-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Master
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
Quote:
Originally Posted by
p4pking
Logical is accepting what the overwhelming majority of people who have dedicated their lives to studying a field tend agree on, rather than spending ten minutes reading something on the Internet and then thinking you're an authority.
I never claimed that I am an authority, I'm just asking that people think for themselves. Rather than being told what to believe.
Just because the majority believe something doesn't prove that it's correct. I guess your talking evolution right? There is a reason it's called a theory.
Wouldn't you rather come to a conclusion based on your own experiences? Stuff you can see and do and explain in front of you? Like I said, all of us have been deceived at some point. All my friends believed there was Santa when I was a kid, even my kids did, were we lying? No, but the majority of us believed it, so does that make it right?
I also mentioned that we were told Pluto was a planet for around 500 years. Turns out that's wrong. It ain't a planet. But we were told it was, so we believed it.
At what point do you start questioning someone, after they had been wrong or lied to you over and over? Do you believe Oswald killed Kennedy alone? 9/11? The reasons the give for the start of wars?
The question you have to ask yourself firstly is, do I believe the government? And if you don't then you need to ask why you believe some stuff they tell you and not other stuff.
From my experience, once someone lies to me, or is wrong about something they confessed was correct, then I find it hard to take what they tell me next time as fact.
No harm in questioning ideas but you are mixing a lot of things to justify your scepticism. Pluto has been reclassified, it could get be labelled a planet again. Yes evolution is just a theory and there are gaps but it is better than creationism.
better than creationism?
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by
walrus
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Master
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
Quote:
Originally Posted by
p4pking
Logical is accepting what the overwhelming majority of people who have dedicated their lives to studying a field tend agree on, rather than spending ten minutes reading something on the Internet and then thinking you're an authority.
I never claimed that I am an authority, I'm just asking that people think for themselves. Rather than being told what to believe.
Just because the majority believe something doesn't prove that it's correct. I guess your talking evolution right? There is a reason it's called a theory.
Wouldn't you rather come to a conclusion based on your own experiences? Stuff you can see and do and explain in front of you? Like I said, all of us have been deceived at some point. All my friends believed there was Santa when I was a kid, even my kids did, were we lying? No, but the majority of us believed it, so does that make it right?
I also mentioned that we were told Pluto was a planet for around 500 years. Turns out that's wrong. It ain't a planet. But we were told it was, so we believed it.
At what point do you start questioning someone, after they had been wrong or lied to you over and over? Do you believe Oswald killed Kennedy alone? 9/11? The reasons the give for the start of wars?
The question you have to ask yourself firstly is, do I believe the government? And if you don't then you need to ask why you believe some stuff they tell you and not other stuff.
From my experience, once someone lies to me, or is wrong about something they confessed was correct, then I find it hard to take what they tell me next time as fact.
No harm in questioning ideas but you are mixing a lot of things to justify your scepticism. Pluto has been reclassified, it could get be labelled a planet again. Yes evolution is just a theory and there are gaps but it is better than creationism.
better than creationism?
Makes more sense and less gaps in it.
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Master
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
Quote:
Originally Posted by
p4pking
Logical is accepting what the overwhelming majority of people who have dedicated their lives to studying a field tend agree on, rather than spending ten minutes reading something on the Internet and then thinking you're an authority.
I never claimed that I am an authority, I'm just asking that people think for themselves. Rather than being told what to believe.
Just because the majority believe something doesn't prove that it's correct. I guess your talking evolution right? There is a reason it's called a theory.
Wouldn't you rather come to a conclusion based on your own experiences? Stuff you can see and do and explain in front of you? Like I said, all of us have been deceived at some point. All my friends believed there was Santa when I was a kid, even my kids did, were we lying? No, but the majority of us believed it, so does that make it right?
I also mentioned that we were told Pluto was a planet for around 500 years. Turns out that's wrong. It ain't a planet. But we were told it was, so we believed it.
At what point do you start questioning someone, after they had been wrong or lied to you over and over? Do you believe Oswald killed Kennedy alone? 9/11? The reasons the give for the start of wars?
The question you have to ask yourself firstly is, do I believe the government? And if you don't then you need to ask why you believe some stuff they tell you and not other stuff.
From my experience, once someone lies to me, or is wrong about something they confessed was correct, then I find it hard to take what they tell me next time as fact.
No harm in questioning ideas but you are mixing a lot of things to justify your scepticism. Pluto has been reclassified, it could get be labelled a planet again. Yes evolution is just a theory and there are gaps but i
t is better than creationism.
Is it?
I was using Pluto as an example that just because the majority believed (were told/ taught) that there were 9 planets for roughly 500 years, doesn't mean it was right.
I am happy to debate this with anyone here, I promise to be respectful, but ask the same in return. You don't have to believe anything I say, all I ask is that you think for yourself.
