Christianity and the End Times

The difference between me and you is that I admit that I could be deceived. You think you could never be deceived.I mentioned that I could be wrong. I mentioned also that the reflectors against which we are being told lasers are bouncing, is a good argument for that piece of equipment being there somehow.(Yet the only thing they say tells me it came back is a beep on a computer and a spike seen on a graph).You can't answer a simple question about the "fantasy" of hearing tools clank in a space vacuum. The sounds are not heard on the ISS. Your not watching the video I count as probably cowardice to have your conceptions challenged.You can act uppity and condescending. But if answering the problem is beneath you I'm not impressed. The evidence looks to some like the footage is staged in an expensive government studio.SOUNDS in outer space?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pnJ3EDfdvhMWe don't hear drills or hammers in the footage of the International Space Station. Why on Apollo 16 moon work but not in astronauts working on the ISS?And this has nothing to do with my Christian faith.
I doubt that many who are doubtful of moon landing footage are all held together because of biblical faith.I'm not antiscience nor anti-real history.I just want to know the truth.
A Cold War propaganda effort to avoid war with the Soviets is a plausible
rationale for staging a high tech victory over US enemies.I saw it as a kid and felt just as proud as any other American, and comforted too. Latter I questioned what I saw and what I revisit to see again and again.At present I believe that if we did go to the moon we also produced some footage as a PLAN B in case it failed. US is not like Russia. We're not about to show people dying on the surface of the moon to American tax payers and to the world at large. So I don't apologize for some skepticism.You function by bigotry and prejudice. So YOU need to make it to be a Bible believing issue. And I have already cautioned readers that I could be incorrect about the moon walks.Now, since you're so smart, just explain sounds of tools clanking and being thrown around in the footage of Apollo (I think it was 16).https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w5O43FkzYZcEdited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Bullshit jaywill, You really need to stop saying stupid stuff. I KNOW I can be deceived and that the most likely source of deception is myself and so look for actual evidence and reality.And all you stupid space comments are also still simply stupid comments that have absolutely nothing to do with the topic and are just more evidence of your carny midway spiel.Won't work.The FACT is the mirrors exist, exist where they should be, first appeared when the flight they were scheduled to be on happened.Done deal. Only fools and con men question the fact mankind went to the moon.

Is there any chance that reality itself could be deceptive? I suppose you will retort that we could never know.

Your own perception (or intuition) of reality can certainly be deceptive. That's why human thought needs to be collaborative.

I agree that we need to collaborate. My question is why must it be skeptically evidence-based? If I walk into a community of believers, and they all confirm the same message, must it be wrong without concrete evidence? Granted I must be wary of drinking any kool-aid, but if they all seem to gain strength from the belief, and if they are otherwise rationally minded people, why must I shun them in favor of the gang of secular humanists at the park or at the library? Surely there is room in this world for atheists who are skeptical of anything or anyone other than humanity itself and evidence-based thinking...but just as surely there is room for faith communities.

You have one community with one message but across the street there's another community with a different message. How can you evaluate the different messages? If they were rationally-minded people, why would they reject concrete evidence?

I evaluate the messengers and not simply the messages. If one community feeds me, talks openly and honestly with me, and does not attempt to indoctrinate me (at least obviously) then I will align with them. I think it all boils down to which people one feels most comfortable with. Jesus never hung out with Temple folk. He hung with the street people kinda like you do.

But the Messenger is the same. It's only the interpretation of the message that differs.That's why it's so foolish to put your faith in the messenger. You're really just listening to what you want to hear. You're accepting the interpretation that you're comfortable with.What you should be doing is comparing the message with reality and then evaluating the interpretations based on how well they correspond to reality.

Actually, you have a good point. I'll have to ponder this one a bit.

What does that even mean?And you do understand that even reality should get tested? That is what Science and Rationality are based on.

quote:

---

Only fools and con men question the fact mankind went to the moon.

---

Shhhhhhhh! Now don't say anything about the sounds recorded on the moon. Maybe they'll just forget about it. (Apollo 12, 15)https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pnJ3EDfdvhMEdited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Okay, so then why did you bring it up on a thread entitled "Christianity and the End Times?"

I watched the video Apollo 16 and end up thinking the crucial point is where the microphone was. That is, it must be in the spacesuit somehow, right? Since he's talking to someone or hearing from someone? If that's the case the mechanical sounds could be transmitted through the spacesuit and not through the "atmosphere" anyway. Or something like that. Not that I know exactly how that would work, just that if the microphone isn't outside then the sound isn't being transmitted to it across the vacuum/"atmosphere"/space anyway.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

quote:

---

On July 17, 2009, NASA released low-resolution engineering test photos of the Apollo 11, Apollo 14, Apollo 15, Apollo 16 and Apollo 17 landing sites that have been photographed by the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter as part of the process of starting its primary mission.[181] The photos show the descent stage of the landers from each mission on the Moon's surface. The photo of the Apollo 14 landing site also shows tracks made by an astronaut between a science experiment (ALSEP) and the lander.[181] Photos of the Apollo 12 landing site were released by NASA on September 3, 2009.[182] The Intrepid lander descent stage, experiment package (ALSEP), Surveyor 3 spacecraft, and astronaut footpaths are all visible. While the LRO images have been enjoyed by the scientific community as a whole, they have not done anything to convince conspiracists that the landings happened.[183]

​

On September 1, 2009, India's lunar mission Chandrayaan-1 took photos of the Apollo 15 landing site and tracks of the lunar rovers.[184][185] The Indian Space Research Organisation launched their unmanned lunar probe on September 8, 2008 (IST), from Satish Dhawan Space Centre. The photos were taken by a hyperspectral camera fitted as part of the mission's image payload.[184]

​

China's second lunar probe, Chang'e 2, which was launched in 2010, can photograph the lunar surface with a resolution of up to 1.3 meters (4.3 feet). It spotted traces of the Apollo landings.[186]

---

Etc etc etcMoon landing conspiracy theories - WikipediaReligious nutters will believe anything.

I've read through your post three or four times and fail to see anything in it that pertains to recording sounds on the moon. What am I missing?