Author Topic: On the Moon Landing  (Read 2277 times)

ThatZenoGuy and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline nogodsforme

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 11008
  • Darwins +1831/-9
  • Gender: Female
  • Jehovah's Witness Protection Program
Re: On the Moon Landing
« Reply #232 on: June 28, 2016, 07:06:24 PM »
Believers do the same thing with religious claims about gods. The presence of good things means that god is real, because god is the source of all good things and can only produce good and perfect things. The presence of bad things also means that god is real, even though god can only produce good and perfect things.  How can that possibly work?

Well, you see, god is allowing Satan--a very bad person-- to run things for a while. Then, when he is ready, god will show up and get rid of Satan and make everything good and perfect. The reasons for a good and perfect god letting his worst enemy control his favorite planet full of his beloved children, for any time at all, is never made clear.

I have compared it to a day care director allowing a violent, drug-addicted motorcycle gang of sex offending sociopaths to take over watching the tiny tots for a few weeks-- just temporarily-- because the kids said they did not like the day care center rules. And besides, some of the kids were disobedient and stole cookies at snack time. So, yeah, let the motorcycle gang take over. If the kids get traumatized, abused or even killed, well, that'll teach those brats.[1] 

Or, there is the possibility is that we cannot judge what is good and bad, because god is the measuring stick for everything. Maybe god is using the bad stuff to make something even better happen, like painful shots to prevent disease, or childbirth pains producing a baby. Yeah, let's go with that. Except that if you can prevent disease without painful shots or produce a baby without excruciating pain wouldn't that be better? So, wouldn't it be even better if god could make good things happen without the bad stuff?  :?
 1. Most of us are terribly bad people and deserve to be under Satan's rule, at least temporarily while god lets it happen. Even the tiny handful of good people deserve to suffer at Satan's hands, because nobody is truly good enough, although god made us this way....
If you have god, why do you need the gun?

Prayer is begging god to change his mind.

Offline wright

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2974
  • Darwins +164/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • "Sleep like a log, snore like a chainsaw."
Re: On the Moon Landing
« Reply #233 on: June 28, 2016, 08:06:18 PM »
^^^Yep and yep.

I'll go on record here as complaining that these so-powerful not-so-secret cabals are really, really bad at their jobs. They never seem to succeed at their supposed objectives, not least of which is silencing their very visible detractors, defectors and other opponents.

If there really was some overarching secret cabal in charge of human society (leaving aside single-issue conspiracies like the Fake Moon Landing), it seems reasonable that the world would be a very different place. Rather unlike the squabbling, uncoordinated, self-interested, only grudgingly better in some places political / economic / social mishmash we actually exist in.

Seriously, even if the ultimate aim were to brainwash everyone so that the last generation happily lines up to file into the Reptoid meatgrinders, there would likely be at least a few hints at some coordinating policy. And I mean more than a few YouTube wingnuts. Things like long-standing grudges mysteriously disappearing: India and Pakistan suddenly making serious concessions to each other, Turkey acknowledging and proposing restitution for the Armenian genocide, all the white supremacists / separatists in the US either spontaneously combusting or repudiating their racist nonsense.

A few unmistakable signs that something odd was going on, ya know? An organization that had as much power as the Illuminati (of whatever flavor) supposedly do couldn't help but make a few ripples now and then. 
Live a good life... If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones. I am not afraid.
--Marcus Aurelius

Offline nogodsforme

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 11008
  • Darwins +1831/-9
  • Gender: Female
  • Jehovah's Witness Protection Program
Re: On the Moon Landing
« Reply #234 on: June 28, 2016, 09:16:06 PM »
^^^As my Jewish scientist colleague says (imagine New Jersey accent with Mel Brooks inflection[1]), "If we Jews really ran the world, do you think it would look like this?"

I agree: if anybody with enough power and intelligence to run the world was running the world, it wouldn't look like this. Nobody is in charge. Not aliens, not demons, not gods and not secret world governmental cabals who want to seize our guns, implant barcodes on our foreheads and force us to read Karl Marx to our kids while eating soylent green washed down with fluoridated water.

Sorry, skeptic. Keep trying to make artificial order out of relative chaos. Good luck with that.
 1. Happy 90th Birthday to Mel! Go watch The 12 Chairs, his best, most understated and underrated movie.
If you have god, why do you need the gun?

Prayer is begging god to change his mind.

Offline Add Homonym

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3962
  • Darwins +396/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • I can haz jeezusburgerâ„¢
Re: On the Moon Landing
« Reply #235 on: June 28, 2016, 09:55:21 PM »
It just sounds fishy to me. Terrorists with box cutters were able to penetrate the best air defense in the world? And fly planes perfectly? You can even see a missile fly out from under the plane in one of the videos. Those were not commercial planes. They were military. You can clearly see it in the video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WlTYET9pYa8

1:34 - 2:10

I hate to say this, but most Islamic-associated terrorism is very badly planned, by individuals, using only knowledge about how to build bombs, off Google. However, 911 appears to be an outlier,  that was planned very well, with a few dollars behind it. Osama decided not to do any more hits on America, because it did not achieve any objectives. Basically, it just pisses Americans off, and they would be more likely to nuke Iraq or Syria. They did however, continue bombing European targets, and got some strategic results, with some countries like Spain moving out of alliances.

The reason I hate to say it, is 99% of Islamic-associated terrorism is very badly done, using suicide bombers, against soft targets. Timothy McVeigh is someone who put a liddle bit more effort into his project, and the results were quite significant, even compared to 911. In Australia, a kid opened a telco fibre pit in the ground, and put something burning in it, and wiped out internet on the north east coast of Australia. The thing we don't like to think about, is that we are terribly vulnerable to anyone who has a brain and wants to do some damage. If someone who was better educated wanted to wage war with your country, it would be unpleasant, and the cops wouldn't catch them. We have built a house of cards.

Quote
You can even see a missile fly out from under the plane in one of the videos. Those were not commercial planes. They were military.

I think you seriously misunderstand the limits of frame by frame video analysis. In that era, INTERLACE was dominant. Interlace is a way of perceptually fudging extra frames and lines into the display. It fools the human "eye" and brain into believing that there is more information there, than there really is. But it's horrendous at displaying movement. When interlace is converted to modern "progressive" systems, there is no clean method to do it. Successive frames end up being merged in garbled ways, depending on the particular deinterlace system the editor just happens to pick. When I deinterlace videos, using AviDemux, I just pick a random field merge system, out of about 5 that it lets me use, and hope for the best. I have no real idea what fudgy result I'm going to get.

Here is a site showing what interlace artefacts look like. At the bottom is a photo he asserts is deinterlace properly. It's only proper because his eye says it looks right, and he got away with it.
http://www.100fps.com/index.htm#whatis

Also, think about why some government conspirator would bother putting missiles onto a plane. Surely, slamming 2 planes into the buildings was bad enough? PCT also assert that the inside of the building were rigged up with explosives.

MAKE UP YOUR MIND AND STICK TO ONE STORY, MORONS.
« Last Edit: June 28, 2016, 09:57:00 PM by Add Homonym »
When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be bleedn obvious.

Offline CrystalDragon

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 593
  • Darwins +75/-3
  • Gender: Female
  • Proud Whovian
Re: On the Moon Landing
« Reply #236 on: June 28, 2016, 10:36:48 PM »
Believers do the same thing with religious claims about gods. The presence of good things means that god is real, because god is the source of all good things and can only produce good and perfect things. The presence of bad things also means that god is real, even though god can only produce good and perfect things.  How can that possibly work?

Well, you see, god is allowing Satan--a very bad person-- to run things for a while. Then, when he is ready, god will show up and get rid of Satan and make everything good and perfect. The reasons for a good and perfect god letting his worst enemy control his favorite planet full of his beloved children, for any time at all, is never made clear.

I have compared it to a day care director allowing a violent, drug-addicted motorcycle gang of sex offending sociopaths to take over watching the tiny tots for a few weeks-- just temporarily-- because the kids said they did not like the day care center rules. And besides, some of the kids were disobedient and stole cookies at snack time. So, yeah, let the motorcycle gang take over. If the kids get traumatized, abused or even killed, well, that'll teach those brats.[1] 

Or, there is the possibility is that we cannot judge what is good and bad, because god is the measuring stick for everything. Maybe god is using the bad stuff to make something even better happen, like painful shots to prevent disease, or childbirth pains producing a baby. Yeah, let's go with that. Except that if you can prevent disease without painful shots or produce a baby without excruciating pain wouldn't that be better? So, wouldn't it be even better if god could make good things happen without the bad stuff?  :?
 1. Most of us are terribly bad people and deserve to be under Satan's rule, at least temporarily while god lets it happen. Even the tiny handful of good people deserve to suffer at Satan's hands, because nobody is truly good enough, although god made us this way....

Regarding your first paragraph, keep in mind that there are several points that imply God runs both good and evil, and one verse even says that "This evil is of the Lord".  If I recall correctly, come to think of it, it seems in the Old Testament God said he was in charge of both good and evil, whereas Satan became in charge of evil in the New Testament.
Sometimes what is unknown is the most interesting.

"It is always darker right before the light.  Or for some people, it just stays dark, but they don't seem to notice."

Offline Add Homonym

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3962
  • Darwins +396/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • I can haz jeezusburgerâ„¢
Re: On the Moon Landing
« Reply #237 on: June 28, 2016, 11:58:32 PM »
Is the Earth really whizzing through space at 67,000 MPH? It looks much slower in that video.

The video only depicts the orbital velocity of the space ship. Low Earth orbit is 7-8km per second, or 28,000 km/h, AKA around the world in 1.4 hours.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low_Earth_orbit
When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be bleedn obvious.

Offline sun_king

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 453
  • Darwins +42/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • We see things not as they are, but as we are
Re: On the Moon Landing
« Reply #238 on: Yesterday at 12:35:38 AM »

It just sounds fishy to me. Terrorists with box cutters were able to penetrate the best air defense in the world? And fly planes perfectly? You can even see a missile fly out from under the plane in one of the videos. Those were not commercial planes. They were military. You can clearly see it in the video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WlTYET9pYa8
1:34 - 2:10

Just on the basic physics of a missile launch, it makes no sense to attach a missile to an airframe and then soft launch it at a target just a few meters away.

-- The airplanes nose can carry way more explosives than three or four missiles which have their body diameter considerably smaller than the airliner's fuselage. In simpler terms, if you are planning to ram into a massive rock formation with a car, you are better off putting a few pounds of plastic explosives on the hood rather than shooting a couple of lumps of C4 from a potato gun just before impact.
-- Air launched missiles usually have a safety fuse that prevents detonation till it reaches a certain range. This is to protect the launch vehicle from getting damaged from its own munitions. But your's is a conspiracy edition missile, so they might have removed the fuse :).
-- There are no rocket motor ignition flashes prior to launch, which means its a soft launch. The missiles would hit a still intact structure of the building with practically no kinetic energy gain. If there were missiles slung under the airliner, it would have been more effective to keep it unreleased and have it detonate after the air-frame ploughs into the building.

That is just the ballistic aspect. The rest of the stuff in the video is utter kaka. It could as well be a Avada Kedavra curse by a Slytherin in the 767!

If you are accusing this as a well planned operation, then have the decency to give the folks who allegedly made the planning a little more common sense. Missiles on airliners that are launched half a second before impact is abysmally dumb and reflects on the collective intelligence of the conspiracy theorists.

Offline velkyn

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 15999
  • Darwins +240/-7
  • Gender: Female
  • You're wearing the juice, aren't you?"
Re: On the Moon Landing
« Reply #239 on: Yesterday at 06:39:08 AM »
Regarding your first paragraph, keep in mind that there are several points that imply God runs both good and evil, and one verse even says that "This evil is of the Lord".  If I recall correctly, come to think of it, it seems in the Old Testament God said he was in charge of both good and evil, whereas Satan became in charge of evil in the New Testament.

off topic..but, CD, now why did this story change?
"There is no use in arguing with a man who can multiply anything by the square root of minus 1" - Pirates of Venus, ERB

http://clubschadenfreude.wordpress.com/

Offline CrystalDragon

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 593
  • Darwins +75/-3
  • Gender: Female
  • Proud Whovian
Re: On the Moon Landing
« Reply #240 on: Yesterday at 07:05:58 AM »
Regarding your first paragraph, keep in mind that there are several points that imply God runs both good and evil, and one verse even says that "This evil is of the Lord".  If I recall correctly, come to think of it, it seems in the Old Testament God said he was in charge of both good and evil, whereas Satan became in charge of evil in the New Testament.

off topic..but, CD, now why did this story change?

Well, I may not be entirely versed in the history, but here's my guess as to what happened: the Israelites realized it wasn't actually a good idea to worship a God who was in charge of both good and evil, so the perspective of Satan developed from being an agent of God in Job[1] to the "ruler of all evil" in the New Testament, so rather than having God be in charge of everything like in the Old Testament (not to mention God was the one who sent "lying spirits" then IIRC), God was the all good force and Satan was the all evil force.
 1. I'm not counting Eden since it says the serpent was just "the craftiest of God's creatures", not explicitly Satan, and the one place I seem to recall Satan being called "the ancient serpent" was in Revelation.
Sometimes what is unknown is the most interesting.

"It is always darker right before the light.  Or for some people, it just stays dark, but they don't seem to notice."

Offline jaimehlers

  • Global Moderator
  • ******
  • Posts: 7575
  • Darwins +1015/-25
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: On the Moon Landing
« Reply #241 on: Yesterday at 07:16:56 AM »
To further sun_king's excellent points a bit more, missiles generally have a boost stage which engages shortly after the missile is released from the plane's hardpoint.  At that point, the missile is still traveling at the same speed as the plane, due to inertia, so the whole point is to boost it to a faster speed so that it flies ahead of the plane.  But the boost stage starts up while it's under the wing; if the plane really had fired a missile shortly before impacting the building, the flare would have started under the plane's wing and been visible moving forward from there, not suddenly appeared at the airplane's nose, because the missile would have no way to move forward without the equivalent of a rocket flare.

Plus, there's no point to firing a missile less than a second before impact.  Even leaving aside the safety fuse that sun_king mentioned, the kinetic damage from the much larger and heavier plane hitting is going to be far more destructive than the relatively small warhead of a plane-launched missile.  Most plane-launched missiles don't have big warheads, simply because the heavier the warhead is, the larger (and slower) the missile ends up being, and you quickly reach a point of diminishing returns.  I just don't see a single missile being worth firing when the plane itself is going to hit less than a second later.
Nullus In Verba, aka "Take nobody's word for it!"  If you can't show it, then you don't know it.

Offline nogodsforme

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 11008
  • Darwins +1831/-9
  • Gender: Female
  • Jehovah's Witness Protection Program
Re: On the Moon Landing
« Reply #242 on: Yesterday at 10:38:56 AM »
^^^And besides all that science and logic and stuff, there is still the basic question of why? What is the purpose of secretly orchestrating all this terrible violence that just causes more problems for everyone, including the military and government officials? Seriously, the only people who benefited from 9/11 were security companies, the Taliban and the folks who make ziploc bags. Everyone else is worse off because of it.

And if the goal was to make the US into a terrified locked down military dictatorship a la Chile under Pinochet with people trapped in their homes by roving death squads, and disappearing relatives or something, it has been 15 years since 9/11 and few signs of that happening. We still, for better or worse, have a functioning government, elections, libraries and the internet where information is freely available, a constitution, etc. We are not trapped in our homes; we are still able to communicate and travel throughout the country, and even go to foreign places.

Once again, I ask the conspiracy folks: why?

It get even crazier when the government conspiracy people somehow meld that dystopian worldview with an all powerful god who will someday make everything into a paradise..... :?
« Last Edit: Yesterday at 10:41:23 AM by nogodsforme »
If you have god, why do you need the gun?

Prayer is begging god to change his mind.

Offline Jag

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3074
  • Darwins +396/-9
  • Gender: Female
  • Official WWGHA Harpy, Ex-rosary squad
Re: On the Moon Landing
« Reply #243 on: Yesterday at 11:09:48 AM »
The disconnect between the often claimed incompetence of the government and the ability to pull off such a HUGE cover up never seems to occur to those who put these ideas forward. The Feds are all idiots, but smart enough to plan and execute massive conspiracies that involve the cooperation of other governments with whom we have strained and contentious relationships. Unless that's all a big conspiracy too...

Because reasons, that's why. &)
"Tell people that there's an invisible man in the sky that created the entire universe and the majority believe you. Tell them the paint is wet, and they have to touch it to be sure." ~George Carlin

Offline wright

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2974
  • Darwins +164/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • "Sleep like a log, snore like a chainsaw."
Re: On the Moon Landing
« Reply #244 on: Yesterday at 02:22:55 PM »
To further sun_king's excellent points a bit more, missiles generally have a boost stage which engages shortly after the missile is released from the plane's hardpoint.  At that point, the missile is still traveling at the same speed as the plane, due to inertia, so the whole point is to boost it to a faster speed so that it flies ahead of the plane.  But the boost stage starts up while it's under the wing; if the plane really had fired a missile shortly before impacting the building, the flare would have started under the plane's wing and been visible moving forward from there, not suddenly appeared at the airplane's nose, because the missile would have no way to move forward without the equivalent of a rocket flare.

Excellent point yourself, there. Hell, even most action movies show the arm / release / boost sequence accurately.
Live a good life... If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones. I am not afraid.
--Marcus Aurelius

Offline nogodsforme

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 11008
  • Darwins +1831/-9
  • Gender: Female
  • Jehovah's Witness Protection Program
Re: On the Moon Landing
« Reply #245 on: Yesterday at 03:00:23 PM »
The disconnect between the often claimed incompetence of the government and the ability to pull off such a HUGE cover up never seems to occur to those who put these ideas forward. The Feds are all idiots, but smart enough to plan and execute massive conspiracies that involve the cooperation of other governments with whom we have strained and contentious relationships. Unless that's all a big conspiracy too...

Because reasons, that's why. &)

Yes. This. The same people who think that the US government is untrustworthy and incompetent believe in these incredibly complex and highly sophisticated conspiracies. We can't deliver the mail, but we can orchestrate 9/11 and create fake moon landings? Is NASA somehow exempt from all the supposed incompetence, waste and inefficiencies of other government agencies? 

"You want the government to run your health care? Look at the Post Office and the DMV! Heh heh heh." Well, if the government can make all those conspiracies work, health care should be a piece of cake. Let the aliens the government keeps hidden at Area 51 cure all our diseases. Or get the scientists hiding all that proof of god to work on curing cancer or something useful instead.

Ignoring the fact that the Post Office managed to deliver government Social Security, disability and unemployment checks to any where from rural Iowa to Honolulu to the Bronx, for a few cents, and without a miss for decades, and that the DMV processes millions of applications and keeps track of all that data with very few problems.

Compared to many foreign countries, the US government agencies are relatively honest and capable. And compared to many private businesses, the government operates efficiently, with lower overhead and less waste. (Anyone try to get a credit mistake cleared up with a private credit bureau lately?)  Things only break down when repubs who don't believe in government services anyway decide to clog up the works by letting unqualified buddies run important agencies (Brownie cough FEMA cough), not approving appointments, not passing a budget, or putting all kinds of silly restrictions on agencies so they cannot function well.

But given all that, I still cannot see how US government agencies have the ability to pull off all of these massively expensive, complicated high-level conspiracies-- and hide all the evidence. And again, why?
If you have god, why do you need the gun?

Prayer is begging god to change his mind.

Offline jaimehlers

  • Global Moderator
  • ******
  • Posts: 7575
  • Darwins +1015/-25
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: On the Moon Landing
« Reply #246 on: Yesterday at 04:41:15 PM »
^Sure they believe it, and they can prove it too.  After all, if the government were competent, there would be no evidence of these conspiracies to begin with.  I mean, why would Joe Conspiracy be able to spot these conspiracies at all if they were competently hidden?  And, of course, the fact that nobody else spots them just proves that the sheeple are brainwashed by guv'ment propaganda.

As for why, it's because the conspirators are diabolical and ruthless villains of course.  Why other reason do they need?  Everyone knows that diabolical and ruthless conspirators will do things like that, because that's what diabolical and ruthless conspirators do.  You don't get your Diabolical Ruthless Conspirator merit badge unless you're willing to do things like that just because.

*eyeroll*
Nullus In Verba, aka "Take nobody's word for it!"  If you can't show it, then you don't know it.

Offline velkyn

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 15999
  • Darwins +240/-7
  • Gender: Female
  • You're wearing the juice, aren't you?"
Re: On the Moon Landing
« Reply #247 on: Yesterday at 07:26:24 PM »
off topic..but, CD, now why did this story change?

Well, I may not be entirely versed in the history, but here's my guess as to what happened: the Israelites realized it wasn't actually a good idea to worship a God who was in charge of both good and evil, so the perspective of Satan developed from being an agent of God in Job[1] to the "ruler of all evil" in the New Testament, so rather than having God be in charge of everything like in the Old Testament (not to mention God was the one who sent "lying spirits" then IIRC), God was the all good force and Satan was the all evil force.
 1. I'm not counting Eden since it says the serpent was just "the craftiest of God's creatures", not explicitly Satan, and the one place I seem to recall Satan being called "the ancient serpent" was in Revelation.

which would lead you to think what, CD?  Why would people change if your god was this supposedly unchanging thing? 
"There is no use in arguing with a man who can multiply anything by the square root of minus 1" - Pirates of Venus, ERB

http://clubschadenfreude.wordpress.com/

Offline nogodsforme

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 11008
  • Darwins +1831/-9
  • Gender: Female
  • Jehovah's Witness Protection Program
Re: On the Moon Landing
« Reply #248 on: Yesterday at 11:15:48 PM »
That good god and evil god stuff, IIRC, was borrowed into the Abrahamic traditions from the Zoroastrian faith of the ancient Persians. They had a god of lightness and good, and a god of darkness and evil.

Sound familiar?
If you have god, why do you need the gun?

Prayer is begging god to change his mind.

Offline CrystalDragon

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 593
  • Darwins +75/-3
  • Gender: Female
  • Proud Whovian
Re: On the Moon Landing
« Reply #249 on: Yesterday at 11:24:05 PM »
which would lead you to think what, CD?  Why would people change if your god was this supposedly unchanging thing?

It would honestly lead me to think that the Bible was simply written by man trying to understand what they saw as divine (which seeing as God Himself didn't physically write it, it says that everything in the Scriptures is "inspired by God", which honestly I've always thought that was vague and coulf mean anything) and that God, providing he exists, is either unknowable to man, mostly distant, or prone to change[1], and basically humans are trying to change what they see as moral and fit for worship.  Understanding of the divine changed/changes as society changes.

That good god and evil god stuff, IIRC, was borrowed into the Abrahamic traditions from the Zoroastrian faith of the ancient Persians. They had a god of lightness and good, and a god of darkness and evil.

Sound familiar?

I actually remember hearing about that in a couple websites, and zi think a video I watched the other day.  It's late here so I'll see if I can find the video in the morning.
 1. which he changes his mind at times in the OT if I recall correctly
« Last Edit: Yesterday at 11:25:41 PM by CrystalDragon »
Sometimes what is unknown is the most interesting.

"It is always darker right before the light.  Or for some people, it just stays dark, but they don't seem to notice."