View Active Topics          Latest 100 Topics          View Your Posts          Switch to Mobile

Jarrah White - The Leading Expert in the Moon Hoax Debate

Discuss Conspiracies and Cover Ups - e.g. 9/11 Truth, JFK Assassination, New World Order, Roswell, Moon Hoax, Secret Societies, etc. whatever conspiracy floats your boat.

Re: Jarrah White whips NASA reps in Moon Hoax Debate!

Postby Eternally Learning » 22 Jun 2011, 04:27

Yup. That's what I thought. Thanks for clearing that up Scepcop. You really are a class-act.
User avatar
Eternally Learning
 
Posts: 56
Joined: 24 Mar 2011, 00:28






Re: Jarrah White whips NASA reps in Moon Hoax Debate!

Postby Eternally Learning » 23 Jun 2011, 00:14

Scepcop wrote:I do not run from questions or issues. I answer them, but I do not engage in endless circles with no point except ad hominem attacks.


Just wondering; have you ever stopped to consider for a moment that the endless circles may be caused by your actions as well as (or even instead of) the other people's? Also, have you ever considered that perhaps what you think of as ad hominem attacks might conceivably actually be accurate outside observations of your behavior? As a self-proclaimed skeptical thinker, I think one of the most important aspects of being under that label is the ability and desire to be most critical of one's own positions and behaviors. I know, for my part at any rate, if a multitude of people kept criticizing me for the same exact things over and over again, I would seriously consider whether they are right or not.
User avatar
Eternally Learning
 
Posts: 56
Joined: 24 Mar 2011, 00:28

Apollo Zero and Kubrick's Odyssey

Postby Scepcop » 15 Jul 2011, 18:14

You guys should check out these new moon hoax films just uploaded to youtube. They are awesome and worth watching! I just saw them and was stunned by them.

Apollo Zero



Kubrick's Odyssey



Apollo Zero makes some great logical points about why the moon landings were improbable and unproven. It is simple to follow and understand. It makes many compelling points and explains the psychology of scientists who face career suicide if they were to ever objectively question the authenticity of the moon landings. One of its valid arguments is that "If NASA is unable to send a man or monkey more than 400 miles above the Earth today, then how would it have sent men to the Moon 240,000 miles away in the late 60's and all the way back again?"

Kubrick's Odyssey is like a mind blowing thriller. In it, Jay Weidner shows many compelling clues that Stanley Kubrick left us in his film "The Shining" that tell the story of how he faked the Apollo moon landing footage and the turmoil he went through in his personal life when he made the deal with the US government that he regretted. That might sound crazy, but when you watch the clues unravel, your jaw will drop and you will be hooked. Whether you believe it or not, you will find it gripping and suspenseful. It is a masterpiece and has gotten rave reviews.

On Amazon.com, a reviewer wrote:

"5.0 out of 5 stars OMG! Your mind will be BLOWN! Kubrick was a genius, and so is Weidner!, April 16, 2011
By
PAPERCROSS - See all my reviews
This review is from: Kubrick's Odyssey: Secrets Hidden in the Films (DVD)
This movie totally changed my mind on so many levels. The information is staggering. .

If you'd like to be broken out of the Matrix and see how far down the rabbit hole goes, buy this film and watch it three times at least? I am going to show this one to my friends to freak them out.

And another thing,
To see my favorite movie, "The Shining," taken apart and exposed as a series of secret messages from the director to the viewing audience was nothing less than brilliant, not to mention genius.
Multiple viewings are required to get all the info in this powerhouse of a documentary, it's super rich with great theories, visual evidence, and aha moments.
Every kubrick fan should own this film. I want the other two films to come out, NOW!?

The final word.....Awesome! "


Also, check out these interviews with Jay Weidner, producer of "Kubrick's Odyssey". They are mind blowing and way deep down the rabbit hole. What he says about Kubrick, Saturn, and the secrets of the elite will leave your jaw dropping, whether you believe them or not. They are very entertaining interviews and got me hooked. Totally out there.



“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Scepcop
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29

Apollo 11 Press Conference: Sadness and Guilt

Postby Scepcop » 15 Jul 2011, 20:04

You guys have got to see this one. Here is the one hour press conference after Apollo 11 returned to Earth. In it, you can obviously see the sadness and guilt on the faces of Armstrong, Collins and Aldrin as they speak before reporters. It's undeniable. They are obviously uncomfortable and depressed. Nearly every comment on YouTube below the video noticed the obvious. As one comment said, these astronauts must have been under enormous pressure to go along with the hoax, because after what happened with the Apollo One fire, they knew that the consequences of non-compliance was death. So they had no choice but to go along with the charade.



