Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Past hour
  2. I thought you left, Derek? In future, don't lie about that, either. It's another tinfoil checkbox ticked..... It's actually NOT a 'cardinal tenet'. It's just one of many aspects of decent science, and it depends on the event/thing being studied. If it was a 'requirement', then one time events, oh like a large meteorite strike or volcanic eruption on a particular geographical landscape, or even a pile of dust being blown onto a spacecraft's solar panels by an event (a cherry-picked one, ignoring other possibilities) would, according to your logic, be unproven and impossible.. Would you like me to give lots of other examples that do not require repeatability, but are nevertheless considered proven beyond doubt? You really don't work in the sciences, do you? Why would that be important, except to someone desperate for anything at all to support an otherwise unsupported scenario? Are you claiming that Baysinger deliberately did not repeat his verification, so as to allow the other missions to be faked? Do you not think that sounds a tad ridiculous? (but never mind, let's proceed down that path..). The thing is, that is not any sort of positive evidence for your tinfoil idiocy. It is simply evidence, amongst a HUGE collection of other evidence, all of which is consistent and well-documented, of Apollo 11 being as advertised. And you acknowledge they got to the moon and back successfully, on that first real try. So .... I guess NASA ran the other missions to provide the repeatability that was missing from Baysingers little contribution? Or for some as yet to be explained ebil nefarious purpose? I mean, that's the sort of dumbass logic you are applying. Look Derek, it's simple - we have plenty of evidence for ALL the missions. Evidence that I, and many others here, are very, very familiar with, from rocketry equations and orbital trajectories, to technical specifications, images and movies and tv transmissions, navigation processes, journals, blueprints, returned samples, later verifying images from the LRO, Japan's Selene, India's Chandrayaan and other independent sources. We've done the hard yards, investigated every denier's claim, and they have all fallen flat on their faces. And this thread? is full of nothing substantive whatsoever. If I've missed the substantive bit, please link me to that post - that will be the one where you posted something convincing and well-researched. Not more bloody handwaving. Thus far, you acknowledge that A11 happened, and your 'best evidence' (term used extremely loosely) that any mission or missions were faked is, wait for it... too much/little dust on Surveyor. And that is completely unsupported (indeed unsupportable) by any reasonable logic and you have (despite promising to do so) not provided a shred of a proper analysis. FTR, I completely reject that such an analysis could be usefully done, and if you ever have the cojones to provide one I'll be very happy to go through it and point out the holes. But Good Luck, anyway. ... OR, you now hint at some as yet secret evidence, to be released in July. Why July? And WTF didn't you start with your best evidence? If it's not cash you want, perhaps it's fame or ego from the interest you think you will get? Frankly I think I'd rather not be famous on the backs of the CT crowd. Antivaxxers, flat earthers, those are the folks you want to adore you, Derek? You want to make gullible even more stupid? And you've given nothing other than handwaves about the significance (or otherwise) of that. Do you honestly think that in any way supports your poop? What a daft attempt at an analogy! As above, Baysinger's efforts are simply another bit of reasonably hard evidence, amongst reams of other stuff, almost all of which is much more solid and 'better'. There's nothing there to 'pull apart', as Baysinger's claim is quite well documented, and it is supported by radio link budget calculations (which you didn't even check, did you?) and also others who listened in on other missions, like the Russians, duh..... The body of evidence for all the missions is and has always been unchallengable. If you think you have successfully challenged it, again, please point me to that post, as I see NOTHING here. BTW, I note you still don't understand the directionality of the signals coming from the moon, or at least don't have the guts to admit you got that wrong. Here, let me repeat - you CANNOT use an (orbiting or otherwise) spacecraft/satellite to emulate a lunar signal by 'relaying'. This is EASILY proven - THINK! Those huge radio dishes (why do you think they are so big?) MUST be pointed directly at the signal source - 240,000 miles away. The moon is of course a moving target, AND each radio dish hands over the signal to the next DSN dish as the moon orbits / earth turns ... so simple parallax comes into play. Every time that handover happened, those dishes were triangulating that signal to an undisputable location ON THE MOON. THINK. Please, Derek, try to be a scientist just once here. Email a real rocket scientist and ask them about this, and then be a brave little Derek and come back and acknowledge that you got that part completely and utterly wrong. Are you brave enough, or not? Do you ever learn, or not? Who cares what someone thinks? {/judgejudy} Just stop pussyfooting and post your countering evidence. And drop the lame personal incredulity - "Omigod, that's not the right amount of dust coz I say so."
  3. It is relevant, you said they told you you may be contacted, i am curious as to how you happen to have been told this. Where did it happen eg: round a dinner table? At a bus stop? Did they just walk up to you and say it in the street one day?. Or Did you go to see one?
  4. Given that the wall is leaning away from the collapsed stoned it is hard to see how some of those stones managed to fall so far away from it. Walls usually collapse in the direction in which they lean or they bulge and slump. It such circumstances the only force acting on the stones is gravity and they fall vertically under their own weight. It might be possible for them to roll if they were round in shape but these are not. The article does say 'that it is not clear whether the damage is caused by people climbing on the wall.'
  5. yes that is a fact weather there is an after life as i have said Time will tell.now i have had a very special experience which has without question changed my views on all of this . all i can say to you freetorome be a good person in your mortal life as i my now sure we will be judged in this life.but i do not know this for a fact.All i can say, there is powers out there and i am confident there is a right and a wrong.
  6. Psychic attack! Need help!

    no, i can feel the pressure throughout the day. but i can feel it best when i'm meditating
  7. DA: Derailers Anonymous Thread III

    I hope all goes well for you. I have been working a lot of hours so I'm only on UM off and on lately. Drop us a line here and there and let us know how you are doing. Good luck!
  8. it really is not irrelevant who because it was more the thought process which triggered my mind at the TIME which is relevant. All i did was remember what the spiritual person said.They probably all say that.
  9. Well Fukushima's already defecating into the Pacific, how much more harm could there really be anyway. I'd suggest learning to forego that tuna though. Just out of an abundance of caution. After all, we wouldn't want it to affect our own families now would we.
  10. "Ok to be gay" school lessons cause unrest

    You did misread that. What I did say was plain English and not rocket science.
  11. What do you think i "believe"? I do not think you have understood what i put. Ofcourse time is important, but my point is, during mans time on Earth, there has been no proof of an after life. Beliefs are not proof. Neither are people who have lost a loved one saying they have had a sign. If the "born, living and dying " cycle also consisted of an after life, then every single person would be able to witness it, nit just the believers. You do not need a medium, to confirm the birth of a baby or the life and death of a person, so why do some people go to them to see if they can make contact with the dead? If there really was an after life, there would not be 3 stages of the cycle of mans exsistance, there would be 4 and mediums would never have set up shop in the first place. You are born. You live. You die THOSE ARE FACTS. You go to an afterlife = BELIEF
  12. acute

    If you watch Real Life Crime shows, the vast majority of crimes are committed in Dade County, Cook County, Las Vegas, and Australia! :o

    1. Hawken

      Hawken

      They need to display more of those Gun Free Zone signs to reduce crime.:w00t:

  13. Mossad foreknowledge 911 attacks

    Comey has just given a new interview to NPR that drives this home. In it, Comey admits that his decision to sharply criticize Clinton at a July 2016 news conference — at which he closed the email probe — was not only a break with department protocol but also that it would have been “reasonable” under the circumstances to have said nothing. link Your point is nullified and been sent to the CT section where it will stagnate until another gullible right winger comes along and uses it again as a poor excuse.
  14. Been looking into that TTSA stuff lately...Still trying to figure out what it's all about...
  15. A quick read tells two things - 1. They have NO proof or even any sketchy evidence that it is actually leaking anything and 2. "Of course, there are questions of compensation and mechanisms to allow these impacts to be minimized." Dare we inquire as to the real purpose of their concerns?
  16. We've over this so many times. These are misinterpretations by the staff at the for profit TTSA and their buddy Luis Elizondo who was described by the Senator from Nevada as doing nothing but creating a pile of paperwork
  17. So they know for sure? Hmmm, I keep reading stuff that says they never knew what they were. Maybe I am reading old stuff I guess. Stereo are there any recent research on this? Maybe a link I could look at?
  18. "Ok to be gay" school lessons cause unrest

    Do you know what a question is? I asked how many of them liked their lives in the shadows? Not on the front page. You think I'm projecting? Hell, lady. My best friend back in the early 2000's was gay. Coolest dude I ever met. I was his freaking wingman. You think I care if someone's gay? Hell to the no. I judge a person by the quality of their character and nothing else. You think I have issues with people. My middle child is trans. S/he is still my kid and I still care about my kid. Don't you dare judge me. Once thing I've learned about people is that a lot of them like their privacy. Their lives quiet and in the background.
  19. US apparently readying for Iran attack

    Yes, I'm sure that you consider him a paragon of virtue and civility. Bottom line is he KNOWS better than to attack U.S. troops and that's all to the good.
  20. Time will tell because that is the catalyst of existence.I understand for someone like you with you beliefs time may not matter in your eyes but i tell you one day you will realize time is the most important key element of the universe.
  21. "Ok to be gay" school lessons cause unrest

    Don't like competition? What else would you do with your time dear aztek?
  22. "Ok to be gay" school lessons cause unrest

    You just wrote how many gays liked being in the closet? If anyone is projecting it's you. No they didnt.
  23. "Ok to be gay" school lessons cause unrest

    try to follow the thread, and stop trolling, and i know trolling when i see one
  24. Where did you meet this spiritual person and how did you know they were a 'spiritual' person?
  25. Animal Lifespans

    He works at a zoo.
  26. "Ok to be gay" school lessons cause unrest

    It wasn't a rant. Your quote was saying just because they are attempting to teach tolerance doesn't mean they'll be accepted. It was an example but maybe you didn't comprehend it. Islam doesn't accept a few things same as Christianity but last time I checked we aren't under a theocracy and our laws aren't subject to change to suit religions.
  1. Load more activity