|
Post by nathan on Mar 30, 2022 9:09:24 GMT -5
I think I need to put this in a larger font...maybe someone could read it to him!
Nathan - it was and is a hoax, and the author has admitted it....read on
Apollo 20 is, at its core, a good story: a successful mission into the unknown, and an unprecedented US-Soviet collaboration. The Apollo program concluded with a secret epilogue, revealing profound truths about humanity’s place in the universe.
But did it really happen? Less than a year after the videos surfaced, a French artist named Thierry Speth5 claimed to have been behind them. He had, in his career, made sculptures strikingly similar to the Mona Lisa alien, and apparently he was found to use the “retiredafb” name on several websites. The Apollo 20 story also suffers from several logical flaws. For example:
It would be impossible to conceal a Saturn V launch from Vandenberg (see footnotes). Furthermore, all Saturn Vs—four billion dollars apiece—are thoroughly accounted for, with the leftover rockets from Apollo either used for Skylab or put on display.
Why didn’t they make any effort to quarantine the alien? The videos show astronauts operating on the Mona Lisa, inside the lunar module and without wearing spacesuits.
Why do we only see the initial overflight, a distant shot of the city, and the alien? Rutledge mentioned details about the inside of the ship, but he apparently didn’t take pictures of it.
Countless thousands of people worked on each Apollo flight. Someone, from the mission controllers to the ground crew to the medical technicians, would have spilled the beans at some point. Why did it stay completely secret until 2007?
It was clear all along. You see, Apollo 20 was, in fact, a hoax. Nonsense cooked up for the internet age. Not only is it wildly implausible on its own terms, the creator has come out and admitted he fabricated everything. There is no alien spacecraft on the far side of the Moon. Nothing has been covered up. This whole article, from the beginning, was a joke. You need to post your source of information so the readers KNOW where you get it and you didn't write the article yourself. You didn't write that article above, right? Prag. I thought you wrote the article but I found you got it from this website below. The author is a skeptic and an unbeliever, prag just like you and your buddies on here.
letsgetoffthisrockalready.com/2021/04/18/apollo-20-the-dark-side-of-the-moon/
You need to read the Interview of the REAL William Rutledge the Captain of the Apollo20 mission NOT some author who had NOT been there himself to see it, he just expressed his opinion, Prag. You should KNOW better than that, Prag. You are doing a very poor job here to discredit me for believing William Rutledge true story.
www.angelismarriti.it/ANGELISMARRITI-ENG/REPORTS_ARTICLES/Apollo20-InterviewWithWilliamRutledge.htm
|
|
|
Post by nathan on Mar 30, 2022 9:20:13 GMT -5
Prag, take the lesson from Ram/Mountain.
6/17/19 Mountain/RAM wrote:
Anyway, I have to say that you are a very hard man to fool, Nathan. You meticulously research anything before you will believe it as fact. Such screening makes it very difficult to convince you of anything. I'm sure many on this board will share my views regarding your proneness to detail and doubting. Therefore I would strongly advise anyone who doubts anything that you post, that they likewise venture on the quest of meticulous research before doing so. You've set the standard. Let others follow.
Consider Nathan. An extremely intelligent character, who carries out meticulous research before presenting his views on here. Basically he is second to none. Have you noticed that there are several atheists on this board and every time Nathan engages them he wipes the floor with their arguments. Have you ever considered that these atheists are mere concoctions of Nathan, whom he shoots down time and again with his views, leaving himself the master of the debate. Generally there is no contest. Nathan wins hands down every time. They have no answer to him. Have you ever wondered why that is?
2) Ram/Mountain wrote in 6/25/21
Firstly, I do not want anyone to jump to the conclusion that I am supporting or encouraging Nathan! I have had my differences and dare I say heated exchanges with this dear fellow over the years. Nevertheless I do insist on a fair and unbalanced approach. I seek this from others, often unsuccessfully, in my exchanges, but do seek to extend this principle to others and that includes Nathan.
Secondly, Nathan has received much criticism and ridicule for his beliefs on this board and most recently on this thread. Such things are fair in my opinion if they are deserved, especially when a person brings it upon themselves. However, in assessing the merits of the case I always look at the evidence with an open mind in a fair, balanced way without showing fear, favor, malice, ill will to anyone. It was part of my training. I go where the evidence, properly viewed, leads me.
