Feel free to question those questioning the Moon landings and their 'evidence', as well.
Houston Control was full of brilliant men who worked as a team to put incredibly brave men in space.
They weren't a collection of crisis actors and bullshit artists.
Edit: Be sure to hit that downvote button, hypocrites. lol Comes in handy when you cannot support your theories with reason and intellect. Make the case and bring the proofs. That's what makes a reasoned debate.
Firm (solid) ament (the thing that participated in the act of)
Plane -t (diminutive)
Uni- (one) -verse (turn of the plow, or furrow)
Radia (spoke of a wheel)
Di (two) mensio (thoughts) / dimensare (measurements)
Meter (a scheme in verse)
Metric (science of versification) (deals with time)
Allen is associated with 6s. Van (from)
Why have the wizenards of the divided knowledge cast these words among our spellings?
I actually leave room for the Moon landings being faked. The rants and unsupported evidence come up way short, however.
Certainly can make the case that the entire counter Psyop to the Space Program and Space X being fake and CGI is actually designed to shit all over the accomplishments of White Americans and sow total doubt of EVERYTHING.
Having watched the full footage, overlaid upon the curiosity I always had about how a tinfoil lined go-kart was able to deal with the “infinite vacuum of space”, the moon landings were almost certainly faked, but that doesn’t equate to “flat earth” or space being fake.
Space is 50/50.
It’s quite obvious something is going on in the sky.
NASA being Hebrew for “to deceive” (“Nasha”) and originally run by a Prussian Nazi doesn’t help anything.
Them being so weird about Antarctica doesn’t help anything, either.
There are legitimate appearing stories fitting both narratives that I can’t fully evaluate.
Even if they’re just getting rockets up really high with long-term floating / camouflaged payloads that don’t crash into the ground all the time, that’s still fairly impressive.
I am open to at least hearing an engaging argument for why the moon landing was fake, if only because it's an opportunity to engage in thought provoking discussion.
Flat earth shit on the other hand, there is not enough proof in the world -- not even sending them up themselves -- that would unscrew their heads from their ass.
I am aware this last bit is a touchy subject for some people, but frankly I don't care. There is endless proof that is easy to observe for the spheroidal planet.
But when it comes to the moon landing, there are a lot of questions that have popped up through the years that never really get properly answered, so my natural curiosity actually likes to hear the questions about it.
Personally, I believe we went. I'm not sure if the time we went is exactly the time we know, however. We have the laser reflector up there, yada yada so on so forth.
I believe the moon landings were real, but I believe the footage to prove that there was the moon landing, was fake. There’s a huge difference. Yes, I believe we went to the moon, because my dad was part of the team. He was not a crisis actor, he was a legitimate rocket scientist. And I have notebooks up on notebooks to prove what he did for a living!
Not that I necessarily take your word on it being real, but the footage was fake, not the landing. A more accurate statement from my stancepoint would be that I don’t know what the landing looked like, or if it happened or not, but the footage was fake, not the landing.
I recently saw a video by the YouTube channel called The Why Files entitled: "The Moon Landing: Stanley Kubrick's Greatest Film | How NASA and Hollywood Fooled the World"
The video sets forth the points people make as to why it was hoaxed, as well as the very valid incentives why there would be a reason to fake it since the USA was in a race to demoralize the USSR. Then it shows evidence to disprove much of it. It does leave questions unexplained, like why astronauts are today talking about in the future it may be possible to travel further than lower orbit, etc. One of the points people make is that you cannot see stars in the photos taken on the moon. But having studied photography, I know that the aperture would have be small, otherwise everything would be a big white blur just to capture the stars in a photo. It also shows how that interview with Stanley Kubrick was actually an actor faking it. There are still many questions remaining though, and the one thing the video mentions at the end is that whistleblower who saw stuff on the far side of the moon.
One of the weirdest discoveries in Wikileaks is the unclassified communication regarding a Soviet attack on a US moonbase in the '70s. Wild stuff.
Your dad worked for NASA and now you can't believe his work was BS, that's the only logical explanation for this unquestionable worship of something satanic.
nah... I'm a high IQ critical thinker and I witness rockets going up and boosters coming down on a nearly weekly basis from here on the Space Coast.
Idiots on this thread claim that's CGI lol And you upvote their comments and downvote mine.
Here is a post of mine on Voat about the Space X ZUMA launch in 2018. Note, I'm questioning EVERYTHING. Also note the identical shill comments found on this thread lol
Yep..
Feel free to question those questioning the Moon landings and their 'evidence', as well.
Houston Control was full of brilliant men who worked as a team to put incredibly brave men in space.
They weren't a collection of crisis actors and bullshit artists.
Edit: Be sure to hit that downvote button, hypocrites. lol Comes in handy when you cannot support your theories with reason and intellect. Make the case and bring the proofs. That's what makes a reasoned debate.
I’ve been increasingly leaning firmament, if only out of spite, but I’ll updoot your legitimate counter-counterpoint!
Stay skeptic and critical thinking of all, frens!
