Go Back   David Icke's Official Forums > Main Forums > David Icke: Research & Media > Human Race Get Off Your Knees

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 22-12-2012, 04:38 AM   #401
sniper13x
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Pacific NW, USA (Radiation anyone?)
Posts: 1,071
Likes: 1 (1 Post)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by simulacra View Post
To which account are you referring to?
Gee i wondah why you responded? ITSA MYSTERY.
sniper13x is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-12-2012, 05:51 AM   #402
indolering
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Rocky Mountain High
Posts: 3,092
Likes: 79 (59 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by simulacra
Have you checked out Mercury yet, look familiar? do you conclude its another alien spaceship? Perhaps its the spare incase the moon conks out?
Yes, well, thanks for your skepticism - it only tells me I'm on the right track. Come back after you've actually read the books and tell me about your 'magic aliens'....
indolering is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-12-2012, 02:47 PM   #403
chattanova
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Norway
Posts: 6,868
Likes: 7 (7 Posts)
Default

IMO the best books on the subject! (all from the 70's)

Uploaded at ImageFra.me

Uploaded at ImageFra.me

Uploaded at ImageFra.me
__________________

OOPARTS http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=11442

_____Truth Doesn't Fear Investigation_____
chattanova is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-12-2012, 11:58 PM   #404
indolering
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Rocky Mountain High
Posts: 3,092
Likes: 79 (59 Posts)
Default

Yes, the Wilson books are indeed the best, and Who Built The Moon and Somebody Else Is On The Moon are good companion volumes. I especially like that Wilson summarizes some of the very early sightings of lights and activity on the lunar surface which absolutely were not of humanity's doing. I also like that Wilson believes in the veracity of the Apollo landings and all the evidence they allegedly collected. Despite the many lies and deceptions of NASA, their data fully supports the spaceship moon theory, while burying the three traditional theories of the moon's origin.
indolering is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2012, 05:37 PM   #405
leon11
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 1,535
Likes: 48 (27 Posts)
Default

can someone send me this book and I'll pass it back or on to someone else when I read it

or a book swap?!
leon11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2012, 08:21 PM   #406
chattanova
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Norway
Posts: 6,868
Likes: 7 (7 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by leon11 View Post
can someone send me this book and I'll pass it back or on to someone else when I read it

or a book swap?!
hehe.. I'm too caring of my copies to send them away

But the best way to get out of stock and rare books is through this search engine

http://www.bookfinder.com/?ref=bf_s1_hd_1
__________________

OOPARTS http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=11442

_____Truth Doesn't Fear Investigation_____
chattanova is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2013, 05:35 AM   #407
pound
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 6,466
Likes: 475 (261 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by greyeagle View Post
has anyone read the amazing book The Coming of Tanhttp://www.rileymartin.com/The_Comin..._Chapter1.html
its an amzing read & well written talking about one of saturns moon being ship.
Also John Lear talks of our moon being for not only holding human souls here on earth,but http://www.godlikeproductions.com/fo...sage559698/pg1
Davids sure onto something
Glad to rebump this magnificent thread.

Thanks for these great links. You alluded to John Lear whom I had totally forgotten about - fascinating stuff, unfortunately I believe he may be on to something. Billy Meier, make of him what you will, has apparently also made past statements about the artificial nature of the Moon, or at least that's what I have seen via reading several articles and posts here and there. I'll have to look into it further.

Santos Bonacci in the video below makes reference to a book authored by fifth century Roman writer Macrobius. The book cited is "Saturnalia" in which Bonacci (towards the last 10 minutes of the video) explains that Macrobius referred to Saturn as "the gateway of the gods" and to the Moon as an entrance place for human souls. Fascinating if indeed this is the case, and I don't doubt his word; it all fits together perfectly with the idea of a Saturn-Moon Matrix as so masterfully described in Icke's books and presentations.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zz77ZKOasv0
__________________
"Who looks outside, dreams; who looks inside, awakes." -- Carl Jung
"The educated person is one who knows how to find out what he does not know" -- George Simmel

Last edited by pound; 04-09-2013 at 05:39 AM.
pound is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-09-2013, 01:10 PM   #408
chockimon
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Rolling down Olympus Mons.
Posts: 2,357
Likes: 51 (31 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by islamvslizards View Post
hi guys

i always assumed that icke used a lot of his resources from sitchin based translations of sumerian texts, but im sure the moon being a giant spaceship isnt mentioned anywhere?