Much has been alleged about 'ridiculous statements' made by Nathan, but I look for the supporting evidence and I am at a loss to see even one, yes even one, carefully prepared, competent rebuttal of even one of his statements. Plenty of emotion, opinion, bias, beliefs, etc., but yet not a single properly constructed opposing viewpoint, sufficient in its content, to devour what Nathan expresses. That such arguments may be able to be prepared is not the issue. I simply await their presentation. I am not rejecting any statement made against Nathan, I merely ask for proper support for the various positions claimed.
I too used to, almost impulsively jump in and challenge some of Nathan's offerings. Take the occasion, some time ago now, when Nathan clearly stated for all to see, that the NAZIs had secret, even top secret bases in occupied Europe during the Second World War.
Initially I found such ideas amusing to say the least, and thankfully I remained quiet with this one, rather than jump in and challenge it, because not long afterwards I came across other verifiable sources fully supporting the claims that Nathan had made. The NAZIs did indeed have secret bases in occupied Europe during the Second World War, even top secret ones. This makes one careful, very careful, about being too swift to challenge such matters in the future, especially from the same source. Egg on the face to RAM (as it was then). That's not happening again!
|
|
|
Post by curlywurlysammagee on Mar 30, 2022 11:04:06 GMT -5
Prag, take the lesson from Ram/Mountain.
6/17/19 Mountain/RAM wrote: Anyway, I have to say that you are a very hard man to fool, Nathan. You meticulously research anything before you will believe it as fact. Such screening makes it very difficult to convince you of anything. I'm sure many on this board will share my views regarding your proneness to detail and doubting. Therefore I would strongly advise anyone who doubts anything that you post, that they likewise venture on the quest of meticulous research before doing so. You've set the standard. Let others follow. Consider Nathan. An extremely intelligent character, who carries out meticulous research before presenting his views on here. Basically he is second to none. Have you noticed that there are several atheists on this board and every time Nathan engages them he wipes the floor with their arguments. Have you ever considered that these atheists are mere concoctions of Nathan, whom he shoots down time and again with his views, leaving himself the master of the debate. Generally there is no contest. Nathan wins hands down every time. They have no answer to him. Have you ever wondered why that is? 2) Ram/Mountain wrote in 6/25/21 Firstly, I do not want anyone to jump to the conclusion that I am supporting or encouraging Nathan! I have had my differences and dare I say heated exchanges with this dear fellow over the years. Nevertheless I do insist on a fair and unbalanced approach. I seek this from others, often unsuccessfully, in my exchanges, but do seek to extend this principle to others and that includes Nathan. Secondly, Nathan has received much criticism and ridicule for his beliefs on this board and most recently on this thread. Such things are fair in my opinion if they are deserved, especially when a person brings it upon themselves. However, in assessing the merits of the case I always look at the evidence with an open mind in a fair, balanced way without showing fear, favor, malice, ill will to anyone. It was part of my training. I go where the evidence, properly viewed, leads me. Much has been alleged about 'ridiculous statements' made by Nathan, but I look for the supporting evidence and I am at a loss to see even one, yes even one, carefully prepared, competent rebuttal of even one of his statements. Plenty of emotion, opinion, bias, beliefs, etc., but yet not a single properly constructed opposing viewpoint, sufficient in its content, to devour what Nathan expresses. That such arguments may be able to be prepared is not the issue. I simply await their presentation. I am not rejecting any statement made against Nathan, I merely ask for proper support for the various positions claimed. I too used to, almost impulsively jump in and challenge some of Nathan's offerings. Take the occasion, some time ago now, when Nathan clearly stated for all to see, that the NAZIs had secret, even top secret bases in occupied Europe during the Second World War. Initially I found such ideas amusing to say the least, and thankfully I remained quiet with this one, rather than jump in and challenge it, because not long afterwards I came across other verifiable sources fully supporting the claims that Nathan had made. The NAZIs did indeed have secret bases in occupied Europe during the Second World War, even top secret ones. This makes one careful, very careful, about being too swift to challenge such matters in the future, especially from the same source. Egg on the face to RAM (as it was then). That's not happening again! NATHAN IS A SUCKER
|
|
|
Post by nathan02 on Mar 30, 2022 11:27:40 GMT -5
Prag, take the lesson from Ram/Mountain.
