|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#61
|
|||
|
|||
Hagar still willingly bending over to let NASA do it to him
On Wed, 13 Dec 2017 21:07:26 -0500, "Bast"
wrote: Sarah Ehrett wrote: On Wed, 13 Dec 2017 09:27:14 -0500, "Bast" wrote: Sarah Ehrett wrote: On Tue, 12 Dec 2017 20:02:46 -0500, "Bast" wrote: Sarah Ehrett wrote: On Tue, 12 Dec 2017 06:47:47 -0500, "Bast" wrote: Sarah Ehrett wrote: So you Are still waiting for you to refute the evidence of radio intercepts being logged to and from the surface of the moon. Six times. Six missions landed on the moon, Bastie. So your story still goes. Still waiting for you to refute the evidence of radio intercepts being logged to and from the surface of the moon. Six times. Six missions landed on the moon, Bastie. But no actual proof. I provided proof, Bastie. It is not my fault you are too stupid to find it in the thread and read it. Still waiting for you to refute the evidence of radio intercepts being logged to and from the surface of the moon. Six times. Six missions landed on the moon, Bastie. You only provided a vague referrence to something that only you, would consider "proof" Keep lying, Bastie. These are still in the thread. Message-ID: Message-ID: You convinnced no one, that Apollo and NASA was/is not a massive money sucking lie. I don't need to convince anyone of the truth. There are thousands of verifiable and scientific proof on the web. You're simply to stupid to find them and too dumb to understand what they say. Not my problem. Now my proof again. Still waiting for you to refute the evidence of radio intercepts being logged to and from the surface of the moon. Six times. Six missions landed on the moon, Bastie. Ya right,.... Still waiting for you to refute the evidence of radio intercepts being logged to and from the surface of the moon. Six times. Six missions landed on the moon, Bastie. and it's just as plausible that I went to the planet Mars for my Christmas vacation last year. I doubt anyone reading this on alt.astronomy would question that you're not a space cadet. Urban Dictionary: space cadet https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=space some one who acts like they are on another planet or plane of existence. either they are incredibly stupid or are on drugs or most likely a combination a person perceived as out of touch with reality. |
#62
|
|||
|
|||
Hagar still willingly bending over to let NASA do it to him
Sarah Ehrett wrote: On Wed, 13 Dec 2017 21:07:26 -0500, "Bast" wrote: Sarah Ehrett wrote: On Wed, 13 Dec 2017 09:27:14 -0500, "Bast" wrote: Sarah Ehrett wrote: On Tue, 12 Dec 2017 20:02:46 -0500, "Bast" wrote: Sarah Ehrett wrote: On Tue, 12 Dec 2017 06:47:47 -0500, "Bast" wrote: Sarah Ehrett wrote: So you Are still waiting for you to refute the evidence of radio intercepts being logged to and from the surface of the moon. Six times. Six missions landed on the moon, Bastie. So your story still goes. Still waiting for you to refute the evidence of radio intercepts being logged to and from the surface of the moon. Six times. Six missions landed on the moon, Bastie. But no actual proof. I provided proof, Bastie. It is not my fault you are too stupid to find it in the thread and read it. Still waiting for you to refute the evidence of radio intercepts being logged to and from the surface of the moon. Six times. Six missions landed on the moon, Bastie. You only provided a vague referrence to something that only you, would consider "proof" Keep lying, Bastie. These are still in the thread. Message-ID: Message-ID: You convinnced no one, that Apollo and NASA was/is not a massive money sucking lie. I don't need to convince anyone of the truth. There are thousands of verifiable and scientific proof on the web. You're simply to stupid to find them and too dumb to understand what they say. Not my problem. Now my proof again. Still waiting for you to refute the evidence of radio intercepts being logged to and from the surface of the moon. Six times. Six missions landed on the moon, Bastie. Ya right,.... Still waiting for you to refute the evidence of radio intercepts being logged to and from the surface of the moon. Six times. Six missions landed on the moon, Bastie. and it's just as plausible that I went to the planet Mars for my Christmas vacation last year. I doubt anyone reading this on alt.astronomy would question that you're not a space cadet. Urban Dictionary: space cadet https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=space some one who acts like they are on another planet or plane of existence. either they are incredibly stupid or are on drugs or most likely a combination a person perceived as out of touch with reality. My reality exists. There are links on the web to it. You can only resort to insults, deleting my posts, and making your own unverifiable vague references. No wonder why the world perceives that you are hagar with a sock-puppet account. Now,..... my proof again. "A funny thing happened on the way to the moon" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xciCJfbTvE4 NASA LIED ABOUT APOLLO, and likely a lot more. |
#63
|
|||
|
|||
Hagar still willingly bending over to let NASA do it to him
On Wednesday, December 13, 2017 at 8:54:46 PM UTC-8, Bast wrote:
Sarah Ehrett wrote: On Wed, 13 Dec 2017 21:07:26 -0500, "Bast" wrote: Sarah Ehrett wrote: On Wed, 13 Dec 2017 09:27:14 -0500, "Bast" wrote: Sarah Ehrett wrote: On Tue, 12 Dec 2017 20:02:46 -0500, "Bast" wrote: Sarah Ehrett wrote: On Tue, 12 Dec 2017 06:47:47 -0500, "Bast" wrote: Sarah Ehrett wrote: So you Are still waiting for you to refute the evidence of radio intercepts being logged to and from the surface of the moon. Six times. Six missions landed on the moon, Bastie. So your story still goes. Still waiting for you to refute the evidence of radio intercepts being logged to and from the surface of the moon. Six times. Six missions landed on the moon, Bastie. But no actual proof. I provided proof, Bastie. It is not my fault you are too stupid to find it in the thread and read it. Still waiting for you to refute the evidence of radio intercepts being logged to and from the surface of the moon. Six times. Six missions landed on the moon, Bastie. You only provided a vague referrence to something that only you, would consider "proof" Keep lying, Bastie. These are still in the thread. Message-ID: Message-ID: You convinnced no one, that Apollo and NASA was/is not a massive money sucking lie. I don't need to convince anyone of the truth. There are thousands of verifiable and scientific proof on the web. You're simply to stupid to find them and too dumb to understand what they say. Not my problem. Now my proof again. Still waiting for you to refute the evidence of radio intercepts being logged to and from the surface of the moon. Six times. Six missions landed on the moon, Bastie. Ya right,.... Still waiting for you to refute the evidence of radio intercepts being logged to and from the surface of the moon. Six times. Six missions landed on the moon, Bastie. and it's just as plausible that I went to the planet Mars for my Christmas vacation last year. I doubt anyone reading this on alt.astronomy would question that you're not a space cadet. Urban Dictionary: space cadet https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=space some one who acts like they are on another planet or plane of existence. either they are incredibly stupid or are on drugs or most likely a combination a person perceived as out of touch with reality. My reality exists. There are links on the web to it. You can only resort to insults, deleting my posts, and making your own unverifiable vague references. No wonder why the world perceives that you are hagar with a sock-puppet account. Now,..... my proof again. "A funny thing happened on the way to the moon" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xciCJfbTvE4 NASA LIED ABOUT APOLLO, and likely a lot more. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fMrB857Oaxw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mYA_g2AJ0fc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RKkpfYUhkig https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y5XkLa9RYNk&t=4s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=401AXoN0mQE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79p2kzeN0tQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wym04J_3Ls0 |
#64
|
|||
|
|||
Hagar still willingly bending over to let NASA do it to him
On Wed, 13 Dec 2017 23:54:43 -0500, "Bast"
wrote: Sarah Ehrett wrote: On Wed, 13 Dec 2017 21:07:26 -0500, "Bast" wrote: Sarah Ehrett wrote: On Wed, 13 Dec 2017 09:27:14 -0500, "Bast" wrote: Sarah Ehrett wrote: On Tue, 12 Dec 2017 20:02:46 -0500, "Bast" wrote: Sarah Ehrett wrote: On Tue, 12 Dec 2017 06:47:47 -0500, "Bast" wrote: Sarah Ehrett wrote: So you Are still waiting for you to refute the evidence of radio intercepts being logged to and from the surface of the moon. Six times. Six missions landed on the moon, Bastie. So your story still goes. Still waiting for you to refute the evidence of radio intercepts being logged to and from the surface of the moon. Six times. Six missions landed on the moon, Bastie. But no actual proof. I provided proof, Bastie. It is not my fault you are too stupid to find it in the thread and read it. Still waiting for you to refute the evidence of radio intercepts being logged to and from the surface of the moon. Six times. Six missions landed on the moon, Bastie. You only provided a vague referrence to something that only you, would consider "proof" Keep lying, Bastie. These are still in the thread. Message-ID: Message-ID: You convinnced no one, that Apollo and NASA was/is not a massive money sucking lie. I don't need to convince anyone of the truth. There are thousands of verifiable and scientific proof on the web. You're simply to stupid to find them and too dumb to understand what they say. Not my problem. Now my proof again. Still waiting for you to refute the evidence of radio intercepts being logged to and from the surface of the moon. Six times. Six missions landed on the moon, Bastie. Ya right,.... Still waiting for you to refute the evidence of radio intercepts being logged to and from the surface of the moon. Six times. Six missions landed on the moon, Bastie. and it's just as plausible that I went to the planet Mars for my Christmas vacation last year. I doubt anyone reading this on alt.astronomy would question that you're not a space cadet. Urban Dictionary: space cadet https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=space some one who acts like they are on another planet or plane of existence. either they are incredibly stupid or are on drugs or most likely a combination a person perceived as out of touch with reality. My reality exists. You finally admit you have a *different* reality from everyone else. Now, still waiting for you to refute the evidence of radio intercepts being logged to and from the surface of the moon. Six times. Six missions landed on the moon, Bastie. |
#65
|
|||
|
|||
Hagar still willingly bending over to let NASA do it to him
On Wed, 13 Dec 2017 22:03:30 -0800 (PST), palsing
wrote: On Wednesday, December 13, 2017 at 8:54:46 PM UTC-8, Bast wrote: Sarah Ehrett wrote: On Wed, 13 Dec 2017 21:07:26 -0500, "Bast" wrote: Sarah Ehrett wrote: On Wed, 13 Dec 2017 09:27:14 -0500, "Bast" wrote: Sarah Ehrett wrote: On Tue, 12 Dec 2017 20:02:46 -0500, "Bast" wrote: Sarah Ehrett wrote: On Tue, 12 Dec 2017 06:47:47 -0500, "Bast" wrote: Sarah Ehrett wrote: So you Are still waiting for you to refute the evidence of radio intercepts being logged to and from the surface of the moon. Six times. Six missions landed on the moon, Bastie. So your story still goes. Still waiting for you to refute the evidence of radio intercepts being logged to and from the surface of the moon. Six times. Six missions landed on the moon, Bastie. But no actual proof. I provided proof, Bastie. It is not my fault you are too stupid to find it in the thread and read it. Still waiting for you to refute the evidence of radio intercepts being logged to and from the surface of the moon. Six times. Six missions landed on the moon, Bastie. You only provided a vague referrence to something that only you, would consider "proof" Keep lying, Bastie. These are still in the thread. Message-ID: Message-ID: You convinnced no one, that Apollo and NASA was/is not a massive money sucking lie. I don't need to convince anyone of the truth. There are thousands of verifiable and scientific proof on the web. You're simply to stupid to find them and too dumb to understand what they say. Not my problem. Now my proof again. Still waiting for you to refute the evidence of radio intercepts being logged to and from the surface of the moon. Six times. Six missions landed on the moon, Bastie. Ya right,.... Still waiting for you to refute the evidence of radio intercepts being logged to and from the surface of the moon. Six times. Six missions landed on the moon, Bastie. and it's just as plausible that I went to the planet Mars for my Christmas vacation last year. I doubt anyone reading this on alt.astronomy would question that you're not a space cadet. Urban Dictionary: space cadet https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=space some one who acts like they are on another planet or plane of existence. either they are incredibly stupid or are on drugs or most likely a combination a person perceived as out of touch with reality. My reality exists. There are links on the web to it. You can only resort to insults, deleting my posts, and making your own unverifiable vague references. No wonder why the world perceives that you are hagar with a sock-puppet account. Now,..... my proof again. "A funny thing happened on the way to the moon" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xciCJfbTvE4 NASA LIED ABOUT APOLLO, and likely a lot more. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fMrB857Oaxw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mYA_g2AJ0fc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RKkpfYUhkig https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y5XkLa9RYNk&t=4s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=401AXoN0mQE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79p2kzeN0tQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wym04J_3Ls0 LOL Poor Bast doesn't have one hint of critical thinking skills. She's a fair troll. But not much of a challenge to engage and destroy. |
