Moon Landing 'hero' Buzz Aldrin finally comes clean

pen-meister

Well-known member
Old World Underground
πŸ‘‘
🐸 Citizen of the Internet 🐸
🎩
β°β˜•πŸš¬πŸš½πŸšΏπŸͺ’πŸ‹πŸ»πŸ₯“πŸ’»β›ͺ️
mixture of lies and truth in order to lure people in.
you make it sound like people get lured into a prison. I got lured into Hitler was not so bad, I got lured into 911 was mossad job, I got lured into the holohoax. Im glad somebody is doing some luring
 

Mark

Well-known asshole. Don't mess with MarkieBoy!
Old World Underground
🐸 Citizen of the Internet 🐸
β°β˜•πŸš¬πŸš½πŸšΏπŸͺ’πŸ‹πŸ»
you make it sound like people get lured into a prison. I got lured into Hitler was not so bad, I got lured into 911 was mossad job, I got lured into the holohoax. Im glad somebody is doing some luring
I'm saying it's the truthful parts that are used as the lure. Then they insert their BS. Of course, not all of them do this. It's quite possible to get untainted info from some sources. But you can be sure that some others are playing this dirty disinfo game in order to taint other, valid information. This is why I would never promote any videos by Eric Dubay concerning the Apollo fraud, however good they may be. I can't prove that Dubay is a liar but I trust my intuition on this. He has been planted there for a purpose which is to discredit Apollo disbelievers.
And on the other hand, while I think Bart Sibrel has a few whacky beliefs himself, I don't believe that he is a liar so I'm quite happy posting his Apollo clips.
 
Last edited:

terrygrip

Well-known member
Old World Underground
🐸 Citizen of the Internet 🐸
β°β˜•πŸš¬πŸš½πŸšΏπŸͺ’πŸ‹πŸ»
Forced to comment because 8 million comments - "scariest moment? didn't happen."

This thread is humor right? Is an explanation really necessary?
 

Mark

Well-known asshole. Don't mess with MarkieBoy!
Old World Underground
🐸 Citizen of the Internet 🐸
β°β˜•πŸš¬πŸš½πŸšΏπŸͺ’πŸ‹πŸ»
Forced to comment because 8 million comments - "scariest moment? didn't happen."

This thread is humor right? Is an explanation really necessary?
Spot the Apollo believer! You're most welcome to join in the confusion.
 

Mark

Well-known asshole. Don't mess with MarkieBoy!
Old World Underground
🐸 Citizen of the Internet 🐸
β°β˜•πŸš¬πŸš½πŸšΏπŸͺ’πŸ‹πŸ»
And btw @pen-meister , I wasn't sure about you at first but you appear to be sincere, if a little misguided. That's why I don't give you a hard time anymore.
 

terrygrip

Well-known member
Old World Underground
🐸 Citizen of the Internet 🐸
β°β˜•πŸš¬πŸš½πŸšΏπŸͺ’πŸ‹πŸ»

pen-meister

Well-known member
Old World Underground
πŸ‘‘
🐸 Citizen of the Internet 🐸
🎩
β°β˜•πŸš¬πŸš½πŸšΏπŸͺ’πŸ‹πŸ»πŸ₯“πŸ’»β›ͺ️
@JasonVorhees
I am only putting this up here because its something "new" I came across on the topic of competitive sailboat races around the world. I am not putting this up as a proof.
So recently I learned of a Skipper, named Herve Riboni, who has participated in a similar contest called "The Whitbread Round The World Race" also called the "Volvo Ocean Race" in their 1993/94 contest. To my surprise this Skipper claims the earth is flat and apparently came, in part, to this conclusion as a result of trying to understand the significant variations in the 'Magnetc Declanations' required on various maps for maritime navigation.

below is a map of 'magnetic declantaions' from wikipedia, which is the subject of a presentation he now gives whereby he contends that the 'magnetic declanations' are used as subterfuge to mask the flat nature of the earth [video below]. His English is broken but understandable- he is Swiss and I assume French is his native tongue. I am just sharing it here as while I am studying further some of his claims.