Can I also say that P4Pking is making an assumption when saying I spent 10 minutes reading something. I was also a zombie to the propaganda that we are brainwashed with from the time we are born from TV, movies and other media, schools etc, up until about 3 years ago. It can be one of the hardest things to question this and be honest with yourself. But wouldn't you rather decide something based on what you can see and do in front of you, rather than be told what to believe?
Serious question for anyone interested in challenging themselves, anyone familiar with explosives in any way? Worked in construction, or demolition, or even played with fireworks at some point in time?
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Master
Quote:
Originally Posted by
walrus
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Master
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
Quote:
Originally Posted by
p4pking
Logical is accepting what the overwhelming majority of people who have dedicated their lives to studying a field tend agree on, rather than spending ten minutes reading something on the Internet and then thinking you're an authority.
I never claimed that I am an authority, I'm just asking that people think for themselves. Rather than being told what to believe.
Just because the majority believe something doesn't prove that it's correct. I guess your talking evolution right? There is a reason it's called a theory.
Wouldn't you rather come to a conclusion based on your own experiences? Stuff you can see and do and explain in front of you? Like I said, all of us have been deceived at some point. All my friends believed there was Santa when I was a kid, even my kids did, were we lying? No, but the majority of us believed it, so does that make it right?
I also mentioned that we were told Pluto was a planet for around 500 years. Turns out that's wrong. It ain't a planet. But we were told it was, so we believed it.
At what point do you start questioning someone, after they had been wrong or lied to you over and over? Do you believe Oswald killed Kennedy alone? 9/11? The reasons the give for the start of wars?
The question you have to ask yourself firstly is, do I believe the government? And if you don't then you need to ask why you believe some stuff they tell you and not other stuff.
From my experience, once someone lies to me, or is wrong about something they confessed was correct, then I find it hard to take what they tell me next time as fact.
No harm in questioning ideas but you are mixing a lot of things to justify your scepticism. Pluto has been reclassified, it could get be labelled a planet again. Yes evolution is just a theory and there are gaps but it is better than creationism.
better than creationism?
Makes more sense and less gaps in it.
Less gaps? Common mate, be honest with yourself. Your basing your beliefs in stuff you have never reasoned for yourself. I'd like your permission to discusses it further, because as I have said, it can be truly challenging to challenge what you have been told all your life. But I can show you some glaring gaps if you really want to question things.
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Master
Quote:
Originally Posted by
walrus
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Master
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
Quote:
Originally Posted by
p4pking
Logical is accepting what the overwhelming majority of people who have dedicated their lives to studying a field tend agree on, rather than spending ten minutes reading something on the Internet and then thinking you're an authority.
I never claimed that I am an authority, I'm just asking that people think for themselves. Rather than being told what to believe.
Just because the majority believe something doesn't prove that it's correct. I guess your talking evolution right? There is a reason it's called a theory.
Wouldn't you rather come to a conclusion based on your own experiences? Stuff you can see and do and explain in front of you? Like I said, all of us have been deceived at some point. All my friends believed there was Santa when I was a kid, even my kids did, were we lying? No, but the majority of us believed it, so does that make it right?
I also mentioned that we were told Pluto was a planet for around 500 years. Turns out that's wrong. It ain't a planet. But we were told it was, so we believed it.
At what point do you start questioning someone, after they had been wrong or lied to you over and over? Do you believe Oswald killed Kennedy alone? 9/11? The reasons the give for the start of wars?
The question you have to ask yourself firstly is, do I believe the government? And if you don't then you need to ask why you believe some stuff they tell you and not other stuff.
From my experience, once someone lies to me, or is wrong about something they confessed was correct, then I find it hard to take what they tell me next time as fact.
No harm in questioning ideas but you are mixing a lot of things to justify your scepticism. Pluto has been reclassified, it could get be labelled a planet again. Yes evolution is just a theory and there are gaps but it is better than creationism.
better than creationism?
Makes more sense and less gaps in it.
what do u mean less gaps. If it’s intelligent design what are the gabs. I thought you were seikh and religious
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
A type of evolution does not rule out intelligent design but there are numerous things to think about. Here is a quote from the science dude
It is important to note that the information written on DNA molecules is not produced by any known natural interaction of matter. Matter and molecules have no innate intelligence, allowing self organization into codes. There are no know n physical laws which give molecules a natural tendency to arrange themselves into such coded structures.
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
I just like to give people examples where they can use their common sense.
I have a challenge that no one will be able to complete, and by not being able to complete this challenge should make anyone question what they have been told. But like I said, people would rather bury their head in the sand, ignorance is bliss.
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
Incidentally the fake moon landings conspiracy only went ballistic after the 70s movie Capricorn One was released - Mars landing filmed in a studio, Astronauts hunted down and killed. That was some scary shit when I was a kid, the idea everything you've been sold is a lie.
Obviously these days with the internet they've become more popular than ever. However, there's as many vids/articles debunking the so-called fakery as there are claims these days.