Also, someone on my forum made this sensible valid point:

http://www.happierabroad.com/forum/view ... c&start=15

There is no question in my mind that the lunar landings are fake, for one very important reason that many people often neglect. That is Cosmic Ray Radiation that is likely instantly fatal to astronauts. There is no material known to man that can shield these rays from the Sun should they take course towards our brave astronauts. Any means of detecting these rays would be useless, because by definition they travel at the speed of light, and there'd be no time to escape.

Astrophysicists today in articles make quotes such as, "it is amazing how NASA did this without adequate shielding..."

http://www.findingdulcinea.com/news/sci ... ions-.html


Space Radiation Hinders NASA’s Mars Ambitions
September 17, 2009 02:45 PM (Click for citation)

by Anita Gutierrez-Folch
Faced with proposed budget cuts and a need for new technologies that would protect astronauts from radiation, NASA may have to put Mars exploration on hold.


NASA’s plans to send astronauts on an exploratory mission to Mars orbit may be shelved due to the threat of radiation. A White House panel set to review NASA’s human space flight missions “suggest[ed] sending astronauts to one of Mars's moons, Phobos or Deimos,” David Shiga reports for New Scientist. But the galactic cosmic rays outside low-Earth orbit “can slice through DNA molecules when they pass through living cells,” leading to cancer, Shiga explains.

(They never conquered the radiation problem. - )

According to the summary report of the Review of U.S. Human Space Flight Plans Committee released last week, “Mars is not an easy place to visit with existing technology and without a substantial investment of resources.” Although the report referred to Mars as “the most scientifically interesting destination in the inner solar system”—echoing the sentiments of Michael Collins and Buzz Aldrin at the 40th anniversary commemoration of the first moon landing—it concluded that Mars “is not the best first destination.”

If astronauts could reach Mars’ moons, they would be able to “use remote-controlled robots to explore the Martian surface and retrieve samples—from the planet as well as the moon itself—for later close-up study on Earth,” Shiga explains. Nevertheless, space radiation, composed mostly of protons and atomic nuclei, poses a real threat for astronauts. According to a study quoted by New Scientist in 2006, these particles actually “cause twice as much serious damage to DNA than [previously] expected,” exposing astronauts to grave risks of cancer and other diseases.

As Shiga explains, Earth’s atmosphere and magnetic field protect people on the ground—and astronauts on the International Space Station—from the harmful effects of radiation. Radiation exposure during trips to the moon is also low: The missions are short and the moon itself offers protection from particles (how does the moon do this? A magnetic field of its own??). On the other hand, planets such as Mars, located beyond low-Earth orbit, are fully exposed to galactic cosmic rays and their destructive radiation. According to calculations made by Frank Cucinotta, chief scientist for radiation studies at NASA's Johnson Space Center in Houston, Texas, a trip to Mars orbit would not comply with NASA’s safety rules for astronauts, which “aim to keep each astronaut's lifetime risk of fatal cancer from space radiation below 3 per cent,” New Scientist reports.


Here's a better article:

Space.com

http://www.space.com/businesstechnology ... 50112.html

Lunar shields are necessary. Astronauts were extremely lucky.

Not like Apollo

Despite the apparent ease of past lunar exploration radiation-wise, such as NASA's successful Apollo moon landings, without adequate shielding long-term occupation of the moon and space exploration may remain out of reach, researchers said.

"A lot of people think about the Apollo astronauts, and that they didn't have much protection and were fine," Lane told SPACE.com. "But in Apollo, it was a very short mission and a lot of [size="6"]it was basically luck[/size]. I'm not sure how they managed to be so lucky, but I don't think you can count on luck on short missions for the future or trips to the planets."

Researchers have said that a major radiation event during the any of six Apollo moon landings could have been catastrophic to the astronauts who carried them out. But Apollo crews lived on the moon for days at most, while long-term mission will run much longer.

Radiation from galactic cosmic rays or solar particles, however, would be extremely likely to affect a long-duration stay on the moon, researchers said

In short, they still cant protect against this radiation. To me, that makes things questionable.
“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Scepcop
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29

Re: Apollo 11 Press Conference: Sadness and Guilt

Postby ProfWag » 15 Jul 2011, 20:52

Scepcop wrote:Also, someone on my forum made this sensible valid point:

http://www.happierabroad.com/forum/view ... c&start=15

There is no question in my mind that the lunar landings are fake, for one very important reason that many people often neglect. That is Cosmic Ray Radiation that is likely instantly fatal to astronauts. There is no material known to man that can shield these rays from the Sun should they take course towards our brave astronauts. Any means of detecting these rays would be useless, because by definition they travel at the speed of light, and there'd be no time to escape.




Please, oh please, oh please tell me you're joking Scepcop! "sensible, valid point"?! I suppose the next thing you're going to tell me is we aren't really seeing the ISS pass overhead because it would get hit with too many cosmic rays as well. (Which, if you didn't know, you can plainly see it as it orbits over your location...)
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Jarrah White whips NASA reps in Moon Hoax Debate!

Postby Craig Browning » 16 Jul 2011, 01:15

Scepcop wrote:I do not run from questions or issues. I answer them, but I do not engage in endless circles with no point except ad hominem attacks.


I can understand what you mean here Winston, I have deliberately stepped out of such threads here and elsewhere because it is a standard practice of Skeptics to twist and turn your words against you and even cozy up to you for a week or two before turning the tables on you, using conversations that were between "friends" against you. . . I've seen and experienced such duplicity far too many times. Yet, I do likewise believe that the "believer" needs to at least step up to the plate and attempt to explain things in a way that at least defines what they believe and why. More importantly, they need to show alternative sources that have lead to their point of view and why.

You've seen my posts on the Psychic type issues and seen how I've "defined" my points of view which does reveal how my experiences and studies lead to conclusions that seriously differ from the majority of "psychics" out there, deliberately bridging the chasm between belief & non-belief; showing how both sides on this particular issue are saying pretty much the same thing and yet, they "miss" seeing what's in front of them -- the elementary commonalities either argument extends and lays in common with the other. Even Edgar Cayce had the tendency to agree with certain scientific/logic based propositions than some of the long-haired fairy-tale theories shared within the psychic/spiritualist communities.

NASA in this particular case, refuses to play the game these idiots want to play because it's simply to big a drain on budgets & time; there's far too much solid data on hand the world over, that proves the lunar landings. For that matter you can ask Optimus Prime, he'll tell you point blank that they were there and why. :lol:

All kidding aside, I know too many people that were directly involved with the Saturn V program and one in particular that worked on the lander unit. The kind of money and brain trust that went into said programs simply wouldn't have been allocated for the sake of a cover-up. It's all conjecture -- a house built on sand, if you would that can not hold any actual weight, just an illusion -- a very imaginative theory that cannot be proved while the target of its content has a literal mountain of proof surrounding it. . . try to not find that evidence; it's utterly impossible.
User avatar
Craig Browning
 
Posts: 1526
Joined: 13 Feb 2010, 05:20
Location: Northampton, MA

Re: Jarrah White whips NASA reps in Moon Hoax Debate!

Postby ProfWag » 16 Jul 2011, 02:14

Craig Browning wrote:
Scepcop wrote:I do not run from questions or issues. I answer them, but I do not engage in endless circles with no point except ad hominem attacks.


I can understand what you mean here Winston, I have deliberately stepped out of such threads here and elsewhere because it is a standard practice of Skeptics to twist and turn your words against you and even cozy up to you for a week or two before turning the tables on you, using conversations that were between "friends" against you. . . I've seen and experienced such duplicity far too many times. Yet, I do likewise believe that the "believer" needs to at least step up to the plate and attempt to explain things in a way that at least defines what they believe and why. More importantly, they need to show alternative sources that have lead to their point of view and why.

I agree with you to a point Craig, but it's also standard practice for "believers" to either not know or not tell the whole story. As for Scepcop's statement, I can assure you that "ad hominem attacks" have come my way from Scepcop far more often than I have slung them at him. And he is notorious for posting a comment that's untruthful or not complete and then never returning to defend himself. I can provide examples if asked.
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Jarrah White whips NASA reps in Moon Hoax Debate!

Postby Scepcop » 16 Jul 2011, 15:08

Craig Browning wrote:
Scepcop wrote:I do not run from questions or issues. I answer them, but I do not engage in endless circles with no point except ad hominem attacks.


I can understand what you mean here Winston, I have deliberately stepped out of such threads here and elsewhere because it is a standard practice of Skeptics to twist and turn your words against you and even cozy up to you for a week or two before turning the tables on you, using conversations that were between "friends" against you. . . I've seen and experienced such duplicity far too many times. Yet, I do likewise believe that the "believer" needs to at least step up to the plate and attempt to explain things in a way that at least defines what they believe and why. More importantly, they need to show alternative sources that have lead to their point of view and why.

You've seen my posts on the Psychic type issues and seen how I've "defined" my points of view which does reveal how my experiences and studies lead to conclusions that seriously differ from the majority of "psychics" out there, deliberately bridging the chasm between belief & non-belief; showing how both sides on this particular issue are saying pretty much the same thing and yet, they "miss" seeing what's in front of them -- the elementary commonalities either argument extends and lays in common with the other. Even Edgar Cayce had the tendency to agree with certain scientific/logic based propositions than some of the long-haired fairy-tale theories shared within the psychic/spiritualist communities.

NASA in this particular case, refuses to play the game these idiots want to play because it's simply to big a drain on budgets & time; there's far too much solid data on hand the world over, that proves the lunar landings. For that matter you can ask Optimus Prime, he'll tell you point blank that they were there and why. :lol:

All kidding aside, I know too many people that were directly involved with the Saturn V program and one in particular that worked on the lander unit. The kind of money and brain trust that went into said programs simply wouldn't have been allocated for the sake of a cover-up. It's all conjecture -- a house built on sand, if you would that can not hold any actual weight, just an illusion -- a very imaginative theory that cannot be proved while the target of its content has a literal mountain of proof surrounding it. . . try to not find that evidence; it's utterly impossible.


Craig,
I do stand up for myself. But there are limits. I told you before, I'm busy with a lot of things, such as updates to my other site, and my life and travel plans, which are 3 years behind. So I have to use my time productively. If you can find a way to freeze time and make my body so that I never tire, then I'll answer every post put to me.

If NASA thinks it's a waste of time to defend itself, then why shouldn't I? All NASA has to do is answer all the questions once, and publish it, but it won't even do that. Jarrah White has them cornered. This is nothing new though. Why do you think that government bureaucrats can even compete with freethinking intellectuals in debate? Get real. They are all about dumbing you down and turning you into a conformist.

I'm disappointed in you Craig. I thought you were awake. It seems you are not.

You make blanket statements above about how no evidence supports the hoax theory, while all the evidence supports the official theory, without even discussing the evidence. That's a major mistake and fallacy, and disqualifies you as a truth seeker. You didn't do any research on this at all. You didn't follow my links or videos. You just made blanket statements. That's not intellectual or logical. That's pure bias and religious mindset.

I'm disappointed in you Craig. I thought you were smarter than that.

If NASA can't get people above 400 miles above the earth, how did it get men 240,000 and back? You didn't answer that.

I could ask you a thousand questions that you wouldn't have the answer to. But you don't care do you? You don't examine evidence objectively. That's a shame.

All the evidence you have is government controlled TV footage that has been pre-recorded and pre-edited. Yes your friends were working on a real space program. But that doesn't mean that the Apollo Moon Missions had to be real. Watch Apollo Zero linked above. It'll give you some things to think about. You do love to think don't you? lol

Jarrah White has a new series debunking the moon rocks. This time he has put up 10 episodes that are over one hour each. See it in his channel.

http://www.youtube.com/whitejarrah
“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Scepcop
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29

Re: Jarrah White whips NASA reps in Moon Hoax Debate!

Postby ProfWag » 16 Jul 2011, 18:34

Scepcop wrote:I'm disappointed in you Craig. I thought you were awake. It seems you are not.


I'm disappointed in you Craig. I thought you were smarter than that.

What was that again about "ad hominem attacks" you mentioned Scepcop?
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Jarrah White whips NASA reps in Moon Hoax Debate!

Postby ProfWag » 16 Jul 2011, 18:58

Scepcop wrote:[If NASA can't get people above 400 miles above the earth, how did it get men 240,000 and back? You didn't answer that.


The key word you mention in this statement is "can't." Is it that NASA "can't" get people above 400 miles or should the word really be "don't?" There is a huge difference in making this point Scepcop. As such, would you please provide a reference for the statement that NASA "can't" get people above 400 miles above the earth please? I've looked and haven't found one, but since you consider yourself a "free-thinker," then this difference in meaning should be obvious for you and easy to find the reference. It would certainly put some validity on your side of the debate. Oh, and I'm looking for a real reference so please don't refer me back to the youtube video as anyone can say anything to make a point. I'll be annxiously awaiting your reference. Also, please note that this is not an "ad hominem" attack, I just simply need clarification on this important statement. Thank you.
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Jarrah White whips NASA reps in Moon Hoax Debate!

Postby Craig Browning » 17 Jul 2011, 01:05

ProfWag wrote:
Scepcop wrote:[If NASA can't get people above 400 miles above the earth, how did it get men 240,000 and back? You didn't answer that.


The key word you mention in this statement is "can't." Is it that NASA "can't" get people above 400 miles or should the word really be "don't?" There is a huge difference in making this point Scepcop. As such, would you please provide a reference for the statement that NASA "can't" get people above 400 miles above the earth please? I've looked and haven't found one, but since you consider yourself a "free-thinker," then this difference in meaning should be obvious for you and easy to find the reference. It would certainly put some validity on your side of the debate. Oh, and I'm looking for a real reference so please don't refer me back to the youtube video as anyone can say anything to make a point. I'll be annxiously awaiting your reference. Also, please note that this is not an "ad hominem" attack, I just simply need clarification on this important statement. Thank you.


He won't because he's too busy surfing Youtube for valid articles and materials, taking trips to far off fantasy lands, etc.

Sorry Winston, you so lose on this one. My views around the Moon trips and Space Travel as a whole are very much based on FACTS but I am curious on another level when it comes to your position in that you believe we've been visited by ET, that ET secretly controls the world government by way of the Illuminati and all that other crazy stuff and so, that being the case, wouldn't it make sense that ET shared his technology with our people so we could evolve along technological lines and conquer the whole space flight problem a few small steps at a time?

We can't stand with one foot in the ET is Here Pool and the other in the "Mankind Can't Fly to the Moon" pool in that the one cancels out the other. So either the Alien Illuminati thins doesn't exist and the lunar landings are all fake or it does exist and the exchange of information allowed us to get there. . . at lest given the various beliefs held in and around the Illuminati conspiracy B.S. such would be logical. then again, human beings may just be smarter than you and your conspiracy chums give them credit for and they figured out how to jump this particular hurdle all on their own.

BTW. . . did you ever look at NASA's plans and why, after the moon landings, they got so bogged down by the Shuttle program?

The original purpose of the Shuttle was to currier materials to the moon so as to aid in the construction of a scientific research center. Problem is, the shuttles proved to be a far more expensive proposition than expected and quite impractical (financially) to use in the manner originally theorized. So they went to plan B -- the International Space Station alongside certain commercial Payload gigs which delayed both, lunar peopling as well as the mars project which, according to the projected schedules of that era, we are over 25 years behind launching. . . because of the failure of the shuttle program, NOT because we've never been to the moon.

Memory serving me right, there are currently 5 U.S. based commercial projects directed at the moon that are to be initiated prior to the end of our current decade along with at least that many more via other space agencies the world over. Two of these programs deal quite specifically with mineral & gas mining... certain gases or the ability to make them are paramount when it comes to populating the moon and using it as a profit producing resource, these corporations are willing to take the risks or venture because of scientific data collected by NASA via those non-existent moon walks you insist didn't happen. Yet, they are willing to pour tens of millions of dollars into said venture.

I know they are dummying down America but gesh! Finding educated billionaires and their highly educated staff throwing so much money at a seemingly viable venture of this kind would suggest that either you're very wrong on this claim or else they are the biggest suckers ever born.

In less that 5 years commercial flights into space will be more than a reality, it will be happening weekly if not daily and via more than one company. Soon, this very same technology will be shuttling scientist to and from the International Space Station and ultimately, to and from the MOON in preparation for the Mars venture which was hoped to take place before 2015 according to the original projections. . . like I said, we're a bit behind on that front due to unexpected set-backs.

So, ignoring all the stuff tied to the moon launches of the 60's and early 70's there seems to be a hell of a lot of stuff going on that is directly linked to the idea of returning to the moon and more importantly, populating the moon for the sake of commercial as well as scientific endeavor. Action that no sane investor or nation would throw money at if the science wasn't there to support it. So maybe your conspiracy chums should be contemplating why this is the case and why these groups (nations) haven't blown the whistle on the great American Lie? Why they keep throwing big money at these projects?

