"There are many things I cannot vouch for to do with the Apollo missions because I don't understand them..."
Unfortunately for you there are a lot of things related to this that you do not understand. I have neither the time nor the inclination to attempt to override your ignorance in the matter. When you're ready, if ever …
"There are many things I cannot vouch for to do with the Apollo missions because I don't understand them..."
Unfortunately for you there are a lot of things related to this that you do not understand. I have neither the time nor the inclination to attempt to override your ignorance in the matter. When you're ready, if ever you get to that point, you'll figure it out as long as you do it before Trump's censorship and clamping down on truth campaign haven't shortcircuited your ability to do so, which will likely be sooner than later.
Sure, there are lots of things I don't understand but my way of determining reality is to treat it like a jigsaw puzzle. You can work out the image of a jigsaw without having every piece of the puzzle. If I thought that a very good understanding of physics was required, eg, how rockets work (or don't work), etc I'd leave the moon landings alone - I'd recognise my knowledge was too limited to determine whether they happened or not ... but the thing is there are many pieces of the puzzle that don't require a high level of scientific understanding and they very much align with the reality of the landings so I have no problem determining they happened.
These are two irrefutable facts that disbelievers gloss over but, in fact, are extremely significant:
--- Prominent anti-moonlanding proponents including Bill Kaysing, Dave McGowan, Massimo Mazzucco and Bart Sibrel are agents - they're the shills not me - who between them have not put forward a single fact that refutes the reality of the moon landings. If you think they have, please let me know just one.
--- No disbeliever has picked up their being shills (in fact, some disbelievers DO pick up that Dave McGowan IS a shill in relation to other subjects but they think what he says in Wagging the Moondoggie is correct when, in fact, it is all false, distortion or irrelevancy).
In your claim about Nixon's phone call, you gave zero indication that you had done any due diligence on what the explanation is for how the call was made. Like most disbelievers of the moon landings you simply confine yourself to the anti-moon landing propaganda bubble and don't bother checking what you believe to be true against what others have to say on the subject.
Right now you're in a gun fight with a plastic butter knife.
Come back when you have some more of your jigsaw puzzle pieces, because those of us that have those pieces are reading this scratching our heads asking what the reasons are why you don't or worse, cannot get them.
It's not complex. And BTW, you are clearly controlled by narratives created for the express purpose of having you believe them amongst lies.
Sorry, this is your issue and problem to figure out. No one can do it for you. But right now you're pretty lost.
Anyway, I think we're finished here. Your mind is not open. The question is why not. Again, I hardly rule out any notions that you get paid to do this
I can see we're making no progress here. I'll leave you to your beliefs as you must leave me to mine.
Just to point out that I worked out that Operation Northwoods was a fake false flag proposal - no one else has that I can see. My special interest is the targeting of those of us with a strong willingness to recognise the many false narratives we are bombarded with. Obviously, those in power don't simply target those willing to believe them, they also put great efforts into targeting those willing to disbelieve them, hence the controlled opposition that abounds. And when a rare, superficially implausible event such as the moon landings happens you can bet your bottom dollar they will exploit that to misdirect the disbelievers ... which they have so clearly done with Bill Kaysing et al ... and they no doubt predicted that when one of the disbeliever ilk - namely yours truly - pointed out these agents that this glaring fact would simply be ignored ... in exactly the same way that the believers ignore the massive discrepancies in official narratives.
I'm tellin' ya. And how does one not see reality there, particularly when people such as Buzz Aldrin of all people have admitted that it didn't happen. Then there's literally, what, hundreds of circumstantial pieces to the puzzle, like an astronaut on the DARK SIDE of the space capsule, with EVERYTHING ELSE in complete shadows, lit up like a Christmas tree in mega-hi-def resolution while everything else looks like it was shot with a potato cam in 1st-gen photographic technology.
You're a shill.
"There are many things I cannot vouch for to do with the Apollo missions because I don't understand them..."
Unfortunately for you there are a lot of things related to this that you do not understand. I have neither the time nor the inclination to attempt to override your ignorance in the matter. When you're ready, if ever you get to that point, you'll figure it out as long as you do it before Trump's censorship and clamping down on truth campaign haven't shortcircuited your ability to do so, which will likely be sooner than later.
Sure, there are lots of things I don't understand but my way of determining reality is to treat it like a jigsaw puzzle. You can work out the image of a jigsaw without having every piece of the puzzle. If I thought that a very good understanding of physics was required, eg, how rockets work (or don't work), etc I'd leave the moon landings alone - I'd recognise my knowledge was too limited to determine whether they happened or not ... but the thing is there are many pieces of the puzzle that don't require a high level of scientific understanding and they very much align with the reality of the landings so I have no problem determining they happened.
These are two irrefutable facts that disbelievers gloss over but, in fact, are extremely significant:
--- Prominent anti-moonlanding proponents including Bill Kaysing, Dave McGowan, Massimo Mazzucco and Bart Sibrel are agents - they're the shills not me - who between them have not put forward a single fact that refutes the reality of the moon landings. If you think they have, please let me know just one.
--- No disbeliever has picked up their being shills (in fact, some disbelievers DO pick up that Dave McGowan IS a shill in relation to other subjects but they think what he says in Wagging the Moondoggie is correct when, in fact, it is all false, distortion or irrelevancy).
In your claim about Nixon's phone call, you gave zero indication that you had done any due diligence on what the explanation is for how the call was made. Like most disbelievers of the moon landings you simply confine yourself to the anti-moon landing propaganda bubble and don't bother checking what you believe to be true against what others have to say on the subject.
Right now you're in a gun fight with a plastic butter knife.
Come back when you have some more of your jigsaw puzzle pieces, because those of us that have those pieces are reading this scratching our heads asking what the reasons are why you don't or worse, cannot get them.
It's not complex. And BTW, you are clearly controlled by narratives created for the express purpose of having you believe them amongst lies.
Sorry, this is your issue and problem to figure out. No one can do it for you. But right now you're pretty lost.
Anyway, I think we're finished here. Your mind is not open. The question is why not. Again, I hardly rule out any notions that you get paid to do this
I can see we're making no progress here. I'll leave you to your beliefs as you must leave me to mine.
Just to point out that I worked out that Operation Northwoods was a fake false flag proposal - no one else has that I can see. My special interest is the targeting of those of us with a strong willingness to recognise the many false narratives we are bombarded with. Obviously, those in power don't simply target those willing to believe them, they also put great efforts into targeting those willing to disbelieve them, hence the controlled opposition that abounds. And when a rare, superficially implausible event such as the moon landings happens you can bet your bottom dollar they will exploit that to misdirect the disbelievers ... which they have so clearly done with Bill Kaysing et al ... and they no doubt predicted that when one of the disbeliever ilk - namely yours truly - pointed out these agents that this glaring fact would simply be ignored ... in exactly the same way that the believers ignore the massive discrepancies in official narratives.
https://petraliverani.substack.com/p/operation-northwoods-false-flag-proposal
OK Chief. Thanks for the relatively civil discourse, for that I am grateful in disagreement. : )
I do hope he gets paid for putting all that energy and time into shilling for NASA's endless hoaxes.
I'm tellin' ya. And how does one not see reality there, particularly when people such as Buzz Aldrin of all people have admitted that it didn't happen. Then there's literally, what, hundreds of circumstantial pieces to the puzzle, like an astronaut on the DARK SIDE of the space capsule, with EVERYTHING ELSE in complete shadows, lit up like a Christmas tree in mega-hi-def resolution while everything else looks like it was shot with a potato cam in 1st-gen photographic technology.