Go Back   David Icke's Official Forums > Main Forums > Hidden Science & Advanced Technology

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 09-10-2010, 03:09 AM   #21
bard
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 817
Likes: 79 (50 Posts)
Default Stanely Kubrick and the Moon Landing

Quote:
Originally Posted by moving finger View Post
The longest definition of 'ignorant' I've ever read.
it is easy to dismiss

it is not easy to pay attention to details

take a look:

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showt...k+moon+landing
__________________
"I will place it where it will not be recognized by the foolish, nor ignored by the Sons of the Doctrine, for it is the key, the perfection and the end."
Turba Philosophorum
bard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2010, 03:36 AM   #22
apollo_gnomon
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 6,392
Likes: 6 (4 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bard View Post
it is easy to dismiss

it is not easy to pay attention to details

take a look:

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showt...k+moon+landing
Thanks for sharing your thread with us. I've read it, but found little if anything that would benefit from my continued attention.

Perhaps you could bring some specific claims to the current threads?
apollo_gnomon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2010, 08:02 AM   #23
stelios
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Tottenham
Posts: 6,795
Likes: 4 (4 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by truegroup View Post
Please explain exactly where you get the "everyone did indeed pretend it was moon rock." LIE from?

It was NOT given by the 3 astronauts. Another LIE.

The piece of wood gift, was given to an old man. HE made the assumption it was a piece of Moon rock.

p.s. The special dark woody brown 'Moon rock', that could be verified by an amateur geologist in 2 seconds flat.
Wait just a minute.
u are simply on a wind up.

Firstly the old man was the dutch prime minister.
Why would the USA hand over a piece of ROTTON WOOD to commemorate the apollo mission?

Last edited by stelios; 09-10-2010 at 08:03 AM.
stelios is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2010, 11:39 AM   #24
truegroup
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Conspiracy research is all about proof, not assumption!
Posts: 17,117
Likes: 1,316 (1,030 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stelios View Post
Wait just a minute.
u are simply on a wind up.

Firstly the old man was the dutch prime minister.
Why would the USA hand over a piece of ROTTON WOOD to commemorate the apollo mission?
The PM was OLD - agreed. The petrified wood is a unique fossil effect.

It wasn't to commemorate the mission! It was to commemorate their visit!


The wind up is you. State exactly what you think this proves.

Are you saying the Moon rocks are faked because this proves it? And the thousands of geologists who examined the REAL frickin' Moon rocks are deluded?

Are you?
truegroup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2010, 12:30 PM   #25
dcdave
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 923
Likes: 1 (1 Post)
Default

Aren'T all rocks that you find on Earth the same all over the universe!
PS Isn't the Moon artificial?
We have writer Mike Bara with us to talk about Dark Mission, co authored with Richard C. Hoagland, on NASA, the occult space program and the missions to the moon. Topics Discussed: Apollo 11, Color images from the Moon, Face on Mars, Is our moon Artificial, Is it built by someone? Constructed Solar System, Life on Mars & Venus, Bodes Law, tidal Locked relationship of Planets and Moon, Secret Societies on the Moon, Masonic Ritual on the Moon, Isis, Osiris, Horus and Set, SS, JPL, Ruins and Structures on the Moon, Alchemical ritual on the Moon, Occult Project Names and some of the Logos of NASA, Orion, Ritual Alignment Model, 19,5 degrees, Apollo 11 and Apollo 17, bring back proof from the earth? Bell Labs, Bell Com and AT & T, Why haven't we been back on the moon? Salvaging of Technology, NASA admits Moon landing tapes got erased, Alien Presence on the Moon? Ruins and Structures on the Moon, Glass Ruins, Crystal Towers, Glass Domes, the Shard, Face on Mars, Face Bombed, Human Lion Hybrid Face? LCROSS bombing of the Moon, Temple 1, Water on the Moon and much more. July 19, 2009 http://www.redicecreations.com/

dcdave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2010, 01:39 PM   #26
dreamweaver
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 10,882
Likes: 24 (13 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stelios View Post
Firstly the old man was the dutch prime minister.
One who had retired 11 years earlier. He was 83 at the time he received the gift.