magnetic-declination-desc.png
magnetic-declination-map.png

Herve Riboni presentation
 

pen-meister

Well-known member
Old World Underground
πŸ‘‘
🐸 Citizen of the Internet 🐸
🎩
β°β˜•πŸš¬πŸš½πŸšΏπŸͺ’πŸ‹πŸ»πŸ₯“πŸ’»β›ͺ️
I will try and find the actual excerpt from Newton on gravity and orbital physics ... and his theoretical application of his theory of gravity and accelleration of two masses attracted toward each other - applied to planets; but in his own writing he said and I paraphrase: no respected man of learning would dare use this theory to postulate such a model of orbiting planets and moons based on his own theory
@BillyRayJenkins
I finally found the quote & citation. Newton is putting his own THEORY of gravity in its proper place. He oughta know!newton.png
 

DaveA

Well-known member
Old World Underground
πŸ‘‘
🐸 Citizen of the Internet 🐸
🎩
β°β˜•πŸš¬πŸš½πŸšΏπŸͺ’πŸ‹πŸ»πŸ₯“πŸ’»β›ͺοΈπŸ–
@JasonVorhees
below is a map of 'magnetic declantaions' from wikipedia, which is the subject of a presentation he now gives whereby he contends that the 'magnetic declanations' are used as subterfuge to mask the flat nature of the earth [video below]. His English is broken but understandable- he is Swiss and I assume French is his native tongue. I am just sharing it here as while I am studying further some of his claims.
Flat-earthers have a simplistic understanding of gravity (it pulls things "down"), and no understanding of magnetism, so physics arguments are useless against them. Instead, imagine a wall with tiny ants crawling on it, at night, and you have a lantern. If the wall is flat, there is absolutely no place you can hold the lantern -- high, low, near, far, north, south, east, west -- such that some ants can see it but others cannot. When the sun sets on a flat earth, it sets for everyone (unless there are people on the other side, who would then all see the sun rise), and if it does not set but merely moves around, it gets lower and dimmer for some people but remains above the horizon.

Once people could travel north-south and see the celestial sphere shift in the opposite direction, there was no debate on the shape of the earth. But until Newton discovered the laws of inertia, it was obvious that the earth does not move; the celestial sphere must revolve around it.
It is inconceivable that inanimate brute matter should, without the mediation of something else which is not material, operate upon and affect other matter without mutual contact...
Then it would have really blown Mr. Newton's mind to learn that the same is true at every scale of existence. Nothing is in "mutual contact" with anything else; the densest matter is but a great void across which point-like particles interact via the four fundamental forces -- strong, weak, electromagnetism, and gravity.
 

Mark

Well-known asshole. Don't mess with MarkieBoy!
Old World Underground
🐸 Citizen of the Internet 🐸
β°β˜•πŸš¬πŸš½πŸšΏπŸͺ’πŸ‹πŸ»
When the sun sets on a flat earth, it sets for everyone...
As I recall, they get around this point by saying that light only travels a finite distance.
... strong, weak, electromagnetism, and gravity.
It's just a hunch, but I believe it will eventually be found out that these forces are all the same; essentially that they are all manifestations of electromagnetism. In other words, why have four separate attractive forces when one would suffice? I think this is more revealing of our current lack of understanding than anything else.

And here's a bonus question: The force of gravity keeps the Earth in orbit around the Sun; the force of gravity also keeps the Moon in orbit around the Earth. So, why doesn't the gravitational influence of the Sun pull the Moon out of its stable orbit around the Earth (it's also puzzling to note that the Moon does not rotate with respect to the Earth, in that we only see one side of it)? These points have never been explained successfully, at least not to my satisfaction.
 
Last edited:

DaveA

Well-known member
Old World Underground
πŸ‘‘
🐸 Citizen of the Internet 🐸
🎩
β°β˜•πŸš¬πŸš½πŸšΏπŸͺ’πŸ‹πŸ»πŸ₯“πŸ’»β›ͺοΈπŸ–
As I recall, they get around this point by saying that light only travels a finite distance.
Which doesn't work unless light bends in some strange way such that the sun appears to dive below the ocean before its light fades out, when in fact it is always above the horizon for everyone on flat-earth.
It's just a hunch, but I believe it will eventually be found out that these forces are all the same; essentially that they are all manifestations of electromagnetism. In other words, why have four separate attractive forces when one would suffice? I think this is more revealing of our current lack of understanding than anything else.
They figured out that electromagnetism and weak are manifestations of the same force, called electroweak. Strong is still poorly understood, and gravity, according to general relativity, isn't a force at all but merely the shortest path through 4D spacetime.

