Youtube comments of Kevin Skinner (@kevinskinner4986).

  1. 209
  2. 181
  3. 92
  4. 56
  5. 53
  6. 44
  7. 40
  8. 38
  9. 25
  10. 22
  11. 22
  12. 22
  13. 21
  14. 20
  15. 17
  16. 17
  17. 17
  18.  @3deanes958  Your first clip is false. I have personally examined this one before trying to figure out how the trick worked. It's actually braindead simple. If you look closely and slow it down, you can watch him stick a finger down his left front pocket and yank on his pants. The fabric bulges as he does. This admittedly took me quite a while to find so I won't fault this one too hard. By the way both the first and third "wire" clips have floating necklaces. ------------- I've seen the second clip before. My immediate thought was "Are you sure he's not pulling himself on one of the footholds that are everywhere on the ship?" ---------------------------- That's not a chromakey screen. it's a grid for filming motion experiments and there are videos of it being used for this. Chromakey screens, by the way, are usually either solid blue or solid green (no grid) and you can never wear the same color clothes otherwise it will appear on you too. That means no green shirts with a green screen or blue shirts with a blue screen and your "forgot to teleport" clip has BOTH so I guess they're using a third screen. I think the third most common color is....... pink? By the way, your "screen" doesn't reach the ceiling and you can see the objects behind it have changed. Are you sure that they don't have more than one of that same off-screen object? ------------------------------- Please show the full clip of the "forgot to teleport the object" scene so we can make sure it's not something either transparent that is difficult to see or small and easily concealed. ----------------- The motion of the guy going down the hall is weird. If you tried to turn like that on a wire rig, the wires would most likely wrap around your body like the string on a yoyo. This isn't the only video I've seen shit like this on; the ISS tour video constantly turns and pivots in ways that should get him tangled up. --------------------------------- I'm sorry, but I have to call you out. Your "Bubble comes from the helmet" is the same deceptive bullshit that the Apollo hoaxers pull. Your clip starts with the "bubble" already visible against the helmet. You need to show the clips BEFORE (and preferably AFTER) this happens if you want to claim that it "came from the helmet" because we only have your word on that when you (or whoever you took this clip from) could have EASILY cut your footage to avoid showing it flying in from the side. Do you know why don't trust short clips from conspiracy sources? THAT.
    16
  19. 15
  20. 14
  21. 14
  22. 13
  23. 12
  24. 12
  25. 12
  26. 11
  27. 10
  28. 10
  29. 10
  30. 10
  31. 9
  32. 9
  33. 9
  34. 9
  35. 8
  36. 8
  37. 8
  38. 8
  39. 8
  40. 7
  41. 7
  42. 7
  43. 7
  44. 7
  45. 7
  46. 7
  47. 7
  48. 7
  49. 7
  50. 7
  51. 7
  52. 7
  53. 7
  54. 7
  55. 6
  56. 6
  57. 6
  58. 6
  59. 6
  60. 6
  61. 6
  62. 6
  63. I hate to break it to you, but Dubay's firmly in the Mantras For Money camp himself. His work is garbage. You can say something in a way that sounds logical all you want, but that doesn't make it true. In reality, on top of largely being plagiarized from other sources, including a man who dropped out of school at the age of 9, it mostly falls apart if you put any sort of pressure on it. I remember when he put out a 10,000 challenge (note that these anti-science challenges are ALWAYS rigged) to prove the Earth was round, in which he promised that he would give detailed responses to would be claimers. He instead gave one-line links to his other videos, which had already been contested, and made up claims such as, and I quote "You can't learn anything about the shape of the ground beneath your feet by looking at the sky." By the way, this immeidately invalidates all Flat Earth claims about polaris and constellations not moving. I remember watching his "Lighthouse curvature distance" video and the first thing that crossed my mind was that not one single time did he provide any evidence that they were ACTUALLY VISIBLE at those distances. He could have made it up and nobody would have questioned him. I remember skimming through his "moon hoax" video and thinking "This is the same list of debunked garbage that every other hoax video has made and which has been disproved for 20 years. Is there not an original thought in his head?" Here's a good reading of how committed Dubay is to the truth: has he published a public list of all of the "proofs" from his "200" proofs that are false or need to be clarified? Surely he's at least removed the unproven hearsay, the "Bla Blah Conspiracy Blah Blah Jews Are Evil" rants, the "no curvature" photograph that got caught cropping out that curvature shown in the original, and the "Faking the distance to the Moon" considering that the original creator of that, Bart Sibrel, is a con artist and got caught red-handed lying about it ten years ago (and which if true, immediately disproves Flat Earth because the claim is that the astronauts were faking the distance from orbit.)
    6
  64. 6
  65. 6
  66. 6
  67. 6
  68. 6
  69. 6
  70. 6
  71. 6
  72. 6
  73. 6
  74. 6
  75. 6
  76. 6
  77. 6
  78. 6
  79. 5
  80. 5
  81. 5
  82. 5
  83. 5
  84. 5
  85. 5
  86. 5
  87. 5
  88. 5
  89. 5
  90. 5
  91. 5
  92. 5
  93. 5
  94. 5
  95. 5
  96. 5
  97. 5
  98. 5
  99. 5
  100. 5
  101. 5
  102. 5
  103. 5
  104. 5
  105. 5
  106. 5
  107. 5
  108. 5
  109. @Versaro And how many interviews have you actually analyzed like this and would you have even thought to have looked unless you had been told by another person that they looked "suspicious"? Are you taking into account the fact that Armstrong had a reputation for hating interviews before he joined NASA? Becoming the most famous man in the world isn't going to make a shy withdrawn introvert suddenly like attention. The fact that Aldrin's personal life is falling apart around him, with a family member that committed suicide from depression within the last year and a failing marriage and that he has other reasons for anxiety and depression than just this? The fact that they may be physically or mentally fatigued from their trip, quarantine, and/or the solid month of being flown around the world every two days? (I don't remember if this is before or after the tour) The fact that public speaking is one of the most common human fears and that people are TRAINED, either by coaching or experience, to get over it? I'm going to blunt. I'd be a wreck if you put me up there because I detest public speaking in front of even small crowds, and if you dragged the armchair psychologists here up on stage and made them give a press conference in front of a large crowd, broadcast to the entire world, and recorded for all eternity, I bet a large number of the blowhards here would shit their pants like they were still in diapers. No, you probably didn't even stop and consider any of these for even a moment. Most of you people immediately assume that it MUST be "because they're lying" because that is what you are told before you watch this and that is what you want to hear. I'm going to say this again. You people can't even notice the Australian Coke Bottle lady lying through her teeth despite forgetting that her story needs to actually take place in Australia. "They look like they're lying" really doesn't convince me when you people can't spot easy lies.
    5
  110. 5
  111. 5
  112. 5
  113. 5
  114. 5
  115. 5
  116. 5
  117. 5
  118. 5
  119. 5
  120. 5
  121. 5
  122. 5
  123. 5
  124. 5
  125. 5
  126. 5
  127. 5
  128. 5
  129. 5
  130. 5
  131. 5
  132. 5
  133. 4
  134. 4
  135. 4
  136. 4
  137. 4
  138. 4
  139. 4
  140. 4
  141. 4
  142. 4
  143. 4
  144. 4
  145. 4
  146. 4
  147. 4
  148. 4
  149. 4
  150. 4
  151. 4
  152. 4
  153. 4
  154. 4
  155. 4
  156. 4
  157. 4
  158. 4
  159. 4
  160. 4
  161. 4
  162. 4
  163. 4
  164. 4
  165. 4
  166. 4
  167. 4
  168. 4
  169. 4
  170. 4
  171. 4
  172. 4
  173. 4
  174. 4
  175. 4
  176. 4
  177. 4
  178. 4
  179. 4
  180. 4
  181. 4
  182. 4
  183. 4
  184. 4
  185. 4
  186. 4
  187. 4
  188. 4
  189. 4
  190. 4
  191. 4
  192. 4
  193. 4
  194. 4
  195. 4
  196. 4
  197. 4
  198. 4
  199. 4
  200. 4
  201. 4
  202. 4
  203. 4
  204. 4
  205. 4
  206. 4
  207. 4
  208. 4
  209. 4
  210. 4
  211. 4
  212. 4
  213. 4
  214. 4
  215. 4
  216. 4
  217. 4
  218. 4
  219. 4
  220. 4
  221. 4
  222. 4
  223. 4
  224. 4
  225. 4
  226. 4
  227. 4
  228. 4
  229. 4
  230. 4
  231. 4
  232. 4
  233. 4
  234. 4
  235. 4
  236. 4
  237. 4
  238. 4
  239. 4
  240. 4
  241. 4
  242. 4
  243.  @tbrown3356  The rest of of the Flat Earthers typically use the AE projection and claim that there's an ice wall where Antarctica should be. The typical flat earth claim is that the sun and moon are 3,000 miles high. According to the most basic aspects of trig, the proportions of a right triangel 3,000 miles high and 5 degrees in angle puts the object you're looking at: 3000/tan(5) = ~ 35000 miles away. Now, go mark that on whatever map you please. I'll wait. ---------------- A close moon should change sizes both over the course of the n ight as it moves across the sky, and when viewed from different latitudes. We're talking 30-50%, something that should be noticed by the naked eye. It does not. Outside of an illusion that makes it ironically appear larger than it is near the horizon, it stays the same all night. ------------------- Measuring the angle for what? How high an object is to you like my sun example? You measure it based on your perspective from an arbitrary horizontal line and ignore the falling ground. The line that crosses the edge of a sphere or circle perpendicular to the radius and extends out from it as the curve falls away is called a "tangent line" by the way. -------------------- Bitching about the name doesn't make it disappear, dearie. It's still a problem whether you call it the Southern Hemisphere or Southern Hemisflat or Southern Insert Gibberish Here. But since you want to be like that, let's rename "equator" to "uncoff" and "hemisphere" to "Blargleflag." Explain why the locations in Southern Blargleflag, the region of your disk out past the uncoff, sees impossible geometry with objects being in multiple places at once.
    4
  244. 4
  245. 4
  246. 4
  247. 4
  248. 4
  249. 4
  250. 4
  251. 4
  252. 4
  253. 4
  254. 4
  255. 4
  256. 4
  257. 4
  258. 4
  259. 4
  260. 3
  261. 3
  262. 3
  263. 3
  264. 3
  265. 3
  266. 3
  267. 3
  268. 3
  269. 3
  270. 3
  271. 3
  272. 3
  273. 3
  274. 3
  275. 3
  276. 3
  277. 3
  278. 3
  279. 3
  280. 3
  281. 3
  282. 3
  283. 3
  284. 3
  285. 3
  286. 3
  287. 3
  288. 3
  289. 3
  290. 3
  291. 3
  292. 3
  293. 3
  294. 3
  295. 3
  296. 3
  297. 3
  298. 3
  299. 3
  300. 3
  301. 3
  302. 3
  303. 3
  304. 3
  305. 3
  306. 3
  307. 3
  308. 3
  309. 3
  310.  @G58  I find it very unlikely that you have actually read the report for yourself. If you have, you would be in the .01% of hoaxers that have. Most of them just believe what they're told on Youtube. I have not read it in its entirety for myself, mostly because the academic websites that have it are expensive to read from, but as far as I'm aware from analysis and excerpts of it I've seen, nowhere in it does he ever claim that lead shielding out be needed. If it did, this figure would almost certainly be revised as more information was gathered (because like I said, WRONG TYPE OF RADIATION), but for some reason hoaxers think that only the very first initial readings have any meaning. By the way, Van Allen watched some of those hoax videos claiming the Belts would have been certain death back in 2001 or so. He called it a bunch of nonsense and called you a bunch of amateurs that had no clue what you were doing and said you were making a mountain out of a molehill on a subject you have no understanding of. I'll find his exact words later when i can be bothered. For reference, Bill Kaysing is the founder of your movement, Ralf Rene is one of your older major authors, Jarrah White is the #1 Apollo hoax Youtuber, Marcus Allen is your #1 Photographic Expert, Bart Sibrel is the creator of A Funny Thing happened on the Way to the Moon (the most popular hoax video, the one with the "faking the distance") and Astronauts Gone Wild (where he harasses the astronauts about swearing on the Bible and gets punched after chasing somebody through the street hurling insults while avoiding telling how he has a criminal record for stalking and trespassing), and David Percy is the creator of What Happened on the Moon (the other really popular hoax video), as well as the owner of Aulis, your #1 hoax website. These are all big names in your field. Even if you have no read or watched their stuff directly, which I find rather unlikely, you have with almost 100% certainty heard their claims repeated on other videos because many, many of them do little more than repeat their claims or base their work upon it.
    3
  311. 3
  312. 3
  313. 3
  314. 3
  315.  @flatearth5821  First of all, Eric Dubay is notorious for using sketchy, unsubstantiated claims and hearsay as "proof" and using the work of proven frauds such as Bart Sibrel, then banning anybody that calls him out on it. He has zero credibility. Okay, so Australia has an airline called Qantas that, in addition to flying across the ocean to LA and Santiago and such (which creates more problems), makes daily flights between Syndey on the east coast and Perth on the west coast. These flights take about 4 1/2 hours. If Australia were the size it appears on YOUR map, the flight would need to take about 10-12 hours making the deception impossible to hide. And no, you can't just fly faster, because supersonic airplanes have a completely different appearance to everyday 787s AND make a loud BANG when they cross 767 mph, the speed of sound. Furthermore, anybody driving between those two cities would certainly notice because it would take far, far longer than it should and cars have a device called an odometer that measures how far you drive. The trucking industry will notice immediately because they log their milage. Sorry, I suspect your "railroad measurer" is either bad at math or lying. -------------- Also, Australia has another problem in that it can see the Southern celestial pole, which circles around a point in the sky due south of every location in the hemisphere simultaneously. When you try and draw the movement of the stars in the Southern Hemisphere on YOUR map, it creates a a paradox where objects are in multiple places at the same time and moving in an impossible geometry direction that would make M.C. Escher cream his pants. Maybe you should decontaminate yourself from your brainwashing and keep an open mind to the possibility that your "truth" movement is a fraud.
    3
  316. 3
  317. 3
  318. 3
  319. 3
  320. 3
  321. 3
  322. 3
  323. 3
  324. 3
  325. 3
  326. 3
  327. 3
  328. 3
  329. 3
  330. 3
  331. 3
  332. 3
  333. 3
  334. 3
  335. 3
  336. 3
  337. 3
  338. 3
  339. 3
  340. 3
  341. 3
  342. 3
  343. 3
  344. 3
  345. 3
  346. 3
  347. 3
  348. 3
  349. 3
  350. 3
  351. 3
  352. 3
  353. 3
  354. 3
  355. 3
  356. 3
  357. 3
  358. 3
  359. 3
  360. 3
  361. 3
  362. 3
  363. 3
  364. 3
  365. 3
  366. 3
  367. 3
  368. 3
  369. 3
  370. 3
  371. 3
  372. 3
  373. 3
  374. 3
  375. 3
  376. 3
  377. 3
  378. 3
  379. 3
  380. 3
  381. 3
  382. 3
  383. 3
  384. 3
  385. 3
  386. 3
  387. 3
  388. 3
  389. 3
  390. 3
  391. 3
  392. 3
  393. 3
  394.  @mikeFlatbird729  The reason the ground appears to "rise to your eye level" is because the angle between your eyes and a point on the ground becomes smaller and smaller the further away it is. This angle is functionally a straight line at infinity. Yes, the sun will also reach that plane directly in front of you. HOWEVER, because it is higher, it will need to be further away to do so and unless there is another factor besides "perspective" (air disturbance, bending light, etc), it will do so at the same rate calculable with basic trigonometry. Do you understand? You want to use that "looking down a hallway" right? How close would the ceiling appear to the floor if instead of a hallway, you were in... say... an aircraft hangar with the ceiling fifty feet above you? It wouldn't be anywhere even close by the end of the building. Now, step outside that building and look for a cloud 5 miles high. It's even further away to get near the horizon! So how far away does a 3,000 mile high object to have to be to get close to the horizon? You should be able to calculate this. If you can't, you're making shit up. And even when the two do meet, it will NEVER become obstructed. It is impossible for the ground to ever obscure an object above it unless it gets between them and an object that reaches that horizon line does not MAGICALLY shrink so that half of the object is one millionth of the size of the other half with a cut so clean it can be made with a knife. The ENTIRE object shrinks together. You know those "disappearing objects on a table" videos? They're cons. The camera is placed below the table so it can only see the front edge. The object doesn't "shrink into the table" as ti moves back. It is actually being obstructed by the table. You said that there are "Celestial laws". What are these laws? Be specific.
    3
  395. 3
  396. 3
  397. 3
  398. 3
  399. 3
  400. 3
  401. 3
  402. 3
  403. 3
  404. 3
  405. 3
  406. 3
  407. 3
  408. 3
  409. 3
  410. 3
  411. 3
  412. 3
  413. 3
  414. 3
  415. 3
  416. 3
  417. 3
  418. 3
  419. 3
  420. 3
  421. 3
  422. 3
  423. 3
  424. 3
  425. 3
  426. 3
  427. 3
  428. 3
  429. 3
  430. 3
  431. 3
  432. 3
  433. 3
  434. 3
  435. 3
  436. 3
  437. 3
  438. 3
  439. 3
  440. 3
  441. 3
  442. 3
  443. 3
  444. 3
  445. 3
  446. 3
  447. 3
  448. 3
  449. 3
  450. 3
  451. 3
  452. 3
  453. 3
  454. 3
  455. 3
  456. 3
  457. 3
  458. 3
  459. 3
  460.  @platygaia5303  You realize that your side's promotion of Michelson-Morley is a blatant lie, right? Michelson-Morley DIDN'T TRY to find evidence of the Earth's movement. It was a test to find luminiferous aether, a magical gas-energy from the 1800s used for light propagation, and failed to find it. The Flat Earther took the experiment, claimed that Aether existed, and used that to "disprove" the foundations that the actual test were supposedly based on. Aether was already falling out of favor before Einstein came along, by the way. Why is it impossible? Your "impossible" claim makes the assumption that the movement is random. However, if the other stars are moving the same speed and direction as us, they will stay in place forever. You have, of course, seen soldiers or marching bands in formation, right? If the stars are in a pattern your "impossible" goes straight out the window Furthermore, do you know what parallax is? It's the difference in position caused by moving positions. The thing about parallax is that the further away an object is, the more movement you need until a change is seen. If an object is far enough away, you need to move extremely, extremely large distances to make even a small change. Take one step forward. Tell me, how much different does China look to you (if you're in China and on the internet.... somehow... how does the China exhibit at Epcot look). This is of course ignoring the procession of the stars indicated by astronomical records from Ancient Greece (who described the spot Polaris currently is as barren) through the Islamic Golden Age and Renaissance that you people conveniently ignore. You want to know something even more impossible? If you go to the Southern Hemisphere and look south, the south-facing constellations circle around a point directly in front of you that doesn't move just like Polaris, and yet are somehow, magically 90 degrees to the side, 180 degrees behind you, and every direction in between simultaneously. How does that work? Because that's what happens when the position and movement of the stars is drawn on YOUR map.
    3
  461. 3
  462. 3
  463. 3
  464. 3
  465. 3
  466. 3
  467. 3
  468. 3
  469. 3
  470. 3
  471. 3
  472. 3
  473. 3
  474. 3
  475. 3
  476. 3
  477. 3
  478. 3
  479. 3
  480. 3
  481. 3
  482. 3
  483. 3
  484. 3
  485. 3
  486. 3
  487. 3
  488. 3
  489. 3
  490. 3
  491. 3
  492. 3
  493. 3
  494. 3
  495. 3
  496. 3
  497. 3
  498. 3
  499. 3
  500. 3
  501. 3
  502. 3
  503. 3
  504. 3
  505. 3
  506. 3
  507. 3
  508. 3
  509. 3
  510. 3
  511. 3
  512. 3
  513. 3
  514. 3
  515. 3
  516. 3
  517. 3
  518. 3
  519. 3
  520. 3
  521. 3
  522. 3
  523. 3
  524. 3
  525. 3
  526. 3
  527. 3
  528. 3
  529. 3
  530. 3
  531. 3
  532. 3
  533. 3
  534. 3
  535. 3
  536. 3
  537. 3
  538. 3
  539. 3
  540. 3
  541. 3
  542. 3
  543. 3
  544. 3
  545. 3
  546. 3
  547. 3
  548. 3
  549. 3
  550. 3
  551. 3
  552. 3
  553. 3
  554. 3
  555. 3
  556. 3
  557. 3
  558. 3
  559. 3
  560. 3
  561. 3
  562. 2
  563. 2
  564. 2
  565. 2
  566. 2
  567. 2
  568. 2
  569. 2
  570. 2
  571. 2
  572. 2
  573. 2
  574. 2
  575. 2
  576. 2
  577. 2
  578. 2
  579. 2
  580. 2
  581. 2
  582. 2
  583. 2
  584. 2
  585. 2
  586. 2
  587. 2
  588. 2
  589. 2
  590. 2
  591. 2
  592. 2
  593. 2
  594. 2
  595. 2
  596. 2
  597. 2
  598. 2
  599. 2
  600. 2
  601. 2
  602. 2
  603. 2
  604. 2
  605. 2
  606. 2
  607. 2
  608. 2
  609. 2
  610. 2
  611. 2
  612. You should rename that app to Deception in Plane Sight. The screenshots of it on their very own apps page debunks their own model. Tell me, how does a spotlight sun create a CONCAVE light pattern, and if night is caused by the sun moving out of range, how the flying fuck does it magically illuminate more of the Southern Hemisphere during the southern winter months when your own app shows the sun moving closer to the edge - and therefore FARTHER AWAY from the opposite side. No offense, but if you believe that this challenge is real, you probably shouldn't have financial independence. All of these anti-science challenges are scams. They exist solely to claim that "Nobody claimed our challenge money" and strut around like peacocks, no matter how many lies they have to tell to keep that position. Eric Dubay put out one of these challenges about 2-3 years ago. When people confronted him about the fact that it's impossible to have two celestial poles on a flat Earth, he started blatantly lying and making excuses such as, and I quote: "You cannot learn anything about the shape of the ground beneath your feet by looking up at the sky". This, of course, means that anybody that tries to use "Polaris doesn't move" is lying too, but he's rather mum on that. Also, isn't Weiss one of the Flat Earthers that delete the comments of people that try and debate him? I know Dubay does. I know that Weiss refuses to debate the big science debunking channels so what makes you think he has any intention of having a serious debate now? Oh right, because he's wagered money he probably doesn't have and won't show. Got it.