A former British prime minister, Maggie Thatcher, is currently 84 and is rarely seen in public nowadays. When Gordon Brown invited her to 10 Downing Street three years ago, it was condemned by Tories (many of them admirers of Thatcher when she was in office) as taking advantage of a frail old lady who had lost her once-formidable powers.
__________________
Congratulations, you found the secret message. Shhh!
dreamweaver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2010, 02:22 PM   #27
truegroup
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Conspiracy research is all about proof, not assumption!
Posts: 17,117
Likes: 1,316 (1,030 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dcdave View Post
Aren'T all rocks that you find on Earth the same all over the universe!
Are you being serious? No they aren't! That is ludicrous.
Are you a geology expert? No. And yet you trash the findings of geologists with your one line pissology.

Quote:
PS Isn't the Moon artificial?
No. Science and gravity measurements say it is a chunk of rock.

Quote:
We have writer Mike Bara with us to talk about Dark Mission, co authored with Richard C. Hoagland, on NASA, the occult space program and the missions to the moon. Topics Discussed: Apollo 11, Color images from the Moon, Face on Mars, Is our moon Artificial, Is it built by someone? Constructed Solar System, Life on Mars & Venus, Bodes Law, tidal Locked relationship of Planets and Moon, Secret Societies on the Moon, Masonic Ritual on the Moon, Isis, Osiris, Horus and Set, SS, JPL, Ruins and Structures on the Moon, Alchemical ritual on the Moon, Occult Project Names and some of the Logos of NASA, Orion, Ritual Alignment Model, 19,5 degrees, Apollo 11 and Apollo 17, bring back proof from the earth? Bell Labs, Bell Com and AT & T, Why haven't we been back on the moon? Salvaging of Technology, NASA admits Moon landing tapes got erased, Alien Presence on the Moon? Ruins and Structures on the Moon, Glass Ruins, Crystal Towers, Glass Domes, the Shard, Face on Mars, Face Bombed, Human Lion Hybrid Face? LCROSS bombing of the Moon, Temple 1, Water on the Moon and much more. July 19, 2009 http://www.redicecreations.com/
Please tell me in any 'hidden scientific universe', how you can use Apollo images and videos to allege UFOs exist. AND at the same time post videos that allege Apollo was faked.

BIG facepalm.
truegroup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2010, 04:44 PM   #28
bard
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 817
Likes: 79 (50 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by apollo_gnomon View Post
Thanks for sharing your thread with us. I've read it, but found little if anything that would benefit from my continued attention.

Perhaps you could bring some specific claims to the current threads?
I am not in the business of convincing people nor am I fighting for your continued attention. You need to figure out things on your own. I've only shown you something you may consider.

That much said, moving finger's remark was extremely arrogant and does not do justice to the OP. What I see in the opening post is someone trying to make sense of the story based on common sense and human psychology. One does not need to be an expert to ask the kind of questions that were being asked.

Are they, the powers that be, capable of lying? Yes. If they lie, would they get any immediate advantage in whatever agenda they may have in mind (like tunneling money and talent into the military-industrial complex allegedly to continue the exploration of Space). Yes, they would. But what if they get caught? What is the price to pay? No price to pay, they do not have to worry about shit. Because in addition to all these intellectual prostitutes posing as mainstream experts, there are many more wannabe exprets, ordinary people who think that they are so smart that nobody can sell them a lie, at least not a very big lie. They would fight to the death and attack anybody who really wants to find out the truth, regardless of where this inquiry may lead them. Look at fractional reserve banking, look at the sodomic cult that runs Hollywood, look at the falsification of ancient history, the list goes on and on. There will always be people who would deny based on their conviction that it can't possibly be true, because they are oh so smart, it is impossible that they have not noticed anything up till now. How could that be?

Going back to the Apollo landings story, there many different aspects here. Was it technically possible to send a human crew all they way to the Moon and return it safely?
Was this ever replicated by another nation or group of nations? It is another question whether the footage shown to the masses was fake. The footage being fake does not mean that there were no Moon landings in principle. Because if there were actual landings but the images shown to the public were fake, or at least seriously tampered with, then the much bigger question is - why fake them? Is there something that they are hiding from us? And this is not the type of questions you can answer even to your own satisfaction by simply browsing the Net.

In any case, people must stay open minded and ask questions. Now the entire thread has been turned into shit, people arguing about a stupid rock.
__________________
"I will place it where it will not be recognized by the foolish, nor ignored by the Sons of the Doctrine, for it is the key, the perfection and the end."
Turba Philosophorum
bard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2010, 05:34 PM   #29
apollo_gnomon
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 6,392
Likes: 6 (4 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bard View Post
I am not in the business of convincing people nor am I fighting for your continued attention. You need to figure out things on your own. I've only shown you something you may consider.
Sorry to react the way I did. I'm very very familiar with the claims by apollozero, especially since he's simply cribbing off Rene and Bart Sibrel's work.

The points he raises are fundamentally flawed, based on lack of information or incorrect understanding of basic facts. I would be willing to discuss them individually and help you understand some of the science behind the space program if you would like; go ahead and start a thread in the "space etc" subforum.

Quote:
Was it technically possible to send a human crew all they way to the Moon and return it safely?
Absolutely. Every piece of hardware was proceeded by other hardware, all tested many times in many ways. The Space Shuttle suits are updated designs based on the Apollo suits; the Space Shuttle Main Engines are derived from the Saturn V's second stage engines. Unmanned hardware had been sent to the moon and back by both the US and USSR - sending human crews to the moon isn't magnificently harder, it just required the correct hardware.

Quote:
Was this ever replicated by another nation or group of nations?
What, putting meat on the moon? No. Putting meat in orbit? Yes. The only reason the Russians didn't make it to the moon was they were saddled with a crappy launcher design -the N1- which kept failing spectacularly on or just above the launch pad. They had all the other pieces, and eventually gave up on the N1 to concentrate on their orbital space station designs. The Russian contribution to the International Space Station has proven the underlying strength of their engineering - the Soyuz craft has been the most successful space vehicle design yet.

Quote:
It is another question whether the footage shown to the masses was fake.
All of the claims of "fake footage" or "fake pictures" are based on flawed understanding. I suggest googling ALSJ - that's the Apollo Lunar Surface Journal. All the pictures taken for every mission are there in the image archives. Take a look and decide for yourself.

Quote:
Now the entire thread has been turned into shit, people arguing about a stupid rock.
I agree whole heartedly.

Last edited by apollo_gnomon; 09-10-2010 at 05:36 PM. Reason: fix typo
apollo_gnomon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2010, 06:11 PM   #30
truegroup
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Conspiracy research is all about proof, not assumption!
Posts: 17,117
Likes: 1,316 (1,030 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bard View Post
What I see in the opening post is someone trying to make sense of the story based on common sense and human psychology. One does not need to be an expert to ask the kind of questions that were being asked.
But when experts answer the questions they get ignored. I am not quite an expert myself, but Apollo_Gnomon is and I would take him up on his offer if you are serious about resolving this.

Quote:
In any case, people must stay open minded and ask questions. Now the entire thread has been turned into shit, people arguing about a stupid rock.
Most HBs (hoax believers) are not open minded. They ignore the complete debunking of their contentions.

You are right about the thread being turned to shit over a gift of a piece of fossilised wood. A case that ably demonstrates anything but an open mind - or understanding of geology.
truegroup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2010, 06:28 PM   #31
bard
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 817
Likes: 79 (50 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by apollo_gnomon View Post
Sorry to react the way I did. I'm very very familiar with the claims by apollozero, especially since he's simply cribbing off Rene and Bart Sibrel's work.
The points he raises are fundamentally flawed, based on lack of information or incorrect understanding of basic facts.
I do not know who apollozero is. The information I posted in my thread was regarding Hoagland's findings of small rainbow-like features in the Apollo photographs and Jay Weidner's explanation in terms of holography-simulation using a Scotchlite screen, an effect used in the cinema industry of the day. I have not seen these issues discussed, let alone debunked by NASA fanboys.

Quote:
Originally Posted by apollo_gnomon View Post
I would be willing to discuss them individually and help you understand some of the science behind the space program if you would like; go ahead and start a thread in the "space etc" subforum.
I am not interested in getting a Science lecture. I am a physicist.


