Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.math > #638633 > unrolled thread

Re: The Apollo moon landings

Back to article view | Back to sci.math

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: The Apollo moon landings Powell Speech-language pathologists Ban <con@gpwzos.org> - 2025-06-08 15:50 +0000
    Re: The Apollo moon landings hertz778@gmail.com (rhertz) - 2025-06-09 00:11 +0000
      Re: The Apollo moon landings Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2025-06-09 07:31 +0200
        Re: The Apollo moon landings bertietaylor@myyahoo.com (Bertitaylor) - 2025-06-10 01:18 +0000
      Re: The Apollo moon landings clzb93ynxj@att.net (LaurenceClarkCrossen) - 2025-06-14 04:17 +0000
        Re: The Apollo moon landings Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2025-06-15 10:02 +0200
          Re: The Apollo moon landings bertietaylor@myyahoo.com (Bertietaylor) - 2025-07-05 10:25 +0000

#638633 — Re: The Apollo moon landings

Jim Pennino wrote:

> Bertitaylor <bertietaylor@myyahoo.com> wrote:
>> Har har har har. Worthy objections if they were shuffling under piano
>> wires on Earth, with threat of them coming undone. But on the Moon they
>> would go up slowly and come down slowly with no damage done. And
>> nothing prevented them from throwing one of the moon rocks up to show
>> how slowly it went up or down.
> 
> They were intelligent professionals, not teenagers making an internet
> video, crackpot.
> 
> Nothing about the Moon says "they would go up slowly" nor that the suits
> wouldn't be damaged by a fall, crackpot.

you are so stupid, hard to believe

𝗕𝘂𝘇𝘇_𝗔𝗹𝗱𝗿𝗶𝗻_𝗮𝗱𝗺𝗶𝘁𝘀_𝗵𝗲_𝗱𝗶𝗱_𝗻𝗼𝘁_𝗴𝗼_𝘁𝗼_＂𝘀𝗽𝗮𝗰𝗲＂!
https://bi%74%63%68ute.com/video/45agkhonLpJZ

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#638637

Explain the infamous conference of Neil Armstrong, Aldrin and Collins,
where they looked like dead inside. They didn't even smile once, and the
guilt and shame was all over them. Why did this happen for more than 2
hours,

By far, not the happiest men in the world, having conquered the Moon,
isn't it?




Apollo 11 Post Flight Press Conference (1969)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hvg5UBdiIHs

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#638640

Am Montag000009, 09.06.2025 um 02:11 schrieb rhertz:
> Explain the infamous conference of Neil Armstrong, Aldrin and Collins,
> where they looked like dead inside. They didn't even smile once, and the
> guilt and shame was all over them. Why did this happen for more than 2
> hours,
> 
> By far, not the happiest men in the world, having conquered the Moon,
> isn't it?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Apollo 11 Post Flight Press Conference (1969)
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hvg5UBdiIHs

I actually like 'symbolism'.

Not for myself, of course, but because the 'bad guys' do and I'm good in 
deciphering symbols.


Now, that video started with two batches at the wall of the press 
conference room:

one for 'NASA' and one for the 'Apollo 11 mission'.

The second logo showed an Eagle landing on the Moon.

Now the eagle is actually a symbol, because it is not a common eagle, 
but the American white-head eagle.

'white head' in German means 'Weißhaupt'.

That was actually a name in German, of a person who happened to be the 
head of a group called 'Illuminati', who allegedly went to America 
(after being prosecuted in Europe).

This Adam Weißhaupt allegedly changed his name in the states and later 
called himself 'George Washington'.


TH

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#638648

On Mon, 9 Jun 2025 5:31:17 +0000, Thomas Heger wrote:

> Am Montag000009, 09.06.2025 um 02:11 schrieb rhertz:
>> Explain the infamous conference of Neil Armstrong, Aldrin and Collins,
>> where they looked like dead inside. They didn't even smile once, and the
>> guilt and shame was all over them. Why did this happen for more than 2
>> hours,
>>
>> By far, not the happiest men in the world, having conquered the Moon,
>> isn't it?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Apollo 11 Post Flight Press Conference (1969)
>>
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hvg5UBdiIHs
>
> I actually like 'symbolism'.
>
> Not for myself, of course, but because the 'bad guys' do and I'm good in
> deciphering symbols.
>
>
> Now, that video started with two batches at the wall of the press
> conference room:
>
> one for 'NASA' and one for the 'Apollo 11 mission'.
>
> The second logo showed an Eagle landing on the Moon.
>
> Now the eagle is actually a symbol, because it is not a common eagle,
> but the American white-head eagle.
>
> 'white head' in German means 'Weißhaupt'.
>
> That was actually a name in German, of a person who happened to be the
> head of a group called 'Illuminati', who allegedly went to America
> (after being prosecuted in Europe).
>
> This Adam Weißhaupt allegedly changed his name in the states and later
> called himself 'George Washington'.

