Alan Shepard Is So Much A Big Fake, Reading His Story Makes Patriotic Americans Crave Antiemetics

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter


B*S* story about him pissing his pants on Mercury Freedom 7.
B*S* story about him putting a filter on his periscope and not being able to see anything during his pathetic 16-minute ballistic missile Redstone test flight.

Prove it.

Opinions not needed.

reply to post by SayonaraJupiter

So, what we have, is an astronaut corps that is composed of medical liars and misfits.

Actually it was composed of test pilots.

reply to post by SayonaraJupiter


which part of any of those are BS considering the entire flight was a test?

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter

 

So, what we have, is an astronaut corps that is composed of medical liars and misfits.

Actually it was composed of test pilots.

Yes. Test pilots who were medical liars and misfits. Magical surgery. Miracle cures and mystifying, faith based recoveries from experiment surgery. What else is necessary for a conspiracy theory?

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter

 

So, what we have, is an astronaut corps that is composed of medical liars and misfits.

Actually it was composed of test pilots.

Test pilots who used pseudonyms at public hospitals, when there are dozens of qualified NASA doctors who could evaluate them.

Perhaps, these two astronauts were faking their ailments so that they can be given ground control assignments for the CIA/Howard Hughes/Richard Nixon fraudulent lunar landings ,during the Apollo TV propaganda program?

reply to post by SayonaraJupiter


Well said SayonaraJupiter. The bogus ailments ironically "ground them" and so provide them with more mobility and CLOUT.......

Slayton's atrial fibrillation puts him in a position of great power, as does Shepard's Meniere's Disease.

reply to post by decisively


Excuse me doc, taking things from novels is no way helping your cause.

Example, I was mentioned in one, and when that novel was wrote the spelling mistakes the things that went on just did not add up to the exact things i saw and heard etc.
It was a football hooligan book, and this all happened in my younger years , the story i told to the story that it told to the story others told you will always find different version of events, sayings- slang ,No two sources are identical
Fact.. however there was a case where i got stabbed in a football match, others say i was stabbed outside the ground, in a fight with 200hundred aside. When i did comment on it although telling the truth i too wrote something different as i could not recount exact detailed events to the 100% mark but that does not mean ergo - i was lying etc. see my point doc?.. You see i can pick any novel find mistakes either in the papers or the said novel and do what you are doing , Although i could prove things do not add up exactly as two sources allways differ from each other with sayings quotes slang all these things does not constitute 100% facts to my or your cause when it comes down to petty nit picking with peoples words .

MY doc says i was cured as a slang way of telling me my progress was getting there after surgery
Because i showed all the signs of recovery etc.
SO WHAT..

He never flew untill 1971 , he then went back to his own job doing what he did before..
Where is this fraudulance ?..
Whats your point now doc?
where is the proof to knock my socks off that we never went "APART FROM DOING WHAT I SAID ABOVE WHICH IS NOT PROOF SO FAR WITH WHAT YOU HAVE SAID DOES THAT MAKE SENSE "

US southern brits all speak like that by saying yeah your cured after someone takes the first step from recovering from a broken leg but may i add still in plaster knowing it is not the case yet.

Again whats your point?..

Ill meet you halfway and say there was some incompetence there but lies noo
I wrote a book on football violence and things were worded differently to exactly 100% what happened but that was not lies that was just me writing a novel how i remembered it and if someone else wrote in the same novel while he was there and how he saw it then our books will have different accounts wont they doc..

HOWEVER AGAIN IT WAS NOT ME LYING IT WAS JUST AS I SORT OF REMEMBER IT.
BUT YOU WOULD JUMP ON IT CALL ME A LIAR ETC..
SO DOC, DOES IT NOW MAKE SENSE TO YOU NOW, AS YOU WOULD CLAIM SEE SEE IT NEVER HAPPENED LOOOK LOOK HE SAID SOMETHING DIFFERENT TO THE PAPERS ETC..

I THINK I HAVE PROVEN MY POINT THERE.. END RESULT I WAS TELLING THE TRUTH BUT IT WAS MY OWN INCOMPETENCE WITH SLANG SAYINGS THAT CAN CONFUSE-- OR LACK OF REMEBERING THE EXACT DETAILS ,THEREFORE ME REMEBERING AND THE PAPERS GETTING IT WRONG.. OVER AND OUT DOC...