Quote:
Originally Posted by apollo_gnomon View Post
Absolutely. Every piece of hardware was proceeded by other hardware, all tested many times in many ways. The Space Shuttle suits are updated designs based on the Apollo suits; the Space Shuttle Main Engines are derived from the Saturn V's second stage engines. Unmanned hardware had been sent to the moon and back by both the US and USSR - sending human crews to the moon isn't magnificently harder, it just required the correct hardware.
What, putting meat on the moon? No. Putting meat in orbit? Yes. The only reason the Russians didn't make it to the moon was they were saddled with a crappy launcher design -the N1- which kept failing spectacularly on or just above the launch pad. They had all the other pieces, and eventually gave up on the N1 to concentrate on their orbital space station designs. The Russian contribution to the International Space Station has proven the underlying strength of their engineering - the Soyuz craft has been the most successful space vehicle design yet.
Meat is not the same as healthy human beings. Safety is a major issue. The hardware was certainly capable of reaching the near planets back then. Again, until the Moon trip is replicated by another nation these questions will remain. People have the right to doubt.

Quote:
Originally Posted by apollo_gnomon View Post
All of the claims of "fake footage" or "fake pictures" are based on flawed understanding. I suggest googling ALSJ - that's the Apollo Lunar Surface Journal. All the pictures taken for every mission are there in the image archives. Take a look and decide for yourself.
I agree whole heartedly.
I've looked at the images. They alone in no way disprove what one can deduce from Hoagland's interview and Weidner's explanation. Prove their conclusions wrong if you wish.
__________________
"I will place it where it will not be recognized by the foolish, nor ignored by the Sons of the Doctrine, for it is the key, the perfection and the end."
Turba Philosophorum
bard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2010, 06:31 PM   #32
garydi
Inactive
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 23
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

dcdave

your an idiot using selective data - classic move

http://www.brighthub.com/science/spa...les/26808.aspx

Von Braun wanted a direct ascent approach, with a giant launch vehicle that would send a large vehicle to land on the moon

Grappling with these problems, NASA set several engineers on the task. They all came up with various solutions, but it was an engineer named William Michael who came up with the solution he termed “not just one way to get to the moon by the end of the decade, but the only way.”

That way was Lunar Orbit Rendezvous (LOR). In LOR, a small lander would land on the moon, then return the astronauts to the mother craft orbiting the lunar surface. Once the astronauts had transferred to the mother ship, the ascent stage would be left in lunar orbit. This required a much smaller and lighter lander and ascent stage. It was an elegant solution.

Von Braun continued to fight for the direct ascent approach, until a meeting on June 7, 1962 at MSC, when he dropped a bombshell. Unknown to his administrators, he had changed his mind. At the end of the meeting, he announced that he now favored LOR.

The Apollo program was on its way.
garydi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2010, 07:10 PM   #33
dcdave
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 923
Likes: 1 (1 Post)
Default

An that makes you a wanker for calling me an idiot! how dare you, im just not convinced an nether are millions of others! i bet you think that little fucker living in a little cave caused 9/11 an an a 757jet made that little hole in that field an the pentagon, o an UFO's are all in my imagination, and the batteries on Bord the landing craft that supposedly landed on the moon were small enough to run the air conditioning in 1969!
dcdave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2010, 07:53 PM   #34
truegroup
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Conspiracy research is all about proof, not assumption!
Posts: 17,117
Likes: 1,316 (1,030 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dcdave View Post
millions of others
Millions? Errr, no. Not quite that many deluded people.

Quote:
the batteries on Bord the landing craft that supposedly landed on the moon were small enough to run the air conditioning in 1969!
Do you know what a Milk Float is?

Batteries worked fine in the 60's. If you contend differently, show your evidence.

p.s. Somebody's unsupported opinion is not evidence by the way.
truegroup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2010, 08:09 PM   #35
dcdave
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 923
Likes: 1 (1 Post)
Default

Do you know what a Milk Float is?
Yea man an look at the amount an weight of said batteries? how much weight would you need an amount of space would they need for that little craft that put them on the moon an then back off?
dcdave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2010, 08:31 PM   #36
truegroup
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Conspiracy research is all about proof, not assumption!
Posts: 17,117
Likes: 1,316 (1,030 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dcdave View Post
Do you know what a Milk Float is?
Yea man an look at the amount an weight of said batteries? how much weight would you need an amount of space would they need for that little craft that put them on the moon an then back off?
Show me your evidence why the Apollo batteries couldn't do the job.
truegroup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2010, 08:46 PM   #37
dcdave
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 923
Likes: 1 (1 Post)
Default

Im just saying that even now electric cars have a lot of batteries just to go a few miles before recharging, way back in 1969 i dident think they had the teck to produce batteries small an light enough then thats all!

