Convincing Arguments for a Moon Hoax? Sleuths?

"Mad Scientist" wrote in message
. cable.rogers.com...
|
| Where is the scientific knowledge from the Moon landings which
| would justify risking lives, and spending billions.

What have you done to look for it?

It is statistically more dangerous to be a crab fisherman than to be an
astronaut. Where is the evidence that eating crab meat justifies the risk
of life?

--
|
The universe is not required to conform | Jay Windley
to the expectations of the ignorant. | webmaster @ clavius.org

"Mad Scientist" wrote in message
. cable.rogers.com...
Those aren't answers, those are deflection tactics. Where is the
scientific knowledge from the Moon landings which would justify risking
lives, and spending billions.

Paul gave you answers. It's only *you* that thinks you never got an
answer.
By the way, do as Paul suggests.

What are you afraid of?





Mac wrote:

On Wed, 25 Aug 2004 21:39:43 GMT, Paul Lawler
wrote:

MAD SCIENTIST, ignoring what has already been posted, then declared
the following:

Meanwhile what justified the billions of dollars spent in going to the
Moon in the first place? No one has yet answered it other than to say
that it was politics? Absurd.

***************************
Several of the people here have already pointed out, several times,
the investment returns on the space program and the Moon effort.
Before you post what you have just done so, again, please take the
time and do your own research.
Either scroll through a couple of the threads or, better yet, contact
NASA and ask for the booklets on "Spin-Offs".
As you are apparently using ROGERS Cable, you might telephone your
local Congressional Critter and ask that person to kindly contact NASA
and ask for just the first one hundred benefits which have more than
justified the Billions of dollars invested.
Finally, if you visit your local library and speak with the Reference
Librarian, that person can quickly refer you to several sources which
will amply reward your own effort...

FINALLY, there has been no convincing arguments for a Moon Hoax.
None.
There have been a lot of half-baked twaddle put out by those with a
very vested interest in selling their books and earning speaking fees.
---Mac

On Thu, 26 Aug 2004 02:35:43 GMT, Mad Scientist
wrote:

Mac wrote:

On Wed, 25 Aug 2004 21:39:43 GMT, Paul Lawler
wrote:

MAD SCIENTIST, ignoring what has already been posted, then declared
the following:

Meanwhile what justified the billions of dollars spent in
going to the Moon in the first place? No one has yet answered it other
than to say that it was politics? Absurd.
***************************
Several of the people here have already pointed out, several times,
the investment returns on the space program and the Moon effort.
Before you post what you have just done so, again, please take the
time and do your own research.
Either scroll through a couple of the threads or, better yet, contact
NASA and ask for the booklets on "Spin-Offs".
As you are apparently using ROGERS Cable, you might telephone your
local Congressional Critter and ask that person to kindly contact NASA
and ask for just the first one hundred benefits which have more than
justified the Billions of dollars invested.
Finally, if you visit your local library and speak with the Reference
Librarian, that person can quickly refer you to several sources which
will amply reward your own effort...
FINALLY, there has been no convincing arguments for a Moon Hoax.
None.
There have been a lot of half-baked twaddle put out by those with a
very vested interest in selling their books and earning speaking fees.
---Mac
**********************
MAD SCIENTIST Declared:
Those aren't answers, those are deflection tactics. Where is the
scientific knowledge from the Moon landings which would justify risking
lives, and spending billions.
*****************************
Those were answers.
Answers given in such a way as to help your self-esteem by permitting
you to do your own work, your own research, to discover the
information for yourself so you would have the skills to continue
doing such.
Rather than spoon-feed you some answers I gave you several paths to
travel to obtain answers for yourself --- I gave you specific
sources.
I am not surprised that you refused to avail yourself of such and
chose to desperately declare your response.
I am so sorry that you wish to indulge yourself in such a fashion.
Just a couple of the results of the scientific knowledge that came
about would be:
(a.) watch your local weather report...
(b.) read the testimony that a Mr. Robert A. Heinlein gave before a
Congressional hearing.
FINALLY, instead of indulging yourself as you have, why don't you make
an effort and try contacting one of your Congressional critters and
ask that person for even just one of the books NASA has regarding some
of the "spin-offs"??
---Mac

Your deflection tactics proved nothing. I am still waiting for the
evidence which you have not shown.

Mac wrote:

On Thu, 26 Aug 2004 02:35:43 GMT, Mad Scientist
wrote:


Mac wrote:

On Wed, 25 Aug 2004 21:39:43 GMT, Paul Lawler
wrote:

MAD SCIENTIST, ignoring what has already been posted, then declared
the following:

Meanwhile what justified the billions of dollars spent in
going to the Moon in the first place? No one has yet answered it other
than to say that it was politics? Absurd.

