Denying the Apollo Moon Landings:...

[really?]

[SydneyPSIder]

[Misha]

Really wrote:

"You are right it is beyond the purview of this thread. What I have in mind are the totally weird ct's that have no facts to back them up, sound implausible because of the scope required of thousands of people to keep their mouths shut, appear out of thin air, are created by a small minority of people that for many reasons don't like the mainstream reports. So there's really nothing to debate here with your example above. What is debatable is your statement that facts can be dredged up by going down the rabbits hole. I've yet to see or hear of that happening. On the flipside, if you are looking for Alice or the White Rabbit then you will always have success. If that is ones goal success is abundant."

Really, you're still missing the barn on this. One, let's take the analogy of UFOs compared to all the conspiracies out there. I am only interested in the small viable percentages of UFOs/conspiracies which cannot be explained and have meat behind them. You're bathwatering all conspiracies under one umbrella. Two, the scope in which you say conspiracies/programs cannot be kept secret does not speak of the cellular nature and the consumption factor. I have to agree with SydneyPSIder that your post is empty. I just provided you with a clear example with what David Irving has put forth. Yet, you ducked it.

[really?]

[Misha]

[ProfWag]

[Misha]

[SydneyPSIder]

[Arouet]

[really?]

I second the plea for PW to come back.

[Misha]

[ProfWag]

[Misha]

[Arouet]

Ouch, GL PW! Welcome back!

[Arouet]