    2
  613. 2
  614. 2
  615. 2
  616. 2
  617. 2
  618. 2
  619. 2
  620. 2
  621. 2
  622. 2
  623. 2
  624. 2
  625. 2
  626. 2
  627. 2
  628. 2
  629. 2
  630. 2
  631. 2
  632. 2
  633. 2
  634. 2
  635. 2
  636. 2
  637. 2
  638. 2
  639. 2
  640. 2
  641. 2
  642. 2
  643. 2
  644. 2
  645. 2
  646. 2
  647. 2
  648. 2
  649. 2
  650. 2
  651. 2
  652. 2
  653. 2
  654. 2
  655. 2
  656. 2
  657. 2
  658. 2
  659. 2
  660. 2
  661. 2
  662. 2
  663. 2
  664. 2
  665. 2
  666. 2
  667. 2
  668. 2
  669. 2
  670. 2
  671. 2
  672. 2
  673. 2
  674. 2
  675. 2
  676.  @appletongallery  Apple, about ten years ago, I took a digitla photography class because I needed some sort of art class for my major. I did an assignment where I took panning shots of the cars driving by my house. Now being the master class photographer I am, i held my camera at arm's length and took pictures without using the viewfinder. I STILL got about 10-20% good shots and that was with one afternoon. Taking photographs without a view finder is a skill that can be PRACTICED, and they had months of training with their equipment. It is nowhere near as impressive as blind people that paint. Furthermore, there are THOUSANDS of photographs. Many of them are bad. Why don't you see them?? Because NASA aren't idiots and hire professional editors to sort through the trash and select the best ones for publication. Unless you've actively gone looking fot hem, you've seen maybe 40-50. You haven't seen the out of focus ones. You haven't seen the badly exposed ones. You generally only see the ones that have been deemed fit for publication and the rest sit in a vault gathering dust.. Also, i would like to point out that 95% of them are rocks and terrain, things that would be "perfectly framed" if you were in the same post code. The real kicker here is that even the ones they do show are NOT perfect. You know that famous photographs of the Man on the Moon? It's EDITED. The original photograph is badly framed, so they cropped it and added a fake black sky because the top of the pack was cut off. Gee, i guess the professional studio photographic crew didn't use their viewfinder on that one.
    2
  677. 2
  678. 2
  679. 2
  680. 2
  681. 2
  682. 2
  683. 2
  684. 2
  685. 2
  686. 2
  687. 2
  688. 2
  689. 2
  690. 2
  691. 2
  692. 2
  693. 2
  694. 2
  695. 2
  696. 2
  697. 2
  698. 2
  699. 2
  700. 2
  701. 2
  702. 2
  703. 2
  704. 2
  705. 2
  706. 2
  707. 2
  708. 2
  709. 2
  710. 2
  711. 2
  712. 2
  713. 2
  714. 2
  715. 2
  716. 2
  717. 2
  718. 2
  719. 2
  720. 2
  721. 2
  722. 2
  723. 2
  724. 2
  725. 2
  726. 2
  727. 2
  728. 2
  729. 2
  730. 2
  731. 2
  732. 2
  733. 2
  734. 2
  735. 2
  736. 2
  737. 2
  738. 2
  739. 2
  740. 2
  741. 2
  742. 2
  743. 2
  744. 2
  745. 2
  746. 2
  747. 2
  748. 2
  749. 2
  750. 2
  751. 2
  752. 2
  753. 2
  754.  @waltright648  No, the astronauts do NOT respond "with no delay". The footage, the actual full footage, contains both constant long pauses and parts of the footage where the astronauts and mission control talk over one another as if they can't hear each other. The claim that there was no delay on the Nixon call is an outright bold-faced lie. There's an almost 10 second pause before the first response and about 4 after the second. Round trip, the delay should be less than 3. ---------- Dust on Earth tends to form clouds when the particles get trapped in the air. There's not a single second of that in 20+ hours of footage, not only of the rover, but of the astronauts kicking it around every five seconds. By the way, there's a scene from.... I think it's 15 or 16, where the astronauts are digging a hole. Not only do they throw the dust clear over their heads with scoops that don't even reach their knees, one of the astronaut sends the dust cascading at least ten feet sideways from about a one-inch foot shuffle. Not a single grain floats during this sequence like it would on Earth. -------------- According to Webb, he stepped down over party politics regarding the 1968 election. He was a staunch democrat and Johnson loyalist, so left when Nixon won. -------- No, rocks from Antarctica would not work. Meteorites are burnt black and contain glass from the heat of entry, and exposure to air and water (these were sitting in snow) causes the minerals in the rock to rust. Measuring how rusted the rocks are is how scientists tell how long a meteorite's been on Earth, by the way. A raw meteorite will be spotted instantly without any testing required, and trying to remove the bad parts will most likely be spotted the instant that geologists put the rocks under the microscope and see all of your chisel marks. ------------ No, it would not be easier. it is impossible to fake low gravity TODAY, 50 years later, without CGI. Wires do not affect any thrown object or the dust, and will clip every single time the astronauts cross paths. Slow motion would slow down ALL footage; low gravity would only vertical movement . That's why the hoaxers only show a few seconds at a time. If they left it on "normal" speed, their other movements would become way too fast when watched for extended periods of time. There are parts where when sped up to Earth speed, the astronauts limbs flail faster than the human body is is comfortably capable of. Do you know how long a special effect lasts in a movie? 3-5 SECONDS. The Apollo 11 footage is three continuous hours, and contains one of the astronauts performing a brief mobility test directly in front of the camera about twenty minutes in where he does a slow hop then immediately starts waving his arms. Lets see the hoaxers speed that up to "Earth gravity". -------- Short note: the fact that the hoaxers can't agree on where the sets are, whether it's Area 51 or Pinewood Studios where 2001 was filmed or someplace else, means there's no evidence of them.
    2
  755. 2
  756. 2
  757. 2
  758. 2
  759. 2
  760. 2
  761. 2
  762. 2
  763. 2
  764. 2
  765. 2
  766. 2
  767. 2
  768. 2
  769. 2
  770. 2
  771. 2
  772. 2
  773. 2
  774. 2
  775. 2
  776. 2
  777. 2
  778. 2
  779. 2
  780. 2
  781. 2
  782. 2
  783. 2
  784. 2
  785. 2
  786. "Liquids don't conform to the exterior of spinning wobbling tilting orbiting oblate spheroids" Just making sure, you do realize that we know for a fact that this is 100% Grade A Oscar Meyer Baloney because we have liquids that stick to magnets, right? "Constellations have remained in the same sequences since hieroglyphic cave drawings despite us being on polar opposite sides of the sun's orbit every six months we still have the same constellations" Put an object on the ground. Step over it. Why are you in the same room as before? You're on opposite sides of the object, so clearly everything must have changed! If you perform this simple test and get this result, clearly you are a Satanic magic-using warlock and should be put to death!!!!! Have you done any research at all beyond what the Flat Earthers dangle in front of you like a carrot on a stick? The thermosphere feels COLD because while the gas is super heated, it's way, way, way way too dilute to heat anything. It has virtually no substance. Convection works on contact with the air, not magic, and there is barely any air. You are not touching enough of the gas to heat your material faster than every other point on the surface loses heat via infrared radiation. It's like trying to burn a whale to death with a handful of red hot sewing needles. " Polaris is still directly north even though you traveled a hundred billion miles today " Uh, yeah, you're exaggerating the distance, but yes that's how parallax works. The farther away an object is, the farther you have to move to make it change positions. This is how magicians make the statue of liberty disappear: they move the audience to the side, but because the buildings on the other side of the bay are so far away, it looks like they haven't moved. "All hail fluoride." Why do the elite drink their own flouridated water? That's pretty stupid if you're trying to indiscriminately poison the masses, since you're also affecting yourselves, your friends and loved ones, and the people that will take over your job when you are dead or retired.
    2
  787. 2
  788. 2
  789. 2
  790. 2
  791. 2
  792. 2
  793. 2
  794. 2
  795. 2
  796. 2
  797. 2
  798. 2
  799. 2
  800. 2
  801. 2
  802. 2
  803. 2
  804. 2
  805. 2
  806. 2
  807. 2
  808. 2
  809. 2
  810. 2
  811.  @ninjacrypt5795  Ninja.... First of all, claiming that "many" rocks were proven fake is a blatant lie. It was ONE rock and the "fake rock" wasn't even NASA's. It was a completely unrelated rock that was ASSUMED to be moon rock purely based on when it was received (despite being a year before the moon landings were given out) and then donated without being appraised. The astronauts were given a payload allotment to bring whatever (reasonable) personal possessions they wanted. Aldrin brought a communion set. Armstrong brought boy scout memorabilia or flags or something dignified (I don't remember what it was). The golf equipment was from that personal payload. It was not in place of anything so don't pretend that it was. You can't receive radio from China without a satellite in part because there's a billion tons of rock called "the curvature of the Earth" in the way. The golf cart extends the range you can move away from the ship and allows you to transport equipment and samples over distance. Anybody that doesn't think this is beneficial has their head up their ass. We see stars from the Earth AT NIGHT. The Apollo missions happened during the DAY and the lunar daytime is two weeks long. Photographs of the stars use long exposure times of several seconds long that, if you tried to use them in sunlight, would render everything in the foreground overexposed and unusable because brightly it photographs use exposure times of less than 1/100th of a second. Your precious "truther" cult leaders are well-aware of this, but continue to pretend this is an issue because lying is much easier. By the way, Apollo 16 took ultraviolet photographs using a telescope. They were determined to have come from the moon. The hoaxers will never, ever tell you about that.
    2
  812. 2
  813. 2
  814. 2
  815. 2
  816. 2
  817. 2
  818. 2
  819. 2
  820. 2
  821. 2
  822. 2
  823. 2
  824. 2
  825. 2
  826. 2
  827. 2
  828. 2
  829. 2
  830. 2
  831. 2
  832. 2
  833. 2
  834. 2
  835. 2
  836. 2
  837. 2
  838. 2
  839. 2
  840. 2
  841. 2
  842. 2
  843. 2
  844. 2
  845. 2
  846. 2
  847. 2
  848. 2
  849. 2
  850. 2
  851. 2
  852. 2
  853. 2
  854. 2
  855. 2
  856. 2
  857. 2
  858. 2
  859. 2
  860. 2
  861. 2
  862. 2
  863. 2
  864. 2
  865. 2
  866. 2
  867. 2
  868. 2
  869. 2
  870. 2
  871. 2
  872. 2
  873. 2
  874. 2
  875. 2
  876. 2
  877. 2
  878. 2
  879. 2
  880. 2
  881. 2
  882. 2
  883. 2
  884. 2
  885. 2
  886. 2
  887. 2
  888. 2
  889. 2
  890. 2
  891. 2
  892. 2
  893. 2
  894. 2
  895. 2
  896. 2
  897. 2
  898. 2
  899. 2
  900. 2
  901. 2
  902. 2
  903. 2
  904. 2
  905. 2
  906. 2
  907. 2
  908. 2
  909. 2
  910. 2
  911. 2
  912. 2
  913. 2
  914. 2
  915. 2
  916. 2
  917. 2
  918. 2
  919. 2
  920. 2
  921. 2
  922. 2
  923. 2
  924. 2
  925. 2
  926. 2
  927. 2
  928. 2
  929. 2
  930. 2
  931. 2
  932. 2
  933. 2
  934. 2
  935. 2
  936. 2
  937. 2
  938. 2
  939. 2
  940. 2
  941. 2
  942. 2
  943. 2
  944. 2
  945. 2
  946. 2
  947. 2
  948. 2
  949. 2
  950. 2
  951. 2
  952. 2
  953. 2
  954. 2
  955. 2
  956. 2
  957. 2
  958. 2
  959. 2
  960. 2
  961. 2
  962. 2
  963. 2
  964. 2
  965. 2
  966. 2
  967. 2
  968. 2
  969. 2
  970. 2
  971. 2
  972. 2
  973. 2
  974. 2
  975. 2
  976. 2
  977. 2
  978. 2
  979. 2
  980. 2
  981. 2
  982. 2
  983. 2
  984. 2
  985. 2
  986. 2
  987. 2
  988. 2
  989. 2
  990. 2
  991. 2
  992. 2
  993. 2
  994. 2
  995. 2
  996. 2
  997. 2
  998. 2
  999. 2
  1000. 2
  1001. 2
  1002. 2
  1003.  @andresbetancourt8561  Question. Are Flat Earthers and conspiracy theorists all high school dropouts? Your spelling is atrocious and none of you ever seem to use paragraphs. ------------ "Water wld never be calm. " You've never ordered a drink on an airplane without ice, have you? Amazing how it sits almost perfectly calm and doesn't instantly slosh out of the cup at 500 miles per hour. By the way, the spinning is about 1000 mph, not 65000 -------- "Guess my hand must be bigger lol" Of course it is. After all, the size that objects appear in relation to one another is how big they are! It looks like it is, so it must be. Or.... would you prefer to admit that you were lying when you said that appearing the same size meant they were? ------------- "Why wldnt buzz Aldridge or Neil Armstrong say we landed on the moon?" Because the man that asked them to swear, Bart Sibrel, is a convicted criminal that harassed them to the point that the police had to be called for stalking and trespassing. Why do you people lie pretend that three of the other astronauts (Gene Cernan, Edgar Mitchell, and Alan Bean) didn't swear on your Bible or make excuses to why they don't count? Pretty obvious that you're the real satanists. -------------- You do realize that the farther an object is away from you, the less its position changes as you move right? Meaning that you would need to move an astronomically far distance to change the position of an object that is trillions of miles away, right? And that the model you are arguing against straight-up says the other stars are moving in roughly the same speed and direction that we are, so will stay in position with each other like soldiers marching in formation, right? So why do you people pretend that the movement is supposedly random? --------- "We landed in the moon and go to Mars but we can't hover over the north pole?" .... yes, because a satellite in orbit requires it to continuously move forward to counteract gravity pulling it down otherwise it will come back to the ground. To quote it like the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, it's essentially throwing yourself at the ground and missing. Geosynchronous orbit creates the illusion of it hovering by having the speed it's moving match the earth's rotation. You can't do that over the poles. Satellites work on science and math, not making shit up and declaring it to be the divine truth that must never be questioned because God Says So. ---------- "And where the fuck did they get that number??" First of all, it's not a trillion miles so the answer is "You pulled it out of your ass" Second, do you know "parallax" is? And not just the Marvel character? It's the measurable difference in size, position, and angle of an object as you move. You can take two or more locations you know the distance between and measure the change in an object to tell how far away it is. By the way, parallax bends your "true model" over a table like a rich man's maid. If the sun, moon, and stars were only a few thousand miles or less, it'd be very obvious because the star circles would be squashed into ovals as you move South and the moon would show more than 90 degrees of rotation between England and the Falkland Islands. Do they look like they're close? Fuck no, they don't. ----------- "Where are the stars in that infamous moon landing. We can see stars from earth but there not there in moon pic?" ..... because the Apollo footage is DAYTIME, you dolt. Cameras have a setting that controls how much light you let in. The proper settings to avoid all of your brightly lit foreground objects in direct sunlight being overexposed is typically about 1/100th of a second or less, while stars are filmed with long exposure shots of several seconds. That's why most pictures of city skylines or the moon at night, from Earth, typically don't have stars in them either. Hint hint. --------- "And you believe that? All I can say to you sheep is bah bah bah bah." Says the person who thinks they're so smart yet lies about the numbers and hasn't an original thought in their head. ========= Edit: My bad, Parallax is DC, not Marvel.
    2
  1004. 2
  1005. 2
  1006. 2
  1007. 2
  1008. 2
  1009. 2
  1010. 2
  1011. 2
  1012. 2
  1013. 2
  1014. 2
  1015. 2
  1016. 2
  1017. 2
  1018. 2
  1019. 2
  1020. 2
  1021. 2
  1022. 2
  1023. 2
  1024. 2
  1025. 2
  1026. 2
  1027. 2
  1028. 2
  1029. 2
  1030. 2
  1031. 2
  1032. 2
  1033. 2
  1034. 2
  1035. 2
  1036. 2
  1037. 2
  1038. 2
  1039. 2
  1040. 2
  1041. 2
  1042. 2
  1043. 2
  1044. 2
  1045. 2
  1046. 2
  1047. 2
  1048. 2
  1049. 2
  1050. 2
  1051. 2
  1052. 2
  1053. 2
  1054. 2
  1055. 2
  1056. 2
  1057. 2
  1058. 2
  1059. 2
  1060. 2
  1061. 2
  1062. 2
  1063. 2
  1064. 2
  1065. 2
  1066. 2
  1067. 2
  1068. 2
  1069. 2
  1070. 2
  1071. 2
  1072. 2
  1073. 2
  1074. 2
  1075. 2
  1076. 2
  1077. 2
  1078. 2
  1079. 2
  1080. 2
  1081. 2
  1082. 2
  1083. 2
  1084. 2
  1085. 2
  1086. 2
  1087. 2
  1088. 2
  1089. 2
  1090. 2
  1091. 2
  1092. 2
  1093. 2
  1094. 2
  1095. 2
  1096. 2
  1097. 2
  1098. 2
  1099. 2
  1100. 2
  1101. 2
  1102. 2
  1103. 2
  1104. 2
  1105. 2
  1106. 2
  1107. 2
  1108. 2
  1109. 2
  1110. 2
  1111. 2
  1112. 2
  1113. 2
  1114. 2
  1115. 2
  1116. 2
  1117. 2
  1118. 2
  1119. 2
  1120. 2
  1121. 2
  1122. 2
  1123. 2
  1124. 2
  1125. 2
  1126. 2
  1127. 2
  1128. 2
  1129. 2
  1130. 2
  1131. 2
  1132. 2
  1133. 2
  1134. 2
  1135. 2
  1136. 2
  1137. 2
  1138. 2
  1139. 2
  1140. 2
  1141. 2
  1142. 2
  1143. 2
  1144. 2
  1145. 2
  1146. 2
  1147. 2
  1148. 2
  1149. 2
  1150. 2
  1151. 2
  1152. 2
  1153. 2
  1154. 2
  1155. 2
  1156. 2
  1157. 2
  1158. 2
  1159. 2
  1160. 2
  1161. 2
  1162. 2
  1163. 2
  1164. 2
  1165. 2
  1166. 2
  1167. 2
  1168. 2
  1169. 2
  1170. 2
  1171. 2
  1172. 2
  1173. 2
  1174. 2
  1175. 2
  1176. 2
  1177. 2
  1178. 2
  1179. 2
  1180. 2
  1181. 2
  1182. 2
  1183. 2
  1184. 2
  1185. 2
  1186. 2
  1187. 2
  1188. 2
  1189. 2
  1190. 2
  1191. 2
  1192. 2
  1193. 2
  1194. 2
  1195. 2
  1196. 2
  1197. 2
  1198. 2
  1199. 2
  1200. 2
  1201. 2
  1202. 2
  1203. 2
  1204. 2
  1205. 2
  1206. 2
  1207. 2
  1208. 2
  1209. 2
  1210. 2
  1211. 2
  1212. 2
  1213. 2
  1214. 2
  1215. 2
  1216. 2
  1217. 2
  1218. 2
  1219. 2
  1220. 2
  1221. 2
  1222. 2
  1223. 2
  1224. 2
  1225. 2
  1226. 2
  1227. 2
  1228. 2
  1229. 2
  1230. 2
  1231. 2
  1232. 2
  1233. 2
  1234. 2
  1235. 2
  1236. Just as a head's up, Bart got caught lying through his teeth about his "faking the distance" video over ten years ago. He lied about the fact that it was supposedly never before seen footage that was supposed to be edited and played back later. It was actually the live scheduled broadcast. He lied about the astronauts pretending to be against the window while actually filming across the cabin, then skipped over a section of footage just moments after the "camera is filling the window" comment where NASA openly asks them to move the camera back, the astronauts confirm, and you can watch the Earth shrink as they do so. The only person claiming they were still against the window when the lights come on is Bart himself. He lied about the astronauts not knowing the camera was on, then muted the audio so you couldn't hear them openly discussing the picture quality the entire time it was supposedly "off". If you actually watch the footage, can clearly see that the terminator line doesn't actually change an inch when the insert is "removed" so apparently it just poofs into thin air when the lights come on. The trick DOESN'T WORK. If the astronauts were in orbit, we'd see the clouds and landmasses moving past the window because the minimum speed to stay in orbit is 17,000 miles per hour and the clips he used are long enough to cross entire oceans and continents. Oh, and most damning, HE GOT CAUGHT skipping over shots of them filming WITHOUT HIS TRICK less than 20 seconds after clips he used. There's a reason he doesn't let people comment on his Youtube channel. He didn't show them filming a close Earth. He simply claimed that a window with a blue glare was the Earth, then carefully compiled his version so you couldn't see any of the details that disproved him. ---------- Also, Bart harassed the astronauts to the point that they had to call the police because he was stalking them and sneaking around outside their houses. They have every reason to not want anything to do with him.
