Ryan Gosling says moon landing was "human achievement",not an american one

Queen Titania said:

Except that ---- just as with 9/11, it was probably not being filmed in 'real time'. A pre - made movie being relayed, even perhaps in Kennedy, as if it where being filmed in real time ---- people are just grown up children and just as gullible - We believe what we are told most of the time because we really do not understand the concept of the lie.

Click to expand...

They had the facility to film everything we saw. And they filmed for their training exercises so what became of those films? You never see an Apollo mission training film, why not? If they were only filming for training, like they said they were, then why didn't they produce a single training film?

So they built this huge studio, complete with a huge "moon" with rails in front of it, to simulate the craft in orbit, and then, lo and behold, the real trip to the moon just happens to look exactly the same as the studio version. They made the films at their studio, that's public knowledge, but all we ever saw was what they broadcast on tv... there isn't any record of a training film, they simply do not exist... but we know they did extensive filming at their studio, isn't that strange?

gullible doesn't begin to cover it.

There's radiation in space, the shielding for it is way too heavy for space flight... that's why man can not go into outer space, the radiation is deadly. We worked for over a decade on trying to "return" to the moon in 2020... and gave up because we could not solve the radiation issue. I guess they are not up to trying to fake it again.

Apollo 11 mission supposedly returned from the moon and recorded the accumulated radiation for the entire mission on dosimeters attached to both the craft and the men's suits. They all read the same; nothing. 1/7th of one REM. That capsule went nowhere, at least, it couldn't have gone higher than 200 miles, in all likelihood, it was just another training drop from a helicopter.

Days said:

They had the facility to film everything we saw. And they filmed for their training exercises so what became of those films? You never see an Apollo mission training film, why not? If they were only filming for training, like they said they were, then why didn't they produce a single training film?

So they built this huge studio, complete with a huge "moon" with rails in front of it, to simulate the craft in orbit, and then, lo and behold, the real trip to the moon just happens to look exactly the same as the studio version. They made the films at their studio, that's public knowledge, but all we ever saw was what they broadcast on tv... there isn't any record of a training film, they simply do not exist... but we know they did extensive filming at their studio, isn't that strange?

gullible doesn't begin to cover it.

There's radiation in space, the shielding for it is way too heavy for space flight... that's why man can not go into outer space, the radiation is deadly. We worked for over a decade on trying to "return" to the moon in 2020... and gave up because we could not solve the radiation issue. I guess they are not up to trying to fake it again.

Apollo 11 mission supposedly returned from the moon and recorded the accumulated radiation for the entire mission on dosimeters attached to both the craft and the men's suits. They all read the same; nothing. 1/7th of one REM. That capsule went nowhere, at least, it couldn't have gone higher than 200 miles, in all likelihood, it was just another training drop from a helicopter.

Click to expand...

Pure propaganda - which is never ever ever admitted too, even thousands of years after a fabricated event ( thinking of Julius Caesar) and sooooo it still carries on to this day!

The Sage of Main Street said:

Court-Jester Martin Luther Supported the Genocide of Both Jews and Peasants

So who do you see as behind the fake landing: Christ-killing Jews or Antichrist Papists?

Click to expand...

"The world is governed by very different personages from what is imagined by those who are not behind the scenes". Benjamin Disraeli

Who they are - I do not give a damn - that the majority are still duped by them I do care about.

Days said:

easy now, all I asked was whether you are familiar with the technology involved in line-of-sight microwave analog television. I'm guessing you might not have a background in that field?

Click to expand...

That's not really how I took it:

I can educate you, if you want that, if you don't want it, I won't bother arguing.

Click to expand...

^ Extremely condescending and rather pompous for someone who actually has no real clue of what he's yammering on about, bit by all means - educate us some more. Us mere mortals need your selfless lectures to "educate ourselves."

To ensure a direct transmission signal from the moon, NASA had to maintain stations in three continents – two in Australia (the Honeysuckle Creek Tracking Station near Canberra and the Parkes Radio Observatory surrounded by sheep paddocks west of Sydney); one at the Goldstone Deep Space Communications Complex in the Mojave Desert of California; and one at the Madrid Manned Flight Tracking Site in Spain. As Armstrong suited up for his first moonwalk, Dick Nafzger, the 28-year-old coordinator of the tracking stations' TV operations, was as nervous as Lebar. Nafzger was the guy at Mission Control charged with monitoring ground equipment and the conversion of the slow-scan footage to US broadcast standards. "We were all going to be involved in something of monumental historic importance," he says.


When Armstrong opened the hatch on the lunar module, stepped out onto the moon, and uttered his famous words about mankind's giant leap, the tracking stations with a direct line on the Apollo's signal were the ones in Australia. The 200-foot-diameter radio dish at the Parkes facility managed to withstand freak 70 mph gusts of wind and successfully captured the footage, which was converted and relayed to Houston. "When the door opened, I knew the camera was working," Lebar says, "It was pure elation."

