2 p.s.i. and yet a boxer's 4 p.s.i. speed bag is virtually unbendable.  The guys would have looked like balloon men if the suits had actually been pressurized.

19) How did the astronauts leave the LEM? In the documentary 'Paper Moon' The host measures a replica of the LEM at The Space Centre in Houston, what he finds is that the 'official' measurements released by NASA are bogus and that the astronauts could not have got out of the LEM.

20)  The water sourced air conditioner backpacks should have produced frequent explosive vapour discharges.  They never did.

21)  During the Apollo 14 flag setup ceremony, the flag would not stop fluttering.

22)  With more than a two second signal transmission round trip, how did a camera pan upward to track the departure of the Apollo 16 LEM? Gus Grissom, before he got burned alive in the Apollo I disaster A few minutes before he was burned to death in the Apollo I tragedy, Gus Grissom said, 'Hey, you guys in the control center, get with it. You expect me to go to the moon and you can't even maintain telephonic communications over three miles.' This statement says a lot about what Grissom thought about NASA's progress in the great space race.

23) Why did NASA's administrator resign just days before the first Apollo mission?

24) NASA launched the TETR-A satellite just months before the first lunar mission. The proclaimed purpose was to simulate transmissions coming from the moon so that the Houston ground crews (all those employees sitting behind computer screens at Mission Control) could "rehearse" the first moon landing. In other words, though NASA claimed that the satellite crashed shortly before the first lunar mission (a misinformation lie), its real purpose was to relay voice, fuel consumption, altitude, and telemetry data as if the transmissions were coming from an Apollo spacecraft as it neared the moon. Very few NASA employees knew the truth because they believed that the computer and television data they were receiving was the genuine article. Merely a hundred or so knew what was really going on; not tens of thousands as it might first appear.

25) In 1998, the Space Shuttle flew to one of its highest altitudes ever, three hundred and fifty miles, hundreds of miles below merely the beginning of the Van Allen Radiation Belts. Inside of their shielding, superior to that which the Apollo astronauts possessed, the shuttle astronauts reported being able to "see" the radiation with their eyes closed penetrating their shielding as well as the retinas of their closed eyes. For a dental x-ray on Earth which lasts 1/100th of a second we wear a 1/4 inch lead vest. Imagine what it would be like to endure several hours of radiation that you can see with your eyes closed from hundreds of miles away with 1/8 of an inch of aluminium shielding!

26) The Apollo 1 fire of January 27, 1967, killed what would have been the first crew to walk on the Moon just days after the commander, Gus Grissom, held an unapproved press conference complaining that they were at least ten years, not two, from reaching the Moon. The dead man's own son, who is a seasoned pilot himself, has in his possession forensic evidence personally retrieved from the charred spacecraft (that the government has tried to destroy on two or more occasions). Gus Grissom was obviously trying to make a big statement as he placed a lime in the window of the Apollo I spacecraft as it sat ready for launch!

27) CNN issued the following report, "The radiation belts surrounding Earth may be more dangerous for astronauts than previously believed (like when they supposedly went through them thirty years ago to reach the Moon.) The phenomenon known as the 'Van Allen Belts' can spawn (newly discovered) 'Killer Electrons' that can dramatically affect the astronauts' health."

28) In 1969 computer chips had not been invented. The maximum computer memory was 256k, and this was housed in a large air conditioned building. In 2002 a top of the range computer requires at least 64 Mb of memory to run a simulated Moon landing, and that does not include the memory required to take off again once landed. The alleged computer on board Apollo 11 had 32k of memory. That's the equivalent of a simple calculator.

29) If debris from the Apollo missions was left on the Moon, then it would be visible today through a powerful telescope, however no such debris can be seen. The Clementine probe that recently mapped the Moons surface failed to show any Apollo artefacts left by Man during the missions. Where did the Moon Buggy and base of the LM go?

 30) In the year 2005 NASA does not have the technology to land any man, or woman on the Moon, and return them safely to Earth.

31) Film evidence has recently been uncovered of a mis-labelled, unedited, behind-the-scenes video film, showing the crew of Apollo 11 staging part of their photography. The film evidence is shown in the video "A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Moon!". and appears above in the 'Why Did Apollo 11 Astronauts Lie About Being In Deep Space?' section.

32) Why did the blueprints and plans for the Lunar Module and Moon Buggy get destroyed if this was one of History's greatest accomplishments?

33) Why did NASA need to airbrush out anomalies from lunar footage of the Moon if they have nothing to hide?




Somebody already posted a link answering most of these questions, a while back.  It was long, but not much longer than this post.  Did you bother to read it?  I found it very interesting.

The moon hoax people are idiots.
Where did you educate the biology, in toulet?

?

Amroth

  • 708
  • Third in command of The Planar Army. MIA
Re: A question concerning the government conspiracy
« Reply #56 on: May 17, 2007, 06:10:42 AM »
Yea I read it but I felt like posting something relevant to what we were talking about which isn't relevant to the topic anyway... but yeah! We never landed on the moon. I am sticking with that until I get actual proof that we were there. Japan is supposed to send a satellite to the moon sometime in the near future... we will find out then.
Nothing is impossible. Improbable. Unlikely. But never impossible.

Re: A question concerning the government conspiracy
« Reply #57 on: May 17, 2007, 06:12:25 AM »
Yea I read it but I felt like posting something relevant to what we were talking about which isn't relevant to the topic anyway... but yeah! We never landed on the moon. I am sticking with that until I get actual proof that we were there. Japan is supposed to send a satellite to the moon sometime in the near future... we will find out then.


I would like to ask what you mean by actual proof.   What would satisfy you?

?

DakaSha

  • 115
  • I'm so obviously gay
Re: A question concerning the government conspiracy
« Reply #58 on: May 17, 2007, 07:35:22 AM »
a trip to the moon and being able to see the flag and buggy :D

wow this sounds like an FE'er ^^

I know the waterfalls shadow is wrong. Eat a dick you fuckin know-it-all :P
A Genius: PBF

?

CSSGHLNN

  • 144
  • Cadet Senior Master Sergeant
Re: A question concerning the government conspiracy
« Reply #59 on: May 19, 2007, 08:52:00 PM »
You don't understand how evidence works in FES.  You see, it is a known fact that the earth is flat. ::)  Since the earth is flat and we are told it is round, there must be a Conspiracy.  That's their proof.  They have demonstrated motive, which is all the money NASA brings in for their fake missions.  Never mind that if you really think about it thousands of people scattered around the globe and with wildly disparate ideologies would all have to be involved.  To the FEers this is the only thing that makes sense because, once again, it is a proven fact that the earth is flat. ::)
A known and proven fact, eh.  Well over 6.5 billion people seem to disagree with you.
Now with self-destructing intolerance for bullsh*t.

OOOHHHH go here http://go-america.myminicity.com/