    2
  1237. 2
  1238. 2
  1239. 2
  1240. 2
  1241. 2
  1242. 2
  1243. 2
  1244. 2
  1245. 2
  1246. 2
  1247. 2
  1248. 2
  1249. 2
  1250.  @founderafrica3844  First of all, pressure is divided by area. The wider area you exert force on, the less of an impact you make and yes, this means that a heavier object can leave less of an impact than a lighter one. This is how snowshoes work. Keep in mind that gas rapidly expands in a vacuum and you have to turn your thrust way, way down otherwise your ship goes UP. Second, you do realize that the ground can have a thin layer of loose dust on a hardened or compacted surface underneath, right? If I spill a bag of flour on my kitchen floor, I will most definitely be able to make footprints in it, but I will not be able to blow a hole in the tile underneath. If the loose dust is only about half an inch or so deep, how deep of a crater are you expecting? Oh, it should be there because Bill Kaysing said so. Third, if you look closely at some of the pictures, you can see rings of lines radiating out from under the engine bell, which would be consistent with wind-based erosion emanating from a central point. Fourth, did you know that both Armstrong and Aldrin call out the lack of a crater live among their observations of the lunar surface? That's right, you didn't cathc them. NASA outed themselves! That's very strange if it was faked, because if you know that it's there, normally you'd either fix your problem or ignore it, not have your actors deliberately bring attention to it. Also, minor gripe. Jet is a specific type of engine. It is not a synonym for "powerful". Now, VTOL aircraft have jet engines with about 3x the maximum thrust of the lander, and as far as I'm aware, they normally don't create massive craters either.
    2
  1251. 2
  1252. 2
  1253. 2
  1254. 2
  1255. 2
  1256. 2
  1257. 2
  1258. 2
  1259.  @carlosvillalta9974  You want to know what happened with the whacked and the punched? Bart got into one of the astronauts' houses by lying about his identity and forging credentials from either the Discovery or History channel (I forget which). After Mitchell figured out that Bart was a fake, he swore on the bible he went (which Bart lies about) and tells him to leave. Bart refused to leave and instead tried to goad him on-camera with "I'll hit you so you can sue me" until literally getting booted out with a kick to the rear. As he's leaving, Mitchell's son comes out of the house and starts trash talking him. That's all the "whacked" comment is: sarcastic trash talk. This is on Bart's channel and in one of his published videos, by the way. He thinks his viewers are too stupid to have watched his own work. ---------- The punch happened after Bart called Aldrin hundreds of miles out of way by pretending to be from a Japanese children's show. After Aldrin told him to get lost and tried to leave (this is not the first time they'd met), Bart tried to physically prevent him from leaving the hotel until the staff kicked him out. He then proceeded to chase Aldrin and a family member through the streets hurling insults despite repeated attempts and requests to leave peacefully with witnesses testifying that Bart was poking them with the Bible and tried to interfere with them crossing a busy street. He tried to sue.... and showed the judge video of himself and the cameraman congratulating each other so it was ruled that he had caused a disturbance deliberately. By the way, returning to the property of a business that has kicked you out is trespassing and should have gotten Bart walked away in cuffs. ----------- Telescope resolution is based on angular size, not distance. It's the ratio of how large it is vs how far it is, not just distance, and this resolution is physically limited by the size of your telescope's mirrors. There is no magic "zoom and enhance" that can see objects too small for the resolution to see. All of those objects you can see far away? They're massive. You're looking for objects only a few feet wide on the moon. How far away can you see an elephant? How far away can you see a flea?
    2
  1260. 2
  1261. 2
  1262. 2
  1263. 2
  1264. 2
  1265. 2
  1266. 2
  1267. 2
  1268. 2
  1269. 2
  1270. 2
  1271. 2
  1272. 2
  1273. 2
  1274. 2
  1275. 2
  1276. 2
  1277. 2
  1278. 2
  1279. 2
  1280. 2
  1281. 2
  1282. 2
  1283. 2
  1284. 2
  1285. 2
  1286. 2
  1287. 2
  1288. 2
  1289. 2
  1290. 2
  1291. 2
  1292. 2
  1293. 2
  1294. 2
  1295. 2
  1296. 2
  1297. 2
  1298. 2
  1299. 2
  1300. 2
  1301. 2
  1302. 2
  1303. 2
  1304. 2
  1305. 2
  1306. 2
  1307. 2
  1308. 2
  1309. 2
  1310. 2
  1311. 2
  1312. 2
  1313. 2
  1314. 2
  1315.  @Lad_Clan  And the formula for how far away an object can be seen is....... oh right, it can't be calculated. Also, you are aware that it takes literally one minute to find videos on youtube where they can "bring back" one boat but FAIL to bring back another one in the same scene no matter how much you zoom because it just... cuts off an arbitrary point? HOW DOES THIS WORK??? ---------- .... why wouldn't we be able to see the reflection.? As long as it's angled properly, it will be 'above" the sea. By the way, at 3,000 miles high, the distance your own side claims the sun is, it would need to be approximately 35,000 miles from the observer to fall below 5 degrees. The sun should never set on Flat Earth. ----------- They're perfect circles because the distance the Earth moves during it is too small compared to how far away they are to matter. The farther an object gets from you, the smaller the angle becomes until it approaches zero. Also, the other stars are moving in the same rough direction that we are. I'm sure you've seen a marching band before right? By the way, you do realize that perfect circles disproves YOU right? If the stars are close to the earth, then the position you are looking at them from would be at an angle and not directly beneath them. This angle will increase the lower they are and the farther you are away from the North Pole. On Flat Earth, the only place on the entire planet you would ever see perfect circles from is Santa's Workshop; everybody else will see star OVALS that become flatter and flatter the farther south you go. Also, it's impossible to have star circles above the South Pole. This causes paradoxes . Your leaders know this.
    2
  1316. 2
  1317. 2
  1318. 2
  1319. 2
  1320. 2
  1321. 2
  1322. 2
  1323. 2
  1324. 2
  1325. 2
  1326. 2
  1327. 2
  1328. 2
  1329. 2
  1330. 2
  1331. 2
  1332. 2
  1333. 2
  1334. 2
  1335. 2
  1336. 2
  1337. 2
  1338. 2
  1339. 2
  1340. 2
  1341. 2
  1342. 2
  1343. 2
  1344. 2
  1345. 2
  1346. 2
  1347. 2
  1348. 2
  1349. 2
  1350. 2
  1351. 2
  1352. 2
  1353. 2
  1354. 2
  1355. 2
  1356. 2
  1357. 2
  1358. 2
  1359. 2
  1360. 2
  1361. 2
  1362. 2
  1363. 2
  1364. 2
  1365. 2
  1366. 2
  1367. 2
  1368. 2
  1369. 2
  1370. 2
  1371. 2
  1372. 2
  1373. 2
  1374. 2
  1375. 2
  1376. 2
  1377. 2
  1378. 2
  1379. 2
  1380. 2
  1381. 2
  1382. 2
  1383. 2
  1384. 2
  1385. 2
  1386. 2
  1387. 2
  1388. 2
  1389. 2
  1390. 2
  1391. 2
  1392. 2
  1393. 2
  1394. 2
  1395. 2
  1396. 2
  1397. 2
  1398. 2
  1399. 2
  1400. 2
  1401. 2
  1402. 2
  1403. 2
  1404. 2
  1405. 2
  1406. 2
  1407. 2
  1408. 2
  1409. 2
  1410. 2
  1411. 2
  1412. 2
  1413. 2
  1414. 2
  1415. 2
  1416. 2
  1417. 2
  1418. 2
  1419. 2
  1420. 2
  1421. 2
  1422. 2
  1423. 2
  1424. 2
  1425. 2
  1426. 2
  1427. 2
  1428. 2
  1429. 2
  1430. 1
  1431. 1
  1432. 1
  1433. 1
  1434. 1
  1435. 1
  1436. 1
  1437. 1
  1438. 1
  1439. 1
  1440. 1
  1441. 1
  1442. 1
  1443. 1
  1444. 1
  1445. 1
  1446. 1
  1447. 1
  1448. 1
  1449. 1
  1450. 1
  1451. 1
  1452. 1
  1453. 1
  1454. 1
  1455. 1
  1456. 1
  1457. 1
  1458. 1
  1459. 1
  1460. 1
  1461. 1
  1462. 1
  1463. 1
  1464. 1
  1465. 1
  1466. 1
  1467. 1
  1468. 1
  1469. 1
  1470. 1
  1471. 1
  1472. 1
  1473. 1
  1474. 1
  1475. 1
  1476. 1
  1477. 1
  1478. 1
  1479. 1
  1480. 1
  1481. 1
  1482. 1
  1483. 1
  1484. 1
  1485. 1
  1486. 1
  1487. 1
  1488. 1
  1489. 1
  1490. 1
  1491. 1
  1492. 1
  1493. 1
  1494. 1
  1495. 1
  1496. 1
  1497. 1
  1498. 1
  1499. 1
  1500. 1
  1501. 1
  1502. 1
  1503. 1
  1504. 1
  1505. 1
  1506. 1
  1507. 1
  1508. 1
  1509. 1
  1510. 1
  1511. 1
  1512. 1
  1513. 1
  1514. 1
  1515. 1
  1516. 1
  1517. 1
  1518. 1
  1519. 1
  1520. 1
  1521. 1
  1522. 1
  1523. 1
  1524. 1
  1525. 1
  1526. 1
  1527. 1
  1528. 1
  1529. 1
  1530. 1
  1531. 1
  1532. 1
  1533. 1
  1534. 1
  1535. 1
  1536. 1
  1537. 1
  1538. 1
  1539. 1
  1540. 1
  1541. 1
  1542. 1
  1543. 1
  1544. 1
  1545. 1
  1546. 1
  1547. 1
  1548. 1
  1549. 1
  1550. 1
  1551. 1
  1552. 1
  1553. 1
  1554. 1
  1555. 1
  1556. 1
  1557. 1
  1558. 1
  1559. 1
  1560. 1
  1561. Ahahahaha. Undeniable. That's a great one. I'm guessing Bart didn't tell you that his precious "smoking gun" got dissected ten years ago and that he got unmasked as a fraud because people weren't stupid and compared his version to NASA's. Why does Bart lie and claim that the live scheduled broadcast was "footage recorded to be played back later"? Why does Bart lie and claim that the astronauts were pretending to be against the window when they were actually filming across the cabin, and then not show the part MOMENTS LATER when NASA asks them to move the camera back, the astronauts acknowledge, and you can watch them do so. The only person claiming they were still against the window is Bart himself. Why did Bart lie and claim that the astronauts didn't know they were filming, and then mute the audio so you couldn't hear them discussing the picture quality from the camera that they supposedly didn't know was on? If the astronauts are actually removing the insert, why doesn't the image actually change while it's being removed? Apparently, whatever they're using for an "insert" poofs into thin air like a vampire in sunlight. Why do the clouds and landmasses not change despite being in a vehicle moving at 17,000 miles per hour, almost 20 times the Earth's rotational speed? The clips he used are long enough that at the minimum speed to stay in orbit, they should have crossed between 1/8 and 1/6 of the entire planet and the altitude needed for geosynchronous orbit is INSIDE the very same Van Allen Belts that are supposed to be the entire reason for the hoax in the first place If you want to see what this trick would actually look like, go put an insert on the side window of your car. You'll notice immediately that no amount of cropping will stop the features outside from changing as you move. And most damning: *** Why did Bart skip over a section of footage less than 20 after a clip he used where you can see them filming the Earth a foot from the square window WITHOUT HIS TRICK before moving to triangular one? A clip that happens BEFORE his big "smoking gun", might I add** Undeniable my ass. To quote the Princess Bride: "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."
    1
  1562. 1
  1563. 1
  1564. 1
  1565. 1
  1566. 1
  1567. 1
  1568. 1
  1569. 1
  1570. 1
  1571. 1
  1572. 1
  1573. 1
  1574. 1
  1575. 1
  1576. 1
  1577. 1
  1578. 1
  1579. 1
  1580. 1
  1581. 1
  1582. 1
  1583. 1
  1584. 1
  1585. 1
  1586. 1
  1587. 1
  1588. 1
  1589. 1
  1590. 1
  1591. 1
  1592. 1
  1593. 1
  1594. 1
  1595. 1
  1596. 1
  1597. 1
  1598. 1
  1599. 1
  1600. 1
  1601. 1
  1602. 1
  1603. 1
  1604. 1
  1605. 1
  1606. 1
  1607. 1
  1608. 1
  1609. 1
  1610. 1
  1611. 1
  1612. 1
  1613. 1
  1614. 1
  1615. 1
  1616. 1
  1617. 1
  1618. 1
  1619. 1
  1620. 1
  1621. 1
  1622. 1
  1623. 1
  1624. 1
  1625. 1
  1626. 1
  1627. 1
  1628. 1
  1629. 1
  1630. 1
  1631. 1
  1632. 1
  1633. 1
  1634. 1
  1635. 1
  1636. 1
  1637. 1
  1638. 1
  1639. 1
  1640. 1
  1641. 1
  1642. 1
  1643. 1
  1644. 1
  1645. 1
  1646. 1
  1647. 1
  1648. 1
  1649. 1
  1650. 1
  1651. 1
  1652. 1
  1653. 1
  1654. 1
  1655. 1
  1656. 1
  1657. 1
  1658. 1
  1659. 1
  1660. 1
  1661. 1
  1662. 1
  1663. 1
  1664. 1
  1665. 1
  1666. 1
  1667. 1
  1668. 1
  1669. 1
  1670. 1
  1671. 1
  1672. 1
  1673. 1
  1674. 1
  1675. 1
  1676. 1
  1677. 1
  1678. 1
  1679. 1
  1680. 1
  1681. 1
  1682. 1
  1683. 1
  1684. 1
  1685. 1
  1686. 1
  1687. 1
  1688. 1
  1689. 1
  1690. 1
  1691. 1
  1692. 1
  1693. 1
  1694. ..... You got duped pretty bad. First of all Von Braun's collaboration with Disney was for a few segments on his TV show Wonderful World of Color. There is no evidence whatsoever that Disney had anything to do with Apollo, and no evidence that meeting up in the early 60s was anything other than discussing more TV show segments. Also, Disney died of lung cancer long before Apollo finished. By the way, Walt himself was a massive patron of technology and progress that would probably have spat in your face if you asked him to fake the landings. Second, the astronaut with the girl is Buzz Aldrin, who's still alive, and it was YOUR SIDE that cut the footage off. He continues talking about needing to know why they stopped to continue next time, blames it on money, and says they went several more times. The hoaxers, obviously, don't like that so they simply cut that out and don't show it. You can find the full interview here on Youtube. Third, NASA was several years ahead of the Russians. The reason Russia didn't get to the moon was because they wasted all their time and effort trying to show that they were ahead of the Americans on everything (who were only about 4 months behind at the beginning and caught up quick) to the point that they neglected the N-1. By the time they started serious development on it, the Americans had been working on the Saturn V quietly in the background for almost 4 years. They then tried to rush development to make up for it and wound up with a piece of shit that blew up every time it launched. Fourth, AHAHAHAHAHAHA, Bart doesn't know what the word "real" means. The bastard';s been caught lying about his evidence so many times that he had to shut off comments on his Youtube channel. Go ask him why he lies about his "faking the distance" video and edits out the parts of it that disprove him, such as the shot of them filming without his trick. Bet he immediately cuts all communication.
    1
  1695. 1
  1696. 1
  1697. 1
  1698. 1
  1699. 1
  1700. 1
  1701. 1
  1702. 1
  1703. 1
  1704. 1
  1705. 1
  1706. 1
  1707. His record? Okay. In September of 2020, about two months before the election, Trump tried to defund and mess with the post office in order to prevent ballots from being delivered on time, risking thousands if not millions of LEGAL votes thrown in the trash for artificially being delayed. He was stopped. When that didn't work, he threatened to have the military seize the voting machines. When that didn't work, Trump called up officials in at least two states to convince them to change the results in his favor. The former head of the RNC was taped offering to pay legal bills for it - which is bribery and should have landed them in prison. When that didn't work, you tried to corrupt the electoral college When that didn't work, his followers threatened to execute the vice president if they didn't get their way. When that didn't work, his advisors hired people to break into a Georgia county's voting records and steal information. They are currently awaiting trial after getting caught on camera. --------- Let's fast forward to this year. Lara Trump is one of the heads of the RNC, a stupid decision made in ultimate cult worship because she's not qualified to run a girl scout troop. Well, Lara went on TV around March or April and bragged on I think it was Newsmax about how the RNC's not going to just have poll watchers, but have "ballot handlers" inside the facility rubbing their grubby hands over your votes. So, a member of Trump's direct family has openly stated their intention to compromise the election. Meanwhile, you have already started lawsuits in Michigan trying to pretend that legal voter registrations are illegal so that you can contest the election and cheat your way to victory by throwing out the real votes. ---------- What do you think is going to happen based on this record? If Vance loses 2028 in a landslide, MAGA is going to cheat to stay in power. They will, with 100% certainty, come up with some sort of excuse to stick your ballot in a paper shredder.
