Comments by "TheOneWith TheEyeOfTruth" (@theonewiththeeyeoftruth884) on "AT&T Tech Channel" channel.

  1. It's a phone call transmitted by radio waves. What's supposed to convince anyone of any lies?
    33
  2. darrell glover No one said the call used a land line all the way to the moon. It was communicated by radio.
    25
  3. Bryson darrell It's called radio , kids. They used radio transmissions to send signals to the moon. Fuck sake! Kids!
    17
  4. Vincent You're right. The hoax theory doesn't hold up. People can see right through it.
    10
  5. Sanctum The signal takes about 1.3 seconds to go one way. Radio signals move at the speed of light. The speed of light is 180,000 miles per second . The moon is 240,000 miles away. Do the math.
    8
  6. John Sergei WTF are you talking about? Radio !! It sends information by radio waves, wirelessly. The phone was connected to a radio. Who cares if the handset was connected by a wire? Police radios have a microphone connected by a wire to the radio unit. The radio unit communicates to other radio units wirelessly. What is so hard to understand? Are you just kidding around?
    7
  7.  @only4posting  What do you mean "there barely are like 0.1 seconds of lag"? It's a one-way speech, with a couple of astronaut voices that could be delayed any amount of time. "little they knew there would be something called 'internet'." Yes, where shitty hoax evidence runs rampant and any clown can have a voice now. Keep using that internet to further bolster the historical fact of the real landings.
    7
  8. vagrant You're embarrassed you didn't know about radio communication.
    7
  9. Radio, same as when Houston talks to them.
    6
  10. Are you?
    5
  11. FUTURE Phone audio is sent by radio transmission, you goof. It's not a phone line going up there, WTF!
    4
  12. kleintjuhD It's just a speech from the president. A delay doesn't apply. It was there and it didn't matter.
    4
  13. Since the first wireless TV remote control came in 1955, NO, we had wireless TV remote control before they went to the moon.
    4
  14. @Liberal Insanity I know. It was 1898, I believe. I'm sure these children on here think technology itself wasn't invented yet in the 1960s.
    4
  15. Allan Bacon Because the signal is physically blocked, by trees, mountains, etc. That was not the case when sending the transmissions through space.
    3
  16.  @JLDJR  1.3-second delay 240,000 miles away. And those of you with "scrambly TVs" or losing reception in the mall, please move out of the sticks and/or stop buying cheap crap.
    2
  17. vagrant Yep, everyone understood that they used radio waves. You're not getting out of your embarrassing "landline" fallacy, no matter what you say.
    2
  18. vagrant It's a "call from the president", idiot. You're embarrassed you didn't know about the existence of radio .
    2
  19. vagrant Yep, radio, as I said the whole time. I'm glad I could teach you about it.
    2
  20. Michael Kofph Thanks. It's good to see other rational, intelligent people around here. What these clowns are going to do about it, is tuck tail and run like cowards. After the dust settles, they will resurface somewhere else to repeat their unfounded nonsense. harooni leaves out the fact that no one said the original tapes are lost / taped over. It was backup copies.
    2
  21. Dennis It's a radio transmission, kid. Use your head.
    2
  22. Tens of DU No, it's because those who believe there is a hoax followed bad evidence; which all of it is. It shows they don't have a basic understanding of physics, but they sound off like assholes about it anyway. That's why we're smarter than they are.
    2
  23. Juan He punched a pest for relentlessly harassing him. You think saying "You're a coward, a liar, and a th-OOF!-ief" is just asking him if he really did the landing?
    2
  24. vagrant You still troll with no evidence. Your embarrassment of not knowing this was a radio transmission is something you clearly can't recover from.
    2
  25.  @iamf6641  Dark side of the lander. There's no one on the dark side of the moon. But there were not any studio lights involved in any of the Apollo photos.
    2
  26. Gilbert NASA doesn't use cheap garbage like you do, and they know what they're doing.
    1
  27. seal1 Because they still can't question the first one.
    1
  28. John Sergei You lost a long time ago.
    1
  29. You guys with your guesses of fakery, so pathetic.
    1
  30. TheTopMostDog I think these guys are mocking the idea of a landline itself calling all the way to the moon, as if that's how the Nixon call to the astronauts was done.
    1
  31. TheTopMostDog I know they're dead serious. They're seriously saying it's supposed to be a land line to the moon, and they're knocking that idea down, as if that's challenging the moon landings somehow.
    1
  32. Corey Apparently, some people have never heard of radio.
    1
  33. Dennis They used radio , kid. What, you never heard of radio?
    1
  34. Leaked Stuff Yeah, because hoax theorists being wrong about no stars , wrong about wrong shadow directions , wrong about cross hairs behind objects , wrong about artificial light on the shadowed side of the lander , wrong about etc. etc. etc. , that really challenged the moon landings! All that wrong stuff really made a case against their authenticity!
    1
  35. Evil Vhs No one believes Nixon phones the moon on a land line. It's called radio . So your attempt to turn the tables on Oddball's "no sense arguing" point is completely worthless.
    1
  36. Chinco He didn't call with a landline phone. It was radio .
    1
  37. harooni So who recently died past 1000 miles out?
    1
  38. Lance They just dismantled the rockets, needed to take a payload including a manned spacecraft to Earth's escape velocity . What were they going to do, leave them assembled on the launch pad to collect dust?
    1
  39. No one has anything on the missions or this radio communication being faked. There was no fakery.
    1
  40. Kyung Yep, still have it now.
    1
  41. John le Bon You mean 5% of the population? Those are the only sane ones? You have no evidence. The real landings have plenty.