It's not a coincidence that people most likely to believe in global/major conspiracies also believe in a supernatural creator. Teleological thinking or something, it's called.
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
Yes we get lied to but the government is terrible at keeping secrets. If a Oval Office blow job cant be kept down low, I don’t think a numerous fake moon landings could be kept hush. It wouldn’t be just the astronauts who would need to keep quiet.
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Incidentally the fake moon landings conspiracy only went ballistic after the 70s movie Capricorn One was released - Mars landing filmed in a studio, Astronauts hunted down and killed. That was some scary shit when I was a kid, the idea everything you've been sold is a lie.
Obviously these days with the internet they've become more popular than ever. However, there's as many vids/articles debunking the so-called fakery as there are claims these days.
It's not a coincidence that people most likely to believe in global/major conspiracies also believe in a supernatural creator. Teleological thinking or something, it's called.
But when you tell the truth the story is always the same, it doesn't change. When you lie, to have to keep changing the story to keep up with the lie.
Evolution is a joke. Instead of just taking their side of the story think about it logically for a second. What do explosions do? Destroy stuff right? But not this big bang explosion, this explosion does something your logic tells you doesn't happen, it creates something.
Right at the beginning and there's already a problem.
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
Let's look at the moon landing logically. Say 2 of us were in a race to location fit example, one of us is the States the other Russia. Now your team has invested a lot of tax payers money in helping to you to win the race. And my team has invested a lot of tax payers money helping me to win the race. Now the States wins the race, but instead of at least finishing the race and making all that money at least mean something, Russia just quits?
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by
walrus
Yes we get lied to but the government is terrible at keeping secrets. If a Oval Office blow job cant be kept down low, I don’t think a numerous fake moon landings could be kept hush. It wouldn’t be just the astronauts who would need to keep quiet.
Ok but how much does NASA get a day, 20 - 50 mil a day. I can do a lot with 50 mil. And if I'm hiring the stuff , wouldn't it make sense for me to hire people I can control, people I have dirt on? You don't think it's possible for them to threaten your friends and family? How much is a hitman roughly?
If anyone has looked into any pedophile ring stuff, there are reports that some abusers were forced into these acts, recorded, as blackmail so they could speak out for fear of their dirt coming out.
And look at Grissom and Co., if anyone thinks they are untouchable just check out JFK to see you're not.
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by
walrus
Yes we get lied to but the government is terrible at keeping secrets. If a Oval Office blow job cant be kept down low, I don’t think a numerous fake moon landings could be kept hush. It wouldn’t be just the astronauts who would need to keep quiet.
Watching one of those vids which debunk the conspiracy theorists, there would have been hundreds of thousands murdered to cover it up.
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
I believe that evolution is real as there is just too much evidence with much of it compiled in Dawkins 'The Greatest Show on Earth'. There is just far too much evidence to refute IMO. Now could aliens have planted the seeds of life like in Prometheus? Possibly, but we have no evidence for that, so I would just go with the evidence that exists as it is all that we have. Life started and then it evolved and I am comfortable with that until something comes along to demolish it. That is what I like about science is that it is theory and open to change providing something more concrete comes along to throw it onto a new path. But the theory of evolution does fit into place quite perfectly.
Do you have a better suggestion than evolution, Alpha?
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
I do not know enough about moon landings to have a proper view, but I should know more about space travel and this kind of thing. It is my next topic for research after my next few books.
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
Quote:
Originally Posted by
walrus
Yes we get lied to but the government is terrible at keeping secrets. If a Oval Office blow job cant be kept down low, I don’t think a numerous fake moon landings could be kept hush. It wouldn’t be just the astronauts who would need to keep quiet.
Ok but how much does NASA get a day, 20 - 50 mil a day. I can do a lot with 50 mil. And if I'm hiring the stuff , wouldn't it make sense for me to hire people I can control, people I have dirt on? You don't think it's possible for them to threaten your friends and family? How much is a hitman roughly?
If anyone has looked into any pedophile ring stuff, there are reports that some abusers were forced into these acts, recorded, as blackmail so they could speak out for fear of their dirt coming out.
And look at Grissom and Co., if anyone thinks they are untouchable just check out JFK to see you're not.
anything can be twisted and turned at anytime in these theories. People who beleive them can explain any differing point of view, that’s what makes them interesting. That 9-11 video covers everything you can think off. Like Lou Reed said, you can’t beleive everything you read and nothing that you see.
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Gandalf
I believe that evolution is real as there is just too much evidence with much of it compiled in Dawkins 'The Greatest Show on Earth'. There is just far too much evidence to refute IMO. Now could aliens have planted the seeds of life like in Prometheus? Possibly, but we have no evidence for that, so I would just go with the evidence that exists as it is all that we have. Life started and then it evolved and I am comfortable with that until something comes along to demolish it. That is what I like about science is that it is theory and open to change providing something more concrete comes along to throw it onto a new path. But the theory of evolution does fit into place quite perfectly.