    1
  1708. 1
  1709. 1
  1710. 1
  1711. 1
  1712. 1
  1713. 1
  1714. 1
  1715. 1
  1716. 1
  1717. 1
  1718. 1
  1719. 1
  1720. 1
  1721. 1
  1722. 1
  1723. 1
  1724. 1
  1725. 1
  1726. 1
  1727. 1
  1728. 1
  1729. 1
  1730. 1
  1731. 1
  1732. 1
  1733. 1
  1734. 1
  1735. 1
  1736. 1
  1737. 1
  1738. 1
  1739. 1
  1740. 1
  1741. 1
  1742. 1
  1743. 1
  1744. 1
  1745. 1
  1746. 1
  1747. 1
  1748. 1
  1749. 1
  1750. 1
  1751. 1
  1752. 1
  1753. 1
  1754. 1
  1755. 1
  1756. 1
  1757. 1
  1758. 1
  1759. 1
  1760. 1
  1761. 1
  1762. 1
  1763. 1
  1764. 1
  1765. 1
  1766. 1
  1767. 1
  1768. 1
  1769. 1
  1770. 1
  1771. 1
  1772. 1
  1773. 1
  1774. 1
  1775. 1
  1776. 1
  1777. 1
  1778. 1
  1779. 1
  1780. 1
  1781. 1
  1782. 1
  1783. 1
  1784. 1
  1785. 1
  1786. 1
  1787. 1
  1788. 1
  1789. 1
  1790. 1
  1791. 1
  1792. 1
  1793. 1
  1794. 1
  1795. 1
  1796. 1
  1797. 1
  1798. 1
  1799. 1
  1800. 1
  1801. 1
  1802. 1
  1803. 1
  1804. 1
  1805. 1
  1806. 1
  1807. 1
  1808. 1
  1809. 1
  1810. 1
  1811. 1
  1812. 1
  1813. 1
  1814. 1
  1815. 1
  1816. 1
  1817. 1
  1818. 1
  1819. 1
  1820. 1
  1821. 1
  1822. 1
  1823. 1
  1824. 1
  1825. 1
  1826. 1
  1827. 1
  1828. 1
  1829. 1
  1830. 1
  1831. 1
  1832. 1
  1833. 1
  1834. 1
  1835. 1
  1836. 1
  1837. 1
  1838. 1
  1839. 1
  1840. 1
  1841. 1
  1842. 1
  1843. 1
  1844. 1
  1845. 1
  1846. 1
  1847. 1
  1848. 1
  1849. 1
  1850. 1
  1851. 1
  1852. 1
  1853. 1
  1854. 1
  1855. 1
  1856. 1
  1857. 1
  1858. 1
  1859. 1
  1860. 1
  1861. 1
  1862. 1
  1863. 1
  1864. 1
  1865. 1
  1866. 1
  1867. 1
  1868. 1
  1869. 1
  1870. 1
  1871. 1
  1872. 1
  1873. 1
  1874. 1
  1875. 1
  1876. 1
  1877. 1
  1878. 1
  1879. 1
  1880. 1
  1881. 1
  1882. 1
  1883. 1
  1884. 1
  1885. 1
  1886. 1
  1887. 1
  1888. 1
  1889. 1
  1890. 1
  1891. 1
  1892. 1
  1893. 1
  1894. 1
  1895. 1
  1896. 1
  1897. 1
  1898. 1
  1899. 1
  1900. 1
  1901. 1
  1902. 1
  1903. 1
  1904. 1
  1905. 1
  1906. 1
  1907. 1
  1908. 1
  1909. 1
  1910. 1
  1911. 1
  1912. 1
  1913. 1
  1914. 1
  1915. 1
  1916. 1
  1917. 1
  1918. 1
  1919. 1
  1920. 1
  1921. 1
  1922. 1
  1923. 1
  1924. 1
  1925. 1
  1926. 1
  1927. 1
  1928. 1
  1929. 1
  1930. 1
  1931. 1
  1932. 1
  1933. 1
  1934. 1
  1935. 1
  1936. 1
  1937. 1
  1938. 1
  1939. 1
  1940. 1
  1941. 1
  1942. 1
  1943. 1
  1944.  @mitchellbirkhead9214  3,000 is a very, very small number compared to the MILLIONS of scientists, engineers, and architects in the US alone as of the last census. You are vastly, vastly outnumbered by the number of engineers that are either neutral or believe the official story. Also, as I recall, most of those 3,000 had never worked on the types of building in question and a sizable percentage of them were students that had no field work at all. Students, of course, being a demographic that is stereotyped for having a distrust of authority to begin with. I also do not trust conspiracy theorists to not lie about their professional opinion in order to push their personal ones, not when you have "photographic experts" analyzing the Apollo photographs and pretending to not know what a lens flare is. Tell me, are the donations being put towards actual research with demonstrable results, or is the leader just living like a king because he's receiving more in donations than he makes from his actual job? The last time I looked into the 9/11 conspiracy claims, I left DISGUSTED at the bullshit you're willing to do and put up with. Did you know that Silverstein never actually said to "pull it"? It was a quote by the fire chief regarding pulling his forces to prevent further loss of life, and yet your side twisted and warped it into Silverstein "calling for the buildings to be destroyed" with a quote that was actually said by a completely different person. And yet you'll tell me that "that's not important and to look at the real issues", because conspiracy theorists are cowards that don't give two shits how much their own side lies as long as it opposes the big bad evil government and convinces others to do the same, even if they join by deceit.
    1
  1945. 1
  1946. 1
  1947. 1
  1948. 1
  1949. 1
  1950. 1
  1951. 1
  1952. 1
  1953. 1
  1954. 1
  1955. 1
  1956. 1
  1957. 1
  1958. 1
  1959. 1
  1960. 1
  1961. 1
  1962. 1
  1963. 1
  1964. 1
  1965. 1
  1966. 1
  1967. 1
  1968. 1
  1969. 1
  1970. 1
  1971. 1
  1972. 1
  1973. 1
  1974. 1
  1975. 1
  1976. 1
  1977. 1
  1978. 1
  1979. 1
  1980. 1
  1981. 1
  1982. 1
  1983. 1
  1984. 1
  1985. 1
  1986. 1
  1987. 1
  1988. 1
  1989. 1
  1990.  @donjames6687  The hoaxers have been lying about the belts for twenty years. Those claims about needing "six inches/feet of lead"? They're pure fiction. We know that it's BS because they're the wrong type of radiation for lead. The belts are alpha and beta radiation, not x and gamma rays, and beta radiation requires low-density shielding because CREATES x-rays when exposed to heavy metals. That same process (called Bremsstrahlung) is how your hospital creates their x-rays in the first place. And this isn't the only lie they've told either. The whining about the belts is pure white noise now. Your "truth" movement has already proven they don't know what they're doing or don't care being honest about it, and people stop listening when you cry wolf. By the way, James Van Allen, the man that discovered them, roasted the hoaxers in the early 2000s and outright stated they were making a mountain out of a molehill on a subject they had zero competence or understanding in. So..... I'd probably be better listening to him than random people on the internet. --------------- I've seen a lot of people go on and on about phones and calculators. Never, not one single time, have I seen a hoaxer even attempt to calculate what would be NEEDED, and certainly not while taking into account that the Apollo calculations were performed on mainframes on Earth, not the shipboard computer. They also don't mention that we were landing probes on the moon and sending them on flybys of Venus 30 million miles away without a pilot with even worse computers. It really comes off more as whining by people that are spoiled by modern technology than an actual serious analysis.
    1
  1991. 1
  1992. 1
  1993. 1
  1994. 1
  1995. 1
  1996. 1
  1997. 1
  1998. 1
  1999. 1
  2000. 1
  2001. 1
  2002. 1
  2003. 1
  2004. 1
  2005. 1
  2006. 1
  2007. 1
  2008. 1
  2009. 1
  2010. 1
  2011. 1
  2012. 1
  2013. 1
  2014. 1
  2015.  @AbdulAhad-wy3hi  1. Because it costs hundreds of billions of dollars and nobody wants to pay for it. Every time we get started, the politicians meddle again and screw everything up. Note that the space shuttle and ISS were supposed to be working on reusable ships (Apollo could only be used once), finding ways to make space travel affordable, long-term medical experiments, and such. This may be boring, but it's the stuff you NEED for any long-term programs. Also, why send a person when a robot is safer, costs a fraction of the amount, and can stay active for YEARS at a time because it doesn't need food, air, or water? 2. According to Congress, they sent the second document back to him without having even looked at it because they had no reason to believe that it wasn't the same irrelevant unusable garbage Baron presented in his first part. Have you tried searching the Dead Letter Office, where undelivered mail ends up? By the way, Baron presented no evidence of any fakery or any sabotage at all. All he talked about was supposed negligence and safety violations on the part of the contractor, most of which had little to do with Apollo 1 and he couldn't remember any of it. He actually was so desperate to seem like he had a reason to be there that he LIED about a conversation with one of the other witnesses where they discussed details that contradicted the hard evidence and on-site recordings they had been presented. If he actually had anything, wouldn't he have put his most importance evidence in the part they actually looked at that i believe didn't go missing, not buried it in the 500 pages of nitpicks? 3. Because that's how the hoaxers told you they looked. They never talk about fatigue, the fact that Armstrong is known to hate interviews, or Aldrin's personal drama going on behind the scenes or the fact that he may still be angry at NASA for cheating him out of being the first man instead.
    1
  2016. 1
  2017. 1
  2018. 1
  2019. 1
  2020. 1
  2021. 1
  2022. 1
  2023. 1
  2024. 1
  2025. 1
  2026. 1
  2027. 1
  2028. 1
  2029. 1
  2030. 1
  2031. 1
  2032. 1
  2033. 1
  2034. 1
  2035. 1
  2036. 1
  2037. 1
  2038. 1
  2039. 1
  2040. 1
  2041. 1
  2042. 1
  2043. 1
  2044. 1
  2045. 1
  2046. 1
  2047. 1
  2048. 1
  2049. 1
  2050. 1
  2051. 1
  2052. 1
  2053. 1
  2054. 1
  2055. 1
  2056. 1
  2057. 1
  2058. 1
  2059. 1
  2060. 1
  2061. 1
  2062. 1
  2063. 1
  2064. 1
  2065. 1
  2066. 1
  2067. 1
  2068. 1
  2069. 1
  2070. 1
  2071. 1
  2072. 1
  2073. 1
  2074. 1
  2075. 1
  2076. 1
  2077. 1
  2078. 1
  2079. 1
  2080. 1
  2081. 1
  2082. 1
  2083. 1
  2084. 1
  2085. 1
  2086. 1
  2087. 1
  2088. 1
  2089. 1
  2090. 1
  2091. 1
  2092. 1
  2093. 1
  2094. 1
  2095. 1
  2096. 1
  2097. 1
  2098. 1
  2099. 1
  2100. 1
  2101. 1
  2102. 1
  2103. 1
  2104. 1
  2105. 1
  2106. 1
  2107. 1
  2108. 1
  2109. 1
  2110. 1
  2111. 1
  2112. 1
  2113. 1
  2114. 1
  2115. 1
  2116. 1
  2117. 1
  2118. 1
  2119. 1
  2120. 1
  2121. 1
  2122. 1
  2123. 1
  2124. 1
  2125. 1
  2126. 1
  2127. 1
  2128. 1
  2129. 1
  2130. 1
  2131. 1
  2132. 1
  2133. 1
  2134. 1
  2135. 1
  2136. 1
  2137. 1
  2138. 1
  2139. 1
  2140. 1
  2141. 1
  2142. 1
  2143. 1
  2144. ... but Apollo 13 a fucking stupid idea to fake, not to mention that you people already lie and claim it went smooth, talking about Apollo 13 as little as possible. First of all, the claim that it was to "increase attention to steal more money" is pure grade A Angus bullshit. The missions are already budgeted in advance - you are not getting new money from this attention - and all you did was convince Congress to shut it down sooner so good job morons, you didn't actually steal jack shit and accomplished nothing but stopping your own hoax. --------------- Second, pulling off the hoax is going to be like pulling teeth. YOUR OWN SIDE claims that only a few people within NASA know that it's a fake, and now you are now in a situation where the people that are NOT part of your hoax are tasked with coming up with solutions. You have no control over what they come up with, or when, and whether this matches any sort of pre-generated data you come up with, and trying to formulate this on the simulators live (which you can't because they're in use), you have no guarantee your hastily concocted data will hold up to scrutiny. You've just taken this elaborate hoax and turned it into the All American Cat Herding Rodeo. Think fast! Also, this is really stupid to do because if they ever have a legitimate emergency and they try and look at your hoax for solutions, you just killed your astronauts for real. ------------ Third, I hope you have one hell of a plan for what you're going to do AFTER the mission because the instant they splash down, there is going to be an investigation. In case you're too drunk on ego to realize what this means, it means that people that are NOT part of your hoax are going to be going through your shit with a fine-toothed comb. Congratulations. You just willingly blew your own hoax open for the shortest of short-term gain. So no, I don't believe for one second that you actually thought about it beyond the most basic surface-level thoughts.
    1
  2145. 1
  2146. 1
  2147. 1
  2148. 1
  2149. 1
  2150. 1
  2151. 1
  2152. 1
  2153. 1
  2154. 1
  2155. 1
  2156. 1
  2157. 1
  2158. 1
  2159. 1
  2160. 1
  2161. 1
  2162. 1
  2163. 1
  2164. 1
  2165. 1
  2166. 1
  2167. 1
  2168. 1
  2169. 1
  2170. 1
  2171. 1
  2172. 1
  2173. 1
  2174. 1
  2175. 1
  2176. 1
  2177. 1
  2178. 1
  2179. 1
  2180. 1
  2181. 1
  2182. 1
  2183. 1
  2184. 1
  2185. 1
  2186. 1
  2187. 1
  2188. 1
  2189. 1
  2190. 1
  2191. 1
  2192. 1
  2193. 1
  2194. 1
  2195. 1
  2196. 1
  2197. 1
  2198. 1
  2199. 1
  2200. 1
  2201. 1
  2202. 1
  2203. 1
  2204. 1
  2205. So, you know that there are shots of the camera zooming out and you can clearly see them filming the Earth that's outside of the ship and clipping with the window sill, right? Both Bart Sibrel and David Percy were caught lying about that a very, very long time ago. Also, David Percy lied on the first piece of evidence in his video; Percy cherry picks frames from his film to claim that a detail is "missing" despite being clearly visible less than a second before before getting obscured by camera angle - which you can see in the footage he himself used. He also cropped his version of the "non-parallel shadows" picture to hide rocks whose shadows were changing direction to match the LEM and prevent people from seeing that they bend and angle when the ground isn't flat. He also was busted lying about his "slow motion" playback speeds by Jarrah White trying to defend him, because Jarrah filmed himself setting it to the the same speed as Percy and proving to the world he doesn't know how percents work. He deliberately showed the worst quality reproductions to people and pretended they were the originals. He also conspired with absolute frauds, like a "scientist" who rigged his tests with conditions that failed to match what he was testing again, and an interview with a woman who 'saw the coke bottle on set' who forgot that the Earth has time zones when fabricating her story and that nighttime in the UK is daytime in Australia. Also, Percy's coauthor is a professional scam artist that makes her living pretending to have psychic powers, and their website got caught fabricating fictional 'scientists' to write their articles Shall I keep going on why Percy's a scumbag? That's just what I remember off the top of my head.
    1
  2206. 1
  2207. 1
  2208. 1
  2209. 1
  2210. 1
  2211. 1
  2212. 1
  2213. 1
  2214. 1
  2215. 1
  2216. 1
  2217. 1
  2218. 1
  2219. 1
  2220. 1
  2221. 1
  2222. 1
  2223. 1
  2224. 1
  2225. 1
  2226. 1
  2227. 1
  2228. 1
  2229. 1
  2230. 1
  2231. 1
  2232. 1
  2233. 1
  2234. 1
  2235. 1
  2236. 1
  2237. 1
  2238. 1
  2239. 1
  2240. 1
  2241. 1
  2242. 1
  2243. 1
  2244. 1
  2245. 1
  2246. 1
  2247. 1
  2248. 1
  2249. 1
  2250. 1
  2251. 1
  2252. 1
  2253. 1
  2254. 1
  2255. 1
  2256. 1
  2257. 1
  2258. 1
  2259. 1
  2260. 1
  2261. 1
  2262. 1
  2263. 1
  2264. 1
  2265. 1
  2266. 1
  2267. 1
  2268. 1
  2269. 1
  2270. 1
  2271. 1
  2272. 1
  2273. 1
  2274. 1
  2275. 1
  2276. 1
  2277. 1
  2278. 1
  2279. 1
  2280. 1
  2281. 1
  2282. 1
  2283. 1
  2284. 1
  2285. 1
  2286. 1
  2287. 1
  2288. 1
  2289. 1
  2290. 1
  2291. 1
  2292. 1
  2293. 1
  2294. 1
  2295. 1
  2296. 1
  2297. 1
  2298. 1
  2299. 1
  2300. 1
  2301. 1
  2302. 1
  2303. 1
  2304. You must be new to the internet. There have been HUNDREDS of these so-called "challenges" on all of the major anti-science topics. As far as I'm aware, not a single one of them has ever actually paid up because they are RIGGED. The judges are biased and have carte blanche to reject any and all takers for any reason they want to. Lying, moving goalposts, ignoring and banning them, it's all been done. Last time I looked at that one, Dubay was trying to weasel out of any claim except the one specific form he wanted with excuses such as, and I quote, "You can't learn anything about the shape of the Earth beneath your feet by looking at the sky" in order to avoid having to answer questions about why the same objects are somehow magically thousands of miles apart in mutually exclusive directions simultaneously. One of the other "challenges" owes Wolfie about 400,000 dollars because Wolfie kept meeting his requirements and he kept chickening out and going "No, I meant X" and kept changing the challenge. One of the creationism ones for.... I can't remember if it was evolution or Young Earth creation of the planet was famous for being a massive sham. Their "independent anonymous judge" turned out to be themselves and they didn't even read the challenges, just sent out generic "sorry not good enough" regardless of the contents. The point of these claims isn't to genuinely search for the truth. It's to strut around like a peacock going "Look everybody, nobody has claimed our prize! Guess that means we're right!"
    1
  2305. 1
  2306. 1
  2307. 1
  2308. 1
  2309. 1
  2310. 1
  2311. 1
  2312. 1
  2313. 1
  2314. 1
  2315. 1
  2316. 1
  2317. 1
  2318. 1
  2319. 1
  2320. 1
  2321. 1
  2322. 1
  2323. 1
  2324. 1
  2325. 1
  2326. 1
  2327. 1
  2328. 1
  2329. 1
  2330. 1
  2331. 1
  2332. 1
  2333. 1
  2334. 1
  2335. 1
  2336. 1
  2337. 1
  2338. 1
  2339. 1
  2340. 1
  2341. 1
  2342. 1
  2343. 1
  2344. 1
  2345. 1
  2346. 1
  2347. 1
  2348. 1
  2349. 1
  2350. 1
  2351. 1
  2352. 1
  2353. 1
  2354. 1
  2355. 1
  2356. 1
  2357. 1
  2358. 1
  2359. 1
  2360. 1
  2361. 1
  2362. 1
  2363. 1
  2364. 1
  2365. 1
  2366. 1
  2367. 1
  2368. 1
  2369. 1
  2370. 1
  2371. 1
  2372. 1
  2373. 1
  2374. 1
  2375. 1
  2376. 1
  2377. 1
  2378. 1
  2379. 1
  2380. 1
  2381. 1
  2382. 1
  2383. 1
  2384. 1
  2385. 1
  2386. 1
  2387. 1
  2388. 1
  2389. 1
  2390. 1
  2391. 1
  2392. 1
  2393. 1
  2394. 1
  2395. 1
  2396. 1
  2397. 1
  2398. 1
  2399. 1
  2400. 1
  2401. 1
  2402. 1
  2403. 1
  2404. 1
  2405. 1
  2406. 1
  2407. 1
  2408. 1
  2409. 1
  2410. 1
  2411. 1
  2412. 1
  2413. 1
  2414. 1
  2415. 1
  2416. 1
  2417. 1
  2418. 1
  2419. 1
  2420. 1
  2421. 1
  2422. 1
  2423. 1
  2424. 1
  2425. 1
  2426. 1
  2427. 1
  2428. 1
  2429. 1
  2430. 1
  2431. 1
  2432. 1
  2433. 1
  2434. 1
  2435. 1
  2436. 1
  2437. 1
  2438. 1
  2439. 1
  2440. 1
  2441. 1
  2442. 1
  2443. 1
  2444. 1
  2445. 1
  2446. 1
  2447. 1
  2448. 1
  2449. 1
  2450. 1
  2451. 1
  2452. 1
  2453. 1
  2454. 1
  2455. 1
  2456. 1
  2457. 1
  2458. 1
  2459. 1
  2460. 1
  2461. 1
  2462. 1
  2463. 1
  2464. 1
  2465. 1
  2466. 1
  2467. 1
  2468. 1
  2469. 1
  2470. 1
  2471. 1
  2472. 1
  2473. 1
  2474. 1
  2475. 1
  2476. 1
  2477. 1
  2478. 1
  2479. 1
  2480. 1
  2481. 1
  2482. 1
  2483. 1
  2484. 1
  2485. 1
  2486. 1
  2487. 1
  2488. 1
  2489. 1
  2490. 1
  2491. 1
  2492. 1
  2493. 1
  2494. 1
  2495. 1
  2496. 1
  2497. 1
  2498. 1
  2499. 1
  2500. 1
  2501. 1
  2502. 1
  2503. 1
  2504. 1
  2505. 1
  2506. 1
  2507. 1
  2508. 1
  2509. 1
  2510. 1
  2511. 1
  2512. 1
  2513. 1
  2514. 1
  2515. 1
  2516. 1
  2517. 1
  2518. 1
  2519. 1
  2520. 1
  2521. 1
  2522. 1
  2523. 1
  2524. 1
  2525. 1
  2526. 1
  2527. 1
  2528. 1
  2529. 1
  2530. 1
  2531. 1
  2532. 1
  2533. 1
  2534. 1
  2535. 1
  2536. 1
  2537. 1
  2538. 1
  2539. 1
  2540. 1
  2541. 1
  2542. 1
  2543. 1
  2544. 1
  2545. 1
  2546. 1
  2547. 1
  2548. 1
  2549. 1
  2550. 1
  2551. 1
  2552. 1
  2553. 1
  2554. 1
  2555. 1
  2556. 1
  2557. 1
  2558. 1
  2559. 1
  2560. 1
  2561. 1
  2562. 1
  2563. 1
  2564. 1
  2565. 1
  2566. 1
  2567. 1
  2568. 1
  2569. 1
  2570. 1
  2571. 1
  2572. 1
  2573. 1
  2574. 1
  2575. 1
  2576. 1
  2577. 1
  2578. 1
  2579. 1
  2580. 1
  2581. 1
  2582. 1
  2583. 1
  2584. 1
  2585. 1
  2586. 1
  2587. 1
  2588. 1
  2589. 1
  2590. 1
  2591. 1
  2592. 1
  2593. 1
  2594. 1
  2595. 1
  2596. 1
  2597. 1
  2598. 1
  2599. 1
  2600. 1
  2601. 1
  2602. 1
  2603. 1
  2604. 1
  2605. 1
  2606. 1
  2607. 1
  2608. 1
  2609. First, there are two types of democracies: direct democracies (what your "mob rule" is talking about), and representative democracies. We, as well as most of the western world, are functionally a representative democracy, because we the people choose politicians to make decisions for us. Republic means we don't have hereditary leadership. We are both a republic and a representational democracy, as is France. Note that a Republic does NOT require you to have any say. China's a republic too. Second, the military will be given the order to intervene. Participation is not optional. Any rank and file that refuses to follow orders will be put in a cell awaiting court martial, and if they try and desert, the military has a complete record of their home addresses. They will give the order to shoot any mutineers and they will destroy any base they are forced to evacuate. This is not a "you smile and they let you go." Third, your militias will be designated as terrorist organizations and dealt with appropriately if they start causing mass harm. If you try and leave the country, you will be arrested on sight. You will also not be recognized as the legitimate government by the rest of the world if you hold a coup. Fourth, I think you misunderstand something. Conservatives don't control the food supply of the cities. Megacorporations do. They will side with their wallet and stay neutral, and do everything in their power to keep supplies going because they don't, not only will they lose a massive amoutn of money, the banks in those cities will freeze their accounts locking them out of their finances, collect and foreclose any debts, and refuse to ever give a loan again. Fourth: you would not be able to sit back. There are enough liberals outside of cities that you will have to deal with the suburbs and rural liberals. Also, as a reminder, the last time we had a civil war, your rural agricultural advantage was dealt with by General Sherman waltzing through Georgia burning anything he could see to the ground. You do not want total war, because we have the technology to make sure the fires can be seen from space.
