The Apollo 11 Moon Landing Site --Now Seen in Unprecedented Detail

reply to post by ajay59


Oh that's one of the classics I have always loved about ATS.

Anyone who uses their brain is labeled as a "paid shill" when all retarded comments are dismissed with facts.

Originally posted by ready4heaven
i rented a documentary on telus cable about the moonlanding beign fake and actually showed the how they did it, this was about 2-3 years ago so i cant remember any of it, but left me with the conclusion of it being fake, because of the flag blowign around and how could they go into space if they never been there before but i dont know much maybe they sent probes or something check out the weather and envirement details, W/E

Conclusion: government has never been good, government is bad.

Hey ready4
Howare you?
You should be commended for searching out the truth.
As long as you stick around here you will learn alot.
I hope you tell all your friends about these discussions. No one here can get them to the moon but they will sure have a few laughs.

Now why on earth would you assume that I was referring to you? Did I direct my comment to you? Did I name any names? The only reasons for you to assume such would be either ego or.......!

reply to post by paradox


I had to get out of the paid shill biz when they kept asking me for bigger and bigger union dues...government work is a b!tch I tell you...

Do any of you anti-Apollo people even understand what a meter is? Imagine a yard. Three feet. 1/2 an inch is WAY less than three feet. How would a camera which can only make out images only three feet across see a pole 1/2 inch wide?

Originally posted by paradox
reply to post by ajay59

 

Oh that's one of the classics I have always loved about ATS.

Anyone who uses their brain is labeled as a "paid shill" when all retarded comments are dismissed with facts.

Hey buddy.
was up?
Could you tell us exactly who has the brain and who is the shill?
That way I will know who is telling the truth.
It is all about the truth of those pictures with you ain't it????

reply to post by ajay59


Plausible deniability proves you are playing a game or this is your entertainment.

reply to post by ajay59


Duly noted, you have just earned ignore, unless you have something of substance to add.

Try more than one or two complete cognitive sentences, citations may be required for claims. We all know how to hide behind the couch and throw raspberries at grandma, not that I was ever inclined to do. What is your motivation to call hundreds of thousands of people stupid?

If there is clear to see a moon base or a UFO than it has to be some photo particle or flair or swamp gas or something but if there is a small dot that should be apolo11 than this is it. Sorry but I don't buy this crap.

Here are the FACTS. TPTB told us that the US landed men on the moon(and they would never dream of misleading us in any way). They showed us video of men landing on the moon(Independence Day was just as real). They brought back moon rocks and (nobody who doesn't receive a paycheck from them) had them analysed. The US has not been back to the moon since(at least not with the same technology). Did I miss any conclusive evidence?

If you are gullible enough to take anything TPTB tell you, I have a bridge for sale super cheap!

Originally posted by ajay59
Now why on earth would you assume that I was referring to you? Did I direct my comment to you? Did I name any names? The only reasons for you to assume such would be either ego or.......!

Can you show me where I even so much as alluded to you speaking of me? I think you will fail in that finding.

It was a statement on a public forum that I replied to.
No ego, I just have a pet peeve for morons

Originally posted by longjohnbritches

Originally posted by paradox
reply to post by ajay59

 

Oh that's one of the classics I have always loved about ATS.

Anyone who uses their brain is labeled as a "paid shill" when all retarded comments are dismissed with facts.

Hey buddy.
was up?
Could you tell us exactly who has the brain and who is the shill?
That way I will know who is telling the truth.
It is all about the truth of those pictures with you ain't it????

edit on 15-3-2012 by longjohnbritches because: I remembered something else

It's more about your continuous failures to prove any claims you are making.

reply to post by Tschusterbauer


LOL....a "clear to see Moon base or UFO"?

One example, please of a "clear to see" Moon base.

Yeah, plenty of "UFOs" out there....and, yeah....most are easily explained, and thus become "identified"..Only a small percentage are truly worthy of more investigations......but, there are, in fact NO such things as a "Moon base".....