hypothetical question. if david is right and he brings proofs to show that the moon is a spaceship, does that mean that everything that you have all believed so far, the evidence of things like the sumerian texts etc, need to be rejected? how would you feel if this happened?
I've read all of Sitchin's books and like quite a lot of conspiracy authors, he offers no proof or evidence, just wishful thinking, but that won't stop the cultists spreading his BS propaganda. Babylonian scriptures are cryptic at best, they can mean absolutely anything.

http://www.survivalistboards.com/sho...d.php?t=138065

http://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...Michael-Heiser

Even Sitchin jumped on the 2012 bandwagon before his death and he was proven wrong. He was just another con artist out to milk you naive gullible cash cows.
__________________
A wise man once said:
1. I do not take it to be true; 2. I do not take it to be false; 3. I do not say you're wrong; 4. I do not not say you're right; 5. I do not say it is true or false; 6. It is both wrong and right, true and false at the same time. Such is the dilemma of relative truth. It is just the finger pointing.
chockimon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-10-2013, 02:53 AM   #409
unlockthepower
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,958
Likes: 248 (131 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by starshine View Post
Look Mr, Icke has done extensive research on this fact
Such as?
__________________
"Television is by nature the dominator drug par excellence. Control of content, uniformity of content, repeatability of content make it inevitably a tool of coersion, brainwashing, and manipulation."
— Jerry Mander, Four Arguments For The Elimination Of Television (New York Quill, 1978) p. 197.
unlockthepower is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-10-2013, 12:20 AM   #410
upendedworld
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 288
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

The old moon (control mechanism) is gone. you are now watching
a projection. don't believe it? you will!
upendedworld is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-10-2013, 11:25 AM   #411
unlockthepower
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,958
Likes: 248 (131 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by upendedworld View Post
The old moon (control mechanism) is gone. you are now watching
a projection. don't believe it? you will!
Source?
__________________
"Television is by nature the dominator drug par excellence. Control of content, uniformity of content, repeatability of content make it inevitably a tool of coersion, brainwashing, and manipulation."
— Jerry Mander, Four Arguments For The Elimination Of Television (New York Quill, 1978) p. 197.
unlockthepower is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2015, 02:19 AM   #412
indolering
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Rocky Mountain High
Posts: 3,092
Likes: 79 (59 Posts)
Default

.





Don't ask me why, but I've been on the fence for years deciding whether or not the Apollo moon landings were real or whether all of them were faked in a studio filmed by Stanley Kubrick. It took an article by Dave McGowan of the Laurel Canyon series fame to bring it all home in a wonderfully humorous and utterly convincing way. He brings forward the most obvious yet rarely discussed problems of reaching the moon from Earth which the True Believers are unable to debunk.

Although this thread concerns the moon's origin and its true nature, I thought it would be instructive to note that NASA has been lying to us from day one about virtually EVERYTHING! The current scientific explanation for the moon's origin (and ostensibly NASA's also) is that the moon was once part of the Earth until some large 'rock' smashed into the Earth and blew out a massive portion of debris into Earth orbit which eventually coalesced into the moon. No problem, right? A more improbable scenario could hardly be offered. Suffice to say there are numerous, serious, scientific objections to this hypothesis which I won't go into here. But clearly, they take us for fools, that we would accept such ludicrous theories or that such improbable contraptions like this one could actually make it to the moon and back.

We've been had, folks. These scientoids are paid hacks, whose salary depends not upon their expertise in physics but in lying to the American people. I include here one or two salient paragraphs of Dave's article to give you an idea of his entertaining style while destroying the official lie.



By Dave McGowan
http://www.davesweb.cnchost.com/Apollo1.html

A whole lot of people are extremely reluctant to give up their belief in the success of the Apollo missions. A lot of people, in fact, pretty much shut down at the mere mention of the Moon landings being faked, refusing to even consider the possibility (Facebook, by the way, is definitely not the best place to promote the notion that the landings were faked, in case anyone was wondering). And yet there are some among the True Believers who will allow that, though they firmly believe that we did indeed land on the Moon, they would have understood if it had been a hoax. Given the climate of the times, with Cold War tensions simmering and anxious Americans looking for some sign that their country was still dominant and not technologically inferior to the Soviets, it could be excused if NASA had duped the world.