I recommend this video for giving me two stunning realizations: Electric charge is actually a combination of two charges, one related to the weak force, and strong charge has two dimensions, not three:
And here's a bonus question: The force of gravity keeps the Earth in orbit around the Sun; the force of gravity also keeps the Moon in orbit around the Earth. So, why doesn't the gravitational influence of the Sun pull the Moon out of its stable orbit around the Earth? This point has never been successfully explained, at least not to my satisfaction.
Just as a small rock and a large rock dropped together fall together, the sun bends the paths of the earth and the moon to the same degree. Not exactly the same, because the sun pulls slightly harder on whichever body is presently closer to it -- the earth at full moon and the moon at new moon two weeks later. Because this force keeps flipping direction, it doesn't cause a lasting change in the moon's orbit but instead makes it oscillate in an 18-year cycle called a "saros". Jupiter, Venus, and Mars also contribute to this oscillation, but again, to no lasting effect. At only 1/400 the distance to the sun, the moon lies firmly within earth's sphere of influence.
 

Mark

Well-known asshole. Don't mess with MarkieBoy!
Old World Underground
🐸 Citizen of the Internet 🐸
β°β˜•πŸš¬πŸš½πŸšΏπŸͺ’πŸ‹πŸ»
Which doesn't work unless light bends in some strange way such that the sun appears to dive below the ocean before its light fades out, when in fact it is always above the horizon for everyone on flat-earth.
Of course it doesn't work. But Flat Earthers have a knack of being able to rearrange the universe in ways to suit their impossibly complex modelling.
... and gravity, according to general relativity, isn't a force at all but merely the shortest path through 4D spacetime.
I'm familiar with this explanation but I consider it a bit dubious. A bit of applied mathemagics can make anything work, however. A while ago I discovered this gem of a video which gives a good, simple perspective on this idea of space-time.


I recommend this video for giving me two stunning realizations: Electric charge is actually a combination of two charges, one related to the weak force, and strong charge has two dimensions, not three:
This guy completely lost me when he started talking about 4D and then 6D 'charge space' (then later on, he starts babbling about 200+ dimensions!). I'm quite sure there are brilliant minds at work on these puzzling questions, but I can never be sure that these people aren't wasting my time, without acquiring the necessary expertise to understand it all (and while I'm no slouch, I doubt I could). Again, clever manipulations involving mathemagics can make anything possible. This isn't a cynical point of view, but there's nothing here that can convince me that these particle physicists are on the right track when it comes to correctly interpreting the results of their experiments. Their explanations carry the weight of authority, however, that's no guarantee that their modelling is correct. The more complex their explanations become, the more inaccessible they are which, in turn, makes their verity even more questionable. I'm afraid I don't have any faith in such explanations.
Just as a small rock and a large rock dropped together fall together, the sun bends the paths of the earth and the moon to the same degree. Not exactly the same...
Well, at least we do know that these various forces balance out somehow because of the apparent orbital stability. I'm not really sure what to believe about that.
 

DaveA

Well-known member
Old World Underground
πŸ‘‘
🐸 Citizen of the Internet 🐸
🎩
β°β˜•πŸš¬πŸš½πŸšΏπŸͺ’πŸ‹πŸ»πŸ₯“πŸ’»β›ͺοΈπŸ–
This guy completely lost me when he started talking about 4D and then 6D 'charge space' (then later on, he starts babbling about 200+ dimensions!).
Lisi is not a proponent of string theory, with its 11 or 26 or however many dimensions. His particles exist in Einstein's 4D spacetime which, except in the vicinity of black holes, can be approximated as three physical dimensions plus time.

Now think of "color space", where you map all possible colors into an RGB cube whose eight corners are black, red, green, blue, cyan, magenta, yellow, and white. Not a real object but an aid to understanding human color perception, because humans see three primary colors.

