PDA

View Full Version : They May Have Faked the Mars Missions Too



Cosmored
12-21-2008, 11:55 AM
I'm not taking a stand on this one but there is a theory that NASA has faked at least some of the missions to Mars. Here's some stuff about it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QH7vN3oO1Zw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FlUPnNiG81k
http://es.youtube.com/watch?v=rM0bHAXsRio
http://es.youtube.com/watch?v=nHdvAiz8yUw
http://es.youtube.com/watch?v=7fNbnXmV1CQ
http://es.youtube.com/watch?v=-J_cMoQ_SzE
http://es.youtube.com/watch?v=NsKX9WPpWRg

http://es.youtube.com/watch?v=0RgmjDJdvV0

I don't rule it out considering all the other lies the government tells us. I don't have the science background to verify anything though so I'm going to sit on the fence. If it turns out that they weren't faked, I won't be disappointed. I'll be happy.

Zathras
12-21-2008, 01:24 PM
I'm not taking a stand on this one but there is a theory that NASA has faked at least some of the missions to Mars. Here's some stuff about it.

Take your bullshit and peddle it somewhere else Cosmoron, no one here wants to read your delusional crap.


I don't rule it out considering all the other lies the government tells us. I don't have the science background to verify anything though so I'm going to sit on the fence. If it turns out that they weren't faked, I won't be disappointed. I'll be happy.

Riiiiiight. so you don't have the science background to verify whether the Mars missions are faked but have no problem declaring that both the Moon missions were faked and 911 was an inside job. Hypocrit thy name is Cosmoron.

ralph wiggum
12-21-2008, 01:31 PM
I think we need a name change, from Cosmored to Cosmoron.

Bubba Dawg
12-21-2008, 01:39 PM
Cosmo, what color is the sky in your world?

This shit is stupid. Don't you have opinions about anything else?

Troll
12-21-2008, 01:58 PM
Cosmored, let me take you down a hypothetical path, as one (semi) conspiracy believer to another:

Let's assume that the Moon landing(s) were faked, and that the Kennedy assassination and 9/11 were both 'inside jobs'. Doesn't the first kind of pale in comparison to the other two? I mean - if the Moon landing was a hoax, so what? Nobody died, and we didn't use it as an excuse to extend government powers or over-commit our military or kill a bunch of innocent people. Plus, we've been back since, so I'm not sure how this conspiracy falls into the ballpark of 9/11 or JFK. It would really just be one more lie a government has told its citizenry.

QFE.

http://a0.vox.com/6a00c2251cf4e38fdb00d4142c2b90685e-320pi

asdf2231
12-21-2008, 01:59 PM
SNIP FOR SANITY.


http://i136.photobucket.com/albums/q198/capt211/retard.jpg

Sonnabend
12-21-2008, 02:41 PM
http://www.toonjokes.com/data/media/9/30.jpg

RobJohnson
12-21-2008, 02:42 PM
More proof that drugs are bad. :D

biccat
12-21-2008, 03:26 PM
Can we just have a list of things the U.S. Government hasn't faked? Did Vietnam really happen? Is there even a country called Vietnam? Was all of the media footage shot in southern California?

Lars1701a
12-21-2008, 03:27 PM
Everyone should not view or respond to a single thread he starts, sooner or later he will leave.

Cosmored
12-21-2008, 03:37 PM
If they can fake moon missions, why is it so implausible that they can fake Mars missions?

http://www.conservativeunderground.com/forum505/showthread.php?t=9002

You people are not saying anything with any substance at all. Thinking people aren't swayed by empty rhetoric and invective. Do you realize that they'd laugh you all out of the debating hall for these responses?

ralph wiggum
12-21-2008, 03:48 PM
If they can fake moon missions, why is it so implausible that they can fake Mars missions?

http://www.conservativeunderground.com/forum505/showthread.php?t=9002

You people are not saying anything with any substance at all. Thinking people aren't swayed by empty rhetoric and invective. Do you realize that they'd laugh you all out of the debating hall for these responses?

People who make stupid claims don't need to be debated, they deserve to be ridiculed only.

Moon
12-21-2008, 04:07 PM
Okay, just for fun I watched the first few videos, and I have to say that whoever the guy is that put them together is not at all very bright. First of all, in the very first video, he spells "Phoenix" incorrectly in the title.

He also says the maximum altitude you can skydive is about 14,000 feet. That's a load of bunk. I've personally airdropped paratroopers at 22,000 feet on a HAHO (High Altitude High Opening) drop, meaning they opened their chutes as soon as they cleared the airplane. There have been other drops I'm aware of from higher altitudes as well.

The narrator puts a lot of stock in what newspapers and magazines say, when anyone with even the smallest amount of common sense knows that errors and exaggerations are routine.

He also points out quite correctly that the Martian mean temperature is much lower than the freezing point of water, but he is comparing the freezing point of water on earth and not on Mars. There's a section in the second or third video where the narrator challenges the report that crumbs of white material uncovered by the Phoenix lander were in fact ice and had vaporized. With Mars' much lower atmospheric pressure, water will rapidly move from solid to gaseous states (sublimation) much like CO2 (dry ice) does on Earth.

An explanation of the phenomenon (http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2008/06/answering-mars.html)

Suckers will fall for this particular conspiracy. Anyone with a lick of common sense,or an IQ above room temperature will not.

Moon
12-21-2008, 04:14 PM
If they can fake moon missions, why is it so implausible that they can fake Mars missions?

http://www.conservativeunderground.com/forum505/showthread.php?t=9002

You people are not saying anything with any substance at all. Thinking people aren't swayed by empty rhetoric and invective. Do you realize that they'd laugh you all out of the debating hall for these responses?

