They May Have Faked the Mars Missions Too

[djones520]

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/...gon1_plane.jpg

Here's a picture of the nose of a 757.
http://www.caverca.com/Images/Boeing...0TACV%2001.jpg

It's obviously not the same kind of plane.


The evidence shows that they faked it.
http://www.conservativeunderground.c...ead.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/in...rs%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]

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]

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.....




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

[Moon]

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/...gon1_plane.jpg

Here's a picture of the nose of a 757.
http://www.caverca.com/Images/Boeing...0TACV%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.c...ead.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]

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




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:

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

[ironhorsedriver]

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]

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]

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]

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]