Jump to content

amy G

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by amy G

  1. 54 minutes ago, Comedy Time said:

    Apollo samples prove beyond any doubt that Man has been to the Moon. Over six missions, 842lbs of samples, including 3m cores were retrieved. Lunar samples that have been peer reviewed by thousands of the world's finest geologists and petrologists. The samples have substantial solar isotope impregnation, many contain large volumes of micro-meteorite impact craters. They collectively are devoid of any contamination from oxygen, water or nitrogen found on Earth, have no evidence of fragmentation or fusion crusts from entry through atmosphere. They show evidence of formation in a lower gravity environment. They are entirely dry as a bone, with the only hydroxyl/water type substances existing within low gravity formed volcanic beads or apatite crystals. They cannot by any possibility be meteorites. They cannot be from Earth. This leaves the only explanation as retrieval off world.


    "Any geoscientist (and there have been thousands from all over the world) who has studied lunar samples knows that anyone who thinks the Apollo lunar samples were created on Earth as part of government conspiracy doesn't know much about rocks. The Apollo samples are just too good. They tell a self-consistent story with a complexly interwoven plot that's better than any story any conspirator could have conceived. I've studied lunar rocks and soils for 45+ years and I couldn't make even a poor imitation of a lunar breccia, lunar soil, or a mare basalt in the lab. And with all due respect to my clever colleagues in government labs, no one in “the Government “ could do it either, even now that we know what lunar rocks are like. Lunar samples show evidence of formation in an extremely dry environment with essentially no free oxygen and little gravity. Some have impact craters on the surface and many display evidence for a suite of unanticipated and complicated effects associated with large and small meteorite impacts. Lunar rocks and soil contain gases (hydrogen, helium, nitrogen, neon, argon, krypton, and xenon) derived from the solar wind with isotope ratios different than Earth forms of the same gases. They contain crystal damage from cosmic rays. Lunar igneous rocks have crystallization ages, determined by techniques involving radioisotopes, that are older than any known Earth rocks. (Anyone who figures out how to fake that is worthy of a Nobel Prize.) It was easier and cheaper to go to the Moon and bring back some rocks than it would have been to create all these fascinating features on Earth. "


    1. Geologists have been examining Apollo samples for 50 years, there is complete agreement that they are authentic and from the Moon.

    2. The samples are impregnated with billions of years of solar exposure causing isotopes impossible to produce on Earth.

    3. It is impossible for a rock to reside on Earth without it interacting with the gasses or liquids it comes into contact with.

    4. It is impossible for a rock to enter the Earth's atmosphere and still retain its outer layers. Apollo rocks have strong Helium 3 on their outer layers.

    5. Lunar samples have in some cases been older than any known Earth rock.

    6. The Apollo samples contain only water encased within volcanic beads showing formation in lower gravity.

    7. The Apollo rocks contain tiny craters far smaller than any man made gun could produce! They also show redistribution effects called "gardening".

    8. The Apollo samples have no terrestrial weathering they simply cannot be from Earth.

    9. Apollo samples show evidence for a whole variety of meteorite impact damage.

    10. They are bone dry with water-type material encased within volcanic beads formed in low gravity and apatite crystals.

    11. It's been suggested that zap pits were created by guns that have limitations of 0.1mm projectiles when the zap pits are in the region of 50 microns (2/1000 inch) in diameter!

    12. It's also been suggested that micrometeorites hitting the Earth could have done this. Yes really:classic_rolleyes:

    13. Apollo samples show evidence of formation with essentially no free oxygen.

    14. Isotope ratios on Apollo rocks are different to anything found on Earth.

    They cannot be meteorites for the reasons given and they cannot be from Earth. They had to have arrived within a sealed environment from off world.


    62 pages of references for those who have looked at the Apollo Moon rocks and soil:


    62 pages of freemason lies and no outside researchers can examine any of it


    The only 'moon' rocks that we have actually examined are fakes.


    Curators at Amsterdam's Rijksmuseum, where the rock has attracted tens of thousands of visitors each year, discovered that the "lunar rock", valued at £308,000, was in fact petrified wood....




  2. 48 minutes ago, Comedy Time said:



    That is completely wrong and often spouted without any understanding or research.


    Some USA firsts:


    First piloted flight Alan Shepard 1961

    First active telecomms satellite 1962

    First planetary flyby 1962

    First Geosynchronous satellite 1963

    First Geostationary satellite 1964

    First piloted orbital change 1965

    First Orbital rendezvous 1965!!

    First Orbital rendezvous and docking 1966!!

    First extended spacewalk 5.5 hrs  1966

    First direct-ascent rendezvous on first orbit 1966!!

    First crewed flight to the Moon Apollo 8 1968!!


    From 1965 America started moving ahead and all the records they set were the ones that enabled the Moon landing. In addition to all those significant firsts they established a whole series of repeat flights to improve the process and identify issues for each successive one. Meanwhile Russia couldn't get their heavy launch vehicle N1 off the ground. THAT is why they didn't get to the Moon first. I have no doubt that they would have "cut a few corners" to do that.




    "Each of the four attempts to launch an N1 failed; during the second launch attempt the N1 rocket crashed back onto its launch pad shortly after liftoff and exploded, resulting in one of the largest artificial non-nuclear explosions in human history. The N1 program was suspended in 1974, and in 1976 was officially canceled. Along with the rest of the Soviet manned lunar programs, the N1 was kept secret almost until the collapse of the Soviet Union in December 1991; information about the N1 was first published in 1989."



    Yeah great theory - not one single piece of proof for it. Let's potentially sabotage the whole program for a few years! The Command Module wasn't built by NASA. If they were planning falsification at that period why make them the prime crew before they had agreed to do it?



    No there aren't. There is not a single piece of undebunked nonsense surrounding any mission. What there is, is a steady stream of people blundering upon youtube videos and gossip, having zero idea of what was involved, mainly with no intention of ever being reasoned with or open to the possibility they are wrong.



    Everything about the evidence proves the missions landed on the Moon.


    You've been going on for pages about how you don't have handlers or work off of a script and you just literally cut and pasted a page of nonsense that freemasons claim as truth.


    None of those "firsts" happened.


    And if you think this is real with all the little "space sounds" that were put in after during post production, then there is nothing left to discuss with you... ever.



  3. 10 hours ago, Ecki Divad said:

    Note: I haven't watched the video.

    I would be interested in your thoughts after you have. I believed much like you just a short time ago.


    6 hours ago, Messenger said:

    I have evolved considerably with my beliefs regarding food since I was guided to a few particular people back in 2016 and I can tell you straight up that no freemasons played a part in my food awakening. lol


    Sorry but NASA and freemasons are not the culprits for every little thing. Evolution is real in a sense of acquiring knowledge and thus making decisions based on new information.

    This about whether explosions create things and whether even one species has ever turned into another. But more importantly, it is about how easy it for freemasons to get most people believing insanely absurd ideas and calling it 'science.'

  4. 16 hours ago, rideforever said:

    I couldn't find any direct flights from the Fawkland Islands to Tazmania.  Are any of the routes on that map up there actually in operation?  Is there a direct Tazmania to South America flight that avoids the S.Pole?


    On this map you can see that from Aus to South Africa or South America the flights do bend down to the Pole but not all the way.

    On the N.Pole there quite a few high latitude cities in Iceland Canada Norway Russia.

    In the South there is only Penguin Central and Capt Scott, and they don't move quickly.




    The two flights completely in the Southern hemisphere are interesting. This was another large part of my awakening not only about Antarctica, but about the entire Southern hemisphere.


    this is from 1901.



    This is from 1907.

    2007 map of undersea cables


    The maps are from https://interestingengineering.com/both-the-us-and-russia-are-stalking-the-worlds-undersea-cables


    What I came to realize was quite obvious and had been hidden in plane sight... literally. When I looked at these same maps from the perspective of being above the North pole and it all makes sense.


    It is worth reading the article, especially for those fascinated by satellite communications.


    Today, 99 percent of the data crossing the oceans is carried by undersea cables. As of 2012, data was flowing error-free at 100 Gbps across Atlantic Ocean routes of up to 6,000 km (3,700 mi). That meant that a typical cable was capable of moving tens of terabits of data per second, with the fastest transatlantic connections taking less than 60 milliseconds (1/1,000 of a second).

  5. I guess you're one of them. A few pieces of easily hoaxable evidence that no one outside of the hoaxers is allowed to examine or know the history of is simply not good enough.


    You have a nice day and I'll continue to wonder about the mountains of evidence that should have piled up since antiquity.

  6. 23 hours ago, oddsnsods said:

    You never take the time to go look for counter evidence to your wild theories.

    Not true at all and your debunking site proves nothing. You have no idea when the Constable drawings were done, just what you have been told. I cold have done those sketches.


    The rest of your post attempts to move flat earth into the discussion which is a common technique used by those who wish to stifle legitimate debate.



    21 hours ago, Lore said:

    Ok, apart from the evidence of Stonehenge being written about since the 6th century...

    Inigo Jones was commissioned by James I to investigate Stonehenge and subsequently published his findings in ’The Most Notable Antiquity of Great Britain’ in 1655. John Aubrey (1626-1697) discovered the ring of holes containing cremated human bones, towards the outer edge of the site, his hand written manuscript of the 1660’s, is in the Bodleian Library, Oxford.

    The illustration below is from the book Beyond Stonehenge by Gerald S. Hawkins and is the “Earliest known perspective of Stonehenge; from a Dutch manuscript, 1574”.



    The video posted above by Coldrum, ‘Stonehenge under Construction’ shows realignments to the site carried out in the 1950’s;  because over millennia (the Bluestones were put in place around 1,750bce) many of the stones had fallen, broken, were destroyed or missing and the original shape was incomprehensible to the increasing number of visitors.

    Sorry, but again, you have no way to confirm these dates.


    As far as the evidence goes, the structure appears to have been created in the last century by freemasons to worship their sun god.


    If this truly were 1000s of years old, there would be countless drawings, paintings, and personal journals telling of this great structure, yet this is not the case.

  7. 21 hours ago, oddsnsods said:


    Yes it was debunked to death years ago on the old forum, why are you bringing it up now I wonder?


    All your posts seem to be aimed at discrediting this forum in your short stay..why dont you actually try researching anything first?

    Hey, you are the guy who posts the memes in the "nature of reality" forum, from a known nasa shill who was exposed years ago. And now this? Maybe you are here to simply shut down legitimate discussion?


    I only began reading this forum a short time prior to it being shut down. I never read that post. I did not know it existed. Perhaps you could elaborate with evidence that stonehenge was built prior to the when the freemsaons built it in the 1900s with cranes.


    As far a discrediting this forum, I find that funny. While my eyes and my mind have just opened recently to so many new and incredible ideas which I previously could never have believed, I have been in the truth/activist community for a long time. One thing that I have come to realize is that all "real truthers" have something in common. When they learn of facts, they don't care which way that truth leads. If they are forced to abandon a long standing belief in the face of new information, sobeit. I am quite sure that Mr. Icke would knows this simple truth as well.


    I have mentioned already that I am not here to argue with anyone. I am really just looking for the truth.




  8. 4 hours ago, Coldrum said:

    Stonehenge has had major reconstructions since 1900

    The masons got to it and restored it in their own image 

    This is the story freemasons tell today, but what evidence is there that this structure ever existed prior to 1900?

  • Create New...