You failed to answer my questions in the other thread, so I will ask them again, and a few others.

1. If the moon landings were faked, why do it more than once? The point was proven the first time, so why fake a trip to the moon a total of 9 times?

2. What possible reason would NASA have for faking the Mars missions? I understand the rationale that you and others cling to to explain away 9/11 as a Bush plot, but what would be gained by faking the Mars missions?

3. If the Mars missions were faked, then why weren't all of them successful?

Of 38 launches from Earth in an attempt to reach the planet, only 19 succeeded, a success rate of 50%. Twelve of the missions included attempts to land on the surface, but only seven transmitted data after landing. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exploration_of_Mars)

4. Since your videos talk about NASA faking their Mars missions, what about the USSR, EU and Great Britain? Were those missions all faked as well?

MrsSmith
12-21-2008, 04:24 PM
I've heard that the US faked the internet. Seriously!! If any of you out there are real people, then I can assure you that the rest of the posters are merely computer programs. Every post any real person makes goes straight to Karl Rove's VRWC spy agency. There really is no internet. There really aren't millions of home computers. Sheesh, when we faked the moon landings, computers were the size of small rooms, so who could ever believe they're now small enough to be in houses all over the world. You're all NUTS. Or FAKES!!!! :eek::eek:











:D

Troll
12-21-2008, 04:34 PM
What possible reason would NASA have for faking the Mars missions? I understand the rationale that you and others cling to to explain away 9/11 as a Bush plot, but what would be gained by faking the Mars missions?


Let's assume that the Moon landing(s) were faked, and that the Kennedy assassination and 9/11 were both 'inside jobs'. Doesn't the first kind of pale in comparison to the other two? I mean - if the Moon landing was a hoax, so what? Nobody died, and we didn't use it as an excuse to extend government powers or over-commit our military or kill a bunch of innocent people. Plus, we've been back since, so I'm not sure how this conspiracy falls into the ballpark of 9/11 or JFK. It would really just be one more lie a government has told its citizenry.

Another QFE. Maybe a double-whammy will get Cosmored to answer?

Moon
12-21-2008, 04:35 PM
Another QFE. Maybe a double-whammy will get Cosmored to answer?

He strikes me as being a True Believer, so I doubt it.

bijou
12-21-2008, 06:16 PM
Compelling evidence, but not quite as convincing as this:

lBuH8NNIBys

bijou
12-21-2008, 06:18 PM
Or this

rQw74N8W7W8

Moon
12-21-2008, 06:37 PM
I love when people with no background in materials science or engineering try to explain what happened on 9/11 in such idiotic and simplistic ways. And to think other people actually watch videos like that and believe that rubbish.

SarasotaRepub
12-21-2008, 06:42 PM
Our new "friend" Cosmored reminds me more and more of an old "friend" Wolfie,
you know, the Furry guy.

Both with one track minds that can't engage beyond their stupid little worlds.

:rolleyes:

bijou
12-21-2008, 06:45 PM
Our new "friend" Cosmored reminds me more and more of an old "friend" Wolfie,
you know, the Furry guy.

Both with one track minds that can't engage beyond their stupid little worlds.

:rolleyes:

Imagine if they had children (http://fandumb.wordpress.com/2006/08/23/stupidfreude-furries-in-space-2/) :eek:

SarasotaRepub
12-21-2008, 07:00 PM
Imagine if they had children (http://fandumb.wordpress.com/2006/08/23/stupidfreude-furries-in-space-2/) :eek:

LOL!!!! :D

asdf2231
12-21-2008, 07:24 PM
If they can fake moon missions, why is it so implausible that they can fake Mars missions?

http://www.conservativeunderground.com/forum505/showthread.php?t=9002

You people are not saying anything with any substance at all. Thinking people aren't swayed by empty rhetoric and invective. Do you realize that they'd laugh you all out of the debating hall for these responses?


THAT was the funniest thing I have read here all year! :D

(On Edit)

Next he is going to be telling us that Ralph Wiggum faked being a chick to get elected Hottest Chick On CU.:p

Mythic
12-22-2008, 02:34 AM
I'm not taking a stand on this one but there is a theory that NASA has faked at least some of the missions to Mars. Here's some stuff about it.

For the love of God! Is all you do watch these videos and assume them all to be true? Its phenomenal how idiotic you are! You aren't taking a stand..HA! That was funny.

Zathras
12-22-2008, 03:02 AM
If they can fake moon missions, why is it so implausible that they can fake Mars missions?

http://www.conservativeunderground.com/forum505/showthread.php?t=9002?

The only people that think that the moon landings were faked are idiots with no life.


You people are not saying anything with any substance at all. Thinking people aren't swayed by empty rhetoric and invective. Do you realize that they'd laugh you all out of the debating hall for these responses?

Wow....just wow. Were you born this stupid or do you have to practice everyday at it? The reason you're getting the reponses you are is because you're the one, not us, that's not saying anything of substance at all. Thinking people aren't swayed by empty rhetoric and invective, which is why we treat you with derision and laughter. Do you realize that they'd laugh you out of the debating hall for these subjects? Hell, you'd be laughed at before you get anywhere near the debate hall, let alone inside.

djones520
12-22-2008, 03:22 AM
I love when people with no background in materials science or engineering try to explain what happened on 9/11 in such idiotic and simplistic ways. And to think other people actually watch videos like that and believe that rubbish.

But but but... wrapping chicken wire around a cinder block then lighting some kerosene on it PROOOVES THAT BUSH BLEW UP THE WORLD TRADE CENTER!!!!!11!!1!!!1 WHY CAN'T YOU SEE IT!!#!!!!!11111111



I love these people.:D

SarasotaRepub
12-22-2008, 07:24 AM
They are priceless. :D

marinejcksn
12-22-2008, 08:01 AM
More proof that drugs are bad. :D

"You see, I think drugs have done some good things for us, I really do. If you don't believe drugs have done good things for us, do me a favor. Go home tonight, take all your albums, all your tapes and all your CDs and burn them. 'Cause you know what, the musicians that made all that great music that's enhanced your lives throughout the years — real fucking high on drugs."