#66
|
|||
|
|||
Hagar still willingly bending over to let NASA do it to him
palsing wrote: On Wednesday, December 13, 2017 at 8:54:46 PM UTC-8, Bast wrote: Sarah Ehrett wrote: On Wed, 13 Dec 2017 21:07:26 -0500, "Bast" wrote: Sarah Ehrett wrote: On Wed, 13 Dec 2017 09:27:14 -0500, "Bast" wrote: Sarah Ehrett wrote: On Tue, 12 Dec 2017 20:02:46 -0500, "Bast" wrote: Sarah Ehrett wrote: On Tue, 12 Dec 2017 06:47:47 -0500, "Bast" wrote: Sarah Ehrett wrote: So you Are still waiting for you to refute the evidence of radio intercepts being logged to and from the surface of the moon. Six times. Six missions landed on the moon, Bastie. So your story still goes. Still waiting for you to refute the evidence of radio intercepts being logged to and from the surface of the moon. Six times. Six missions landed on the moon, Bastie. But no actual proof. I provided proof, Bastie. It is not my fault you are too stupid to find it in the thread and read it. Still waiting for you to refute the evidence of radio intercepts being logged to and from the surface of the moon. Six times. Six missions landed on the moon, Bastie. You only provided a vague referrence to something that only you, would consider "proof" Keep lying, Bastie. These are still in the thread. Message-ID: Message-ID: You convinnced no one, that Apollo and NASA was/is not a massive money sucking lie. I don't need to convince anyone of the truth. There are thousands of verifiable and scientific proof on the web. You're simply to stupid to find them and too dumb to understand what they say. Not my problem. Now my proof again. Still waiting for you to refute the evidence of radio intercepts being logged to and from the surface of the moon. Six times. Six missions landed on the moon, Bastie. Ya right,.... Still waiting for you to refute the evidence of radio intercepts being logged to and from the surface of the moon. Six times. Six missions landed on the moon, Bastie. and it's just as plausible that I went to the planet Mars for my Christmas vacation last year. I doubt anyone reading this on alt.astronomy would question that you're not a space cadet. Urban Dictionary: space cadet https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=space some one who acts like they are on another planet or plane of existence. either they are incredibly stupid or are on drugs or most likely a combination a person perceived as out of touch with reality. My reality exists. There are links on the web to it. You can only resort to insults, deleting my posts, and making your own unverifiable vague references. No wonder why the world perceives that you are hagar with a sock-puppet account. Now,..... my proof again. "A funny thing happened on the way to the moon" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xciCJfbTvE4 NASA LIED ABOUT APOLLO, and likely a lot more. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fMrB857Oaxw While it usually is customary to include a descriptions of what the video is about, so people know what they are about to watch. I will respond to your first link "A Funny Thing..." Moon Conspiracy debunked pt 1 of 2 " (sic) This video goes into how the original video wastes time at the begining offering little more than unsubstantiated facts, by doing excatly the same thing. Then he gets into telling us that the Van Allen radiation belts have "safe" areas that can be passed through without any problems,....but then shows a video where the belts are uniformly dense except at the poles. But does not say how a trip to the moon could go find and go through those "Safe areas" Are we supposed to believe that the ships left earth earth at escape velocity near the poles, then stopped dead and made right turns in space to go to the moon, which orbits approximately at the equator. Then made the same dead stop and hard right turn when returning to earth ? THEN,....he claims that only plexiglass and thin metal would better shield the astronauts form the radiation in the belts. far better than thick shielding. Which makes no sense at all. Or your dentist would just use a plexiglass plate to protect you and them when you go in for xrays, and not the heavy lead aprons on you and them standing behind a wall lined with lead. Even though the x-rays in space a far stronger, and would last much longer than the few seconds of a dental x-ray Then we get into explanations of shadows. Where the debunker tries to explain that photographs and your eyes work differently,.....but goes on to say that photos also work like your eyes, sometimes. e.g. on earth you can still see if you are in a buidlings shadow. so the film can as well. However he offers no explanation of why the moon pictures show pitch black shadows surrounding lit areas in the same shadow. Reflected light can not pick and choose where it is reflected to.....it will light a