NASA says humans could land on Mars in 25 years

[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?

Do u think it was only being transmitted via landline

Are you just going to keep asking me questions, but not answer any yourself. I always answer a question when asked, check my posts, anyone asks me something, if I see it obviously, I will answer. No problem.

I could speculate that it could have been transmitted by satellite link or something like that. I don't believe that. But your missing the point.

[p4pking]

Walrus actually makes a good point that applies to most conspiracy theories, especially something like 911. There is never anyone credible who was “allegedly” part of it that comes out even hinting at a hoax. Now think about how many people would have had to be directly involved, much less privy to it happening, in order to make something like that work. You don’t think there would be so much as a deathbed confession? They would all go to the grave too afraid of “them”? No offence but you’re posting like a stoned teenager. You haven’t answered questions or cited any of your own evidence to the contrary, and it’s you’re*, ffs.....

[Alpha]

Walrus actually makes a good point that applies to most conspiracy theories, especially something like 911. There is never anyone credible who was “allegedly” part of it that comes out even hinting at a hoax. Now think about how many people would have had to be directly involved, much less privy to it happening, in order to make something like that work. You don’t think there would be so much as a deathbed confession? They would all go to the grave too afraid of “them”? No offence but you’re posting like a stoned teenager. You haven’t answered questions or cited any of your own evidence to the contrary, and it’s you’re*, ffs.....

Come on mate, don't worry about the spelling. That's weak.

Just saying there are no confessions, is not proof that the moon landings are real. In no way does it prove the authenticity.

What questions haven't I answered?

I like to use stuff I am familiar with, no base my ideas on photo shopped images or fake films.

I am familiar with phones, we all are. We are all familiar with cell phones right?

Now in 2018 just walking into another room on my phone, my reception can drop out. We all have experience with this. We all know it wouldn't be possible to have a cable from earth to the moon, so the president could talk on a landline to the guys on the moon.

But that's the story they sold you. I didn't make that video. They did. So I ask myself, why would they be selling me this story that I know can't be real. Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me. Then you look into everything else and it is comically how brain washed we are. Believing film, images and stories, rather than your own common sense, when it's obvious to see that they are lying to you.

And I can provide you any evidence you want, they supplied the images that you can examine for yourself and see they have been altered or have no noise.

You can look up the official logs and compare them. The story about traveling through the Van Allan belts as safely as possible, completely contradict their official logs.

[p4pking]

It’s not spelling, you’re using the wrong word and it makes you sound like a kid. Saying there were no confessions would be using the common sense you like to bang on about, it would be very very hard to believe nobody either involved or with credentials in anything related to space travel or astrophysics ever came out to support your claims. The vast majority of early unmanned attempts to land on the moon over nearly two decades failed. Were they all a hoax too? There have been numerous 3rd party investigations by neutral countries with their own space programs in later years which have photographed the site of and confirmed the moon landing, fact. If you listen to Nixon’s conversation unedited, there was well over a 2 second pause in most of the exchanges, as it was made via a radio call that had to be relayed from numerous satellites and then from Houston. Sometimes the “story” we are told is just what happened, otherwise people a hell of a lot smarter than we are could have come up with something of substance to refute it.

[Alpha]

It’s not spelling, you’re using the wrong word and it makes you sound like a kid. Saying there were no confessions would be using the common sense you like to bang on about, it would be very very hard to believe nobody either involved or with credentials in anything related to space travel or astrophysics ever came out to support your claims. The vast majority of early unmanned attempts to land on the moon over nearly two decades failed. Were they all a hoax too? There have been numerous 3rd party investigations by neutral countries with their own space programs in later years which have photographed the site of and confirmed the moon landing, fact. If you listen to Nixon’s conversation unedited, there was well over a 2 second pause in most of the exchanges, as it was made via a radio call that had to be relayed from numerous satellites and then from Houston. Sometimes the “story” we are told is just what happened, otherwise people a hell of a lot smarter than we are could have come up with something of substance to refute it.

We're in a boxing forum bud, take a break. Sometimes auto correct changes sh-t, and I don't really care to go back and proof read.

The evidence is there. How easy is it to blackmail people? Threaten you or your loved ones lives? Destroy you're credibility? NASA was getting millions a day. People are easy to control. This is shown everyday in TV and films, it's not beyond the realm of impossibility.

Again you're taking the word of all these agencies and their images and films. They all have an agenda.

The evidence is there for everyone to see if they look into it. No ones hiding it.