    1
  2610. 1
  2611. 1
  2612. 1
  2613. 1
  2614. 1
  2615. 1
  2616. 1
  2617. 1
  2618. 1
  2619. 1
  2620. 1
  2621. 1
  2622. 1
  2623. 1
  2624. 1
  2625. 1
  2626. 1
  2627. 1
  2628. 1
  2629. 1
  2630. 1
  2631. 1
  2632. 1
  2633. 1
  2634. 1
  2635. 1
  2636. 1
  2637. 1
  2638. 1
  2639. 1
  2640. 1
  2641. 1
  2642. 1
  2643. 1
  2644. 1
  2645. 1
  2646. 1
  2647. 1
  2648. 1
  2649. 1
  2650. 1
  2651. 1
  2652. 1
  2653. 1
  2654. 1
  2655. 1
  2656. 1
  2657. 1
  2658. 1
  2659. 1
  2660. 1
  2661. 1
  2662. 1
  2663. 1
  2664. 1
  2665. 1
  2666. 1
  2667. 1
  2668. 1
  2669. 1
  2670. 1
  2671. 1
  2672. 1
  2673. 1
  2674. 1
  2675. 1
  2676. 1
  2677. 1
  2678. 1
  2679. 1
  2680. 1
  2681. 1
  2682. 1
  2683. 1
  2684. 1
  2685. 1
  2686. 1
  2687. 1
  2688. 1
  2689. 1
  2690. 1
  2691. 1
  2692. 1
  2693. 1
  2694. 1
  2695. 1
  2696. 1
  2697. 1
  2698. 1
  2699. 1
  2700. 1
  2701. 1
  2702. 1
  2703. 1
  2704. 1
  2705. 1
  2706. 1
  2707. 1
  2708. 1
  2709. 1
  2710. 1
  2711. 1
  2712. 1
  2713. 1
  2714. 1
  2715. 1
  2716. 1
  2717. 1
  2718. 1
  2719. 1
  2720. 1
  2721. 1
  2722. 1
  2723. 1
  2724. 1
  2725. 1
  2726. 1
  2727. 1
  2728. 1
  2729. 1
  2730. 1
  2731. 1
  2732. 1
  2733. 1
  2734. 1
  2735. 1
  2736. 1
  2737. 1
  2738. 1
  2739. 1
  2740. 1
  2741. 1
  2742. 1
  2743. 1
  2744. 1
  2745. 1
  2746. 1
  2747. 1
  2748. 1
  2749. 1
  2750. 1
  2751. 1
  2752. 1
  2753. 1
  2754. 1
  2755. 1
  2756. 1
  2757. 1
  2758. 1
  2759. 1
  2760. 1
  2761. 1
  2762. 1
  2763. 1
  2764. 1
  2765. 1
  2766. 1
  2767. 1
  2768. 1
  2769. 1
  2770. 1
  2771. 1
  2772. 1
  2773. 1
  2774. 1
  2775. 1
  2776. 1
  2777. 1
  2778. 1
  2779. 1
  2780. 1
  2781. 1
  2782.  @timdescher2606  Then why are there lots of videos where you can clearly see the ship being obscured? Why are there videos where they "bring the object back', then pan over to another further ship that looks like it's sinking, zoom in on that, and FAIL to change the waterline? Do you know why the ship isn't being obscured? Because your Flat Earth Masters choose not to show the ones where they are. --------------- We've already checked out Eric Dubay, thank you very much and he was full of more shit than an outhouse the last ten times. Why on Earth do you think people haven't? ----------------- Tim, objects in physics maintain their forward momentum when launched from a moving object. The planes are traveling at the COMBINED speed, 1500 vs 500. Yes, that means to an outside observer, the plane flying in the opposite direction would appear to be flying backwards. This is a well-known quirk of physics relating to a law called the Conservation of Momentum and it's literally half of the Freshman midterm. Might I remind you that the people taking these classes are the engineers that build your buildings, vehicles, and bridges, so teaching them false physics to "maintain the globe conspiracy" is SUICIDAL because people will DIE when shit doesn't work properly. That's why objects dropped out of a car window continue moving forward. That's why when you launch an object backwards at the same speed that you're moving forward, it appears to fall straight down. That's why you can jump inside that airplane without being squashed like a bug on a windshield against the back wall as the plane moves under you. This has been tested to death, and I do mean literal corpses. Planes have to take this into account to keep from missing their targets by miles because their bombs will continue moving forward after released.
    1
  2783. 1
  2784. 1
  2785. 1
  2786. 1
  2787. 1
  2788. 1
  2789. 1
  2790. 1
  2791. 1
  2792. 1
  2793. 1
  2794. 1
  2795. 1
  2796. 1
  2797. 1
  2798. 1
  2799. 1
  2800. 1
  2801. 1
  2802. 1
  2803. 1
  2804. 1
  2805. 1
  2806. 1
  2807. 1
  2808. 1
  2809. 1
  2810. 1
  2811. 1
  2812. 1
  2813. 1
  2814. 1
  2815. 1
  2816. 1
  2817. 1
  2818. 1
  2819. 1
  2820. 1
  2821. 1
  2822. 1
  2823. 1
  2824. 1
  2825. 1
  2826. 1
  2827. 1
  2828. 1
  2829. 1
  2830. 1
  2831. 1
  2832. 1
  2833. 1
  2834. 1
  2835. 1
  2836. 1
  2837. 1
  2838. "better opportunities for their children, " Here, let me spell out your so-called "opportunities" for you. We have 10x your population, okay? Just 10x. We have had more school shootings in the last year than your country has had since you left Britain. You understand that, right? Firearms are the leading cause of death for children and teens in this country. Your child is more likely to be shot than die in a car crash. Our education system, which you think is so great, is terrible, and it's only been about 2 years since the last time the Republicans tried to ban evolution and gravity from being taught in public schools because they want to live in a medieval theocracy where science is the work of the devil. If you think your child will be wealthy as an adult, you're sadly mistaken. If you child goes to college, they will be paying off student loans for the next 20 years of their life. Our birth rate is falling because cost of having and raising children is unaffordable for many starting families. Our "more affordable housing" is a blatant lie; rent is through the roof and housing is unaffordable for most young families in part because the Republicans changed the laws so that Wall Street could buy up the houses and double the rent. We also do NOT have government-sponsored healthcare and in addition to insurance that is extremely expensive and doesn't cover squat, our after-insurance costs are 5-10x higher than yours If your child has a major medical emergency once they're a young adult, there's a good chance they come close to winding up on the street, and the False Christians in this country treat the homeless like vermin So yeah..... wonderful opportunities you're giving your child. What did they do to make you hate them that much?
    1
  2839. 1
  2840. 1
  2841. 1
  2842. 1
  2843. 1
  2844. 1
  2845. 1
  2846. 1
  2847. 1
  2848. 1
  2849. 1
  2850. 1
  2851. 1
  2852. 1
  2853. 1
  2854. 1
  2855. 1
  2856. 1
  2857. 1
  2858. 1
  2859. 1
  2860. 1
  2861. 1
  2862. 1
  2863. 1
  2864. 1
  2865. 1
  2866. 1
  2867. 1
  2868. 1
  2869. 1
  2870. 1
  2871. 1
  2872. 1
  2873. 1
  2874. 1
  2875. 1
  2876. 1
  2877. 1
  2878. 1
  2879. 1
  2880. 1
  2881. 1
  2882. 1
  2883. 1
  2884. 1
  2885. 1
  2886. 1
  2887. 1
  2888. 1
  2889. 1
  2890. 1
  2891. 1
  2892. 1
  2893. 1
  2894. 1
  2895. 1
  2896. 1
  2897. 1
  2898. 1
  2899. 1
  2900. 1
  2901. 1
  2902.  @maxconspira2962  It has a gradient that reaches 85% pressure at Denver, a populated city, 50% pressure at about the height of Mt Everest, and 1% at less than 100 miles high. And yet your dome is supposedly somewhere between 100-200 miles high, where they tried to "bomb through it" and 3,000 miles high where the sun is. So.... what's filling the rest of your dome? What's filling the mostly empty space? Why does pressure not equalize inside of it? How does a barrier OUTSIDE of the pressure gradient, on the other side of near-vacuum from the atmosphere, prevent the equalizing INSIDE of it? Why will none of you discuss this? ---------- By the way, the pressure at the deepest part of the ocean is about 16,000 PSI. That's only six miles deep. Your dome is holding back..... how much water exactly? An infinite amount? I'm not sure how God has any time to listen to your prayers when he'd be spending the entirety of his time keeping his dome from cracking like an egg. Or maybe it's just made of some rare unobtainium material that defies mortal knowledge that somehow never breaks under an infinite amount of pressure. ---------- Rockets are not airplanes. They do not push on external objects. They expel their own mass to create thrust through a law of physics called the Conservation of Momentum, which states that the total momentum of a system (mass time velocity), remains constant unless an outside force alters it. This means that if you take part of an object's mass and shoot it in one direction, the remaining mass will alter velocity to compensate relative to the direction and speed it was shot so that Ejected Momentum + Remaining Momentum = Original. Note that expelling the mass into space and "not moving because there's nothing to push again" means that you have changed mass and not changed velocity, meaning that the momentum has changed. In other words, YOUR ARGUMENT breaks the law. You want to claim we're "talking physics now" and yet are willingly ignorant of one of most fundamental laws of physics that is literally half of a college freshman midterm. But who cares how many laws of physics YOU break when you can shout God Moves in Mysterious Ways and hand wave away all criticism. ----------- Also, nobody claims that sound travels in space. Transmissions from spacecraft are radio broadcasts, which are electromagnetic radiation like light.
    1
  2903. 1
  2904. 1
  2905. 1
  2906. 1
  2907. 1
  2908. 1
  2909. 1
  2910. 1
  2911. 1
  2912. 1
  2913. 1
  2914. 1
  2915. 1
  2916. 1
  2917. 1
  2918. 1
  2919. 1
  2920. 1
  2921. 1
  2922. 1
  2923. 1
  2924. 1
  2925. 1
  2926. 1
  2927. 1
  2928. 1
  2929. 1
  2930. 1
  2931. 1
  2932. 1
  2933. 1
  2934. 1
  2935. 1
  2936. 1
  2937. 1
  2938. 1
  2939. 1
  2940. 1
  2941. 1
  2942. 1
  2943. 1
  2944. 1
  2945. 1
  2946. 1
  2947. 1
  2948. 1
  2949. 1
  2950. 1
  2951. 1
  2952. 1
  2953. 1
  2954. 1
  2955. 1
  2956. 1
  2957. 1
  2958. 1
  2959. 1
  2960. 1
  2961. 1
  2962. 1
  2963. 1
  2964. 1
  2965. 1
  2966. 1
  2967. 1
  2968. 1
  2969. 1
  2970. 1
  2971. 1
  2972. 1
  2973. 1
  2974. 1
  2975. 1
  2976. 1
  2977. 1
  2978. 1
  2979. 1
  2980. 1
  2981. 1
  2982. 1
  2983. 1
  2984. 1
  2985. 1
  2986. 1
  2987. 1
  2988. 1
  2989. 1
  2990. 1
  2991. 1
  2992. 1
  2993. 1
  2994. 1
  2995.  @terryhill4732  The "destroyed" technology is probably the infrastructure needed to run it. Let's suppose you have all of the knowledge and blueprints on hand and you want to rebuild Apollo as-is. Nobody has built, tested, or transported those specialized parts for 50 years and the equipment to do so was almost certainly cannibalized for other projects decades ago. Hell, you'll be lucky if any of the original factories are even still in use. You have to rebuild your entire manufacturing base. All of your pilots are now 90 years old. You're going to need to rebuild all of your simulator equipment to train new ones. And we know for a fact that NASA tore up their launch facility to reuse the land for the space shuttle 40 years ago so even if you had a Saturn V working and ready to go, you can't USE it. ----------------- But lets suppose that you want to incorporate newer technology. That's good. Progress is good. Okay, first step. All of your modern computers you mentioned are many, many times WEAKER to radiation than 1960s parts. That's one of the downsides of circuit miniaturization that the hoaxers desperately try to hide and get very angry if you mention. Weaker computers means you need to stronger shielding to do the same job. Changing the shielding means that you have most likely changed the weight of your ship. You now need to go recalculate your engine requirements, then see what else this affects. And you have to do this for every. Single. Change. If you want a technology where you can simply snap old and new parts together and not care, stick to LEGO.
    1
  2996. 1
  2997. 1
  2998. 1
  2999. 1
  3000. 1
  3001. 1
  3002. 1
  3003. 1
  3004. 1
  3005. 1
  3006. 1
  3007. 1
  3008. 1
  3009. 1
  3010. 1
  3011. 1
  3012. 1
  3013. 1
  3014. 1
  3015. 1
  3016. 1
  3017. 1
  3018. 1
  3019. 1
  3020. 1
  3021. 1
  3022. 1
  3023. 1
  3024. 1
  3025. 1
  3026. 1
  3027. 1
  3028. 1
  3029. 1
  3030. 1
  3031. 1
  3032. 1
  3033. 1
  3034. 1
  3035. 1
  3036. 1
  3037. 1
  3038. 1
  3039. 1
  3040. 1
  3041. 1
  3042. 1
  3043. 1
  3044. 1
  3045. 1
  3046. 1
  3047. 1
  3048. 1
  3049. 1
  3050. 1
  3051. 1
  3052. 1
  3053. 1
  3054. 1
  3055. 1
  3056. 1
  3057. 1
  3058. 1
  3059. 1
  3060. 1
  3061. 1
  3062. 1
  3063. 1
  3064. 1
  3065. 1
  3066. 1
  3067. 1
  3068. 1
  3069. 1
  3070. 1
  3071. 1
  3072. 1
  3073. 1
  3074. 1
  3075. 1
  3076. 1
  3077. 1
  3078.  @Nastyfinger1444  Okay..... Bart Sibrel rearranged, dubbed over, and edited out portions of his "faking the distance" video to hide that the original directly contradicts his story and contains shots that are impossible to perform with the trick he claims was used and GOT CAUGHT almost immediately because he was too stupid to realize people would find the footage he used and compare versions. He neglects to mention when showing how "angry" the astronauts are to be "confronted with the truth" that his video was filmed AFTER harassing them to the point that the police had to get involved. His "six feet of lead to cross the Van Allen Belts" is MADE UP and pulled straight out of his ass; the belts are the wrong type of radiation for lead shielding, and yet were supposed to take your side's claims about how the "deadly radiation would have killed them" seriously even though you've already lied once on the subject so you've proven that your analysis cannot be trusted. And much much more. David Percy, the owner of Aulis, put out a 4 hour "documentary," but is such a compulsive liar that he couldn't go ten minutes without flubbing his evidence on his very first claim (where he claims that a flap is "missing" on the video footage and claims that proves the video and still photographs were taken separately- then cherry picks individual frames to hide that the flap was clearly visible less than a second before until being obscured by camera angle.) He also cropped his "non-parallel shadows" picture to hide the the rocks in the lower right have shadows that change direction to match the object in the background he's comparing to, deliberately showed poor-quality reproductions to people to "analyze", rigged his playback speeds when showing how it's "slow motion" by showing a different speed than he claimed (which was accidentally proven by fellow hoaxer Jarrah White in a hilarious own goal) and more. David Percy's coauthor, Mary Bennett, is a professional bullshit artist and makes her living scamming people into thinking she has psychic powers. .Aulis, Percy's website, invents fictional "scientists" or uses "experts" talking about fields as far removed from their field as biology is from 18th century French literature to make their work seem more credible than they actually are. Their articles have also been analyzed and debunked many times, such as the stereoparallax article, which uses a lofty PhD.c that "founded a school and a university" that nobody can find in order give authenticity to a well-worded piece of tripe that uses formulas that are incompatible with the Apollo lenses and therefore completely pointless to read further because all subsequent math is automatically wrong. Una Ronald, the Australian coke bottle lady Percy "interviewed", couldn't be more obviously lying if her name was Pinnochio. She claims that she "stayed up late to watch the live broadcast and the coke bottle was gone when it was repeated in the morning". Might want to fact check your story there dearie considering that the landings happened at 11 AM in Western Australia and would have been repeated on the EVENING news, not the morning edition. Unless you work the graveyard shift or are a college student pulling an all-nighter, you have no business claiming you "stayed up late" to watch them. Unless of course you actually live in America or perhaps Britain, where Percy lives. Shall I keep going? No offense, but an "overwhelming amount of evidence" doesn't amount to jack shit if the people presenting it can and have been proven to be liars or incompetant. Of course you already knew all of this, since you did RESEARCH into the hoax claims and the people making them instead of blindly believing them at face value.
    1
  3079. 1
  3080. 1
  3081. 1
  3082. 1
  3083. 1
  3084. 1
  3085. 1
  3086. 1
  3087. 1
  3088. 1
  3089. 1
  3090. 1
  3091. 1
  3092. 1
  3093. 1
  3094. 1
  3095. 1
  3096. 1
  3097. 1
  3098. 1
  3099. 1
  3100. 1
  3101. 1
  3102. 1
  3103. 1
  3104. 1
  3105. 1
  3106. 1
  3107. 1
  3108. 1
  3109. 1
  3110. 1
  3111. 1
  3112. 1
  3113. 1
  3114. 1
  3115. 1
  3116. 1
  3117. 1
  3118. 1
  3119. 1
  3120. 1
  3121. 1
  3122. 1
  3123. 1
  3124. 1
  3125. 1
  3126. 1
  3127. 1
  3128. 1
  3129. 1
  3130. 1
  3131. 1
  3132. 1
  3133. 1
  3134. 1
  3135. 1
  3136. 1
  3137. 1
  3138. 1
  3139. 1
  3140. 1
  3141. 1
  3142. 1
  3143. 1
  3144. 1
  3145. 1
  3146. 1
  3147. 1
  3148. 1
  3149. 1
  3150. 1
  3151. 1
  3152. 1
  3153. 1
  3154. 1
  3155. 1
  3156. 1
  3157. 1
  3158. 1
  3159. 1
  3160. 1
  3161. 1
  3162. 1
  3163. 1
  3164. 1
  3165. 1
  3166. 1
  3167. 1
  3168. 1
  3169. 1
  3170. 1
  3171. 1
  3172. 1
  3173. 1
  3174. 1
  3175. 1
  3176. 1
  3177. 1
  3178. 1
  3179. 1
  3180. 1
  3181. 1
  3182. 1
  3183. 1
  3184. 1
  3185. 1
  3186. 1
  3187. 1
  3188. 1
  3189. 1
  3190. 1
  3191. 1
  3192. 1
  3193. 1
  3194. 1
  3195. 1
  3196. 1
  3197. 1
  3198. 1
  3199. 1
  3200. 1
  3201. 1
  3202. 1
  3203. 1
  3204. 1
  3205. 1
  3206.  Sinjin Smyth  Tell me, did your leaders tell you that: - Bart SIbrel got caught with his hand in the cookie jar editing his "smoking gun" to remove portions of the original that disproved him, MADE UP his "six feet of lead to cross the Van Allen Belts" out of thin air, and neglected to mention when showing how "angry the astronauts are to be confronted" that he filmed that video AFTER earning himself a police record for stalking, harassment, and trespassing? - David Percy cherry picked frames to hide that his "missing" details were present mere seconds before, cropped photographs to hide that his "non-parallel shadows" changed direction, deliberately showed people poor-quality fifth or sixth generation replicas to "analyze", and rigged his "slow motion" playback speeds? That last one was accidentally confirmed by Jarrah White, who filmed himself doing the same thing in front of the camera. Way to score an own goal. - Mary Bennett, David Percy's coauthor, claims on Aulis's very own About the Authors page to have found her hoax information using PSYCHIC POWERS? - Aulis uses fictional scientists, or ones that are talking about subjects that they have no experience in, to make their articles seem more credible than they actually are? - "Professional photographer" Marcus Allen is a paid employee for some Australian dimestore equivalent to the National Enquirer? - Una Ronald, the Australian Coke Bottle Lady, flat-out lied in her story by claiming that she "stayed up late to watch the live broadcast and it was gone in the morning" even though the landings happened at NOON in Australia and would have been repeated on the EVENING news? - Jack White tried to pass off his own edits as anomalies in his "photographic analysis"? - Dr Groves rigged his radiation and heat tests by exposing them to conditions that do NOT match what they would have been exposed to to the point of ignoring the fact that there is no air in space? - Jarrah White censors his critics to the point that he fraudulently flagged their videos with bogus copyright strikes to try and get their accounts banned? False DMCA claims to harass people are PERJURY by the way. Yeah, yeah, you have an "open mind". That's why you didn't question a word these con artists said and immediately believed them because "A video on the internet says so, therefore it MUST be true!"