whole area or none of it at all. Of course the claims that the same radiation would have certainly affect the film in the cameras that took the photos with the shadows. Would certainly show fogginess and white spots/streaks after radiaton exposure for the better part of a week in space. Yet the debunker, does not even mention that the photos show no degregation or radiation effects at all. However anyone who has ever traveled with a camer knows enough not to put their film through the xray inspections at airports, where the exposure is only a few seconds. And of course, the photos from Chernobyl and Fukushima clear demonstrates what effect radiation has on film even in the short term. DEBUNKING Debunked. I will leave the rest of the links you posted (below), for others to view, as I have no need of editing away any evidence that I am certain will be able to be as easily debunked as I just have with this one instance. BTW I have taken the time to watch ALL the debunking videos, and they only have reaffirmed the facts I already knew. That people are desperate to twist reality any way they can to keep the NASA fairy tales alive. It is far easier for some people to keep believing the lie, than to admit they were naive enough to be fooled in the first place. ......Magicians, count on that human weakness. And so does NASA, and the politicians. There are people out there who actually still believe that the Bush's and Clintons, and even Adolph Hitler, are wonderful trustworthy honorable people. Despite any facts or proof you present to them. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mYA_g2AJ0fc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RKkpfYUhkig https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y5XkLa9RYNk&t=4s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=401AXoN0mQE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79p2kzeN0tQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wym04J_3Ls0 |
#67
|
|||
|
|||
Hagar still willingly bending over to let NASA do it to him
Sarah Ehrett wrote: On Wed, 13 Dec 2017 22:03:30 -0800 (PST), palsing wrote: On Wednesday, December 13, 2017 at 8:54:46 PM UTC-8, Bast wrote: Sarah Ehrett wrote: On Wed, 13 Dec 2017 21:07:26 -0500, "Bast" wrote: Sarah Ehrett wrote: On Wed, 13 Dec 2017 09:27:14 -0500, "Bast" wrote: Sarah Ehrett wrote: On Tue, 12 Dec 2017 20:02:46 -0500, "Bast" wrote: Sarah Ehrett wrote: On Tue, 12 Dec 2017 06:47:47 -0500, "Bast" wrote: Sarah Ehrett wrote: So you Are still waiting for you to refute the evidence of radio intercepts being logged to and from the surface of the moon. Six times. Six missions landed on the moon, Bastie. So your story still goes. Still waiting for you to refute the evidence of radio intercepts being logged to and from the surface of the moon. Six times. Six missions landed on the moon, Bastie. But no actual proof. I provided proof, Bastie. It is not my fault you are too stupid to find it in the thread and read it. Still waiting for you to refute the evidence of radio intercepts being logged to and from the surface of the moon. Six times. Six missions landed on the moon, Bastie. You only provided a vague referrence to something that only you, would consider "proof" Keep lying, Bastie. These are still in the thread. Message-ID: Message-ID: You convinnced no one, that Apollo and NASA was/is not a massive money sucking lie. I don't need to convince anyone of the truth. There are thousands of verifiable and scientific proof on the web. You're simply to stupid to find them and too dumb to understand what they say. Not my problem. Now my proof again. Still waiting for you to refute the evidence of radio intercepts being logged to and from the surface of the moon. Six times. Six missions landed on the moon, Bastie. Ya right,.... Still waiting for you to refute the evidence of radio intercepts being logged to and from the surface of the moon. Six times. Six missions landed on the moon, Bastie. and it's just as plausible that I went to the planet Mars for my Christmas vacation last year. I doubt anyone reading this on alt.astronomy would question that you're not a space cadet. Urban Dictionary: space cadet https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=space some one who acts like they are on another planet or plane of existence. either they are incredibly stupid or are on drugs or most likely a combination a person perceived as out of touch with reality. My reality exists. There are links on the web to it. You can only resort to insults, deleting my posts, and making your own unverifiable vague references. No wonder why the world perceives that you are hagar with a sock-puppet account. Now,..... my proof again. "A funny thing happened on the way to the moon" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xciCJfbTvE4 NASA LIED ABOUT APOLLO, and likely a lot more. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fMrB857Oaxw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mYA_g2AJ0fc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RKkpfYUhkig https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y5XkLa9RYNk&t=4s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=401AXoN0mQE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79p2kzeN0tQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wym04J_3Ls0 LOL Poor Bast doesn't have one hint of critical thinking skills. She's a fair troll. But not much of a challenge to engage and destroy. Uh,....already one step ahead of you. See my response already posted that I actually took the time to compose and explain,...and not just lower myself to your level and take a cheap sniper shot then run away. You don't destroy so good , do you ? As I'm still here. And still kicking your ass with logic and facts. |
#68
|
|||
|
|||
Hagar still willingly bending over to let NASA do it to him
Sarah Ehrett wrote: On Wed, 13 Dec 2017 23:54:43 -0500, "Bast" wrote: Sarah Ehrett wrote: On Wed, 13 Dec 2017 21:07:26 -0500, "Bast" wrote: Sarah Ehrett wrote: On Wed, 13 Dec 2017 09:27:14 -0500, "Bast" wrote: Sarah Ehrett wrote: On Tue, 12 Dec 2017 20:02:46 -0500, "Bast" wrote: Sarah Ehrett wrote: On Tue, 12 Dec 2017 06:47:47 -0500, "Bast" wrote: Sarah Ehrett wrote: So you Are still waiting for you to refute the evidence of radio intercepts being logged to and from the surface of the moon. Six times. Six missions landed on the moon, Bastie. So your story still goes. Still waiting for you to refute the evidence of radio intercepts being logged to and from the surface of the moon. Six times. Six missions landed on the moon, Bastie. But no actual proof. I provided proof, Bastie. It is not my fault you are too stupid to find it in the thread and read it. Still waiting for you to refute the evidence of radio intercepts being logged to and from the surface of the moon. Six times. Six missions landed on the moon, Bastie. You only provided a vague referrence to something that only you, would consider "proof" Keep lying, Bastie. These are still in the thread. Message-ID: Message-ID: You convinnced no one, that Apollo and NASA was/is not a massive money sucking lie. I don't need to convince anyone of the truth. There are thousands of verifiable and scientific proof on the web. You're simply to stupid to find them and too dumb to understand what they say. Not my problem. Now my proof again. Still waiting for you to refute the evidence of radio intercepts being logged to and from the surface of the moon. Six times. Six missions landed on the moon, Bastie. Ya right,.... Still waiting for you to refute the evidence of radio intercepts being logged to and from the surface of the moon. Six times. Six missions landed on the moon, Bastie. and it's just as plausible that I went to the planet Mars for my Christmas vacation last year. I doubt anyone reading this on alt.astronomy would question that you're not a space cadet. Urban Dictionary: space cadet https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=space some one who acts like they are on another planet or plane of existence. either they are incredibly stupid or are on drugs or most likely a combination a person perceived as out of touch with reality. My reality exists. You finally admit you have a *different* reality from everyone else. Now, still waiting for you to refute the evidence of radio intercepts being logged to and from the surface of the moon. Six times. Six missions landed on the moon, Bastie. A lot of talk and false bravado,....but still no links to back you up. Present the actual evidence,.....I'm willing to destroy it as fast as you can shovel it. |
#69
|
|||
|
|||
Hagar still willingly bending over to let NASA do it to him
Sarah Ehrett wrote: On Wed, 13 Dec 2017 22:03:30 -0800 (PST), palsing wrote: On Wednesday, December 13, 2017 at 8:54:46 PM UTC-8, Bast wrote: Sarah Ehrett wrote: On Wed, 13 Dec 2017 21:07:26 -0500, "Bast" wrote: Sarah Ehrett wrote: On Wed, 13 Dec 2017 09:27:14 -0500, "Bast" wrote: Sarah Ehrett wrote: On Tue, 12 Dec 2017 20:02:46 -0500, "Bast" wrote: Sarah Ehrett wrote: On Tue, 12 Dec 2017 06:47:47 -0500, "Bast" wrote: Sarah Ehrett wrote: So you Are still waiting for you to refute the evidence of radio intercepts being logged to and from the surface of the moon. Six times. Six missions landed on the moon, Bastie. So your story still goes. Still waiting for you to refute the evidence of radio intercepts being logged to and from the surface of the moon. Six times. Six missions landed on the moon, Bastie. But no actual proof. I provided proof, Bastie. It is not my fault you are too stupid to find it in the thread and read it. Still waiting for you to refute the evidence of radio intercepts being logged to and from the surface of the moon. Six times. Six missions landed on the moon, Bastie. You only provided a vague referrence to something that only you, would consider "proof" Keep lying, Bastie. These are still in the thread. Message-ID: Message-ID: You convinnced no one, that Apollo and NASA was/is not a massive money sucking lie. I don't need to convince anyone of the truth. There are thousands of verifiable and scientific proof on the web. You're simply to stupid to find them and too dumb to understand what they say. Not my problem. Now my proof again. Still waiting for you to refute the evidence of radio intercepts being logged to and from the surface of the moon. Six times. Six missions landed on the moon, Bastie. Ya right,.... Still waiting for you to refute the evidence of radio intercepts being logged to and from the surface of the moon. Six times. Six missions landed on the moon, Bastie. and it's just as plausible that I went to the planet Mars for my Christmas vacation last year. I doubt anyone reading this on alt.astronomy would question that you're not a space cadet. Urban Dictionary: space cadet https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=space some one who acts like they are on another planet or plane of existence. either they are incredibly stupid or are on drugs or most likely a combination a person perceived as out of touch with reality. My reality exists. There are links on the web to it. You can only resort to insults, deleting my posts, and making your own unverifiable vague references. No wonder why the world perceives that you are hagar with a sock-puppet account. Now,..... my proof again. "A funny thing happened on the way to the moon" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xciCJfbTvE4 NASA LIED ABOUT APOLLO, and likely a lot more. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fMrB857Oaxw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mYA_g2AJ0fc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RKkpfYUhkig https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y5XkLa9RYNk&t=4s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=401AXoN0mQE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79p2kzeN0tQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wym04J_3Ls0 LOL Poor Bast doesn't have one hint of critical thinking skills. She's a fair troll. But not much of a challenge to engage and destroy. Here is a freebie debunking for you. Just to show how charitable and generous I am during the Chrstmas season. Moon hoax conspiracy debunked: Engine halos https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CSikP0i3fr0 Now lets go over it, shall we. The landing video clearly shows dust/debris being shot out radially during the landing video taken by the astro-nots themselves. It is even mentioned in the audio that they are "throwing some dust" But after the landing, not one photo shows any disturbance of the surface under the lander, or any sign of the radial lines the dust would have formed. Even the tinyest of craters are still pristine and round. Now,....please explain to me and the other "conspiracy nuts" .....where did that dust during the landing come from,.....and where did it go immediately AFTER the landing. I await your response. with all the anticipation of a giddy schoolgirl. FREEBIE ADDENDUM: I'll even offer you a video produced by NASA of what it should look like when something like a rocket exhaust disturbs the surface of loose ground at one point. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HaHHCUUI55E Whoops sorry,....I should have warned you it would be loud. BTW you can also try to explain why the audio during the moon landing, has no noticable sound of the rocket only a few feet below the astro-nots, transmitting even a whisper of noise through the ship. and you can hear their voices clearly. Can you imagine this occuring ??? After listening to this video ? (I'm so charitable at this time of year I even sicken myself) |
#70
|
|||
|
|||
Hagar still willingly bending over to let NASA do it to him
Most of your questions are answered here...
http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/f...lo.html#crater .... the Grandaddy of all debunking sites... Really, you need to be several fries short of a Happy Meal to buy into these conspiracy theories... |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
FR Bending of Light -- Proof | oriel36[_2_] | Amateur Astronomy | 0 | January 25th 10 08:14 PM |
FR Bending of Light | philippeb8 | Astronomy Misc | 221 | December 8th 09 06:31 PM |
A question about the bending of light. | brian a m stuckless | Policy | 0 | May 1st 06 11:46 PM |
A question about the bending of light. | brian a m stuckless | Policy | 0 | May 1st 06 04:53 PM |
A question about the bending of light. | brian a m stuckless | Astronomy Misc | 0 | May 1st 06 04:53 PM |