    1
  42. needmoreramsay They just used radio , you clown. Ever heard of radio ?
    1
  43. dave What was the comment? He could start speaking earlier.
    1
  44. harooni Yeah, at this point, after all those hoax gems like no stars , wrong shadow directions were completely incorrect hoax proofs. After so many bullshit proofs of a hoax, how could you not think it was a hoax? Pfft.
    1
  45. jneroo Nothing you say is correct. There are no obstructions to radio communications in space.
    1
  46.  @boomshanka4667  It's not belief. It's purely the evidence.
    1
  47.  @boomshanka4667  Oh, yes, everything is fake, everywhere. We're not even here at all, actually. Thanks for the amazing revelation.
    1
  48.  @toniwilliams5277  What planet and what decade are you from? My cell phone connection is always awesome. Stop buying junk. NASA didn't use junk, plus there is nothing in space vacuum to block radio signals.
    1
  49.  Shorty  It's more like 45, and that has nothing to do with anything.
    1
  50.  @mrtaylor5042  It's 1.3 seconds delay to the moon, and much less than that to the ISS.
    1
  51.  @iamf6641  1.3 second delay, and yes the president was holding a phone. So what? The transmissions used radio waves.
    1
  52.  @iamf6641  Yes, radio waves, which is what they used to transmit communications to the moon. That's what I said. What part of that are you not understanding? The delay is not missing, kid.
    1
  53.  @iamf6641  23 is a kid. The landings were real. The transmission was via radio waves, and the delay is there. There is nothing you can say about anything.
    1
  54.  @iamf6641  Still live with your parents? Most likely. Who do you support? What advanced career do you have? How strong are you, physically? Only 23-year-olds think 23 is not a kid. You don't have the adult perspective yet to know the difference. Anyway, you don't have any case about the radio communication.
    1
  55.  @iamf6641  Whatever you can make up. Tell me you make a bajillion dollars, and you get to buy candy with it every weekend. Yeah, you're an IT graduate who gets voice communication concepts wrong, doesn't know reality from what's fake, and can't form a sentence. That's not what you get from post-secondary education. You're full of shit.
    1
  56.  @iamf6641  Me too. I'm glad we can agree on that. What do you actually believed happened? No president call? What?
    1
  57.  @iamf6641  What the president said was scripted? The whole series of missions was scripted? What?
    1
  58.  @iamf6641  In 1/6th gravity and vacuum for hours at a time over a large area? The astronauts are lightweight over their entire bodies. It can't be faked.
    1
  59.  @iamf6641  You can't explain how. Also, why are all the hoax arguments wrong? Arguments such as: no stars wrong shadow directions astronauts should be pitch black on the shadowed side of the lander rockets don't work in vacuum etc. If it's a hoax, then why were all those arguments (and others) completely wrong?
    1
  60.  @iamf6641  Who said what is the dark side of the moon. No source, no citation. Your quotes are the worst ever. I'm talking about the side of the lander away from the sun; the side of the lander that's not directly lit by the sun. It's still lit indirectly by sunlight bouncing off the moon's surface. So the hoaxer argument that it should be pitch black on the dark side of the lander (of the LANDER, of the LANDER, not dark side of the MOON) is BOGUS! "daekside of the moon" "they even said its the dark side of the moon" Can't you follow along in one single thought from start to finish? Were you able to follow that, without quoting something else that no one ever said? There is no hoax, because there are no valid hoax arguments. That's it.
    1
  61.  @iamf6641  Yeah, you know how you can actually see the moon's surface? You see it because sunlight bounces off it. How do you think we see things? (We see light from it.) Therefore, there is light bouncing "from thee moosns suface lmao", as you so eloquently stated. So what's funny?
    1
  62.  @iamf6641  Yeah, it's always vague from you. It's because you can't respond to anything I've said.
    1
  63.  @iamf6641  You have nothing. I guess you don't think it's a hoax after all.
    1
  64.  @iamf6641  You're! As in you're no IT graduate. And no, only an explanation why all hoax evidence is wrong, or one valid piece of evidence from you, would shut me up. But you'll never have either.
    1
  65.  @iamf6641  Go ahead, little kid.
    1
  66.  @iamf6641  Yeah, I know, but was there going to be any evidence from you? Something to back up your claims, other than you just getting communication times wrong, and everything else wrong? Do you have something that's correct? Or were you just kidding about doubting the moon landings?
    1
  67.  @iamf6641  Just a little evidence. The littlest easiest one.
    1
  68.  @iamf6641  I only ask because I know there isn't any.
    1
  69.  @iamf6641  Or you could be a man and commit some evidence for scrutiny, without all the really bad excuses. Are you telling me there was nothing behind your repeated posts all the way up this thread? You have the time to post all that, but no time for the slightest evidence? That's telling me there is nothing you've got.
    1
  70.  @iamf6641  No, don't believe what they say. Follow the evidence. The evidence indicates (only) that they were real. That's just another excuse (believe NASA). I don't care what NASA says. The evidence, which also comes from sources outside NASA, says they're real. You were the sheep who saw one YouTube video, and echoed what some guy on the video told you.
    1
  71.  @iamf6641  You don't have anything else.
    1
  72.  @iamf6641  Oh, mom jokes, what a little kid thing to do. Thanks for making my point. What you will tell me, huh? I lost count of how many times I've said this, but GO AHEAD ! (FFS)
    1
  73.  @iamf6641  I guess that's what you were talking about telling me. Thanks.
    1
  74.  @zapbranigan5099  Excuse me. I was talking to the 23-year-old kid.
    1
  75. It's all real. You not understanding something because you lack the education or the information does not indicate any problem with the moon program.
    1