Conspiracy's?

[CTC564]

I've heard and read many theories on 9-11


I keep coming back to this thought...IF all of the theories are accurate, WHAT CAN BE DONE ABOUT IT?

Nothing is the answer I always come up with...

 

[Hobobob]

Cut it with 8th grade science class editorial, everyone has their opinions. You all are dissecting my one comment.

I'm sorry dude, but your one comment disagrees with some fundamental principles of physics. I'm sorry if I came off as snarky, but you have to realize when your opinion flies in the face of well-known fact.

 

[David Jayne]

Cut it with 8th grade science class editorial, everyone has their opinions. You all are dissecting my one comment.

Well, yeah, because it's this glaring......... thing. I really don't get it.

 

[basshawk]

Here are some conspiracies that turned out to be true. There's more info and video reports on the web page.

Invalid Link Removed

 

[Sequimite]

Here are some conspiracies that turned out to be true. There's more info and video reports on the web page.

Invalid Link Removed

The Mafia is a pretty good one, I'll give you that. Hoover kept the lid on that, insisting that there was no organized crime in the US. Bobby Kennedy had some epic fights with him on the subject.

add> having said that a lot of the other examples are silly

 

[FREAKYSTLYEY]

There is no sensation from speed. It's the acceleration up to speed that puts the heavy G load on the astronauts.

This is a good example of how "common sense" is exalted by people who paid no attention in 8th grade science class.

Lol, Sooo true...

Not to mention were moving around the sun at 66,000 how can we possibly make it

 

[machine gewehr]

You know too much.

 

[miles'tone]

Moon landing, real or faked?

Neither.

Everything is a holographic projection.

Nothing exists nor has ever happened.





















still got G.A.S?

 

[Jeff Bonny]

As for the "Moon Landing". I believe the moon landing happened but I don't believe the video we saw was it. The footage was actually created on a movie set. This explains all of the issues the conspiracy theorists have with some of the images in it.

There's a guy out there whose name escapes me contending that Kubrick shot the moon landing on a sound stage. Throwing out all speculation and looking only at the comparison between the background projection techniques Kubrick pioneered in 2001: A Space Odyssey and the moon landing footage there is a reasonable case for technical similarities between the two. In the context of the cold war it wouldn't be a huge surprise to find out the Americans didn't want to tip off the Russians to any technology that might have been seen in or extrapolated from real footage.

Now I'm not completely convinced the queen of England is a blood drinking reptilian/human hybrid but I do find it amusing that there are people who sincerely believe nobody in power has conspired recently to stay in power. History is full of conspiracies, why would that have all of a sudden stopped in the last few decades?

 

[Febs]

Firstly, the moon is 238,857 miles away. It took them three days to get there, so that would be 3317.45833 miles-per-hour, straight for three whole days. (Moon distance divided by 72 hours/rough estimate.)

That's humans withstanding that speed constantly for 72 hours straight.

Why do you think that humans would have any difficulty whatsoever withstanding a constant speed of 3,000 miles per hour? You're on a planet right now that is orbiting the sun at over 67,000 miles per hour.

Now, they are going 3,000 mph and, at the end of 3 days then can pin point it so that their ship hovers at the desired spot above the moon instead of crashing the F into it?

Then, apparently two guys separated from the ship in a lunar lander. While the other guy kind of hovered in the ship with a space anchor?? (I don't understand how it could successfully hover there like the Millennium Falcon.)

The ship did not travel to a fixed spot above the moon's service and "hover there like the Millennium Falcon." It entered into an orbit around the moon. When the lunar module descended to the service, the command module remained in lunar orbit.

 

[guy n. cognito]

Cut it with 8th grade science class editorial, everyone has their opinions. You all are dissecting my one comment.

Yes, because you are trying to debunk this event using physics, all the while proving that you don't grasp even it's most basic concepts. Your opinion is based on a lack of education.

 

[dj150888]

Yeah, maybe it couldn't actually be provided visually for TV and was unspectacular- like just one guy touching the surface and saying "Okay, we did it, let's get the F out of here..."

There are elements to the story which I find may have been difficult to execute and may have in reality been done another way.

Firstly, the moon is 238,857 miles away. It took them three days to get there, so that would be 3317.45833 miles-per-hour, straight for three whole days. (Moon distance divided by 72 hours/rough estimate.)

That's humans withstanding that speed constantly for 72 hours straight. Also, since they are going 3300 miles-per-hour, in the event debris flew by, it would be at an incredible rate. That's 55 miles per minute or close to a mile-per-second. There would be no time to react to large debris, rock whatever. I mean, it's not a Star Trek ship.

Now, they are going 3,000 mph and, at the end of 3 days then can pin point it so that their ship hovers at the desired spot above the moon instead of crashing the F into it?

Then, apparently two guys separated from the ship in a lunar lander. While the other guy kind of hovered in the ship with a space anchor?? (I don't understand how it could successfully hover there like the Millennium Falcon.)

So the two guys go down there and run around a bit, take pictures and stuff. Then they leave and successfully dock with what's left of the original rocket, which left them with just the tip to fly back, without a launch, again at 3,000 mph and casually go back to earth?
They had a cargo ship's worth of fuel in that puny ship to make the trip back at 3,000 mph in 3 days??

