9/11 Fact or Fiction?

Alfreredocsil wrote:Sure you can, I placed one on Jupiter when I was there and I can get my signal bounced back see, watch this:

Ping..........................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................
<return ping>
See that wasn't so hard now was it? Oh and Thorn777 can verify it (as soon as I pay him $50 to say *uh huh...I can verify it*, lol.

The problem is no one but them has the equipment to test it out and verify it from an outside source. Like everything else regarding the moon landing you have to trust the info they give out.

Hah!! I'll verify it if you give me a million bucks!! (not Monopoly money...)

Alfreredocsil wrote:
I'll bet I can (given enough money) find 24 people to garantee through death that the sky is actually purple.

Oh, really??

No, Doubt it. They would last until they were about to die then spill it all.

Maybe...maybe not. There are plenty of other options I know of that NASA had at their disposal but they are all in the realm of "conspiracy theory" as well.

The facts remain though that the things they point out in the video I gave the link for are substantial and NASA's explanations don't explain anything..most of which consist of "Oh thats rediculous, we were there because we say we were...take our word for it". I don't know how you get around the faked images or the "irregularities" in the pics. Just too many things that go against their story in my opinion.

WHy would you want to though?

Bragging rights and respect. Look how many countries were in total awe from our supposed success of landing on the moon. There are a multitude of reason they did it. What was really the point of going there in the first place? That pretty much sums it up in and of itself. We haven't been back so whatever they thought they gained by going there in the first place is what they stood to gain by faking it. Except without the difficulties of actually doing it.

What about all the tech that came from the race to the moon? It luanched us far into the future

What was that specifically? Give me some examples and I can maybe refute them.

As long as there has been a space program, there have been detractors. "What are we doing up in space when we've got real problems right here on Earth?"

I welcome that question since it gives me a chance to list the multitude of innovations we use every day that were first developed for space exploration. And that list keeps getting longer and longer.

Just recently, I used a new ear thermometer to check the temperature of a squirming grandchild. The handy device is based on metal coatings technology developed for space helmets.

Smoke detectors, hand-held vacuum cleaners, water filters and ergonomic furniture are just some of the many household items first developed for use in space. The highly efficient foam insulation used in new homes was first used to insulate fuel tanks on liquid-fueled rockets.

Portable X-ray machines, programmable pacemakers and many surgical tools were all pioneered as part of the space program. Concentrated baby foods, as well as the freeze-dried instant mixes we feed our kids, were first consumed in space. Many of the biofeedback techniques (Really, really good stuff, I have used it.)used to reduce stress were first developed for use by astronauts.

Satellites have revolutionized telecommunications and the Global Positioning System (GPS) can help navigators on land, in the air or on the seas locate their position to within 10 feet anywhere in the world.

The list goes on and on. Studies have shown that for every dollar spent on space development, $7 have been returned to the economy in the form of a new product or service. But one space-program spin-off is paying dividends greater than anyone ever imagined.

While the economy in many parts of the world is in shambles, the U.S. economy keeps humming along. Americans are earning more money than ever before. Unemployment is near an all-time low. And, amazingly, inflation is virtually nonexistent.

Why is the American economy so strong? Economists, not generally known for brevity, answer with a single word: productivity. Since 1990, productivity increases in the United States have averaged 2.1 percent each year.

Besides our fabled work ethic, what is it that makes American workers so productive? Computers. American workers know how to use computer technology to work better and smarter. And you can thank the space program for those computers.

During the 1950s, computers were the size of a supermarket. To travel into space, however, we needed computers that could fit into a phone booth. Companies like Fairchild and Intel experimented with ways to reduce the size of computers. The result was the microprocessor.

Every one of the tiny computer chips found in personal computers, network servers, airplanes, manufacturing equipment, cars, toaster ovens, washing machines, toys, alarm clocks, and thousands of other products can trace its heritage back to those integrated circuits first developed for the space program.

Thirty-five years ago, critics called the newly invented microprocessors "novelties" and "toys." Today, the cost of developing these "toys" has been returned a billion-fold, if not more.

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration accounts for a mere 1 percent of the federal budget — an amazingly small amount when you consider the profound effect the agency's work has had on the quality of our lives. Ironically, while the research and development budgets for other government agencies are increasing, NASA's continues to decline — this in spite of its extraordinary track record.

We must continue investing in technology and the space program. We should encourage our children to study math and science. If anything, we should invest more in science education. Standard & Poors DRI estimates that if our productivity and innovation continues at its present rate, real wages could rise by 9 percent over the next decade. Corporate earnings could rise as much as 54 percent.

Scientific growth means economic growth. The evidence is irrefutable. Let's not turn our backs on progress. There is still so much to discover — new medicines, new materials, new ways to protect the environment.

If I sound like I'm excited, I am. Who knows which new "toys" will revolutionize the way we live.

