| Author | Topic |
|---|
I supported Toymods
Location:
Epping, Sydney
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
the lunar conspiracy theory
|
Thu, 27 November 2003 05:49
|
 |
ok, having spent an hour or two having a conspiracy theorist try and convince me that not only was the first american moon landing a fake, but that to this day noone has walked on the moon, can someone please direct me to the website that refutes all the reasons for the moon landing being a hoax?
I just want to give him the website and then ignore him
|
|
|
I Supported Toymods
Location:
Sydney
Registered:
December 2002
|
|
Re: the lunar conspiracy theory
|
Thu, 27 November 2003 06:00
|
|
Let me guess... this person is either:
-Elderly
-Druggo
-Heavily religious
Check this conspiracy out
|
|
|
Location:
Gawler, SA
Registered:
August 2003
|
|
Re: the lunar conspiracy theory
|
Thu, 27 November 2003 06:03
|
|
|
I have a magazine from years ago called X Factor which has it. About 6 or so pages of all the photos and why they are fake.
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
Epping, Sydney
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: the lunar conspiracy theory
|
Thu, 27 November 2003 06:08
|
|
no
I was after the page that takes all the arguments of why they are fake, and shoots holes in them with a 24 guage shotty
|
|
|
Location:
Brisbane
Registered:
February 2003
|
|
Re: the lunar conspiracy theory
|
Thu, 27 November 2003 06:22
|
|
how about:
spaceflight.nasa.gov
or
fuck.off.you.conspiracy.theory.wanker.org/?cmd=sto p_wasting_air
seriously, try google? you might have to try a few different combinations of fake or cynic or similar 'doubting' words to cull out the weird shit.
charles.
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
Epping, Sydney
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: the lunar conspiracy theory
|
Thu, 27 November 2003 06:24
|
|
I first noticed it earlier in the day, when he mentioned how the CIA was responsible for "so many" assassinations
and I thought "fair enough, they've dabbled in world politics and most likely deposed more than a few leaders" etc - but ALL moon landings being a hoax? I find that rather tough to swallow
|
|
|
Location:
Newcastle
Registered:
April 2003
|
|
Re: the lunar conspiracy theory
|
Thu, 27 November 2003 06:38
|
|
Can't help with the moon landing but have a look at this site for extreme conspiracy/taking over the country stuff.
www.nzaif.com
Good luck to them i say.
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
I renounced punctuation
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
Epping, Sydney
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: the lunar conspiracy theory
|
Thu, 27 November 2003 08:03
|
|
I didn't say I *believed* any of his crap
I just wasn't in the mood to argue with someone who is not gonna change their mind - just wanna point him to a website I once visited, and let him know how wrong he is, and never speak of it again
and incidentally yes, he's a bit of a druggy
|
|
|
Registered:
August 2002
|
|
|
Location:
Sydney
Registered:
June 2003
|
|
Re: the lunar conspiracy theory
|
Fri, 28 November 2003 00:38
|
|
The fact that with a powerful enough telescope you can see the footprints seems to me to make it pretty clear it wasnt a fake. 
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
I renounced punctuation
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: the lunar conspiracy theory
|
Fri, 28 November 2003 01:12
|
|
No current telescope (even space based) can resolve the lunar bases, let alone footprints.
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
Epping, Sydney
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: the lunar conspiracy theory
|
Fri, 28 November 2003 01:26
|
|
yep
coz this guy's argument was that when the japanese put up their orbital telescope (hubble equivilent), they'll be able to prove there were no moon landings, as there wont be any footprints, etc.
even if all that happened (which I doubt it would), the moon has no atmosphere to speak of, so any mini asteroids that hit it could have mucked up the surface where the landings occurred
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
I renounced punctuation
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
Epping, Sydney
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: the lunar conspiracy theory
|
Fri, 28 November 2003 02:01
|
|
yeah
but this guy's argument is that america is still pretending it landed on the moon, so any evidence provided by america is also part of the conspiracy.
Ah well, 2 week break from work starting monday, so I dont have to deal with his crap 
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
Australia
Registered:
November 2003
|
|
Re: the lunar conspiracy theory
|
Fri, 28 November 2003 02:36
|
|
I just run by the theory that IF NASA had faked it, they would have done it so well that nobody would ever have known (until somebody else actually landed on the moon).
Errors in those pics look like they have been made by a primary school kid, and I don't think the NASA dudes would have fucked up that severely.
Yes, some of the pictures were touched up, but no, its not a fake landing
|
|
|
Location:
Sydney
Registered:
September 2003
|
|
|
Location:
Sydney
Registered:
June 2003
|
|
Re: the lunar conspiracy theory
|
Fri, 28 November 2003 03:09
|
|
|
Really? I thought they could. I stand corrected.
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
I renounced punctuation
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
|
Location:
melb
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: the lunar conspiracy theory
|
Fri, 28 November 2003 07:05
|
|
smt_007 are you kidding me? I saw that show your talking about...does the phrase "taking the piss" mean anything to you..
It was so bloody stupid, no one could have taken it seriously.
You didnt really believe it did you.....oh dear.
Caledwvech wrote:
The fact that with a powerful enough telescope you can see the footprints seems to me to make it pretty clear it wasnt a fake.
I love how you said this like you knew it was the truth...where do people come up with their ideas???
have you even used a telescope..no? - well why make such a unfounded statement then?
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
Australia
Registered:
November 2003
|
|
Re: the lunar conspiracy theory
|
Fri, 28 November 2003 07:09
|
|
| chrisss wrote on Fri, 28 November 2003 15:05 |
I love how you said this like you knew it was the truth...where do people come up with their ideas???
have you even used a telescope..no? - well why make such a unfounded statement then?
|
Eeeeeaaaassseee up Chrisss
He obviously read that somewhere, and furthermore, he retracted his statement later
|
|
|
Location:
melb
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: the lunar conspiracy theory
|
Fri, 28 November 2003 07:17
|
|
yeah that did sound a bit harsh.
tend to get a bit carried away on the forums sometimes.
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
Australia
Registered:
November 2003
|
|
Re: the lunar conspiracy theory
|
Fri, 28 November 2003 07:21
|
|
|
Hahaha, I'm sure Cal will forgive you
|
|
|
Location:
Sydney
Registered:
September 2003
|
|
Re: the lunar conspiracy theory
|
Fri, 28 November 2003 10:44
|
|
|
Hey, i didnt say i beleived it, i just saw it is what im saying.
|
|
|
Registered:
July 2002
|
|
Re: the lunar conspiracy theory
|
Sun, 30 November 2003 14:33
|
|
yes it's fake, believe it or not...
the moon doesn't have an atmosphere, so there's no way there can be wind blowing the flag
between the earth and the moon, there's a very strong radioactive belt, which would fry any human getting near it, to be able to withstand it, you need a piece of lead probably 100000 times thicker than anything you can imagine, imagine how think a wall you need to built to shield a blown up nuclear reactor.
If they actually landed the moon, can you find an explaination, that after 30-40 years of HUGE technology improvements, new inventions, all the new scientific discovery, that NONE of the other country is even slightly interested to try to land on the moon just once more?? Why don't they do it once more with the current quality of the video cameras?
The pictures that they've taken from the moon, have very similar backgrounds in every photo...
In fact, landing on the moon was just a stunt pulled off by the US, to move the world & esp. US citizen's attention away from the Vietnam war.
Just as 911 was a stunt & also an excuse for the smart little Bush to destroy Iraq & Saddam, as Senior Bush failed...
go search around for "september inside job"
read and judge for yourself
|
|
|
Location:
Perth
Registered:
November 2002
|
|
Re: the lunar conspiracy theory
|
Sun, 30 November 2003 14:42
|
|
I heard about that radioactive belt as well. Apparently the Apollo missions are the only manned missions to go past it. The russians didn't get past it cause they didn't know how.
The other interesting thing is that the camera's where mounted on the astronauts chests, so they wouldn't have been able to line up their shots, etc etc cause they coudn't see through a viewfinder, yet the shots that we see from the moon are perfectly framed, and crystal clear.....
interesting, not to mention the apparently over a dozen astronauts dying in a few years, all of suspicious deaths
|
|
|
Location:
Perth
Registered:
November 2002
|
|
|
Location:
Perth
Registered:
July 2002
|
|
Re: the lunar conspiracy theory
|
Sun, 30 November 2003 15:27
|
|
The flag used had stiffeners in it to display the flag.
The whole of space is full off various types of lethal radiation. Maybe the conspiracy is lots of astronauts die young because they can't be fully protected.
Why would they go to all the effort of faking a moon landing to distract from Vietnam when they could just kill the President?
As for the 911 conspiracy... 
|
|
|
Registered:
July 2002
|
|
Re: the lunar conspiracy theory
|
Sun, 30 November 2003 22:31
|
|
| gtman wrote on Mon, 01 December 2003 01:42 |
I heard about that radioactive belt as well. Apparently the Apollo missions are the only manned missions to go past it. The russians didn't get past it cause they didn't know how.
|
But it's pretty silly to believe that NO ONE still can't work out how to get to the moon after 40 years if it's really possible. And I'm sure even the new batch of US astronauts will want to have the feel of walking on the moon once more!! I'm sure those kind of people won't even mind dying even if they can do it once in their life, but no, the whole world decided they don't want to walk the moon EVER AGAIN, oh well..
Also the spacesuit that they wearing can no way protect them from direct sunlight anyway, with all those heat and radiation, what was the temp. on the surface of a planet in direct sunlight again?
| gtman wrote on Mon, 01 December 2003 01:42 |
interesting, not to mention the apparently over a dozen astronauts dying in a few years, all of suspicious deaths
|
They are more likely assassinated
| Quote: |
The flag used had stiffeners in it to display the flag
|
But that still can't explain why the flag is flapping in the "wind", there's no wind on the moon..
| Quote: |
kill the President
|
kill which President??
what's wrong with the 911 conspiracy? For a simple fact that the plane that "crashed" in the desert isn't "crashed", I'm sure we've all seen a plane crash with the huge pile of trash on the accident site, whereas this plane that crashed in the desert have debris miles away from each other.
|
|
|
Registered:
July 2002
|
|
Re: the lunar conspiracy theory
|
Sun, 30 November 2003 22:36
|
|
|
oh yeah, just remembered another thing, the rocket used on the space shuttle would have created a HUGE cratter from landing on the moon, but in the pictures, there's nothing, and through the mission, I'm sure there would've been some dust being attached to the shuttle, but the shuttle in the photo looks like it just came out of the showroom
|
|
|
Location:
Sydney
Registered:
June 2003
|
|
Re: the lunar conspiracy theory
|
Sun, 30 November 2003 22:36
|
|
| chrisss wrote on Fri, 28 November 2003 18:05 |
I love how you said this like you knew it was the truth...where do people come up with their ideas???
have you even used a telescope..no? - well why make such a unfounded statement then?
|
Yes I do forgive you.  But I would like to point out a few things. Yes I did read this, in more than one place, but after I found out it was wrong I said that I was wrong. I am sorry if I offended you.
After accusing me of "telling something as if it was the truth" you then go and make a statement as if it was the truth in regards to my using a telescope. Just in case you were wondering, I have used different telescopes many many times, and star gazing used to be one of my hobbies. So yes I have used a telescope.
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
Epping, Sydney
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: the lunar conspiracy theory
|
Sun, 30 November 2003 22:47
|
|
[quote title=gt20v wrote on Mon, 01 December 2003 09:31]| gtman wrote on Mon, 01 December 2003 01:42 |
what's wrong with the 911 conspiracy? For a simple fact that the plane that "crashed" in the desert isn't "crashed", I'm sure we've all seen a plane crash with the huge pile of trash on the accident site, whereas this plane that crashed in the desert have debris miles away from each other.
|
actually, if you've paid attention to more than 1 new report, you'll find that quite often when planes crash, they leave debris for miles. probably has something to do with the fact that they're travelling at 700km/hr and loaded with aviation fuel . Especially remembering that the chances are it wasn't pilots that tried for a crash landing, but civvies who had taken out the terrorists.
regarding other people walking on the moon - how do you think NASA could justify the massive expense? "Oh, we think all astronauts should walk on the moon". yeah, I'm sure that would get funding approval from congress.
And other countries walking on the moon.... why bother? America has already been there and done that. Russia had it's mind on bigger things - creating the first orbital space station. Why copy what america has done when you can do something they haven't?
[Updated on: Sun, 30 November 2003 22:49]
|
|
|
Registered:
July 2002
|
|
Re: the lunar conspiracy theory
|
Sun, 30 November 2003 22:54
|
|
this is a good website, read and analyse a bit, many of the better website have newspaper articled linked, and a lot of "proof", I had a look at the Lunar website above, but it's just plain talk of what he thinks, there's no proof, he reckon he understands the reasons and technology, but nothing can back him up..
http://www.welfarestate.com/wtc/
[Updated on: Sun, 30 November 2003 22:56]
|
|
|
Registered:
July 2002
|
|
Re: the lunar conspiracy theory
|
Sun, 30 November 2003 23:04
|
|
| Quote: |
None of the suspects named by the FBI appeared on any of the official
passenger lists. A further point was how the FBI had managed to retrieve
the passport of one of the suspects amid the molten and twisted remains of
thousands of tons of steel and rubble brought about by the Twin Towers
collapse.
|
http://www.welfarestate.com/wtc/flight-skills.txt
how in a world would something like this happen, and US doesn't send in their investigation team to find the "real truth" but instead, clean up the place ASAP and export all the junk metal ASAP, YEAH RIGHT! We have to live our "NORMAL" life so as not to let the terriorist win! That's a good excuse
|
|
|
Registered:
July 2002
|
|
Re: the lunar conspiracy theory
|
Sun, 30 November 2003 23:33
|
|
| draven wrote on Mon, 01 December 2003 09:47 |
actually, if you've paid attention to more than 1 new report, you'll find that quite often when planes crash, they leave debris for miles. probably has something to do with the fact that they're travelling at 700km/hr and loaded with aviation fuel . Especially remembering that the chances are it wasn't pilots that tried for a crash landing, but civvies who had taken out the terrorists.
|
Then they should start making bombs with aviation fuel, anyway, on a plane crash site, there should be a huge burnt plane mark on the ground, but there was nothing at the crash site...
| Quote: |
And other countries walking on the moon.... why bother? America has already been there and done that. Russia had it's mind on bigger things - creating the first orbital space station. Why copy what america has done when you can do something they haven't?
|
is the world that simple? Can't you see that they haven't got any man to go too far off away from the Earth, because they can't?
THIS IS FUNNY! JUST FOUND IT ON THE NET...
http://www.moontruth.com/clips/moontruth.mpg
but the clip is faked, (ie. not real proof...  )
[Updated on: Sun, 30 November 2003 23:36]
|
|
|
Registered:
July 2002
|
|
Re: the lunar conspiracy theory
|
Sun, 30 November 2003 23:40
|
|
This is just as good...
| Quote: |
Moon Landing Hoaxer Buzz Aldrin Punches Filmmaker
by SMH.COM. AU
Police are investigating allegations former Apollo 11 astronaut Edwin "Buzz" Aldrin made a sceptic see stars by punching him when confronted with charges that his historic 1969 moonwalk was a hoax, police said today.
The 72-year-old Aldrin, who was one of the first two astronauts to walk on the lunar landscape when the United States landed man on the moon on July 20, 1969, is accused of punching independent filmmaker Bart Sibrel in the face outside a Beverly Hills hotel yesterday.
Sibril, 37, - who believes the moon landings were faked to fool the Soviets into believing the United States had achieved the ultimate space goal - was used by a Japanese television team to surprise Aldrin with an "ambush", following an interview in the hotel.
"I walked up to him on the sidewalk and put a bible up to him and asked him to swear on the bible that he actually walked on the moon," Sibril, who has confronted Aldrin on two other occasions, told AFP.
"He refused to do it so I told him he was a thief to take money for giving and interview on something he didn't do.
|
|
|
|
Registered:
July 2002
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
Epping, Sydney
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: the lunar conspiracy theory
|
Mon, 01 December 2003 00:11
|
|
ffs
this is the sort of shit I had to get away from at work.
|
|
|
Registered:
July 2002
|
|
Re: the lunar conspiracy theory
|
Mon, 01 December 2003 00:26
|
|
|
what do you work as?
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
Epping, Sydney
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: the lunar conspiracy theory
|
Mon, 01 December 2003 00:30
|
|
work for an electronics company
|
|
|
Registered:
July 2002
|
|
Re: the lunar conspiracy theory
|
Mon, 01 December 2003 00:52
|
|
|
oh, manufacturing ECUs? You sounded like you don't like your job..
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
Epping, Sydney
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: the lunar conspiracy theory
|
Mon, 01 December 2003 00:54
|
|
the work is fine
when you have someone trying to convince you that no person has ever walked on the moon, it becomes tedious.
it's conspiracy theorists equivilent of drive-by preaching mormons in the city.
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
I renounced punctuation
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: the lunar conspiracy theory
|
Mon, 01 December 2003 01:23
|
|
All nonsense. Here is the real scoop.
All the people that had to be kept quiet to prevent the fact we never landed on on the moon were in the World Trade Centre on September 11, 2001. Then the US government sent 19 Saudi agents to fly planes into the twin towers killing all the co-conspiritors. Nobody's the wiser.
Come 2005, the SELENE probe will be orbiting the moon. One of its (many) objectives is to take photos of the remnants of the lunar bases.
Remember, sending man to the moon was a political stunt performed under a thinly veiled scientific disguise. It was done at incredible cost and significant risk. The political environment has changed significantly since then so the impetus to send people back there is non existant. The Mars Surveyor probes clearly demonstrated that much can be achieved with automated machines. The Russian managed to get 300 g of moon rocks back by using automated satellites using 1960's technology.
Invariably the conspiracy theorists are high on bullshit and low on knowledge or substantial qualifications. To argue with them lends credibility to their moronic delusional crud. However, I'm more cynical than that. They prey on the less intelligent/easily gullible, tempting them to buy book and videos.
|
|
|
Location:
Perth
Registered:
July 2002
|
|
|
Location:
Sydney
Registered:
June 2003
|
|
Re: the lunar conspiracy theory
|
Mon, 01 December 2003 03:18
|
|
|
Really???? Wow. I didnt know that. Might have to try and travel to the edge one day.
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
Australia
Registered:
November 2003
|
|
Re: the lunar conspiracy theory
|
Mon, 01 December 2003 03:48
|
|
|
But where does all the water go?
|
|
|
Location:
Perth
Registered:
July 2002
|
|
Re: the lunar conspiracy theory
|
Mon, 01 December 2003 04:01
|
|
It's under the control of the CIA! 
|
|
|
Location:
Sydney
Registered:
June 2003
|
|
Re: the lunar conspiracy theory
|
Mon, 01 December 2003 05:06
|
|
|
I just falls off. But then the cosmic rays evaporate it and it turns into clouds.
|
|
|
Registered:
July 2002
|
|
Re: the lunar conspiracy theory
|
Mon, 01 December 2003 23:48
|
|
have you heard "if you were to tell a lie, it has to be a big one", because when you do, no one will believe that you're telling a lie..
if you think you can trust whatever TV, video, or news feeds you, then you better think twice, because they are very sucessful at propaganda.
If you think it's hard to believe that the moon landing was fake, try imagining what's behind 911
http://www.welfarestate.com/wtc/flight-skills.txt
http://www.welfarestate.com/wtc/
no extremist can drive a 1000km/h plane into a relatively small target / building at that speed, try driving a car at 300km/h and hit a target the same relative size as the building, and ask the tyres to do the work, now imagine how you can do it at 1000km/h with a commercial airliner without computer remote control, the third airplane is actually blown up in the air into bits so no evidence is left behind, the FBI found the black box of the plane after 2 days, HAVE ANYONE EVER HEARD ANYTHING ABOUT THIS BOX EVER SINCE??
waste more than 10 years and spend millions of dollars to train 16 (not sure of exact figure?) of pilots and send them to hell? If I was these "masterbrain", and if I want you all US to die, I'll spend a couple of grand and put them in education, nice clothes, and give them a job at the water supply and put poison in it, take these "white dust" thing and spread them around in subway, get someone to work in electricity places and blow them all up, now which one is easier and cheaper compared to training a flying circus.
both plane ran into the towers, and someone is just lucky enough to capture the first plane, that's a coincident, second plane struck at an angle, but somehow both building fell down by implosion, instead of falling to one side, if they said the heat of the aviation fuel caused the floor to weaken, then it's bullshit, the fuel all blew up at once when it crashed, and all was left was the white smoke from burning shit inside the office, the building was designed to withstand a smaller (but faster, therefore same momentum) plane to hit, when these 2 plane hit the building, it did not even move the building one bit! The wind would've probably move the building more than the plane did, but no, the top floors AND the bottom floor all imploded nicely down to the floor without affecting anything else around it... Aren't we just lucky?
| Quote: |
conspiracy theorists are high on bullshit and low on knowledge
|
Hope the above website can change your mind because all evidence/articles is backed by reputatable newspress, but sorry to disappoint you, but it's actually most people are high on bullshit and low on knowledge, otherwise propaganda won't work...
read it for your own goods, but we still can't change the world, but at least you can understand what "politics" is about, (dirty)
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
Australia
Registered:
November 2003
|
|
Re: the lunar conspiracy theory
|
Tue, 02 December 2003 00:28
|
|
Hahaha, my god, I haven't laughed that hard in a while
Thanks for the joke 
It made my day
|
|
|
Location:
Sydney
Registered:
June 2003
|
|
Re: the lunar conspiracy theory
|
Tue, 02 December 2003 00:46
|
|
gt, If you are trying to say that it was a conspiracy, then you are clutching at straws. Anything in the world could be a conspiracy if you uncover enough "evidence".
The reason the buildings collapsed striaght down instead of sideways is the way that they were built. Have you looked at that? To be built that high, they have to be built a certain way. That meant that when the floor of one of the levels became "detached" from the side, it fell straight onto the floor below it, which in turn was enough force (as you can imagine) to break that one loose and so on.
As for the training people to do it for 10 year, who ever said terrorists were lucid? The sheer fact that they go into places and blow themselve up means, that they are capable of anything. Those 16 people probably committed their lives to that and were more than happy to spend 10 years doing it. As for the money, millions of dollars is a drop in the ocean when you are as rich as Osama.
|
|
|
Location:
Epping, Sydney
Registered:
April 2003
|
|
Re: the lunar conspiracy theory
|
Tue, 02 December 2003 00:54
|
|
| Quote: |
no extremist can drive a 1000km/h plane into a relatively small target / building at that speed, try driving a car at 300km/h and hit a target the same relative size as the building,
|
yes... "extremists" are exceptionally crap pilots.
|
|
|
Location:
Epping, Sydney
Registered:
April 2003
|
|
Re: the lunar conspiracy theory
|
Tue, 02 December 2003 00:57
|
|
|
the building was wider than most runways anyway..
|
|
|
Registered:
July 2002
|
|
Re: the lunar conspiracy theory
|
Tue, 02 December 2003 00:58
|
|
Hi Caledwvech,
I didn't say they weren't rich enough, but to be honest, US is way richer, BUT I'm saying there's easier way, read my post for other easier, quicker and more effective way to kill Americans, if they can send arthrax around, they can move arthrax around.
I hope you can back your reason for the building collapsing straight down, because it doesn't make physical sense, in another word it's full of shit, the only reasoning is there's enough explosives planted inside the building to implod it.
Even if there was enough force to break all the floors below straight down, what happens to the upper levels? It would've fell to the ground and shattered EVERYWHERE.
CrUZsida: I hope you didn't really find it funny, it's thousands of human life involved, and don't forget the Bali bombing, and no one really took more than few minutes to find out the real baddie, so who did it? Bin Laden, how did you know? Because the news told you! But the real truth lies in the news that are 1-2 days old, because the facts always contradicts itself, go through the website for links to news articles still being hosted on the news server.
|
|
|
Location:
Epping, Sydney
Registered:
April 2003
|
|
Re: the lunar conspiracy theory
|
Tue, 02 December 2003 01:03
|
|
or perhaps we could always come the conclusion that instead of everything being a conspiracy, this world just has lots of crap going on, and bad things happen.... perhaps a better solution is needed than a 'who done it'...
(not to disagree with anything gt20v said or agree either.. but just an idea.)
what do you all reckon about THAT theory?
|
|
|
Registered:
July 2002
|
|
Re: the lunar conspiracy theory
|
Tue, 02 December 2003 01:05
|
|
| RobST162 wrote on Tue, 02 December 2003 11:57 |
the building was wider than most runways anyway..
|
but dude, how fast are you travelling when you get close to the runway? and before you land on the runway? less than 20 knots, but the speed they crashed into the building? close to 1000km/h! (I'm sure it was more than 800km/h)
It was military controlled, by a computer that is not on board the plane, in another word, it's radio controlled.
|
|
|
Location:
Sydney
Registered:
June 2003
|
|
Re: the lunar conspiracy theory
|
Tue, 02 December 2003 01:08
|
|
|
Yeah there probably are more effective ways of killing Americans, I'll give you that, but you must admit, this was probably the most dramatic. And if the 4th plane had of hit the White House, if could have been a lot worse. Go read this site. Interesting.http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wtc/collapse.html
|
|
|
Location:
Sydney
Registered:
June 2003
|
|
Re: the lunar conspiracy theory
|
Tue, 02 December 2003 01:10
|
|
[quote]less than 20 knots[\quote]
Acutally it depends a lot on the plane. Those planes would be travelling at roughly 150-180km/hr. So a lot less, but it is still not impossible to do it. You would be able to have a nice long run up.
|
|
|
Registered:
July 2002
|
|
Re: the lunar conspiracy theory
|
Tue, 02 December 2003 01:11
|
|
| RobST162 wrote on Tue, 02 December 2003 12:03 |
perhaps a better solution is needed than a 'who done it'...
|
you are very right, as that's also the reason why no one would try and work out what actually happened, because every one in the world is too busy paniking or hating, it's very sucessful..
There was once a case when a guy drove a private plane and got a heart attack while up in the sky, within 5-10 minutes the military sent a few F16s or something to escort the plane to make sure that it fell to the ocean and not where people lived, not this time, 15 minute after highjack, lost of radio, nope, airforce is not going to do anything, 30 minutes, nah we give it more time, 45 minutes, everything is going to ok, 1 hour, CRASH, oh well, what a bad accident, hope no one is injured, antoher 15 minutes, oops, another plane is gone, we better start sending a F16 and see what's going on, CRASH into the Polygon, ooops, I think we're too late, there may have been some terrorist activity, would you believe that's what US spent BILLIONS dollars on? Would you believe their response time is so slow??
|
|
|
Location:
Epping, Sydney
Registered:
April 2003
|
|
Re: the lunar conspiracy theory
|
Tue, 02 December 2003 01:12
|
|
but if all I wanted to do was to "hit" the runway, not even land.. It would be easy as I reckon. If pilots can drop bombs on tiny targets (I grant the assistance of CCIP devices) or straff a small target with a machine gun in WWII in rattley old Spitfires travelling at a similar speed, then I don't see why a very well engineered plane with precise controls with an appropriate approach couldn't hit something the size of a runway in the air, let alone a building that has thousands more square metres available
We will never know though what really went down... that is certain.
|
|
|
