posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 09:41 PM
Originally posted by wulff
Originally posted by ProfessorAlfB
Originally posted by AthlonSavage
Great finds. The picture that shows panel on ground no way is that natural just no way. If thats a real Mars picture then all i can say is you have
shown definitive proof of an artifical object on Mars and therefore strong circumstantial evidence that Nasa is lying at point blank to the taxpayers
who fund them.
edit on 24-1-2013 by AthlonSavage because: (no reason given)
Well they already pulled off the biggest hoax of the 20th century when they said man had gone to the Moon, so to pull off another hoax is just a walk
in the park for them.
Oh come on, don't start with that "we didn't go to the moon" crap on this interesting thread, once the pictures showing the sites with the astronauts
foot prints should have shut up every uneducated 'scientist' on the planet! As was stated before, if it was faked to what purpose? To beat the
Russians, right? So, why would they do it more than once and take a chance on getting caught?
Get OVER IT, we went to the Moon... Nasa hides stuff from us (like WHY they risked so much to go to the moon) but please, please don't get started on
This thread is about strange shapes found on Mars.. the OP said NOTHING about cover-ups!! Enough said!
Dont know what photos of Astronauts footprints you are referring to but you obviously swallowed their hoax, hook, line and sinker! So where is your
proof that they actually went to the Moon then?
The so called "Moonrocks" they brought back?...They were found in Antartica, just like the Martian Meteorites were.
How do you explain the obvious fill lighting in many of the official NASA Apollo pics when the only light source available was the Sun?
How do you explain the doctored reflections in the Astronauts visors that show incorrectly placed reflections of the horizon for the camera angles?
How do you explain how the LM's rocket plume didn't leave a single mark in the dust under the LM when in reality it would have blasted a crater under
Explain how the LM's undercarriage remained totally clean and pristine when in reality it would look dirty and coated with both melted and unmelted
moon dust blasted out by the rocket plume?
In fact, why dont you try and explain how NASA managed to get any photos back in the first place, especially ones in such good condition when
radiation fogs film and the basically standard unshieided Hasselblad cameras used would have been continuously exposed to the Solar wind, Solar X-rays
and Gamma rays for the entire period they were outside the LM on the Moon?
I wont hold my breath!
edit on 26-1-2013 by ProfessorAlfB because: a