6/17/19 Mountain/RAM wrote: Anyway, I have to say that you are a very hard man to fool, Nathan. You meticulously research anything before you will believe it as fact. Such screening makes it very difficult to convince you of anything. I'm sure many on this board will share my views regarding your proneness to detail and doubting. Therefore I would strongly advise anyone who doubts anything that you post, that they likewise venture on the quest of meticulous research before doing so. You've set the standard. Let others follow. Consider Nathan. An extremely intelligent character, who carries out meticulous research before presenting his views on here. Basically he is second to none. Have you noticed that there are several atheists on this board and every time Nathan engages them he wipes the floor with their arguments. Have you ever considered that these atheists are mere concoctions of Nathan, whom he shoots down time and again with his views, leaving himself the master of the debate. Generally there is no contest. Nathan wins hands down every time. They have no answer to him. Have you ever wondered why that is? 2) Ram/Mountain wrote in 6/25/21 Firstly, I do not want anyone to jump to the conclusion that I am supporting or encouraging Nathan! I have had my differences and dare I say heated exchanges with this dear fellow over the years. Nevertheless I do insist on a fair and unbalanced approach. I seek this from others, often unsuccessfully, in my exchanges, but do seek to extend this principle to others and that includes Nathan. Secondly, Nathan has received much criticism and ridicule for his beliefs on this board and most recently on this thread. Such things are fair in my opinion if they are deserved, especially when a person brings it upon themselves. However, in assessing the merits of the case I always look at the evidence with an open mind in a fair, balanced way without showing fear, favor, malice, ill will to anyone. It was part of my training. I go where the evidence, properly viewed, leads me. Much has been alleged about 'ridiculous statements' made by Nathan, but I look for the supporting evidence and I am at a loss to see even one, yes even one, carefully prepared, competent rebuttal of even one of his statements. Plenty of emotion, opinion, bias, beliefs, etc., but yet not a single properly constructed opposing viewpoint, sufficient in its content, to devour what Nathan expresses. That such arguments may be able to be prepared is not the issue. I simply await their presentation. I am not rejecting any statement made against Nathan, I merely ask for proper support for the various positions claimed. I too used to, almost impulsively jump in and challenge some of Nathan's offerings. Take the occasion, some time ago now, when Nathan clearly stated for all to see, that the NAZIs had secret, even top secret bases in occupied Europe during the Second World War. Initially I found such ideas amusing to say the least, and thankfully I remained quiet with this one, rather than jump in and challenge it, because not long afterwards I came across other verifiable sources fully supporting the claims that Nathan had made. The NAZIs did indeed have secret bases in occupied Europe during the Second World War, even top secret ones. This makes one careful, very careful, about being too swift to challenge such matters in the future, especially from the same source. Egg on the face to RAM (as it was then). That's not happening again! NATHAN IS A SUCKER** Come on doubting Thomas you and your buddies on here MUST do a better job.... than just to say it's a hoax, a Fraud and a sucker. That is all you can come up with NO Rebuttal against the MAN/Captain of the Apollo 20 Mission on the far side of the moon then you are a biggest looser of them all.
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Mar 30, 2022 11:29:50 GMT -5
You're on shaky ground Nathan. Claiming that God convinces you of conspiracy theories is bordering on blasphemy. Is that the best come back you can come up with? that is a pathetic come back. You and your unbelievers don't even understand or know what is reality or conspiracy theories are, elder.Maybe curlywurlysammagee had a better comeback... Insanity.
|
|
|
Post by nathan02 on Mar 30, 2022 11:48:45 GMT -5
Is that the best come back you can come up with? that is a pathetic come back. You and your unbelievers don't even understand or know what is reality or conspiracy theories are, elder. Maybe curlywurlysammagee had a better comeback... Insanity. ** All he ever come up with sillies words just like you such as fraud, insanity, sucker and so on without any good rebuttal informatio. Words are cheap shots and don't help much for his side of thing.
