The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Do you beleive man actually walked on the moon? This is a debatable question as there are many things which could make it all made up.
When you look at the pictures of the moon and the United States of America flag you will notice that the flag is waving in the wind but there is no wind on the moon!! Perhaps it was all set up at area 51 in the middle of the arizona desert? was it windy that day? and in the pictures there are no stars in the background! where did they all go!
I also think that there is a thing like the Ozone layer around the moon which is radioactive or something and it would kill humans who came in contact with it and also which I should mention why hasn't any one visited the moon since 1969? that is 33 years and man hasn't went back up to the moon.
There was also a program on before which I watched and they said a russian spy plane or something like that seen the lines where the props were to go. What do you think?
When you look at the pictures of the moon and the United States of America flag you will notice that the flag is waving in the wind but there is no wind on the moon!! Perhaps it was all set up at area 51 in the middle of the arizona desert? was it windy that day? and in the pictures there are no stars in the background! where did they all go!
I also think that there is a thing like the Ozone layer around the moon which is radioactive or something and it would kill humans who came in contact with it and also which I should mention why hasn't any one visited the moon since 1969? that is 33 years and man hasn't went back up to the moon.
There was also a program on before which I watched and they said a russian spy plane or something like that seen the lines where the props were to go. What do you think?
Page:
Well haven't you folks been having a big chin-wag over a big rock in space
Meka Dragon wrote:
>this VAN HALEN belt
hur hur hur
>this VAN HALEN belt
hur hur hur
Dr Duck wrote:
> As i see it, it doesn't matter whether one particular theory is right
> or wrong, it's whether unquestioningly buying into everything the
> government chooses to tell you without any form of critical analysis
> or independent thought is 'right or wrong'.
I didn't witness everything, but all 3 attack sites were blanketed in coverage as were the skies over NYC and DC.
I don't believe everything governments say - they have to lie sometimes. 9/11 wasn't one of those times and there is no convincing evidence to back it up.
The aliens conspiracy ? Don't believe in that. Titanic conspiracy ? Nope. Moon landings ? Nope. Agent orange ? Nope.
Too many people look for wild and massive conspiracies and don't notice the all too obvious deceptions going on. Take a look at the Iraq situation. MPS, papers and the "public" are all going nuts over it, and whilst they are going nuts about it American and British forces are moving into attack positions.
Most deceptions aren't conspiracies, it's just people not noticing the blinding obvious.
Oh, BTW, it can be confirmed that all planes on 9/11 returned with weapons as to hide this inventories would have to be faked, giving the impression a missile had been stolen and the Congressional investigation into 9/11 confirmed no weapons were used by the USAF that day, these people were looking for any mishandling by Bush of the crisis and found nothing. This page also has further details which if read, show why there is no conspiracy,
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/ 2224245.stm (REMOVETHESPACE)
~~Belldandy~~
> As i see it, it doesn't matter whether one particular theory is right
> or wrong, it's whether unquestioningly buying into everything the
> government chooses to tell you without any form of critical analysis
> or independent thought is 'right or wrong'.
I didn't witness everything, but all 3 attack sites were blanketed in coverage as were the skies over NYC and DC.
I don't believe everything governments say - they have to lie sometimes. 9/11 wasn't one of those times and there is no convincing evidence to back it up.
The aliens conspiracy ? Don't believe in that. Titanic conspiracy ? Nope. Moon landings ? Nope. Agent orange ? Nope.
Too many people look for wild and massive conspiracies and don't notice the all too obvious deceptions going on. Take a look at the Iraq situation. MPS, papers and the "public" are all going nuts over it, and whilst they are going nuts about it American and British forces are moving into attack positions.
Most deceptions aren't conspiracies, it's just people not noticing the blinding obvious.
Oh, BTW, it can be confirmed that all planes on 9/11 returned with weapons as to hide this inventories would have to be faked, giving the impression a missile had been stolen and the Congressional investigation into 9/11 confirmed no weapons were used by the USAF that day, these people were looking for any mishandling by Bush of the crisis and found nothing. This page also has further details which if read, show why there is no conspiracy,
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/ 2224245.stm (REMOVETHESPACE)
~~Belldandy~~
There's nothing wrong with questioning the "official line", but I do find it offensive when people write books expounding ridiculous conspiracy theories and making a mint out of other people's suffering. Like that French bloke and his 9/11 book.
Belldandy wrote:
> I don't need to believe the official line Bob, I saw it damn well
> happen that afternoon. There is no lie, only a small group of
> attention seeking sad people with over active imaginations and too
> much free time.
So you're saying you were really a witness to every aspect of everything that happened sept 11, there's nothing anyone's released that you've had to take on faith?
Bull.