Do you have a better suggestion than evolution, Alpha?
My belief is that we were created by something, everything is to perfect to have just started randomly from nothing.
Evolution is so basic when you look at it.
So out of this explosion, that is unlike every other explosion you have had experience around, this explosion creates something. Then out of that, for no reason life started, and out of that we got fish, and then the fish came onto land, but unlike every fish you have ever had experience with, these ones change their gills into lungs, really? Most fish die in a couple of minutes from my experience, but lets let that slide. Then they somehow mutated to apes, and then to us. The glaring whole right there is, where are all these in between mutations? There should be millions of them everywhere.
Also there has never been macro mutations.
Micro mutations is mutations in a species over a length of time. Macro mutations is one species mutating into another species. Can't happen. All Darwin's theory was written before any proof on these mutations was discovered. Hence his 'theory'.
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
It takes about 8 and a half hours but here it is. You will miss all the diagrams, but it is a great book and Dawkins has a very nice voice.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=peoanRP0Hts
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by
walrus
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
Quote:
Originally Posted by
walrus
Yes we get lied to but the government is terrible at keeping secrets. If a Oval Office blow job cant be kept down low, I don’t think a numerous fake moon landings could be kept hush. It wouldn’t be just the astronauts who would need to keep quiet.
Ok but how much does NASA get a day, 20 - 50 mil a day. I can do a lot with 50 mil. And if I'm hiring the stuff , wouldn't it make sense for me to hire people I can control, people I have dirt on? You don't think it's possible for them to threaten your friends and family? How much is a hitman roughly?
If anyone has looked into any pedophile ring stuff, there are reports that some abusers were forced into these acts, recorded, as blackmail so they could speak out for fear of their dirt coming out.
And look at Grissom and Co., if anyone thinks they are untouchable just check out JFK to see you're not.
anything can be twisted and turned at anytime in these theories. People who beleive them can explain any differing point of view, that’s what makes them interesting. That 9-11 video covers everything you can think off. Like Lou Reed said, you can’t beleive everything you read and nothing that you see.
Exactly, so wouldn't it be better to make your mind up on thinking about things logically, rather than accepting fake pictures and video as evidence?
Obvious questions you should ask yourself:
Why has no one ever gone back?
The Van Allen belts, how could the actornauts survive them. When asked about them a actornaut said he doesn't think they were discovered then. So not discovering something means that the miles of radiation won't kill you?
Why have they lost or taped over all the data? It's a pretty historic event for mankind, but obviously not important enough.
Why would they keep giving you fake footage from the ISS or space walks?
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
Here is part 2. I would read the book as it is too much information to listen to.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FDPCszCzsvY
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Gandalf
I like Dawkins, but there is no evidence of these mutations. Doesn't matter how long the video is, answer is still the same, evidence please.
Most people think carbon dating means its fact, but how many actually know how accurate it is? I doubt you will find anywhere saying that it is accurate past 60,000 years. But they want to speculate billions of years back?
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
Believing something because you see it in a video or diagrams defies logic.
Again it's blindly following a theory and trying to claim it as fact.
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Gandalf
I like Dawkins, but there is no evidence of these mutations. Doesn't matter how long the video is, answer is still the same, evidence please.
Most people think carbon dating means its fact, but how many actually know how accurate it is? I doubt you will find anywhere saying that it is accurate past 60,000 years. But they want to speculate billions of years back?
What do you mean there is no evidence of macro mutation, do we not see this in dogs and cats, for example, over a relatively short time span? To see the evolution of a creature in the sense that it goes from the sea to the land you are talking a very long period of time, but we do have fossil records as incomplete as they are. You have to go by the evidence that exists. I am sure if we make it another million years we will be little bit different and have a fossil record to show it. We have records, though not perfect, for how we have got where we are today.
Here is the evolution of our friend the whale.
https://ocean.si.edu/through-time/an...ales-animation
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
Believing something because you see it in a video or diagrams defies logic.
Again it's blindly following a theory and trying to claim it as fact.
That's what fossil records are, they are a puzzle of the past being put back together. The pieces always appear to fit thus justifying the theory.
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Gandalf
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Gandalf
I like Dawkins, but there is no evidence of these mutations. Doesn't matter how long the video is, answer is still the same, evidence please.
Most people think carbon dating means its fact, but how many actually know how accurate it is? I doubt you will find anywhere saying that it is accurate past 60,000 years. But they want to speculate billions of years back?
What do you mean there is no evidence of macro mutation, do we not see this in dogs and cats, for example, over a relatively short time span? To see the evolution of a creature in the sense that it goes from the sea to the land you are talking a very long period of time, but we do have fossil records as incomplete as they are. You have to go by the evidence that exists. I am sure if we make it another million years we will be little bit different and have a fossil record to show it. We have records, though not perfect, for how we have got where we are today.