Fundamental particles have six different types of charge (that we know of), so Lisi plots their positions in "charge space" as a 6D hypercube, which he then twirls around its six axes looking for patterns.
 

Mark

Well-known asshole. Don't mess with MarkieBoy!
Old World Underground
🐸 Citizen of the Internet 🐸
β°β˜•πŸš¬πŸš½πŸšΏπŸͺ’πŸ‹πŸ»
His particles exist in Einstein's 4D spacetime which, except in the vicinity of black holes...
... which are mathemagical abstractions. I really don't want to keep posting clips for you, but please pay attention to this brief one. Yes, it is a bit lazy of me, however I cannot provide a better explanation than this man does.


... so Lisi plots their positions in "charge space" as a 6D hypercube, which he then twirls around its six axes looking for patterns.
But does this have anything to do with reality? Maybe, but I doubt it. I've yet to see anything useful that these people provide. They waste tons of pubic money on their particle accelerators and such.

Here is one more, if you can be bothered. I like this channel a lot. It's worth a browse-through.

 
Last edited:

DaveA

Well-known member
Old World Underground
πŸ‘‘
🐸 Citizen of the Internet 🐸
🎩
β°β˜•πŸš¬πŸš½πŸšΏπŸͺ’πŸ‹πŸ»πŸ₯“πŸ’»β›ͺοΈπŸ–
... which are mathemagical abstractions. I really don't want to keep posting clips for you, but please pay attention to this brief one. Yes, it is a bit lazy of me, however I cannot provide a better explanation than this man does.
"Black holes don't exist because they conflict with my theory that stars are made of condensed matter."

This dude flunked freshman-level physics and decided to make a living telling people that physics is all bullshit, "the sun is obviously a solid object", etc.

We know that dark objects of extreme density exist because we can observe them throwing nearby massive stars around. S2, the closest star to the center of our galaxy, reaches 20% of the speed of light at closest approach to this unseen point.

Ever since 1676, when Ole RΓΈmer discovered that light travels at finite speed, it's been theorized that extremely dense objects could have gravity too strong for even light to escape, though it took almost 300 years to actually find one.

What's scary is that we still have no way of detecting solitary black holes, so we have no idea how common they are.
 

pen-meister

Well-known member
Old World Underground
πŸ‘‘
🐸 Citizen of the Internet 🐸
🎩
β°β˜•πŸš¬πŸš½πŸšΏπŸͺ’πŸ‹πŸ»πŸ₯“πŸ’»β›ͺ️
... which are mathemagical abstractions. I really don't want to keep posting clips for you, but please pay attention to this brief one. Yes, it is a bit lazy of me, however I cannot provide a better explanation than this man does.



But does this have anything to do with reality? Maybe, but I doubt it. I've yet to see anything useful that these people provide. They waste tons of pubic money on their particle accelerators and such.

Here is one more, if you can be bothered. I like this channel a lot. It's worth a browse-through.

I liked that first vid. thanks Mark.
black-holes-relativity.png
 

pen-meister

Well-known member
Old World Underground
πŸ‘‘
🐸 Citizen of the Internet 🐸
🎩
β°β˜•πŸš¬πŸš½πŸšΏπŸͺ’πŸ‹πŸ»πŸ₯“πŸ’»β›ͺ️
>Buzz Aldrin on Conan O'Brien, 2000
>Conan: I remember watching the moon landing as a kid
>Buzz: No you didn't. You watched animation. You watched animation and you heard our voices.
 

Zoomhauer

Well-known member
Cave Beast
β°β˜•
you make it sound like people get lured into a prison. I got lured into Hitler was not so bad, I got lured into 911 was mossad job, I got lured into the holohoax. Im glad somebody is doing some luring
This seems to be a common draw. It starts with realizing the causes of World War I were complex, therefore Germany does not bear sole responsibility for its outbreak, which means the Versailles treaty was unfair for only punishing Germany. This means German pushback was only reasonable, right up to wanting to rejoin with the Germans in Danzig eager to join the Reich. Soviets also invaded Poland so the entire Allies vs. Axis paradigm rings hollow. The entire war post 1950s is retconned as one to save Jewish victims from meanie aggressor despite Allied leaders Truman & Stalin both distrusting Jews in their personal lives.

