Originally posted by wolfgang59Furthermore, there is actually no "dark side" of the moon?
Nobody knows if there is wind on the moon or not.
And nobody knows what colour the lunar sky is.
However we do know that Apollo 11 crew supposedly took pre-packed
"space food" for the voyage there and the return !!!
Why?
When there is all that cheese? They only needed to take crackers.
A "day" on the moon lasts approximately 29 (earth) days and 12 hours meaning there is sunrise and sunset on the moon approximately once per month....Meaning that on the moon, the "phases" as we see them from earth are actually the moons morning and evening. Meaning that it is possible to land on the moon in the lunar "day" and enjoy a nearly month of daylight. Perfect if you are planning a trip.
Meaning Santa Claus does not exist.
Originally posted by wolfgang59They are planning to land on the sun but at night so it wont be hot.
I had not realised until a friend told me but the alleged Apollo 11 landing was when thre moon was in its first quarter!
Why choose a small target and make the job difficult?.
Also launch time was during the day when they couldn't even see their target!
Both these facts are verifiable.
Just DOES NOT MAKE SENSE.
29 Mar 17
Originally posted by wolfgang59Always wave the sarcasm flag on this Kind of Posts.
I had not realised until a friend told me but the alleged Apollo 11 landing was when thre moon was in its first quarter!
Why choose a small target and make the job difficult?.
Also launch time was during the day when they couldn't even see their target!
Both these facts are verifiable.
Just DOES NOT MAKE SENSE.
People might not find out otherwise...
[flag] no sarcasm here[/flag]
Originally posted by Captain StrangeAnd we know that because Hamilton's programs would only work if someone was actually physically on the moon.
At least the landings weren't faked.
Or, yet in another string of appearance of proofs.
Put enough appearances together, one can be forgiven for mistaking the body whole as sufficient, regardless how weak or even internally/externally contradictory each of the appearances themselves are.
Heroic in effort, perhaps, but contributed to what amounts to a massive failure to mankind.
29 Mar 17
Originally posted by FreakyKBHWhat for? You don't believe in anything but a flat Earth, your religion. Apply for tax free status, start a church. Maybe you can get people to believe, it shouldn't be hard, they programmed YOU pretty good with the flat Earth lie.
Well, I do pay taxes.
Hey, run for office, maybe you can be the first flatass president. If that idiot in there now could do it, YOU surely could.
29 Mar 17
Originally posted by FreakyKBHSo now besides being a civilization changing mind, you now are an expert on space software. Amazing. How did you happen to come by this expertise pray tell?
And we know that because Hamilton's programs would only work if someone was actually physically on the moon.
Or, yet in another string of appearance of proofs.
Put enough appearances together, one can be forgiven for mistaking the body whole as sufficient, regardless how weak or even internally/externally contradictory each of the appearances themselve ...[text shortened]... .
Heroic in effort, perhaps, but contributed to what amounts to a massive failure to mankind.
Originally posted by sonhouseThat's not true, nearly any of it.
What for? You don't believe in anything but a flat Earth, your religion. Apply for tax free status, start a church. Maybe you can get people to believe, it shouldn't be hard, they programmed YOU pretty good with the flat Earth lie.
Hey, run for office, maybe you can be the first flatass president. If that idiot in there now could do it, YOU surely could.
I believe in God and have no religion otherwise--- I really don't even consider my belief in God as a religion, to be clear.
The shape of the earth, i.e., round, flat, square, really has zero impact on the day to day lives of people walking on its surface.
But for some inexplicable reason, we are indoctrinated with the concept right out of the gate: every classroom in the world has a globe and are being taught the shape of the earth... even though there is little to no bearing on anything related to practical application in their lives, academic or otherwise.
Someone considers it a vital piece of information, and is emphatically concerned that it be taught as early as possible.
What doesn't make sense to a child being taught the rotundity of the earth is pushed out and replaced with knowledge from 'people who know better.'
And yet those same objections stand today.
A religion is based on dogma: answers which cannot be questioned.
The scientific method is all about answering questions, all about constantly asking questions even when answers have been found.
Any claim made for a ball earth fails to pass all aspects of the scientific method, and yet the 'answer' cannot be questioned.
That's not science; that's a religion.
29 Mar 17
Originally posted by sonhouseThe doctors analyzing the physiological reactions of the astronauts: would the same data been available to them regardless of the locale of their subjects?
So now besides being a civilization changing mind, you now are an expert on space software. Amazing. How did you happen to come by this expertise pray tell?