Here is the evolution of our friend the whale.
https://ocean.si.edu/through-time/an...ales-animation
What do you mean we see it in cats and dogs? I've never seen a cat mutate into a dog. That's what macro mutation is. 1 species mutating into another.
Again where are all these in between mutations? And why have all the supposed links they have found, Lucy etc turned out to be hoaxes?
What happens to a fish when you see it out of water? Don't worry about what you have seen or taught, from your experience in life, what happens to a fish when out of water?
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Gandalf
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
Believing something because you see it in a video or diagrams defies logic.
Again it's blindly following a theory and trying to claim it as fact.
That's what fossil records are, they are a puzzle of the past being put back together. The pieces always appear to fit thus justifying the theory.
But no fossil's of these in between mutations?
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Gandalf
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Gandalf
I like Dawkins, but there is no evidence of these mutations. Doesn't matter how long the video is, answer is still the same, evidence please.
Most people think carbon dating means its fact, but how many actually know how accurate it is? I doubt you will find anywhere saying that it is accurate past 60,000 years. But they want to speculate billions of years back?
What do you mean there is no evidence of macro mutation, do we not see this in dogs and cats, for example, over a relatively short time span? To see the evolution of a creature in the sense that it goes from the sea to the land you are talking a very long period of time, but we do have fossil records as incomplete as they are. You have to go by the evidence that exists. I am sure if we make it another million years we will be little bit different and have a fossil record to show it. We have records, though not perfect, for how we have got where we are today.
Here is the evolution of our friend the whale.
https://ocean.si.edu/through-time/an...ales-animation
What do you mean we see it in cats and dogs? I've never seen a cat mutate into a dog. That's what macro mutation is. 1 species mutating into another.
Again where are all these in between mutations? And why have all the supposed links they have found, Lucy etc turned out to be hoaxes?
What happens to a fish when you see it out of water? Don't worry about what you have seen or taught, from your experience in life, what happens to a fish when out of water?
A mutation means that something in the evolutionary process changes to produce something different, but that does not mean you can just flip into a new species. You will only move on from the common ancestor that you have. A cat is not going to evolve into a dog, but you have seen cats of all types evolve certainly over millions of years with the different types of wild cats and their various appearances, sizes and characteristics. Even in the relatively short term we have seen many types of dogs emerge by blending other dogs and in a very short period of time. Along with it come health issues as such evolution has been too quick and at a detrimental cost to the poor mutt who wasn't going to emerge like that through natural selection alone.
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
Quote:
Originally Posted by
walrus
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
Quote:
Originally Posted by
walrus
Yes we get lied to but the government is terrible at keeping secrets. If a Oval Office blow job cant be kept down low, I don’t think a numerous fake moon landings could be kept hush. It wouldn’t be just the astronauts who would need to keep quiet.
Ok but how much does NASA get a day, 20 - 50 mil a day. I can do a lot with 50 mil. And if I'm hiring the stuff , wouldn't it make sense for me to hire people I can control, people I have dirt on? You don't think it's possible for them to threaten your friends and family? How much is a hitman roughly?
If anyone has looked into any pedophile ring stuff, there are reports that some abusers were forced into these acts, recorded, as blackmail so they could speak out for fear of their dirt coming out.
And look at Grissom and Co., if anyone thinks they are untouchable just check out JFK to see you're not.
anything can be twisted and turned at anytime in these theories. People who beleive them can explain any differing point of view, that’s what makes them interesting. That 9-11 video covers everything you can think off. Like Lou Reed said, you can’t beleive everything you read and nothing that you see.
Exactly, so wouldn't it be better to make your mind up on thinking about things logically, rather than accepting fake pictures and video as evidence?
Obvious questions you should ask yourself:
Why has no one ever gone back?
The Van Allen belts, how could the actornauts survive them. When asked about them a actornaut said he doesn't think they were discovered then. So not discovering something means that the miles of radiation won't kill you?
Why have they lost or taped over all the data? It's a pretty historic event for mankind, but obviously not important enough.
Why would they keep giving you fake footage from the ISS or space walks?
Some of these questions were already answered in this thread, i'm pretty sure an explanation can be easily found for all, but if you start from the position that all the official evidence is fake then nothing will ever convince you and you can't lose.
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Gandalf
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
Believing something because you see it in a video or diagrams defies logic.
Again it's blindly following a theory and trying to claim it as fact.
That's what fossil records are, they are a puzzle of the past being put back together. The pieces always appear to fit thus justifying the theory.
But no fossil's of these in between mutations?
Apparently the puzzle is being put together, but I have not seen the actual fossil record myself. I cannot be an expert on IQ, evolution, and space travel all at the same time. :(
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart...red-180963287/
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Incidentally the fake moon landings conspiracy only went ballistic after the 70s movie Capricorn One was released - Mars landing filmed in a studio, Astronauts hunted down and killed. That was some scary shit when I was a kid, the idea everything you've been sold is a lie.