|
|
|
Post by curlywurlysammagee on Mar 30, 2022 13:19:42 GMT -5
** All he ever come up with sillies words just like you such as fraud, insanity, sucker and so on without any good rebuttal informatio. Words are cheap shots and don't help much for his side of thing. The problems with your stories have been pointed out to you many times over the years. That you are too thick to take that on board is your problem, not anyone elses.
|
|
|
Post by Annan on Mar 30, 2022 14:07:00 GMT -5
You can tell when someone gets under Natue’s skin as he writes epistle after epistle and resorts to copious amounts of copy. 🤣
|
|
|
Post by nathan02 on Mar 30, 2022 14:30:47 GMT -5
** All he ever come up with sillies words just like you such as fraud, insanity, sucker and so on without any good rebuttal informatio. Words are cheap shots and don't help much for his side of thing. The problems with your stories have been pointed out to you many times over the years. That you are too thick to take that on board is your problem, not anyone elses. ** You and your doubting Thomas rebuttal on are too weak! Against what I posted most of the time. You guys and gals need to do better to change my mind to accept your point of views, opinions, and suggestions.
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Mar 30, 2022 14:55:07 GMT -5
The problems with your stories have been pointed out to you many times over the years. That you are too thick to take that on board is your problem, not anyone elses. ** You and your doubting Thomas rebuttal on are too weak! Against what I posted most of the time. You guys and gals need to do better to change my mind to accept your point of views, opinions, and suggestions. Your conspiracy theories and science fiction are too stupid for us to even know where to start. Besides...a man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still.
|
|
|
Post by mrdobalina on Mar 30, 2022 15:06:54 GMT -5
The problems with your stories have been pointed out to you many times over the years. That you are too thick to take that on board is your problem, not anyone elses. ** You and your doubting Thomas rebuttal on are too weak! Against what I posted most of the time. You guys and gals need to do better to change my mind to accept your point of views, opinions, and suggestions. I guess you have proved curlys point right there. Doubting Thomas is another typical Christian cop out answer when on the back foot, and contains zero substance, apart from to lay the blame with the other person for not drinking from your cup of stupidity without question. It is impossible to reason a man out of an opinion he didn't reason himself into in the first place. So, to round up the narcissistic gaslighting in that post, 1 "you and your doubting thomas rebuttal" 2 "Too weak against your superiority" 3 "We need to do better 4 ''To change YOUR mind 5 "To accept our opinions" That has to be some kind of world record for maximum gaslighting in a minimum of words, and not two full lines of text.
|
|
|
Post by Grant on Mar 30, 2022 15:12:25 GMT -5
The problems with your stories have been pointed out to you many times over the years. That you are too thick to take that on board is your problem, not anyone elses. ** You and your doubting Thomas rebuttal on are too weak! Against what I posted most of the time. You guys and gals need to do better to change my mind to accept your point of views, opinions, and suggestions. Nathan, it is your arguments which are weak. Do you wonder why no one believes what you write but do what Prags and others write. It's because your information is too weak. You doubting Thomas, numbers speak.
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Mar 30, 2022 15:14:47 GMT -5
The problems with your stories have been pointed out to you many times over the years. That you are too thick to take that on board is your problem, not anyone elses. ** You and your doubting Thomas rebuttal on are too weak! Against what I posted most of the time. You guys and gals need to do better to change my mind to accept your point of views, opinions, and suggestions. I nominate Wally for this task. You both live in PNW so give up sniffing gas for a day and sit down with Wally and listen to him without an "I know better" attitude.
|
|
|
Post by nathan02 on Mar 30, 2022 16:05:19 GMT -5
** You and your doubting Thomas rebuttal on are too weak! Against what I posted most of the time. You guys and gals need to do better to change my mind to accept your point of views, opinions, and suggestions. I nominate Wally for this task. You both live in PNW so give up sniffing gas for a day and sit down with Wally and listen to him without an "I know better" attitude. ** I do listen to Wally's advice... Come on what is this sniffing gas stuff? How low can to stoop, elder.
