Won't get fooled again ...Moon Landing.
So is this a good time to mention that the moon is actually a holographic projection? http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread844642/pg1
Well, I'm convinced.
The moon landing was faked.
Next time we go, I'm not believing it.
I am quite looking forward to the day we can prove some posters on this forum have landed on Earth, let alone mankind landing on a holographic proje.... sorry... on the moon.
When Looking at uncertain situations be it conspiracy theorys or not one must be able to challenge everything in order to choose what to believe, because in the end none of us were there (inside craft at the time )and knows for sure.
From my viewpoint , and i may be wrong i think Americans Landed on the moon on July 20, 1969.Russians didnt contest it to my knoledge .Why was the ORIGINALl footage of one of the highest moments in human histoy overwritten and other "dubious" themes i dont have a formed oppinion but sounds a bit... awkward at least and its things like these that fuel the sometimes controversial themes
What i find amazind is caracters like DJS.
One thing i learned over the years is that the kind of people that :
1 - are UNABLE to discuss a subject without insulting others "immature arrogant narcissist" "insane" implying drinking problems or bisexuallity in other users
2 - asks for peoples C.V. in order to accept theyre oppinion , but he that presents himself as some sort of "specialist" with extensive contacts within the area dont provide nothing to back that up apart from i did this and that that a 12 year old can write in theyre mama basement:
"Please provide your level of education, your advanced degrees and the experience you have that enables you to make such definitive statements about technical and scientific issues." Evidence sir , is not what you say you did , but what you can prove to others BTW, in case you didnt had trainning in that Area
3 - Generalization ( all conspiracy theorys in same bag)
Are just TOXIC , dont promote a healthy discussion and there should be an option to skip theyre low standars comments.
Implying that in order to fake an event this size WOULD HAVE to have many ppl involved , i am sorry sir , but that just demonstrates how limited your knowledge of Space Operations is ,withing N.A.S.A or E.S.A only ones i have some info.IF you really had some insight you would know that is a NEED TO KNOW BASIS and the whole picture is only available for a few (i can understand why and is understandable i think)
So you see , although i sort have the same end opinion that you in this issue , our aproach collide frontally
in wich i think you REASON with people as you apparently want to force them to believe in you by calling them (*******) if they present other perspective or pointing out sexual remarks wich is , you know ,LOW and surelly not from someone so extensivelly experienced in discussing complicated tecnical issues with other people.
I would ask Simon to have a look at this , as if users are HARASSED and INSULTED by theyre opinion and they dont have an option to blacklist /ignore that person they will leave , as it is one of his purpose ,written in other post.
Take Care All
Well " kick50r" I am " The Rebel " who started this O.P. If you are interested, the way I look at it is that, it was a very grave mistake of me to label my O.P heading " Won't get fooled again.... Moon Landing" as it implied I didn't believe man landed on the moon, and it also implied I had evidence to support the claim. Such a conclusion was however pure fantazy.
To clarify, now wiser to Internet debate,I would never start a new O.P " The National Socialist revolution was the revolution against the spirit of cosmopolitan tastes" because I believe I would find the thread fall of banal, stupid conversation, allowing opportunity for posters who like to create controversy.
However I have learnt starting threads about the brands of different chocolates, or about berry picking, are never banal, stupid threads, because although not serious they have away of discovering the hearts and minds of posters and developing in to O.Ps of far greater meaning than the O.P suggested.
P.s " Kick50r" whilst you suggest DJS bullied me on this thread, it would be remiss of me not to mention it was a very short winter, and on other threads we get on great.
Hello " The Rebel" .
Ive read all you and other users wrote in this thread , and i dont think having Toxic people comenting on your thread is your fault. People that like to contribute somehow and give theyre opinion will do it , and toxic people will ... welll we already know what .
While i may seem to suggest DJS bullied you in this thread , what i meant was he did it to the most of the people that presented valid arguments that colided against him.
Now , if people come to a thread to give an opinion , as SOME USERS did in this thread , and we DONT HAVE any other option to avoid such toxic ,pathetic, offensive behaviour from ONE USER, something is wrong.
I think this forum has rules .The behaviour from this user complies with those rules ?
I would ask Simon to have a look at this thread ,because although this issue concerns all involved , obviouslly in the end it is is final word that i will respect.
There were no valid arguments presented in this OP regarding the moon landing being faked. None. There were valid questions that were answered with evidence cited from experts, as well as rock solid analyses provided by me and others. As I stated in Sevan's OP you also resurrected for one purpose - to skewer me - I've posted on hundreds of OPs. I've left a target rich environment, so knock yourself out.
And when you find an error I've made please present it. I don't want to be wrong any longer than necessary. Good luck.
You won't find any errors from me in this OP. If you want to avoid my sarcasm and wise ass comments it is very simple. Don't post nonsense.
Kick, I can help you, but you have to let me.
About 30 percent of American citizens (aka Trump supporters) —and maybe lots more—are as dumb as a bag of inbred hammers.
From a recent (2013) Vanity Fair article, citing a poll taken by Public Policy Polling, ranked by Fordham University as the best out of 28 organizations for the accuracy of its national pre-election estimates.
Twenty-six percent of Americans either believe that Barack Obama is the Anti-Christ, and is preparing for war with the Messiah or aren’t sure that he isn’t. 26 percent also believe that the government puts fluoride into drinking water not for dental health but for “other, more sinister reasons,” as the P.P.P. question read. It was all a communist plot, you see, to do . . . something.
Fifty-four percent of Americans—either believes that childhood vaccinations cause autism or aren’t sure whether they do. Never mind that study after study, including one just released by the Centers for Disease Control, say this belief is uneducated malarkey. Why should anyone consider that when we have former Playboy model and B-movie actress Jenny McCarthy disagreeing? Yes, that is where we are: Americans are more likely to believe a nursing-school dropout than PhDs from America’s most prestigious institutions of higher learning.
Forty-nine percent either believe the college dropouts and billionaires or aren’t sure if they should—that global warming is a hoax. Not simply that scientists are in error (which they aren’t) but that they have orchestrated the most expensive, wide-ranging, and mind-numbing fraud in the history of the world, just ’cause.
Once again, it’s the PhDs versus college dropouts like Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity. Sure, there are a few scientists—almost never climatologists—who cast aspersions on the idea that all the melting ice and record temperatures in the world might have something to do with the planet getting warmer. But when the vast, vast, vast majority of scientists—including one hired by the Koch brothers, the multi-billionaires with a financial interest in poo-poohing climate change—have concluded not only that the phenomenon is real but that it is being triggered by man-made pollutants, perhaps doubters should set aside their doubts.
But the Limbaughs and Hannitys of the world have done a great job convincing Americans that climatologists have entered into this massive, incomprehensible conspiracy to fool the world that there’s a problem. The reason, they say, is that climatologists are doing it for the money, so they can continue to live in their climatologist mansions and drive their climatologist Ferraris. (For the 26 percent who might not get it, that was sarcasm.) Meanwhile, the people who selflessly fight for Americans—the billionaire industrialists and oil-industry magnates—speak only truth because, you know, they have no financial reason to suggest climate change is a fraud. After all, they have dedicated themselves to a modest life so they can advance the truth, residing in their tumble-down, billionaire shacks and driving their billionaire 1994 Chevys. (Once again—sarcasm.)
If a doctor said you had stomach cancer, would you consult Rush Limbaugh for a second opinion? Of course, that sounds like nonsense, but many Americans have no qualms about listening to political commentators and untrained activists when it comes to even more complex scientific questions. In essence, the greater amount of training it takes to understand something, the more likely, it seems, that Americans will turn to people with shallow knowledge for guidance.
Take vaccines and autism. The entire idea started with a horrific, fraudulent study in a 1998 issue of the Lancet. Click on the link to the abstract, and you’ll notice the large, red word “RETRACTED” across it. The reason is that the study has been deemed a fraud. Not a single legitimate study backs the idea. But the McCarthys of the world march on, true believers who are simply unqualified, frightening Americans into believing their children are safer if they have no protections against deadly disease.
The untrained assault on climate change is the same thing. Consistently, political commentators will say such things as “there’s a blizzard! Global warming is fake!” without any understanding that there is a huge difference between weather and climate.](http://www.nasa.gov/missionpages/noaa-n/climate/climateweather.html))
I think your going about this wrong,
You are asking the opinions of others presumably to measure them in forming your opinion,
Instead I suggest you go in the internet and Google "how to critical thinking"
Do your own research,
Look at the verifiable evidence
Listen to both sides of the argument
Form a conclusion that was reached rationally,
Tepid the Skeptic
With a caveat. If one side of the argument has no specific education, no in depth knowledge and no real experience on an issue then, unless they are citing those who do have such, they should be viewed with suspicion if not ignored.
That's what the Vanity Fair article above points out, and it is what I stress each time the CT whackadoodles start with their nonsense.
The world wide web, with CT sites that have spread like the infection they are, has contributed to the CT mindset and the spread of this sometimes deadly and always de-evolving disease.
Having been a college professor, it rankles me more than a bit to have uneducated dumbasses taking an entrenched stand or an issue for which they know nothing and are too lazy to obtain actual empirical data.
They seek to level or minimize the giants whose shoes they aren't fit to tie - men and women with advanced degrees (you idiots have ANY idea what it takes to get a Master's degree or a PhD???), decades of experience in a specific field and the ethics of Ghandi.
And all these dimwits have is a mouse and their mama's Internet account.
I find that disgusting. Vomit inducing disgusting.