Registered bored user

monkwarrior wrote:
so what happens after you wash them, you have a hundred dollar pair?
monkwarrior wrote:
megrendel ah no.  click the link above to the definition of slave, and look at 2.
monkwarrior wrote:
Pretty ridiculous cartoon, i couldn't think anyone who made this is enlightened, no matter how many times they say they are.  But it really does show how the west has fallen with its arrogance and pride.
monkwarrior wrote:
megrendel .. again.. ..or confirming your definition is too narrow.
monkwarrior wrote:
megrendel ..or that your definition is too narrow
monkwarrior wrote:
DrCribbens I can understand exactly what you're writing.  Sadly, right from the gate, and until your last post you continued to assume and ridicule.  So it's no wonder you went off on a tangent assuming and ridiculing about that van allen video i posted, when my point for posting it was that nasa continues to confuse.  My point of view is nimble, based on what can be proven, and can change as more information arises.  Too bad you  don't want to spend that effort focusing on the speed of the fall in your hammer and feather drop video, compared to the speed of the piece that fell off their suit in the video i posted previously. 

In case you lost the links here is the link for the questionable physics pulling up, and when the item falls off:

Here is your video at the moment the hammer and feather are dropped:

You can see the hammer and feather fall much slower, and don't cover nearly the same distance compared to the distance travelled in the first video where the item falls off.

One other thing you may want to look at (assuming you are still open to questions and i'm wrong and you're not set in your way), is why, on the moon devoid of atmosphere, can we hear them hammering?  There is no medium for sound to travel in, so how do you explain that?  Will you take the irrational 'it went through the suit/their body', assertions people who don't like to question take?
monkwarrior wrote:
in the last year or so he's done over 60 of these, one every few days or so (not every day). It's a bit peculiar, nothing wrong with it, but i wonder what his reasoning is, or maybe if its helpful somehow..
monkwarrior wrote:
thething911 Like there isn't fearful slaves of debt today.
monkwarrior wrote:
jaysingrimm no more or less than i do about most other countries, sin grips them all.
monkwarrior wrote:
squrlz4ever i would love to see it with my own eyes

monkwarrior wrote:
DrCribbens yes, as i said it was a waste of time, as you are set in your way.  To you, it is a fact that you don't question, even though you cannot prove it on your own, and if any question arises you try to bring it into the publicly accepted narrative, or assert it even though you cannot prove either.  It seems you are well versed on how to act on those who raise question to that narrative, so no doubt you would fear going against it.

However, not everyone is like this.  The evidence that raises questions of the achievement still persist, have not satisfactorily been explained, or raise more questions of other things that were presented. So naturally, people will question the achievement, and some will take the position opposite of your assertion that the landing was true: that the landing was faked.

But not all of them who question are like this.  Many people view our progress into space as our next step, and have looked into the 'achievement' very very closely, and subsequent releases by similar agencies, and saw there is enough to question, and raise suspicion.  The achievement itself has not continued, and even nasa is now confusing us for example.   

I prefer to follow what can be proven, and neither side has proven it to me, that we went or not. But one thing for certain is these questions can be erased for me and many others if we begin to colonise the moon.  As every year passes without it, only more will question it, and there is nothing you can do about that, it's human nature.

Oh by the way, notice how slow that hammer/feather fell in the video you posted, compared to the item in the previous video i posted?  Aren't you questioning yet?  If not you might still be indoctrinated.
monkwarrior wrote:
i agree with the title "Focusing Way Too Much On Making Mars Habitable", because for a while there it seemed it had reached a delusional level.  

The most sensible step is learning to live on a celestial body closest to us, the moon.  We can clearly see it, Can communication in seconds vs minutes. Help is 3 days away vs 6 months.  Getting a habitat up and running would be much quicker and safer on the moon.  Not only could we then launch from the moon to attempt Mars with a much stronger understanding, but it would also inspire people to look up and see where we can go with their own eyes.
monkwarrior wrote:
its all right, but still meh because of the battery life/charge time.
monkwarrior wrote:
toetagmodel2 Gerry's right.

The nation is no longer made up of people brave and free, but fearful and slaved.
monkwarrior wrote:
  • to you.
  • the achievement is in question, and more question it as every year passes.. so yes they need to go back to prove they did it now the evidence is in question for many non-indoctrinated people.
  • you are ignoring history, and the fact that during the cold war there were no doubt secrecy clauses with a lot of people.
  • just because you want to ignore guilty demeanor doesn't mean others must, nor does it mean it's to be ignored because of your false equivolocy.
  • there were no pictures, china could have easily faked it, they have known to be faking spacewalks
  • Tracking is still questionable..  While i agree they could have heard the transmissions and see the telemetry beamed back by the module, i don't agree they were tracking it all the way as the tools to track it weren't there.
  • Yeah you don't seem to understand physics in that respect, but i get you want to make your story to confirm your bias.
  • We have ways to measure the acceleration of an object in free fall, you can easily work it out on your own.
  • Then you need your eyes checked because the delay of the whisp indicates they aren't.  But i get you want to see what you want to see.

As for your 'movie questions' i have no answers because i'm not a movie maker, but i'm sure some others could come up with good answers if you google it.  Also I did address your point even though it wasn't to your liking, but there were points you didn't address too, (eg the reflector).  

But i see it's a complete waste of time to continue this with you, as you clearly are set in your ways and refuse to challenge your world view.  It's almost like, when you question what i question, you're trying to find find answers that confirm what you have been told is true even though you can't prove it was true in the first place (just repeating what you were told). I have many questions, some don't have answers, and i'm sorry i don't accept the stories you have told yourself to answer them, as i feel the answers are more assertive-based (from indoctrination) rather than fact-based (what can be observed).  Notice how you are playing defensive to defend your world view, and i am simply questioning.  