    1
  3207. 1
  3208. 1
  3209. 1
  3210. 1
  3211. 1
  3212. 1
  3213. 1
  3214. 1
  3215. 1
  3216. 1
  3217. 1
  3218. 1
  3219. 1
  3220. Just as a head's up, the "Challenger astronauts are alive" is a scam. The creator took pictures of siblings or other people with similar names and claimed that they were the "same person": - despite the fact that several of them would need facial and dental surgery to match. - despite the fact that they have jobs that they would not be able to be hired for or keep. No astronaut is going to be able to hold a job as an Ivy League law professor because A. the job will, with 100% certainty, get their background and references chked and B. this is a job that requires a Masters in the relevant field and they do not have the education or experience to not be fired for incompetency because they don't have the slightest clue what any of it means. - despite the fact that they CANNOT pretend to be their own siblings because if they ever meet with anybody that knew them or their family, their cover is immediately blown. - despite the fact that if they were alive, the government would have assigned them completely new names like they do with people on Witness Protection. - and despite the fact that there's NO REASON to keep them alive and little reason to fake it in the first place. An assassination is one thing, but staging an accident for shits and giggles does NOT increase your funding and only hurts your operations. If I were in charge of NASA, I'd murder them for real and dispose of the bodies where they'd never be found, possibly the ocean or entomb them in the WIPP facility where nobody will ever open the container, just to get rid of the loose ends, or maybe I'm misunderstanding "Evil organization bent on world conquest." By the way, the statistical likelihood of the astronauts having siblings is approximately 80%.
    1
  3221. 1
  3222. 1
  3223. 1
  3224. 1
  3225. 1
  3226. 1
  3227. 1
  3228. 1
  3229. 1
  3230. 1
  3231. 1
  3232. 1
  3233. 1
  3234. 1
  3235. 1
  3236. 1
  3237. 1
  3238. 1
  3239. 1
  3240. 1
  3241. 1
  3242. 1
  3243. 1
  3244. 1
  3245. 1
  3246. 1
  3247. 1
  3248. 1
  3249. 1
  3250. 1
  3251. 1
  3252. 1
  3253. 1
  3254. 1
  3255. 1
  3256. 1
  3257. 1
  3258. 1
  3259. 1
  3260. 1
  3261. 1
  3262. 1
  3263. 1
  3264. 1
  3265. 1
  3266. 1
  3267. 1
  3268. 1
  3269. 1
  3270. 1
  3271. 1
  3272. 1
  3273. 1
  3274. 1
  3275. 1
  3276. 1
  3277. 1
  3278. 1
  3279. 1
  3280. 1
  3281. 1
  3282. 1
  3283. 1
  3284. 1
  3285. 1
  3286. 1
  3287. 1
  3288. 1
  3289. 1
  3290. 1
  3291. 1
  3292. 1
  3293. 1
  3294. 1
  3295. 1
  3296. 1
  3297. 1
  3298. 1
  3299. 1
  3300. 1
  3301. 1
  3302. 1
  3303. 1
  3304. 1
  3305. 1
  3306. 1
  3307. 1
  3308. 1
  3309. 1
  3310. 1
  3311. 1
  3312. 1
  3313. 1
  3314. 1
  3315. 1
  3316. 1
  3317. 1
  3318. 1
  3319. 1
  3320. 1
  3321. 1
  3322. 1
  3323. 1
  3324. 1
  3325. 1
  3326. 1
  3327. 1
  3328. 1
  3329. 1
  3330. 1
  3331. 1
  3332. 1
  3333. 1
  3334. 1
  3335. 1
  3336. 1
  3337.  @flatearth5821  For starters, the Earth has TWO celestial poles. The stars in the Southern Hemisphere circle around a fixed point in the sky in the middle of the constellation Octans that is due south of every location in the Hemisphere just like the Northern stars circle around Polaris First of all, it is impossible for a spinning dome to create a circle around any location except the center. It can NEVER create one outwards. You can test this with a colander, which is a bowl filled with holes for draining food. The explanations your side tries to give for this amount to throwing made up bullshit at the wall and praying that it will stick and generally don't address point 2. Second, take a look at your map. You see how Africa, Australia, South America, and the Pacific Ocean (which has a bunch of small island chains along the bottom of it) form a big X? Because you can see the stars from 2-3 of these locations simultaneously (depending on the season), this means that the same objects are located tens of thousands of miles apart in mutually exclusive directions, and rotated, simultaneously. Explain how it is possible on a flat plane for the same object to be in front of you, behind you, left, right, and every direction in between, vast distances from you, AND rotated accordingly, at the same time. Preferably without invoking "God Moves in Mysterious Ways". This only makes sense on a globe or other three-dimensional object, as these directions then point towards each other. I'll wait. If you somehow get an answer, which I doubt you will, I have more problems with your model making no geometric sense.
    1
  3338. 1
  3339. 1
  3340. 1
  3341. 1
  3342. 1
  3343. 1
  3344. 1
  3345. 1
  3346. 1
  3347. 1
  3348. 1
  3349. 1
  3350. 1
  3351. 1
  3352. 1
  3353.  @jupiterjohnson7191  First of all, what is your people's obsession with computing power? That is NOT the limiting factor and even if it were, you have nothing to prove it beyond incredulity All I hear is cell phones calculators blah blah blah. Not once, not one single time, have I heard anybody even attempt to calculate what was actually NEEDED. I've also never heard a single one of you comment on the existence of NASA's computing bank of mainframes that actually ran the hard calculations, let alone their capabilities. ---------- By the way, do you know what the downside to those super tiny pin needle computer components is? They are many, many times WEAKER, not stronger, against radiation than Apollo-era components, and become more susceptible the smaller you make them. Congratulations, you made the mission harder. Gee I wonder if that's why the Orion video people like to deliberately misrepresent was talking about the belts' ability to damage the electronics.... ------------- News flash buddy. We can't afford those wars either. We are massively in DEBT and our military spending is a cancerous mass that increases by more than NASA's entire budget every single year. And in case you haven't noticed, we have a party in this country called the Republicans that screech like harpies at every single penny increase that's not on the military. Do you know why the Space Shuttle shut down after 30 years in use? Because Congress refused to pay for both that and the plans to return to the moon simultaneously. So.... Apparently NASA told this big secret that only a few people are supposed to have the actual details to Congress - an organization notorious for infighting, faction wars, and personal schemes, and most importantly, whose members change every few years. That makes total sense.
    1
  3354. 1
  3355. 1
  3356. 1
  3357. 1
  3358. 1
  3359. 1
  3360. 1
  3361. 1
  3362. 1
  3363. 1
  3364. 1
  3365. 1
  3366. 1
  3367. 1
  3368. 1
  3369. 1
  3370. 1
  3371. 1
  3372. 1
  3373. 1
  3374. 1
  3375. 1
  3376. 1
  3377. 1
  3378. 1
  3379. 1
  3380. 1
  3381. 1
  3382. 1
  3383. 1
  3384. 1
  3385. 1
  3386. 1
  3387. 1
  3388. 1
  3389. 1
  3390. 1
  3391. 1
  3392. 1
  3393. 1
  3394. 1
  3395. 1
  3396. 1
  3397. 1
  3398. 1
  3399. 1
  3400. 1
  3401. 1
  3402. 1
  3403. 1
  3404. 1
  3405. 1
  3406. 1
  3407. 1
  3408. 1
  3409. 1
  3410. 1
  3411. 1
  3412. 1
  3413. 1
  3414. 1
  3415. 1
  3416. 1
  3417. 1
  3418. 1
  3419. 1
  3420. 1
  3421. 1
  3422. 1
  3423. 1
  3424. 1
  3425. 1
  3426. 1
  3427. 1
  3428. 1
  3429. 1
  3430. 1
  3431. 1
  3432. 1
  3433. 1
  3434. 1
  3435. 1
  3436. 1
  3437. 1
  3438. 1
  3439. 1
  3440. 1
  3441. 1
  3442. 1
  3443. 1
  3444. 1
  3445. 1
  3446. 1
  3447. 1
  3448. 1
  3449. 1
  3450. 1
  3451. 1
  3452. 1
  3453. 1
  3454. 1
  3455. 1
  3456. 1
  3457. 1
  3458. 1
  3459. 1
  3460. 1
  3461. 1
  3462. 1
  3463. 1
  3464. 1
  3465. 1
  3466. 1
  3467. 1
  3468. 1
  3469. 1
  3470. 1
  3471. 1
  3472. 1
  3473. 1
  3474. 1
  3475. 1
  3476. 1
  3477. 1
  3478. 1
  3479. 1
  3480. 1
  3481. 1
  3482. 1
  3483. 1
  3484. 1
  3485. 1
  3486. 1
  3487. 1
  3488. 1
  3489. 1
  3490. 1
  3491. 1
  3492. 1
  3493. 1
  3494. 1
  3495. 1
  3496. 1
  3497. 1
  3498. 1
  3499. 1
  3500. 1
  3501. 1
  3502. 1
  3503. 1
  3504. 1
  3505. 1
  3506. 1
  3507. 1
  3508. 1
  3509. 1
  3510. 1
  3511. 1
  3512. 1
  3513. 1
  3514. 1
  3515. 1
  3516. 1
  3517. 1
  3518. 1
  3519. 1
  3520. 1
  3521. 1
  3522. 1
  3523. 1
  3524. 1
  3525. 1
  3526. 1
  3527. 1
  3528. 1
  3529. 1
  3530. 1
  3531. 1
  3532. 1
  3533. 1
  3534. 1
  3535. 1
  3536. 1
  3537. 1
  3538. 1
  3539. 1
  3540. 1
  3541. 1
  3542. 1
  3543. 1
  3544. 1
  3545. 1
  3546. 1
  3547. 1
  3548. 1
  3549. 1
  3550. 1
  3551. 1
  3552. 1
  3553. 1
  3554. 1
  3555. 1
  3556. 1
  3557. 1
  3558. 1
  3559. 1
  3560.  @KingRahiem  First of all, Apollo cost about 130 billion dollars, and their current budget is HALF of what it was in the 60s and another half of that is devoted to non-spaceflight research. It's extremely expensive and nobody really wants to pay for it. Second, only three countries have manned space programs at all: the US, Russia, and China. Russia's own moon attempts ended in disaster. The truth is that they spent more time and money than they should have trying to show up the Americans to the point of neglecting the N-1, their equivalent to the Saturn V, and when they rushed development to try and get back on schedule, they wound up with a piece of garbage that blew up when they tried to launch it. The N-1, it turned out, had a fatal design flaw in their engine design where a single rocket would cause too much vibration. In order to fix this, they would have basically scrap much of it and start over, and so they shelved it because like any sane and reasonable person would notice, wasting any more time on this failed endeavor would result in them being behind in everything else forever and never being relevant again because the Americans weren't going to sit there waiting for them to catch up. The reality is that today, 50 years later, neither Russia nor China have any MOTIVE not to take their sweet ass time. You can only be first ONCE and the moon ain't going anywhere, at least not very fast. Without the Cold War space race driving it, you are essentially spending a very, very large amount of money for ultimately not a whole lot of actual gain. Robots would be cheaper and can last years on the moon because they don't need food, air, or water, and for all the talk people give about mining, the only resource of any actual value (helium 3) is both able to be synthesized in a lab and primarily desired for a hypothetical energy source that doesn't work and isn't expected to be commercially viable for another fifty years. Do you know WHY we built the space shuttle, by the way? Because the Apollo-era technology was deemed too inefficient and too expensive to justify long-term operations. Especially since Apollo and before are all single-use spacecraft. You need to build a new one every single launch because they can only be used once. And so they tried to work on technology to make spaceflight cheaper (which failed by the way) and built the first REUSABLE spacecraft. But building reusable spacecraft is "moving backwards". Working on long-term medical experiments before committing to long-term colonization plans is "moving backwards". Developing water and air reclamation systems that work in space and physics experiments that will be used to design future equipment and all of the other shit they do on the ISS is "moving backwards". Never let a conspiracy theorist program your computer. They'll stick to the first method they find that works no matter how much of a memory hog it is, evolve it into a convoluted mess, and never ever rework anything because optimization and bug fixing is "moving backwards."
    1
  3561. 1
  3562. 1
  3563. 1
  3564. 1
  3565. 1
  3566. 1
  3567. 1
  3568. 1
  3569. 1
  3570. 1
  3571. 1
  3572. 1
  3573. 1
  3574. 1
  3575. 1
  3576. 1
  3577. 1
  3578. 1
  3579. 1
  3580. 1
  3581. 1
  3582. 1
  3583. 1
  3584. 1
  3585. 1
  3586. 1
  3587. 1
  3588. 1
  3589. 1
  3590. 1
  3591. 1
  3592. 1
  3593. 1
  3594. 1
  3595. 1
  3596. 1
  3597. 1
  3598. 1
  3599. 1
  3600. 1
  3601. 1
  3602. 1
  3603. 1
  3604. 1
  3605. 1
  3606. 1
  3607. 1
  3608. 1
  3609. 1
  3610. 1
  3611. 1
  3612. 1
  3613. 1
  3614. 1
  3615. 1
  3616. 1
  3617. 1
  3618. 1
  3619. 1
  3620. 1
  3621. 1
  3622. 1
  3623. 1
  3624. 1
  3625. 1
  3626. 1
  3627. 1
  3628. 1
  3629. 1
  3630. 1
  3631. 1
  3632. 1
  3633. 1
  3634. 1
  3635. 1
  3636. 1
  3637. 1
  3638. 1
  3639. 1
  3640. 1
  3641. 1
  3642. 1
  3643. 1
  3644. 1
  3645. 1
  3646. 1
  3647. 1
  3648. 1
  3649. 1
  3650. 1
  3651. 1
  3652. 1
  3653. 1
  3654. 1
  3655. 1
  3656. 1
  3657. 1
  3658. 1
  3659. 1
  3660. 1
  3661. 1
  3662. 1
  3663. 1
  3664. 1
  3665. 1
  3666. 1
  3667. 1
  3668. 1
  3669. 1
  3670. 1
  3671. 1
  3672. 1
  3673. 1
  3674. 1
  3675. 1
  3676. 1
  3677. 1
  3678. 1
  3679. 1
  3680. 1
  3681. 1
  3682. 1
  3683. 1
  3684. 1
  3685. 1
  3686. 1
  3687. 1
  3688. 1
  3689. 1
  3690. 1
  3691. 1
  3692. 1
  3693. 1
  3694. 1
  3695. 1
  3696. 1
  3697. 1
  3698. 1
  3699. 1
  3700. 1
  3701. 1
  3702. 1
  3703. 1
  3704. 1
  3705. 1
  3706. 1
  3707. 1
  3708. 1
  3709. 1
  3710. 1
  3711. 1
  3712. 1
  3713. 1
  3714. 1
  3715. 1
  3716. 1
  3717. 1
  3718. 1
  3719. 1
  3720. 1
  3721. 1
  3722. 1
  3723. 1
  3724. 1
  3725. 1
  3726. 1
  3727. 1
  3728. 1
  3729. 1
  3730. 1
  3731. 1
  3732. 1
  3733. 1
  3734. 1
  3735. 1
  3736. 1
  3737. 1
  3738. 1
  3739. 1
  3740. 1
  3741. 1
  3742. 1
  3743. 1
  3744. 1
  3745. 1
  3746. 1
  3747. 1
  3748. 1
  3749. 1
  3750. 1
  3751. 1
  3752. 1
  3753. 1
  3754. 1
  3755. 1
  3756. 1
  3757. 1
  3758. 1
  3759. 1
  3760. 1
  3761. 1
  3762. 1
  3763. 1
  3764. 1
  3765. 1
  3766. 1
  3767. 1
  3768. 1
  3769. 1
  3770. 1
  3771. 1
  3772. 1
  3773. 1
  3774. 1
  3775. 1
  3776. Do you just believe everything that the hoaxers tell you? You have like five different motives that you can't agree on for why Kennedy was killed. Also, have you considered the possibility that Oswald may have been killed by the KGB to silence him because he was an attempted defector? If the US thinks that he did it on their orders, they're going to start WW3 and nuke Moscow. Russia didn't get to the moon because they BLEW THEIR LEAD. They were so obsessed with being "first at everything'" that they wasted their time and money on meaningless bullshit and wound up several years behind the Americans on actually building their heavy lift rocket. They then tried to to rush development and wound up with a piece of garbage that blew up when they tried to launch it. They ended up so far behind they had to shelve it to stay relevant because the Americans weren't going to sit there waiting for them to catch up and continuing that dead end would result in them losing at everything else. Also, their lead rocket designer died halfway through the project. Russia's the first country to put animals through the Van Allen Belts genius. The only deaths they had weren't from radiation poisoning, they were from the ship malfunctioning. That's about as close to radiation poisoning as falling asleep in the bathtub. By the way, the ISS runs through the lowest levels of it about every hour and a half. Russia has declared no such intention, but keep believing that if you want. Also, if Russia were going to attempt that, China would be attempting it too in order to beat them.
    1
  3777. 1
  3778. 1
  3779. 1
  3780. 1
  3781. 1
  3782. 1
  3783. 1
  3784. 1
  3785. 1
  3786. 1
  3787. 1
  3788. 1
  3789. 1
  3790. 1
  3791. 1
  3792. 1
  3793. 1
  3794. 1
  3795. 1
  3796. 1
  3797. 1
  3798. 1
  3799. 1
  3800. 1
  3801. 1
  3802. 1
  3803. 1
  3804. 1
  3805. 1
  3806. 1
  3807. 1
  3808. 1
  3809. 1
  3810. 1
  3811. 1
  3812. 1
  3813. 1
  3814. 1
  3815. 1
  3816. 1
  3817. 1
  3818. 1
  3819. 1
  3820. 1
  3821. 1
  3822. 1
  3823. 1
  3824. 1
  3825. 1
  3826. 1
  3827. 1
  3828. 1
  3829. 1
  3830. 1
  3831. 1
  3832. 1
  3833. 1
  3834. 1
  3835. 1
  3836.  @Historia.Magistra.Vitae.  Buddy, we INTENTIONALLY don't have nationalized rules because the country was built on the idea of States Rights. The states have the right to choose their own laws regarding the election, aren't even required to select their electors via a popular election, and we didn't have a unified election date until 1845 in response to the invention of the telegraph. Under the constitution, the creation and administration of electoral laws in Pennsylvania falls to Pennsylvania. Texas is not an involved party, same national election or not. They have no legal grounds to sue unless Pennsylvania's actions are interfering with Texas's ability to administer their own laws and election, nor does Pennsylvania have grounds to complain about Texas's attempts at voter suppression. I'm sorry that this isn't the answer you want to hear, but it's the truth. Any lawsuits about state laws not being followed or unconstitutional laws are going to have to come from INSIDE the state itself and this is how the SCOTUS almost always rules. Any expert on constitutional law outside the Conservative Koolaid Club would have told you this would be the result before the lawsuit even hit the court's desk. By the way, if the entire state votes twice, the result doesn't change beyond stupid people splitting their votes. Most people are going to just vote twice for the same candidate anyways, so the percent will stay exactly the same, and the number of electoral college votes each state gets is a fixed number equal to the the number of senators and congressmen each state has, so even if each person votes 100,000,000 times, that doesn't change.