Bill Hicks. :D

Cosmored
12-22-2008, 08:52 AM
I love when people with no background in materials science or engineering try to explain what happened on 9/11 in such idiotic and simplistic ways. And to think other people actually watch videos like that and believe that rubbish.
I think this picture of the nose of the plane that hit the Pentagon pretty much proves that 9/11 was an inside job.
http://www.g7welcomingcommittee.com/blog/wp-content/images/pentagon1_plane.jpg

Here's a picture of the nose of a 757.
http://www.caverca.com/Images/Boeing%20757%20TACV%2001.jpg

It's obviously not the same kind of plane.


If the moon landings were faked, why do it more than once? The point was proven the first time, so why fake a trip to the moon a total of 9 times?

The evidence shows that they faked it.
http://www.conservativeunderground.com/forum505/showthread.php?t=9002

There is a theory that the government was getting more money to finance the Vietnam war. Anyway, they were getting money. Who knows where all the money went.

http://www.apfn.org/apfn/moon.htm
(excerpt)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The cost of the entire Apollo program: USD $25.4 billion -1969 Dollars ($135-billion in 2005 Dollars). See NASA Budget. (Includes Mercury, Gemini, Ranger, Surveyor, Lunar Orbitar, Apollo programs.) Apollo spacecraft and Saturn rocket cost alone, was about $ 83-billion 2005 Dollars (Apollo spacecraft cost $ 28-billion (CS/M $ 17-billion; LM $ 11-billion), Saturn I, IB, V costs about $ 46-billion 2005 dollars). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Apollo Motives
Several motives have been suggested for the U.S. government to fake the moon landings - some of the recurrent elements are:
Distraction - The U.S. government benefited from a popular distraction to take attention away from the Vietnam war. Lunar activities did abruptly stop, with planned missions cancelled, around the same time that the US ceased its involvement in the Vietnam War.
Cold War Prestige - The U.S. government considered it vital that the U.S. win the space race with the USSR. Going to the Moon, if it was possible, would have been risky and expensive. It would have been much easier to fake the landing, thereby ensuring success.
Money - NASA raised approximately 30 billion dollars pretending to go to the moon. This could have been used to pay off a large number of people, providing significant motivation for complicity. In variations of this theory, the space industry is characterized as a political economy, much like the military industrial complex, creating fertile ground for its own survival.
Risk - The available technology at the time was such that there was a good chance that the landing might fail if genuinely attempted.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


What possible reason would NASA have for faking the Mars missions? I understand the rationale that you and others cling to to explain away 9/11 as a Bush plot, but what would be gained by faking the Mars missions?

Same as above. They could fake something and keep the money. Prestige would also be a reason. The government wants Americans to think they live in the greatest country in the world.


If the Mars missions were faked, then why weren't all of them successful?
That would be a good tactic. The whole thing would be more believeable and they would still get the money for the faked failed missions. They faked Apollo 13.


Since your videos talk about NASA faking their Mars missions, what about the USSR, EU and Great Britain? Were those missions all faked as well?
I never said I was sure the NASA Mars missions were faked. I just want to put all the info I can find on the table so it can be sorted out. Here's something else I found.

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=9436&hl=mars%20hoax&st=0

It may turn out that they were real. After they way they faked the moon missions and planned and carried out 9/11, and generally lie about lots of other stuff, I think this is worth investigating.


Okay, just for fun I watched the first few videos, and I have to say that whoever the guy is that put them together is not at all very bright. First of all, in the very first video, he spells "Phoenix" incorrectly in the title.

He also says the maximum altitude you can skydive is about 14,000 feet. That's a load of bunk. I've personally airdropped paratroopers at 22,000 feet on a HAHO (High Altitude High Opening) drop, meaning they opened their chutes as soon as they cleared the airplane. There have been other drops I'm aware of from higher altitudes as well.

The narrator puts a lot of stock in what newspapers and magazines say, when anyone with even the smallest amount of common sense knows that errors and exaggerations are routine.

He also points out quite correctly that the Martian mean temperature is much lower than the freezing point of water, but he is comparing the freezing point of water on earth and not on Mars. There's a section in the second or third video where the narrator challenges the report that crumbs of white material uncovered by the Phoenix lander were in fact ice and had vaporized. With Mars' much lower atmospheric pressure, water will rapidly move from solid to gaseous states (sublimation) much like CO2 (dry ice) does on Earth.
I don't rule out the missions' having been real.


Suckers will fall for this particular conspiracy. Anyone with a lick of common sense,or an IQ above room temperature will not.
A thinking person has neither an a priori incredulity, nor a naive willingness to believe.


Compelling evidence, but not quite as convincing as this:
I'm not an engineer but that does make sense. Why did the towers fall at near free-fall speed?

djones520
12-22-2008, 09:11 AM
I think this picture of the nose of the plane that hit the Pentagon pretty much proves that 9/11 was an inside job.
http://www.g7welcomingcommittee.com/blog/wp-content/images/pentagon1_plane.jpg

Here's a picture of the nose of a 757.
http://www.caverca.com/Images/Boeing%20757%20TACV%2001.jpg

It's obviously not the same kind of plane.