From here:http://space.balettie.com/Lovell.html

Ithink if you'll look at them by the each, you'll discover that in every case, the ywere developed from the "space race" which didn't necissarily include going to the moon. Most of the space race involved military use of low orbit things like sats and stuff that really had nothing to do with going to the moon. I have no doubt tha twe can put man in space, going to the moon however is a whole different thing.
Things like Mylar, plastics, computers etc...weren't really developed in the quest to set foot on the moon but to work in space within orbit. Some were even invented for the military like the air force and sonic flight, they were just conveniently useful for NASA's space Odyssey.

Yeah, but space race involved the moon. The camera used on the moon shrunk things down, etc.

Haha, nice, we posted that at the same time. I intended mine to be a reply to the your post before the last one but it works good for your last one, lol.

I'm not refuting the usefulness of NASA, just the fact (supposed fact) the yset foot on the moon. Obviously we have been and can manage orbit and things like Sats and orbital space travel. Thats where the innovations and developments came from. Our quest of reaching for the stars is on-going no doubt, what Ido doubt is that we were able to get as far as the moon in '69.

NASA has created some great things, I'm not saying it was a waste of money...I'm saying that they haven't gotten to the moon yet.

No, what has shrunken technology is the practical use of it in every day life on earth. The spacerace included the moonlanding yes but that is still ongoing..we haven't achieved it yet. The actual spacerace started with rocket technology and nation superiority. Russia took a decided advantage with Sputnik..the US, not to be outdone..faked the moonlanding to one up Russia. After that Russia calmed down and NASA kept working on the initial goal of nation superiority through the use of space. The "moonlanding" just gave us some breathing room, which was why it was advantagous to fake it.

There was plenty of need here on earth for R&D of things like microprocessors and superconductors.

And we're also assuming that NASA actually created all that stuff. Theories abound that a ton of that stuff is a result of captured alien technonolgy. Crazy?

Well, why did we have to fake it? Why not actually land and all?

You didn't actually watch that video did you?

We didn't and don't have the technology to get through the radiation belt that exists in outer space away from the safety of the Earth. It would take 6' of lead shielding to keep the people on the craft from being toast. The space suits and all were way too thin to protect from the massive amounts of radiation out there.

It was far simpler to create the hoax than to actually do the deed. Had they actually landed there, the irregularities wouldn't be an issue in the video and pics and those of us that do not believe...would believe, lol..

Never had time, was at school.

Radiation, interesting. So then, the international space station is a Hoax? As far as we know, we do not have a shield to protect them from Radiation, as far as we know. Look, if they could of lines everything with Lead, protecting themselves from radiation. Nor do we know if they had another technology. Plus, we can survive some radiation. What is to say they did not have just enough protection?

No, the Space Station is within the protected zone of earths magnetic shield, as are the sats, and space missions. The Van Allen belt is the radiation zone that exists 500 miles away from the earth and is the unbreachable band of radiation. Everyhting Nasa does is well within that 500 mile range...except for the moon missions, lol.

The missions near earth don't take very much shielding and we have that capability. If they had another "proprietary" secret technology tha tallowed them to go to the moon in spite of the radiation...that could be an explanation...but they have yet to use that as an excuse. I might accept that as a possibility but so far as I know there is no precident for that at this time.

I have theorized that we should be able to use solar generated magnetics and ions to create a plasma shield (yes a force field) for space travel to get around the radiation problem and maybe even the light/speed barrier but I'm a moron..if that would work I'm sure someone else would have figured it out before me. There isn't the slightest hint that they have ever developed anything like that. But then again....I have wondered a few times how far out Stargate actually was, would be funny if not only the moonlanding was real but we have actually been planet hopping for 20 years, lol.

Actually, I am fairly certain that we already have a protective barrier of some sort. The government has been covering something up, for years, since 1947. The government has covered something up at Roswell, whether they created it or not is not important, they got something from it, which easily could mean the means for a protective shield.

The Flag was made to wave NASA explained that years ago... The rocks on the moon are known to reflect light

Reflect light, maybe, but not bounce a laser around and then send it right back. Angle of Input equals angle of output. You would have to hit something perpendicular to the laser, a really, really big gamble.

What? No I mean about the Shadows

Hmm...thats a good point, I know they covered something up at Roswell and I'm reasonably certain it was at least one alien crash. The problem is I'm also certain they faked the moon landing, otherwise the weird things in the pics wouldn't be there.
My best guess is that perhaps the alien technology to deal with the radiation was of no use to humans. Either we couldn't reproduce or it was hazardous in itself. I'd guess we couldn't reverse engineer it until after '69 and maybe haven't yet. Some of the simpler stuff like carbon fiber...materials and such would have been easier for us to figure out but higher technology maybe not so much. We were still using slide rules at that time.

Whenever they keep coming up with different excuses for something like Roswell and they are all different...it's pretty obvious there's way more to the story. In most cases the first reportings are usually the more accurate as they didn't have time to filter the data.

What about the shadows?

Huh? You mean the shadows in the pics of the moon landing?

They merge if you draw a line through them, shadows cast on a landscape with only one light scource will remain parellell. This shows that this was shot on a set with more than one light scource.
Then there's the crosshairs in the pics that were supposedly etched into the lens but in the pics, several objects cover parts of them, lol. They look like photoshoped images done by a fourth grader, lol.