Last edited by dcdave; 09-10-2010 at 08:47 PM.
dcdave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2010, 08:52 PM   #38
truegroup
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Conspiracy research is all about proof, not assumption!
Posts: 17,117
Likes: 1,316 (1,030 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dcdave View Post
Im just saying that even now electric cars have a lot of batteries just to go a few miles before recharging, way back in 1969 i dident think they had the teck to produce batteries small an light enough then thats all!
Modern batteries are used to shift tons of car - just like milk floats. Not run a few low amp electric circuits.

Research it before making wild unsupported claims.
truegroup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2010, 08:58 PM   #39
apollo_gnomon
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 6,392
Likes: 6 (4 Posts)
Default

Blunderbuss posting doesn't help keep the thread tidy, and frankly it shows a lack of mental discipline.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dcdave View Post
An that makes you a wanker for calling me an idiot!
I agree - that was unnecessary.

Quote:
how dare you, im just not convinced an nether are millions of others! i bet you think that little fucker living in a little cave caused 9/11 an an a 757jet made that little hole in that field an the pentagon, o an UFO's are all in my imagination, and the batteries on Bord the landing craft that supposedly landed on the moon were small enough to run the air conditioning in 1969!
But this run-on-sentence rant is also unnecessary. Plus, you introduce logical and factual arguments that have no place in the current discussion. If your beliefs regarding the Apollo program are colored by your beliefs in other things, perhaps you should step back and examine them all critically for a moment. They're not mutually self-supporting beliefs, despite the tendency of many in the conspiracy and truth movements to behave as if they were.

Quote:
i bet you think that little fucker living in a little cave caused 9/11
The act of being in a cave does not rule out a person from planning, ordering and funding an action. Military, paramilitary, criminal and revolutionary leaders are perfectly capable of launching actions from caves, or bunkers, or remote mansions in the mountains of columbia, or the sub-sub basements of the Pentagon. Narcotics and gang leaders continue to run their organizations from within prison cells. Modern communications, including satellite phones and access to international banking make such things not just possible but preferable from a strategic viewpoint.

Quote:
an a 757jet made that little hole in that field an the pentagon
Personally, I usually regret getting involved in 9/11 conversations. The bitterness and frustration that you reveal in these terse sentences confirms my decision. I'll leave this one alone.

Quote:
an UFO's are all in my imagination
I personally remain agnostic on the issue of UFO's, but as a child I read literally every single book on the subject in the Boise Public Library and finally had to conclude that the lack of unity to the reports called them all into question. I'm sure there are other sentient beings in the universe, but the reports thus far lack coherence and credibility.

Quote:
and the batteries on Bord the landing craft that supposedly landed on the moon were small enough to run the air conditioning in 1969!
This is an example of the technical discussion I'm willing to engage in - you claim to be a "physicist" but apparently don't know much about batteries, or about the thermal management used in the Apollo Lunar Module and in the A7L Space Suits. I'll tell you about them, if you like, but you have to get off the high horse and stop being so pissy about everything.

You can't just dismiss the entire Apollo program based on someone else's lack of understanding of basic technology.

Are you really a scientist? I'd thing you would know how to approach the questions better.

I'll give you a hint. What does "air conditioner" mean in the context of lunar hardware? Does the video use the term correctly? Or are the viewers being misled by imprecise and incomplete information? Does your experience with flash light and automotive batteries contain the entirety of battery technology? Or is the video manipulating your mind by playing on those experiences without giving you complete and accurate information?

{sorry - I seem to have confused Bard, the physicist, with dcdave.**

Last edited by apollo_gnomon; 09-10-2010 at 09:00 PM. Reason: to edit
apollo_gnomon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2010, 09:00 PM   #40
apollo_gnomon
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 6,392
Likes: 6 (4 Posts)
Default

Quote:
how much weight would you need an amount of space would they need for that little craft that put them on the moon an then back off?
You know that rockets are not battery propelled, right?
apollo_gnomon is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:01 PM.


Shoutbox provided by vBShout (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.