We want to share an important update with our Betfair Community users.
Over the coming months, the Betfair Community platform will be winding down. The final active day for the platform will be December 21st. From December 22nd, users will no longer be able to access the platform.
Your discussions, insights, engagement, and, most importantly, feedback have helped shape the platform and guided innovation. Your feedback continues to be important to us, and we will continue to listen via our dedicated feedback channels, as well as through product testing and innovations.
To share your feedback and experience, visit: https://support.betfair.com/app/home
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:
I don't know , I wouldn't swear on the bible under those circumstances .
|
|
By:
Their refusal to swear on the Bible, has undermined everything that's been claimed about the moon landings since the first claims that they were going there.
Why would they do that? Instead of trying to put suspicions to bed, their actions threw petrol on a burning fire. |
|
By:
does religion/god accept court swearing on bibles but not general street challenges?
|
|
By:
Terry,
They measured the radiation dose as the rocket passed through the belt. B&B The moon doesn't have an atmosphere to interfere with the trajectory of the lander so aerodynamics are not an issue. To slow it they just had to ensure by design that the reverse thrust passed through its centre of gravity. |
|
By:
What are they thinking about the future by refusing to swear.
Like them all making a second fortune apiece from saying that it was all a hoax? |
|
By:
Well ok , what do you think would happen if they put their hand on the bible
Who would have believed them after that sort of charade? no one , aircraft , houses , gardens and people These are things I understand . |
|
By:
They would swear on the bible, and no one would believe them .
|
|
By:
lfc1971--any proof to back up that statement about Jack Nicklaus' brain.
|
|
By:
And if you were a family member of the astronaut, maybe a wife a father or mother or son or daughter
And you see your father swearing on the bible to justify himself and to others that he wasn't telling lies Why would anyone do that , to me that would be wrong. |
|
By:
The thing is that fewer people believe them now than before, because they refused.
There was nothing to gain from swearing that they did. While there was everything to lose from refusing to swear. |
|
By:
not a single person would change their mind, imo
|
|
By:
It strongly suggests that their religious faith is much stronger than the capacity within them to tell lies.
|
|
By:
But it may not be about their religious faith , whether they have one or not .
It's more about the things I have described . It about the character and nature of people I trust them more , and would trust them less if I saw them do that. |
|
By:
getting mixed up with ernie els and his slow heartbeat JML
|
|
By:
well you are a one off ifc
|
|
By:
Was trying to keep out of the thread, but seriously not "swearing on the bible". Is that it?
The thread starter is obviously a conspiritard addict and best pitied, but Crippen claiming that a refusal to satisfy a troll badgering you in the street is evidence of anything? btw people generally don't perjure themselves in court after swearing on the bible, because they have no reason to tell anything other than what they believe is the truth. Those that do perjure themselves know they face action if caught, I guarantee you they don't gaf about the religious aspects. |
|
By:
lfc would trust them more if lying and less if telling truth
couldnt make it up |
|
By:
The swearing on the bible aspect is a bit subjective but I suspect that Dave is right. They probably had a policy not to engage with conspiracy nutters at all, just ignore them as to engage would give them legitimacy and a platform.
|
|
By:
Swearing on the Bible in law courts, goes back to the time when people were generally God fearing.
It offered some sort of a safeguard that most people would take the process very seriously indeed. And to a greater degree than the punishment handed out by the court for perjury. Obviously times have changed as religion is now taken less seriously Yet America is a still very religious place, and few genuinely God-fearing people would violate their faith by telling lies after swearing on the Bible. So the challenge, although not conclusive if taken up, carries a lot of weight if it is turned down. |
|
By:
It carries no weight at all if the refuser is not a believer. I can't speak for those who do believe, perhaps others have already done so.
|
|
By:
On that clip where buzz chins the guy Id have p issed laughing if they chinned the old fooker back and his arse dropped out his trousers.
|
|
By:
If the official policy was not to engage with conspirators, then nothing else over and above that can be inferred from the refusal.
|
|
By:
The guy goading buzz had some restraint i know that, I dont know what he did after but the natural reaction of most is to fire straight back
|
|
By:
Imagine if a spectator approached the Queen with a bible and asked her to swear on it what would you make of her refusal?
|
|
By:
Id be more surprised if she chinned em and then got chinned back
|
|
By:
that right dave ask question always when something didn't seem right
ps still no pics etc vegas |
|
By:
double p.s nice of you to join in
 |
|
By:
More than one refused.
|
|
By:
I think she has someone to the chinning on her behalf, Dusty.
The bible wielder might have wanted to ask questions regarding a conspiracy theory about Chas' paternity. She would have every right to do so. |
|
By:
thought they all refused and were all God fearing yanks, but of course that's just the tip of the iceberg,so many things wrong with it dave
|
|
By:
I was on the moon with them, I've just sworn on the bible to that effect
/thread |
|
By:
There's not one shred of evidence to say it was a conspiracy and the landing didn't happen.
|
|
By:
Just watched this clip and these astronauts sure do get angry!! John Young (Apollo 10): 'do you want me to knock you on the head?'
https://youtu.be/o1S0oObHT0c Certainly odd. |
|
By:
Buzz Aldrin: 'we were just passengers' What the....?
|
|
By:
No one would ask a Godless, compulsive and habitual liar who's gone through life observing hardly any moral or ethical standards whatsoever to swear on a Bible.
Their words are worthless anyway. |
|
By:
No offence intended in my last post towards any one on here.
|
|
By:
I have to agree with those who have said it would be far more difficult to fake a mission to the moon, than to actually go the moon! As someone said on here earlier, surely it would all have been exposed by now if there had been a conspiracy to fake the landings (too many people involved, other parties such the Russians monitoring events, etc).
Weren't the Chinese planning to pass over the landing site and take photographic evidence? Is that mission still to happen? |
|
By:
If I was one of the few men who landed on the moon in a tremendous technological achievement and was later asked if it was true I'd be very narked.
|
|
By:
Then Charlie, why would you fuel the fires of doubt by refusing endorse your words with such a simple process as swearing on the Bible?
|
|
By:
Refusing to swear on the Bible is taken as an admission of guilt in many quarters.
The astronauts would be well aware of that. |