Obviously these days with the internet they've become more popular than ever. However, there's as many vids/articles debunking the so-called fakery as there are claims these days.
It's not a coincidence that people most likely to believe in global/major conspiracies also believe in a supernatural creator. Teleological thinking or something, it's called.
But when you tell the truth the story is always the same, it doesn't change. When you lie, to have to keep changing the story to keep up with the lie.
Evolution is a joke. Instead of just taking their side of the story think about it logically for a second. What do explosions do? Destroy stuff right? But not this big bang explosion, this explosion does something your logic tells you doesn't happen, it creates something.
Right at the beginning and there's already a problem.
Evolution is flawed therefore we must have been created? The "god of the gaps" argument, which is truly illogical.
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Incidentally the fake moon landings conspiracy only went ballistic after the 70s movie Capricorn One was released - Mars landing filmed in a studio, Astronauts hunted down and killed. That was some scary shit when I was a kid, the idea everything you've been sold is a lie.
Obviously these days with the internet they've become more popular than ever. However, there's as many vids/articles debunking the so-called fakery as there are claims these days.
It's not a coincidence that people most likely to believe in global/major conspiracies also believe in a supernatural creator. Teleological thinking or something, it's called.
But when you tell the truth the story is always the same, it doesn't change. When you lie, to have to keep changing the story to keep up with the lie.
Evolution is a joke. Instead of just taking their side of the story think about it logically for a second. What do explosions do? Destroy stuff right? But not this big bang explosion, this explosion does something your logic tells you doesn't happen, it creates something.
Right at the beginning and there's already a problem.
Evolution is flawed therefore we must have been created? The "god of the gaps" argument, which is truly illogical.
So you think all the amazing stuff that happens on earth, all the eco systems, cells etc, everything working perfectly just came together randomly from an explosion? That seems logical.
Rather than something that created everything to work the way it does?
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Gandalf
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Gandalf
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
Believing something because you see it in a video or diagrams defies logic.
Again it's blindly following a theory and trying to claim it as fact.
That's what fossil records are, they are a puzzle of the past being put back together. The pieces always appear to fit thus justifying the theory.
But no fossil's of these in between mutations?
Apparently the puzzle is being put together, but I have not seen the actual fossil record myself. I cannot be an expert on IQ, evolution, and space travel all at the same time. :(
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart...red-180963287/
You don't have to be an expert on anything, just tell me, in your experience, what happens to fish when they are out of water?
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
Quote:
Originally Posted by
walrus
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
Quote:
Originally Posted by
walrus
Yes we get lied to but the government is terrible at keeping secrets. If a Oval Office blow job cant be kept down low, I don’t think a numerous fake moon landings could be kept hush. It wouldn’t be just the astronauts who would need to keep quiet.
Ok but how much does NASA get a day, 20 - 50 mil a day. I can do a lot with 50 mil. And if I'm hiring the stuff , wouldn't it make sense for me to hire people I can control, people I have dirt on? You don't think it's possible for them to threaten your friends and family? How much is a hitman roughly?
If anyone has looked into any pedophile ring stuff, there are reports that some abusers were forced into these acts, recorded, as blackmail so they could speak out for fear of their dirt coming out.
And look at Grissom and Co., if anyone thinks they are untouchable just check out JFK to see you're not.
anything can be twisted and turned at anytime in these theories. People who beleive them can explain any differing point of view, that’s what makes them interesting. That 9-11 video covers everything you can think off. Like Lou Reed said, you can’t beleive everything you read and nothing that you see.
Exactly, so wouldn't it be better to make your mind up on thinking about things logically, rather than accepting fake pictures and video as evidence?
Obvious questions you should ask yourself:
Why has no one ever gone back?
The Van Allen belts, how could the actornauts survive them. When asked about them a actornaut said he doesn't think they were discovered then. So not discovering something means that the miles of radiation won't kill you?
Why have they lost or taped over all the data? It's a pretty historic event for mankind, but obviously not important enough.
Why would they keep giving you fake footage from the ISS or space walks?
Some of these questions were already answered in this thread, i'm pretty sure an explanation can be easily found for all, but if you start from the position that all the official evidence is fake then nothing will ever convince you and you can't lose.
I'm not about winning or losing, just getting people to think for themselves. Rather than what they have been brainwashed to believe is true. If you look at the evidence and still believe we went to the moon fine, but I find it impossible that anyone could not believe the amount of evidence that is available.
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
Quote:
Originally Posted by
walrus
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
Quote:
Originally Posted by
walrus
Yes we get lied to but the government is terrible at keeping secrets. If a Oval Office blow job cant be kept down low, I don’t think a numerous fake moon landings could be kept hush. It wouldn’t be just the astronauts who would need to keep quiet.
Ok but how much does NASA get a day, 20 - 50 mil a day. I can do a lot with 50 mil. And if I'm hiring the stuff , wouldn't it make sense for me to hire people I can control, people I have dirt on? You don't think it's possible for them to threaten your friends and family? How much is a hitman roughly?
