Not sure it is "comprehensive", maybe coincidental ?wayneL said:This one is comprehensive and entertaining...no matter what you think.
http://nasdaqtrader.blogspot.com/2006/08/who-killed-john-oneill-911-conspiracy.html
Enjoy:
carmo said:Not sure it is "comprehensive", maybe coincidental ?
Over the years I have always doubted the moon landings. If it was so easy then why haven't they been back.I have heard people say the moon landings were fake. Considering they are planning to go to the moon about ten years later why don't they just use the same design and go now? 60's technology did it why not use 90's technology etc?
What do you think?
This one is comprehensive and entertaining...no matter what you think.
http://nasdaqtrader.blogspot.com/2006/08/who-killed-john-oneill-911-conspiracy.html
Enjoy:
The CIA must have taken care of it.Am I being more than usually obtuse here? This is what came up when I clicked on the link:
The CIA must have taken care of it.
Prawn,
I can't even remember what it was about.
Did the CIA get to you with a mind altering drug ?
Who's to say they haven't? Just because the meeja hasn't reported it doesn't mean it didn't happen...Over the years I have always doubted the moon landings. If it was so easy then why haven't they been back.
<Insert previous comment>But if it was so easy for the americans to do it, why haven't the russians followed.
What building 7 really quite remarkably shows is a person's cognitive biases.As for that building, pfft what a heap of crap that youtube is, im an engineer and it is not probable for a buliding to collapse that way but still highly possible, get over it, it looked cool. The US used **** building standards regarding fireproofing and have changed them post 911. whatever
American people don't know much One overlooked revelation in the latest Pew Research Centre report. The 3,615 American people interviewed for the survey were asked: "Who is the current prime minister of Great Britain?" Results: 58% had no idea; 28% named Gordon Brown; 5% thought it was John Howard (former Australian PM); 4% named Robert Gates (US defence secretary); and 5% came up with the right answer, Rupert Murdoch. -- The Pew Research Center for the People and the Press
The final landing was the Apollo 17 mission. I remember watching it with a 3 year old and discussing how the astronauts were carrying all their air and water with them on their backs.We landed on the moon like 7 or 9 times and the final attempt was apollo 11 or 13 (the one they made a movie about)
We landed on the moon like 7 or 9 times and the final attempt was apollo 11 or 13 (the one they made a movie about) there really was nothing worth going back for, we had done all the tests available at the time and brought back samples, there was no need to colinise it as we may as well just make a space station that we can move ect. The moon is pointless to colinise. The reason that we are only now considering going back and that its such an issue is that safety standards are so much higher now then in the 60s and 70s. And the US wants to test equipment in low atmospheres for the hopeful trip to mars in the future.
As for that building, pfft what a heap of crap that youtube is, im an engineer and it is not probable for a buliding to collapse that way but still highly possible, get over it, it looked cool. The US used **** building standards regarding fireproofing and have changed them post 911. whatever
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?