Same chap who as a truthful kid cut down trees and owned up to his dad
about that instead of blaming slaves or someone else to avoid whipping?
>
>
> TH

--

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#638691

On Mon, 9 Jun 2025 0:11:55 +0000, rhertz wrote:

> Explain the infamous conference of Neil Armstrong, Aldrin and Collins,
> where they looked like dead inside. They didn't even smile once, and the
> guilt and shame was all over them. Why did this happen for more than 2
> hours,
>
> By far, not the happiest men in the world, having conquered the Moon,
> isn't it?
>
>
>
>
> Apollo 11 Post Flight Press Conference (1969)
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hvg5UBdiIHs
The usual "skeptic" is someone who defends the consensus of
professionals by means of an either-or dichotomy between "science" and
"pseudoscience" relying on appeal to "authority" while ridiculing
critics. It's lucky the moon landings succeeded if they tried to rely on
relativity!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#638719

Am Samstag000014, 14.06.2025 um 06:17 schrieb LaurenceClarkCrossen:
> On Mon, 9 Jun 2025 0:11:55 +0000, rhertz wrote:
> 
>> Explain the infamous conference of Neil Armstrong, Aldrin and Collins,
>> where they looked like dead inside. They didn't even smile once, and the
>> guilt and shame was all over them. Why did this happen for more than 2
>> hours,
>>
>> By far, not the happiest men in the world, having conquered the Moon,
>> isn't it?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Apollo 11 Post Flight Press Conference (1969)
>>
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hvg5UBdiIHs
> The usual "skeptic" is someone who defends the consensus of
> professionals by means of an either-or dichotomy between "science" and
> "pseudoscience" relying on appeal to "authority" while ridiculing
> critics. It's lucky the moon landings succeeded if they tried to rely on
> relativity!

The 'usual skeptic' would look at the 'body language' of these heros.

They didn't look very pleased, for instance, while being honored by 
standing ovations.

Those were, apparently, 'orchestrated' by these guys sitting in the 
middle of the audience.

But some sort of positive emotions would be a natural reaction to that 
kind of applause.

But that didn't happen. Instead of smiling and grinning, the astronauts 
bowed their heads down, what is not the usual sign for good feelings.


TH

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#639086

On Sun, 15 Jun 2025 8:02:19 +0000, Thomas Heger wrote:

> Am Samstag000014, 14.06.2025 um 06:17 schrieb LaurenceClarkCrossen:
>> On Mon, 9 Jun 2025 0:11:55 +0000, rhertz wrote:
>>
>>> Explain the infamous conference of Neil Armstrong, Aldrin and Collins,
>>> where they looked like dead inside. They didn't even smile once, and the
>>> guilt and shame was all over them. Why did this happen for more than 2
>>> hours,
>>>
>>> By far, not the happiest men in the world, having conquered the Moon,
>>> isn't it?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Apollo 11 Post Flight Press Conference (1969)
>>>
>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hvg5UBdiIHs
>> The usual "skeptic" is someone who defends the consensus of
>> professionals by means of an either-or dichotomy between "science" and
>> "pseudoscience" relying on appeal to "authority" while ridiculing
>> critics. It's lucky the moon landings succeeded if they tried to rely on
>> relativity!
>
> The 'usual skeptic' would look at the 'body language' of these heros.
>
> They didn't look very pleased, for instance, while being honored by
> standing ovations.
>
> Those were, apparently, 'orchestrated' by these guys sitting in the
> middle of the audience.
>
> But some sort of positive emotions would be a natural reaction to that
> kind of applause.
>
> But that didn't happen. Instead of smiling and grinning, the astronauts
> bowed their heads down, what is not the usual sign for good feelings.

Cruel to make competent people tell lies for their whole lives.

Woof woof such dishonesty is possible only for the naturally sinful ape.
>
>
> TH

--

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | sci.math

csiph-web