NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years

[p4pking]

https://goo.gl/images/uVWfVM

[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.

@Fenster is that your writing it’s good

If course its not, is someone else's story, which is just hearsay.

Let us analyse all the original data so we can see what actually went on. You lost it? All of it? Come on. Evidence please.

What about the space rocks that were brought back? Can we analyse those please? What they turning out to be fake?

How about another simple question. Remember Nixon on the landline talking to the actors in space in 1969? That's some connection. Even now with today's technology my reception cuts out all over the place. But they have perfect reception hours many thousands of miles away?

Start believing your own common sense, rather than stories.

[walrus]

Was there even one Snowden in the (fake moon landing) conspiracy? Anyone try to spill the beans in all these years

[Alpha]

Was there even one Snowden in the (fake moon landing) conspiracy? Anyone try to spill the beans in all these years

Gus Grissom was outspoken about NASA's capabilities, his team dies 2 weeks later.

But your all missing the obvious, like Nixon on the landline, does anyone here believe he was speaking to the actors on a landline? Then ask yourself why they were presenting that story to you.

If you truly believe that the moon landings were real, you have lost the virtue of discernment and I feel sorry for you.

They can make up any excuse they want about the Van Allen belts, but how many times did they confirm the radiation levels or check that the actors were ok while passing through? Never, seems odd. They'll tell you they had to make a northerly heading to avoid the most dangerous parts, but their logs don't show this, they actually contradict it, and show a heading just south of the equator.

Official NASA images when put into photo forensics show a square background behind images, like they have been pasted on. Also anyone with some photography knowledge knows about noise in photos. It basically means as you brighten an image the dark shadowed areas will also lighten up due to this noise. The NASA photo's don't display any of this noise in the shadowed parts. They remain completely black. This is basic stuff you can do yourself.

The truth never changes, but you have to keep adding to a lie.

[walrus]

Was there even one Snowden in the (fake moon landing) conspiracy? Anyone try to spill the beans in all these years

Gus Grissom was outspoken about NASA's capabilities, his team dies 2 weeks later.

But your all missing the obvious, like Nixon on the landline, does anyone here believe he was speaking to the actors on a landline? Then ask yourself why they were presenting that story to you.

If you truly believe that the moon landings were real, you have lost the virtue of discernment and I feel sorry for you.

They can make up any excuse they want about the Van Allen belts, but how many times did they confirm the radiation levels or check that the actors were ok while passing through? Never, seems odd. They'll tell you they had to make a northerly heading to avoid the most dangerous parts, but their logs don't show this, they actually contradict it, and show a heading just south of the equator.

Official NASA images when put into photo forensics show a square background behind images, like they have been pasted on. Also anyone with some photography knowledge knows about noise in photos. It basically means as you brighten an image the dark shadowed areas will also lighten up due to this noise. The NASA photo's don't display any of this noise in the shadowed parts. They remain completely black. This is basic stuff you can do yourself.

The truth never changes, but you have to keep adding to a lie.

ill ask again cause I never looked, was there even one ed Snowden spilling the beanz.

[walrus]

And alpha, u keep bringing up the landline. What are u saying, you think it was a direct line from the pole to outer space? You don’t think any other tech was involved? I don’t get your hang up with the land line

[Alpha]

And alpha, u keep bringing up the landline. What are u saying, you think it was a direct line from the pole to outer space? You don’t think any other tech was involved? I don’t get your hang up with the land line

My hang up is: Do you believe the president was on a landline talking to the actors hundreds of thousands of miles away?

[Alpha]

Was there even one Snowden in the (fake moon landing) conspiracy? Anyone try to spill the beans in all these years

Gus Grissom was outspoken about NASA's capabilities, his team dies 2 weeks later.

But your all missing the obvious, like Nixon on the landline, does anyone here believe he was speaking to the actors on a landline? Then ask yourself why they were presenting that story to you.

If you truly believe that the moon landings were real, you have lost the virtue of discernment and I feel sorry for you.

They can make up any excuse they want about the Van Allen belts, but how many times did they confirm the radiation levels or check that the actors were ok while passing through? Never, seems odd. They'll tell you they had to make a northerly heading to avoid the most dangerous parts, but their logs don't show this, they actually contradict it, and show a heading just south of the equator.

Official NASA images when put into photo forensics show a square background behind images, like they have been pasted on. Also anyone with some photography knowledge knows about noise in photos. It basically means as you brighten an image the dark shadowed areas will also lighten up due to this noise. The NASA photo's don't display any of this noise in the shadowed parts. They remain completely black. This is basic stuff you can do yourself.

The truth never changes, but you have to keep adding to a lie.

ill ask again cause I never looked, was there even one ed Snowden spilling the beanz.

I can't tell ya, I do know there have been mystery NASA deaths. NASA and the moon landings aren't really my thing, but I am able to use common sense and it really is comical how fake this is.