Whould you get in this if I told you it goes to the moon?

originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People
a reply to: clevargenuis



Why don't you instead respond to the evidence shown that the LM had a solid structure beneath the foil, and thus could withstand the forces exerted on it during the mission. Furthermore, if you have a reason (other than "because I said so") that the structure of the LM could not withstand to forces of landing on the Moon and taking off again, then please post some evidence to support that.

I have every reason to doubt NASAs claims. nasas claims are just that, claims. The only evidence for there claims are from Nasa themselves. Circular arguments galore.

Heres the thing. You werent on the lander.

Those who were in it refused to swear that they really went to the moon. That speaks volumes.

would they not put there hands on a book and SWEAR ?? Answer: They were feeling FEAR, GUILT and SHAME.
.

originally posted by: seagull

a reply to: clevargenuis

You have been asked, several times now, to provide proof of your assertions.

Your continued refusal to do so, in fact, constitutes trolling by almost any definition.

Put up, or shut up.

lm not trolling. I'm just not convinced that the lander made it to the moon. I cant prove it *didnt* go to the moon unless I start putting faith in nasa, which i cant.

Why should I?

originally posted by: OneBigMonkeyToo
a reply to: clevargenuis

Evidence to support your point of view.

Post it.

The astronauts thenselves refused to swear they went to the moon. So why should I believe anything you or nasa claims

originally posted by: clevargenuis

originally posted by: OneBigMonkeyToo
a reply to: clevargenuis

Evidence to support your point of view.

Post it.

The astronauts thenselves refused to swear they went to the moon. So why should I believe anything you or nasa claims

That's not evidence they didn't go. That's just them not putting their hand in a book.

Come on kiddo. Post some evidence. A paper. A YouTube video. Anything. We all know you can do it.

originally posted by: clevargenuis

I have every reason to doubt NASAs claims. nasas claims are just that, claims. The only evidence for there claims are from Nasa themselves. Circular arguments galore.

Wrong. You've obviously ignored the post I made pointing that out to you, and just because you've decided you don't like NASA as a source it does not invalidate their data. Don't just kneejerk your way through a thread saying they are wrong, prove it.

Heres the thing. You werent on the lander.

Neither were you, so this proves what?

Those who were in it refused to swear that they really went to the moon. That speaks volumes.

False. Convicted thug Bart Sibrel had a habit of stalking astronauts, lying to them to get into their homes and then demand they swear on a bible. Several did. Two of them gave him what he deserved.

would they not put there hands on a book and SWEAR ?? Answer: They were feeling FEAR, GUILT and SHAME.

See above. You need to do your research properly. I have met 7 astronauts that have been to the moon, shaken their hand and heard their testimony. What have you done to prove your point?

a reply to: TerryDon79

if they really did go to the moon they would have just put there hands on the book and said so. they didnt and theres no reason for us to assume they did.

That is all the evidence we need, even if the lander was made of titanium.

originally posted by: clevargenuis
a reply to: TerryDon79

if they really did go to the moon they would have just put there hands on the book and said so. they didnt and theres no reason for us to assume they did.

That is all the evidence we need, even if the lander was made of titanium.

That's not evidence.

Post
Some
Evidence

a reply to: clevargenuis

And as I pointed out to you, they did. By your standard that means they went to the moon.

Where is your evidence that the LM was not capable of doing the job for which it was designed?

you've decided you don't like NASA as a source it does not invalidate their data.

and your operating on an Unshakable faith in NASA. nothing i show will be good enough as evidence why dont you admit that roflmao

Convicted thug Bart Sibrel had a habit of stalking astronauts, lying to them to get into their homes and then demand they swear on a bible. Several did. Two of them gave him what he deserved.

the astronauts getting violent simply proves sibrels point that they were hiding something.

if the astronauts didnt swear on camera we have a legitimete reason to conclude that the landings were faked.

originally posted by: clevargenuis

you've decided you don't like NASA as a source it does not invalidate their data.

and your operating on an Unshakable faith in NASA. nothing i show will be good enough as evidence why dont you admit that roflmao

maybe if you posted some evidence we would see if you were correct or not.

Convicted thug Bart Sibrel had a habit of stalking astronauts, lying to them to get into their homes and then demand they swear on a bible. Several did. Two of them gave him what he deserved.

the astronauts getting violent simply proves sibrels point that they were hiding something.

it just proves that he annoyed them a lot. Nothing more, nothing less.

if the astronauts didnt swear on camera we have a legitimete reason to conclude that the landings were faked.

so if someone doesn't swear something on camera then it didn't happen? You couldn't be further from making an argument if you really tried.

Post
Some
Evidence

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: clevargenuis
a reply to: TerryDon79

if they really did go to the moon they would have just put there hands on the book and said so. they didnt and theres no reason for us to assume they did.

That is all the evidence we need, even if the lander was made of titanium.

That's not evidence.

Post
Some
Evidence

Nope.that counts as evidence that nasa faked it.

you asked for evidence, i gave it to you, whether you like it or not.

You dont get to move goalposts and redefine what passes off as evidence lmao.

originally posted by: clevargenuis

originally posted by: TerryDon79

originally posted by: clevargenuis
a reply to: TerryDon79

if they really did go to the moon they would have just put there hands on the book and said so. they didnt and theres no reason for us to assume they did.

That is all the evidence we need, even if the lander was made of titanium.

That's not evidence.

Post
Some
Evidence

Nope.that counts as evidence that nasa faked it.

I'd love to see you do that in court.

you asked for evidence, i gave it to you, whether you like it or not.

youve not posted any evidence. All you've done is state your opinion. Opinion=/=evidence

You dont get to move goalposts and redefine what passes off as evidence lmao.

you haven't posted any so there's been no need to move any goalposts.

originally posted by: OneBigMonkeyToo
a reply to: clevargenuis

And as I pointed out to you, they did. By your standard that means they went to the moon.

Where is your evidence that the LM was not capable of doing the job for which it was designed?

YOU need to provide evidence that it did go to the moon.

and no, citing the source of the claim (nasa) as evidence of the claim is fallacious. Thats pretty much what nasa defendants are doing all the time.

originally posted by: clevargenuis

originally posted by: OneBigMonkeyToo
a reply to: clevargenuis

And as I pointed out to you, they did. By your standard that means they went to the moon.

Where is your evidence that the LM was not capable of doing the job for which it was designed?

YOU need to provide evidence that it did go to the moon.

actually, it is you that needs to prove it didn't. The thread is about to going to the moon. Of the thread was "proof we went to the moon" then we would need to post evidence. Your claim needs evidence.

and no, citing the source of the claim (nasa) as evidence of the claim is fallacious. Thats pretty much what nasa defendants are doing all the time.

go look for the Russians and Australians. There's plenty of data from both of those countries proving that NASA went to the moon.

a reply to: clevargenuis

onebigmonkey.com...

originally posted by: TerryDon79

Evidence already provided several times. It doesnt need your seal of approval

The astronauts refusal to swear they went to the moon is all the evidence needed. take it or leave it.

it seems so important to you that skeptics MUST believe what you believe about nasa. Wierd.

originally posted by: clevargenuis
originally posted by: TerryDon79

Evidence already provided several times. It doesnt need your seal of approval

care to show this evidence that has been "provided several times"? Remember, opinion=/=evidence

The astronots refusal to swear they went to the moon is all the evidence needed. take it or leave it.

that isn't evidence.

it seems so important to you that skeptics MUST believe what you believe about nasa. Wierd.

I never said that. I asked for proof. That's the thing you have provided zero of.

originally posted by: [post=20679072]clevargenuis

The astronauts refusal to swear they went to the moon is all the evidence needed. take it or leave it.

Oh, right...a person who appears to be a raving lunatic pushes his way up to a person and asks that person to swear something on the bible, and the person refuses to appease the raving lunatic.

Yeah, THAT'S good evidence. Case closed, we can all stop being government shills now. [rolls eyes]

a reply to: clevargenuis

You keep mentioning this and conveniently ignoring the astronauts who did swear on the bible, which means they went.

You are the one asserting that the LM could not go to the moon, where is your evidence that supports your case? Actual evidence, not the lies of a convicted criminal making money from idiots.

originally posted by: OneBigMonkeyToo
a reply to: clevargenuis

You keep mentioning this and conveniently ignoring the astronauts who did swear on the bible, which means they went.

Yeah, but tape and foil and stuff.

I'm sure we are in for another moving of the goalposts, just like when the goalposts were moved to this bible crap.