Film Clip of Neil Armstrong Landing on the Moon

myf16 said:
The NSX was designed by space aliens. Human beings could never be so clever. :D

I would be very careful sharing that information "they" could be listening :eek:

The truth will one-day be revealed that "They" used Honda as a cover. Until then, the truth will be denied by those who only believe a human could develop such a far superior car like the NSX? :p
 
vintagecarman said:
Either way, let me am very clear on your accusation comparing this opinion to me saying a plane never hit the Pentagon. That is absurd!! I'm offended by that stement and would appreciate a retraction. The two have nothing to do with each other than the word conspiracy!

I'd retract my statement if it was worth retracting but it isn't. The fact is, you are discrediting the achievements of our space program and calling the astronauts that landed on the moon liars and conspirators. That's as much an insult as telling the victims of the Pentagon incident that the plane never hit it when they know it did. Our courageous astronauts should be recognized for their achievements. You have to consider the facts... That's the problem when you talk to conspiracy theorists like those who never believe the Holocaust happened. They discredit cold hard proof like bodies, pictures, eye witnesses...

How about the rocks, so unique to the moon? How about the reflectors scientists still use to this day? How did those reflectors manage to land there? The thousands working on the program? The fact that the Russians couldn't disprove the landing themselves? The video evidence?

http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a17/a17v_1445052.mov
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a15/a15v_1244753.mov
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a15/a15v_1442653.mov
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a17/a17v_1193545.mov
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a17/a17v_1433340.mov
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a17/a17v_1670930.mov

Look at the distance on this dust kick: http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a17/a17v_1653633.mov
Check out this hammer throw: http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a17/a17v_1702944.mpg

You've got a lot more to explain than the the US Government does...
 
Malibu Rapper said:
I'd retract my statement if it was worth retracting but it isn't. The fact is, you are discrediting the achievements of our space program and calling the astronauts that landed on the moon liars and conspirators. That's as much an insult as telling the victims of the Pentagon incident that the plane never hit it when they know it did. Our courageous astronauts should be recognized for their achievements. You have to consider the facts... That's the problem when you talk to conspiracy theorists like those who never believe the Holocaust happened. They discredit cold hard proof like bodies, pictures, eye witnesses...

How about the rocks, so unique to the moon? How about the reflectors scientists still use to this day? How did those reflectors manage to land there? The thousands working on the program? The fact that the Russians couldn't disprove the landing themselves? The video evidence?
Look at the distance on this dust kick:
You've got a lot more to explain than the the US Government does...

Thanks for the video clips and the insults however, you have failed to turn me into a believer! You honestly feel that I have more to explaining to do than this government? :confused: Just to play devils advocate, I will make a trip to the Kennedy space center.

BTW
I have refrained from personally insulting you or your beliefs so why do you insist on insulting me. I feel horrible for the victims of the Pentagon and the Holocaust; undoubtedly millions and millions have suffered needlessly!
I believe both happened 100%

How great suffering can be compared to the government faking a landing on the moon is beyond me :confused:
 
nsxr1 said:
Those who are gullible/ignorant enough to swallow the junk science supporting the Moon landing hoax theory are the same type of people who are in denial about natural selection and evolution and instead promote "creationism" as an opposing theory.
Actually, I have to disagree on this one. Despite what you choose to believe, both creationism and evolutionism are both valid *theories*. This holds true because evidence exists both ways, especially when you start to consider that creationism is built upon the assumption that there is an all-powerful being at work. Under the theory and that assumption, if God wanted to snap his fingers and create a world in motion 6000 years ago, then so be it- it would be impossible to disprove either way, because all measurements would be based on a world already set in motion.

This does vary, however, from the moon landing, since this was all known at the time- there are no assumptions and [presumably] no unknowns.

As a side note, I would suggest reading "Darwin's Black Box" - a very interesting read questioning evolution from a biochemistry standpoint (NOT from a theological standpoint). Evolution can be questioned because we have never seen a full evolution of any animal. Natural selection, however, has been shown to exist, and thus is indisputable. Be careful about lumping them together.
 
vintagecarman said:
You honestly feel that I have more to explaining to do than this government?
BTW
I have refrained from personally insulting you or your beliefs so why do you insist on insulting me. I feel horrible for the victims of the Pentagon and the Holocaust; undoubtedly millions and millions have suffered needlessly!
I believe both happened 100%

You are missing my point. First, didn't you ever learn that the burden of proof is on the person who is making the claim?