Such sentiments made me realize that the Moon landing lie is somewhat unique among the big lies told to the American people in that it was, in the grand scheme of things, a relatively benign lie, and one that could be easily spun. Admitting that the landings were faked would not have nearly the same impact as, say, admitting to mass murdering 3,000 Americans and destroying billions of dollars worth of real estate and then using that crime as a pretext to wage two illegal wars and strip away civil, legal and privacy rights.

And yet, despite the fact that it was a relatively benign lie, there is a tremendous reluctance among the American people to let go of the notion that we sent men to the Moon. There are a couple of reasons for that, one of them being that there is a romanticized notion that those were great years – years when one was proud to be an American. And in this day and age, people need that kind of romanticized nostalgia to cling to.

But that is not the main reason that people cling so tenaciously, often even angrily, to what is essentially the adult version of Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny and the Tooth Fairy. What primarily motivates them is fear. But it is not the lie itself that scares people; it is what that lie says about the world around us and how it really functions. For if NASA was able to pull off such an outrageous hoax before the entire world, and then keep that lie in place for four decades, what does that say about the control of the information we receive? What does that say about the media, and the scientific community, and the educational community, and all the other institutions we depend on to tell us the truth? What does that say about the very nature of the world we live in?

That is what scares the hell out of people and prevents them from even considering the possibility that they could have been so thoroughly duped. It’s not being lied to about the Moon landings that people have a problem with, it is the realization that comes with that revelation: if they could lie about that, they could lie about anything.

It has been my experience that the vast majority of the people who truly believe in the Moon landings know virtually nothing about the alleged missions. And when confronted with some of the more implausible aspects of those alleged missions, the most frequently offered argument is the one that every ‘conspiracy theorist’ has heard at least a thousand times: “That can’t possibly be true because there is no way that a lie that big could have been covered up all this time … too many people would have known about it … yadda, yadda, yadda.”

But what if your own eyes and your innate (though suppressed) ability to think critically and independently tell you that what all the institutions of the State insist is true is actually a lie? What do you do then? Do you trust in your own cognitive abilities, or do you blindly follow authority and pretend as though everything can be explained away? If your worldview will not allow you to believe what you can see with your own eyes, then the problem, it would appear, is with your worldview. So do you change that worldview, or do you live in denial?

The Moon landing lie is unique among the big lies in another way as well: it is a lie that seemingly cannot be maintained indefinitely. Washington need never come clean on, say, the Kennedy assassinations. After all, they’ve been lying about the Lincoln assassination for nearly a century-and-a-half now and getting away with it. But the Moon landing hoax, I would think, has to have some kind of expiration date.

How many decades can pass, after all, without anyone coming even close to a reenactment before people start to catch on? Four obviously haven’t been enough, but how about five, or six, or seven? How about when we hit the 100-year anniversary?

If the first trans-Atlantic flight had not been followed up with another one for over forty years, would anyone have found that unusual? If during the early days of the automobile, when folks were happily cruising along in their Model T’s at a top speed of 40 MPH, someone had suddenly developed a car that could be driven safely at 500 MPH, and then after a few years that car disappeared and for many decades thereafter, despite tremendous advances in automotive technology, no one ever again came close to building a car that could perform like that, would that seem at all odd?

There are indications that this lie does indeed have a shelf life. According to a July 17, 2009 post on CNN.com, “It’s been 37 years since the last Apollo moon mission, and tens of millions of younger Americans have no memories of watching the moon landings live. A 2005-2006 poll by Mary Lynne Dittmar, a space consultant based in Houston, Texas, found that more than a quarter of Americans 18 to 25 expressed some doubt that humans set foot on the moon.”

The goal of any dissident writer is to crack open the doors of perception enough to let a little light in – so that hopefully the seeds of a political reawakening will be planted. There are many doors that can be pried open to achieve that goal, but this one seems particularly vulnerable. Join me then as we take a little trip to the Moon. Or at least pretend to.

