Lol well firstly you are assuming that the technology used in faking the moon landing had to be greater than in 2001: A Space Odyssey. My point is that they would not need technology greater than that to fake the moon landing, in fact, one could pull it off with the same or even much worse technology even as simple as using wires. I think the man in the video is making a classic strawman argument.
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
the article doesn't say that. it says hundreds of rocks were given out by the state dept. in the 1970's -- but this doddering old man claimed to have received this in 1969. no one ever confirmed a rock was given to a half-blind, half-deaf man in his 80's who was no longer an employee of the Dutch government a mere 3 months after the first moon mission.
try reading it again -- the words that are actually there, not the ones you want to be there
try reading it again -- the words that are actually there, not the ones you want to be there
Excerpt from article:
"The museum acquired the rock after the death of former Prime Minister Willem Drees in 1988. Drees received it as a private gift on Oct. 9, 1969, from then-U.S. ambassador J. William Middendorf during a visit by the three Apollo 11 astronauts, part of their "Giant Leap" goodwill tour after the first moon landing."
T
I know strawman arguments and that man didn't make one. I'm not debating that they couldn't fake the moon landing. I'm debating the fact that they could make it look realistic. Stanley Kubrick's movie is enjoyable (well, the last half), but it certainly doesn't look real. That's the difference I'm talking about. You couldn't fake the moon landing in a studio, back in 1969. It just wasn't possible.
Well then it would be a strawman argument that they'd need such and such technology in order to fake the moon landing when in fact they do not need it or even much technology at all. That is why it is a strawman argument because the premise of advanced movie technology is not necessary to fake the moon landing.
As for your argument that it looks realistic, lol, to me it looks very fake and cheap, like unto those old movies such as Planet of the Apes. Added on to the anomalies, the mess ups, and NASA's reputation for being dubious and liars and faking pictures in today's time only lends support to my point that the moon landing is a hoax, and indeed not just the moon landing.
NASA can't be trusted Tintin. Quite frankly, I am kind of surpised you of all the people on here have not perceived this given that you have perceived past the other common lies of science falsely so-called such as old earth mythology (which you will find relies in part on the space lies.)
As for your argument that it looks realistic, lol, to me it looks very fake and cheap, like unto those old movies such as Planet of the Apes. Added on to the anomalies, the mess ups, and NASA's reputation for being dubious and liars and faking pictures in today's time only lends support to my point that the moon landing is a hoax, and indeed not just the moon landing.
NASA can't be trusted Tintin. Quite frankly, I am kind of surpised you of all the people on here have not perceived this given that you have perceived past the other common lies of science falsely so-called such as old earth mythology (which you will find relies in part on the space lies.)
I
I don't mind the topic change. It all goes together anyways.
I never believed we went to the moon myself.
I think we had the technology to fake the landing, I think we've had it a long time. Just because Hollywood didn't use it doesn't mean it wasn't used. (NASA) I saw the movie Interstellar and in it they said we faked the landings to bankrupt Russia in a race to the moon. We would definitely do something like that lol. Even in the 60's. Watch videos of Buzz and his 'handler' during his late year interviews. (I'll try to find the vid)
I'm still curious how some say we couldn't fake landings but we somehow had tech that allowed the feed from the moon to be live....
In WildHeretic's articles its said that as per human nature... IF we went to the moon, we never came back. One.. Its impossible.. Two.. We'd rape the moon for whatever resource we could get from it. I still don't think we've ever been. But if we made it, we're still there.
I never believed we went to the moon myself.
I think we had the technology to fake the landing, I think we've had it a long time. Just because Hollywood didn't use it doesn't mean it wasn't used. (NASA) I saw the movie Interstellar and in it they said we faked the landings to bankrupt Russia in a race to the moon. We would definitely do something like that lol. Even in the 60's. Watch videos of Buzz and his 'handler' during his late year interviews. (I'll try to find the vid)
I'm still curious how some say we couldn't fake landings but we somehow had tech that allowed the feed from the moon to be live....
In WildHeretic's articles its said that as per human nature... IF we went to the moon, we never came back. One.. Its impossible.. Two.. We'd rape the moon for whatever resource we could get from it. I still don't think we've ever been. But if we made it, we're still there.
Last edited by a moderator:
I
This show actually made me laugh out loud.
To Catch A Comet | PBS Programs | PBS
They're so clever. *eye roll*
To Catch A Comet | PBS Programs | PBS
They're so clever. *eye roll*
E
The sun the moon Mars etc.. Are all spheres as the earth is too.
[TABLE="align: center"]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[TABLE="align: center"]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[TABLE="align: center"]
[TR]
[TD]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[TR]
[TD]
He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in.[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
I
But does circle mean a ball, or a flat circle? A concave circle? Which circle seems plausible with a firmament? Do we have a solid firmament? The meaning of firmament seems to imply a solid of sorts.
If not a solid, explain how it separates the waters above from waters below?
Oh and watch this. Curious.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=vGdhdZH7T7k
Idk why it's not clickable
If not a solid, explain how it separates the waters above from waters below?
Oh and watch this. Curious.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=vGdhdZH7T7k
Idk why it's not clickable
Last edited by a moderator:
S
sometimes edisontrent lolIm just happy to be a lover of say a rose...
Just a poetic writer on how the dew captures the light upon that petal
And I write the beauty of what I see.
Lol Edisontrent
I guess my dear friend what Im saying is
I like being the viewer lol of Gods gifts
I dont think Id liked a career as a Botanical researcher lol
For they are required to dissect the contents of a flower.
I just love looking at the beauty of one