(unless you want to consider the Apollo landing sites in that category? Bit of a stretch, ut hey, why not?)

reply to post by ajay59


Man, do you people even research the stuff you're saying? The lunar samples have been analyzed by scientists from around the world, including private institutions:

www.scientificamerican.com...

Now a new study, published online August 5 in Science, pushes back against the hydrated-moon hypothesis. Zachary Sharp, a geochemist at the University of New Mexico, and his colleagues measured the chemical composition of several Apollo samples and found that the chlorine content of the lunar rocks and soils implied that the moon's interior was largely bereft of water, as originally suspected.

from the article.

Originally posted by NuminousCosmos
reply to post by ajay59

 

Man, do you people even research the stuff you're saying? The lunar samples have been analyzed by scientists from around the world, including private institutions:

Research is not something they are good at.

They mostly like to parrot fringe conspiracy websites with absolutely no substance whatsoever

Originally posted by paradox

Originally posted by ajay59
Now why on earth would you assume that I was referring to you? Did I direct my comment to you? Did I name any names? The only reasons for you to assume such would be either ego or.......!

Can you show me where I even so much as alluded to you speaking of me? I think you will fail in that finding.

It was a statement on a public forum that I replied to.
No ego, I just have a pet peeve for morons

Excuse me, reply to post by ajay59 did not appear in the upper left corner?

Originally posted by NuminousCosmos
reply to post by ajay59

 

Man, do you people even research the stuff you're saying? The lunar samples have been analyzed by scientists from around the world, including private institutions:

www.scientificamerican.com...

Now a new study, published online August 5 in Science, pushes back against the hydrated-moon hypothesis. Zachary Sharp, a geochemist at the University of New Mexico, and his colleagues measured the chemical composition of several Apollo samples and found that the chlorine content of the lunar rocks and soils implied that the moon's interior was largely bereft of water, as originally suspected.

from the article.

Key word, institutions. I wonder where they get their funding?

Originally posted by Tschusterbauer
If there is clear to see a moon base or a UFO than it has to be some photo particle or flair or swamp gas or something but if there is a small dot that should be apolo11 than this is it. Sorry but I don't buy this crap.

Good for you son.
Don't let the bullies try to box you in a corner with thier CIRCULAR logic nonsense. Either you see something that you understand or tell us about it.
I see nothing in the photos that some here claim exist.
Some are militants and others latch on to you like pit bulls hoping to convert you to thier, errr religon.
peace brother

reply to post by longjohnbritches


I like your way of thinking brother! No one should allow others to ram crap down their throat, especially when it smells rotten squirms!

reply to post by ajay59


Who would you like to research the chlorine counts in lunar regolith? You? Do you have a laboratory with all the accoutrements?

Originally posted by ajay59

Originally posted by NuminousCosmos
reply to post by ajay59

 

Man, do you people even research the stuff you're saying? The lunar samples have been analyzed by scientists from around the world, including private institutions:

www.scientificamerican.com...

Now a new study, published online August 5 in Science, pushes back against the hydrated-moon hypothesis. Zachary Sharp, a geochemist at the University of New Mexico, and his colleagues measured the chemical composition of several Apollo samples and found that the chlorine content of the lunar rocks and soils implied that the moon's interior was largely bereft of water, as originally suspected.

from the article.

Key word, institutions. I wonder where they get their funding?

Hi aj
I danced all nite with these pit bulls on another thread about DA ROCKS.
If that's all they got it's off the theme of the posts by the rules I checked it out. I think they just bait folks with that crap. beware of these people.

reply to post by ajay59


See, that's the problem with the recent influx of people to this website.

See the slogan at the top "Deny Ignorance?"
You should try it.

This place is about questioning things and learning. When you have multiple people here who obviously know much more than you know (nothing wrong with that, there's always someone who knows more) giving you FACTS, you are not supposed to plug your ears. You are supposed to ask questions and LEARN. Everything you have said so far holds absolutely no water even if you like to think it does. You can feel free to pat the backs of which ever other ignorant thinkers you wish. You're not helping yourself, or this website out one bit.

Everything you say will easily be pulled apart.
All you have are lame assumptions.