    1
  3837. 1
  3838. 1
  3839.  @3y35poihjpn  Sorry for the slow response, work has been extremely busy and frankly RL is more important than arguing on the internet. Now then, where to start.... This shit's been around for ages. Here's an 11 year old video details David Percy's What Happened on the Moon? If you can't be bothered to watch, he gets caught (among other things): Cropping photographs to remove details that disproved him, blatantly lying about his playback speeds (which was accidentally proved by another hoaxer trying to defend him), cherry picking frames to lie and claim that details were "missing" when they were visible less than a second before, and more. part 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2qEEoQCb2I part 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ByiMQXVyY74&t=336s part 3: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hyQV1s9uGqk David Percy is the owner of Aulis, your #1 website by the way. His coauthor Mary Bennett shouldn't be trusted at all because she's either a professional kook or a professional scam artist. She makes her living writing books about how she has psychic powers and claims to have found her hoax information using ESP. If you don't believe me, it's on Aulis's About The Authors page. Bart Sibrel's work has been shredded for ages. Among his other lies, which you can find discussed, he has so-called "proof of the astronauts faking the distance to the moon." The trick doesn't work in a moving vehicle (no method of cropping will stops the features outside from changing as the ship orbits), and he GOT CAUGHT editing around shots in the original that disproved him. Here's the clip he doesn't want you to see. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jghYBAI3i6o&t=175s Here's part 1 of a full breakdown of A Funny Thing on the Way to the Moon. The full things' about an hour and a half. I don't expect you to watch the whole thing, though. Conspiracy theorists never do. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h4oEDCeigzs By the way, Sibrel neglects to mention in his other video where he shows how "angry the astronauts are to be called out on the lies" that he got into their houses by lying about his identity and has a criminal record for stalking and trespassing. Clavius.org has a large amount of criticism of the hoax claims, particularly the older ones (it's an older website). This includes the fact that "photographic expert" Jack White tried to pass off HIS OWN EDITS as "anomalies" with deceptive editing and perspective tricks, and calling out Dr. Groves, one of the only "scientists" willing to put their name on your work, for pulling bullshit such as rigging his radiation tests with levels thousands of times higher than the listed values on Apollo, and doing heat tests using the only method of heat transfer that doesn't exist in space Your "Australian Coke Bottle lady" forgot that that nighttime in the US and Britain is DAYTIME in Australia, and yet people still believe her bullshit story about how she "stayed up late to watch the live broadcast and saw a coke bottle that was gone in the morning" - despite the fact that the broadcast happened at 11AM in her time zone. If you really want to ask around, I'd recommend going to the Apollo Hoax forums, where they have discussions on many, many hoax videos and papers, including complete demolitions of a number of the pages on Aulis, as well as the fact that they have articles written by FICTIONAL PEOPLE. I like the one on stereoparallax article by "Oleg Oleynik" that not only destroys the article, but also discusses the fact that nobody can find any evidence that he even exists despite his claim to have "founded a university." Where is this proof? All over the place if you got off your ass and LOOKED instead of writing it off as "lies and propaganda". I mean... the hoax claims MUST be true, right? People that oppose the big evil government would never lie.
    1
  3840. 1
  3841. 1
  3842. 1
  3843. 1
  3844. 1
  3845. 1
  3846. 1
  3847. 1
  3848. 1
  3849. 1
  3850. 1
  3851. 1
  3852. 1
  3853. 1
  3854. 1
  3855. 1
  3856. 1
  3857. 1
  3858. 1
  3859. 1
  3860. 1
  3861. 1
  3862. 1
  3863. 1
  3864. 1
  3865. 1
  3866. 1
  3867. 1
  3868. 1
  3869. 1
  3870. 1
  3871. 1
  3872. 1
  3873. 1
  3874. 1
  3875. 1
  3876. 1
  3877. 1
  3878. 1
  3879. 1
  3880. 1
  3881. 1
  3882. 1
  3883. 1
  3884. 1
  3885. 1
  3886. 1
  3887. 1
  3888. 1
  3889. 1
  3890. 1
  3891. 1
  3892. 1
  3893. 1
  3894. 1
  3895. 1
  3896. 1
  3897. 1
  3898. 1
  3899. 1
  3900. 1
  3901. 1
  3902. 1
  3903. 1
  3904. 1
  3905. 1
  3906. 1
  3907. 1
  3908. 1
  3909. 1
  3910. 1
  3911. 1
  3912. 1
  3913. 1
  3914. 1
  3915. 1
  3916. 1
  3917. 1
  3918. 1
  3919. 1
  3920. 1
  3921. 1
  3922. 1
  3923. 1
  3924. 1
  3925. 1
  3926. 1
  3927. 1
  3928. 1
  3929. 1
  3930. 1
  3931. 1
  3932. 1
  3933. 1
  3934. 1
  3935. 1
  3936. 1
  3937. 1
  3938. 1
  3939. 1
  3940. 1
  3941. 1
  3942. 1
  3943. 1
  3944. 1
  3945. 1
  3946. 1
  3947. 1
  3948. 1
  3949. 1
  3950. 1
  3951. 1
  3952. 1
  3953. 1
  3954. 1
  3955. 1
  3956. 1
  3957. 1
  3958. 1
  3959. 1
  3960. 1
  3961. 1
  3962. 1
  3963. 1
  3964. 1
  3965. 1
  3966. 1
  3967. 1
  3968. 1
  3969. 1
  3970. 1
  3971. 1
  3972. 1
  3973. 1
  3974. 1
  3975. 1
  3976. 1
  3977. 1
  3978. 1
  3979. 1
  3980. 1
  3981. 1
  3982. 1
  3983. 1
  3984. 1
  3985. 1
  3986. 1
  3987. 1
  3988. 1
  3989. 1
  3990. 1
  3991. 1
  3992. 1
  3993. 1
  3994. 1
  3995. 1
  3996. 1
  3997. 1
  3998. 1
  3999. 1
  4000. 1
  4001. 1
  4002. 1
  4003. 1
  4004. 1
  4005. 1
  4006. 1
  4007. 1
  4008. 1
  4009. 1
  4010. 1
  4011. 1
  4012. 1
  4013. 1
  4014. 1
  4015. 1
  4016. 1
  4017. 1
  4018. 1
  4019. 1
  4020. 1
  4021. 1
  4022. 1
  4023. 1
  4024. 1
  4025. 1
  4026. 1
  4027. 1
  4028. 1
  4029. 1
  4030. 1
  4031. 1
  4032. 1
  4033. 1
  4034. 1
  4035. 1
  4036. 1
  4037. 1
  4038. 1
  4039. 1
  4040. 1
  4041. 1
  4042. 1
  4043. 1
  4044. 1
  4045. 1
  4046. 1
  4047. 1
  4048. 1
  4049. 1
  4050. 1
  4051. 1
  4052. 1
  4053. 1
  4054. 1
  4055. 1
  4056. 1
  4057. 1
  4058. 1
  4059. 1
  4060. 1
  4061. 1
  4062. 1
  4063. 1
  4064. 1
  4065. 1
  4066. 1
  4067. 1
  4068. 1
  4069. 1
  4070. 1
  4071. 1
  4072. 1
  4073. 1
  4074. 1
  4075. 1
  4076. 1
  4077. 1
  4078. 1
  4079. 1
  4080. 1
  4081. 1
  4082. 1
  4083. 1
  4084. 1
  4085. 1
  4086. 1
  4087. 1
  4088. 1
  4089. 1
  4090. 1
  4091. 1
  4092. 1
  4093. 1
  4094. 1
  4095. 1
  4096. 1
  4097. 1
  4098. 1
  4099. 1
  4100. 1
  4101. 1
  4102. 1
  4103. 1
  4104. 1
  4105. 1
  4106. 1
  4107. 1
  4108. 1
  4109. 1
  4110. 1
  4111. 1
  4112. 1
  4113. 1
  4114. 1
  4115. 1
  4116. 1
  4117. 1
  4118. 1
  4119. 1
  4120. 1
  4121. 1
  4122. 1
  4123. 1
  4124. 1
  4125. 1
  4126. 1
  4127. 1
  4128. 1
  4129. 1
  4130. 1
  4131. 1
  4132. 1
  4133. 1
  4134. 1
  4135. 1
  4136. 1
  4137. 1
  4138. 1
  4139. 1
  4140. 1
  4141. 1
  4142. 1
  4143. 1
  4144. 1
  4145. 1
  4146. 1
  4147. 1
  4148. 1
  4149. 1
  4150. 1
  4151. 1
  4152. 1
  4153. 1
  4154. 1
  4155. 1
  4156. 1
  4157. 1
  4158. 1
  4159. 1
  4160. 1
  4161. 1
  4162. 1
  4163. 1
  4164. 1
  4165. 1
  4166. 1
  4167. 1
  4168. 1
  4169. 1
  4170. 1
  4171. 1
  4172. 1
  4173. 1
  4174. 1
  4175. 1
  4176. 1
  4177. 1
  4178. 1
  4179. 1
  4180. 1
  4181. 1
  4182. 1
  4183. 1
  4184. 1
  4185. 1
  4186. 1
  4187. 1
  4188. 1
  4189. 1
  4190. 1
  4191. 1
  4192. 1
  4193. 1
  4194. 1
  4195. 1
  4196. 1
  4197. 1
  4198. 1
  4199. 1
  4200. 1
  4201. 1
  4202. 1
  4203. 1
  4204. 1
  4205. 1
  4206. 1
  4207. 1
  4208. 1
  4209. 1
  4210. 1
  4211. 1
  4212. 1
  4213. 1
  4214. 1
  4215. 1
  4216. 1
  4217. 1
  4218. 1
  4219. 1
  4220. 1
  4221. 1
  4222. 1
  4223. 1
  4224. 1
  4225. 1
  4226. 1
  4227. 1
  4228. 1
  4229. 1
  4230. 1
  4231. 1
  4232. 1
  4233. 1
  4234. 1
  4235. 1
  4236. 1
  4237. 1
  4238. 1
  4239. 1
  4240. 1
  4241. 1
  4242. 1
  4243. 1
  4244. 1
  4245. 1
  4246. 1. ...... you don't even get your own side's claims right. The claim is that the flag's waving in the wind despite no air, not no gravity. The "waving" flag clips they show are after the astronauts have been TOUCHING the flag with their hands, swinging the pole around, and the flag has a rod through the top to keep it extended. It's "waving" about as much as my shower curtain. 2. Um.... no? The largest telescopes on the planet can barely make out an object the size of a football field at that distance. They wouldn't even register an object as small a flag as a single dot. I would like to remind you that when the LRO took photographs of the site that had closer detail (because they were taken from lunar orbit), you immediately called them fake too. 3. No, those "strings" are the antennae that's on the back of the pack. by the way, if the astronauts were on wires, the two astronauts would spent half of the mission tangled together because the instant one walks around the other, the wires will wrap together. Also, wires don't affect the dust or any other moving objects, like that time the one astronaut trips over one of the experiments, breaks it, and decides to spontaneously chuck it. 4. Fun fact: Hoax author David Percy (the owner of Aulis, your #1 website) got caught cropping his "non-parallel shadows" pictures to remove sections where you could see the shadows bending on the ground to match the other object. "Photographic Expert" Jack White put his comparison lines directly on top of those same details in order to hide them. 5. If I had a nickle for every hoaxer that claimed to have relatives that worked for NASA or who claimed to have met the astronauts and didn't, I'd have enough to send a kid to college.
    1
  4247. 1
  4248. 1
  4249. 1
  4250. 1
  4251. 1
  4252. 1
  4253. 1
  4254. 1
  4255. 1
  4256. 1
  4257. 1
  4258. 1
  4259. 1
  4260. 1
  4261. 1
  4262. 1
  4263. 1
  4264. 1
  4265. 1
  4266. 1
  4267. 1
  4268. 1
  4269. 1
  4270. 1
  4271. 1
  4272. 1
  4273. 1
  4274. 1
  4275. 1
  4276. 1
  4277. 1
  4278. 1
  4279. 1
  4280. 1
  4281. 1
  4282. 1
  4283. 1
  4284. 1
  4285. 1
  4286. 1
  4287. 1
  4288. 1
  4289. 1
  4290. 1
  4291. 1
  4292. 1
  4293. 1
  4294. 1
  4295. 1
  4296. 1
  4297. 1
  4298. 1
  4299. 1
  4300. 1
  4301. 1
  4302. 1
  4303. 1
  4304. 1
  4305. 1
  4306. 1
  4307. 1
  4308. 1
  4309. 1
  4310. 1
  4311. 1
  4312. 1
  4313. 1
  4314. 1
  4315. 1
  4316. 1
  4317. 1
  4318. 1
  4319. 1
  4320. 1
  4321. 1
  4322. 1
  4323. 1
  4324. 1
  4325. 1
  4326. 1
  4327. 1
  4328. 1
  4329. 1
  4330. 1
  4331. 1
  4332. 1
  4333. 1
  4334. 1
  4335. 1
  4336. 1
  4337. 1
  4338. 1
  4339. 1
  4340. 1
  4341. 1
  4342. 1
  4343. 1
  4344. 1
  4345. 1
  4346. 1
  4347. 1
  4348. 1
  4349. 1
  4350. 1
  4351. 1
  4352. 1
  4353. 1
  4354. 1
  4355. 1
  4356. 1
  4357. 1
  4358. 1
  4359. 1
  4360. 1
  4361. 1
  4362. 1
  4363. 1
  4364. 1
  4365. 1
  4366. 1
  4367. 1
  4368. 1
  4369. 1
  4370. 1
  4371. 1
  4372. 1
  4373. 1
  4374. 1
  4375. I'm going to give you a word of advice. If you ever want to make a hoax video and decide to LIE about your evidence, make sure that nobody, under any circumstances, ever gets a hold of your source material. Bart Sibrel's "faking the distance" video has been proven to be complete horseshit for over ten years. The slimy bastard tried to rearrange clips and edit out portions of the raw footage which not only completely contradicted him, but which contained shots that are PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE to perform with the trick he claims was used.... and GOT CAUGHT pretty much the instant that anybody else got their hands on that tape. If you want to think "Oh, he might have been mistaken", then why does he STILL push that same video even though he's had his nose shoved in it like a dog that shit the carpet a dozen times over by now? By the way, the MINIMUM speed to maintain orbit is more than 17,000 miles per hour. The clips he used, uncut, are about 12-15 minutes long each. At that speed, the astronauts would have crossed between 1/8 and 1/6 of the entire planet during that time, so explain to me why the clouds and landmasses barely change even though a REAL ship in orbit would have seen entire oceans or continents pass by them during that time? Either the astronauts are least far enough away to get geosynchronous orbit, which completely undermines the entire logic behind the hoax in the first place because that is INSIDE the outer Van Allen Belt, or that is not the Earth. Either way, Sibrel is WRONG.
    1
  4376. 1
  4377. 1
  4378. 1
  4379. 1
  4380. 1
  4381. 1
  4382. 1
  4383. 1
  4384. 1
  4385.  @justinherbert9146  I missed the "and back" while reading hastily. .... how is three million miles without a fatality impressive? STS-61-C, the Space Shuttle Columbia mission directly before the Challenger disaster, flew almost 3 million miles ON ITS OWN. You know, because spacecraft need to keep flying to not come crashing back to Earth. Also, I like how you people deliberately ignore the time the oxygen tank blew up because "almost dead" isn't good enough. I have a great idea! Let's fake an accident! That'll totally help us "deceive the masses" and not shoot ourselves in the foot with a rocket launcher when the outside meddlers start rooting through our stuff during the inevitable investigation. -------------- Jesus fucking Christ. I know parrots with more originality. So, you do realize that dust clouds don't form in a vacuum right? Without air resistance, every single grain of dust will be blown away from the ship and not come back. And considering that that the ship used a pressure sensor to shut off the engine WHILE STILL FLYING, the dust would have to go up into the exhaust to get on top of the legs. Also, you can see radial lines in the dust in many of the photographs directly under the bell indicating wind-based erosion. By the way, you know who the person that discovered the "no crater" was? Neil Armstrong. Within one minute of climbing off the lander, he himself calls out that there's no crater, so apparently NASA already knew it should be there long before you people examined it and thought they'd rather deliberately call attention to their own mistake instead of...you know... grabbing a shovel.
    1
  4386. 1
  4387. 1
  4388. 1
  4389. 1
  4390. 1
  4391. 1
  4392. The hoaxers aren't very honest. First of all, telemetry isn't the data to go to the moon. It's the data you get FROM the moon - the readout of the instruments during your mission. Even if you don't have this, there's nothing stopping you from making a blind flight or gathering new information from a probe first. Which they'd do when testing the ship anyways. ----- The "destroyed" technology is most likely referring to the physical equipment. The factories and equipment for building and testing your ship would have been recycled, dismantled and repurposed decades ago, the training equipment would have been decommissioned after the missions were over so you have no pilots, and we know for a fact that NASA tore up the launch tower 40 years ago to reuse the land for the space shuttle. You can have all of the knowledge, navigational data, and blueprints in the universe and unless you have a physical ship, a crew trained to use it, and a launch facility set up to use it, you do not move five feet. ----- The issue with the belts isn't radiation poisoning. They're explicitly talking about computers. Apollo used magnetic core memory, an archaic hardware type that's extremely resistant to radiation and EMPS, but which isn't used anymore because integrated circuits are faster and cheaper to produce. Integrated circuits used in modern computers are very susceptible and get weaker every generation because the smaller you make your parts, the easier it becomes for them to be damaged and corrupted. Creating radiation hardened equipment is difficult, expensive, and slow enough that your parts are outdated by the time they are made. Also, that "recently" was ten years ago and it was specifically hyping up a test (that was successful) a month later. They're hyping for marketing, not admitting "this is something that's a major problem we can't solve." This isn't the answer the hoaxers want you to hear and they get very mad about it.
    1
  4393. 1
  4394. 1
  4395. 1
  4396. 1
  4397. 1
  4398. 1
  4399. 1
  4400. 1
  4401. 1
  4402. 1
  4403. 1
  4404. 1
  4405. 1
  4406. 1
  4407. 1
  4408. 1
  4409.  @kidwave1  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9HdPi9Ikhk Nixon call's just after 55:00. You can actually hear the echo other times Mission Control talks as well, not just him. The astronauts take 8 seconds and 4 to respond to him. Other fun things the hoaxers will never show you in this footage. 5:20 Armstrong directly calls out the lack of the crater. During this entire time he does so, he's moving a cord around with normal arm speeds so he's clearly not at slow motion. 22:00. Aldrin jumps off the lander. he immediately attempts to jump back on, misses, then does it again, hoisting himself about 3 feet with basically no effort. Normal Earth speed arm movements and body movements immediately after "slow motion" fall so he's not slowed either. Both astronauts do a mobility test directly in front of the camera and you can see their arms are not slowed. 25:15 Both astronauts comment on the lack of a crater again. 34:00 The camera is moved away from the ship. It spins a full 360 degrees while doing so, though is very blurry, then is spun about 270 back afterwards once the camera's in place. Nobody else is there. You can also skip the footage around and see that after the flag is placed, it doesn't move even a centimeter for the entire rest of the footage despite the lies about there being wind. There's also a segment I didn't find the timestamp for quickly (and can't be bothered to look) where the astronauts deliberately kick the dust around. Between that and the camera mounted in the LEM window, you can see the dust fly at least a good 15 feet.
    1
  4410. 1
  4411. 1
  4412. 1
  4413. 1
  4414. 1
  4415. 1
  4416. 1
  4417. 1
  4418. 1
  4419. 1
  4420. 1
  4421. 1
  4422. 1
  4423. 1
  4424. 1
  4425. 1
  4426.  @truBador2  You didn't know? Bart got unmasked as a fraud ten years ago because people found the footage he used and compared versions. ------ He lied about the footage being recorded for playback later; it was the live scheduled broadcast. ------- He lied about the astronauts not knowing they were filming, then muted the audio so you couldn't hear them openly discussing it. ------- He lied about the astronauts pretending to be against the window , then skipped over the section immediately after the "camera filming the window" comment where NASA asks them to prepare for interior shots, the astronauts openly state they are moving the camera back, and you can watch them do so. The only person claiming they were supposedly against the window is Bart himself --------- His trick doesn't even work; if the astronauts were in orbit, we'd see the features outside constantly moving because orbital speed is almost 20 times faster than the Earth's rotation and the clips are long enough to circle approximately 1/6 of the entire planet. --------- And there's a segment about 15 seconds after a clip Bart uses in A Funny Thing where the camera zooms out and you can see it sitting about a foot from one of the square windows, no insert, filming an object that is clearly outside, then moves across the cabin to film it out a triangular window. ------------- Not a single one of you Bart fans has the balls to call him out on it. Most hoaxers treat Bart's word as having the same authority as the Bible and the same reaction if you dare question it.