“If NASA had really wanted to fake the moon landings – we’re talking purely hypothetical here – the timing was certainly right. The advent of television, having reached worldwide critical mass only years prior to the moon landing, would prove instrumental to the fraud’s success.”
Wired Magazine
 
Adolph Hitler knew a little bit about the fine art of lying. In Mein Kampf, he wrote that, "If you're going to tell a lie, make sure it's a really fucking big lie."
 
Truth be told, I’m not exactly conversant in the German language so that may not be an exact translation, but it certainly captures the gist of what the future Fuhrer was trying to say. He went on to explain that this was so because everyone in their everyday lives tells little lies, and so they fully expect others to do so as well. But most people do not expect anyone to tell a real whopper … you know, the kind of brazen, outlandish lie that is just too absurd to actually be a lie. The kind of lie that is so over-the-top that no one would dare utter it if it was in fact a lie.
 
That is the type of lie, according to Hitler, that will fool the great masses of people, even when the lie is so transparently thin that it couldn't possibly stand up to any kind of critical analysis by anyone actually exercising their brain rather than just blindly accepting the legitimacy of the information they are fed. Take, for example, the rather fanciful notion that the United States landed men on the Moon in the late 1960's and early 1970's. That's the kind of lie we're talking about here: the kind that seems to defy logic and reason and yet has become ingrained in the national psyche to such an extent that it passes for historical fact.
 
And anyone who would dare question that ‘historical fact,’ needless to say, must surely be stark raving mad.
 
Before proceeding any further, I should probably mention here that, until relatively recently, if I had heard anyone putting forth the obviously drug-addled notion that the Moon landings were faked, I would have been among the first to offer said person a ride down to the grip store. While conducting research into various other topics, however, it has become increasingly apparent that there are almost always a few morsels of truth in any 'conspiracy theory,' no matter how outlandish that theory may initially appear to be, and so despite my initial skepticism, I was compelled to take a closer look at the Apollo program.
 
The first thing that I discovered was that the Soviet Union, right up until the time that we allegedly landed the first Apollo spacecraft on the Moon, was solidly kicking our ass in the space race. It wasn’t even close. The world wouldn’t see another mismatch of this magnitude until decades later when Kelly Clarkson and Justin Guarini came along. The Soviets launched the first orbiting satellite, sent the first animal into space, sent the first man into space, performed the first space walk, sent the first three-man crew into space, was the first nation to have two spacecraft in orbit simultaneously, performed the first unmanned docking maneuver in space, and landed the first unmanned probe on the Moon.
 
Everything the U.S. did, prior to actually sending a manned spacecraft to the Moon, had already been done by the Soviets, who clearly were staying at least a step or two ahead of our top-notch team of imported Nazi scientists. The smart money was clearly on the Soviets to make it to the Moon first, if anyone was to do so. Their astronauts had logged five times as many hours in space as had ours. And they had a considerable amount of time, money, scientific talent and, perhaps most of all, national pride riding on that goal.
 
And yet, amazingly enough, despite the incredibly long odds, the underdog Americans made it first. And not only did we make it first, but after a full forty years, the Soviets apparently still haven't quite figured out how we did it. The question that is clearly begged here is a simple one: Why is it that the nation that was leading the world in the field of space travel not only didn’t make it to the Moon back in the 1960s, but still to this day have never made it there? Could it be that they were just really poor losers? I am imagining that perhaps the conversation over in Moscow’s equivalent of NASA went something like this:
 
Boris: Comrade Ivan, there is terrible news today: the Yankee imperialists have beaten us to the Moon. What should we do?
Ivan: Let's just shit-can our entire space program.
Boris: But comrade, we are so close to success! And we have so much invested in the effort!
Ivan: Fuck it! If we can't be first, we aren't going at all.
Boris: But I beg of you comrade! The moon has so much to teach us, and the Americans will surely not share with us the knowledge they have gained.
Ivan: Nyet!
 
In truth, the entire space program has largely been, from its inception, little more than an elaborate cover for the research, development and deployment of space-based weaponry and surveillance systems. The media never talk about such things, of course, but government documents make clear that the goals being pursued through space research are largely military in nature. For this reason alone, it is inconceivable that the Soviets would not have followed the Americans onto the Moon for the sake of their own national defense.






