tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5842308776616107900.post5823551866107870307..comments2023-06-29T23:58:03.749+10:00Comments on church of nobody: Lighting the Moondoggienobodyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13067422372087431256noreply@blogger.comBlogger62125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5842308776616107900.post-14603359442314715912011-09-08T07:14:22.487+10:002011-09-08T07:14:22.487+10:00Gallier! Lovely to have you pop in. How are you?
...Gallier! Lovely to have you pop in. How are you?<br /><br />Thanks for this mate. All good grist for the mill, as we say. They're certainly good photes, far and away better than those laughable pix that the European Space Agency released with the arrow pointing at a dot that pretty much looked like every other dot on the moon's surface. It's the source of these, NASA, that's the problem. You and I know they're well and truly a part of the MKULTRA gag. I don't know that they could ever quite be trusted with anything.<br /><br />Or to put it another way, in any trial, were the accused to testify to his own innocence, we wouldn't give him the time of day. And here's NASA, who are effectively the accused in this case, providing the proof of their innocence of the charges of fakery.<br /><br />Ha! Metaphor time! Imagine a trial wherein a fellow was accused of murdering his wife by a convoluted method of poisoning involving, I don't know, feeding her a DNA attacking GMO blutwurst or something, and then taking the stand on account of being the world expert in GMO DNA attacks and declaring that such a thing was impossible. Can you dig it?<br /><br />As things stand, in this world of photoshop and other such trickeries, I vote we sit tight and wait for those mad bastards out there who spend hours comparing photes to see what errors they can find. Perhaps they won't find any. It's possible. If this one has them stumped then it's a tick for the believers.<br /><br />Still, it's interesting isn't it?nobodyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13067422372087431256noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5842308776616107900.post-69942815074612804972011-09-08T05:00:50.691+10:002011-09-08T05:00:50.691+10:00Hey Nobby, have you seen ?
http://www.space.com/12...Hey Nobby, have you seen ?<br />http://www.space.com/12835-nasa-apollo-moon-landing-sites-photos-lro.html<br /><br />New photoshops of the moon ;-)gallier2https://www.blogger.com/profile/04285836062429366578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5842308776616107900.post-85286326363143879052009-11-01T01:54:57.676+11:002009-11-01T01:54:57.676+11:00gallier:
you are always welcome at my blog, you d...gallier:<br /><br />you are always welcome at my blog, you disagreed fairly, I find no fault in that.<br /><br />We all have our opinions, and that is not bad, as long as we don't belittle others that hold different opinions then ourselves, and you didn't.<br /><br />IMO that is good.<br /><br />Penny :)Pennyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16834513101685995010noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5842308776616107900.post-63990230498734650162009-10-31T16:16:58.007+11:002009-10-31T16:16:58.007+11:00Right you are Gallier. I don't know about anyo...Right you are Gallier. I don't know about anyone else but for me everything's up for grabs no matter how cherished. I cherished the moon landings? Chuck it out! I cherish the moon hoax? Chuck THAT out! I don't care what it is: if it's false it can go. Not forgetting of course that if it's hard to determine if a thing is one or t'other, then fine! I hold no firm opinion. But either way, the question is always worth asking.<br /><br />Speaking of asking questions, for me Dave McGowan is like some crazy stuntman, or wing-walker, or something. He doesn't give a fuck what anyone thinks, he's going to push that envelope regardless. And whether this line fails, or that one, it doesn't matter - I'm going to cheer the guy regardless. Fearless!