Re: Landing on the Moon

Discussion in 'DVD Video' started by Troy, Dec 8, 2003.

  1. Troy

    Troy Guest

    In response to message news:,
    written by Philip Traum <> on 12/7/2003 1:49:07 PM in alt.magic.secrets:

    > Read what you just replyed to again SLOWLY this time. What LINKS can Igive you from pictures in a
    > BOOK? Some book I picked up at a bookstore when I was researching thisand wanted to verify that I
    > could find the picture in a regular book of moon landing photos that was not related to any conspiracy
    > theory, just photographic history.


    A picture like this would be all over the conspiracy sites. Even the
    name of the book would be helpful.

    > If there are any online, you will have to find them yourself, it will take the same effort if you look
    > for them or if I do. I have seen them on line a few years ago, but I have no idea where that was, it
    > would take me just as long to search for it as it would you, and since YOU are the one who wants to see
    > it, YOU should do the work. I did the work years ago when I wanted to see it. Since I already seen
    > it and know it exists, I don't need to find it again, I know that it exists.


    Fine.

    /e spend 20 seconds at Google, finds a dead page, looks at the cached
    copy, changes his Google search, and finds this:

    http://www.geocities.com/aditya_theprince/moon.htm

    The picture in question is, I don't doubt here:
    http://www.geocities.com/aditya_theprince/images/moon3.jpg

    From the page: "If you would also notice that in the place marked F,
    mysteriously there is a footprint."

    > No, I am not making any claim, I am just reporting photographic facts. If you think up some bizarre
    > claim that goes against photographic history, like that we actually did land on the moon, then it is up
    > to YOU to prove that bizarre conspiracy theory.


    You claimed there were "Photos of moon lander on top of footprints that
    would have had to be there before it landed and astronauts got out is
    also nothing we need to prove."

    That footprint (if it even is a footprint) did not necessarily have to
    be there before the LEM landed. It's quite possible that it's *behind*
    the LEM's foot you see in the foreground, not *under* it. It's hard to
    say for certain with a 2D picture, but it does appear to be behind it.

    As has been explained, the astronauts stored equipment under the LEM, so
    they had to go under it to retrieve that equipment.

    > Don't be an idiot. If you could explain it in any way, I could do it too, and I have a lot more
    > intelligence in my head than you do!


    I'd debate this with you, but I'm not lowering myself to your level to
    insult your intelligence.

    > There is nothing to explain, other than the OBVIOUS that the
    > footprint was placed on the set before the lander was placed on top of the footprint.


    It also could be that the footprint was behind the LEM's leg and was
    placed there when the astronauts went under the LEM to retrieve their
    equipment.

    > See what I mean about you being an idiot? And YOU want to look at the pictures to EXPLAIN them to
    > ME?? LOL!


    *If* the LEM landed in the spot of a previous mission, or in a spot were
    astronauts of a previous mission had travelled, the dust under the
    landing gear would not be disturbed by the exhaust, since there is no
    air for the exhaust to push around. You're thinking of how dust behaves
    on Earth, not how it behaves in a vacuum.

    However, looking at the picture, it is more likely that it is just under
    the LEM, behind the landing gear.

    > > Really? I've never seen that in the Bible.

    >
    > Perhaps you should try READING it, rather than just waving it around then.


    When did I *ever* wave the Bible around in here? I'm not the one putting
    Bible quotes in my signature.

    > Here are some other quotes from that mythology bullshit book you most likely have not seen also:


    The Bible has nothing to do with this discussion, so I'm not going to
    give you the pleasure of debating it.


    --
    Troy
     
    Troy, Dec 8, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Troy

    Re: Landing on the Moon

    Troy, Dec 8, 2003, in forum: DVD Video
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    415
  2. Troy

    Re: Fake Moon Landing Texts

    Troy, Dec 8, 2003, in forum: DVD Video
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    474
  3. Troy

    Re: Fake Moon Landing Texts

    Troy, Dec 8, 2003, in forum: DVD Video
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    490
    Mark W
    Dec 8, 2003
  4. Replies:
    3
    Views:
    594
    Michael Gray
    Sep 15, 2005
  5. Replies:
    11
    Views:
    849
    Denis Loubet
    Jan 12, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page