Next, I never said you didn't care about or feel bad for the victims of both former events. My comparison with these events is that there are witnesses to all of these events that need to be respected, namely the astronauts and the hardworking people at NASA that know and believe in what they achieved. Now you're insulting them by saying it was all a hoax, telling them what they know and did wasn't really true and that they are all part of a huge conspiracy. These are people that stepped foot on the moon, their families, their friends that know in their mind what happened. Just like I know my coworker was killed when the plane hit the Pentagon. How would you feel if you were told you never graduated college when in fact you did? Or other things along those same lines... You know it's true because you were there and you'd feel insulted.

If you feel insulted by any of my posts, it was never my intention. But if you do feel insulted, I guess the truth just hurts and I can accept that.
 
i have just one question;
if we really did land on the moon some 30-40 years ago,why havn't we been back considering the huge step forward in technology since then?
 
jaytip nsx said:
i have just one question;
if we really did land on the moon some 30-40 years ago,why havn't we been back considering the huge step forward in technology since then?

http://www.redzero.demon.co.uk/moonhoax/Go_Back.htm

Also, propulsion technology has had no breakthrough in 50 years.

Turn your question around: if it's so easy to fake a Moon mission, why haven't we faked another one? Seems to me this question actually supports the reality of the Moon landing.
 
mojo said:
Actually, I have to disagree on this one. Despite what you choose to believe, both creationism and evolutionism are both valid *theories*. This holds true because evidence exists both ways, especially when you start to consider that creationism is built upon the assumption that there is an all-powerful being at work. Under the theory and that assumption, if God wanted to snap his fingers and create a world in motion 6000 years ago, then so be it- it would be impossible to disprove either way, because all measurements would be based on a world already set in motion.
This really belongs in its own separate thread, but I just can't let this go unchallenged...

You are missing the point. Despite what YOU choose to believe, comparing creationism and evolution is like comparing apples and oranges (or, more accurately - apples and elephants). While you may regard creationism as a theory, it is strictly a <U><B>religious</B></U> theory based solely on religious (in this case Christian) dogma found in the Old Testament of the Bible. There is absolutely NOTHING scientific about it. The Old Testament is a collection of parables written by human beings and has absolutely no basis in fact. It was written over a period of time in which man knew next to nothing of the observable world around him, and religious speculation was the order of the day and the best he could do to explain that world. Hence the simplistic and ridiculous nursery rhyme-like assertions that the universe was created in 6 days, woman was created from a man's rib, etc. The fact is they just didn't know any better.

In contrast, evolution by way of natural selection is a <U><B>scientific</B></U> theory based on verifiable observations of the natural world. Like all scientific theories, it was formulated over many years and was subject to independent peer review every step of the way. It exists as it does because it agrees with and reliably predicts observations. And there is an enormous amount of observable evidence that supports the Theory of Evolution, gaps in the fossil record notwithstanding.

The mistake that proponents of creationism make is confusing their personal religious, faith-based beliefs with science. In fact, the ongoing efforts in this country to portray creationism as a science are nothing more than veiled attempts to introduce Christianity into the public classroom, where most Americans recognize it does not belong. Creationism should be taught in Christian Sunday schools and Christian churches, NOT in science/biology classrooms.

Another falsehood promoted by creationists is that the scientific Theory of Evolution rules out the existence of a divine creator. Nothing could be further from the truth. The Theory of Evolution says NOTHING regarding the existence of a creator one way or the other. Such an assertion is beyond the scope of science since it can never be proven nor disproven through observation and/or experimentation. The existence and/or nature of "God" (or "the Gods") is a subject that belongs strictly in the realm of religion. Creationists attempt to associate the Theory of Evolution with atheism to set up a false choice - believe in the Biblical story of creation or disbelieve in a divine entity. In this way they hope to drive less-than-critical-thinking people into their camp.

You can believe, if you wish, that a divine, conscious being created with a wave of his (hers? its??) hand life on Earth just as we see it today. You can never, ever hope to prove it or quantify it in any way, but you are certainly free take it on blind faith. You cannot, however, use that belief to refute conclusions reached via the scientific method. History is replete with such attempts. As science has progressively pushed the envelope of knowledge and understanding, it has often contradicted and undermined established religious beliefs and traditions. This, of course, is and always has been inevitable. The reaction of certain members of the unobjective faithful has often been to attack and attempt to discredit or even destroy the offending science (or scientist) in whatever way possible. So it is today with the "scientific" creationists, whose goal is to discredit evolution - a theory that holds up to scientific scrutiny and is accepted by virtually everyone within the scientific community. By erroneously defining Biblical creationism as being rooted in "science", they attempt to contradict that which threatens their chosen dogmatic and simplistic beliefs regarding the creation and development of life on Earth. But make no mistake - while the Theory of Evolution without a doubt blows Old Testament creationism right out of the water, it DOES NOT address much less cast doubt on the existence or nature of God. Anyone who tells you it does is either lying or simply lacks a basic understanding of the theory. The Theory of Evolution and belief in the existence of a divine power are totally compatible, as evidenced by the fact that most scientists (including myself) subscribe to both.

