Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Doomsday
1: Nope. Try agian. The moon reflects the sun's light so if anything it'd be an ambient light IF THAT while one were actually one it and it'd be coming form the surface itself. Not from a direct and focused secondary point. That dosent explain the crosshair phenominon at all seeing that the crosshair is BEHIND another image. All the light in the world wouldn't do that. Especially seeing that the object that broke the continuity isn't luminiscent in any way shape or form.
A: False again. First up, the craft landing on the moon would apply force against the craft AND the moon's surface. Not magically defy physics and only apply it to the craft. Secondly, thrusters (aka afterburners) ONLY work off air. Ever see a flame in space? Don't you need air (and fuel and spark) to have fire??? C'mon man, this is thirdgrade stuff. "Thrusters" as you keep callin it only works off the basic principals of air. And they're not called "thusters" they're called Afterburners. They're defined as this:
af·ter·burn·er Audio pronunciation of "afterburner" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (ftr-bûrnr)
n.
1. A device for augmenting the thrust of a jet engine by burning additional fuel with the uncombined oxygen in the exhaust gases.
Wait.....did that just say oxygen??? damn....
You keep aying "we went to the moon" but haven't given a credible explaination yet. Sounds liek you dont' even know the fundamentals of a friggin fire.
|
I'm not going to argue simple science with someone who likes to disagree for the sake of disagreeing...
There is virtually NO AIR RESISTANCE in space...so thrusters work much easier in space than on earth...There are molecules in space...but that's negligible for what we're talking about...
and Cross haird behind an image COULD be created through bleeding intense light...research it duke.
I'm saying that you could have a rocket take off on the moon and not create this huge crater or dust plume...Quite possible again due to the fact--AGAIN--that a dust plume is created by the air in between the ship and the ground, which on the moon doesn't exist.
You're argument that we didn't go to the moon stems on a few photos that exibit unusual light representations?
that's ridiculous...cuz, weren't u the same person who said GHOSTS can't exist because of of natural phenomenon...
now...which is more logical? that we went to the moon and there were visual abnormalities due to various light sources, or that there is an international Hoax to make JFK look like a fuckin hero?
get da fuck outta here