Click to expand...

Please read and learn to listen instead of pretending that you are some kind of "expert."

Jesus, doowd....get over yourself.

Days said:

They had the facility to film everything we saw. And they filmed for their training exercises so what became of those films? You never see an Apollo mission training film, why not? If they were only filming for training, like they said they were, then why didn't they produce a single training film?

Click to expand...

"Why won't Obama release his Long-form BC???"
Because no matter what gets released - it's fake.

So they built this huge studio, complete with a huge "moon" with rails in front of it, to simulate the craft in orbit, and then, lo and behold, the real trip to the moon just happens to look exactly the same as the studio version. They made the films at their studio, that's public knowledge, but all we ever saw was what they broadcast on tv... there isn't any record of a training film, they simply do not exist... but we know they did extensive filming at their studio, isn't that strange?

Click to expand...

If we don't have any film of the studio used to mimic the moon landing, how do we know that it looked exactly the same?

gullible doesn't begin to cover it.

Click to expand...

That works both ways, you can be gullible in the quest to NOT believe something.

There's radiation in space, the shielding for it is way too heavy for space flight... that's why man can not go into outer space, the radiation is deadly. We worked for over a decade on trying to "return" to the moon in 2020... and gave up because we could not solve the radiation issue. I guess they are not up to trying to fake it again.

Click to expand...

Yes, there is radiation in space. In particular, the Van Allen belt. Let me explain something about that:

Here:

Apollo 11 mission supposedly returned from the moon and recorded the accumulated radiation for the entire mission on dosimeters attached to both the craft and the men's suits. They all read the same; nothing. 1/7th of one REM. That capsule went nowhere, at least, it couldn't have gone higher than 200 miles, in all likelihood, it was just another training drop from a helicopter.

Click to expand...

One more time:


Van Allen Belt is composed of CHARGED PARTICLES - not X-rays, Gama rays, etc.

The belts are 1,000 - 60,000 miles long made up mostly of high energy protons which are larger and more easily blocked by lead and other materials and electrons which are smaller and do less damage while being harder to block. Because electrons are so small, they do very little damage.

Queen Titania said:

Pure propaganda - which is never ever ever admitted too, even thousands of years after a fabricated event ( thinking of Julius Caesar) and sooooo it still carries on to this day!

Click to expand...

The NASA hoaxes never end. rovers on Mars, Cassini playing in amongst Saturn's rings... you can't believe anything they claim to be doing, even if they only fake 10% of it, how do you know which 10% is faked? And it might be worse than 10%, but no matter, what does it have to do with my life? I have an interest in science, so I go there, but beyond posting about them on the internet, rockets in space don't really affect me.

Puzzling Evidence said:

That's not really how I took it:



^ Extremely condescending and rather pompous for someone who actually has no real clue of what he's yammering on about, bit by all means - educate us some more. Us mere mortals need your selfless lectures to "educate ourselves."



Please read and learn to listen instead of pretending that you are some kind of "expert."

Jesus, doowd....get over yourself.

Click to expand...

I have studied the Apollo missions for over 10 years... soooo, not kidding you, I can educate you. That wasn't condenscending, my perspective is my perspective. Speaking of condenscending...

"someone who actually has no real clue of what he's yammering on about"

really? how so? I'm ready to back up anything I said. And a whole lot more.

Meanwhile, you never answered whether you have any background in early television line-of-sight technology. If you want to discuss the video from Apollo missions, you are going to need that. I get the feeling that all you want to do is argue with people, and anything that belies that you are not an expert you try to cover up.

I'm not an expert. But I studied up on it, I understand it. If you want to discuss what happened to that signal from Apollo 11, let's start with the signal technology. Makes sense, no?

Puzzling Evidence said:

"Why won't Obama release his Long-form BC???"
Because no matter what gets released - it's fake.



If we don't have any film of the studio used to mimic the moon landing, how do we know that it looked exactly the same?



That works both ways, you can be gullible in the quest to NOT believe something.



Yes, there is radiation in space. In particular, the Van Allen belt. Let me explain something about that:

Here:

One more time:

Van Allen Belt is composed of CHARGED PARTICLES - not X-rays, Gama rays, etc.

The belts are 1,000 - 60,000 miles long made up mostly of high energy protons which are larger and more easily blocked by lead and other materials and electrons which are smaller and do less damage while being harder to block. Because electrons are so small, they do very little damage.

Click to expand...

You are lots of fun to listen to, but you don't seem to think before you post. Here, you reply to a post that wasn't directed at you, and you think it is a post that is arguing with you, which it wasn't, it was me chatting with someone I've known for 15 years about something we both know a lot about.

But you take it upon yourself to try and argue with the post.

So here, let's look at your rebuke...

basically, you have a self-help program for me, referring me to clueless debunkers that have been out there lying forever for NASA. okay, I can appreciate that. But what is your own response? What do you have to offer that made you want to reply to my post?

There's 2 points in the post that you replied to...

• why did NASA build a film studio complete with full stage, artificial moon and tracking on rails? How is that "training"? and if it was used for training, why didn't they make any training videos?
• radiation is one of the obstacles to manned space flight. NASA's own records for the Apollo missions record that they never left low earth orbit with any of the missions. Apollo 11, for instance, accumulated 1/7th of one REM for the entire mission.

I can't see where you addressed either point. So what was your motive in replying to the post? It wasn't directed at you, but if you had something to say, go ahead and say it.

Days said:

The NASA hoaxes never end. rovers on Mars, Cassini playing in amongst Saturn's rings... you can't believe anything they claim to be doing, even if they only fake 10% of it, how do you know which 10% is faked? And it might be worse than 10%, but no matter, what does it have to do with my life? I have an interest in science, so I go there, but beyond posting about them on the internet, rockets in space don't really affect me.

Click to expand...

Well no because there aren't any, Days my darling - There are no rockets in space. But the lies - the lies do affect us all -

Queen Titania said:

Well no because there aren't any, Days my darling - There are no rockets in space. But the lies - the lies do affect us all -

Click to expand...

It depends on how you define "space". Originally, "outer space" was anywhere beyond our atmosphere. But where do you draw the line on the atmosphere? I would say anything beyond the ionosphere (anything beyond 50 miles out) was the original meaning of "outer space". I love this line... "Space; the final frontier, these are the voyages of the starship enterprise..." and so Jefferson Airplane became Jefferson Starship... and we never really left the concept of flying an airplane in the atmosphere... look at all of the space flight in the STAR WARS series; it is all fighter flight, none of it is space flight.

The lies really do affect us all. Not sure if they hurt us all that much. I like to think it helped a whole bunch of podunk cavemen in Pennsylvania learn to dream. We shot rockets out beyond the atmosphere, it was interesting, I doubt if any humans were ever stupid enough to go up there, I'm damn skeptical that they would have made it back. You can't re-enter the atmosphere at orbital speed (17,000 mph) the capsule would burn up immediately and explode. So the only way back is by slowing all the way back down to under mach one, and then you have to wonder if the parachutes would have really held. So, how did they do that? If you spent 2 booster rockets getting up to speed of orbit, you are going to need at least one more booster rocket to slow back down... which they didn't have. So it would seem obvious that nothing they sent up ever returned. That doesn't apply to the slow speed vehicles that we have sent up of late; although they couldn't have docked with the space station, they could have re-entered and returned. And the space station is possible, but getting back from it, isn't.

As far as all these probes that supposedly haunt our solar system. All fake. Probes went to the moon, and that was one helluva an achievement... by the Russians.

"Days, post: 2217122, member: 8860"

I don't believe the Russians have done it either - and but most important is the lie and I really do believe that each and every one of them hurts us all, if only because we are looking in the wrong direction for truths and or that if we believe one lie spewed out all and everywhere by 'Deep International State' then we shall believe others and be unable to discern between lies and honesty ---- on any level. If kids are exploring a lie in school, as though it were truth, how can we, as mankind, move in any good direction?

Queen Titania said:

"The world is governed by very different personages from what is imagined by those who are not behind the scenes". Benjamin Disraeli

Who they are - I do not give a damn - that the majority are still duped by them I do care about.

Click to expand...

Make Every Dynasty Die Nasty

Behind the scenes then and there and now and here in America has been the sheltered hereditary guillotine-fodder ruling class, who also created the anti-Jewish and anti-Catholic superstitions by merely describing what they themselves are doing to us. If you don't hate Preppies, you have no right to be a citizen.

Days said:

The voice and the video were both attached to the same signal. But the video was compartmentalized, it was broken apart and neatly packed to save on bandwidth. Now, when the signal arrived, the audio went directly through, but the video had to be rebuilt, remember, everything was happening in real time. This only happened for the Apollo 11 broadcast. And it had everything to do with being out of range, because that was the reason they broke the video down to begin with.

And the bottom line is, they were still way out of range, compartmentalizing the signal might have gained them an additional 15,000 miles in range (might!) but that still left them 180,000 miles short of the moon. A low power transmission shot through a two foot diameter dish on the top of the Eagle didn't make up for any of that 180,000 miles. If you know anything at all about early television, line-of-sight technology, because that's what we have here; a microwave signal shooting between two dishes, you would immediately recognize how badly the Apollo missions were out of range. Doesn't that make arguing over what slowed the picture kind of moot?

easy now, all I asked was whether you are familiar with the technology involved in line-of-sight microwave analog television. I'm guessing you might not have a background in that field?

