NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years

[Alpha]

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.

[Fenster]

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.

[Alpha]

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.

[Alpha]

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?

[Fenster]

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.

[Alpha]

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.

Trust me I have said many times that I was brain washed and believed what they told me to be true.

The point I was making about the footprints is that the actornauts are heavy enough to leave footprints, but the module isn't? You can clearly see the pads resting on dirt/ sand/ dust whatever, with no dust settling on them after landing. Try jumping in talcum powder and not getting any dust on you.

The module being hoisted up.

Suspicious objects in visor reflections.

Watching the film in 2x speed just looks they are walking on earth.

Like I said, I could go on and on, and you could post the cover stories. But ask yourself, why would I want to deceive you? Have I ever been dishonest or have you caught me in a lie, the whole time I have been on this forum? I think I'm a pretty straight up guy. All I'm asking is that you think for yourself and then decide based on the actual evidence. But I guarantee that the government has lied and deceived you.

30 billion dollars and they lost all the data and audio tapes and destroyed the technology? Come on. And no one cares?

You can repeat everything they say and believe it, but like I said before if you look at the things that you might have some experience with, because neither of us will ever go to space, take the race example I used. You should have experience around something similar. So I win the race to the shop and you just quit?

Or you went somewhere for the first time in 1969 but are unable to go back there today.

Simple questions.

[walrus]

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.

@Fenster is that your writing it’s good

[p4pking]

https://goo.gl/images/uVWfVM