The evidence shows that they faked it.
http://www.conservativeunderground.com/forum505/showthread.php?t=9002

There is a theory that the government was getting more money to finance the Vietnam war. Anyway, they were getting money. Who knows where all the money went.

http://www.apfn.org/apfn/moon.htm
(excerpt)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The cost of the entire Apollo program: USD $25.4 billion -1969 Dollars ($135-billion in 2005 Dollars). See NASA Budget. (Includes Mercury, Gemini, Ranger, Surveyor, Lunar Orbitar, Apollo programs.) Apollo spacecraft and Saturn rocket cost alone, was about $ 83-billion 2005 Dollars (Apollo spacecraft cost $ 28-billion (CS/M $ 17-billion; LM $ 11-billion), Saturn I, IB, V costs about $ 46-billion 2005 dollars). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Apollo Motives
Several motives have been suggested for the U.S. government to fake the moon landings - some of the recurrent elements are:
Distraction - The U.S. government benefited from a popular distraction to take attention away from the Vietnam war. Lunar activities did abruptly stop, with planned missions cancelled, around the same time that the US ceased its involvement in the Vietnam War.
Cold War Prestige - The U.S. government considered it vital that the U.S. win the space race with the USSR. Going to the Moon, if it was possible, would have been risky and expensive. It would have been much easier to fake the landing, thereby ensuring success.
Money - NASA raised approximately 30 billion dollars pretending to go to the moon. This could have been used to pay off a large number of people, providing significant motivation for complicity. In variations of this theory, the space industry is characterized as a political economy, much like the military industrial complex, creating fertile ground for its own survival.
Risk - The available technology at the time was such that there was a good chance that the landing might fail if genuinely attempted.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Same as above. They could fake something and keep the money. Prestige would also be a reason. The government wants Americans to think they live in the greatest country in the world.


That would be a good tactic. The whole thing would be more believeable and they would still get the money for the faked failed missions. They faked Apollo 13.


I never said I was sure the NASA Mars missions were faked. I just want to put all the info I can find on the table so it can be sorted out. Here's something else I found.

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=9436&hl=mars%20hoax&st=0

It may turn out that they were real. After they way they faked the moon missions and planned and carried out 9/11, and generally lie about lots of other stuff, I think this is worth investigating.


I don't rule out the missions' having been real.


A thinking person has neither an a priori incredulity, nor a naive willingness to believe.


I'm not an engineer but that does make sense. Why did the towers fall at near free-fall speed?

Dumb fuck. I had a Station Chief who was at the Pentagon when the plane hit. She was NOT the kind of person who could keep a secret like this. They don't let people who get fired as a Station Chief keep secrets of inside jobs like that.

Your insinuations that the US Military would willingly kill thousands of the citizens that we have sworn to protect, not to mention the hundreds of fellow service members who where also killed at the Pentagon has made one thing abundantly clear. You'll most certainly get a mudhole stomped in your ass if you ever try to bring this shit up to one of us in person.

Zeus
12-22-2008, 09:35 AM
The Govt exposed themselves when Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX) who, on a visit to JPL, asked if Mars Pathfinder had taken an image of the flag planted there in 1969 by Neil Armstrong! :eek:

Jackson Lee, who represents Houston, was a member of the House Science Committee’s space subcommittee.

enslaved1
12-22-2008, 09:50 AM
Everyone should not view or respond to a single thread he starts, sooner or later he will leave.

Nah, we could just ask the mods to replace every post with this.....


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v221/righteous_slave/TheUltimateWarrior.gif

Same level of intelligence, just not as much to make fun of.

Moon
12-22-2008, 09:38 PM
I think this picture of the nose of the plane that hit the Pentagon pretty much proves that 9/11 was an inside job.
http://www.g7welcomingcommittee.com/blog/wp-content/images/pentagon1_plane.jpg

Here's a picture of the nose of a 757.
http://www.caverca.com/Images/Boeing%20757%20TACV%2001.jpg

It's obviously not the same kind of plane.
Your over-pixelated "proof" is nothing of the sort. It was a damn plane that hit the Pentagon. If you still claim it wasn't, then please tell the class what happened to the plane.



The evidence shows that they faked it.
http://www.conservativeunderground.com/forum505/showthread.php?t=9002

There is a theory that the government was getting more money to finance the Vietnam war. Anyway, they were getting money. Who knows where all the money went.

http://www.apfn.org/apfn/moon.htm
(excerpt)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The cost of the entire Apollo program: USD $25.4 billion -1969 Dollars ($135-billion in 2005 Dollars). See NASA Budget. (Includes Mercury, Gemini, Ranger, Surveyor, Lunar Orbitar, Apollo programs.) Apollo spacecraft and Saturn rocket cost alone, was about $ 83-billion 2005 Dollars (Apollo spacecraft cost $ 28-billion (CS/M $ 17-billion; LM $ 11-billion), Saturn I, IB, V costs about $ 46-billion 2005 dollars). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Apollo Motives
Several motives have been suggested for the U.S. government to fake the moon landings - some of the recurrent elements are:
Distraction - The U.S. government benefited from a popular distraction to take attention away from the Vietnam war. Lunar activities did abruptly stop, with planned missions cancelled, around the same time that the US ceased its involvement in the Vietnam War.
Cold War Prestige - The U.S. government considered it vital that the U.S. win the space race with the USSR. Going to the Moon, if it was possible, would have been risky and expensive. It would have been much easier to fake the landing, thereby ensuring success.
Money - NASA raised approximately 30 billion dollars pretending to go to the moon. This could have been used to pay off a large number of people, providing significant motivation for complicity. In variations of this theory, the space industry is characterized as a political economy, much like the military industrial complex, creating fertile ground for its own survival.
Risk - The available technology at the time was such that there was a good chance that the landing might fail if genuinely attempted.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Same as above. They could fake something and keep the money. Prestige would also be a reason. The government wants Americans to think they live in the greatest country in the world.


That would be a good tactic. The whole thing would be more believeable and they would still get the money for the faked failed missions. They faked Apollo 13.

The proof is that the moon missions were all real. Your fantasies otherwise notwithstanding.

Why would they have to create such a godawful boondoggle as faking all those missions for a few billion more dollars? the checkbook was wide open for the government to spend as it wished. They certainly aren't going to try to pull off something as complicated as faking 9 missions to the moon for some extra cash...they don't have that kind of imagination.



http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=9436&hl=mars%20hoax&st=0[/url]

It may turn out that they were real. After they way they faked the moon missions and planned and carried out 9/11, and generally lie about lots of other stuff, I think this is worth investigating.


I don't rule out the missions' having been real.


A thinking person has neither an a priori incredulity, nor a naive willingness to believe.


I'm not an engineer but that does make sense. Why did the towers fall at near free-fall speed?
A thinking person also doesn't allow themselves to be led around by the nose by such blatantly false information as you support. If you had a lick of common sense, you would be able to see through the nonsense portrayed in Loose Change and the other conspiracy crap that's out there.

I love the term "near free fall speed". It shows a basic lack of understanding on your part, and the pied piper's you blindly follow. Two questions:

1. How fast (or slow) should the towers have fallen?

2. Why have no structural engineers come forward in supporting the notion that the 9/11 attacks were staged? If anyone could see through the subterfuge that you believe exists, it would be a bunch of structural engineers. Where are they?

Zathras
12-22-2008, 09:46 PM
Nah, we could just ask the mods to replace every post with this.....


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v221/righteous_slave/TheUltimateWarrior.gif

Same level of intelligence, just not as much to make fun of.

Actually, I might do that on my own. Save the mods some work and respond to Cosmoron in the way his posts deserve.

Here is Cosmoron's last post substituted with the graphic Enslaved suggested:


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v221/righteous_slave/TheUltimateWarrior.gif

Well, what do you know...that pic does make Cosmoron's post seem much more intelligent.

ironhorsedriver
12-23-2008, 07:00 AM
Cosmo, How about the Voyager's? You need to spend some quality time on some science sites, get away from all the conspiracy sites. Maybe you'll learn a little something.
We have done some amazing things in space, and there all true.
And your 911 conspiracy theory is mind boggling, if you truly believe half of what you spout, you need to seek help. There are many good Psychiatrists who would help you find a safe bunker!

linda22003
12-23-2008, 08:26 AM
Do you realize that they'd laugh you all out of the debating hall for these responses?

Do you realize that no one in his right mind would be IN a debating hall for this crap? :p

linda22003
12-23-2008, 08:29 AM
1. I'm not an engineer but that does make sense.
2. Why did the towers fall at near free-fall speed?

1. Not an engineer? I'm shocked.
2. Gravity.

enslaved1
12-23-2008, 10:09 AM
Actually, I might do that on my own. Save the mods some work and respond to Cosmoron in the way his posts deserve.

Here is Cosmoron's last post substituted with the graphic Enslaved suggested:



Well, what do you know...that pic does make Cosmoron's post seem much more intelligent.

Glad to be of assistance.

Sonnabend
12-23-2008, 02:39 PM
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v221/righteous_slave/TheUltimateWarrior.gif

FlaGator
12-23-2008, 06:00 PM
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v221/righteous_slave/TheUltimateWarrior.gif


But the trip your head took to Uranus was real wasn't it?

Ree
12-23-2008, 06:10 PM
Should I bother to read all the shit or just post pics?



Never mind....
http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i310/ReeW/1426a9d5b60513c556cf275db8b5c8cc.jpg

Mythic
12-23-2008, 09:29 PM
Oh my God...I just read something that stated the cow really never jumped over the moon...I...omg...

FlaGator
12-23-2008, 10:12 PM
Oh my God...I just read something that stated the cow really never jumped over the moon...I...omg...

I'm going to need videos from youtube if you want to convince me.

Mythic
12-24-2008, 01:00 AM
Watch this video from 8 minutes. I wont tell you why or how but it proves cows dont travel over moons.
http://www.youtube.com/v/Da2qD2qLL4I&hl

These next few illustrate my point even clearer.

http://www.youtube.com/v/8dsQWDhf5yw&hl=en&fs

http://www.youtube.com/v/U_1qdemp5eI&hl

http://www.youtube.com/v/BAhhZ0w0iQU&hl

These videos weren't enough at first, but I think that there is a possibility that the cow did not jump over the moon because of these videos.

http://www.youtube.com/v/fECSQ7ytBK4&hl

http://www.youtube.com/v/Yz4GsXi8b9w&hl

http://www.youtube.com/v/XXgDfzaK3Ac&hl

Now after you watch these videos, even though some of them are over 10 minutes long, I want you to all of a sudden agree with me. If you didn't watch all of them you are lacking knowledge. I will ignore everything you post because if it isnt in these videos (which I worship like a god) it cannot possibly have any truth to it. Everyone knows only youtube videos are right and facts from scientists are made up. But considering how the moon missions were faked, I can see how a cow would be unable to jump let alone over the moon.

Cosmored
12-24-2008, 11:56 AM
Dumb fuck. I had a Station Chief who was at the Pentagon when the plane hit. She was NOT the kind of person who could keep a secret like this. They don't let people who get fired as a Station Chief keep secrets of inside jobs like that.
The evidence shows that whatever hit the Pentagon was much smaller than a 757. Therefore, you are lying.

This ain't the nose of a 757.
http://www.g7welcomingcommittee.com/blog/wp-content/images/pentagon1_plane.jpg

http://www.physics911.net/missingwings


Your over-pixelated "proof" is nothing of the sort. It was a damn plane that hit the Pentagon. If you still claim it wasn't, then please tell the class what happened to the plane.
It was a plane. It just wasn't a 757. It was a much smaller plane.