Click to expand...

1. It was a radio signal.
2. Transmissions from one place on earth to another are blocked by trees, mountains, and such. Transmissions from the moon, not so.

Puzzling Evidence said:

It's a ridiculous scenario because the people who know all have to be killed and apparently THOUSANDS of employees were privy to this "hoax" and thus far, no one who worked for NASA on this project has said as much.

So who was killed....name one person who was killed for silence. More unfounded speculation? Its hogwash, the worst kind of absurdity.

Click to expand...

Conserve your ammo dude. It's not a hill worth dying on.

Days said:

You are lots of fun to listen to, but you don't seem to think before you post. Here, you reply to a post that wasn't directed at you, and you think it is a post that is arguing with you, which it wasn't, it was me chatting with someone I've known for 15 years about something we both know a lot about.

But you take it upon yourself to try and argue with the post.

So here, let's look at your rebuke...

basically, you have a self-help program for me, referring me to clueless debunkers that have been out there lying forever for NASA. okay, I can appreciate that. But what is your own response? What do you have to offer that made you want to reply to my post?

There's 2 points in the post that you replied to...

• why did NASA build a film studio complete with full stage, artificial moon and tracking on rails? How is that "training"? and if it was used for training, why didn't they make any training videos?
• radiation is one of the obstacles to manned space flight. NASA's own records for the Apollo missions record that they never left low earth orbit with any of the missions. Apollo 11, for instance, accumulated 1/7th of one REM for the entire mission.

I can't see where you addressed either point. So what was your motive in replying to the post? It wasn't directed at you, but if you had something to say, go ahead and say it.

Click to expand...

Dude, I'm really sick and tired of you making everyone of my posts about me. We're are presumably having a discussion, if that's too much for you to handle, please exit the conversation, because taunting you is not why I came here.

If you want to debate, debate what I effing post and stop making this crap about me.

Days said:

I have studied the Apollo missions for over 10 years... soooo, not kidding you, I can educate you. That wasn't condenscending, my perspective is my perspective. Speaking of condenscending...

Click to expand...

Oh, you've studied it? You mean you watched a few youtube videos and now you're some kind of expert?

I'm not an expert.

Click to expand...

Oh....well, of course you aren't. Carry on.

bdtex said:

Conserve your ammo dude. It's not a hill worth dying on.

Click to expand...

Calling this dude out, he's an "expert" with no working knowledge of NASA.

Queen Titania said:

Well no because there aren't any, Days my darling - There are no rockets in space. But the lies - the lies do affect us all -

Click to expand...

Then how do you propose we ended up launching satellites into space? Is the earth flat as well? Are we resting on the back of a giant turtle?

Puzzling Evidence said:

Calling this dude out, he's an "expert" with no working knowledge of NASA.

Click to expand...

I know.

Days said:

You can't re-enter the atmosphere at orbital speed (17,000 mph) the capsule would burn up immediately and explode.

Click to expand...

So the only way back is by slowing all the way back down to under mach one, and then you have to wonder if the parachutes would have really held. So, how did they do that?

Click to expand...

Watch it for yourself, but let me guess, this was "just as fake" as the moon landing, of course...

An entire piece of continuous footage.

If you spent 2 booster rockets getting up to speed of orbit, you are going to need at least one more booster rocket to slow back down... which they didn't have. So it would seem obvious that nothing they sent up ever returned. That doesn't apply to the slow speed vehicles that we have sent up of late; although they couldn't have docked with the space station, they could have re-entered and returned. And the space station is possible, but getting back from it, isn't.

Click to expand...

About one minute after entering our atmosphere, a booster rocket ignites but only to steer the craft to a spot in the ocean where it was to splash down - not to slow itself down. You don't need any rockets to slow down, just air.

*If you shoot a bullet straight up in the air and it re falls to earth, it would barely have enough velocity to break your skin. Why? Resistance to the air.

The spacecraft falling, meets serious resistance to the air and the parachutes slow it even further. Not exactly 'rocket science.'

Drogue parachutes are deployed at 22,000 feet. The whole event takes ten minutes from before entry to splash down and there is continual video evidence from multiple sources to confirm it.

As far as all these probes that supposedly haunt our solar system. All fake. Probes went to the moon, and that was one helluva an achievement... by the Russians.

Click to expand...

So how can you call China from the US via cell phone? Because of satellites.

Here....educate yourself even further:


Also, don't mention that you are a moon landing denier on any dating sites. Just trust me on this.