Jockndoris wrote: Attention sts60
The reason I have not responded is that I have been away from my desk for nearly three weeks of the six since I first put up my post.The time between answers is not the problem. The problem is that you put no thought into your answers, nor do you attempt to learn anything between answers.
Also I am not as skilled as you chaps at picking up the quotes to respond directly to them but I am here to respond to any oustanding points.No, your history here does not support that assertion.
You never answered the bulk of
my questions and rebuttals to your opening post, in which post I noted that you couldn't even figure out the source of your quote - not a promising start, and you went downhill from there.
You eventually waved your hands vaguely about "lot 171" - a place you have never bothered to identify - and made some garbled, self-contradictory claim that the places you thought looked too much like another place didn't actually look like another place, but have ignored
subsequent rebuttals, including
an explanation as to your completely incorrect handwaving about "roundabout" trajectories, as well as
a dissection of your profoundly silly claims about "three crafts to Mars" and "Mission Control simulators". You have responded to none of these in any substantive manner.
You abandoned the
"Who shot Armstrong?" thread
you started on the old board, yet brought it up again here despite the fact that the very simple explanation had been provided to you
years ago!
The fact that there have been 2772 views and 128 replies shows that I have caused a fair amount of interestDon't hurt your arm patting yourself on the back. There are no other conspiracists active on this board, and the bulk of the replies corrected your many wrong claims, but you have largely ignored them only to reappear as if nothing had happened.
and nobody has shot me down in flames.Fantasy.
You have repeatedly demonstrated that you don't understand the engineering or scientific principles involved, have made
many errors of fact, and your opinions are simply bald and manifestly uninformed assertions. I alone have corrected something like a dozen major errors you have made.
I think NASA are doing the same thing again that they did it the 1960's and give out far too much detail because thats what they think the American public expect for the money spent (some estimates show $7 for every preson in America).Wrong. Again. NASA puts out so much detail because it is the organization's
mission to disseminate scientific information.
I want them to succeed and show us something useful that we have not seen before. Surely the Curiosity is going to find something new. You've previously made claims about "nothing new" which were promptly shown to be wrong. You have yet to admit your errors.
Why I am still shouting about the original hoax is because all the scientists in other countries have assumed that they did it and have not looked for other ways of getting to the Moon or Mars. No, this is completely untrue. You have no idea what you're talking about.
Completely different ideas are needed like anti-gravity or using springs... Troll. And not a very entertaining one either.
