Proof of moon lading fake!??
- Thread starter Neville
- Start date
It is theoretically possible to give the moon an atmosphere but it would lilely dissipate within 1000 years. You could concievably be able to sit a transparent membraneous bubble on that atmosphere to keep it in. The bubble would have to somehow be able to "heal" damage done to it though by either being somehow alive or being swarmed by nanites.
And to those who think that the moon landing was faked let me laugh at you with contempt. HAHAHAHOHOHOHOHOHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHURHURHURHUR!!!!!!!
You guys make my day.
ripleofdeath
Registered Senior Member
heyya all
thread double up???
anywho
my 5kb worth is to the effect that the only reason that the U$A aint on the moon now in public fashion is because they were told to "get off it"
and mind thier own business!
just the same as mars!
where are all the landers???
think about it!!! ... logicaly for once!!!
who controls the pictures!??? {Neville... too true dude}
groove on all
peace light truth love
thread double up???
anywho
my 5kb worth is to the effect that the only reason that the U$A aint on the moon now in public fashion is because they were told to "get off it"
and mind thier own business!
just the same as mars!
where are all the landers???
think about it!!! ... logicaly for once!!!
who controls the pictures!??? {Neville... too true dude}
groove on all
peace light truth love
****HeY..I'm with these guys...
ripleofdeath heyya all
thread double up???
anywho
my 5kb worth is to the effect that the only reason that the U$A aint on the moon now in public fashion is because they were told to "get off it"
and mind thier own business!
just the same as mars!
where are all the landers???
think about it!!! ... logicaly for once!!!
who controls the pictures!??? {Neville... too true dude}
groove on all
peace light truth love
Clockwood quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by chroot
Well, the moon is not massive enough to hold an atmosphere... which means it's not likely to ever be able to support any life (that we're familiar with).
- Warren
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is theoretically possible to give the moon an atmosphere but it would lilely dissipate within 1000 years. You could concievably be able to sit a transparent membraneous bubble on that atmosphere to keep it in. The bubble would have to somehow be able to "heal" damage done to it though by either being somehow alive or being swarmed by nanites.
And to those who think that the moon landing was faked let me laugh at you with contempt. HAHAHAHOHOHOHOHOHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHURHURHURHUR!!!!!!!
I downloaded that piece of Crap... and it is NOTHING like the original moon landing!... I Saw it as a kid on TV... Never forget... on the original the astonauts hopped big hops.. and slowly landed! the dust rose slowly, and settled the same way! they were told to leave in no uncertain terms! No moon station would be tolerated! one more flight to keep people on earth from asking questions.. they were ALWAYS shadowed to and from the moon! Ever wonder why we haven't put a base on the moon? were were ignorant then.. and now? a pieace of cake cept for a couple BIG reasons... like a craft or two dozen that scared the pud outta our astronauts.. the keyword was... there IS a santa Claus.. I see a santa claus... meaning UFO... heres a pic, original..
ripleofdeath heyya all
thread double up???
anywho
my 5kb worth is to the effect that the only reason that the U$A aint on the moon now in public fashion is because they were told to "get off it"
and mind thier own business!
just the same as mars!
where are all the landers???
think about it!!! ... logicaly for once!!!
who controls the pictures!??? {Neville... too true dude}
groove on all
peace light truth love
Clockwood quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by chroot
Well, the moon is not massive enough to hold an atmosphere... which means it's not likely to ever be able to support any life (that we're familiar with).
- Warren
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is theoretically possible to give the moon an atmosphere but it would lilely dissipate within 1000 years. You could concievably be able to sit a transparent membraneous bubble on that atmosphere to keep it in. The bubble would have to somehow be able to "heal" damage done to it though by either being somehow alive or being swarmed by nanites.
And to those who think that the moon landing was faked let me laugh at you with contempt. HAHAHAHOHOHOHOHOHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHURHURHURHUR!!!!!!!
I downloaded that piece of Crap... and it is NOTHING like the original moon landing!... I Saw it as a kid on TV... Never forget... on the original the astonauts hopped big hops.. and slowly landed! the dust rose slowly, and settled the same way! they were told to leave in no uncertain terms! No moon station would be tolerated! one more flight to keep people on earth from asking questions.. they were ALWAYS shadowed to and from the moon! Ever wonder why we haven't put a base on the moon? were were ignorant then.. and now? a pieace of cake cept for a couple BIG reasons... like a craft or two dozen that scared the pud outta our astronauts.. the keyword was... there IS a santa Claus.. I see a santa claus... meaning UFO... heres a pic, original..
An old post off of Xev's links.. this dude has it wrapped up!
WLD_Bill
3 posts
That's why we are the "hill-billies" of the universe. It's not our fault though. Take a plant for example, if you give it light 24/7 vs 8/7 (hours/days), does it not flourish more rapidly?
What if mankind evolved in a 24/7 environment, would we not be further advanced? We would have been debating this stuff we do today many thousands of years ago.
Other civilizations in the universe have been blessed with such an environment and I believe they have this shit down-pat.
We will find the answers at an astonishing rate.
Regards.
WLD_Bill
3 posts
That's why we are the "hill-billies" of the universe. It's not our fault though. Take a plant for example, if you give it light 24/7 vs 8/7 (hours/days), does it not flourish more rapidly?
What if mankind evolved in a 24/7 environment, would we not be further advanced? We would have been debating this stuff we do today many thousands of years ago.
Other civilizations in the universe have been blessed with such an environment and I believe they have this shit down-pat.
We will find the answers at an astonishing rate.
Regards.