If they are that big of fools I need to hit them up for research funds to locate Avalon and the lands of the Tuathadedonen :mrgreen:
User avatar
Craig Browning
 
Posts: 1526
Joined: 13 Feb 2010, 05:20
Location: Northampton, MA

Re: Jarrah White whips NASA reps in Moon Hoax Debate!

Postby NinjaPuppy » 17 Jul 2011, 03:59

Craig Browning wrote:Sorry Winston, you so lose on this one. My views around the Moon trips and Space Travel as a whole are very much based on FACTS but I am curious on another level when it comes to your position in that you believe we've been visited by ET, that ET secretly controls the world government by way of the Illuminati and all that other crazy stuff and so, that being the case, wouldn't it make sense that ET shared his technology with our people so we could evolve along technological lines and conquer the whole space flight problem a few small steps at a time?

We can't stand with one foot in the ET is Here Pool and the other in the "Mankind Can't Fly to the Moon" pool in that the one cancels out the other.

Why not? Can there be no room for the possibility that there are life forms with higher intelligence than human beings? It's the same argument as saying women aren't smarter than men. Since every individual has their own mental capacity, I don't find it hard to believe that some women are smarter than some men. How much of a stretch is it to allow for the theory that if there are other life forms somewhere in the universe that they are much smarter than us humans?
User avatar
NinjaPuppy
 
Posts: 4002
Joined: 28 Jul 2009, 20:44

Re: Jarrah White whips NASA reps in Moon Hoax Debate!

Postby Craig Browning » 18 Jul 2011, 01:06

NinjaPuppy wrote:
Craig Browning wrote:Sorry Winston, you so lose on this one. My views around the Moon trips and Space Travel as a whole are very much based on FACTS but I am curious on another level when it comes to your position in that you believe we've been visited by ET, that ET secretly controls the world government by way of the Illuminati and all that other crazy stuff and so, that being the case, wouldn't it make sense that ET shared his technology with our people so we could evolve along technological lines and conquer the whole space flight problem a few small steps at a time?

We can't stand with one foot in the ET is Here Pool and the other in the "Mankind Can't Fly to the Moon" pool in that the one cancels out the other.

Why not? Can there be no room for the possibility that there are life forms with higher intelligence than human beings? It's the same argument as saying women aren't smarter than men. Since every individual has their own mental capacity, I don't find it hard to believe that some women are smarter than some men. How much of a stretch is it to allow for the theory that if there are other life forms somewhere in the universe that they are much smarter than us humans?


I think you misunderstood my point here Ninja. . . I fully support the idea that higher intelligence exists and I even believe that we've had some form of interaction with it. I simply don't buy into the whole Illuminati conspiracy rhetoric certain fanatics like to tie on to such things.
User avatar
Craig Browning
 
Posts: 1526
Joined: 13 Feb 2010, 05:20
Location: Northampton, MA

Re: Jarrah White whips NASA reps in Moon Hoax Debate!

Postby NinjaPuppy » 18 Jul 2011, 03:19

Craig Browning wrote:I think you misunderstood my point here Ninja. . . I fully support the idea that higher intelligence exists and I even believe that we've had some form of interaction with it. I simply don't buy into the whole Illuminati conspiracy rhetoric certain fanatics like to tie on to such things.

Ahhhhh, understood. However if you believe in the possibility of higher intelligence existing, what makes it so far fetched that they are the ones in control? I mean you can't argue the fact that behind every successful endeavor there is someone or a group in charge. You got your bosses and you got your worker bees in every type of business and there's always one or two who have final say about how things are handled.

Even if you remove the ET sitch and go with wealthy vs. poor. Money is power, money talks, time is money and the list goes on. The Illuminati are obviously thought to be not of the human variety but regardless of DNA or species, the world is run by wealthy, powerful people.
User avatar
NinjaPuppy
 
Posts: 4002
Joined: 28 Jul 2009, 20:44

Re: Jarrah White whips NASA reps in Moon Hoax Debate!

Postby NinjaPuppy » 18 Jul 2011, 06:03

Here's an interesting sidebar about the Apollo Astronaut Wives. This is number one of six. I caught the show on PBS today.

User avatar
NinjaPuppy
 
Posts: 4002
Joined: 28 Jul 2009, 20:44

PreviousNext

Return to Conspiracies / Cover Ups

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron