Chit Chat
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 2116 comments are related to the topic:
APOLLO 17 A FAKE?
APOLLO 17 A FAKE?
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 2,116
|
By:
Insider Trader what was the "super computer" used for?
|
|
By:
Thats the point David.
The computers used for the mission were less powerful than a phone calculator. Do you believe in UFOs? |
|
By:
what specific tasks on that mission would require vast computing power? "UFO" means unidentified flying object, how can someone not believe in that?
|
|
By:
Do you believe aliens have visited or are on earth?
|
|
By:
Did you believe there were WMDs in Iraq?
|
|
By:
I think the distances between solar systems and the difficulty of crossing those distances make it unlikely.
Anyway, what tasks on the moon mission would require a super computer? You brought it up were you just spouting off what you read somewhere else? |
|
By:
All these questions and no answers - he must think he's Socrates.
|
|
By:
Here is the source code David:
https://github.com/chrislgarry/Apollo-11/ When I say supercomputer I mean something more powerful than was available in the 1960s. Clearly the term supercomputer is relative. Maybe you are right and all this could be down on a KBs of RAM given that 5% of USA income was spent on the project. The point I am making is that the same people who discount any question that Paddock was the only shooter in Vegas or 911 could have had rogue state involvement are also totally and utterly convinced there were WMDs in Iraq and the Moon landing photos were genuine. |
|
By:
Ho could they accurately predict that they would land at dawn when we all know that aeroplanes can often be put off track with turbulence etc, and they were going into the unknown with variables etc.
|
|
By:
Dave, their were banks of monitors at mission control. Presumably each monitor had a unique function and was receiving data from the spacecraft. I would expect the on board computer would have to be pretty sophisticated to achieve so many tasks. Computer hardware back then took up a lot of space, were power hungry and needed constant maintenance.
|
|
By:
If the Las Vegas shooting was a hoax or false flag, then it's about selling security scanners to public places such as hotels, shopping centers, hospitals and the like. It will net the company that makes them a lot of money, sold on the promise of making the public 'safer.'
Meanwhile the x-rays from all these scanners will cause cancers, not to mention the cost of the machines, the inconvenience, the time wasted. The on-going cost of all this un-needed security will be huge. |
|
By:
G Hall they were in orbit above the moon, there is no significant atmosphere above the moon to cause "turbulence". hth
Insider Trader The point I am making is that the same people who discount any question that Paddock was the only shooter in Vegas or 911 could have had rogue state involvement are also totally and utterly convinced there were WMDs in Iraq and the Moon landing photos were genuine. But you aren't making any point. Rational people, capable of critical thinking, look at the "story" they are presented with and the evidence backing up that story, including the motivation behind the production of it and falsifying some aspects or all of it. They then draw conclusions. The conclusions are not certain beliefs simply probabilities that certain things are true. Most conspiracy theorists fall down badly in this process due to lack of intelligence/education or mental illness. |
|
By:
They admitted the moon landing hoax in the film 'Interstella'. It was done as a propergander coo against the Ruskies.
|
|
By:
dave you are very good at bad mouthing people but not so good at answering questions. so again,with all the info(or rather the lack of it)in your mind there is no doubt that Paddock was the guy who killed all those innocent people? yes or no will do ta
|
|
By:
terry mccann I refer you to my post below
Rational people, capable of critical thinking, look at the "story" they are presented with and the evidence backing up that story, including the motivation behind the production of it and falsifying some aspects or all of it. They then draw conclusions. The conclusions are not certain beliefs simply probabilities that certain things are true. Most conspiracy theorists fall down badly in this process due to lack of intelligence/education or mental illness. Not "no doubt" but an extremely high probability that Paddock was responsible. |
|
By:
see there is the put down,although you have no evidence whatsoever you believe whatever you told,and you call me crazy
|
|
By:
Thanks Dave I wouldn't be the sharpest on these matters
|
|
By:
Most conspiracy theorists fall down badly in this process due to lack of intelligence/education or mental illness.
