Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > alt.astronomy > #281754 > unrolled thread
| Started by | "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-02-07 10:09 -0600 |
| Last post | 2016-02-08 17:34 -0800 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 304 — 24 participants |
Back to article view | Back to alt.astronomy
Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-02-07 10:09 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Hägar <hsahm@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-07 08:33 -0800
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-02-08 01:35 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2016-02-08 09:06 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Hägar <hsahm@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-08 13:45 -0800
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2016-02-08 21:09 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Hägar <hsahm@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-09 06:56 -0800
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2016-02-16 19:30 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Cujo DeSockpuppet <cujo@petitmorte.net> - 2016-02-17 02:27 +0000
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 04:04 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-07 12:45 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-02-07 20:28 +0100
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-07 13:53 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-02-07 21:58 +0100
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-07 18:51 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-02-09 22:35 +0100
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2016-02-09 18:24 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-02-10 21:36 +0100
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2016-02-10 16:56 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-02-10 22:58 +0100
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2016-02-10 18:48 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2016-02-10 18:55 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-11 04:00 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2016-02-12 20:19 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-13 04:28 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2016-02-13 08:42 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-13 14:50 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2016-02-14 20:55 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2016-02-14 21:39 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2016-02-15 01:37 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2016-02-15 04:41 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2016-02-15 11:43 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2016-02-15 13:09 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2016-02-15 18:21 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-15 17:24 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2016-02-15 19:09 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-16 04:07 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2016-02-16 09:03 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-02-16 14:54 +0000
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2016-02-16 15:22 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-02-17 02:43 +0000
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2016-02-17 01:19 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2016-02-17 13:20 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2016-02-17 14:04 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-02-17 19:30 +0000
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2016-02-17 23:10 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 03:51 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2016-02-17 13:16 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2016-02-17 14:03 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-02-17 19:11 +0000
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 palsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 16:44 -0800
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-03-23 06:02 -0400
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 03:51 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2016-02-16 15:19 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 04:03 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2016-02-16 15:18 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2016-02-17 13:14 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Cujo DeSockpuppet <cujo@petitmorte.net> - 2016-02-17 22:46 +0000
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 03:50 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-15 17:23 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-15 03:23 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2016-02-15 11:46 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 mr.hvac@gmail.com - 2016-02-15 13:10 -0800
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2016-02-15 16:55 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-15 17:25 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2016-02-15 19:12 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-16 04:08 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Government Shill #2 <gov.shill@gmail.com> - 2016-02-16 13:59 +1100
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 palsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2016-02-15 19:04 -0800
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2016-02-16 01:15 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-16 04:08 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2016-02-16 15:26 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 04:04 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2016-02-17 10:54 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 03:49 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2016-02-14 20:56 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-15 03:23 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2016-02-15 04:48 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-10 04:41 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-02-10 20:08 +0100
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2016-02-10 15:35 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-02-10 21:43 +0100
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2016-02-10 16:55 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2016-02-10 16:43 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-11 03:57 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-02-13 19:50 +0100
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-13 14:52 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2016-02-15 04:56 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-15 17:24 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Guess Who <don'temailme@youputz.cpom> - 2016-02-13 15:59 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2016-02-13 16:02 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-02-13 21:22 +0000
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2016-02-08 11:24 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-02-16 08:24 +0100
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-16 04:09 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-02-17 06:08 +0100
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Government Shill #2 <gov.shill@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 16:19 +1100
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 04:09 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2016-02-17 11:01 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 03:49 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2016-02-18 10:06 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2016-02-18 20:26 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-02-19 10:44 +0100
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2016-02-08 11:19 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2016-02-08 17:26 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2016-02-08 22:39 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-09 03:42 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2016-02-07 17:29 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-02-07 16:51 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-07 18:52 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-02-08 02:26 +0000
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-08 03:48 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2016-02-08 08:46 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2016-02-08 11:33 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2016-02-08 17:34 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2016-02-08 17:55 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-02-09 00:48 +0000
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2016-02-08 20:15 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2016-02-08 22:42 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-09 03:44 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2016-02-09 16:48 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2016-02-09 17:32 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2016-02-09 18:31 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-10 04:41 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2016-02-10 16:45 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2016-02-14 17:31 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Arc Michael <abookoflife@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-14 14:39 -0800
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Saul Levy <saullevy1@cox.net> - 2016-02-14 22:27 -0700
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2016-02-14 20:39 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-15 03:20 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2016-02-09 16:44 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-02-09 22:15 +0000
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2016-02-08 20:12 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2016-02-08 22:43 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Arc Michael <abookoflife@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-08 20:29 -0800
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-09 03:46 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Arc Michael <abookoflife@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-10 19:16 -0800
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Saul Levy <saullevy1@cox.net> - 2016-02-11 09:48 -0700