***************************

Several of the people here have already pointed out, several times,
the investment returns on the space program and the Moon effort.
Before you post what you have just done so, again, please take the
time and do your own research.
Either scroll through a couple of the threads or, better yet, contact
NASA and ask for the booklets on "Spin-Offs".
As you are apparently using ROGERS Cable, you might telephone your
local Congressional Critter and ask that person to kindly contact NASA
and ask for just the first one hundred benefits which have more than
justified the Billions of dollars invested.
Finally, if you visit your local library and speak with the Reference
Librarian, that person can quickly refer you to several sources which
will amply reward your own effort...
FINALLY, there has been no convincing arguments for a Moon Hoax.
None.
There have been a lot of half-baked twaddle put out by those with a
very vested interest in selling their books and earning speaking fees.
---Mac

**********************
MAD SCIENTIST Declared:

Those aren't answers, those are deflection tactics. Where is the
scientific knowledge from the Moon landings which would justify risking
lives, and spending billions.

*****************************
Those were answers.
Answers given in such a way as to help your self-esteem by permitting
you to do your own work, your own research, to discover the
information for yourself so you would have the skills to continue
doing such.
Rather than spoon-feed you some answers I gave you several paths to
travel to obtain answers for yourself --- I gave you specific
sources.
I am not surprised that you refused to avail yourself of such and
chose to desperately declare your response.
I am so sorry that you wish to indulge yourself in such a fashion.
Just a couple of the results of the scientific knowledge that came
about would be:
(a.) watch your local weather report...
(b.) read the testimony that a Mr. Robert A. Heinlein gave before a
Congressional hearing.
FINALLY, instead of indulging yourself as you have, why don't you make
an effort and try contacting one of your Congressional critters and
ask that person for even just one of the books NASA has regarding some
of the "spin-offs"??
---Mac

Mad Scientist wrote in
able.rogers.com:



Paul Lawler wrote:

Mad Scientist wrote in
news39Xc.25379$UTP.13641 @twister01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com:


What threads would those be? Provide evidence. And you may as well
call me a liar, when you have already proven that you lie and
deceive.


Okay... you're a liar. Happy now?

Oh and while your at it giving other possible explanations for how the
stones, and mummy came to be at the top of mountain peaks - please
explain how the Nazca lines came to be laid out across valleys, and
mountains' and don't forget to explain why massive faults exist
between them, and how come some of the lines run right to the edge of
immense cliff facing. My explanation accounts for the entire mystery
across the
Andes, and which suggests that the Nazca lines were originally laid
out on a perfectly flat plain, but when the massive upheavals took
place, the whole area was heaved up, unevenly...which is why now the
ancient monuments are scattered 'half way up mountains', while some
remains are found on the higher peaks of mountains - like the mummy
with no corresponding structures present. It also accounts in one
full sweep, why many large blocks of stone are found all over the
place. It also accounts for why remains of the Tiahuanco city is
found 2000 feet below, and underwater in the lake known as Titicaca.

Okay... you're a liar. Happy now?

"Mad Scientist" wrote in message
. cable.rogers.com...
Your deflection tactics proved nothing. I am still waiting for the
evidence which you have not shown.

Note the above, then note this, posted at almost the same time:
"Go look for the evidence there Mac; it can easily be found if you search
long enough if it is so important to you. I will not waste my time."

See the split personality Mad "Scientist" has?




Mac wrote:

On Thu, 26 Aug 2004 02:35:43 GMT, Mad Scientist
wrote:


Mac wrote:

On Wed, 25 Aug 2004 21:39:43 GMT, Paul Lawler
wrote:

MAD SCIENTIST, ignoring what has already been posted, then declared
the following:

Meanwhile what justified the billions of dollars spent in going to the
Moon in the first place? No one has yet answered it other than to say
that it was politics? Absurd.

***************************

Several of the people here have already pointed out, several times,
the investment returns on the space program and the Moon effort.
Before you post what you have just done so, again, please take the
time and do your own research.
Either scroll through a couple of the threads or, better yet, contact
NASA and ask for the booklets on "Spin-Offs".
As you are apparently using ROGERS Cable, you might telephone your
local Congressional Critter and ask that person to kindly contact NASA
and ask for just the first one hundred benefits which have more than
justified the Billions of dollars invested.
Finally, if you visit your local library and speak with the Reference
Librarian, that person can quickly refer you to several sources which
will amply reward your own effort...
FINALLY, there has been no convincing arguments for a Moon Hoax.
None.
There have been a lot of half-baked twaddle put out by those with a
very vested interest in selling their books and earning speaking fees.
---Mac

**********************
MAD SCIENTIST Declared:

Those aren't answers, those are deflection tactics. Where is the
scientific knowledge from the Moon landings which would justify risking
lives, and spending billions.

*****************************
Those were answers.
Answers given in such a way as to help your self-esteem by permitting
you to do your own work, your own research, to discover the
information for yourself so you would have the skills to continue
doing such.
Rather than spoon-feed you some answers I gave you several paths to
travel to obtain answers for yourself --- I gave you specific
sources.
I am not surprised that you refused to avail yourself of such and
chose to desperately declare your response.
I am so sorry that you wish to indulge yourself in such a fashion.
Just a couple of the results of the scientific knowledge that came
about would be:
(a.) watch your local weather report...
(b.) read the testimony that a Mr. Robert A. Heinlein gave before a
Congressional hearing.
FINALLY, instead of indulging yourself as you have, why don't you make
an effort and try contacting one of your Congressional critters and
ask that person for even just one of the books NASA has regarding some
of the "spin-offs"??
---Mac

At least you aren't being deceptive and hiding your true colors. Happy
that you insult me, hardly..that would make me no different than you
sociopaths.