<br /><br />As for him committing seppeku, it just looks that way. Sure he's got a blade in his hand, and yep there's blood all over the tatami, but you know... that's knife fights for ya. And besides, that blood is mostly the other guy's...nobodyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13067422372087431256noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5842308776616107900.post-37073983567134524222009-10-30T22:10:58.022+11:002009-10-30T22:10:58.022+11:00Hello boyz and girlz. I hope I'm still allowed...Hello boyz and girlz. I hope I'm still allowed to take part at the nice conversation here and there (there being at Penny's blog), feeling a little bit lonely defending the position that the moon landing wasn't faked.<br />This said, I don't have definitive answers but everything I checked seemed OK and if ones wades through the archives (obviously the parts that were put on the web), that "they" would have put in a tremendously lot of effort to make it look genuine. There are thousands of pictures, movie clips, measurements, digitized handbooks for every part of the missions with all schematics (see at http://www.cs.indiana.edu/sudoc/image_30000061709352/30000061709352/pdf/techdata.htm) , really, really a lot of stuff. This doesn't prove much, it only shows that there were a lot of people (and companies) involved and that these people thought what they were doing. <br /><br />This said I would like to rise the debate at a higher level, we could argue each detail of the hoax/genuine for hours without bringing more to the debate. <br /><br />On Penny's blog someone brought a link to an entry of winter patriot (http://winterpatriot.blogspot.com/2007/02/did-nasa-start-moon-landing-was-hoax.html) stating that the hoax stories were started by NASA itself. <br />That's something interesting, a good stick to discredit anyone having a too close look at what NASA is up to. Because, we should not forget, that NASA is part of the military industrial and scientific complex Eisenhower was warning people about, in his farewell address. <br />That NASA has a lot to hide is quite obvious (11 from 134 shuttle missions were classified DoD missions) and the industry collusion is undeniable (especially after results of the Challenger disaster commission). And that even the scientific mission is fraught with political shenanigans can be seen when one looks closely (look at James Hansen's frauds concerning the data NASA-GISS about global warming, best blog to see what I'm talking about is http://wattsupwiththat.com/)<br /><br />PS: for full disclosure and because I was asked several times (Edo), I am an EU commission official and nobody can confirm it by back-tracking the IP address. This said, now I have to put a disclaimer that all my point of views are only mine and do in no way whatsoever represent the views of the commission or of the hierarchy.gallier2https://www.blogger.com/profile/04285836062429366578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5842308776616107900.post-21727218718415177342009-10-30T18:09:46.905+11:002009-10-30T18:09:46.905+11:00Pipe smoke, eh?! Anya even got the pipe in the pic...Pipe smoke, eh?! Anya even got the pipe in the pic! Hidden in plain sight,eh. Yer a cunning bastard, I'll give ya that.<br /><br />When ya headin back to Korea? I reckon that yoga practice is a good move, mate.jamesnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5842308776616107900.post-66201114016746168622009-10-30T17:52:20.611+11:002009-10-30T17:52:20.611+11:00Oh wait! It gets better! Here's a bunch of Phi...Oh wait! It gets better! Here's a bunch of <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0MFEFnRJC4k" rel="nofollow">Philippino drag queens</a> entertaining an entire prison with a cover of that Korean song. God, that's perfect!nobodyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13067422372087431256noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5842308776616107900.post-70898882748967697242009-10-30T17:41:11.368+11:002009-10-30T17:41:11.368+11:00You didn't know I was famous mate? Put my name...You didn't know I was famous mate? Put my name into google and you'll get 96,000,000 results. Never mind John Lennon and Jesus, I'm bigger than that guy who played Mini-Me. What was him name again? Exactly! QED.<br /><br />Oh look, in searching to see how famous I am I found a bunch of sexy Korean girls <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qFjP-OJ7Bh4" rel="nofollow">singing about me.</a> God knows what they're saying but I was definitely 'me' I thought.<br /><br />Otherwise if you're really interested in me faking the moon landings, here's a <a href="http://www.honeysucklecreek.net/images/people_at_work2/SaturnV_model.jpg" rel="nofollow">photo</a> of me and Kevin 'Grunty' McTrouser standing next to one of the models I built. Looks pretty real don't it? As for the secret... pipe smoke! Blow it at the camera lens and Bob's your uncle. Stanley Kubrick eat your heart out!nobodyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13067422372087431256noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5842308776616107900.post-62666479194713318652009-10-30T15:40:16.379+11:002009-10-30T15:40:16.379+11:00Hey, Nobby, mate, yer famous! This animator or som...Hey, Nobby, mate, yer famous! This animator or somethin' says you could've faked the moon landings; true - "<em>Nobody could have faked that."</em> It's from the link Kikz gave. Here's a fuller quote -<br />"<em>. . . . says Dennis Muren. Muren, an eight-time Oscar winner, is the senior visual effects supervisor at Industrial Light & Magic, a division of Lucas Digital. He was responsible for making the Jurassic Park monsters come alive and for key scenes in Terminator 2, Star Wars, and The Abyss.<br /><br />"A moon landing simulation might have looked pretty real to 99.9 percent of the people. The thing is, though, that it wouldn't have looked the way it did. I've always been acutely aware of what's fake and what's real, and the moon landings were definitely real," Muren stipulates. "Look at 2001 or Destination Moon or Capricorn One or any other space movie: everybody was wrong. That wasn't the way the moon looked at all. There was an unusual sheen to the images from the moon, in the way that the light reflected in the camera, that is literally out of this world. Nobody could have faked that." </em><br /><br />So how'd you do it? The sheen thing, that is.jamesnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5842308776616107900.post-41100135809531337132009-10-29T18:05:18.305+11:002009-10-29T18:05:18.305+11:00FB
Tim, I agree – see my comment of 21:10 7:12FB<br /><br />Tim, I agree – see my comment of 21:10 7:12Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5842308776616107900.post-59059415062137718042009-10-29T16:06:43.503+11:002009-10-29T16:06:43.503+11:00Woof Woof Meow!Woof Woof <a href="http://images.google.com/images?client=safari&rls=en-us&q=cat%20pose&oe=UTF-8&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&hl=en&tab=wi" rel="nofollow">Meow!</a>nobodyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13067422372087431256noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5842308776616107900.post-75696664320024918852009-10-29T10:14:14.460+11:002009-10-29T10:14:14.460+11:00Nobody, yoga?!
You downward dog, you!
lol!
namas...Nobody, yoga?!<br /><br />You downward dog, you!<br />lol!<br /><br />namaste<br />i get that from rodney yeePennyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16834513101685995010noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5842308776616107900.post-7795065697860553952009-10-29T00:17:52.877+11:002009-10-29T00:17:52.877+11:00I come at Dave from a different angle then some of...I come at Dave from a different angle then some of you may.<br /><br />The moon is a subject dave has touched on before.<br />Both in his works and in his interviews.<br /><br /><br />Maybe, he hasn't really dug into it, like the Laurel canyon stuff, but, he has written on it previously.<br /><br />As nobody points out he doesn't dig into other topics often discussed by some of us.<br /><br />Nobody also pointed out before that WRH doesn't dig into all the things that many others have.<br /><br />I made a comment way back that these people cannot be all things to us.<br /><br />We have to decide for ourselves, wether what they write/post/talk about resonates with us.<br /><br />Like 9/11 which has it's stronger and weaker arguements, the gist of the situation is the official story isn't true.<br /><br />And sadly like Apollo we will never know THE TRUTH, because we weren't there.<br /><br />Nobody points out, rightly so, there have been sooo many lies, it is very nearly impossible to take anything as it has been told to us.<br /><br />That is where the real problem lies, not with Dave McGowan or Micheal Rivero, the rampant lies that create our reality.Pennyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16834513101685995010noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5842308776616107900.post-56720661925039665522009-10-29T00:16:39.769+11:002009-10-29T00:16:39.769+11:00hmmm. found this on lewrockwell this am..
http://...hmmm. found this on lewrockwell this am..<br /><br />http://www.lewrockwell.com/spl/the-wrong-stuff.html<br /><br />glad yer physically feelin bettr noby :)kikzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05647064395400783134noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5842308776616107900.post-69034411491976764092009-10-28T20:59:02.022+11:002009-10-28T20:59:02.022+11:00"there is no such thing as light from the sun..."there is no such thing as light from the sun, it is electromagnetic radiation...."<br />Um....electromagnetic radiation IS light. There is a tiny frequency range of that spectrum that our eyes can detect, with or without an atmosphere. I'll quote from my physics book "Maxwell, on the basis of the calculated speed of electromagnetic waves, argued that light must be an electromagnetic wave." p528 "Physics" by Douglas C. Giancoli.timhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03229697161527136177noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5842308776616107900.post-25301056804013210422009-10-28T17:24:46.839+11:002009-10-28T17:24:46.839+11:00AM! Yay - big grin on the face of yours truly. Gla...AM! Yay - big grin on the face of yours truly. Glad to see you're as feisty as ever. Onya mate.nobodyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13067422372087431256noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5842308776616107900.post-66426451178092271602009-10-28T17:17:54.816+11:002009-10-28T17:17:54.816+11:00Good to see you and the rest of the "irrevere...Good to see you and the rest of the "irreverent" ones still at it ;)<br /><br />The Moon Landing? oh, har de har har<br />Though I've read plenty on this subject, I really don't need no stinkin' "proofs" that it didnt' happen. For me it was always the fact that they didn't go back...to Colonize the place! Who are they fuckin' kidding. <br /><br />Anyhow, adieu. Y hasta luego... write on mite,annemariehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05839321588685752060noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5842308776616107900.post-1962800337332300582009-10-28T15:57:11.398+11:002009-10-28T15:57:11.398+11:00Thanks folks,
I thought that that was all very gr...Thanks folks,<br /><br />I thought that that was all very groovy. And in spite of Gallier's best efforts, I reckon I'm down with Edo. There's something odiferous about the whole caper. Mind you, this one and every other one, ha ha.<br /><br />I know that it's poor of me to apply the legal concept of falsum in uno, falsum in omnibus (false in one, false in all) to an entity rather than a single individual, but the US government has an abysmal track record with the truth. I understand that it's impossible for them to lie ALL the time and that sometimes they do tell the truth, but I'm thinking that it's only when it doesn't make any difference.<br /><br />Aside from that, I can dig wishing that Dave would stick with Laurel Canyon, but I also can't blame the guy for grinding to a halt on it. These things happen. You should see me! I used to be able to write in spite of Fox Sport screaming at me all day. And now I no longer can. I might have won a few battles with them but they won the war.<br /><br />Otherwise, the insistent line of thought that drove everything I wrote here (writing this blog used to fill my dreams you know) seems to be, um... less. I expect it's the yoga. And to be honest with you, the yoga is more fun.<br /><br />But I'll write something soon. ish.nobodyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13067422372087431256noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5842308776616107900.post-57089047431641176862009-10-28T02:20:39.821+11:002009-10-28T02:20:39.821+11:00i nobody, I was waiting for your next blurb, as I ...i nobody, I was waiting for your next blurb, as I wait for Dave I will wait for your next postPennyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16834513101685995010noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5842308776616107900.post-46934663874071114852009-10-27T22:08:36.104+11:002009-10-27T22:08:36.104+11:00"Dave made (or had to make) credibility hara-..."Dave made (or had to make) credibility hara-kiri."<br /><br />That's an interesting thought, and one that's not slipped me by either.<br />What's been obvious from discussion here, and over at Penny's blog is that Dave has made some elementary mistakes in his research.... Now personally, I'm gutted about this, because my initial reaction to that is to ask the question, "why?". Why Apollo, why now?<br /><br />I hate to admit it, but maybe Gallier has a point. It was the Laurel Canyon stuff I've been waiting with baited breath to read to its conclusion... The Apollo stuff came out of the blue.. Why?<br /><br />Why Dave? (if you're watching?)<br /><br />All that said... The radiation issue, the battery issue, that wacky press conference with 3 very uncomfortable looking astronauts... I still smell bullshit.Edohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04382069174934294077noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5842308776616107900.post-82103349966281498692009-10-27T17:39:04.152+11:002009-10-27T17:39:04.152+11:00Well done everyone... You've all made a great ...Well done everyone... You've all made a great article, well, brilliant!<br /><br />So entertaining. Give yourselves a pat on the back!<br /><br />Now, back to more mundane issues.<br />Gallier, which 'government department' do you work for? I'm curious.<br /><br />How I love word verification = hissesEdohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04382069174934294077noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5842308776616107900.post-19942354418092941652009-10-27T17:37:09.142+11:002009-10-27T17:37:09.142+11:00Oh no, me going again to University, no thanks. I&...Oh no, me going again to University, no thanks. I've got a degree in CS (Maîtrise d'Informatique as it is called here) and I wouldn't like to have to pass it again (the computer part was relatively easy but the rest (maths, physics, chemistry) was pure pain. This said, when I was at the military, my room mate was a amateur astronomer, a real passionate one and I decided then that it wasn't something for me. As you have probably noticed, I'm a real geek and take interest in all things scientific, but this guy (nice guy btw) was always making really boring things, like verifying ephemerides calculations, checking numbers, writing programs to check numbers. He was a brilliant guy and had already a job promise at that time from the SNECMA (the big french jet engine motorist) where he started after accomplishing his duty. I had to continue University after mine. So, no thanks, no real astronomy for me.gallier2https://www.blogger.com/profile/04285836062429366578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5842308776616107900.post-74621895792945450742009-10-27T15:35:09.571+11:002009-10-27T15:35:09.571+11:00Good God Gallier, it's seems your eagle eyes a...Good God Gallier, it's seems your eagle eyes are matched only by the cleanliness of your monitor. Me with my grotty laptop screen, I was wondering what the hell you were talking about right up until the moment I put them in photoshop and blew out the levels to 1 and 0 with nothing in between. There are definitely dots there. I wonder if any astronomers have done the math and figured out where the camera was pointing at, and when?<br /><br />I say Gallier, you seem to be into this above and beyond the call of duty - could you pop off to university for a couple of years, get yourself a degree in astronomy, and figure it out for us?<br /><br />Just joking mate. And that thing I said I was going to put on the front page? It all fell in a screaming heap. It started brilliantly but went nowhere. 1500 words chucked. Never mind. Hopefully some other thought will occur to me. Yoroshiku.nobodyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13067422372087431256noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5842308776616107900.post-79450705517962553362009-10-27T14:30:05.588+11:002009-10-27T14:30:05.588+11:00I'm looking at that last photo that Nobby has ...I'm looking at that last photo that Nobby has deconstructed and found kosher as far as the light source and shadows are concerned, and I'm wondering if the shadow stuff is to distract us from something far more obvious, something that is missing - the dog that didn't bark sorta thing.<br /><br />There's no dust on that shiny landing pad and it's attendant leg. The surface of the moon appears to have a layer of fine powdery dirt and if this landing craft came down from on high then the rocket would have blown all that dust to the shithouse. This has been said before. So an argument might be that it all resettled back down after the boys shut off their hot rocket. But if that were the case then that landing pad would be covered in dust but there's not a speck on it.<br />So it could only be that there is no dust in the immediate vicinity (because it got blown away) or there's dust there but it is also over the landing pad as well. <br />What can't be the case is dust on the ground to leave footprints in and no dust on the pad. But that's what we've got.jamesnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5842308776616107900.post-53697387163506399262009-10-26T21:20:37.207+11:002009-10-26T21:20:37.207+11:00Just a question for the good people here:
I've...Just a question for the good people here:<br />I've found several photos of which these 3 were the best, where there are some faint white dots on the black background<br />http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a15/AS15-84-11238HR.jpg<br />http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a15/AS15-84-11239HR.jpg<br />http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a15/AS15-84-11240HR.jpg<br /><br />what are these dots? Stars, space debries, dirt? <br /><br />And another point where Dave was talking ridiculous bullshit in his <br />article look at that picture of Apollo 10, look at the shape of the high-gain antennas<br />http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a410/AS10-28-4165HR.jpg<br /><br />in his fourth part, where he says that the CM pictures are composites, where a piece of moon picture hides parts of the high-gain antenna.<br />http://davesweb.cnchost.com/Apollo_CSM_lunar_orbit2.jpg<br /><br />So look at the other pictures from Apollo 8 on to Apollo 17, you will see that it is the shape of the antenna. <br />With bullshit like that, how are we supposed to take seriously any other point he makes, even if it has merrit. The hypotheses I made in the first comment here seems more and more likely, Dave made (or had to make) credibility hara-kiri.gallier2https://www.blogger.com/profile/04285836062429366578noreply@blogger.com