Space nonsense

Be the 1st to vote.

They spread the moon nonsense out over the year to fill the news gaps. Why else wouldn’t they release the news when “it happened” on 9/11/13¿

Does anyone still doubt anything NASA and the related space agencies say?

The researchers say a lump of rock weighing about 400kg (900lb) and travelling at 61,000km/h (38,000mph) slammed into the surface of the Moon.

The explosive strike was spotted by the Moon Impacts Detection and Analysis System (Midas) of telescopes in southern Spain on 11 September at 20:07 GMT.

m.bbc.com/news/science-environ…

No tags for this post.

1 thought on “Space nonsense

  1. rickpotvin

    Hey Ab– and fans– check this out. I just found a CLUES post I made about fakery at NASA on an apparent “anti-fundamentalist forum” where they try to ridicule our line of reasoning. There are 14 comments which attack me, insult me, ridicule me and mock me. They do a good job! They quoted me at lenght and I published under my own name– so this entire piece is easily findable under my name in google. (Other types of personalities might have creid about cyberbullying– but I say the anti-bully industry is illegitimate and fraudulent too– social engineering designed to stop free speech). Here’s the post
    fstdt.com/QuoteComment.aspx?QI…

    I plan on returning to CLUES at some point since Simon invitied me back after hearing me on Ab’s podcast but his registration page still won’t accept my email. We’ll work it out. I’ll be carefuly HOW I post to CLUES in the future and save my “notes” for my own Who Did 9/11 Forum at www.network54.com/Forum/153202…
    which uses Network54. I find that commenting on issues here at Fakolokist is best and easiest by posting in this comments section under an appropriate topic– like this one about NASA for insatnce. Ab’s index is good enough to find it again.

    I like to be picked up by the anti-Fundie forum because they go overboard on attacking my views– which in a paradoxical way, might lead some of their readers to seriously reconsider our view. Interestingly, that paradox exists in all good attacks– the attack is free advertising for our exposee…. a true paradox in formal logic that turns the tables on the attacker. The very act of attack provides the exposee… sort of a yin yang of truth.

    I have not used Ab’s forum here because it’s divided up on too many sections. I can’t find Simon’s feed either as AB said was aavailable. I like Ab’s gadget that shows the latest comments here. I’ve stopped using quick chat. Just some feedback here to be helpful, not critical.

Leave a Reply