I have been watching this thread for a while now and there are a few comments I would like to make:
originally posted by HARAK
In the 60's, they say that US Astronauts, stepped the Moon, for the first time, in all Mankind. Sorry... but no!
Soviet Union, actually got there first in the 50's, (two astronauts landed), and they went by a shocking experience.... err.... There was an ancient
facility there, appeared at first glince abandoned, but... automatic sentrys were still active, and one astronaut, got killed. The other ran away...as
fast as his suit let him, and could escape. He was very, very, lucky, because somehow, he could manage to be syncronized with the proper trajectory,
to being brought back to Earth's Ionosphere.
All this was top-secret. Not anymore...sorry!!
But there's more, oh boy there's a lot more, in fact!
Ok, no problem.
So
please grant your fellow ATS members the opportunity for such an understanding. An explanation as to why or how you arrived at such
a conclusion. Surely one who has such knowledge would feel a responsibility to actually offer paths that could be followed by others and so afford
them the luxury of such an understanding.
HARAK
Otherwise, if you have garanties, that you are absolutelly well informed, and that there couldn't be any interest in disguising a landing in the
Moon, well... my advise then, is... forget this thread, and don't waste your precious time.
If I had in my mind something that I considered a truth and another had 'garunties' that prove my belief incorrect I would be
very
interested in hearing that opinion, and would very much want them to contribute, in a curteous manner of course, to any debate about the subject. Why
would you, especially after saying:
originally posted by HARAK
It seems not right to me to avoid seeing other people's comments, just because they follow a different perspective.
then go on to advise those who may have such information to forget this thread? I would have thought that after such a statement you would positively
encourage such interaction.
And just WHAT is this post supposed to contribute to the thread?
Originally posted by HARAK
Originally posted by groingrinder
You could not possibly watch in real time as the soundtrack and video travel at the same speed from the moon to the earth. Watchers in Australia
tuning to the actual signal from the spacecraft and NOT THE NASA TRANSMISSION heard something slightly different.
See?
Another member posts relevant information and you post 'See?' Well done, I congratulate you on such a response.
Originally posted by HARAK
Originally posted by SomewhereinBetween
Harak it is too bad you will not give more.
» Right or wrong, good or bad; always duality pursuing our thoughts and actions.
It appears, if you would care to take a look at your friend Kangaxx big thread, that we have been here before.
Yet again:
See?
What I see is someone who cannot or, to give you the benefit of the doubt, willnot offer any corroborating evidence, or even the faintest hint as to
why he holds certain beliefs sitting on his hands and then jumping on board with anyone who happens to post supporting his points because he is
incapable of offering such himself.
After anothers thread about Aliens coming back later this year, this thread and your attitude, give me an almost spooky sense of Deja vu.
Thus it is not surprising to see kangaxx rear his head in this thread, along with such helpful, and not in the slightest bit patronising, advice as:
Listen carefully waht i will told you
Hey kangaxx, I noticed you had returned a while back and have seen you are very angry about your treatement on another thread, repeatedly stating on
about how unfair this board is. It is intresting to note that I am aware of a number of people who posted on your big thread, ended up with a warning
for doing so in such a manner and were unhappy with the action taken against them. So it appears that the mods cannot win, at least though those who
were warned have seen fit to move on rather than keep posting such obvious whines about it in other threads.
I believe your group should have offered it's findings and information on UFO's to the UN by now. I would be interested in hearing on what kind of
reception the UN gave after your little experiment. Inclusive of all relevant information such as dates etc. of course. If it's not classified that
is. Anyway, back to the topic at hand.
Originally posted by dusran
Why did you even post this here to begin with if you are not going to provide any evidence? (...) So basically it just seems that you're stroking
your ego by strutting around saying that you know more than the rest of us.
originally posted by HARAK
I'm not saying i know more than you, nor anyone else. I don't know where did you get that idea.
Really now, why don't you just copy and paste from kangaxx great revalation? Which, just to remind everyone, gives us four and a half months before
the "Aliens will "comeback" in a official way this year!"
You don't know more than anyone else?
In the 60's, they say that US Astronauts, stepped the Moon, for the first time, in all Mankind. Sorry... but no!
While it could be interpreted as a beautiful lesson in humility you offer here, (after all it is said that "A wise man knows nothing but this he
knows well") I somehow doubt it. If you know, as you claim, that the above quote is a fact then I am of the understanding that you do indeed know
more than quite a few others. Where next?
Do you have the gall to go so far as to post, and assure us all that:
I am not a God.
an absurdly arrogant and unrequired post that only presents us with proof of an unchecked and bloated ego such as your good friend did? Perhaps not
yet, but through so numerous similarities as are apparent I do not doubt such a time will come.
Of course you could so easily nullify many of the enclosed comments by offering your fellow ATS members the opportunity for such an understanding, as
I mentioned initially and as requested by many throughout this thread. After all we are supposed to be a supportive, helpful community here. With
that in mind then, I find it surprising that, if you do indeed have such a deep understanding of the truth, not only have you declined to share, but
have sidstepped and sniped at those who have made such requests.
Or is this thread to end as your good friends, with a whimper and a change of heart conveyed by a statment that your posting was only a theory (after
being exposed) before asking the thread be closed to save the author from further loss of face?
As for such helpful posts as:
Originally posted by Italiano
always the same people....
Perhaps the reason for this could be the responses that you decry are posted by those who, like myself, hold a genuine interest in such matters and
who are tired of having the subject continually ridiculed due to outrageous claims made by those whos only motive is to have their ego massaged a
little. A personal want that detracts from the subject any much needed credability. Perhaps then with this understanding it might be more logical to
see those who initially make such claims as 'dis-info agents'.
It is a simple technique used by those who desire to be cult leaders, to those who deny the required unquestioning faith, label them as devils,
dis-info agents or whatever would be most easily accepted by those you hope to sway.
So who then would be of most use as a dis-info agent? Let us consider here which of the two would be most effective, if dis-info were the desired
aim?
1)
One who looks and logically questions such claims and by there actions gives credence to the possibility and study of the subject thus
providing the general public (who may be a little afraid of entering the arena because of 'mad conspiracy theorists') with an opportunity to see
that there are those interested in the field who cannot be simply cast aside as cranks who believe anything at the drop of a hat and therefore gain
the subject credibility;
or
2)
One who makes outrageous claims which would obviously, true or not, be unacceptable to the vast majority of people and so estrange them and
further polarise the subject. Then, to cap it off, such a person refuses to provide the least bit of evidence, or even hint as to why they have
reached such a conclusion. Surely an illogical step which would again lead most people who happened into such a conversation to look upon the whole
field with great and justified scepticism, if even that.
So perhaps Italiano it may be wise for you and, others of such ilk, to sit a minute and think a little more about the benifits that blind acceptance
brings. The fantastic technology we see surrounding us all today, conceivably any and every advance that mankind has made has come from the search
for truth in various fields. If we had remained seated, watching in awe as the which doctor danced about the village fire with such blind acceptance
and unquestioning minds as you seem to wish then I doubt we would be communicating through such a medium as ATS.
In which case thank God for sceptics, their denial of ignorance and unfaltering search for truth.
Regards,
Jack
