NASA still trying to prove the moon landing wasn't faked.

Vidcapper wrote on 7/21/2018 2:29 AM:
On 21/07/2018 02:58, Bradley K. Shurman wrote:
Image 24 where there is no disturbance of the "moon" dirt from a
rocket engine firing.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/scien...-moon-landing-
photos-Apollo-11-pictures-Neil-Armstrong


NASA don't have to prove anything - it is the idiotic conspiracy
theorists job to try & prove their case - which they can't, as all
their claims are easily debunked.


Please watch the landing video in the link.

The camera was shooting at the landing ground on the moon surface while
the lander was descending. They forgot to add flying moon dust in the
Hollywood studio.

Pay attention to the landing site when the camera was shooting at the
moon surface. There is no flying moon dust or exhaust smoke from the
rocket engine.



Gunner

My name is Mark Wieber the shameless ass.

My friends call me the baddest lying ass in Taft.

I love to trash the socialist system that saved my life.

I don't pay my hospital bills, rent & taxes, and I feel no shame.

Mark Wieber (Gunner Asch) - self employed "Coyote Engineering" scrapper.
https://picasaweb.google.com/1040422...22097241260450

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

On 21 Jul 2018, Gunner Asch wrote
(in article ):

Vidcapper wrote on 7/21/2018 2:29 AM:
On 21/07/2018 02:58, Bradley K. Shurman wrote:
Image 24 where there is no disturbance of the "moon" dirt from a
rocket engine firing.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/scien...-moon-landing-
photos-Apollo-11-pictures-Neil-Armstrong

NASA don't have to prove anything - it is the idiotic conspiracy
theorists job to try & prove their case - which they can't, as all
their claims are easily debunked.

Please watch the landing video in the link.

The camera was shooting at the landing ground on the moon surface while
the lander was descending. They forgot to add flying moon dust in the
Hollywood studio.

Pay attention to the landing site when the camera was shooting at the
moon surface. There is no flying moon dust or exhaust smoke from the
rocket engine.

Wasn’t that because the lander had very little fuel, and Armstrong was
guiding it down like an aircraft using his own skill and experience? They
needed to save some fuel for the take off again, or they would have been
stuck there.

I’m sure that is what he said on an interview many years ago.



Gunner

My name is Mark Wieber the shameless ass.

My friends call me the baddest lying ass in Taft.

I love to trash the socialist system that saved my life.

I don't pay my hospital bills, rent & taxes, and I feel no shame.

Mark Wieber (Gunner Asch) - self employed "Coyote Engineering" scrapper.
https://picasaweb.google.com/1040422...22097241260450

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

On Sat, 21 Jul 2018 11:13:52 +0100, johnny-knowall
wrote:

On 21 Jul 2018, Gunner Asch wrote
(in article ):

Vidcapper wrote on 7/21/2018 2:29 AM:
On 21/07/2018 02:58, Bradley K. Shurman wrote:
Image 24 where there is no disturbance of the "moon" dirt from a
rocket engine firing.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/scien...-moon-landing-
photos-Apollo-11-pictures-Neil-Armstrong

NASA don't have to prove anything - it is the idiotic conspiracy
theorists job to try & prove their case - which they can't, as all
their claims are easily debunked.

Please watch the landing video in the link.

The camera was shooting at the landing ground on the moon surface while
the lander was descending. They forgot to add flying moon dust in the
Hollywood studio.

Pay attention to the landing site when the camera was shooting at the
moon surface. There is no flying moon dust or exhaust smoke from the
rocket engine.

Wasn’t that because the lander had very little fuel, and Armstrong was
guiding it down like an aircraft using his own skill and experience? They
needed to save some fuel for the take off again, or they would have been
stuck there.

I’m sure that is what he said on an interview many years ago.

you do realise that there are no such things as aeroplanes...all the
'reports' are fake news designed to make the politicians look good
and to give handouts to so-called pilots...

My name is Mark Wieber the shameless ass.

My friends call me the baddest lying ass in Taft.

I love to trash the socialist system that saved my life.

I don't pay my hospital bills, rent & taxes, and I feel no shame.

Mark Wieber (Gunner Asch) - self employed "Coyote Engineering" scrapper.
https://picasaweb.google.com/1040422...22097241260450

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


--
www.abelard.org

On 21 Jul 2018, abelard wrote
(in ):

On Sat, 21 Jul 2018 11:13:52 +0100,
wrote:

On 21 Jul 2018, Gunner Asch wrote
(in article ):

Vidcapper wrote on 7/21/2018 2:29 AM:
On 21/07/2018 02:58, Bradley K. Shurman wrote:
Image 24 where there is no disturbance of the "moon" dirt from a
rocket engine firing.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/scien...-moon-landing-
photos-Apollo-11-pictures-Neil-Armstrong

NASA don't have to prove anything - it is the idiotic conspiracy
theorists job to try & prove their case - which they can't, as all
their claims are easily debunked.

Please watch the landing video in the link.

The camera was shooting at the landing ground on the moon surface while
the lander was descending. They forgot to add flying moon dust in the
Hollywood studio.

Pay attention to the landing site when the camera was shooting at the
moon surface. There is no flying moon dust or exhaust smoke from the
rocket engine.

Wasn’t that because the lander had very little fuel, and Armstrong was
guiding it down like an aircraft using his own skill and experience? They
needed to save some fuel for the take off again, or they would have been
stuck there.

I’m sure that is what he said on an interview many years ago.

you do realise that there are no such things as aeroplanes...all the
'reports' are fake news designed to make the politicians look good
and to give handouts to so-called pilots...

But if there are no aircraft, what kind of flying contraption is creating all
those novichok trails in the sky?

On Sat, 21 Jul 2018 11:56:09 +0100, johnny-knowall
wrote:

On 21 Jul 2018, abelard wrote
(in ):

On Sat, 21 Jul 2018 11:13:52 +0100,
wrote:

On 21 Jul 2018, Gunner Asch wrote
(in article ):

Vidcapper wrote on 7/21/2018 2:29 AM:
On 21/07/2018 02:58, Bradley K. Shurman wrote:
Image 24 where there is no disturbance of the "moon" dirt from a
rocket engine firing.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/scien...-moon-landing-
photos-Apollo-11-pictures-Neil-Armstrong

NASA don't have to prove anything - it is the idiotic conspiracy
theorists job to try & prove their case - which they can't, as all
their claims are easily debunked.

Please watch the landing video in the link.

The camera was shooting at the landing ground on the moon surface while
the lander was descending. They forgot to add flying moon dust in the
Hollywood studio.

Pay attention to the landing site when the camera was shooting at the
moon surface. There is no flying moon dust or exhaust smoke from the
rocket engine.

Wasn’t that because the lander had very little fuel, and Armstrong was
guiding it down like an aircraft using his own skill and experience? They
needed to save some fuel for the take off again, or they would have been
stuck there.

I’m sure that is what he said on an interview many years ago.

you do realise that there are no such things as aeroplanes...all the
'reports' are fake news designed to make the politicians look good
and to give handouts to so-called pilots...

But if there are no aircraft, what kind of flying contraption is creating all
those novichok trails in the sky?

it's all done with lasers and fake film


--
www.abelard.org