Paul Lawler wrote:

Mad Scientist wrote in
able.rogers.com:



Paul Lawler wrote:


Mad Scientist wrote in
news39Xc.25379$UTP.13641 @twister01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com:



What threads would those be? Provide evidence. And you may as well
call me a liar, when you have already proven that you lie and
deceive.


Okay... you're a liar. Happy now?

Oh and while your at it giving other possible explanations for how the
stones, and mummy came to be at the top of mountain peaks - please
explain how the Nazca lines came to be laid out across valleys, and
mountains' and don't forget to explain why massive faults exist
between them, and how come some of the lines run right to the edge of
immense cliff facing. My explanation accounts for the entire mystery
across the
Andes, and which suggests that the Nazca lines were originally laid
out on a perfectly flat plain, but when the massive upheavals took
place, the whole area was heaved up, unevenly...which is why now the
ancient monuments are scattered 'half way up mountains', while some
remains are found on the higher peaks of mountains - like the mummy
with no corresponding structures present. It also accounts in one
full sweep, why many large blocks of stone are found all over the
place. It also accounts for why remains of the Tiahuanco city is
found 2000 feet below, and underwater in the lake known as Titicaca.


Okay... you're a liar. Happy now?

"Mad Scientist" wrote in message
. cable.rogers.com...
At least you aren't being deceptive and hiding your true colors. Happy
that you insult me, hardly..that would make me no different than you
sociopaths.


Calling you a liar isn't an insult, it's a demonstrated fact.
Live with it kookboi.
Dance some more for us.




Paul Lawler wrote:

Mad Scientist wrote in
able.rogers.com:

Paul Lawler wrote:


Mad Scientist wrote in
news39Xc.25379$UTP.13641 @twister01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com:



What threads would those be? Provide evidence. And you may as well
call me a liar, when you have already proven that you lie and
deceive.


Okay... you're a liar. Happy now?

Oh and while your at it giving other possible explanations for how the
stones, and mummy came to be at the top of mountain peaks - please
explain how the Nazca lines came to be laid out across valleys, and
mountains' and don't forget to explain why massive faults exist
between them, and how come some of the lines run right to the edge of
immense cliff facing. My explanation accounts for the entire mystery
across the Andes, and which suggests that the Nazca lines were originally
laid out on a perfectly flat plain, but when the massive upheavals took
place, the whole area was heaved up, unevenly...which is why now the
ancient monuments are scattered 'half way up mountains', while some
remains are found on the higher peaks of mountains - like the mummy
with no corresponding structures present. It also accounts in one
full sweep, why many large blocks of stone are found all over the
place. It also accounts for why remains of the Tiahuanco city is
found 2000 feet below, and underwater in the lake known as Titicaca.


Okay... you're a liar. Happy now?

You have got to be the single most arrogant fraud lurking on
alt.astronomy we have ever witnessed. You wouldn't understand astronomy
even if the Hubble telescope fell on your head.

Wally Anglesea wrote:

"Mad Scientist" wrote in message
. cable.rogers.com...

At least you aren't being deceptive and hiding your true colors. Happy
that you insult me, hardly..that would make me no different than you
sociopaths.



Calling you a liar isn't an insult, it's a demonstrated fact.
Live with it kookboi.
Dance some more for us.




Paul Lawler wrote:


Mad Scientist wrote in
t.cable.rogers.com:

Paul Lawler wrote:



Mad Scientist wrote in
news39Xc.25379$UTP.13641 @twister01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com:




What threads would those be? Provide evidence. And you may as well
call me a liar, when you have already proven that you lie and
deceive.


Okay... you're a liar. Happy now?

Oh and while your at it giving other possible explanations for how the
stones, and mummy came to be at the top of mountain peaks - please
explain how the Nazca lines came to be laid out across valleys, and
mountains' and don't forget to explain why massive faults exist
between them, and how come some of the lines run right to the edge of
immense cliff facing. My explanation accounts for the entire mystery
across the Andes, and which suggests that the Nazca lines were originally
laid out on a perfectly flat plain, but when the massive upheavals took
place, the whole area was heaved up, unevenly...which is why now the
ancient monuments are scattered 'half way up mountains', while some
remains are found on the higher peaks of mountains - like the mummy
with no corresponding structures present. It also accounts in one
full sweep, why many large blocks of stone are found all over the
place. It also accounts for why remains of the Tiahuanco city is
found 2000 feet below, and underwater in the lake known as Titicaca.


Okay... you're a liar. Happy now?

There is a big difference between Hollywood and the likes of you and
your lot. Hollywood is entertainment, it doesn't claim that ET and Star
Wars actually happened.


Another illusion shattered =0(