• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Why on earth do people still believe we have send men to the moon?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Exact what kind of proof are you looking for?
Video tapes,moonrocks and sworn statements aren't good enough?

I get the feeling if they put you in a rocket and shot you to the moon,you would still proclaim it fake.
And offer no evidence to support it.

You know who makes allegations with nothing to back it?
Liars,attention whores,and crazy people.

well if moonrocks are fake, then that isn't good enough indeed,

And you seem to have some emotional problems with my statement. Ah well, that is not my problem, That is yours, of course.
 
Last edited:
I am still waiting for the evidence that we went to the moon,

It is up to them to proof. They just can't because there is no evidence at all.

Here you go.

Man+on+the+Moon.gif
 
The OP is doing the reverse burden of proof ploy. The OP by stating "when it is soooo obvious they haven't done that at all." becomes the OP's back it up.

The OP has failed to prove the stance made in the first post.
 
I know it's more than you deserve, but there you go.

well, if that is all you can do...stupidity. ah well.


Now, bring on some evidence we went to the moon!

Moonrocks are fake, video is tampered with, and the list goes on and on.


You should think 'skeptic' people would need some sort of evidence instead of blind faith in the apollo misions,
 
The OP is doing the reverse burden of proof ploy. The OP by stating "when it is soooo obvious they haven't done that at all." becomes the OP's back it up.

The OP has failed to prove the stance made in the first post.


It is soooooo obvious because there is NO reliable evidence.

I can't proof a negative.

But I can spell it out for you.

THE U.S.A. HAS NEVER SEND MEN TO THE MOON, BECAUSE THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT THEY DID.

There.
 
And how about the fake moonrocks?
 
well, if that is all you can do...stupidity. ah well.


Now, bring on some evidence we went to the moon!

Proof We Landed on the Moon is in the Dust | Popular Science

Moonrocks are fake,

No they aren't.

video is tampered with,

No it isn't.

and the list goes on and on.

No it doesn't.

You should think 'skeptic' people would need some sort of evidence instead of blind faith in the apollo misions,

There's been plenty of evidence it's just that you don't want to acknowledge it. A common trait among CTers.
 
There's been plenty of evidence it's just that you don't want to acknowledge it. A common trait among CTers.


Nope, there is BELIEVE that there is plenty of evidence. In reality , if you take a real close look, there is none. None at all.
 


Very funny that url, because you see an astronaut with a Hasselblad camera, Nearly impossible to film with
with those gloves and no viewfinder but perfect shots! It's hilarious.

And do you really think the film survived the radiation and the enormous changes in temperature?
Of course not!

The whole thing is ridiculous and you can only laugh about so much crap,
 
It is soooooo obvious because there is NO reliable evidence.

I can't proof a negative.

But I can spell it out for you.

THE U.S.A. HAS NEVER SEND MEN TO THE MOON, BECAUSE THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT THEY DID.

There.

What you post is an opinion, using the reverse burden of proof tact.

Then you should be able to provide sources that refute the "official" history record of the moon missions. Of course you should summarize what the source is stating and state why you believe they are correct. If you post long vids to back up your statement, post the time mark of the vid that backs up whatever statement you make.

If not your trolling and having nothing of meaning to say.
 
What you post is an opinion, using the reverse burden of proof tact.

Then you should be able to provide sources that refute the "official" history record of the moon missions. Of course you should summarize what the source is stating and state why you believe they are correct. If you post long vids to back up your statement, post the time mark of the vid that backs up whatever statement you make.

If not your trolling and having nothing of meaning to say.

well, I was with the fake moon rocks. Do you really believe they are real? They are not!
 
well, I was with the fake moon rocks. Do you really believe they are real? They are not!

Noted. No source to back up your statement. So what we have is your opinion.

When you provide information requested , then maybe your questions will be answered.
Much like your drowning in CT thread and your lack of responding to post 153.
 
Noted. No source to back up your statement.

Much like your drowning in CT thread and your lack of responding to post 153.

Didn't you know that rocks from the moon aren't moon rocks? smh
 
Didn't you know that rocks from the moon aren't moon rocks? smh

You got me.:mrgreen:
There is no life. This is all one big computer simulation. Can't wait for the reboot or next version to come out.:lamo
 
Noted. No source to back up your statement. So what we have is your opinion.

When you provide information requested , then maybe your questions will be answered.
Much like your drowning in CT thread and your lack of responding to post 153.

Well, one thing is for sure. You haven't done ANY research.

'Moon rock' given to Holland by Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin is fake
A moon rock given to the Dutch prime minister by Apollo 11 astronauts in 1969 has turned out to be a fake.


rock_1471511c.jpg

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.

'Moon rock' given to Holland by Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin is fake - Telegraph


What a joke this whole moon landing thing is!
 
Well, one thing is for sure. You haven't done ANY research.

What a joke this whole moon landing thing is!

So between 1969 and 2009 you don't think the original might have been stolen and switched with another? Where are all the other proven fakes?
 
So between 1969 and 2009 you don't think the original might have been stolen and switched with another?


ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha

well, ok, but then you have to proof that to be the case! So please, be my guest!

You are hilarious and very stupid I might add. Yes, a deserved Ad Hominem.


Now please go read something or whatever.


Putting you back on 'ignore' where you belong.
 
Well, one thing is for sure. You haven't done ANY research.




What a joke this whole moon landing thing is!

How Do We Know That It's a Rock from the Moon?

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. [After writing these words I learned that virtually the same sentiments had already been expressed by some of my lunar sample colleagues.]

Don't ever change Pin dAr. Of all the crack pots on this site, you're my favorite. Now go dig up some stuff on the pyramids for us.
 
ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha

well, ok, but then you have to proof that to be the case! So please, be my guest!

You are hilarious and very stupid I might add. Yes, a deserved Ad Hominem.


Now please go read something or whatever.


Putting you back on 'ignore' where you belong.

You are saying all the rocks are fake and always were. Your claim. Burden of proof is yours, not mine
 
Have you ever stood on a corner in Winslow, Arizona? It's such a fine sight to see.

When I was still a Owner Operator (semi).....I went 300 miles out of route to do exactly that. The pics I had taken were lost at the developer.....grrrrrrr!
 
When I was still a Owner Operator (semi).....I went 300 miles out of route to do exactly that. The pics I had taken were lost at the developer.....grrrrrrr!

Reminds me of when I was in the Army stationed in Germany. My roommate was the biggest Beatles fan you could imagine. We took a long weekend to England and re-created this shot of the Abby Rd album cover.

Beatles_-_Abbey_Road.jpg


Of course my roommate was barefoot.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom