No, because it was a live event.
And they would not have this bs story about everything about that mission that does not exist anymore.
They could have worked on the safekeeping of future footage that would not get damaged by the radation. If they really were capable of going to the moon it would have been done many times, with every time some better quality footage.
But that is not how it went. They cant, but somehow they can land a rover on Mars, yeah right.
There would still be the 'live coverage'. So, this sounds plausible. Yet is not.
*PS: You could film ahead of time. But then this just leaves the fact that humans would die from that level of radiation, leading to skipping the actual mission part of the endeavor.
there are two separate things here two separate bit closely associated things:
the footage and the faking of the films. are the films real do they represent a real thing?
the mission , the action, itself. did a craft go, did a craft go from Earth to the moon in some way similar to how we are being told it did
these two are obviously mixed up in our minds because we are so often presented with films representing a real action. but they are not the same.
the films might be fake - the films are fake - and (not but: and ) the truth or falsehood of the story or idea - that this group of men went in a vessel from the Earth to the Moon and came back - is a separate issue to be interrogated.
I and many others can see that , separately from the films the story , that the idea is impossible and therefore did not happen.
like confusing the Domain of words with the Domain of Reality, the fake film should not be confused with whether or not the event happened. it did not, but it is a different thing.
The conspiracy in that...tempting ones consent to readily take suggestions by others, which tempts one forwards/towards outcomes; while separating/distancing one from origin.
we landed
a) 55 years and counting and the minds of the many are still afloat reasoning about a suggested landing by few.
b) Natural L(and) A(ir) W(ater)....that's the only LAND of the free and the home of the brave. Reasoning about suggested implies ones denial to land on perceivable foundation.
radiation
RADIA'TION, noun (Latin radiatio) - "emission (inception) and diffusion (death) of rays (life) of light".
DAM'AGE, noun - "any hurt, injury or harm to one's estate"...ignorance/denial of radiation hurts; injures and harms the state of ones being.
the number of times I have blocked you it's just incredible. but these blocking systems don't work.
I and everyone else detest you because you add nothing and distract much with your complete and utter word garbage, word salad , word association football.
Nature works...otherwise those within couldn't complain to each other about what does or doesn't work.
these blocking systems don't work...I and everyone else
The former implies one complaining about others; while the latter implies one being the spokesperson for all others. Try bringing complains about others to their spokesperson and see how that works itself out...
I have blocked...
How could solid (life) within fluid (inception towards death) obstruct/block anything without establishing indigestion within self?
incredible
Aka putting oneself within (in) creed (credo) to another aka establishing creditor and debtor.
complete and utter word...
How can a word be complete without using all letters suggested to shape words?
add nothing
If nature implies everything perceivable, then how could anyone within add anything (or nothing) to it?
Sleight of hand: "Jesus fucking Christ"...Jesus implies savior (one who delivers); while Christ implies anointed (one being delivered) aka delivery (inception towards death) of delivered (life).
Others suggest "fucking" as the seam to bind together that which nature sets apart. This implies freemasonry aka a mason of free (will of choice) using "Jesus fucking Christ" aka suggested information as bricks and ones consent to it as mortar to build walls of ignorance within the mind/memory of others.
distract
DIS (away) TRAHERE (to draw)... being implies within (life) way (inception towards death), while being enabled to draw inspiration from perceivable...or ignore it for whatever others are suggesting.
The suggested word "distract" contains that which "clarifies"...if one resists suggested for perceivable.
No, because it was a live event. And they would not have this bs story about everything about that mission that does not exist anymore. They could have worked on the safekeeping of future footage that would not get damaged by the radation. If they really were capable of going to the moon it would have been done many times, with every time some better quality footage. But that is not how it went. They cant, but somehow they can land a rover on Mars, yeah right.
Well said, it was a total up and down fraud. You cannot land on a light.
No. It never happened. End of story.
There would still be the 'live coverage'. So, this sounds plausible. Yet is not.
*PS: You could film ahead of time. But then this just leaves the fact that humans would die from that level of radiation, leading to skipping the actual mission part of the endeavor.
We spell ayh "I'. just so ya know. Its not gaelic. its english.
We spell ya' "you" just so you know. Ayh guess we all have some wiggle room. ~(o.o)~
No, we don't.
there are two separate things here two separate bit closely associated things:
these two are obviously mixed up in our minds because we are so often presented with films representing a real action. but they are not the same.
the films might be fake - the films are fake - and (not but: and ) the truth or falsehood of the story or idea - that this group of men went in a vessel from the Earth to the Moon and came back - is a separate issue to be interrogated.
I and many others can see that , separately from the films the story , that the idea is impossible and therefore did not happen.
like confusing the Domain of words with the Domain of Reality, the fake film should not be confused with whether or not the event happened. it did not, but it is a different thing.
Nope.
The conspiracy in that...tempting ones consent to readily take suggestions by others, which tempts one forwards/towards outcomes; while separating/distancing one from origin.
a) 55 years and counting and the minds of the many are still afloat reasoning about a suggested landing by few.
b) Natural L(and) A(ir) W(ater)....that's the only LAND of the free and the home of the brave. Reasoning about suggested implies ones denial to land on perceivable foundation.
fuck off and die.
the number of times I have blocked you it's just incredible. but these blocking systems don't work.
I and everyone else detest you because you add nothing and distract much with your complete and utter word garbage, word salad , word association football.
Nature works...otherwise those within couldn't complain to each other about what does or doesn't work.
The former implies one complaining about others; while the latter implies one being the spokesperson for all others. Try bringing complains about others to their spokesperson and see how that works itself out...
How could solid (life) within fluid (inception towards death) obstruct/block anything without establishing indigestion within self?
Aka putting oneself within (in) creed (credo) to another aka establishing creditor and debtor.
How can a word be complete without using all letters suggested to shape words?
If nature implies everything perceivable, then how could anyone within add anything (or nothing) to it?
Fuck/fucker/fugger implies SEAM; verb - "to bind; sew together"...off (removing/separating) contradicts that.
Sleight of hand: "Jesus fucking Christ"...Jesus implies savior (one who delivers); while Christ implies anointed (one being delivered) aka delivery (inception towards death) of delivered (life).
Others suggest "fucking" as the seam to bind together that which nature sets apart. This implies freemasonry aka a mason of free (will of choice) using "Jesus fucking Christ" aka suggested information as bricks and ones consent to it as mortar to build walls of ignorance within the mind/memory of others.
DIS (away) TRAHERE (to draw)... being implies within (life) way (inception towards death), while being enabled to draw inspiration from perceivable...or ignore it for whatever others are suggesting.
The suggested word "distract" contains that which "clarifies"...if one resists suggested for perceivable.
Thanks for the inspiration and enjoy the equinox.