4
clemaneuverers 4 points ago +4 / -0

You've made no real points here, and launched straight into ad hominem, which is telling.

I'll just address one point:

Because the moon does not have spy satellites orbiting around it.

I'll just quote from the link I provided, since you probably didn't read it:

Since 2009, the LRO’s camera (LROC) has been mapping the lunar surface with resolutions of between 1m/pixel and 0.5m/pixel. In 2011, NASA announced that LRO had briefly descended in altitude and returned pictures of 0.25m/pixel.

For comparison, the cameras aboard the privately owned GeoEye-1 satellite have a resolution of 0.41m/pixel and are perfectly capable of distinctly resolving cars and humans from an altitude of nearly 700km (435.7miles).3

While bearing in mind that the ISRO probe is even more capable than the GeoEye, it is also true to say that having stated that the Apollo lunar landing sites were imaged by the LROC from a distance of 50km (31miles) at 0.5-meter resolution, the NASA images of these locations should be able to show any hardware present at these sites in distinct detail.

Yet the only LROC images that NASA has released since 2009 show a few white or gray pixels. Some are better than others, but generally they leave much open for interpretation.

4
clemaneuverers 4 points ago +4 / -0

the LRO images of the alleged landings sites are dodgy for many reasons:

  • They should be higher resolution. NASA has made two sets of images of landing site from lunar orbiting satellites. The earlier set at 50 km out and a later set at 25 km out. There was no improvement in resolution in the closer set of images.

  • At the time they made the images, both times, they have technology that can take images of earth from space with a high enough resolutions to tell what make of car is own the ground and even spot individual people. There is nothing like that resolution in the moon images. Why not?

  • The trails of the astronauts foots prints and rover tire trails are visible, despite the resolution issues. A stark contradiction. The rover itself appears as a pixelated blob, yet at the same resolution the tracks are clearly defined.

  • The boot print trails and rover tracks mysteriously stop abruptly outside the confines of the published area of the promotional image, and even rover tracks change color from black to white (the landing site images are a small part of a much larger surface scan)

  • inconsistent lighting between photos: with some pictures showing the artifacts lit up a bright white and others showing them pitch black, despite the Sun being directly overhead in both pictures; there is even one obliquely angled picture of the Apollo 15 site with the sunlit side of the ‘LM’ in darkness

  • there are ridiculous photos supposedly showing the US flag still casting a shadow on the lunar surface, when it should have been destroyed by micrometeorites decades ago. For a valid comparison, in 1992 the Soviet Union flag erected outside the orbiting Mir space station was reduced to ‘only two threads’ after less than two years of micrometeorite bombardment

https://www.aulis.com/j_white_col2.htm

https://youtu.be/qr3YrmTOQaY?list=PL41EF9DE445B05F89

10
clemaneuverers 10 points ago +10 / -0

Today, the Supreme Court not only reversed nearly 50 years of precedent, it relegated the most intensely personal decision someone can make to the whims of politicians and ideologues

Sounds like he doesn't believe in democracy

1
clemaneuverers 1 point ago +1 / -0

Prove it.

Check my links dumb-ass

It has been a topic of research for some geologists for over 100 years.

Check my links dumb-ass

More than you, liar.

Not until you check my links dumb-ass

So what's the difference between you and Ezra Miller?

Dumb-ass.

3
clemaneuverers 3 points ago +3 / -0

There is evidence the planet expanded in the past. It has been a topic of research for some geologists for over 100 years. You know absolutely nothing about it. Just the usual bullshit from you.

3
clemaneuverers 3 points ago +4 / -1

The 50% number is based on careful examination of rock age on the sea beds, which are all far younger than the rock above sea level on the islands and continents. The rock on the sea bed ages progressively in bands, with the older bands being near the continental coastlines, and the youngest near the center of the oceans. It's deduced that the planet was first composed only of the continents, which all fit together like a puzzle, but only on a sphere that is 50% smaller than the current earth. The extra surface area on the modern earth is all the ocean beds. In the past this has been incorrectly interpreted as "continental drift" - but they are not drifting, the surface area of the planet became greater, the origin points of new mass being the center of our current oceans, and moved them apart and away from each other. Here's good video summing up some of this, and there is also an excellent book:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Othb0xsvZb4

https://www.expansiontectonics.com/wpPDF/ExpansionTectonicsHandout0915.pdf

2
clemaneuverers 2 points ago +4 / -2

I think the confusion arises because the Earth is bigger than they say it is. Because they refuse to acknowledge the expanding nature of the planet. My two cents; the planet, it's obviously somewhat spherical, but it's the mass/volume that is at issue. The accepted model has the earth as a fixed mass throughout it's life time. This is going to fuck up all measurements and "ancestral" observations because the planet gradually expanded in size. It was 50% smaller at it's earliest. If you ignore that, then a greater expanse of land would visually appear to be flat where you would expect to notice a curve, and contrary to whatever internet calculators people are using.

5
clemaneuverers 5 points ago +5 / -0

I watched some stuff about Aubrey de Grey some years ago, but given what I've discovered since then about psuedoscience like neuro-science, DNA sequencing, the delusion and misconception of microbiology and the like; the corruption of science in general: I reckon he's either delusional or a con man. Death has already been greatly delayed as regards life expectancy. I guess we'll know what upper limit is capable with unlimited funds when we see how old Queen Elizabeth is when she dies (if not already dead), or Rothschild.

However there are stories, and I reckon they have some degree of truth, of old monks who practiced taichi, yoga, qigong and whatnot, living to be 120 or older, and being agile till their last day. and of course there are legends of people living to be hundreds of years old in various ancient texts. It makes me wonder if it's not a case of our modern understanding not living up to what appears to be lost knowledge / wisdom from older civilizations.

2
clemaneuverers 2 points ago +2 / -0

I believe this to be the case. There are various proof videos I've seen over the years, not just this one.

7
clemaneuverers 7 points ago +7 / -0

I already had a couple beers already so here's my unfiltered thoughts:

I really don't know. My own idea / feeling is that some "elites" have come to realize that there are certain human limitations that they can never hope to even pay to overcome - death and space travel are two major examples, though some may dispute the space travel one.

At the same time they are realizing this (generationally perhaps), they see that the standard of living for everyday plebs has been creeping upwards for decades... almost 2 centuries. It must disturb some of them that they can't gain access to the things they want, things that they would perceive as surpassing the ordinary existence (and they can probably think of things far crazier than I'm able to) and which would make them more special than other humans, such as immortality and proper space travel, (again, just for example);

whereas the "plebs" gain more and more, relatively in their own lives, every year; they live longer and longer, have better and better food etc. access to better tech - again relatively, which is important, because satisfaction is relative, which must make "elites" seethe.

I imagine some of these "elite" would actively seek to make life worse for people in general, based on this perceived discrepancy of progress between their own lives and the lives of ordinary people. This may be conscious or sub-conscious, but I imagine it drives them in some way. There definitely seems to be a desire to have society return to a more feudal state, albeit a modern, technocratic, one.

7
clemaneuverers 7 points ago +7 / -0

Watch the documentary "cancer: the forbidden cures" it's on YouTube. Search for "Essiac" which is probably the most immediate, accessable of the potential cures covered by that film.

2
clemaneuverers 2 points ago +2 / -0

The books were digitized independently by British man John Wantling, a victim of mercury amalgam poisoning, using the Manchester Library

http://whale.to/a/wantling_h.html

It's easy to suppress older, non-narrative conforming information these days by simply not including such materials in official digitization efforts. The largest digitization of old books effort in the world is literally run by google, a company heavily invested in vaccines; so you could well expect never to find these books included in their efforts.

0
clemaneuverers 0 points ago +1 / -1

I see nothing has changed with you.

How do I see what your deleted comment says?

I didn't delete any comment.

6
clemaneuverers 6 points ago +7 / -1

Another suggestion: The Great Global Warming Swindle - that was actually shown on British television in 2007 - the wikipedia page for it is full of reeee and seething, lol.

3
clemaneuverers 3 points ago +5 / -2

My suggestion is series of videos on the topic of nuclear weapons being a hoax (quotes under each link are by the film maker, Unpopular Opinion) :

No, nuclear weapons aren't real. I know, i know, you think it's ridiculous on the face of it.

Here's a nice video from the 50's showcasing an atomic bomb detonation. They had to fake everything and show a load of gibberish because they didn't have anything real to show you. Quite obvious in retrospect. Fake town being destroyed = no actual detonation + soldiers deployed way too close to ground zero with no casualties = no atomic detonation.

Following on from the previous video, here I look at the Trinity bomb test of 1945.

Continuing the nuclear hoax analysis, we move onto the inadequacies of the gun type fission bomb design and an overview of American firebombing of Japan.

Continuing the Atomic Hoax analysis, we look at Hiroshima & Nagasaki.

A continuation of my series on "Nuclear Weapons are fictional" - this looks at the Operation Crossroads Bikini Atoll tests by the US and the Soviet and UK nuclear bomb projects post-WW2. Contains sarcasm and the comical farce of international superpowers caught blatantly lying.

Final video in the "nukes are fake" series, we look at the bandwagon jumpers of France, China, India, Pakistan and North Korea. Prepare for some truly awful state propaganda.

6
clemaneuverers 6 points ago +6 / -0

Makes me think of a sites like reddit or twitter where admin have access to many more years of data - he put this bot together quite easily and it fooled the majority of anons.

7
clemaneuverers 7 points ago +7 / -0

There was a study testing these self serve touch screens in fast-food joints for the presence of fecal matter - and the amount was sky-high. Who knew so many people had poopy fingers, and that forcing them all to touch the same surface would accumulate that... shit.

2
clemaneuverers 2 points ago +2 / -0

I see from looking at the comments under this, and the separated three parts on his channel, that he got a lot of undue flak for this from moon-hoaxers. It makes me wonder if the idea of the challenger astronauts being alive is not actually doing damage to NASA critics. Is it pushed artificially? We know from the Apollo missions, that NASA and it's supporters are not beyond killing innocent people in service to and to perpetuate their hoaxes. Were the challenger astronauts killed for similar ends?

view more: Next ›