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2016-02-09 16:43 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2016-02-09 18:27 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2016-02-09 20:06 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2016-02-10 07:31 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-02-10 18:09 +0000
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2016-02-10 16:51 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-11 03:59 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2016-02-14 20:45 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2016-02-10 16:44 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-09 03:43 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2016-02-09 17:00 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2016-02-09 19:13 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-10 04:41 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2016-02-10 12:57 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-11 03:58 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2016-02-12 12:15 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-13 04:28 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-10 04:41 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2016-02-10 16:47 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-08 16:56 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2016-02-08 20:19 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-09 08:17 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2016-02-09 09:54 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 mr.hvac@gmail.com - 2016-02-09 07:43 -0800
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2016-02-09 13:06 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-09 10:16 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2016-02-09 13:05 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-09 12:09 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2016-02-09 16:48 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2016-02-10 07:17 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 mr.hvac@gmail.com - 2016-02-10 04:34 -0800
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2016-02-10 16:45 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2016-02-08 22:41 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-09 03:43 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-02-08 18:26 +0000
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2016-02-08 14:13 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2016-02-08 17:35 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2016-02-08 18:01 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-02-09 00:50 +0000
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2016-02-09 16:44 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-02-09 22:24 +0000
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2016-02-10 07:19 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-02-10 17:50 +0000
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2016-02-10 13:04 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-02-11 14:53 +0000
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Cujo DeSockpuppet <cujo@petitmorte.net> - 2016-02-11 02:36 +0000
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2016-02-10 23:23 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Arc Michael <abookoflife@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-10 20:25 -0800
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-11 00:26 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Cujo DeSockpuppet <cujo@petitmorte.net> - 2016-02-11 22:24 +0000
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 mr.hvac@gmail.com - 2016-02-11 15:42 -0800
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2016-02-12 12:19 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Arc Michael <abookoflife@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-12 17:28 -0800
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Saul Levy <saullevy1@cox.net> - 2016-02-14 22:26 -0700
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Cujo DeSockpuppet <cujo@petitmorte.net> - 2016-02-13 16:42 +0000
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2016-02-08 20:21 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2016-02-09 16:49 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2016-02-10 13:08 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2016-02-10 16:51 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-09 03:44 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2016-02-09 09:04 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-10 04:41 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2016-02-10 16:09 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2016-02-10 17:01 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-11 03:56 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-11 03:55 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2016-02-10 16:50 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-11 03:57 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2016-02-14 20:49 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-15 03:20 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2016-02-15 17:00 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-15 17:26 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Cujo DeSockpuppet <cujo@petitmorte.net> - 2016-02-16 01:30 +0000
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2016-02-09 17:02 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-10 04:41 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2016-02-10 16:48 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-02-09 01:11 +0000
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2016-02-09 16:44 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-09 03:40 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2016-02-09 13:08 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2016-02-09 16:44 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-10 04:41 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2016-02-10 16:44 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-11 03:57 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2016-02-14 20:50 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-10 04:41 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-02-08 04:59 +0100
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2016-02-08 08:52 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2016-02-08 14:00 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2016-02-08 14:06 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2016-02-08 17:26 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2016-02-08 20:42 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Sergio <imvalid@invalid.com> - 2016-02-08 16:41 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2016-02-08 20:46 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-09 03:41 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-09 03:40 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2016-02-09 17:09 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2016-02-09 09:10 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2016-02-09 17:07 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2016-02-13 11:41 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2016-02-14 20:58 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-09 03:40 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2016-02-08 00:06 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2016-02-08 08:55 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2016-02-08 13:53 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2016-02-08 20:48 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-09 03:46 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2016-02-09 16:52 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2016-02-13 11:45 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2016-02-14 20:59 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-09 03:41 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2016-02-08 11:35 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2016-02-08 13:59 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2016-02-08 20:51 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-02-09 02:41 +0000
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Arc Michael <abookoflife@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-08 19:22 -0800
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Saul Levy <saullevy1@cox.net> - 2016-02-08 21:35 -0700
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2016-02-16 19:39 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 palsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2016-02-16 18:33 -0800
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 04:06 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2016-02-08 11:29 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2016-02-08 13:53 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2016-02-08 14:03 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2016-02-08 17:19 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-02-09 01:01 +0000
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2016-02-08 21:03 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2016-02-08 22:48 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-09 03:44 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-09 03:42 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2016-02-09 16:59 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2016-02-08 20:54 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2016-02-09 16:58 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-02-09 22:20 +0000