DOC YOU NEED TO FIND SOME PROOF OTHER THAN SECONAL DISEASE OF THE MIDDLE EAR,
CONFUSIONS, SAYINGS, ETC AS ABSOLUTE PROOF..

AT LEAST SO FAR DOC YOU HAVE NOT SWAYED ME OR US WITH WHAT YOU HAVE SAID IN THE THREADS AS YET.. PLEASE IF YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE THAT HAS DEFINATE PROOF THEN POST YOUR THREAD AND I WILL BE HAPPY TO RESPOND... I AM TIRED ITS 6 45 IN ENGLAND AND I HAVE NOT SLEPT AS YET AND CAPS ARE ON LOL...

reply to post by SayonaraJupiter


Do we have a single shot, single image of Shepard with a bandage on his ear ? From anytime in 1968 or 1969 ???????

Do we have any believable testimony by anyone that Shepard had a bandage on his hear ?

Either way it would be interesting, could be a huge clue there either way, a photo of Shepard with a bandage. It would date the surgery, and possibly give other clues.

If he never had a bandage, then he never had the surgery.

reply to post by denver22


No, incorrect.

It is actually straightforward. If we are able to show Alan Shepard's alleged surgery occurred in 1969, then we will have shown all of Apollo to be fraudulent. The case will have been demonstrated in an absolute sense because he could not have been cured and tested and cleared in four months. His doctor said he was tested for a year before he was declared fit to fly. His doctor wrote that in the book I quoted above.

A lot at stake here. We have already proven Apollo fraudulent MANY TIMES BEFORE by demonstrating this kind of internal incoherence of this Apollo narrative. That said, this would perhaps be our "best" example because so much of the writing deals with alleged primary source materials. William House writing about his own experience and so forth.

This one is HUGE......a Haymaker indeed.

reply to post by decisively


do we have any reason to believe you though?? you who claims general samuel phillips is a medical doctor

posted on 3-5-2012
Why would Phillips write in a May 1969 National Geographic article that the Apollo 8 astronauts could not possibly have had INFLUENZA because they were vaccinated? Phillips is not a doctor.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

posted on 4-6-2012
How about ol' Dr. Samuel Phillips M.D.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

you have already been told and you knew yourself that Phillips was NOT a doctor.. yet you still say he is a Doctor?? is this how you got your qualifications as a doctor as well?? the same as Phillips??

why dont you look at your own internal incoherencies and contradictions? by your own words your arguments are a HOAX.

reply to post by choos


doesn't matter if I am a doc or not, if you believe me or not, the facts I put out are square up, that is all that matters anyway

That said, you make a big mistake by ignoring my talents, or better said, denying them. You guys are way behind here and cannot dig yourselves out because you have no doc, and if you get one, I will cut him or her to ribbons in a flash..

BIG PROBLEM, sorry bout that, Neil shouldn't of done this....

Originally posted by decisively
reply to post by denver22

 

No, incorrect.

It is actually straightforward. If we are able to show Alan Shepard's alleged surgery occurred in 1969, then we will have shown all of Apollo to be fraudulent. The case will have been demonstrated in an absolute sense because he could not have been cured and tested and cleared in four months. His doctor said he was tested for a year before he was declared fit to fly. His doctor wrote that in the book I quoted above.

A lot at stake here. We have already proven Apollo fraudulent MANY TIMES BEFORE by demonstrating this kind of internal incoherence of this Apollo narrative. That said, this would perhaps be our "best" example because so much of the writing deals with alleged primary source materials. William House writing about his own experience and so forth.

This one is HUGE......a Haymaker indeed.

edit on 7-6-2012 by decisively because: caps

edit on 7-6-2012 by decisively because: added "will"

edit on 7-6-2012 by decisively because: caps

edit on 7-6-2012 by decisively because: spelling

edit on 7-6-2012 by decisively because: (no reason given)

edit on 7-6-2012 by decisively because: forgot to write caps last time,

I SEE YOU TOOK NO NOTICE OF MY POST AT ALL

reply to post by decisively


but if you say their contradictions prove apollo fake..

than your own contradictions prove your arguments fake get it yet?

hey why dont you post a photo of your qualifications? dated and edit the name out? or is your personal life none of my bussiness again??

I am indeed supremely confident whether working in the field of medical science, swimming, biking, playing the piano, teaching.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by decisively
reply to post by denver22

 

No, incorrect.

It is actually straightforward. If we are able to show Alan Shepard's alleged surgery occurred in 1969, then we will have shown all of Apollo to be fraudulent.

No it wont , he had surgery recovered then got flight status back but chose to undergo more tests so what
after all he never flew so why are you whining like a child still over nothing...?

"Fact he did not get up there again till 1971.".

R-E-A-D DOC...

No fraudulence there as he did not flllllllllllllllllllllyyyyyyyyyyyyy lol.
If he did then you would have something to crow about doc...

reply to post by denver22

Good luck trying to prove Harland wrong...

A point not in dispute by anyone is that Shepard was restored to flight status May, 1969.

David Harland wrote that the surgery was in 1969.

What that means is that at some point, we will come across something by Shepard himself, House, Slayton, some incontrovertible endorsement of the surgery taking place in 1969.

Harland does not miss this stuff. I personally believe it is his ROLE, functioning in this capacity. He does not deal with the contradictions by making them disappear, as was the case with the Stafford "did he see it or not lightning business contradiction". Harland states them, accepts them, very explicitly, in terms of the material facts which he cannot make go away, and then he tries to imply that it is no big deal. This is the sense in which Harland confronts the inconsistencies and internal incoherencies that people like myself turn up. I find them and he pretends they are no big deal. He does not ignore them. He never makes the fatal error of pretending they do not exist. He never makes the mistake of ignoring those facts that constitute the material evidence underpinning any given contradiction. Note how he came right out and wrote in his Apollo 12 Book that Stafford called the lightning "speculation" while McDivitt claimed he saw it, and they both were in the Firing Room. Harland didn't blink, just wrote that out.

We all know what happened in the Stafford case, and we will see it here at some point, all depending on how hard people decide to work on it. But make no mistake, you will not prove Harland wrong here. It's even conceivable he wrote some of this Apollo script nonsense. I have not been able to find out how old he is.

So we will find David Harland is once again correct, that the "surgery" occurred in 1969, and with it, we will show once again, very elegantly I might add, that Apollo is fraudulent. And to that, David Harland will respond, "Fraudulent ? what ? "

reply to post by decisively


so the operation was early '69 and he obtained full flight status in may '69..

his actual mission wasnt until january 1971.. and he was taken off the april 1970 flight due to being deemed ill-prepared..

so wheres the contradictions?? its shown from being taken from the apollo 13 mission that if at any stage he was not fit to fly or ill-prepared he would be taken off the flight roster.. yet for some reason you believe that once obtained full flight status there are no more checks? and that its impossible for him to lose his full flight status?

Originally posted by choos
reply to post by decisively

 

so the operation was early '69 and he obtained full flight status in may '69..

his actual mission wasnt until january 1971.. and he was taken off the april 1970 flight due to being deemed ill-prepared..

so wheres the contradictions?? its shown from being taken from the apollo 13 mission that if at any stage he was not fit to fly or ill-prepared he would be taken off the flight roster.. yet for some reason you believe that once obtained full flight status there are no more checks? and that its impossible for him to lose his full flight status?

Yes that's it choos, also he was a gentleman about it and sought more training tests checks etc
then he decides the jig is up for the the upcoming mission and gets assigned to the next in 1971
why can't you see that doc, your 54 years old patrick i lost count of you aliases you were under now

P.S you crafty devil Also that is two years after surgery doc

reply to post by decisively


Why are you ignoring every post where you are called out as a liar and a fraud?

PERP

reply to post by decisively


lol you make it sound as if he was in the upcoming mission with some bandage wrapped round his ear flying in the apollo 13 program breaking some flight status code geez doc play the game properly, please listen up...
He has surgery in 1969 , then come may he gets his flight status back , he feels he is not ready he needs more training, tests continue to run, opinions sought: etc..Which may last a year i don't care as he does not fly until1971.
He has to step down , he goes back to doing what he does , gets the go ahead in the Apollo 14 mission in 1971. Note: two years after the surgery.. bingo our boy is back in the saddle again..

Next question patrick1000 or is it doc decisivley .....?

Originally posted by paradox
reply to post by decisively

 

Why are you ignoring every post where you are called out as a liar and a fraud?

PERP

PARADOX,like you said, i think it is time for a thread on the moon hoaxer PERPS