I think social memories would serve also.. If Mankind were as one, with a truth based world opinion, no one more or less, the Energies "Spent" on war and strife could be put into a universal Database for All to feed off of to Grow at as fast a pace as knowledge could be spread. Generations could be shortcutted.
who cares if its a fake...
if it was, then the russians fell for it.....
next thing you know poeple will be speculating that the Mars Lander was just some hoax in a guy garage..
if it was, then the russians fell for it.....
next thing you know poeple will be speculating that the Mars Lander was just some hoax in a guy garage..
ok
now, someone may have said this, but i just read the first few... its easy to say YES WE WENT TO THE MOON... the flag still moves because it holds energy, and it has to release it... there are no stars because of the camera's contrast, and there will be no spot where the ship landed due to the fact they are in space...
now, someone may have said this, but i just read the first few... its easy to say YES WE WENT TO THE MOON... the flag still moves because it holds energy, and it has to release it... there are no stars because of the camera's contrast, and there will be no spot where the ship landed due to the fact they are in space...
the moon absorbed many, many meteors that should have hit earth, in fact the theory is that it and the earth were once one, but a meteor hit earth and splashed off a large part or somethign like that..
river-wind
Valued Senior Member
the current thoery for the creation of the moon was that it was created when a large stellar body hit the earth. rock and dust were ejected form the imact; this material was caught by the earth's gravity and found a stable orbit. it re-formed a seperate body over time.
The best way to show that this is truely the case if if the core of the moon contains very low amounts of heavy metals. these heavy metals had setteled to the center of the earth by the time of the collision, so the matter ejected form the planet should contain mostly light elements. If the moon were created by the same process as the earth, it should contain similar levels of heavy metals, as there would have been no force to seperate those metals from the material swirling around the early sun.
So far, surface material has supported the impact creation theory; the EU (European Union) is currently building a robot explorer that will take core samples of the moon, and really verify the mineral contents of the Moon's core.
And having modeled and animated human character movement in 3d application for years, I can tell you that slowing down the frame rate of the video would not make the astronaught appear to float as they did in the original moon landing footage. The astronaughts in that footage follow a different trajectory path than would be possible in earth's 1G environment. Slowing down the video would only make the astronaugts look like they were moving slowly-not like they were floating.
funny video though
as is this site:
http://brainsluice.tripod.com/moonlanding.html
The best way to show that this is truely the case if if the core of the moon contains very low amounts of heavy metals. these heavy metals had setteled to the center of the earth by the time of the collision, so the matter ejected form the planet should contain mostly light elements. If the moon were created by the same process as the earth, it should contain similar levels of heavy metals, as there would have been no force to seperate those metals from the material swirling around the early sun.
So far, surface material has supported the impact creation theory; the EU (European Union) is currently building a robot explorer that will take core samples of the moon, and really verify the mineral contents of the Moon's core.
And having modeled and animated human character movement in 3d application for years, I can tell you that slowing down the frame rate of the video would not make the astronaught appear to float as they did in the original moon landing footage. The astronaughts in that footage follow a different trajectory path than would be possible in earth's 1G environment. Slowing down the video would only make the astronaugts look like they were moving slowly-not like they were floating.
funny video though
as is this site:
http://brainsluice.tripod.com/moonlanding.html
CounslerCoffee
Registered Senior Member
The moon isn't real, fools! There was no moon landing because the moon itself does not exist!
Let's think clearly on this subject:
-All scientists agree that the moon exist.
How come? Why is it that scientists all agree on this one subject!?
Why do all these scientists exist? Where did all these "Scientists" come from? At least one (Quite possibly insane) scientists always disagrees with a theory. Well, last I heard, there wasn't even a MOON theory.
So what do these "Scientists" have to support there moon existing, nothing.
-No moon theory.
-No moon evidence.
-No moon period.
How can scientists not even have a moon theory? It just doesn't make any sense. The moon is a secret illuminati device that will one day be used to destroy us all.
Case closed. Coffee one, illuminati 0.
Let's think clearly on this subject:
-All scientists agree that the moon exist.
How come? Why is it that scientists all agree on this one subject!?
Why do all these scientists exist? Where did all these "Scientists" come from? At least one (Quite possibly insane) scientists always disagrees with a theory. Well, last I heard, there wasn't even a MOON theory.
So what do these "Scientists" have to support there moon existing, nothing.
-No moon theory.
-No moon evidence.
-No moon period.
How can scientists not even have a moon theory? It just doesn't make any sense. The moon is a secret illuminati device that will one day be used to destroy us all.
Case closed. Coffee one, illuminati 0.
Originally posted by ripleofdeath
heyya all
thread double up???
anywho
my 5kb worth is to the effect that the only reason that the U$A aint on the moon now in public fashion is because they were told to "get off it"
and mind thier own business!
just the same as mars!
where are all the landers???
think about it!!! ... logicaly for once!!!
who controls the pictures!??? {Neville... too true dude}
groove on all
peace light truth love
There reallyt havnt been thatm any landers... theres on on mars because it takes somewhere around 8 months to reach mars, and i dont ever recall one being set on the moon, though if your not convinced , nasa openly shows video from the mars lander. I doubt alienswould chose to live in a hostile environment like the moon or mars, besides, nasa is a civilian company funded by the government
Severus666
Registered Member
The moon landing was lauded
revbill2001
Registered Senior Member
Whaddya call em
If people on Mars are called Martians, and people on the moon are called selenites do you call the people on Pluto Plutoniums?
If people on Mars are called Martians, and people on the moon are called selenites do you call the people on Pluto Plutoniums?
revbill2001
Registered Senior Member
Yes, and people with monumentally inflated egos are called egomaniacs