There was much about the Apollo flights that was truly miraculous, but arguably the greatest technological achievement was the design of the lunar modules. Has anyone, by the way, ever really taken a good look at one of those contraptions? I mean a detailed, up-close look? I’m guessing that the vast majority of people have not, but luckily we can quickly remedy that situation because I happen to have some really good, high-resolution images that come directly from the good people at NASA. While what is depicted in the image may initially appear, to the untrained eye, to be some kind of mock-up that someone cobbled together in their backyard to make fun of NASA, I can assure you that it is actually an extremely high-tech manned spacecraft capable of landing on the surface of the Moon. And incredibly enough, it was also capable of blasting off from the Moon and flying 69 miles back up into lunar orbit! Though not immediately apparent, it is actually a two-stage craft, the lower half (the part that looks like a tubular aluminum framework covered with Mylar and old Christmas wrapping paper) being the descent stage, and the upper half (the part that looks as though it was cobbled together from old air conditioning ductwork and is primarily held together, as can be seen in the close-up, with zippers and gold tape) being the ascent stage.

The upper half, of course, is the more sophisticated portion, being capable of lifting off and flying with enough power to break free of the Moon’s gravity and reach lunar orbit. It also, of course, possessed sophisticated enough navigational capabilities for it to locate, literally out in the middle of fucking nowhere, the command module that it had to dock with in order to get the astronauts safely back to Earth. It also had to catch that command module, which was orbiting the Moon at a leisurely 4,000 miles per hour.

But we’ll get to all that a little later. I think we can all agree for now that such a sleek, stylish, well-designed craft would have no problem flying with that kind of power, precision and stability.

There is one thing that appears to be a problem though: how did they get everything on board the modules that they were going to need to successfully complete their missions? According to NASA, the modules were (excluding the landing pads) only about twelve feet in diameter. That is obviously not a whole lot of space to work with, so let’s try to think of everything that we would need if we were astronauts venturing off on a little journey to the Moon.

First of all, of course, we have to account for the space taken up by the various components of the ship itself. There is the framework and the, uhh, let’s call it the ‘fuselage’ of the craft. And we will need a lot of very sophisticated navigation and guidance and communications equipment, all of which took up a whole lot more space back in the ‘60s than it would today. And then, needless to say, there is the power supply – or rather multiple power supplies. For the descent stage, there is the reverse-thrust rocket that allegedly allowed the craft to make a soft landing on the Moon. And then for the ascent stage, there is a powerful rocket to propel the random bundle of sheet metal into lunar orbit. There are also additional rockets to allegedly stabilize the vessel in flight (the random clusters of what look like bicycle horns).

Next up is the massive amount of fuel that will be required to power all of those rockets, for both the ascent and descent stages of the mission. The ascent stage in particular is going to be a bit of a fuel hog, as ascending 69 miles and breaking free of the Moon’s gravity is a formidable challenge, to say the least. Though it may only have 1/6 the gravitational pull of Earth, keep in mind that it is still a force strong enough to create the tides here on Earth, 234,000 miles away.

I’m not a rocket scientist, by the way, so I am sure that there are quite a few components that I am leaving off of my lunar module – but that’s okay, because our spaceship is already feeling really cramped just with the stuff listed so far. And we’re just getting started.





In the summer of 1967, the first space-ready LEM was delivered to Cape Kennedy to be loaded aboard the Apollo 4 launch vehicle. Incredibly, it had taken less than five years to get “the most complicated and sophisticated spacecraft ever conceived” from the chalkboard to the launch pad! And in the mid-1960s no less! (By the way, I happened to stumble across this image of Apollo 4 sitting on the launch pad. It is, I have to say, a mighty impressive shot. Kudos to the non-astronaut photographer who snapped it.)
 
The lunar module never made it aboard that impressive looking rocket ship. Upon delivery, the module was found to have “hundreds of problems,” including bad wiring, faulty parts, an abundance of poor workmanship, and, most alarmingly, serious leaks throughout the fuel system. Grumman had neglected, it seemed, to perform any pre-flight checks. Worse yet, as Grumman’s team raced to correct the numerous problems, a pressure test caused a window to blow out, blasting jagged holes in the skin of the craft and sending debris flying throughout the formerly dust-free module.
 
The cause of the blowout was never determined. NASA and Grumman though decided to take the “Fuck it! What’s the worst that could happen?” approach and merely replaced the window and ignored the failed pressure test, making no design changes to the modules. After all, there was a timetable to adhere to.
 
In the end, as we all know, the lunar modules performed flawlessly. According to legend, Neil Armstrong, ever the cool one, set the first LEM down with barely fifteen seconds of fuel remaining in the tank. And when he and Buzz fired up that ascent engine for the very first time, it popped them off the surface of the Moon as if they were riding on a champaign cork. As it turned out though, the lunar module had not yet faced its toughest challenge.


 






 

Last edited by indolering; 06-02-2015 at 03:31 AM.
indolering is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2016, 03:56 AM   #413
pound
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 6,466
Likes: 475 (261 Posts)
Default Jeff Rense & William Tompkins - The Moon is an Alien Command Center



Quote:
Clip from November 30, 2016 - guest William Tompkins on the Jeff Rense Program.
__________________
"Who looks outside, dreams; who looks inside, awakes." -- Carl Jung
"The educated person is one who knows how to find out what he does not know" -- George Simmel
pound is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2017, 06:52 PM   #414
elshaper
Inactive
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Pandæmonium
Posts: 25,965
Likes: 5,575 (3,762 Posts)
Default

I have not watched this but it might be relevant. I'll leave it to the Moon experts.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IrLXgc57dIw
elshaper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2017, 07:31 PM   #415
davebeard
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 1,184
Likes: 690 (409 Posts)
Default

It's crazy, what a nutty theory, but for centuries people have associated the moon with mood swings and madness...
my own friend has worked with "naughty" children for many years,
there is a pattern with kids and behaviour around the time of low moon, and full moon.

"oh shit... am I covering full moon week?"

it's something that is known to people who work in this field...

WHY? and HOW? does the moon do this to people?
__________________
Fight
Likes: (1)
davebeard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2017, 07:43 PM   #416
the mighty zhiba
Inactive
 
the mighty zhiba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 20,828
Likes: 5,989 (2,995 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by davebeard View Post
It's crazy, what a nutty theory, but for centuries people have associated the moon with mood swings and madness...
my own friend has worked with "naughty" children for many years,
there is a pattern with kids and behaviour around the time of low moon, and full moon.

"oh shit... am I covering full moon week?"

it's something that is known to people who work in this field...

WHY? and HOW? does the moon do this to people?
As moderators we noticed on the forum how when it was full moon, some members would 'play up' - infact we'd often say 'is it full moon?' and invariably it was.

More reports came in at full moon times than almost all other times (with a few exceptions).

Last edited by the mighty zhiba; 02-01-2017 at 07:45 PM.
Likes: (2)
the mighty zhiba is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2017, 08:03 PM   #417
baboshka1
Inactive
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 4,301
Likes: 2,962 (1,227 Posts)
Default

When I was in FL I went to that nasa place, its cost $100 to see some tin cans and a stage set.
My friend said to me before I went in, I will come of convinced that man went to the moon.
baboshka1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2017, 09:49 PM   #418
cosmic tramp
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 5,900
Likes: 2,707 (1,758 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by the mighty zhiba View Post
As moderators we noticed on the forum how when it was full moon, some members would 'play up' - infact we'd often say 'is it full moon?' and invariably it was.

More reports came in at full moon times than almost all other times (with a few exceptions).
Interesting fact: a recent survey revealed that GP appointments in UK increase by 3.6% during a full moon.
Likes: (1)
cosmic tramp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2017, 09:50 PM   #419
truth seeker 09
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 3,844
Likes: 1,734 (1,002 Posts)
Default

I believe there was something on the Moon astronauts found.

Joe Rogan: The speech Neil Armstrong gave at the 25th anniversary of the Apollo 11 mission.


Last edited by truth seeker 09; 03-01-2017 at 04:38 PM.
truth seeker 09 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2017, 02:18 PM   #420
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 truth seeker 09 View Post
Joe Rogan: The speech Neil Armstrong gave at the 25th anniversary of the Apollo 11 mission.

Off topic bollocks. There us nothing cryptic about his speech at all. Would you like a link to where Joe Rogan the internet nobody explains how he doesn't think the landings were hoaxed during an interview with Neil deGrasse?
truegroup 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 05:52 PM.


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