RootsBooster Posted May 19, 2011 Share Posted May 19, 2011 Sorry, you're right. ... Do you think I used enough exclamation marks? I'm not sure I got my point across? Edit: !!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! !!! Yes, Dosxuk, you're right, but they still publicised that fact even if at the time was not technologically possible to do what they claimed to do. So, do I have to believe the landings? I want to see a picture, that's all. If you're ignoring all the other evidence FOR the moon landings, and only a photo of the flag on the moon, took FROM Earth, will convince you then you will most likely be left in decisional limbo forever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karis Posted May 19, 2011 Share Posted May 19, 2011 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! !!! . /\/\()||()(|~| |$ €oD!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karis Posted May 19, 2011 Share Posted May 19, 2011 Sorry!!! I was receiving a message from the Mothership. I'm OK now. To anyone seriously doubting the Moon landing pics, they really only need to watch the Mythbusters show. Or, did NASA pay them off, too? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RootsBooster Posted May 19, 2011 Share Posted May 19, 2011 Sorry!!! I was receiving a message from the Mothership. I'm OK now. To anyone seriously doubting the Moon landing pics, they really only need to watch the Mythbusters show. Or, did NASA pay them off, too? If you take a photo of a Mythbuster's moustache from an angle halfway between portrait and profile and connect the corners using red lines, you get a pyramid with an eye on top!!!!!! WAKE UP!!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spineless Posted May 19, 2011 Author Share Posted May 19, 2011 The only experiment I'd really like the Mythbusters to do on camera is to impale themselves to prove that Ivan the Terrible techique was really quite painful and caused a slow death. I might look like a freak, yeah, that's ok with me, I'm not that bothered about it. I'd rather look like that than look like a halibut. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dosxuk Posted May 19, 2011 Share Posted May 19, 2011 Yes, Dosxuk, you're right, but they still publicised that fact even if at the time was not technologically possible to do what they claimed to do. Please don't tell me you think everything the American's said publically about their intelligence gathering ability during the Cold War was true... That said, they could get higher resolution than from satellites, as I said earlier in the thread, by high flying aircraft. I don't know if the camera systems on the aircraft were capable of resolving such a resolution to read a headline, but it sounds implausible to me. So, do I have to believe the landings? I want to see a picture, that's all. If you want to see a picture, of a flag, about 1m across, about 230,000 miles away, and will refuse to believe unless you see it, then I'm afraid you'll just have to not believe. Humanity does not have any cameras capable of resolving such detail, so therefore no pictures can or do exist. Do you accept the images taken from the recent probe sent round the moon as evidence? ----------------------------- On another note, my favourite Moon based conspiracy theory, is that suggested on this forum in response to the question of how did the US fool Russia into believing there was a spacecraft travelling and then landing. Apparently, NASA sent an actual spacecraft, which didn't contain people, to travel along the exact path which they published, then landed, took off again, and came back, all as we're told. They then sent the signals they were making in their hanger secretly to the spacecraft which then transmitted them back to Earth. Surely at some point in all of that they'd have decided it was easier just to pull of the mission for real? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spineless Posted May 19, 2011 Author Share Posted May 19, 2011 I was quite excited about the announcement made about those pictures and then disappointed with the outcome. Although I've always been impressed by the ingenuity shown by mankind in previous centuries, I think the "intermission" theories are what I'd consider most plausible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RootsBooster Posted May 20, 2011 Share Posted May 20, 2011 The only experiment I'd really like the Mythbusters to do on camera is to impale themselves to prove that Ivan the Terrible techique was really quite painful and caused a slow death. I might look like a freak, yeah, that's ok with me, I'm not that bothered about it. I'd rather look like that than look like a halibut. Wow, they're a sore subject then eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingjimmy Posted May 20, 2011 Share Posted May 20, 2011 No, I haven't seen the evidence you are talking about. In fact, if you read the following article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third-party_evidence_for_Apollo_Moon_landings Did you really just link to a well sourced and long Wikipedia page entitled 'Third party evidence for the Apollo moon landings' right after saying 'I haven't seen the evidence'? This has to be a joke right? You cannot be serious! Nothing will convince you, your mind is closed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingjimmy Posted May 20, 2011 Share Posted May 20, 2011 The only experiment I'd really like the Mythbusters to do on camera is to impale themselves to prove that Ivan the Terrible techique was really quite painful and caused a slow death. Why on earth would you want that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.