Same. Tho mentioning that here usually brings out the hordes and potential banning.
Especially OP here. Will post about it and then ban any dissenters. If you don't believe it, don't bring it up.
The words for these things are interesting:
Firm (solid) ament (the thing that participated in the act of) Plane -t (diminutive) Uni- (one) -verse (turn of the plow, or furrow) Radia (spoke of a wheel) Di (two) mensio (thoughts) / dimensare (measurements) Meter (a scheme in verse) Metric (science of versification) (deals with time) Allen is associated with 6s. Van (from)
Why have the wizenards of the divided knowledge cast these words among our spellings?
Does this help to lock us into war, somehow?
It suffices that light speed is so darn slow. That's God's way of isolating planets in our universe.
I actually leave room for the Moon landings being faked. The rants and unsupported evidence come up way short, however.
Certainly can make the case that the entire counter Psyop to the Space Program and Space X being fake and CGI is actually designed to shit all over the accomplishments of White Americans and sow total doubt of EVERYTHING.
Having watched the full footage, overlaid upon the curiosity I always had about how a tinfoil lined go-kart was able to deal with the “infinite vacuum of space”, the moon landings were almost certainly faked, but that doesn’t equate to “flat earth” or space being fake.
Space is 50/50. It’s quite obvious something is going on in the sky. NASA being Hebrew for “to deceive” (“Nasha”) and originally run by a Prussian Nazi doesn’t help anything. Them being so weird about Antarctica doesn’t help anything, either. There are legitimate appearing stories fitting both narratives that I can’t fully evaluate.
Even if they’re just getting rockets up really high with long-term floating / camouflaged payloads that don’t crash into the ground all the time, that’s still fairly impressive.
Haha nice downdoot, whoever did it. Sorry I have opinions and stated some reasons for them!
I am open to at least hearing an engaging argument for why the moon landing was fake, if only because it's an opportunity to engage in thought provoking discussion.
Flat earth shit on the other hand, there is not enough proof in the world -- not even sending them up themselves -- that would unscrew their heads from their ass.
I am aware this last bit is a touchy subject for some people, but frankly I don't care. There is endless proof that is easy to observe for the spheroidal planet.
But when it comes to the moon landing, there are a lot of questions that have popped up through the years that never really get properly answered, so my natural curiosity actually likes to hear the questions about it.
Personally, I believe we went. I'm not sure if the time we went is exactly the time we know, however. We have the laser reflector up there, yada yada so on so forth.
You have a lot to learn.
Do we not have a terrestrial telescope powerful enough to view the landing site?
Here is some evidence for speculation and scrutiny:
https://www.planetary.org/articles/3172?gad_source=1&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIyKa_mOLngwMVEIVaBR1bLAEzEAMYASAAEgI3YvD_BwE
A Stereoscopic method of verifying Apollo lunar surface images
http://archive.is/XTfJg
I believe the moon landings were real, but I believe the footage to prove that there was the moon landing, was fake. There’s a huge difference. Yes, I believe we went to the moon, because my dad was part of the team. He was not a crisis actor, he was a legitimate rocket scientist. And I have notebooks up on notebooks to prove what he did for a living!
Great clarification, agreed!
Not that I necessarily take your word on it being real, but the footage was fake, not the landing. A more accurate statement from my stancepoint would be that I don’t know what the landing looked like, or if it happened or not, but the footage was fake, not the landing.
I recently saw a video by the YouTube channel called The Why Files entitled: "The Moon Landing: Stanley Kubrick's Greatest Film | How NASA and Hollywood Fooled the World"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yDyJe1nmSOM
The video sets forth the points people make as to why it was hoaxed, as well as the very valid incentives why there would be a reason to fake it since the USA was in a race to demoralize the USSR. Then it shows evidence to disprove much of it. It does leave questions unexplained, like why astronauts are today talking about in the future it may be possible to travel further than lower orbit, etc. One of the points people make is that you cannot see stars in the photos taken on the moon. But having studied photography, I know that the aperture would have be small, otherwise everything would be a big white blur just to capture the stars in a photo. It also shows how that interview with Stanley Kubrick was actually an actor faking it. There are still many questions remaining though, and the one thing the video mentions at the end is that whistleblower who saw stuff on the far side of the moon.
One of the weirdest discoveries in Wikileaks is the unclassified communication regarding a Soviet attack on a US moonbase in the '70s. Wild stuff.
Your dad worked for NASA and now you can't believe his work was BS, that's the only logical explanation for this unquestionable worship of something satanic.
Now you're just talking out your ass....
you're blinded and lied to
nah... I'm a high IQ critical thinker and I witness rockets going up and boosters coming down on a nearly weekly basis from here on the Space Coast.
Idiots on this thread claim that's CGI lol And you upvote their comments and downvote mine.
Here is a post of mine on Voat about the Space X ZUMA launch in 2018. Note, I'm questioning EVERYTHING. Also note the identical shill comments found on this thread lol
https://archive.searchvoat.co/v/news/2327030