How many times does Neil Armstrong lie to us in this 1970 BBC interview.

page: 1
12
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 09:39 AM
link   
Lets take a liars poll OK? See if you can enumerate the number of times Neil Armstrong lies us in this BBC interview.

Take note that during the interview he mentions the sure fact that one day soon there will surely be a colony on the moon. If so, then perhaps they might consider a graveyard for those who would expire during their stay. So, in light of his recent death why not also take a poll as to whether or not his body should be held in abeyance till such time as he could be buried there, or simply to have his ashes strewn over the surface of the moon so as to honor his great achievements as the worlds greatest liar.


www.youtube.com...
edit on 26-8-2012 by de_Genova because: added info




posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 09:44 AM
link   
Lying about what? I can't watch the video at the moment. If you're referring to the moon base thing, that's a prediction, not a statement.



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 09:55 AM
link   


edit on 26/8/2012 by Kolya because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 10:00 AM
link   
I read the YouTube comments while listening to the interview-priceless.One poster says its all a lie,Jewish propaganda.He also says that the world is flat,if it? wasn't people on the other side of the world would fall off!He says Mohammed told us this then gives the god is great carry on.Another Muslim poster then says he is embarrassed by him and that he gives Muslims a bad name.
The comments were better than the video,i love YouTube comments.
What do you think Armstrong is lying about?



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 10:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by SpearMint
Lying about what? I can't watch the video at the moment. If you're referring to the moon base thing, that's a prediction, not a statement.


Everything about the Apollo 11 mission in particular.................and the entire NASA Apollo program in general.
edit on 26-8-2012 by de_Genova because: added info



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 10:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by de_Genova

Originally posted by SpearMint
Lying about what? I can't watch the video at the moment. If you're referring to the moon base thing, that's a prediction, not a statement.


Everything about the Apollo mission.................


That mission happened, there's still proof on the moon's surface. The Lie was the broadcast aired all around the world. What really happened up there is the real story.



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 10:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by de_Genova

Originally posted by SpearMint
Lying about what? I can't watch the video at the moment. If you're referring to the moon base thing, that's a prediction, not a statement.


Everything about the Apollo 11 mission in particular.................and the entire NASA Apollo program in general.
edit on 26-8-2012 by de_Genova because: added info


Got anything to back up your claims? He does.



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 10:38 AM
link   
It is obvious to anyone with an IQ over, say, 90 that the technology used in 1969 could not have done what they presented.

NASA admits to have used staged photographs and releasing them at the time as authentic.

NASA today is researching solutions to problems like lethal to humans radiation that they must solve to return to the Moon or go to Mars.

Only one element of the many has to be found to be scientifically bogus to discredit the lunar landing claims:
the lunar lander single rocket engine could not have worked;
the radiation danger was not solved, there was essentially zero protection while on the lunar surface;
the film photography could not have survived the radiation, studio perfect photographs are presented as those made by astronauts with no way to focus, set, or frame;
there was no way to heat or cool the lunar lander while on the surface;
the risk of leaving bodies on the moon was too great, they knew the tech was insufficient for the deadline of 1969;
it was a "matter of national security", any means necessary justified the end.

think about it critically



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 10:42 AM
link   
IQ 137 here you gotta do better than that.



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 10:43 AM
link   
It certainly take long before the "moon landing is a hoax" provocateurs come out of the woodwork. Neil Armstrong told the truth. There is more scientific evidence to prove the landing happened as opposed to those who "believe" it to be a hoax.



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 10:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by SpearMint

Originally posted by de_Genova

Originally posted by SpearMint
Lying about what? I can't watch the video at the moment. If you're referring to the moon base thing, that's a prediction, not a statement.


Everything about the Apollo 11 mission in particular.................and the entire NASA Apollo program in general.
edit on 26-8-2012 by de_Genova because: added info


Got anything to back up your claims? He does.


now prepare yourself for 43857 pictures with some crazy red circles made on mspaint pointing to dark spots and strange light reflections!


+8 more 
posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 11:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by sprtpilot
It is obvious to anyone with an IQ over, say, 90 that the technology used in 1969 could not have done what they presented.

IQ 156. You're wrong.


NASA admits to have used staged photographs and releasing them at the time as authentic.