I know someone will chime in with the official story...I still won't believe it. I think it's possible, what dmonroe said - the version we see is more of a Hollywood production to make it more digestible for public consumption. The actual landing was probably way different, took a lot longer/maybe by other players and they didn't have the technology to broadcast it.

A little reading wouldn't go awry.

I don't expect everyone to know huge amounts of detailed science, but when you're attempting to use it to make a point, you should at least know the basic physics behind what you're asserting.

 

[sloasdaylight]

Space anchor. I about spit out my coffee when I read that.

 

[Relic]

A little reading wouldn't go awry.

I don't expect everyone to know huge amounts of detailed science, but when you're attempting to use it to make a point, you should at least know the basic physics behind what you're asserting.

Seriously...

ZB - for real, no insults or snarkiness intended - study it a little more in depth. If, after you've read details behind the whole moon landing, (and by details I mean actual scientific/historical details not conspiracy theory literature), and you still believe it was faked, please post here as to why. I'm very interested.
Right now you do not seem to be understanding the physics behind it which is why it may seem so suspicious to you.

 

[livinitup0]

Mythbusters did a show debunking many of the commonly used talking points about the "fake" moon landing. I was kinda skeptical until I watched it.

Now I'm kinda awestruck by the amount of balls shown by those original astronauts.

 

[Relic]

Mythbusters did a show debunking many of the commonly used talking points about the "fake" moon landing. I was kinda skeptical until I watched it.

Now I'm kinda awestruck by the amount of balls shown by those original astronauts.

Absolutely. Not only that, but the ingenuity that went into every detail...freaking astounding.

 

[Relic]

Moon landing, real or faked?

Neither.

Everything is a holographic projection.

Nothing exists nor has ever happened.



still got G.A.S?

Ahh now you're talking!
"The Holographic Universe"?
I love this bizarre "reality perception" stuff.

Converse to your statement, I've also heard a theory that I like to ponder quite a bit - the non-linear time aspect whereby everything that has happened, can happen or will ever possibly happen, is simultaneously all happening right now. Our perception of the universe is linear so that it seems like we're moving through time on a single set path, which is only illusionary. Cool stuff to ponder.

And now back to our regularly scheduled program..

 

[CTC564]

Ahh now you're talking!
"The Holographic Universe"?
I love this bizarre "reality perception" stuff.

Converse to your statement, I've also heard a theory that I like to ponder quite a bit - the non-linear time aspect whereby everything that has happened, can happen or will ever possibly happen, is simultaneously all happening right now. Our perception of the universe is linear so that it seems like we're moving through time on a single set path, which is only illusionary. Cool stuff to ponder.

And now back to our regularly scheduled program..

Ooooooh...my brain just popped!!!

 

[ZB158]

Seriously...

ZB - for real, no insults or snarkiness intended - study it a little more in depth. If, after you've read details behind the whole moon landing, (and by details I mean actual scientific/historical details not conspiracy theory literature), and you still believe it was faked, please post here as to why. I'm very interested.
Right now you do not seem to be understanding the physics behind it which is why it may seem so suspicious to you.

I didn't mention physics. I stated, "That's humans withstanding that speed constantly for 72 hours straight."

I was imagining traveling like that having an effect on one's system, i.e. becoming ill. But, TBH, that is not based on fact, either, it was speculation.

It really wasn't a major point of what I was saying. If anything really stands out, it's regarding the astronauts going on the moon, re-docking with a hovering ship and then somehow getting back up to 3,000 mph/back to earth in 3 days.

And having enough fuel in the tiny section that broke off the top of the rocket in traveling to the moon and back up to the those sustained speeds on the way back/238,000 miles without a launch. A total of roughly 475,000 miles in 6 days - sustained at those speeds with enough fuel by that tiny ship.

The reason I stated that I still won't believe it - is because that basic premise I described with the ship(s) just does not seem feasible to me at all.

I do believe the U.S. went to the moon..but I think it was a much larger operation...and, in theory, they couldn't just say they went there without a live broadcast as that would actually seem less credible.

 

[guy n. cognito]

I didn't mention physics. I stated, "That's humans withstanding that speed constantly for 72 hours straight."

I was imagining traveling like that having an effect on one's system, i.e. becoming ill. But, TBH, that is not based on fact, either, it was speculation.

It really wasn't a major point of what I was saying. If anything really stands out, it's regarding the astronauts going on the moon, re-docking with a hovering ship and then somehow getting back up to 3,000 mph/back to earth in 3 days.

And having enough fuel in the tiny section that broke off the top of the rocket in traveling to the moon and back up to the those sustained speeds on the way back/238,000 miles without a launch. A total of roughly 475,000 miles in 6 days.

Which, again demonstrates your complete lack of understanding of physics. Just because you don't understand it doesn't mean it's not true.....

Objects in motion tend to stay in motion in the same speed and direction until acted upon by an unbalanced force. If you don't understand that concept and how it applies to space travel, then you really need to rethink your argument.