As i see it, it doesn't matter whether one particular theory is right or wrong, it's whether unquestioningly buying into everything the government chooses to tell you without any form of critical analysis or independent thought is 'right or wrong'.
Surely at some time we need someone to suggest to people that the emperor might actually be naked?
> I don't need to believe the official line Bob, I saw it damn well
> happen that afternoon. There is no lie, only a small group of
> attention seeking sad people with over active imaginations and too
> much free time.
So you're saying you were really a witness to every aspect of everything that happened sept 11, there's nothing anyone's released that you've had to take on faith?
Bull.
As i see it, it doesn't matter whether one particular theory is right or wrong, it's whether unquestioningly buying into everything the government chooses to tell you without any form of critical analysis or independent thought is 'right or wrong'.
Surely at some time we need someone to suggest to people that the emperor might actually be naked?
Bob wrote:
> I will admit that a lot of people do take too much as fact but the
> same goes for you. You are just believeing the official line without
> really considering the chance that it could be a lie.
Okay, Bob, new video's today, and new intelligence released by the US shows Osama knew the Pentagon was a target, that the damage done ot it was planned and successful. Intelligence is said to be partly gathered by the UK according to Fox News this morning.
Next, a commercial airliner can lose an engine and still fly. A mid air explosion would scatter personal effects and wreckage all over the area. Was there any ? No. Burning oil ? No. Do any of the calls made by people on that flight say "we've been hit" ? No. Impact damage canot be caused by wreckage. The military hiding a mising missile ? Er, yeah, no one would notice I don't think...... Other stinger theory destroyer....the Secret Service do have Stingers, however there is no reason the Secret Service would be at the Pentagon as the President was no where near. Plus no one knew the plane was even missing as the transponder was off, how did anyone even know it was there to launch the imaginary missile ? Fighter's, for all their technology, need radar lock of some form and no AWACS were up at that point. The panes own radars could have picked them up at a certain range, but not quickly enough.
Next, congress was already a target. The White House would not be a target as the President was not there at the time. Psychological effect ? Pentagon and Congress make better targets for that.
I don't need to believe the official line Bob, I saw it damn well happen that afternoon. There is no lie, only a small group of attention seeking sad people with over active imaginations and too much free time.
~~Belldandy~~
> I will admit that a lot of people do take too much as fact but the
> same goes for you. You are just believeing the official line without
> really considering the chance that it could be a lie.
Okay, Bob, new video's today, and new intelligence released by the US shows Osama knew the Pentagon was a target, that the damage done ot it was planned and successful. Intelligence is said to be partly gathered by the UK according to Fox News this morning.
Next, a commercial airliner can lose an engine and still fly. A mid air explosion would scatter personal effects and wreckage all over the area. Was there any ? No. Burning oil ? No. Do any of the calls made by people on that flight say "we've been hit" ? No. Impact damage canot be caused by wreckage. The military hiding a mising missile ? Er, yeah, no one would notice I don't think...... Other stinger theory destroyer....the Secret Service do have Stingers, however there is no reason the Secret Service would be at the Pentagon as the President was no where near. Plus no one knew the plane was even missing as the transponder was off, how did anyone even know it was there to launch the imaginary missile ? Fighter's, for all their technology, need radar lock of some form and no AWACS were up at that point. The panes own radars could have picked them up at a certain range, but not quickly enough.
Next, congress was already a target. The White House would not be a target as the President was not there at the time. Psychological effect ? Pentagon and Congress make better targets for that.
I don't need to believe the official line Bob, I saw it damn well happen that afternoon. There is no lie, only a small group of attention seeking sad people with over active imaginations and too much free time.
~~Belldandy~~
I think everyone here should watch Capricorn One and a bit less of The X-Files.
Heres an idea. What if America realised that they could send equipment to the moon but just not people. Then it would be an easy hoax. Lauch like there are people on the craft. All the ground stations believe there are. Then get Mr Armstrong over to Area 51 where he can record his show. Then uplink it to the craft so that it can land and send the signal back. It could have happened or maybee not.
locky1133 wrote:
> You can't see a Flag on a moon that is millions of miles away with
> merely a Telescope!
The moon isn't millions of miles away. I think it's actually about 180,000 ish.
> You can't see a Flag on a moon that is millions of miles away with
> merely a Telescope!
The moon isn't millions of miles away. I think it's actually about 180,000 ish.
Armatige Shanks wrote:
> ??? What do you need a satellite for?
>
> Like Ive posted here already... just get hold of a telescope or half
> decent pair of binoculars, and look for yourself...
You can't see a Flag on a moon that is millions of miles away with merely a Telescope!
> ??? What do you need a satellite for?
>
> Like Ive posted here already... just get hold of a telescope or half
> decent pair of binoculars, and look for yourself...
You can't see a Flag on a moon that is millions of miles away with merely a Telescope!
Page: