Liverpool FC Forum

by **The Ace1983** » Fri Apr 21, 2006 8:31 pm

Inspired by a thread in Gen. Chat, this is to find out which one you are more prepared to believe.

by **RUSHIE#9** » Fri Apr 21, 2006 10:15 pm

I've gone for the Neil Armstrong not landing on the moon conspiracy 'cos unless you've got something like $15 billion to fund your own trip to the moon how the hell are you gonna prove they did land on the moon. All of the evidence is there as well, the U.S flag waving in the wind:

the fact that the sun is casting shadows (not sure about this one to be honest).
Until you can go down to yer local Lunn POly and book a fortnight at the Costa Del Moon resort I suppose we'll never be able to prove this one.

by **anti-hero** » Fri Apr 21, 2006 10:50 pm

Courtney Love that coke whore.

Nirvana was never the same...

by **Lando_Griffin** » Sat Apr 22, 2006 4:31 am

Big Foot, as it is feesable that an Orangutan was mal-formed, or evolution took an unexpected turn.

No way could it be a talking creature though, unless Robin Williams had not shaved for a decade.

by **anti-hero** » Sat Apr 22, 2006 9:16 am

What about Nessie?

He haunts me every time I go swimming.

by **Dalglish** » Mon May 08, 2006 1:12 am

Gotta be the JFK one for me . Only a nation as stupid as the US of A would assassinate their most popular ever President only to vote in their dumbest one ever 40 years later

by **Sabre** » Mon May 08, 2006 1:16 am

I've gone for the Neil Armstrong not landing on the moon conspiracy 'cos unless you've got something like $15 billion to fund your own trip to the moon how the hell are you gonna prove they did land on the moon. All of the evidence is there as well, the U.S flag waving in the wind:

Nope. The merkins were there. They placed some mirrors in order to do accurate distance measures (measurement through reflections) and those mirrors have been used by several international universities. So either Armstrong put them there or the aliens did.

Visit this site if you're interested

http://www.badastronomy.com/

They debunk bad science. And many conspiracies related with astronomy.

I voted for the JFK one, but actually it was the CIA.

by **dawson99** » Mon May 08, 2006 9:49 am

roswell, ive seent he series and everything

by **Judge** » Mon May 08, 2006 12:49 pm

what about - roberts is only one person

by **anti-hero** » Wed May 10, 2006 1:00 am

Sabre wrote:
I've gone for the Neil Armstrong not landing on the moon conspiracy 'cos unless you've got something like $15 billion to fund your own trip to the moon how the hell are you gonna prove they did land on the moon. All of the evidence is there as well, the U.S flag waving in the wind:

Nope. The merkins were there. They placed some mirrors in order to do accurate distance measures (measurement through reflections) and those mirrors have been used by several international universities. So either Armstrong put them there or the aliens did.

Visit this site if you're interested

http://www.badastronomy.com/

They debunk bad science. And many conspiracies related with astronomy.

I voted for the JFK one, but actually it was the CIA.

Why would the CIA assasinate JFK?

by **66-1112520797** » Wed May 10, 2006 6:56 am

anti-hero wrote:
Sabre wrote:
I've gone for the Neil Armstrong not landing on the moon conspiracy 'cos unless you've got something like $15 billion to fund your own trip to the moon how the hell are you gonna prove they did land on the moon. All of the evidence is there as well, the U.S flag waving in the wind:

Nope. The merkins were there. They placed some mirrors in order to do accurate distance measures (measurement through reflections) and those mirrors have been used by several international universities. So either Armstrong put them there or the aliens did.

Visit this site if you're interested

http://www.badastronomy.com/

They debunk bad science. And many conspiracies related with astronomy.

I voted for the JFK one, but actually it was the CIA.

Why would the CIA assasinate JFK?

I'm not to sure but didnt it have something to do with Cuba ?

Dont quote me but I think JFK wanted to pull out of Cuba to basiclly keep the peace with the Soviet Union, Cuba had the Soviet backing because they were a Communist government, and still are.

While Kennedy wanted out, other bigwigs from the whiteshouse supposedly didnt want the US to back down from the Soviets. This is why, apparently the CIA came in and did the honours for them by assasinating JFK. There is a hole lot more to it I'm sure but I think thats the gist.

Please correct me if I'm wrong ?

by **66-1112520797** » Wed May 10, 2006 7:04 am

RUSHIE#9 wrote:I've gone for the Neil Armstrong not landing on the moon conspiracy 'cos unless you've got something like $15 billion to fund your own trip to the moon how the hell are you gonna prove they did land on the moon. All of the evidence is there as well, the U.S flag waving in the wind:

the fact that the sun is casting shadows (not sure about this one to be honest).
Until you can go down to yer local Lunn POly and book a fortnight at the Costa Del Moon resort I suppose we'll never be able to prove this one.

Also on this subject there was the matter of the photo itself.
As you can see it's a picture perfect photo, something they reckon would be imposible to do considering there space suits were fitted with camera's around the midrift.

by **Judge** » Wed May 10, 2006 8:15 am

Bamaga man wrote:
RUSHIE#9 wrote:I've gone for the Neil Armstrong not landing on the moon conspiracy 'cos unless you've got something like $15 billion to fund your own trip to the moon how the hell are you gonna prove they did land on the moon. All of the evidence is there as well, the U.S flag waving in the wind:

the fact that the sun is casting shadows (not sure about this one to be honest).
Until you can go down to yer local Lunn POly and book a fortnight at the Costa Del Moon resort I suppose we'll never be able to prove this one.

Also on this subject there was the matter of the photo itself.
As you can see it's a picture perfect photo, something they reckon would be imposible to do considering there space suits were fitted with camera's around the midrift.

the flag is held up by a horizontal pole, and waves due to soalr wind.

Its not that. Its the fact there are no stars in the picture?? where are the stars!!

by **112-1077774096** » Wed May 10, 2006 8:18 am

and no dust etc etc etc

by **Judge** » Wed May 10, 2006 8:21 am

peewee wrote:and no dust etc etc etc

oh yes the dust

Liverpool FC Forum

Which is most likely to be true? - Conspiracies

Which is most likely to be true? - Conspiracies

Who is online