Where?


NASA today is researching solutions to problems like lethal to humans radiation that they must solve to return to the Moon or go to Mars.

Yeah and if you did the TINIEST bit of research you'd understand why they are doing this and why it does not discredit the moon landing.


Only one element of the many has to be found to be scientifically bogus to discredit the lunar landing claims:
the lunar lander single rocket engine could not have worked;

It could, did, and still does (the principle)


the radiation danger was not solved, there was essentially zero protection while on the lunar surface;

Indeed the astronauts developed cataracts likely due to the high radiation environment. Radiation doesn't kill you instantly though.


the film photography could not have survived the radiation, studio perfect photographs are presented as those made by astronauts with no way to focus, set, or frame;

Except there was focus, set and frame and there are plenty of terrible photos.

The rest of your post is just regurgitating the same old claims over and over and over again. You don't want to hear the truth, so you try and drown it out with nonsense.

Grow up.



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 11:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by de_Genova

Originally posted by SpearMint
Lying about what? I can't watch the video at the moment. If you're referring to the moon base thing, that's a prediction, not a statement.


Everything about the Apollo 11 mission in particular.................and the entire NASA Apollo program in general.
edit on 26-8-2012 by de_Genova because: added info


in your version of the world maybe. But in the reality we live in the Apollo 11 mission was one of the most documented and scrutinized events in human history by both ourselves and Americas enemies. Unless of course you think the entire planet was in on it.



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 11:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by SpearMint

Originally posted by de_Genova

Originally posted by SpearMint
Lying about what? I can't watch the video at the moment. If you're referring to the moon base thing, that's a prediction, not a statement.


Everything about the Apollo 11 mission in particular.................and the entire NASA Apollo program in general.
edit on 26-8-2012 by de_Genova because: added info


Got anything to back up your claims? He does.


"Astronaut Neil Armstrong, who died earlier this weekend, carried a pennant belonging to Argentina's Independiente de Avellaneda on his history-making 1969 trip to the Moon." Fox News

Maybe he took a Maytag washer and dryer and a Chevy truck, too.



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 11:38 AM
link   
reply to post by de_Genova
 


If you can't respect the living then at least respect the dead and move on.


+6 more 
posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 01:10 PM
link   
Explanation: Uhmmm?


Patrick Moore asks Neil Armstrong what the sky was like on the moon ...

Neil replies the sky was black!

Now how could that be so?

Ok it is this simple ok ....

Here is a picture of the sky on EARTH during the day and in full sunlight ...



Now please count EXACTLY how many STARS you can see!? [not including the sun, which is not in the picture]

If you can NOT SEE 1 single star ... then this is no different than being in cis-lunar space [ie between the earth and the moon] or on the moon DURING exposure to the FULL light of the sun.

If we can't see stars during the day due to the low level light of the stars being OVERWHELMED by the intense sunlight for our own local star aka Sol, then the astronauts would have experienced exactly the same during any of their time in the full sunlight.

Also Neil mentions that ONLY the SUN and the EARTH are visible from the SUNLIT side of the moon and this is no different from the EARTH when we view the MOON in full SUNLIGHT!



Note the lack of STARS OK!
Neil is NOT LYING!

Next Patrick Moore asks Neil Armstrong about seeing the CORONA of the sun and Neil points out that it is only visible when looking FROM INSIDE the shadow of the MOON i.e. when the moon is partially eclipsing the sun as they orbited the moon in the command module!





How many STARS [except for the SUN itself] do you see?

If you see NONE then again I have made the point that Neil is not lying on this issue either.

Next Patrick Moore asks Neil Armstrong about the different colours of the moon regolith and how that changes with different incident angles of the Sunlight upon the moon.

Now looking at the above provided picture of the moon ... HOW MANY COLOURS CAN YOU DISCERN?

Is there any reds or greens or even browns?

Regolith, as Neil describes it close up is like a fine grey powder ...



... and under the microscope it appears as post-molten glass.




Fig. 1. JEOL 6400 scanning electron microscope (secondary electron) images of lunar regolith and regolith simulant components: (a) plagioclase grain from Apollo 16 sample 64 500, (b) plagioclase grain from crushed Shawmere anorthosite, (c) glass fragment from Apollo 16 sample 64 500, and (d) glass from crushed fayalitic olivine slag from OB-1


Note how different it appears under different lighting conditions.