[Primo Carnera]

I haven’t had a lot to say recently on this , and that’s only because @Alpha is saying it so much better than I could . #team@Alpha

[Alpha]

Thanks Primo, I feel alone out here. Just a bit on the claim they transmitted the Nixon call by radio. A radio wave can most certainly reach much further than the moon if it is propagated correctly and has enough strength . The delay is the only problem , as it would take about 4.34 seconds, sunlight takes 9 min. 20 sec. to reach us btw , and light or radio waves travel the same speed in a vacuum. Nothing wrong with a well - meaning publicity stunt , I guess.

I take it p4pking watched the Nixon call I'm taking about. Forget the fake delays you hear. Towards the end when Nixon says something about seeing them on the Hornet or something. Check the delay, probably less than 2 seconds. Hmmmm

[p4pking]

It’s not spelling, you’re using the wrong word and it makes you sound like a kid. Saying there were no confessions would be using the common sense you like to bang on about, it would be very very hard to believe nobody either involved or with credentials in anything related to space travel or astrophysics ever came out to support your claims. The vast majority of early unmanned attempts to land on the moon over nearly two decades failed. Were they all a hoax too? There have been numerous 3rd party investigations by neutral countries with their own space programs in later years which have photographed the site of and confirmed the moon landing, fact. If you listen to Nixon’s conversation unedited, there was well over a 2 second pause in most of the exchanges, as it was made via a radio call that had to be relayed from numerous satellites and then from Houston. Sometimes the “story” we are told is just what happened, otherwise people a hell of a lot smarter than we are could have come up with something of substance to refute it.

We're in a boxing forum bud, take a break. Sometimes auto correct changes sh-t, and I don't really care to go back and proof read.

The evidence is there. How easy is it to blackmail people? Threaten you or your loved ones lives? Destroy you're credibility? NASA was getting millions a day. People are easy to control. This is shown everyday in TV and films, it's not beyond the realm of impossibility.

Again you're taking the word of all these agencies and their images and films. They all have an agenda.

The evidence is there for everyone to see if they look into it. No ones hiding it.

Auto correct never changes you’re to your, and you kept doing it without exception. The evidence is there, you’re free to look into it why would neutral countries decades later again conduct elaborate hoaxes to support a conspiracy that would be so outdated? You think there are agencies with that kind of worldwide pull and threat? I just think it would’ve been easier to land on the moon than it would be to fake it, conduct such elaborate cover up stories and maintain them for decades around the world, keeping so many people quiet, etc. The irony is, in calling “them” fraudulent, you actually give all these outfits far too much credit.

[Alpha]

It’s not spelling, you’re using the wrong word and it makes you sound like a kid. Saying there were no confessions would be using the common sense you like to bang on about, it would be very very hard to believe nobody either involved or with credentials in anything related to space travel or astrophysics ever came out to support your claims. The vast majority of early unmanned attempts to land on the moon over nearly two decades failed. Were they all a hoax too? There have been numerous 3rd party investigations by neutral countries with their own space programs in later years which have photographed the site of and confirmed the moon landing, fact. If you listen to Nixon’s conversation unedited, there was well over a 2 second pause in most of the exchanges, as it was made via a radio call that had to be relayed from numerous satellites and then from Houston. Sometimes the “story” we are told is just what happened, otherwise people a hell of a lot smarter than we are could have come up with something of substance to refute it.

We're in a boxing forum bud, take a break. Sometimes auto correct changes sh-t, and I don't really care to go back and proof read.

The evidence is there. How easy is it to blackmail people? Threaten you or your loved ones lives? Destroy you're credibility? NASA was getting millions a day. People are easy to control. This is shown everyday in TV and films, it's not beyond the realm of impossibility.

Again you're taking the word of all these agencies and their images and films. They all have an agenda.

The evidence is there for everyone to see if they look into it. No ones hiding it.

Auto correct never changes you’re to your, and you kept doing it without exception. The evidence is there, you’re free to look into it why would neutral countries decades later again conduct elaborate hoaxes to support a conspiracy that would be so outdated? You think there are agencies with that kind of worldwide pull and threat? I just think it would’ve been easier to land on the moon than it would be to fake it, conduct such elaborate cover up stories and maintain them for decades around the world, keeping so many people quiet, etc. The irony is, in calling “them” fraudulent, you actually give all these outfits far too much credit.

If I type Yo on my phone it gives me a selection of You Your and You're at the top of the key board. So the words are already filled out, I just click the one I want, my bad, probably wasn't paying attention, and don't go back to proof read my posts. Sue me, I don't really care. I know the difference in the word. It's not really relevant, you still understand what I'm saying right? Go back and have a look through my other post over the last couple of years, I'm sure I've used it correctly at some point.

Yes I do believe there are agencies working together. But just because you think it would have been easier is not proof against the evidence.

You don't have to take my word for it, debunk it yourself, then you'll find out how much you've been fooled.