And what about the people who can't believe their own eyes, like when the question below is put. What do they lack? ''Put your hand on the Bible and swear to God that you walked on the moon.'' |
|
By:
Terry McCann
I have gone through a process of looking at the information presented which is: Paddock was a gambler who frequented casinos. Paddock booked and registered into the room from which the shooting took place. Paddock bought the guns and ammo found in that room. Paddock brought a sufficient number of suitcases up to the room that the guns and ammo could have been in those suitcases. Paddocks car contained more ammo and explosive material. Paddock was found dead in the room from which the shooting took place. The police claim that no one left the room between the time the shooting stopped and they entered the room to find Paddock dead. Which of these do you choose to disbelieve and why? |
|
By:
Thanks for proving my point Crippen
|
|
By:
but of course the story has been change numerous times to suit but you forgotten to mention that, you proberly didn't know even know or care about that though
|
|
By:
also dave there is nothing to prove anything as THERE IS NO PICS/VIDEO OR CC TV TO BACK IT UP. what have they written down about that then? can you explain it?
|
|
By:
Terry McCann
I have gone through a process of looking at the information presented which is: Paddock was a gambler who frequented casinos. Paddock booked and registered into the room from which the shooting took place. Paddock bought the guns and ammo found in that room. Paddock brought a sufficient number of suitcases up to the room that the guns and ammo could have been in those suitcases. Paddocks car contained more ammo and explosive material. Paddock was found dead in the room from which the shooting took place. The police claim that no one left the room between the time the shooting stopped and they entered the room to find Paddock dead. Which of these do you choose to disbelieve and why? |
|
By:
the answer to that is in my answer,work it out for yourself
|
|
By:
ok I understand that you don't want to embarrass yourself. You have nothing in your life but paranoia and given that, no evidence or logical train of thought will satisfy you.
|
|
By:
At least you aren't as bad as Sandy Hook deniers, harassing bereaved parents. Pity Paddock hadn't made it his mission to gather some of them together.
|
|
By:
I post something you cant answer and you turn nasty,what kind of a dick does that?
|
|
By:
you believe want you like,i couldn't give a sh1t
Really? dave you are very good at bad mouthing people but not so good at answering questions. so again,with all the info(or rather the lack of it)in your mind there is no doubt that Paddock was the guy who killed all those innocent people? yes or no will do ta btw dave you've not answered my question yet,im at you until you do still haven't told me where the evidence was dave? could have been anyone firing the shots,so tell me why you think it was defo this guy paddock, can you say it without a shadow of a doubt it was him? not demanding anything dave just saying why at a casino of all places we have NO evidence of this bloke doing this terrible thing,but weve been though all this before Mr.McCann to you dave, do you believe Oswald acted alone, a yes or no will do |
|
By:
Quite bizarre.
You've got terry mccann, Inside Trader, Dr C, G Hall, Get me a drink, and probably a few more I've missed all having a go at Dave. He's told he bad mouths people, gets told to f off, told he's being stupid and a thick bullyboy are$ehole and a dick. I've missed a few insults but it doesn't seem to me that dave is actually the one bullying here. |
|
By:
Dave seems always go with the official version or expert opinion.
Dave which of the following, if any, do you believe: 1. Paddock killed all the victims in Vegas. 2. There was 1 shooter in the JFK murder. 3. No one involved in any government knew about 911 before it happened. 4. There were WMDs in Iraq before the US lead invasion. 5. The EU was designed from the beginning for political union (not just for trade). 6. The Reichstag was burnt down by Marinus van der Lubbe. 7. Man was photographed walking on the moon in 1969. 8. Diana died as a result of a tragic accidient. 9. Communists attacked mosques in Iran in the 1953 coup. |
|
By:
o do come in Charlie for gawd sakes
|
|
By:
you wont get a proper answer insider btw
|
|
By:
Charlie where did I have a go at Dave I didnt
|
|
By:
What a bizarre post by Insider Trader. How can I possibly state that "Paddock killed all the victims in Vegas". That is the kind of thing Crippen or McCann would say. Do you seriously think I'm stupid enough to fall for idiotic trick questions?
btw there were quite obviously WMD in Iraq at some point, the dead bodies of gassed Kurdish children testify to that. |
|
By:
Correction.
4. There were WMDs in Iraq JUST before the US lead invasion. |
|
By:
the working classes are not capable of logical thought ,
I have no doubt that the vast majority of people who don't believe in the moon landings are working class . That's all you need to know . |
|
By:
 |
|
By:
I think insider trader mentioned ghosts elsewhere .
Well some people believe in ghosts and some do So what ? These are the facts , there are no evidence that ghosts exist , no photos , no video , no recordings , no physical ghost in the room in the machine. However there are machines , and there are people And we know what a machine can do and what a person can do with that technical knowledge and skill That's the sort of evidence that is relevant here |
|
By:
I mean if you try to say as insider trader and drC and others might say that people lie and have lied in the past and will be very capable of being liers and did that reason we don't believe that astonauts landed on the moon
Then we are not going to get very far People are lyers I think we can all believe that. |
|
By:
What we need is evidence that they are lying
That is not something that seems to bother the theorists , it is good enough for them to say that people have lied in the past But of course that is not evidence , you might as well say that people have told the truth in the past Thats were they go wrong when they try to look at things, they are not capable of logical thought |