You, I and everyone else on this planet are (or should be) free to believe anything we wish about the existence and/or nature of God. But the world would be a much better place if everyone recognized that these beliefs are in fact a personal faith-based choice and can never - repeat NEVER - be proven nor disproven. In other words, don't take your religion too seriously because there are many, many alternate faith-based "theories" that are equally valid or invalid (whichever way you wish to look at it).

mojo said:
As a side note, I would suggest reading "Darwin's Black Box" - a very interesting read questioning evolution from a biochemistry standpoint (NOT from a theological standpoint). Evolution can be questioned because we have never seen a full evolution of any animal. Natural selection, however, has been shown to exist, and thus is indisputable. Be careful about lumping them together.
Note: Natural selection is the mechanism by which the evolution of living organisms occurs.

You can question the Theory of Evolution all you want, but to be credible you must do it within the framework of the scientific method. You cannot use religious dogma (such as stories and parables contained in the Bible) to refute science. They are oil and water and do not mix. Science is based upon repeatable, verifiable observations that agree with theoretical predictions. Religion is based solely upon the imagination and the writings of man. Scientific theories are subject to peer review and a barrage of objective scrutiny before they are finally accepted. Religious beliefs are accepted at face value and without question.

By the way, by your stated criterion you could also question quantum mechanics since no one has made (nor likely ever will make) direct observations at the sub-atomic level. Acceptance of quantum mechanics is based on indirect observations that can be made and that agree with predictions made by quantum mechanical theories. The Theory of Evolution has gained acceptance in precisely the same way.
 
SNDSOUL said:
I have to say that the caliper of topics and replies on this forum are outstanding. Some of you(and you know who you are) are too smart for you own good. Sometimes I think I feel smarter just reading you guys' replies! ;)


Caliper? do you mean 4,6 or 8 piston calipers? Of course if you would have said "caliber" 9mm , 38 or 357 :)

Some people cant see the forest thru the trees, and forget how to laugh.
Armando :D
 
nsxr1 said:
The conspiracy theorist's MO is to repeat the same allegations over and over again in spite if the fact that they have been conclusively disproven/discredited. Their strategy is to compel you to refute their points repeatedly (because ignorant statements always cry out for rebuttal) until you just get tired of defending the obvious. Those who are gullible/ignorant enough to swallow the junk science supporting the Moon landing hoax theory are the same type of people who are in denial about natural selection and evolution and instead promote "creationism" as an opposing theory. It just illustrates that no matter what strides are made in science and technology, there will always be those who doggedly continue to insist that "the Earth is flat".

There are just as many conspiracy theories that have been proven to be true as those that have turned out to be false. People no longer refer to them as "conspiracy theories" once they have become accepted, so people forget very easily.

Evolution was once considered such, and those who believed it were considered kooks. The first scientist to say the earth was round and actually revolved around the sun was executed by the Spanish government for floating such a wild conspiracy theory to the masses -- he was actually suggesting that the catholic church were liars. How could the church manage to keep this information secret? How many thousands of clergy would they have to bribe??

There were anarchists in 1898 who suggested that the Spanish did not sink the USS Maine. They were considered political enemies and were rounded up and jailed by the government.

There were people in the late 1930s in both the United States and in some countries in Western Europe that believed the rumours that the Germans were rounding up Jews and Gypsies, placing them in camps, and executing them. These people were also considered conspiracy theorists for suggesting something so rediculous and crazy.

And just 2 years ago, some of us (myself included) said that there were no WMDs in Iraq. We too were called names and told were were stupid for thinking that Saddam Hussein had no WMDs. What a wild conspiracy theory that turned out to be...

Just be careful what labels you put on things. There are always going to be different theories about things. This word "conspiracy" continues to be misused. It simply means "the involvement of more than one person" in and act of some sort. But you seem to use it as if it means "crazy" or "absurd". If those are the words you want to use, then use them. Using the world "conspiracy" simply shows ignorance.
 
Back
Top