The only thing someone rational can say is this: "They say we went, but others have pointed out flaws and questions about the evidence presented to this achievement, that leave the feat in question for many.  The passage of time without a repeat of the feat, or even a manned outpost on the moon (for obvious scientific reasons (eg. most logical stepping stone to space from earth)) raises further question.  The only thing they can do to null these questions is to go back to prove they can do it and to get humankind on the first stepping stone."

And yes, i get people like yourself want to assert it was done, and accept the assertion it was done.  But like i said, people like myself are fact-based, and evidence exist that throw the achievement into question (even if you want to ignore or re-vision that evidence).
monkwarrior wrote:

  • That NASA lies is not irrelevant,  if someone is willing to fake a photo of an achievement, then that achievement is now in question (the photo was allegedly taken from the moon)
  • They haven't been back, but now that the achievement continues to grow in doubt, its really up to them to return.
  • It most certainly could have been faked by a few people in the know, with many people under them in a need-to-know basis, and various other means, that you think it is laughable and want to ignore it on your assertion is your choice though
  • To you a guilty demeanor may not mean anything (considering how hard you are pushing to assert the moon landing is fact it doesn't surprise me), however to many people who excel at reading body language (which just so happens to be our primary language), it reveals much, enough to raise question.
  • When i said the only images i actually meant clear images that we can see (LRO is the only one to have them). Have you looked at the Indian, Japanese, and Chinese photos of the "apollo landing sites"?  I have, and the Japanese and Indian photos don't show anything, China claimed it had seen something, but no images of it have been released.  They all claim to have seen the landing site, but no hardware or tracks are shown until NASA's LRO.
  • Regarding the soviets tracking it, its still questionable.
  • I've heard that too about the apollo astronaut being helped up, but 2 things.  When someone is holding their hand, why does their back go up first instead of their hand. Also if it is 1/6 gravity, why did that thing fall off his back at closer to 9.8m/s^2 rather than 1.6m/s^2, remember it's 1/6 gravity (also about the dust, nothing could blow it that way as both their feet were not causing it)

Now i will address your questions:
  1. (see above) they haven't seen the artifacts. Please feel free to disprove me with pictures that i may have missed that clearly show these artifacts.
  2. (see 1).
  3. (see above) short answer: lies and deception under the guise of "for all humankind" (history is full of this and if you have to ask how you are willfully ignoring facts).
  4. Those reflectors are actually covered quite well in this article:  Also National Geographic did a report on the lasers bounce in 1966:  And in addition if it was so valuable why was the moon laser bouncing stopped in 2009?
  5. It can be easily explained with slowed down playback.

There are questions still that remain, and this is why the doubt over the achievement exists. I understand that you think it's circumstantial evidence at best, and it's nothing that hasnt been debunked.  But if you aren't open to questions and have solidified your world view that it is fact, even in face of the questions, you are simply putting your head in the sand to ignore them.  You freely admit there are things you haven't looked into, perhaps you should, with the intent to get concrete answer questions, rather than to quell your doubt regarding your world view on it?  Understand i used to be in your shoes for a long time, until the time grew, the questions started to grow, nasa's public releases started to show holes in its narrative.  Now i question.

monkwarrior wrote:
DrCribbens you were done with your first post.  You couldn't contain your ridicule, indicating your indoctrination without question to this 'achievement', despite the evidence that leads people less prone to patriotic propaganda to question it.

perhaps next time you want to have a discussion you might want to tone down the rhetoric a few notches from the get go.
monkwarrior wrote:
DrCribbens why would i stop just because you think i'm embarrassing myself, when you are really too lazy to scroll down (or do a ctrl+f search for monkwarrior's posts) to where i did point out things that raise questions of the 'achievement'?  Do you want to keep ignoring that, and asserting i have not put forth anything to back up some things i've seen that raise a question?  

Any sane reader can see you are came out initially to ridicule and put words in my mouth, and then have me answer claims that i have never made.  If you want to assert your world view in the face of someone who is searching for answers, but are so offended someone is question it you have to stoop to ridicule, you're part of the problem not the solution.  If you are so sure everything is explainable then please look at the points i've presented and answer them directly.
monkwarrior wrote:
DrCribbens Appealing to ignorance, when i've already pointed out a number of things throughout this post, still isn't going to make your assertions work. Granted, i imagine you think it's enough closure for you, but the evidence that throws the achievement into question still remains..
monkwarrior wrote:
jaysingrimm you're welcome to assert what you like to defend your fragile world view, but you can't expect others to accept your fallacies.
monkwarrior wrote:
jaysingrimm The modern troll doesn't like to be called a troll  They like to assert things about others despite the obvious facts and words people used, which reveals the toll to be a troll.  They often avoid admitting they are a troll because they like to think they're wise.
monkwarrior wrote:
squrlz4ever they've released pictures that are photoshopped.  For example, the 'earthrise' photo with the lunar surface at the bottom and the earth above the surface, when adjusted to view the darks, it can easily be seen the 'earth' was a square picture that was cropped in (you can see the square crop around the 'earth').  Also, nasa's 'official pictures of earth' continue to change, showing different sizes of continents. In fact, there's probably 6-10 official pictures of the earth, that when compared are completely different.

There's no point arguing.  People who insist we went will rely on the evidence i've already seen, ignoring the evidence that puts it into question.  Since the achievement is in question, there is only one thing they can do to resolve it:  Go back.
monkwarrior wrote:
DrCribbens i'm sorry, but i am not believing 'it was faked', but that the evidence put forth has put the 'achievement' into question. i have no theory, so you are mistaken in using your propaganda term 'conspiracy theorist' with me.
monkwarrior wrote:
squidbush That's fine, we're known to each other, and we both know they're too afraid to do anything.