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2016-02-09 18:33 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-10 04:41 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2016-02-10 16:46 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-11 03:58 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Sarah Ehrett <ninety7gt@cox.net> - 2016-02-14 20:51 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2016-02-16 19:32 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 04:06 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Justin tyme" <Justin_Tyme2003@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-07 17:19 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-02-07 17:23 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Justin tyme" <Justin_Tyme2003@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-07 19:28 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2016-02-08 11:37 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Justin tyme" <Justin_Tyme2003@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-08 12:09 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2016-02-08 22:45 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Justin tyme" <Justin_Tyme2003@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-09 12:44 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2016-02-09 17:33 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Justin tyme" <Justin_Tyme2003@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-09 18:40 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> - 2016-02-10 03:18 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-10 04:41 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Justin tyme" <Justin_Tyme2003@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-10 11:56 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Justin tyme" <Justin_Tyme2003@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-10 11:55 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-10 04:41 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-10 04:41 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-10 04:41 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2016-02-08 08:59 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Government Shill #2 <gov.shill@gmail.com> - 2016-02-08 12:57 +1100
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-08 03:47 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2016-02-08 09:02 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-09 03:42 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2016-02-16 19:31 -0500
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 04:05 -0600
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 palsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2016-02-07 18:22 -0800
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Saul Levy <saullevy1@cox.net> - 2016-02-07 21:24 -0700
Re: Moon Hoax - latest proof July 2015 Arc Michael <abookoflife@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-08 17:34 -0800
Page 3 of 16 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 … 16 Next page →
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-17 02:43 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <na0mob$u2r$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #282171 |
BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> writes: >You would do better explaining the above to your dog. At least he/she >might twist his head and seem to listen. As I mentioned before, k00ktaunting is a form of entertainment for me. Yes, I know, I shouldn't have fun at the expense of my inferiors. I know the likes of slowjoe will never understand my explanations. But maybe there are lurkers out there who may learn from my posts.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-17 01:19 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.312ddafbac347d2b98c522@news.giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #282198 |
In article <na0mob$u2r$1@pcls7.std.com>, moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com says... > > BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> writes: > > >You would do better explaining the above to your dog. At least he/she > >might twist his head and seem to listen. > > As I mentioned before, k00ktaunting is a form of entertainment for me. > Yes, I know, I shouldn't have fun at the expense of my inferiors. It's too fun not to do it. > > I know the likes of slowjoe will never understand my explanations. > But maybe there are lurkers out there who may learn from my posts. I firmly believe SlowJoe is nothing but a troll. Bast is the real thing. -- BDK: Head Government Shill, Psychotronic World Dominator. Master of Remote Viewing. Level 6 expert in kOOkStudies. Former FEMA camp activities director. Head Strategic Writer. Former Black Helicopter color consultant.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-17 13:20 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <na2df6$s7i$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #282171 |
BDK wrote: > In article <n9vd80$9bi$1@pcls7.std.com>, moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com > says... >> >> "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> writes: >> >>> K Wills (Shill #3) wrote: >>>>> I'm going to predict she will say something about the Van Allen >>>>> Belts, or some other BS she read on a kOOksite and swallowed, hook, >>>>> line, and sinker. >>>> >>>> The problem with that is the fact that very little time was spent >>>> passing through the belts. Roughly four hours total. That's not long >>>> enough for fatal exposure. >> >>> Really,....so how about you taking a trip to fukushima and show us >>> how long you can survive in the reactor shells. >> >> Nope, it is well known that how dangerous radiation is is a function >> of exposure time multiplied by the radiation rate. >> >> Of course this is a red herring, leaking failed reactors will have a >> much higher radiation rate than the Van Allen belts, so "safe" exposure >> time will be that much shorter, If it's 100 times more intense, then >> the "safe" time will be 100 times shorter. A million times more >> intense = >> a million times shorter safe time. >> >> But the kooks all (deliberately) overlook one thing: The Apollo >> missions simply went around the worse of the Van Allen belts. They >> avoided the inner belt completely and went through a weaker portion of >> the outer belt, and spent little time there. The belts are aligned >> with the (magnetic) equator so they went out closer to the magnetic >> poles. > > You would do better explaining the above to your dog. At least he/she > might twist his head and seem to listen. You might as well try that explanation on a dog. You can even try explaining to the dog just how the apollo craft were able to make a 90 degree turn in space
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-17 14:04 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.312e8e4b107ab72d98c526@news.giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #282220 |
In article <na2df6$s7i$1@dont-email.me>, fakename@nomail.invalid says... > > BDK wrote: > > In article <n9vd80$9bi$1@pcls7.std.com>, moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com > > says... > >> > >> "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> writes: > >> > >>> K Wills (Shill #3) wrote: > >>>>> I'm going to predict she will say something about the Van Allen > >>>>> Belts, or some other BS she read on a kOOksite and swallowed, hook, > >>>>> line, and sinker. > >>>> > >>>> The problem with that is the fact that very little time was spent > >>>> passing through the belts. Roughly four hours total. That's not long > >>>> enough for fatal exposure. > >> > >>> Really,....so how about you taking a trip to fukushima and show us > >>> how long you can survive in the reactor shells. > >> > >> Nope, it is well known that how dangerous radiation is is a function > >> of exposure time multiplied by the radiation rate. > >> > >> Of course this is a red herring, leaking failed reactors will have a > >> much higher radiation rate than the Van Allen belts, so "safe" exposure > >> time will be that much shorter, If it's 100 times more intense, then > >> the "safe" time will be 100 times shorter. A million times more > >> intense = > >> a million times shorter safe time. > >> > >> But the kooks all (deliberately) overlook one thing: The Apollo > >> missions simply went around the worse of the Van Allen belts. They > >> avoided the inner belt completely and went through a weaker portion of > >> the outer belt, and spent little time there. The belts are aligned > >> with the (magnetic) equator so they went out closer to the magnetic > >> poles. > > > > You would do better explaining the above to your dog. At least he/she > > might twist his head and seem to listen. > > > > > > > You might as well try that explanation on a dog. > You can even try explaining to the dog just how the apollo craft were able > to make a 90 degree turn in space A 90 degree turn?? Ok, I'll bite, when did they make a 90 degree turn and why would they do it? I bet this one will set new records in Stooptardery. -- BDK: Head Government Shill, Psychotronic World Dominator. Master of Remote Viewing. Level 6 expert in kOOkStudies. Former FEMA camp activities director. Head Strategic Writer. Former Black Helicopter color consultant.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-17 19:30 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <na2hnt$d0v$2@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #282220 |
"Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> writes: >You might as well try that explanation on a dog. >You can even try explaining to the dog just how the apollo craft were able >to make a 90 degree turn in space Wow, Bast has never heard of these miracle components of rockets called "rocket engines"! (and it wasn't a 90 degree turn anyway, they simply avoided the worst of the belts, not the belts completely) Geez, I knew kooktards were dumb, but I never realized they were that dumb!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-17 23:10 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.312f0e58eba7fd598c527@news.giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #282227 |
In article <na2hnt$d0v$2@pcls7.std.com>, moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com says... > > "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> writes: > > >You might as well try that explanation on a dog. > >You can even try explaining to the dog just how the apollo craft were able > >to make a 90 degree turn in space > > Wow, Bast has never heard of these miracle components of rockets called > "rocket engines"! (and it wasn't a 90 degree turn anyway, they simply > avoided the worst of the belts, not the belts completely) > > Geez, I knew kooktards were dumb, but I never realized they were that > dumb! I want her to fully explain the whole deal, in her "special ed" sort of way. Could be a good one. And yes, over the years they've proven, time and time again to be an endless well of stupid. -- BDK: Head Government Shill, Psychotronic World Dominator. Master of Remote Viewing. Level 6 expert in kOOkStudies. Former FEMA camp activities director. Head Strategic Writer. Former Black Helicopter color consultant.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-18 03:51 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <a05bcb5oati4k70efbirm7hr0e2ng9862s@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #282220 |
On Wed, 17 Feb 2016 13:20:12 -0500, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
wrote:
>BDK wrote:
>> In article <n9vd80$9bi$1@pcls7.std.com>, moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com
>> says...
>>>
>>> "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> writes:
>>>
>>>> K Wills (Shill #3) wrote:
>>>>>> I'm going to predict she will say something about the Van Allen
>>>>>> Belts, or some other BS she read on a kOOksite and swallowed, hook,
>>>>>> line, and sinker.
>>>>>
>>>>> The problem with that is the fact that very little time was spent
>>>>> passing through the belts. Roughly four hours total. That's not long
>>>>> enough for fatal exposure.
>>>
>>>> Really,....so how about you taking a trip to fukushima and show us
>>>> how long you can survive in the reactor shells.
>>>
>>> Nope, it is well known that how dangerous radiation is is a function
>>> of exposure time multiplied by the radiation rate.
>>>
>>> Of course this is a red herring, leaking failed reactors will have a
>>> much higher radiation rate than the Van Allen belts, so "safe" exposure
>>> time will be that much shorter, If it's 100 times more intense, then
>>> the "safe" time will be 100 times shorter. A million times more
>>> intense = a million times shorter safe time.
>>>
>>> But the kooks all (deliberately) overlook one thing: The Apollo
>>> missions simply went around the worse of the Van Allen belts. They
>>> avoided the inner belt completely and went through a weaker portion of
>>> the outer belt, and spent little time there. The belts are aligned
>>> with the (magnetic) equator so they went out closer to the magnetic
>>> poles.
>>
>> You would do better explaining the above to your dog. At least he/she
>> might twist his head and seem to listen.
>
>
>You might as well try that explanation on a dog.
Do you think yourself that dumb? Really?
>You can even try explaining to the dog just how the apollo craft were able
>to make a 90 degree turn in space
It can be done. I don't recall any Apollo craft doing it, but it
can be done.
--
Shill #3.
Strategic Writer, Current Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-17 13:16 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <na2d7v$r8b$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #282165 |
Michael Moroney wrote: > "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> writes: > >> K Wills (Shill #3) wrote: >>>> I'm going to predict she will say something about the Van Allen >>>> Belts, or some other BS she read on a kOOksite and swallowed, hook, >>>> line, and sinker. >>> >>> The problem with that is the fact that very little time was spent >>> passing through the belts. Roughly four hours total. That's not long >>> enough for fatal exposure. > >> Really,....so how about you taking a trip to fukushima and show us how >> long you can survive in the reactor shells. > > Nope, it is well known that how dangerous radiation is is a function > of exposure time multiplied by the radiation rate. > > Of course this is a red herring, leaking failed reactors will have a > much higher radiation rate than the Van Allen belts, so "safe" exposure > time will be that much shorter, If it's 100 times more intense, then > the "safe" time will be 100 times shorter. A million times more > intense = > a million times shorter safe time. > > But the kooks all (deliberately) overlook one thing: The Apollo missions > simply went around the worse of the Van Allen belts. They avoided the > inner belt completely and went through a weaker portion of the outer > belt, and spent little time there. The belts are aligned with the > (magnetic) equator so they went out closer to the magnetic poles. You can't "go around" the Van Allen Belts you idiot. It's a they completely circle the earth kind of thing.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-17 14:03 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.312e8dee9054803f98c525@news.giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #282219 |
In article <na2d7v$r8b$1@dont-email.me>, fakename@nomail.invalid says... > > Michael Moroney wrote: > > "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> writes: > > > >> K Wills (Shill #3) wrote: > >>>> I'm going to predict she will say something about the Van Allen > >>>> Belts, or some other BS she read on a kOOksite and swallowed, hook, > >>>> line, and sinker. > >>> > >>> The problem with that is the fact that very little time was spent > >>> passing through the belts. Roughly four hours total. That's not long > >>> enough for fatal exposure. > > > >> Really,....so how about you taking a trip to fukushima and show us how > >> long you can survive in the reactor shells. > > > > Nope, it is well known that how dangerous radiation is is a function > > of exposure time multiplied by the radiation rate. > > > > Of course this is a red herring, leaking failed reactors will have a > > much higher radiation rate than the Van Allen belts, so "safe" exposure > > time will be that much shorter, If it's 100 times more intense, then > > the "safe" time will be 100 times shorter. A million times more > > intense = > > a million times shorter safe time. > > > > But the kooks all (deliberately) overlook one thing: The Apollo missions > > simply went around the worse of the Van Allen belts. They avoided the > > inner belt completely and went through a weaker portion of the outer > > belt, and spent little time there. The belts are aligned with the > > (magnetic) equator so they went out closer to the magnetic poles. > > > > > > You can't "go around" the Van Allen Belts you idiot. > It's a they completely circle the earth kind of thing. Wow, you're too stupid to live. -- BDK: Head Government Shill, Psychotronic World Dominator. Master of Remote Viewing. Level 6 expert in kOOkStudies. Former FEMA camp activities director. Head Strategic Writer. Former Black Helicopter color consultant.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-17 19:11 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <na2gkf$d0v$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #282219 |
"Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> writes: >Michael Moroney wrote: >> But the kooks all (deliberately) overlook one thing: The Apollo missions >> simply went around the worse of the Van Allen belts. They avoided the >> inner belt completely and went through a weaker portion of the outer >> belt, and spent little time there. The belts are aligned with the >> (magnetic) equator so they went out closer to the magnetic poles. >You can't "go around" the Van Allen Belts you idiot. >It's a they completely circle the earth kind of thing. Yes you can. Not completely but much reduced exposure. The Belts are a belt around the (magnetic) equator. They're pretty much shaped like a donut with the earth stuck in the hole. Go out via the North (or South) Pole and you avoid most of the donut (belt), It doesn't take a genius to figure that one out. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Allen_radiation_belt
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | palsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-17 16:44 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <6ac6468b-3cf4-4c2f-8423-3da9e026e384@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #282219 |
On Wednesday, February 17, 2016 at 10:16:17 AM UTC-8, Bast wrote: > You can't "go around" the Van Allen Belts you idiot. > It's a they completely circle the earth kind of thing. Perhaps you should indulge in a little self-education before talking about things of which you know very little... Google is your friend... http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-23 06:02 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.315c33cb9392efa198a045@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #282230 |
In article <6ac6468b-3cf4-4c2f-8423-3da9e026e384@googlegroups.com>, pnalsing@gmail.com says... > > On Wednesday, February 17, 2016 at 10:16:17 AM UTC-8, Bast wrote: > > > You can't "go around" the Van Allen Belts you idiot. > > It's a they completely circle the earth kind of thing. > > Perhaps you should indulge in a little self-education before talking about things of which you know very little... Google is your friend... > > http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm He suffers from the same kind of reasoning that has so many movies showing explosions in space as forming disks instead of globes--he doesn't quite grasp the notion of there being three spatial dimensions.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-18 03:51 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <iv4bcbt53kojuubpsn05j93pr7q2aaii14@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #282219 |
On Wed, 17 Feb 2016 13:16:21 -0500, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
wrote:
>Michael Moroney wrote:
>> "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> writes:
>>
>>> K Wills (Shill #3) wrote:
>>>>> I'm going to predict she will say something about the Van Allen
>>>>> Belts, or some other BS she read on a kOOksite and swallowed, hook,
>>>>> line, and sinker.
>>>>
>>>> The problem with that is the fact that very little time was spent
>>>> passing through the belts. Roughly four hours total. That's not long
>>>> enough for fatal exposure.
>>
>>> Really,....so how about you taking a trip to fukushima and show us how
>>> long you can survive in the reactor shells.
>>
>> Nope, it is well known that how dangerous radiation is is a function
>> of exposure time multiplied by the radiation rate.
>>
>> Of course this is a red herring, leaking failed reactors will have a
>> much higher radiation rate than the Van Allen belts, so "safe" exposure
>> time will be that much shorter, If it's 100 times more intense, then
>> the "safe" time will be 100 times shorter. A million times more
>> intense =
>> a million times shorter safe time.
>>
>> But the kooks all (deliberately) overlook one thing: The Apollo missions
>> simply went around the worse of the Van Allen belts. They avoided the
>> inner belt completely and went through a weaker portion of the outer
>> belt, and spent little time there. The belts are aligned with the
>> (magnetic) equator so they went out closer to the magnetic poles.
>
>
>You can't "go around" the Van Allen Belts you idiot.
>It's a they completely circle the earth kind of thing.
Is the inability to understand the written word a part of your
mental illness? Michael wrote, as seen above, "They avoided the inner
belt completely and went through a weaker portion of the outer belt,
and spent little time there."
--
Shill #3.
Strategic Writer, Current Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-16 15:19 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.312d4e4096c69d3e98c51f@news.giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #282164 |
In article <n9va1t$k72$1@dont-email.me>, fakename@nomail.invalid says... > > K Wills (Shill #3) wrote: > > On Mon, 15 Feb 2016 19:09:21 -0500, BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> > > wrote: > > > >> In article <sgn4cbpv38mqlb5q5lschbv0n5hc6m73ef@4ax.com>, > >> compuelf@gmail.com says... > >>> > >>> On Mon, 15 Feb 2016 13:09:30 -0500, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>> [...] > >>> > >>>>>> Awwww, You didn't like that one ? > >>>>>> Here.....Try this one. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Secret Moon - NASA fake moon and mars hoax PROVEN > >>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iNxxzEIzDVU > >>>>> > >>>>> It would take someone as insane and stupid as the goof who posted > >>>>> that video to buy into it. So, no surprise you do buy into it. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Geeeez, give me SOME credit. > >>> > >>> You buy into a k00k video that PROVES itself false in less than a > >>> minute, but want some credit? Really? > >>> > >>>> I sat in amazement as a child watching the live telecast of those > >>>> first steps. > >>> > >>> As did I, though I don't actually remember it. > >>> Literally millions of people all over the world watched the live > >>> even. > >>> > >>>> BUT I knew manned moon trips were impossible as soon as I started > >>>> school, and learned WHY it was impossible. > >>> > >>> But it wasn't impossible. > >>> You're still free to provide VALID evidence that it was > >>> impossible. > >>> > >>>> So someday when you reach high school,....there is still hope you to > >>>> may learn the truth of science. > >>> > >>> What truth is that? > >>> > >>>> I know you may think grammer school is impossible to graduate from,. > >>>> but eventually they will get tired of repeating you in grade 6 over > >>>> and over and > >>> > >>> Wow. An ad hom. Nothing screams failure like having been reduced > >>> to ad hom attacks. > >>> How about explaining, in detail, why the man missions were > >>> impossible. And please use valid, verifiable evidence for your claims. > >>> I will certainly be using them to counter you. > >> > >> I'm going to predict she will say something about the Van Allen Belts, > >> or some other BS she read on a kOOksite and swallowed, hook, line, and > >> sinker. > > > > The problem with that is the fact that very little time was spent > > passing through the belts. Roughly four hours total. That's not long > > enough for fatal exposure. > > > > > > Really,....so how about you taking a trip to fukushima and show us how long > you can survive in the reactor shells. > Don't worry, what doesn't kill you, makes you stronger, right ? What does that have to do with the Van Allen belts? > > Of course it would make a lot more sense to have the space station orbiting > several hundred miles higher to get it completely out of earths atmosphere. > Wonder why NASA never thought of that ? WTF? -- BDK: Head Government Shill, Psychotronic World Dominator. Master of Remote Viewing. Level 6 expert in kOOkStudies. Former FEMA camp activities director. Head Strategic Writer. Former Black Helicopter color consultant.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-17 04:03 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <7bh8cb1eg7bvhundnrk9c5va3mtdg532dp@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #282164 |
On Tue, 16 Feb 2016 09:03:16 -0500, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
wrote:
>K Wills (Shill #3) wrote:
>> On Mon, 15 Feb 2016 19:09:21 -0500, BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> In article <sgn4cbpv38mqlb5q5lschbv0n5hc6m73ef@4ax.com>,
>>> compuelf@gmail.com says...
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, 15 Feb 2016 13:09:30 -0500, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> [...]
>>>>
>>>>>>> Awwww, You didn't like that one ?
>>>>>>> Here.....Try this one.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Secret Moon - NASA fake moon and mars hoax PROVEN
>>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iNxxzEIzDVU
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It would take someone as insane and stupid as the goof who posted
>>>>>> that video to buy into it. So, no surprise you do buy into it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Geeeez, give me SOME credit.
>>>>
>>>> You buy into a k00k video that PROVES itself false in less than a
>>>> minute, but want some credit? Really?
>>>>
>>>>> I sat in amazement as a child watching the live telecast of those
>>>>> first steps.
>>>>
>>>> As did I, though I don't actually remember it.
>>>> Literally millions of people all over the world watched the live
>>>> even.
>>>>
>>>>> BUT I knew manned moon trips were impossible as soon as I started
>>>>> school, and learned WHY it was impossible.
>>>>
>>>> But it wasn't impossible.
>>>> You're still free to provide VALID evidence that it was
>>>> impossible.
>>>>
>>>>> So someday when you reach high school,....there is still hope you to
>>>>> may learn the truth of science.
>>>>
>>>> What truth is that?
>>>>
>>>>> I know you may think grammer school is impossible to graduate from,.
>>>>> but eventually they will get tired of repeating you in grade 6 over
>>>>> and over and
>>>>
>>>> Wow. An ad hom. Nothing screams failure like having been reduced
>>>> to ad hom attacks.
>>>> How about explaining, in detail, why the man missions were
>>>> impossible. And please use valid, verifiable evidence for your claims.
>>>> I will certainly be using them to counter you.
>>>
>>> I'm going to predict she will say something about the Van Allen Belts,
>>> or some other BS she read on a kOOksite and swallowed, hook, line, and
>>> sinker.
>>
>> The problem with that is the fact that very little time was spent
>> passing through the belts. Roughly four hours total. That's not long
>> enough for fatal exposure.
>
>
>
>
>
>Really,....so how about you taking a trip to fukushima and show us how long
>you can survive in the reactor shells.
Fukushima has a much higher concentration of radiation. You can't
honestly be as stupid as you're presenting yourself to be. This is an
act, right?
>Don't worry, what doesn't kill you, makes you stronger, right ?
>
So the saying goes.
>Of course it would make a lot more sense to have the space station orbiting
>several hundred miles higher to get it completely out of earths atmosphere.
>Wonder why NASA never thought of that ?
They did. The cost to benefit ration didn't work.
Didn't you take any sort of science class in sixth grade where
this sort of stuff was taught?
--
Shill #3.
Strategic Writer, Current Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-16 15:18 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.312d4e0bdc29388998c51e@news.giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #282153 |
In article <d6t5cbhsh0l3jqnl2sdmibobb0e6vgrsel@4ax.com>, compuelf@gmail.com says... > > On Mon, 15 Feb 2016 19:09:21 -0500, BDK <Control@Worldcontrol.com> > wrote: > > >In article <sgn4cbpv38mqlb5q5lschbv0n5hc6m73ef@4ax.com>, > >compuelf@gmail.com says... > >> > >> On Mon, 15 Feb 2016 13:09:30 -0500, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> > >> wrote: > >> > >> [...] > >> > >> >>> Awwww, You didn't like that one ? > >> >>> Here.....Try this one. > >> >>> > >> >>> Secret Moon - NASA fake moon and mars hoax PROVEN > >> >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iNxxzEIzDVU > >> >> > >> >> It would take someone as insane and stupid as the goof who posted that > >> >> video to buy into it. So, no surprise you do buy into it. > >> > > >> > > >> >Geeeez, give me SOME credit. > >> > >> You buy into a k00k video that PROVES itself false in less than a > >> minute, but want some credit? Really? > >> > >> >I sat in amazement as a child watching the live telecast of those first > >> >steps. > >> > >> As did I, though I don't actually remember it. > >> Literally millions of people all over the world watched the live > >> even. > >> > >> >BUT I knew manned moon trips were impossible as soon as I started school, > >> >and learned WHY it was impossible. > >> > >> But it wasn't impossible. > >> You're still free to provide VALID evidence that it was > >> impossible. > >> > >> >So someday when you reach high school,....there is still hope you to may > >> >learn the truth of science. > >> > >> What truth is that? > >> > >> >I know you may think grammer school is impossible to graduate from,. but > >> >eventually they will get tired of repeating you in grade 6 over and over and > >> > >> Wow. An ad hom. Nothing screams failure like having been reduced > >> to ad hom attacks. > >> How about explaining, in detail, why the man missions were > >> impossible. And please use valid, verifiable evidence for your claims. > >> I will certainly be using them to counter you. > > > >I'm going to predict she will say something about the Van Allen Belts, > >or some other BS she read on a kOOksite and swallowed, hook, line, and > >sinker. > > The problem with that is the fact that very little time was spent > passing through the belts. Roughly four hours total. That's not long > enough for fatal exposure. Details, details. All that matters to the kOOktard/Troofer is if it feels right and fits their agenda. -- BDK: Head Government Shill, Psychotronic World Dominator. Master of Remote Viewing. Level 6 expert in kOOkStudies. Former FEMA camp activities director. Head Strategic Writer. Former Black Helicopter color consultant.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-17 13:14 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <na2d3s$qle$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #282140 |
K Wills (Shill #3) wrote: > On Mon, 15 Feb 2016 13:09:30 -0500, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> > wrote: > > [...] > >>>> Awwww, You didn't like that one ? >>>> Here.....Try this one. >>>> >>>> Secret Moon - NASA fake moon and mars hoax PROVEN >>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iNxxzEIzDVU >>> >>> It would take someone as insane and stupid as the goof who posted that >>> video to buy into it. So, no surprise you do buy into it. >> >> >> Geeeez, give me SOME credit. > > You buy into a k00k video that PROVES itself false in less than a > minute, but want some credit? Really? > >> I sat in amazement as a child watching the live telecast of those first >> steps. > > As did I, though I don't actually remember it. > Literally millions of people all over the world watched the live > even. > >> BUT I knew manned moon trips were impossible as soon as I started >> school, and learned WHY it was impossible. > > But it wasn't impossible. > You're still free to provide VALID evidence that it was > impossible. > >> >> So someday when you reach high school,....there is still hope you to >> may learn the truth of science. > > What truth is that? > >> I know you may think grammer school is impossible to graduate from,. >> but eventually they will get tired of repeating you in grade 6 over >> and over and > > Wow. An ad hom. Nothing screams failure like having been reduced > to ad hom attacks. > How about explaining, in detail, why the man missions were > impossible. And please use valid, verifiable evidence for your claims. > I will certainly be using them to counter you. No,....you aren't worth wasting any more of my time on.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Cujo DeSockpuppet <cujo@petitmorte.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-17 22:46 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <XnsA5B1B4D7E9676stillnolawsuitedmo@208.90.168.18> |
| In reply to | #282218 |
"Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> wrote in news:na2d3s$qle$1@dont-email.me: > > > K Wills (Shill #3) wrote: >> On Mon, 15 Feb 2016 13:09:30 -0500, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> >> wrote: >> >> [...] >> >>>>> Awwww, You didn't like that one ? >>>>> Here.....Try this one. >>>>> >>>>> Secret Moon - NASA fake moon and mars hoax PROVEN >>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iNxxzEIzDVU >>>> >>>> It would take someone as insane and stupid as the goof who posted >>>> that video to buy into it. So, no surprise you do buy into it. >>> >>> >>> Geeeez, give me SOME credit. >> >> You buy into a k00k video that PROVES itself false in less than a >> minute, but want some credit? Really? >> >>> I sat in amazement as a child watching the live telecast of those >>> first steps. >> >> As did I, though I don't actually remember it. >> Literally millions of people all over the world watched the live >> even. >> >>> BUT I knew manned moon trips were impossible as soon as I started >>> school, and learned WHY it was impossible. >> >> But it wasn't impossible. >> You're still free to provide VALID evidence that it was >> impossible. >> >>> >>> So someday when you reach high school,....there is still hope you to >>> may learn the truth of science. >> >> What truth is that? >> >>> I know you may think grammer school is impossible to graduate from,. >>> but eventually they will get tired of repeating you in grade 6 over >>> and over and >> >> Wow. An ad hom. Nothing screams failure like having been reduced >> to ad hom attacks. >> How about explaining, in detail, why the man missions were >> impossible. And please use valid, verifiable evidence for your >> claims. I will certainly be using them to counter you. > > No,....you aren't worth wasting any more of my time on. Looks like a k00k v1ct0lly hace been the declaredest. -- Cujo - The Official Overseer of Kooks and Trolls in dfw.*, alt.paranormal, alt.astrology and alt.astrology.metapsych. Supreme Holy Overlord of alt.fucknozzles. Winner of the 8/2000, 2/2003 & 4/2007 HL&S award. July 2005 Hammer of Thor. Winning Trainer - Barbara Woodhouse Memorial Dog Whistle - 12/2005 & 4/2008. COOSN-266-06-01895. "I have violated NO ISPs AUP."- Ed the Liar. This signature was made by SigChanger. You can find SigChanger at: http://www.phranc.nl/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-18 03:50 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <ut4bcb98rtmrn7uarehiv6hpc3rrc3elob@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #282218 |
On Wed, 17 Feb 2016 13:14:11 -0500, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
wrote:
>K Wills (Shill #3) wrote:
>> On Mon, 15 Feb 2016 13:09:30 -0500, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
>> wrote:
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>>>> Awwww, You didn't like that one ?
>>>>> Here.....Try this one.
>>>>>
>>>>> Secret Moon - NASA fake moon and mars hoax PROVEN
>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iNxxzEIzDVU
>>>>
>>>> It would take someone as insane and stupid as the goof who posted that
>>>> video to buy into it. So, no surprise you do buy into it.
>>>
>>> Geeeez, give me SOME credit.
>>
>> You buy into a k00k video that PROVES itself false in less than a
>> minute, but want some credit? Really?
>>
Bast?
>>> I sat in amazement as a child watching the live telecast of those first
>>> steps.
>>
>> As did I, though I don't actually remember it.
>> Literally millions of people all over the world watched the live
>> even.
>>
>>> BUT I knew manned moon trips were impossible as soon as I started
>>> school, and learned WHY it was impossible.
>>
>> But it wasn't impossible.
>> You're still free to provide VALID evidence that it was
>> impossible.
>>
Bast?
>>> So someday when you reach high school,....there is still hope you to
>>> may learn the truth of science.
>>
>> What truth is that?
>>
Bast?
>>> I know you may think grammer school is impossible to graduate from,.
>>> but eventually they will get tired of repeating you in grade 6 over
>>> and over and
>>
>> Wow. An ad hom. Nothing screams failure like having been reduced
>> to ad hom attacks.
>> How about explaining, in detail, why the man missions were
>> impossible. And please use valid, verifiable evidence for your claims.
>> I will certainly be using them to counter you.
>
>
>No,....you aren't worth wasting any more of my time on.
Again? Well, lying and claiming you're going to ignore me, again,
is probably safer for your mental illness than admitting there is no
evidence for your k0k claim.
--
Shill #3.
Strategic Writer, Current Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "K Wills (Shill #3)" <compuelf@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-15 17:23 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <rfn4cb5u04876f8l5k4s37r9391jducdle@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #282119 |
On Mon, 15 Feb 2016 04:41:55 -0500, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
wrote:
>
>
>Sarah Ehrett wrote:
>> On Sun, 14 Feb 2016 21:39:35 -0500, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Sarah Ehrett wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 08:42:54 -0500, "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> I can't see 4 or 5 of you actually sharing one brain.
>>>>> ...And know who might have use of it today.
>>>>> So it makes sense that I might be confused about which personality I
>>>>> might have reached today
>>>>
>>>> Another example of Bast's mental illness(es).
>>>
>>>
>>> Awwww, You didn't like that one ?
>>
>> Your disjointed thoughts and comments? Nope. I don't suffer fools
>> gladly. That comment is not meant as sarcasm as the original intent
>> but rather as is commonly used today.
>
>
>
>Oh gosh, you lost the link again. How careless of you.
>Fortunately it's still in MY POST, for everyone else to see.
>But I'll copy my reply for you again. BELOW
>
>...Be careful this time. You wouldn't want it to look to all the world that
>you have no argument and just delete or ignore, what you can't refute.
>
Why would she want to emulate you and/or Run Away Roger?
>
>Awwww, You didn't like that one ?
>Here.....Try this one.
>
>Secret Moon - NASA fake moon and mars hoax PROVEN
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iNxxzEIzDVU
Got anything credible?
Didn't think so.
--
Shill #3.
Strategic Writer, Current Psychotronic World Dominator and FEMA camp
counselor
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 16 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 … 16 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | alt.astronomy
csiph-web