|
|
|
Post by nathan02 on Mar 30, 2022 16:08:38 GMT -5
** You and your doubting Thomas rebuttal on are too weak! Against what I posted most of the time. You guys and gals need to do better to change my mind to accept your point of views, opinions, and suggestions. Nathan, it is your arguments which are weak. Do you wonder why no one believes what you write but do what Prags and others write. It's because your information is too weak. You doubting Thomas, numbers speak. ** I always back up what I believe it is you doubting Thomas and unbelievers don't get it or believe it so be it. It is what it is, we have agree to disagree.
|
|
|
Post by mrdobalina on Mar 30, 2022 16:15:45 GMT -5
** You and your doubting Thomas rebuttal on are too weak! Against what I posted most of the time. You guys and gals need to do better to change my mind to accept your point of views, opinions, and suggestions. I guess you have proved curlys point right there. Doubting Thomas is another typical Christian cop out answer when on the back foot, and contains zero substance, apart from to lay the blame with the other person for not drinking from your cup of stupidity without question. It is impossible to reason a man out of an opinion he didn't reason himself into in the first place. So, to round up the narcissistic gaslighting in that post, 1 "you and your doubting thomas rebuttal" 2 "Too weak against your superiority" 3 "We need to do better 4 ''To change YOUR mind 5 "To accept our opinions" That has to be some kind of world record for maximum gaslighting in a minimum of words, and not two full lines of text.
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Mar 30, 2022 16:48:44 GMT -5
Nathan, it is your arguments which are weak. Do you wonder why no one believes what you write but do what Prags and others write. It's because your information is too weak. You doubting Thomas, numbers speak. ** I always back up what I believe it is you doubting Thomas and unbelievers don't get it or believe it so be it. It is what it is, we have agree to disagree. You back up what you believe with conspiracy websites and YouTube clips that prove nothing apart from your naivety, stubbornness and lack of cognitive ability.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Mar 30, 2022 17:11:55 GMT -5
Why have you waited so long to tell us that? ** I have been telling you and those like you over 10 years or longer! NonE, have you been sleeping in the classes again? No. I just haven't been reading your posts.
|
|
|
Post by nathan02 on Mar 30, 2022 17:19:49 GMT -5
** I have been telling you and those like you over 10 years or longer! NonE, have you been sleeping in the classes again? No. I just haven't been reading your posts. *** Thanks, goodness one less doubting Thomas to deal with, you give me a short break from you for sure.
|
|
|
Post by nathan02 on Mar 30, 2022 17:37:07 GMT -5
** I always back up what I believe it is you doubting Thomas and unbelievers don't get it or believe it so be it. It is what it is, we have agree to disagree. You back up what you believe with conspiracy websites and YouTube clips that prove nothing apart from your naivety, stubbornness and lack of cognitive ability. ** The people I presented or back up my belief have been involved with the events, they shared what they had seen and heard. And you unbelievers don't believe their stories! Calling their stories conspiracy theories. You are so pathetic and very stunborn about it... And you say I am stunborn and naive because I don't agree with your unbelief. Now, I see and understand how Jesus and the apostles felt so upset at the unbelieving Jews, Pharisees, and Scribes who doubted at their words, teachings and preaching to them. Jesus said he was like a mother hens who tried to call her little chicks to come under his wings of protection from Predators and they would NOT. It's still the same today.
|
|
|
Post by Grant on Mar 30, 2022 19:01:32 GMT -5
You back up what you believe with conspiracy websites and YouTube clips that prove nothing apart from your naivety, stubbornness and lack of cognitive ability. ** The people I presented or back up my belief have been involved with the events, they shared what they had seen and heard. And you unbelievers don't believe their stories! Calling their stories conspiracy theories. You are so pathetic and very stunborn about it... And you say I am stunborn and naive because I don't agree with your unbelief. Now, I see and understand how Jesus and the apostles felt so upset at the unbelieving Jews, Pharisees, and Scribes who doubted at their words, teachings and preaching to them. Jesus said he was like a mother hens who tried to call her little chicks to come under his wings of protection from Predators and they would NOT. It's still the same today. You don't believe what others on here post so that makes you the unbeliever and doubting Thomas.
|
|
|
Post by mrdobalina on Mar 30, 2022 19:03:47 GMT -5
** You and your doubting Thomas rebuttal on are too weak! Against what I posted most of the time. You guys and gals need to do better to change my mind to accept your point of views, opinions, and suggestions. I guess you have proved curlys point right there. Doubting Thomas is another typical Christian cop out answer when on the back foot, and contains zero substance, apart from to lay the blame with the other person for not drinking from your cup of stupidity without question. It is impossible to reason a man out of an opinion he didn't reason himself into in the first place. So, to round up the narcissistic gaslighting in that post, 1 "you and your doubting thomas rebuttal" 2 "Too weak against your superiority" 3 "We need to do better 4 ''To change YOUR mind 5 "To accept our opinions" That has to be some kind of world record for maximum gaslighting in a minimum of words, and not two full lines of text.
|
|
|
Post by intelchips on Mar 30, 2022 19:14:25 GMT -5
I guess you have proved curlys point right there. Doubting Thomas is another typical Christian cop out answer when on the back foot, and contains zero substance, apart from to lay the blame with the other person for not drinking from your cup of stupidity without question. It is impossible to reason a man out of an opinion he didn't reason himself into in the first place. So, to round up the narcissistic gaslighting in that post, 1 "you and your doubting thomas rebuttal" 2 "Too weak against your superiority" 3 "We need to do better 4 ''To change YOUR mind 5 "To accept our opinions" That has to be some kind of world record for maximum gaslighting in a minimum of words, and not two full lines of text. Nathan's point of view
|
|
|
Post by nathan02 on Mar 30, 2022 19:16:54 GMT -5
** The people I presented or back up my belief have been involved with the events, they shared what they had seen and heard. And you unbelievers don't believe their stories! Calling their stories conspiracy theories. You are so pathetic and very stunborn about it... And you say I am stunborn and naive because I don't agree with your unbelief. Now, I see and understand how Jesus and the apostles felt so upset at the unbelieving Jews, Pharisees, and Scribes who doubted at their words, teachings and preaching to them. Jesus said he was like a mother hens who tried to call her little chicks to come under his wings of protection from Predators and they would NOT. It's still the same today. You don't believe what others on here post so that makes you the unbeliever and doubting Thomas. ** If you are correct then I am a believer! and I will "Like" your posts and praise you for it.
|
|
|
Post by Pragmatic on Mar 30, 2022 19:53:30 GMT -5
I think I need to put this in a larger font...maybe someone could read it to him!
Nathan - it was and is a hoax, and the author has admitted it....read on
Apollo 20 is, at its core, a good story: a successful mission into the unknown, and an unprecedented US-Soviet collaboration. The Apollo program concluded with a secret epilogue, revealing profound truths about humanity’s place in the universe.
But did it really happen? Less than a year after the videos surfaced, a French artist named Thierry Speth5 claimed to have been behind them. He had, in his career, made sculptures strikingly similar to the Mona Lisa alien, and apparently he was found to use the “retiredafb” name on several websites. The Apollo 20 story also suffers from several logical flaws. For example:
It would be impossible to conceal a Saturn V launch from Vandenberg (see footnotes). Furthermore, all Saturn Vs—four billion dollars apiece—are thoroughly accounted for, with the leftover rockets from Apollo either used for Skylab or put on display.
Why didn’t they make any effort to quarantine the alien? The videos show astronauts operating on the Mona Lisa, inside the lunar module and without wearing spacesuits.
Why do we only see the initial overflight, a distant shot of the city, and the alien? Rutledge mentioned details about the inside of the ship, but he apparently didn’t take pictures of it.
Countless thousands of people worked on each Apollo flight. Someone, from the mission controllers to the ground crew to the medical technicians, would have spilled the beans at some point. Why did it stay completely secret until 2007?
It was clear all along. You see, Apollo 20 was, in fact, a hoax. Nonsense cooked up for the internet age. Not only is it wildly implausible on its own terms, the creator has come out and admitted he fabricated everything. There is no alien spacecraft on the far side of the Moon. Nothing has been covered up. This whole article, from the beginning, was a joke. You need to post your source of information so the readers KNOW where you get it and you didn't write the article yourself. You didn't write that article above, right? Prag. I thought you wrote the article but I found you got it from this website below. The author is a skeptic and an unbeliever, prag just like you and your buddies on here.
letsgetoffthisrockalready.com/2021/04/18/apollo-20-the-dark-side-of-the-moon/
You need to read the Interview of the REAL William Rutledge the Captain of the Apollo20 mission NOT some author who had NOT been there himself to see it, he just expressed his opinion, Prag. You should KNOW better than that, Prag. You are doing a very poor job here to discredit me for believing William Rutledge true story.
www.angelismarriti.it/ANGELISMARRITI-ENG/REPORTS_ARTICLES/Apollo20-InterviewWithWilliamRutledge.htm
Actually, I emailed a someone I know, who works in Germany in Comms for the ISS, and asked "how do you deal with a forum kook who believes all this Apollo 20 rubbish"? She emailed that text to me.
In addition, let me add:
There is no way a Saturn V could be launched without it being widely known, for a number of technical reasons, not withstanding communications requirements, at that time.
I have already told you that the Saturn Vs have all been accounted for, and the one slated for Apollo 20 was used in a Skylab launch.
Any Commander or had to have been in a previous mission, usually three back, as part of Nasa's policy.
There was no Rutledge in any previous Apollo mission.
Because of the thousands of people involved in a Saturn V launch, which was required for escaping Earth Orbit, and Lunar injection, there is no way someone would not have squawked if it was true.
But as I was explained, the person who dreamed it all up, has admitted it was a joke/hoax, and you swallowed, and are now too proud to admit that your faith is misplaced.
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Mar 30, 2022 20:00:57 GMT -5
You back up what you believe with conspiracy websites and YouTube clips that prove nothing apart from your naivety, stubbornness and lack of cognitive ability. ** The people I presented or back up my belief have been involved with the events, they shared what they had seen and heard. And you unbelievers don't believe their stories! Calling their stories conspiracy theories. You are so pathetic and very stunborn about it... And you say I am stunborn and naive because I don't agree with your unbelief. Now, I see and understand how Jesus and the apostles felt so upset at the unbelieving Jews, Pharisees, and Scribes who doubted at their words, teachings and preaching to them. Jesus said he was like a mother hens who tried to call her little chicks to come under his wings of protection from Predators and they would NOT. It's still the same today. You compare yourself with Jesus but you're nothing like him. The garbage you preach in his name is a disgrace.
|
|
|
Post by nathan on Mar 30, 2022 20:05:47 GMT -5
Actually, I emailed a someone I know, who works in Germany in Comms for the ISS, and asked "how do you deal with a forum kook who believes all this Apollo 20 rubbish"? She emailed that text to me.
In addition, let me add:
There is no way a Saturn V could be launched without it being widely known, for a number of technical reasons, not withstanding communications requirements, at that time.
I have already told you that the Saturn Vs have all been accounted for, and the one slated for Apollo 20 was used in a Skylab launch.
Any Commander or had to have been in a previous mission, usually three back, as part of Nasa's policy.
There was no Rutledge in any previous Apollo mission.
Because of the thousands of people involved in a Saturn V launch, which was required for escaping Earth Orbit, and Lunar injection, there is no way someone would not have squawked if it was true.
But as I was explained, the person who dreamed it all up, has admitted it was a joke/hoax, and you swallowed, and are now too proud to admit that your faith is misplaced.
It was a TOP Secret mission between USSR and US Secret Space program your friend was too young to KNOW about it and she didn't have a top secret clearance back then either. Did you sent the interview between the reporter and Rutledge website address to your friend? Let her see the video of the HUGE Space Ship, the Mona Lisa human being lived 1.5 Billion years ago, and the Cathedral city on the far side of the moon, OK.
By the way, Rutledge was the commander of the Apollo19 and 20 mission.
www.angelismarriti.it/ANGELISMARRITI-ENG/REPORTS_ARTICLES/Apollo20-InterviewWithWilliamRutledge.htm
How old was your friend back in 1976 when the Apollo20 when the mission launched?
|
|
|
Post by verna on Mar 30, 2022 20:40:24 GMT -5
Oh my good lord. There is no point. Just ignore the man.
|
|