If anyone has looked into any pedophile ring stuff, there are reports that some abusers were forced into these acts, recorded, as blackmail so they could speak out for fear of their dirt coming out.
And look at Grissom and Co., if anyone thinks they are untouchable just check out JFK to see you're not.
anything can be twisted and turned at anytime in these theories. People who beleive them can explain any differing point of view, that’s what makes them interesting. That 9-11 video covers everything you can think off. Like Lou Reed said, you can’t beleive everything you read and nothing that you see.
Exactly, so wouldn't it be better to make your mind up on thinking about things logically, rather than accepting fake pictures and video as evidence?
Obvious questions you should ask yourself:
Why has no one ever gone back?
The Van Allen belts, how could the actornauts survive them. When asked about them a actornaut said he doesn't think they were discovered then. So not discovering something means that the miles of radiation won't kill you?
Why have they lost or taped over all the data? It's a pretty historic event for mankind, but obviously not important enough.
Why would they keep giving you fake footage from the ISS or space walks?
Some of these questions were already answered in this thread, i'm pretty sure an explanation can be easily found for all, but if you start from the position that all the official evidence is fake then nothing will ever convince you and you can't lose.
I'm not about winning or losing, just getting people to think for themselves. Rather than what they have been brainwashed to believe is true. If you look at the evidence and still believe we went to the moon fine, but I find it impossible that anyone could not believe the amount of evidence that is available.
The problem is you're asking questions which have an answer but refuse to believe the answers because you don't trust the source. For instance -
The Van Allen belts, how could the actornauts survive them? Answer - Van Allen belts, where the Earth’s magnetic field concentrates solar radiation, would be dangerous only if people lingered there for several days. In fact the astronauts whizzed through in a matter of hours, receiving a radiation dose no greater than a medical X-ray.
The pictures on the moon are fake? Answer - Footage of Neil Armstrong’s small step was shot by a camera mounted on the outside of the Eagle lander. Pictures of Armstrong’s first step taken from the surface of the moon are actually Buzz Aldrin descending the ladder, snapped by Armstrong. Remote cameras left on the moon could easily record the departure of lunar modules
There's no point in looking at evidence in the first place if you've already made up your mind.
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
Quote:
Originally Posted by
walrus
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
Quote:
Originally Posted by
walrus
Yes we get lied to but the government is terrible at keeping secrets. If a Oval Office blow job cant be kept down low, I don’t think a numerous fake moon landings could be kept hush. It wouldn’t be just the astronauts who would need to keep quiet.
Ok but how much does NASA get a day, 20 - 50 mil a day. I can do a lot with 50 mil. And if I'm hiring the stuff , wouldn't it make sense for me to hire people I can control, people I have dirt on? You don't think it's possible for them to threaten your friends and family? How much is a hitman roughly?
If anyone has looked into any pedophile ring stuff, there are reports that some abusers were forced into these acts, recorded, as blackmail so they could speak out for fear of their dirt coming out.
And look at Grissom and Co., if anyone thinks they are untouchable just check out JFK to see you're not.
anything can be twisted and turned at anytime in these theories. People who beleive them can explain any differing point of view, that’s what makes them interesting. That 9-11 video covers everything you can think off. Like Lou Reed said, you can’t beleive everything you read and nothing that you see.
Exactly, so wouldn't it be better to make your mind up on thinking about things logically, rather than accepting fake pictures and video as evidence?
Obvious questions you should ask yourself:
Why has no one ever gone back?
The Van Allen belts, how could the actornauts survive them. When asked about them a actornaut said he doesn't think they were discovered then. So not discovering something means that the miles of radiation won't kill you?
Why have they lost or taped over all the data? It's a pretty historic event for mankind, but obviously not important enough.
Why would they keep giving you fake footage from the ISS or space walks?
Some of these questions were already answered in this thread, i'm pretty sure an explanation can be easily found for all, but if you start from the position that all the official evidence is fake then nothing will ever convince you and you can't lose.
I'm not about winning or losing, just getting people to think for themselves. Rather than what they have been brainwashed to believe is true. If you look at the evidence and still believe we went to the moon fine, but I find it impossible that anyone could not believe the amount of evidence that is available.
The problem is you're asking questions which have an answer but refuse to believe the answers because you don't trust the source. For instance -
The Van Allen belts, how could the actornauts survive them? Answer -
Van Allen belts, where the Earth’s magnetic field concentrates solar radiation, would be dangerous only if people lingered there for several days. In fact the astronauts whizzed through in a matter of hours, receiving a radiation dose no greater than a medical X-ray.
The pictures on the moon are fake? Answer -
Footage of Neil Armstrong’s small step was shot by a camera mounted on the outside of the Eagle lander. Pictures of Armstrong’s first step taken from the surface of the moon are actually Buzz Aldrin descending the ladder, snapped by Armstrong. Remote cameras left on the moon could easily record the departure of lunar modules
There's no point in looking at evidence in the first place if you've already made up your mind.
Of course they have a cover story for everything. It's all good. The government wouldn't lie to you. They have your best interests at heart. Don't worry about the millions they are steal from us, you have fake images and video as your proof. The government has always told you the truth so there's no reason not to believe what they are telling me now. Yeah who cares that after 500 years of telling us there are 9 planets, that nah that not right Pluto is no longer a planet. But don't worry trust us, this other stuff we're telling and showing you is right.
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Gandalf
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Gandalf
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
Believing something because you see it in a video or diagrams defies logic.
Again it's blindly following a theory and trying to claim it as fact.
That's what fossil records are, they are a puzzle of the past being put back together. The pieces always appear to fit thus justifying the theory.
But no fossil's of these in between mutations?
Apparently the puzzle is being put together, but I have not seen the actual fossil record myself. I cannot be an expert on IQ, evolution, and space travel all at the same time. :(
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart...red-180963287/
You don't have to be an expert on anything, just tell me, in your experience, what happens to fish when they are out of water?
Well, a fully formed fish would die, but a creature that evolved over millions of years until it was finally able to leave the water for extended periods would perhaps have been a bit like this. I don't think a fish could ever just step onto land and have a fun time.
https://www.nature.com/news/2006/060.../060403-7.html
Why do you think whales have lungs? Why not just have gills like other fish? Evolution explains it better than anything else.
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
Again when they have a cover story it's really just hearsay.
But you can look at the images and film that is available and see quite clearly that stuff doesn't make sense.
The actornauts left quite deep footprints right? Seems a little strange as they were lighter due to the moons atmosphere. Oh but the lunar module didn't even make an indent. Or a blast creator of some sort when lifting back off.
Cross hairs etched into the camera lenses, but turning up behind images.
Actornauts being pulled up from his knees unnaturally, like a harness pulling him up.
Moon rocks turning out to be fake.
The list goes on and on.
I mean, if they have lied to you before, what makes you want to believe them so willingly now?
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Gandalf
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Gandalf
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Gandalf
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
Believing something because you see it in a video or diagrams defies logic.
Again it's blindly following a theory and trying to claim it as fact.
That's what fossil records are, they are a puzzle of the past being put back together. The pieces always appear to fit thus justifying the theory.
But no fossil's of these in between mutations?
Apparently the puzzle is being put together, but I have not seen the actual fossil record myself. I cannot be an expert on IQ, evolution, and space travel all at the same time. :(
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart...red-180963287/
You don't have to be an expert on anything, just tell me, in your experience, what happens to fish when they are out of water?
Well, a fully formed fish would die, but a creature that evolved over millions of years until it was finally able to leave the water for extended periods would perhaps have been a bit like this. I don't think a fish could ever just step onto land and have a fun time.
https://www.nature.com/news/2006/060.../060403-7.html
Why do you think whales have lungs? Why not just have gills like other fish? Evolution explains it better than anything else.
But your basing your belief on something your own logic tells you can't happen.
Every fish I have ever seen, dies out of water. But these magic evolution fish, that all started from an explosion, then from a single cell, that then multiplied, and mutated into fish (something that has never been proven, one species mutating into another type of species) who somehow managed to stay alive long enough to change their gills into lungs. Then these creatures mutated along through to apes, along to man.
And no where to be seen, one of these in between mutations, at any step of the way, there should be millions of them around. All this mutating going on.
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
A scientific method must be observable and repeatable. Can you think of 1 piece observable evidence for Darwinism evolution?
Again it's blindly faith, following what you have been told and taught. No actual evidence.
-
Re: NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years
As I said, Alpha, you haven't started from an impartial position - "lets examine the evidence," you've already decided any explanation which refutes the conspiracy theory is invalid because the source is corrupt, so what is the point in asking questions in the first place?
Footprints? Answer - Particles of moon dust have a different size and shape from sand and don't need moisture to hold a compressed shape. Many powders on Earth can behave in the same way. Try walking in spilt talcum powder
No Blast Crater? Answer - At first glance, conspiracy theorists have a point here. There should be a blast crater beneath the landing module - that is, if it were making its landing on Earth instead of a lower gravity environment. Landing on the Moon requires far less thrust than is necessary on Earth since there is far less gravitational pull.
Additionally, the landing module set down on solid rock and left no more of a crater than a 747 jet would on the runway at an airport. The lack of a crater actually supports the authenticity of the Moon landing, because if they were perpetuating a hoax, it stands to reason NASA would have also thought of a blast crater and made sure there was one in place to satisfy the critics. The fact of the matter is there was no crater created by the actual landing, and they did not feel compelled to dig one so that their landing would appear more authentic.
From your starting point every possible explanation is dismissed with - corruption. It is the same with virtually all conspiracy theories.