If you still claim it wasn't, then please tell the class what happened to the plane.
There are lots of plausible theories. One is that the plane landed at some military base and the people were disposed of by the conspirators.
Watch "Painful Deceptions".
http://www.question911.com/linksall.htm
In the last five minures of part 1 there's a plausible theory about what they did with the passengers.


The proof is that the moon missions were all real. Your fantasies otherwise notwithstanding.
You're not going to convince any thinking people with empty rhetoric. You have to debunk the evidence.
http://www.conservativeunderground.com/forum505/showthread.php?t=9002


Why would they have to create such a godawful boondoggle as faking all those missions for a few billion more dollars? the checkbook was wide open for the government to spend as it wished. They certainly aren't going to try to pull off something as complicated as faking 9 missions to the moon for some extra cash...they don't have that kind of imagination.
They also distracted people's attention from the war in Vietnam and made them think that the US was some kind of "Superior" country.


How fast (or slow) should the towers have fallen?

I tend to think that the pancaking would slow down the speed of fall considerably. This isn't the proof I'm presenting though. I maintain that the picture of the nose of the plane that hit the Pentagon and the damage to the Pentagon which is not consistent with a 757 crash is proof that 9/11 was an inside job.
http://0911.site.voila.fr/index1.htm

The speed of the falling towers does fit the picture though.



Why have no structural engineers come forward in supporting the notion that the 9/11 attacks were staged? If anyone could see through the subterfuge that you believe exists, it would be a bunch of structural engineers. Where are they?
We have to consider the idea that an engineer would be risking his career and maybe his life and the life of his whole family if he started speaking publicly about this. Let's not forget what happened to Thomas Baron.
http://es.youtube.com/watch?v=ZfYBJFPuiwE

Also, the press is controlled so he or she could only do YouTube videos and give non-televised lectures on it.

Here's some stuff about the American press.

http://www.youtube.com//watch?v=bbnxsPgcsH0
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=chomsky+media&search_type=&aq=f
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Media/media_watch.html
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Propaganda/Propaganda_page.html
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Media_control_propaganda/Media_Control.html

Read the article watch the documentary by Steven Jones.

http://www.question911.com/linksall.htm
http://www.wtc7.net/articles/WhyIndeed09.pdf


Cosmo, How about the Voyager's? You need to spend some quality time on some science sites, get away from all the conspiracy sites. Maybe you'll learn a little something.
We have done some amazing things in space, and there all true.
After the Apollo hoax we have to take everything NASA says with a grain of salt. A lot of stuff is probably real while a lot of stuff probably isn't.

Here is some other stuff that looks suspicious.

http://es.youtube.com/watch?v=MNP828YIUQo
(3:55 time mark)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2U-NGXBIaaA
(3:10 time mark)

----------------------------
Go down about 30% of the way on this page...
http://ocii.com/~dpwozney/apollo3.htm
...until you see this.
"APOLLO 9: Dave scott performs Extra Vehicular Activities LAVA # : LV-1998-00030.mov"

That space walk looks suspicious.
----------------------------

You people seem to have a naive willingness to believe the official American version of everything. Here are some websites I suggest you start reading.

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/
http://www.globalresearch.ca/

ralph wiggum
12-24-2008, 12:00 PM
And with that nonsense, we're off to Stupid Liberal Tricks again.

enslaved1
12-24-2008, 12:45 PM
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v221/righteous_slave/deadhorse.gif


You people seem to have a naive willingness to believe the official American version of everithing. Here are some websites I suggest you start reading.

And you seem have the naive willingness to believe just about anything else sat in front of you.

Zathras
12-24-2008, 01:20 PM
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v221/righteous_slave/TheUltimateWarrior.gif

Much better.

Mythic
12-24-2008, 03:25 PM
You're not going to convince any thinking people with empty rhetoric. You have to debunk the evidence.We already debunked all your "evidence" and you ignored it. Lol. You are a piece of work. Did you ever go to that 9/11 site I showed you?


I maintain that the picture of the nose of the plane that hit the Pentagon and the damage to the Pentagon which is not consistent with a 757 crash is proof that 9/11 was an inside job. I will disprove that here:
http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/hunthoax.html?q=hunthoax.html
Try this too
http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/ppfinal.html

Size of 757 matches the initial size of hole in the building - somewhere between 13 and 16 feet (757 is 13 feet wide/high)

Rims found in building match those of a 757

Small turbine engine outside is an APU

Same engine has been clearly stated to not match a Global Hawk engine

Blue seats from 757 laying on ground in photos

Part of "American" fuselage logo visible in more than 1 photo

Engine parts photographed inside match a Rolls-Royce RB211

Structural components photographed in wreckage match Boeing paint primer schemes

Large deisel generator in front of building hit by a large heavy object

Large deisel engine outside is spun towards the building - could not be result of bomb blast or missile explosion

Multiple eye witnesses say they saw an airliner

Multiple eye witnesses say they saw an airliner hit the Pentagon

60+ bodies, matching the passenger list and flight crew roster identified and returned to families from Pentagon wreckage
For even more go to this site.
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread79655/pg1


I know you will ignore me again, but you Cosmored are wrong and will never be right no matter whatyou say.

Cosmored
12-26-2008, 10:42 AM
We already debunked all your "evidence" and you ignored it. Lol. You are a piece of work. Did you ever go to that 9/11 site I showed you?

Yes. It's post #64 on the other thread.
http://www.conservativeunderground.com/forum505/showthread.php?t=9138&page=7


Size of 757 matches the initial size of hole in the building - somewhere between 13 and 16 feet (757 is 13 feet wide/high)
Look at the picture at the top of this page.
http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=4223&st=30

The fence is still there. There are no signs of the wings having hit the Pentagon.


Rims found in building match those of a 757

Small turbine engine outside is an APU

Same engine has been clearly stated to not match a Global Hawk engine

Blue seats from 757 laying on ground in photos
Plane parts can be planted. So can bodies. Who knows what might have been planted in the area of the crash just before the crash.


Part of "American" fuselage logo visible in more than 1 photo
That could have been planted when the area was still smoke-covered just after the crash.


Large deisel generator in front of building hit by a large heavy object

Large deisel engine outside is spun towards the building - could not be result of bomb blast or missile explosion
This is plantable too. Anything that could possibly have been planted is not conclusive proof.


Multiple eye witnesses say they saw an airliner

Witnesses can be planted; that would be a part of a conspiracy as big as this one. Witnesses are not proof as people can lie.


60+ bodies, matching the passenger list and flight crew roster identified and returned to families from Pentagon wreckage

In this link there's a documentary called "Painful Deceptions".
http://www.question911.com/linksall.htm

In the last five minutes of part one a theory is put forth that explains the passengers.



I maintain that the picture of the nose of the plane that hit the Pentagon and the damage to the Pentagon which is not consistent with a 757 crash is proof that 9/11 was an inside job.
I will disprove that here:
http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHART...=hunthoax.html
Try this too
http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/ppfinal.html

I can't see anything in those two links that disprove anything. All I see is that they are putting forth alternative explanations that don't disprove the conspiracy explanations. We just have two sets of explanations. If there is something undebunkable such as the picture of the nose of the craft that hit the Pentagon which is obviously not the nose of a 757, all of those alternative explanations fall by the wayside.

http://www.g7welcomingcommittee.com/blog/wp-content/images/pentagon1_plane.jpg
http://physics911.net/missingwings

Be specific. Pick just two or three specific things from one of those sites that you think debunk the evidence of the photo of the nose of the plane that hit the Pentagon and we can talk about whether they are really conclusive proof.

asdf2231
12-26-2008, 11:29 AM
Does anyone like Pie?

Or Kitties?

http://i213.photobucket.com/albums/cc167/Kittysquared/pie_kitty.gif

ironhorsedriver
12-26-2008, 11:37 AM
How do you plant a fusalage before the smoke clears? Do you have any idea how absurd that sounds? Just the logistics would keep it from being secret. Man, you need to get a life.

Sonnabend
12-26-2008, 11:41 AM
Not to mention the fact that the fuselage would weight several tons.

Cosmored
12-26-2008, 01:17 PM
How do you plant a fusalage before the smoke clears?
Not a big heavy fusalage--I was referring to the pieces of aluminum from the sides of a plane. They were light enough for a few men to carry. I saw nothing in the pictures that couldn't have been planted.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iS2rlAoKiy4
3W's (dot) youtube (dot) com/watch?v=iS2rlAoKiy4

Zathras
12-26-2008, 01:20 PM
Wow, answer me this Cosmoron...if the US government did fake 9-11, how come they couldn't fake finding WMD's in Iraq? You'd think one would go with the other. The government being able to pull off the biggest deception in human history with faking 9-11 can't fake WMD's being found in Iraq? Seems to be a bit inconsistent.

Goldwater
12-26-2008, 01:27 PM
Wow, answer me this Cosmoron...if the US government did fake 9-11, how come they couldn't fake finding WMD's in Iraq? You'd think one would go with the other. The government being able to pull off the biggest deception in human history with faking 9-11 can't fake WMD's being found in Iraq? Seems to be a bit inconsistent.

Or the previous president and a blowjob.

Cosmored
12-26-2008, 01:44 PM
Wow, answer me this Cosmoron...if the US government did fake 9-11, how come they couldn't fake finding WMD's in Iraq? You'd think one would go with the other. The government being able to pull off the biggest deception in human history with faking 9-11 can't fake WMD's being found in Iraq? Seems to be a bit inconsistent.
I don't know the answer to that question but that doesn't mean there is no answer. The picture of the nose of the plane that hit the Pentagon and the fact that the damage to the Pentagon is inconsistent with a 757 crash closes the whole case.

http://www.g7welcomingcommittee.com/blog/wp-content/images/pentagon1_plane.jpg
http://physics911.net/missingwings

9/11 was an inside job.

Zathras
12-26-2008, 01:49 PM
I don't know the answer to that question but that doesn't mean there is no answer. The picture of the nose of the plane that hit the Pentagon and the fact that the damage to the Pentagon is inconsistent with a 757 crash closes the whole case.

http://www.g7welcomingcommittee.com/blog/wp-content/images/pentagon1_plane.jpg
http://physics911.net/missingwings

9/11 was an inside job.

Yawn, just as I though you'd answer the question, with deflection. Do everyone a favor and don't breed. Keep your defective DNA from polluting the human race. Stupidity on the scale of yours can do nothing but bring down the IQ of the human race.

Cosmored
12-26-2008, 02:05 PM
Yawn, just as I though you'd answer the question, with deflection.
Do you think the nose in the photo is the nose of a 757? How do you explain the shape? I know the photo was taken with a fish-eye lens but nothing else in the photo is distorted enough to cause the distortion that would be necessary to make a 757 nose look like the nose in the picture.

There's also the circumstantial evidence of there only being two photos from two cameras available even though the Pentagon had lots of other cameras that were in a position to take a clear picture of the craft.
http://0911.site.voila.fr/index3.htm

A 757 wouldn't fit in the space behind the box in the picture; the nose would protrude.

asdf2231
12-26-2008, 02:56 PM
Do you think the nose in the photo is the nose of a 757? How do you explain the shape? I know the photo was taken with a fish-eye lens but nothing else in the photo is distorted enough to cause the distortion that would be necessary to make a 757 nose look like the nose in the picture.

There's also the circumstantial evidence of there only being two photos from two cameras available even though the Pentagon had lots of other cameras that were in a position to take a clear picture of the craft.
http://0911.site.voila.fr/index3.htm

A 757 wouldn't fit in the space behind the box in the picture; the nose would protrude.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D1NAwlepnSs&eurl=http://www.conservativecave.com/index.php?topic=19859.msg226143

Mythic
12-26-2008, 03:03 PM
Not a big heavy fusalage--I was referring to the pieces of aluminum from the sides of a plane. They were light enough for a few men to carry. I saw nothing in the pictures that couldn't have been planted.

So all that shrapnel from the plane was placed there instantly after the collision of what you say to be a missle. Then the people that put it there disappeared and somehow nobody saw them.

Sonnabend
12-26-2008, 06:04 PM
Maybe this will explain what Cosmotard is trying to say

http://i45.photobucket.com/albums/f62/Cerriadh/worldconspiracy.jpg

Zathras
12-26-2008, 07:18 PM
Do you think the nose in the photo is the nose of a 757?

Yes and you can't prove otherwise.


How do you explain the shape? I know the photo was taken with a fish-eye lens but nothing else in the photo is distorted enough to cause the distortion that would be necessary to make a 757 nose look like the nose in the picture.

Easy, the 757 that hit the Pentagon skipped on the ground just prior to impacting into the building. What you're seeing is the dust cloud that was kicked up from it.


There's also the circumstantial evidence of there only being two photos from two cameras available even though the Pentagon had lots of other cameras that were in a position to take a clear picture of the craft.
http://0911.site.voila.fr/index3.htm

A 757 wouldn't fit in the space behind the box in the picture; the nose would protrude.

Circumstantial evidence eh? Gee, why am I not surprised that you'd use that to bolster your weak assed arguments.

AmPat
12-26-2008, 09:20 PM
Cosmored
MemberYou really have no idea how crazy you are , do you? A hoax of this magnitutude needs less than 1 tenth of one percent of common sense to see that it would be impossible to successfully pass. You really need to take up knitting or somthing more productive with your time.:cool:

patriot45
12-26-2008, 09:30 PM
You really have no idea how crazy you are , do you? A hoax of this magnitutude needs less than 1 tenth of one percent of common sense to see that it would be impossible to successfully pass. You really need to take up knitting or somthing more productive with your time.:cool:

Hang on there! Any thinking man should be skeptical! Check out this conspiracy They are every where you look!! . :rolleyes:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=saHs6J0OXVI

BSR
12-26-2008, 10:32 PM
Hang on there! Any thinking man should be skeptical! Check out this conspiracy They are every where you look!! . :rolleyes:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=saHs6J0OXVI



That was awesome...

"As you can see, the ice on the left completely melted while the metal barely melted at all"


This dude is mocking Conspiracy nuts..

ironhorsedriver
12-27-2008, 08:29 AM
You really have no idea how crazy you are , do you? A hoax of this magnitutude needs less than 1 tenth of one percent of common sense to see that it would be impossible to successfully pass. You really need to take up knitting or somthing more productive with your time.:cool:

Nah, he'd be even worse off when the needle somehow ended up in his head.

Zathras
12-27-2008, 12:21 PM
Nah, he'd be even worse off when the needle somehow ended up in his head.

Naw I think Cosmoron would be ok if that happened. We have plenty of evidence here that he doesn't have much in the brains department so the needle wouldn't hit anything vital.

Cosmored
12-27-2008, 12:35 PM
So all that shrapnel from the plane was placed there instantly after the collision of what you say to be a missle. Then the people that put it there disappeared and somehow nobody saw them.
Not a missile--a fighter-sized plane.

http://www.g7welcomingcommittee.com/blog/wp-content/images/pentagon1_plane.jpg
http://physics911.net/missingwings



Do you think the nose in the photo is the nose of a 757?
Yes and you can't prove otherwise.
The picture of the nose of the plane that hit the Pentagon proves otherwise.


Easy, the 757 that hit the Pentagon skipped on the ground just prior to impacting into the building. What you're seeing is the dust cloud that was kicked up from it.

There were no marks on the lawn.
http://killtown.911review.org/pentalawn.html

Look at the picture at the top of this page.
http://0911.site.voila.fr/index3.htm

There is smoke behind the craft. It's probably from a missile that's being fired. The resolution of the picture is high enough for the substance behind the plane to clearly be smoke.

Now look at the alleged nose of the craft that hit the Pentagon in this picture.
http://www.g7welcomingcommittee.com/blog/wp-content/images/pentagon1_plane.jpg

The shadowline underneath is clear and it's consistent with the shadow of the Pentagon. That is clearly the nose of a plane and clearly not dust.

Zathras
12-27-2008, 01:12 PM
the same lame assed argument as before

You need more tinfoil Cosmoron. The stuff you have on your head is leaking.

Sonnabend
12-27-2008, 09:02 PM
So one question remains: and its one you'll never be able to answer.

Where are the passengers.

asdf2231
12-27-2008, 10:37 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AhKbxNvgt54

lurkalot
12-27-2008, 10:46 PM
oh crap, I suppose that weird looking little robot thing with the letters NASA that I ran over the other day out in the dunes was something important? :o

Celtic Rose
12-27-2008, 11:03 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AhKbxNvgt54

That was hilarious :p

Zathras
12-27-2008, 11:42 PM
So one question remains: and its one you'll never be able to answer.

Where are the passengers.

Oh, and Cosmoron, don't tell us to look at some tin foil wearing, conspiridiocy theorists website. It's not a valid source.