Also note how many colours it can manufacture during such changing lighting conditions.



Neil is NOT LYING about this issue either.

As to the issue of the anomalous distances percieved I can only wildly speculate (possibly the dual helmets and seeing through two layers of clear plastic) and I leave that issue for those that are more wise than me on such things and maybe Phage and or Jim Oberg might be kind enough to answer that too hard basket question that I am unable to quikly discuss and detail the physics of?


Neil is giving his own personal account here and his words must be taken at face value.

Neil gives a candid answer.

But if you care to dig for yourself then OL is sure you will find corroborating evidence from the personal accounts of Buzz Aldrin and the other astronauts who landed on the moons surface.

Penultimately Patrick Moore asks Neil Armstrong about the far side of the moon and Neil details it as not having any mares aka seas.





Note how they are pictures from 2 different satellites sent to the moon on different occasions.

Also note the similarities between the 2 different set of pictures.

Neil is NOT LYING on this issue.

Finally Patrick Moore asks Neil about prospects of lunar bases on the moon.

Neil gives his personal opinion on that issue and again that must be taken at face value and placed into the context of that time frame and what was known at the time and what was projected as being a possible, sensible timeline for such advancements to occur.

Neil gives a candid answer.

The video ends.

Personal Disclosure: Neil lies ZERO TIMES OK!
edit on 26-8-2012 by OmegaLogos because: Edited to replace buggy picture link with similar picture.



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 01:16 PM
link   
I see the only 'reality' being that NO-ONE has been beyond the Van Allen Belts (since the supposed Apollo missions). And those that (cough)have(cough) show no signs whatsoever of radiation.

I have seen enough evidence to convince me we have not landed a human on the moon, nor even ventured beyond the Belts.

What powered the PLISS. Batteries according to the astronauts. Such powerful batteries that they kept them warm in the shadows, yet cool in the sun. No steam is shown emanating from the astronauts when they go from the being in Sun to then into Shadow.

They couldn't see any stars from the surface of the moon (Neils own words). Yeah, right.

And what about the supposed distant Earth shot(s) taken, again their own words, with the camera up against the window? If the camera was tight against the _ Who's arm was that moving in between the camera and the _

I call BS on the whole program. Sure they went into low earth orbit. But beyond?

Debunk the photo's all you like. Debunk the video's all you like. But the radiation? Good luck with that.



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 01:23 PM
link   
reply to post by de_Genova
 


Do you honestly think that if there was even the slightest bit of credible evidence that NASA and the US government faked the Apollo 11 mission that the Soviet Union would have remained quiet about it?
They would have been all over it and using it as a propoganda weapon to completely discredit the US on the international stage.
That neither they or China did anything of the sort speaks volumes.

Unless of course you believe they were in on the 'conspiracy'?

I suspect there may be 'things' that have occurred during some / all manned space flights and moon landings and for one reason or another details of these 'things' are not being released to the general public, but to suggest Neil Armstrong is a liar and the Apollo missions a complete fake and fabrication is, in my humble opinion, firstly simply incorrect and secondly an insult to his memory and achievement.



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 03:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by SpearMint

Originally posted by de_Genova

Originally posted by SpearMint
Lying about what? I can't watch the video at the moment. If you're referring to the moon base thing, that's a prediction, not a statement.


Everything about the Apollo 11 mission in particular.................and the entire NASA Apollo program in general.
edit on 26-8-2012 by de_Genova because: added info


Got anything to back up your claims? He does.


Have you ever heard of cold welding? I suggest you look it up.
Manned (or even unmanned) space travel is an impossibility.

We are privy to one of the biggest hoaxes ever perpetrated on mankind,
edit on 26-8-2012 by OutonaLimb because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 04:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by OutonaLimb
Have you ever heard of cold welding? I suggest you look it up.
Manned (or even unmanned) space travel is an impossibility.

So why can we see satellites from the ground? How have they managed to do this if space travel is impossible? How is it that amateurs can detect signals from spacecraft much further out?





new topics
top topics
 
12
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join