    1
  4427. 1
  4428. 1
  4429. 1
  4430. 1
  4431. 1
  4432. 1
  4433. 1
  4434. 1
  4435. 1
  4436. 1
  4437. 1
  4438. 1
  4439. 1
  4440. 1
  4441. 1
  4442. 1
  4443. 1
  4444. 1
  4445. 1
  4446. 1
  4447. 1
  4448. 1
  4449. 1
  4450. 1
  4451. 1
  4452. 1
  4453. 1
  4454. 1
  4455. 1
  4456. 1
  4457. 1
  4458. 1
  4459. 1
  4460. 1
  4461. 1
  4462. 1
  4463. 1
  4464. 1
  4465. 1
  4466. 1
  4467. 1
  4468. 1
  4469. 1
  4470. 1
  4471. 1
  4472. 1
  4473. 1
  4474. 1
  4475. 1
  4476. 1
  4477. 1
  4478. 1
  4479. 1
  4480. 1
  4481. 1
  4482. 1
  4483. 1
  4484. 1
  4485. 1
  4486. 1
  4487. 1
  4488. 1
  4489. 1
  4490. 1
  4491. 1
  4492. 1
  4493. 1
  4494. 1
  4495. 1
  4496. 1
  4497. 1
  4498. 1
  4499. 1
  4500. 1
  4501. 1
  4502. 1
  4503. 1
  4504. 1
  4505. 1
  4506. 1
  4507. 1
  4508. You're right, the fact that they "can't recall seeing seeing the stars AT ALL during the mission" IS bullshit, because that's NOT what they said. The hoaxers like to outright lie about this because dishonesty is an easy victory. During the interview, the astronauts were asked TWO questions about the stars: whether they could be seen from the moon's surface, and whether they could be seen through the solar corona (the haze around the sun that's normally invisible) despite the glare. Armstrong's answers were (paraphrased because I'm too lazy to get a direct quote at this time) this: They could NOT see the stars from the daylight side of the moon without their equipment. That';s a straight up, unquestionable "No" and explicitly specifies the daytime side. And: He could not recall - during the time they were filming the solar corona - what stars were visible which is what Collins responded to, because he was there when they were taking those pictures from the command module in lunar orbit. In other words, they don't remember seeing any during a specific part of the mission where they were looking at the sun itself and not paying attention to the stars. Head's up, by the way, the "Shut up elbow" is a blatant lie. You can clearly see that he does NOT elbow Collins because there's a second version of the interview shot from a front camera; the hoaxers NEVER show this one when discussing this on purpose. At no point do they ever once say they couldn't se them at all, but that doesn't stop the hoaxers from lying and deliberately generalizing it away. By the way, if you read the transcripts of the radio communication during the mission, Armstrong himself also points out that the stars became visible once they entered the moon's shadow. That's just not what they were asked. This is a baffling "proof" when you think on it. If the landings were faked, wouldn't the three of them have simply used their Gemini missions for reference? This isn't their first space mission. And if ALL space missions were faked, wouldn't NASA have calculated the answers and given the a script for the most likely questions? There wouldn't be any fumbling or "elbowing because they disagreed on answers or who saw what*
    1
  4509. 1
  4510. 1
  4511. 1
  4512. 1
  4513. 1
  4514. 1
  4515. 1
  4516. 1
  4517. 1
  4518. 1
  4519. 1
  4520. 1
  4521. 1
  4522. 1
  4523. 1
  4524. 1
  4525.  @prof.solzhenitsyn235  Prof.... the UN flag is ornamental only. It can't be used for real navigation. Polar maps cause everything south of the Equator to become extremely stretched out to the point the Australia is double its actual size. That's why that recent challenge was made. "Hey Flat Earth leaders. We found those Southern hemisphere flights you lie and claim don't exist. Take one with me so we can see who's wrong." Because those flight paths are DOUBLE the distance on the Flat Earth. And surprise surprise, not a single one of the Flat Earth "truthers" has the balls to take them up on it. ------- As far the stars, I'm not talking about Polaris. I'm talking about the other one. Eric did tell you that there's TWO celestial poles right? One around Polaris, and one in the South around an empty point in the constellation Octans. It is impossible for there to be two celestial poles on a Flat plane and their excuses hold about as much water as a sieve. That's why the Flat Earthers try their damnedest to ignore them. ----------- By the way, speaking of Polaris. You people claim that the stars are about 3,000 miles high right? 3000 miles high vs 9,000 miles away is about 18 degrees still above the horizon on a flat plane. So.... how exactly does this "law of perspective" cause the stars to be dozens of degrees in the sky from where they should actually be ? If Polaris were actually "too far to be seen", you'd think that would simply become too small and too dim to see, rendering the entire sky that direction an empty black starless void, not causing constellations to be nowhere even close to their actual positions. The "Law of Perspective" is like the Force in Star Wars: Made up fantasy plot hole filler that should never be questioned.
    1
  4526. 1
  4527. 1
  4528. 1
  4529. 1
  4530. 1
  4531. 1
  4532. 1
  4533. 1
  4534. 1
  4535. 1
  4536. 1
  4537. 1
  4538. 1
  4539. 1
  4540. 1
  4541. 1
  4542. 1
  4543. 1
  4544. 1
  4545. 1
  4546. 1
  4547. 1
  4548. 1
  4549. 1
  4550. 1
  4551. 1
  4552. 1
  4553. 1
  4554. 1
  4555. 1
  4556. 1
  4557. 1
  4558. 1
  4559. 1
  4560. 1
  4561. 1
  4562. 1
  4563. 1
  4564. 1
  4565. ​ Thomas Pickering  Our dishonesty? Your #1 website Aulis is run by David percy, who has been caught cropping photographs, lying about his playback speeds, deliberately showing poor-quality photos for "analysis" and much, much more, and Mary Bennett, who makes her living scamming people and claims to have found her information using PSYCHIC POWERS, and has been caught inventing fictional" scientists" to write their articles with bogus credentials. Bart Sibrel has been repeatedly caught lying about his evidence, including editing his "faking the distance" video to remove sections of it that contained shots that cannot be performed with the trick he claims was used, because he knew that you idiots would be too stupid to check. Note both Percy and Sibrel have made tens of thousands of dollars in merchandise sales off of you idiots. Your photographic expert Jack White tried to pass off his own edits as "anomalies" and got caught. Your "scientist" Dr. Groves rigged his radiation and heat tests with levels thousands of times what would be on Apollo and using the only method of heat transfer that doesn't exist in space. The actress (at least I hope she's an actress) that played the "Australian Coke Bottle" lady forgot that her story needs to actually take place in Australia and told a big pile of bullshit about how she "stayed up late to watch the live broadcast and the bottle was gone in the morning".... despite the fact that the broadcast took place at 11 AM in her time zone, and you people still believe her. Whoops. Many of the hoax videos just blindly repeat the same claims over and over and over that were disproved twenty years ago because your "truth movement" is a giant circle jerk that doesn't give two shits about learning and doesn't care if the information they give is even true as long as you morons lap it up like a starving animal. It's this same bullshit over and over and over and over. Gee, look at that, why don't you explain why you "truth seekers" are hoaxing? Oh wait, you won't, because you don't give a shit if you lie or are lied to as long as it's not the big bad evil government.' Answer the question: when are the "truth seekers" going to admit that they're all frauds?
    1
  4566. 1
  4567. 1
  4568. 1
  4569. 1
  4570. 1
  4571. 1
  4572. 1
  4573. 1
  4574. 1
  4575. 1
  4576. 1
  4577. 1
  4578. 1
  4579. 1
  4580. 1
  4581. 1
  4582. 1
  4583. 1
  4584. 1
  4585. 1
  4586. 1
  4587. 1
  4588. 1
  4589. 1
  4590. 1
  4591. 1
  4592. 1
  4593. 1
  4594. 1
  4595. 1
  4596. 1
  4597. 1
  4598. 1
  4599. 1
  4600. 1
  4601. 1
  4602. 1
  4603. 1
  4604. 1
  4605. 1
  4606. 1
  4607. 1
  4608. 1
  4609. 1
  4610. 1
  4611. 1
  4612. 1
  4613. 1
  4614. 1
  4615. 1
  4616. 1
  4617. 1
  4618. 1
  4619. 1
  4620. 1
  4621. 1
  4622. 1
  4623. 1
  4624. 1
  4625. 1
  4626. 1
  4627. 1
  4628. 1
  4629. 1
  4630. 1
  4631. 1
  4632. 1
  4633. 1
  4634. 1
  4635. 1
  4636. 1
  4637. 1
  4638. 1
  4639. 1
  4640. 1
  4641. 1
  4642. 1
  4643. 1
  4644. 1
  4645. 1
  4646. 1
  4647. 1
  4648. 1
  4649. 1
  4650. 1
  4651. 1
  4652. 1
  4653. 1
  4654. 1
  4655. 1
  4656. 1
  4657. 1
  4658. 1
  4659. 1
  4660. 1
  4661. 1
  4662. 1
  4663. 1
  4664. 1
  4665. 1
  4666. 1
  4667. 1
  4668. 1
  4669. 1
  4670. 1
  4671. 1
  4672. 1
  4673. 1
  4674. 1
  4675. 1
  4676. 1
  4677. 1
  4678. 1
  4679. 1
  4680. 1
  4681. 1
  4682. 1
  4683. 1
  4684. 1
  4685. 1
  4686. 1
  4687. 1
  4688. 1
  4689. 1
  4690. 1
  4691. 1
  4692. 1
  4693. 1
  4694. 1
  4695. 1
  4696. 1
  4697. 1
  4698. 1
  4699. 1
  4700. 1
  4701. 1
  4702. 1
  4703. 1
  4704. 1
  4705. 1
  4706. 1
  4707. 1
  4708. 1
  4709. 1
  4710. 1
  4711. 1
  4712. 1
  4713.  @winter_equinox1492  Buddy, I know you think the "If NASA admitted they were lying you wouldn't believe it" is cool and catchy, but it's a dumb idea and I can throw it right back in your face. If the conspiracy theorists came out and admitted they were lying to drum up anti-authority sentiments and scam money out of the gullible, the majority of you wouldn't believe it either. You'd lie and claim that they were "threatened" or "Paid off" to maintain your position. I'm not referring to the tidal locking. I'm referring to the fact that we would see parallax and rotation if the moon was close. Surely you've looked at literally any nearby object and noticed that it changes appearance when you move left and right. A 3D object will show different sides. A 2D object becomes skewed, with a circle looking oval to anybody that is not directly 90 degrees perpendicular. And yet the moon doesn't do this, despite the fact that the Flat Earthers claim the moon to be at a height (most common claim is about 3,000 miles) where there would be more than 90 degrees of rotation between the capitol of England, London, and their territory in the Falkland Islands off the coast of South America, both of which are about 3500 miles from the equator. I will show my math if you want. What it does do is act like a 2D sprite in a 3D game, such as an enemy health bar, or an enemy sprite from very early video games like the original Doom, where they always point the camera no matter what angle you view it at, with every single one of the 7 billion humans on Earth seeing it pointing to them individually.. A person 5000 miles west should not see the same shape and sides of a close moon as somebody directly beneath it. You have two options: either the moon is very far away, far enough that the distance you move is inconsequential to the distance to it, in which case Flat Earth is a big fat stinking lie Or you need to get your book approved by Hogwarts because it operates on MAGIC and rules completely alien to any other object on this plane of existence.
    1
  4714. 1
  4715. 1
  4716. 1
  4717. 1
  4718. 1
  4719. 1
  4720. 1
  4721. 1
  4722. 1
  4723. 1
  4724. 1
  4725. 1
  4726. 1
  4727. 1
  4728. 1
  4729. 1
  4730. 1
  4731. 1
  4732. 1
  4733. 1
  4734. 1
  4735. 1
  4736. 1
  4737. 1
  4738. 1
  4739. 1
  4740. 1
  4741. 1
  4742. 1
  4743. 1
  4744. 1
  4745. 1
  4746. 1
  4747. 1
  4748. 1
  4749. 1
  4750. 1
  4751. 1
  4752. 1
  4753. 1
  4754. 1
  4755. 1
  4756. 1
  4757. 1
  4758. 1
  4759. 1
  4760. 1
  4761. 1
  4762. 1
  4763. 1
  4764. 1
  4765. 1
  4766. 1
  4767. 1
  4768. 1
  4769. 1
  4770. 1
  4771. 1
  4772. 1
  4773. 1
  4774. 1
  4775. 1
  4776. 1
  4777. 1
  4778. 1
  4779. 1
  4780. 1
  4781. 1
  4782. 1
  4783. 1
  4784. 1
  4785. 1
  4786. 1
  4787. 1
  4788. 1
  4789. 1
  4790. 1
  4791. 1
  4792. 1
  4793. Let me save you the trouble: Don't bother. If you are going to, pirate them. Don't give him a single cent. Bart's very well-known for being a fraud. There are critiques of his work on Youtube that are almost as old as Youtube himself, and he got caught red-handed blatantly and deliberately lying many times. That "Halfway to the distance" video of his? It's edited to skip over parts of it that disprove his story, including the astronauts very obviously moving the camera back away from the window he claims they were pretending to be against, and shots of them filming without his trick. He likes to pretend "The astronauts were afraid of me because they were confronted with the truth", then neglects to mention that was after he earned himself an arrest record for stalking and trespassing. (He's also got another criminal record for wrecking somebody's car by jumping on it because they took the spot he wanted). Oh, by the way, if he tries to push that "son of an air force base officer" story, don't listen to it. The story's obviously bs. It tries to name the mission after a phrase (Slam Dunk) that was invented AFTER the moon landings, it has blatant anachronisms and references to people that had already retired or had no business being there, and Bart forgot to check the guy's details when fabricating the date his "deathbed confession" was made on because he date he uses was a year and a half before the fire mentioned in it. We know this for a fact because the family put out a GoFundMe for it. Ooops.
    1
  4794. 1
  4795. 1
  4796. 1
  4797. 1
  4798. 1
  4799. 1
  4800. 1
  4801. 1
  4802. 1
  4803. 1
  4804. 1
  4805. 1
  4806. 1
  4807. 1
  4808. 1
  4809. 1
  4810. 1
  4811. 1
  4812. 1
  4813. 1
  4814. 1
  4815. 1
  4816. 1
  4817. 1
  4818. 1
  4819. 1
  4820. 1
  4821. 1
  4822. 1
  4823. 1
  4824. 1
  4825. 1
  4826. 1
  4827. 1
  4828. 1
  4829. 1
  4830. 1
  4831. 1
  4832. 1
  4833. 1
  4834. 1
  4835. 1
  4836. 1
  4837. 1
  4838. 1
  4839. 1
  4840. 1
  4841. ...... Trump literally started election denial in 2016 by claiming that the Iowa caucus was stolen from him, long before he became the frontrunner, and FOUR YEARS before the 2020 election. He wasn't challenging just because there was legitimate cause. He did it because he's a lying scumbag that was going to refuse the results if he lost, just like he did previous elections. The election WAS investigated. Multiple times. You refused to accept the results every time. That's why several recounts had already happened before Trump's "perfect phone call", and why Cyber Ninja, the Republican company hired by Republicans, is bankrupt after finding that Biden won better than before. If the only thing Donald Trump did was challenge the results, his associates would not be on their way to prison because they were caught on a security camera breaking into election servers and stealing data. Once again, the Republican party tries to pull a Watergate and gets caught. 2000 Mules is the one that got caught lying through their teeth, right? As I recall from their debunkings, they: - Lied about how accurate those pings are, discounted legitimate reason to be at the location or passing by, and discounted people dropping off ballots for family members - Lied about drop offs "hiding their identity" with masks and gloves and not.... say.... wearing them because they're a PLAGUE and everybody and their brother is masked and gloved. - Claimed people visited multiple locations, but gave zero evidence that they had - Lied about the fact that ballot harvesting is legal in some places, and made no effort to ascertain that people dropping off groups of ballots weren't people with legitimate reason to do so, like nursing home workers delivering ballots for the infirm. - Didn't they also get caught cropping images to try and claim that people "visited multiple times" by cropping images and reusing images from the same shot? Come on, man. The Apollo hoaxers do this garbage literally every single day. They'd have your wallet in ten minutes. There's a reason you didn't ride that ship to court - because perjury is a felony.
    1
  4842. 1
  4843. 1
  4844. 1
  4845. 1
  4846. 1
  4847. 1
  4848. 1
  4849. 1
  4850. 1
  4851. 1
  4852. 1
  4853. 1
  4854. 1
  4855. 1
  4856. 1
  4857. 1
  4858. 1
  4859. 1
  4860. 1
  4861. 1
  4862. 1
  4863. 1
  4864. 1
  4865. 1
  4866. 1
  4867. 1
  4868. 1
  4869. 1
  4870. 1
  4871. 1
  4872. 1
  4873. 1
  4874. 1
  4875. 1
  4876. 1
  4877. 1
  4878. 1
  4879. 1
  4880. 1
  4881. 1
  4882. 1
  4883. 1
  4884. 1
  4885. 1
  4886. 1
  4887. 1
  4888. 1
  4889. 1
  4890. 1
  4891. 1
  4892. 1
  4893. 1
  4894. 1
  4895. 1
  4896.  @beaman444  The farther away an object is, the less it changes as you move. A mountain 10-15 miles away isn't going to change a whole lot if you move a few hundred feet. Overlapping the pictures (as opposed to simply showing them side-by-side) shows they're not exact, by the way. I grew up with a mountain looming out my bedroom window. It looked the same from basically everywhere in the neighborhood. ---------------- The "problem they still have to solve" isn't radiation poisoning. it's damage to the ELECTRONICS that run this ship (which is explicitly mentioned in the video). Modern computers are weaker to radiation; it's one of the side effects of circuit miniaturization, and this gets worse the smaller and more compact your components get. The hoaxers really, really don't like it when you point this out. It doesn't matter if your astronauts get sick or not if the ship crashes because stuff stopped working. Also, that video was a hype video to promote their upcoming test a month or so later. It's most likely exaggerating a bit to make their shit seem more important to people that are likely not well-versed. That was several years ago. The test already happened almost a decade ago. Just as a correction, the astronauts wouldn't have traveled through the belts in the LEM. With the possible exception of Apollo 13's return trip, they would have been in the Command Module, which is much thicker. Incidentally, Jack Swigert of Apollo 13 died of nose cancer that spread to his marrow a few years later. ---------- Oh and by the way, anybody that claims they would need to have lead shielding is lying. Straight up lying, don't bother listening to them. The Belts are beta radiation, which requires low-density materials such as aluminum, plastic, and acrylic glass because it creates secondary radiation when it hits heavy metals - meaning using lead shielding is suicidal. This process is called bremsstrahlung if you want to look it up, and same process is how your dentist creates their x-rays to begin with. An x-ray machine creates its x-rays by accelerating loose electrons at a piece of metal.
    1
  4897. 1
  4898. 1
  4899. 1
  4900. 1
  4901. 1
  4902. 1
  4903. 1
  4904. 1
  4905. 1
  4906. 1
  4907. 1
  4908. 1
  4909. 1
  4910. 1
  4911. 1
  4912. 1
  4913. 1
  4914. 1
  4915. 1
  4916. 1
  4917. 1
  4918. 1
  4919. 1
  4920. 1
  4921. 1
  4922. 1
  4923. 1
  4924. 1
  4925. 1
  4926. 1
  4927. 1
  4928. 1
  4929. 1
  4930. 1
  4931. 1
  4932. 1
  4933. 1
  4934. 1
  4935. 1
  4936. 1
  4937. 1
  4938. 1
  4939. 1
  4940. 1
  4941. 1
  4942. 1
  4943. 1
  4944. 1
  4945. 1
  4946. 1
  4947. 1
  4948. 1
  4949. 1
  4950. 1
  4951. 1
  4952. 1
  4953. 1
  4954. 1
  4955. 1
  4956. 1
  4957. 1
  4958. 1
  4959. 1
  4960. 1
  4961. 1
  4962. 1
  4963. 1
  4964. 1
  4965. 1
  4966. 1
  4967. 1
  4968. 1
  4969. 1
  4970. 1
  4971. 1
  4972. 1
  4973. 1
  4974. 1
  4975. 1
  4976. 1
  4977. 1
  4978. 1
  4979. 1
  4980. 1
  4981. 1
  4982. 1
  4983. 1
  4984. 1
  4985. 1
  4986. 1
  4987. 1
  4988. 1
  4989. 1
  4990. 1
  4991. 1
  4992. 1
  4993. 1
  4994. 1
  4995. 1
  4996. 1
  4997. 1
  4998. 1
  4999. 1
  5000. 1
  5001. 1
  5002. 1
  5003. 1
  5004. 1
  5005. 1
  5006. 1
  5007. 1
  5008. 1
  5009. 1
  5010. 1
  5011. 1
  5012. 1
  5013. 1
  5014. 1
  5015. 1
  5016. 1
  5017. 1
  5018. 1
  5019. 1
  5020. 1
  5021. 1
  5022. 1
  5023. 1
  5024. 1
  5025. 1
  5026. 1
  5027. 1
  5028. 1
  5029. 1
  5030. 1
  5031. 1
  5032. 1
  5033. 1
  5034. 1
  5035. 1
  5036. 1
  5037. 1
  5038. 1
  5039. 1
  5040. 1
  5041. 1
  5042. 1
  5043. 1
  5044. 1
  5045. 1
  5046. 1
  5047. 1
  5048. 1
  5049. 1
  5050. 1
  5051. 1
  5052. 1
  5053. 1
  5054. 1
  5055. 1
  5056. 1
  5057. 1
  5058. 1
  5059. 1
  5060. 1
  5061. 1
  5062. 1
  5063. 1
  5064. 1
  5065. 1
  5066. 1
  5067. 1
  5068. 1
  5069. 1
  5070. 1
  5071. 1
  5072. 1
  5073. 1