9/11 is a big one too. If you believe the 9/11 Commission, well, the event still served as a huge redpill on illegal immigration, overstayed visas, multiculturalism, Islams incompatibility with the West, diversity and immigration in general considering the Mideast is a breeding grounds for violent anti-Americanism and even "moderate" Muslims share lots of hatred with and sympathy for the radicals and terrorists.
If you don't believe the Commission Report, well then of course there's Silverstein, the Dancing Israelis set free within weeks of their arrest, Odigo messaging service's prewarning of the attacks, Fox News' 2001 report on massive Israeli spy rings infiltrating America (subsequently shelved, never spoken of again), Netanyahu "this benefits us" comments, PNAC, neocons, the Israel lobby, Israeli history of terrorism/our greatest ally memes (King David hotel bombing, USS Liberty, Pollard).

And regardless of whether you believe the Commission Report or not, it becomes clear that the forever wars in Arabia, the Patriot Act, the NSA, the militarization of police, the turning the US of A into a police state and gun control were all at best irrelevant to the supposed goal of ensuring we would never have to face such a vicious attack ever again. Both tales will also lead a logical thinker to the real problem in each equation: diversity. In one case Muslims. In the other Jews. These paths are also not mutually exclusive, i.e one of these being guilty does not make the other innocent.
 

Mark

Well-known asshole. Don't mess with MarkieBoy!
Old World Underground
🐸 Citizen of the Internet 🐸
β°β˜•πŸš¬πŸš½πŸšΏπŸͺ’πŸ‹πŸ»
This dude flunked freshman-level physics and decided to make a living telling people that physics is all bullshit, "the sun is obviously a solid object", etc.
This only reeks of butthurt. I'd recommend you look at his material more closely, not that I expect you ever will. Anyway, whatever.
 

Mark

Well-known asshole. Don't mess with MarkieBoy!
Old World Underground
🐸 Citizen of the Internet 🐸
β°β˜•πŸš¬πŸš½πŸšΏπŸͺ’πŸ‹πŸ»
@DaveA

Here is a paper by Dr. Robitaille outlining 40 lines of evidence that the Sun (and by extension, the stars) is composed of condensed matter. He's also produced a fair number of videos on his channel about this. It looks like a slam-dunk to me.

 

DaveA

Well-known member
Old World Underground
πŸ‘‘
🐸 Citizen of the Internet 🐸
🎩
β°β˜•πŸš¬πŸš½πŸšΏπŸͺ’πŸ‹πŸ»πŸ₯“πŸ’»β›ͺοΈπŸ–
Here is a paper by Dr. Robitaille outlining 40 lines of evidence that the Sun (and by extension, the stars) is composed of condensed matter. He's also produced a fair number of videos on his channel about this. It looks like a slam-dunk to me.
I cannot dissect the sun or observe black holes in my backyard telescope, so I follow the one-drop rule instead: One African great-great-grandparent makes you a nigger. One drop of sewage in a barrel of wine makes a barrel of sewage. And one drop of politics in a field of science makes it a field of politics.

If I read of some scientific finding, and there's any way whatsoever that it could have an effect on public policy, I dismiss it as rubbish. Psychology, sociology, and economics are all utter bullshit. Zoology used to be exploited so politicians could "save endangered species", but now that they can "save the planet from global warming" instead, climatology is their new whore and zoology might be OK.

And of course medicine has been utterly destroyed by the need to find a Covid "vaccine" and "prove" it "safe and effective".

Getting back to astrophysics, what does the (non)existence of black holes mean for public policy? Absolutely nothing, which is why I assume that scientists there are doing actual science and not grinding political axes.
 

Mark

Well-known asshole. Don't mess with MarkieBoy!
Old World Underground
🐸 Citizen of the Internet 🐸
β°β˜•πŸš¬πŸš½πŸšΏπŸͺ’πŸ‹πŸ»
Getting back to astrophysics, what does the (non)existence of black holes mean for public policy? Absolutely nothing, which is why I assume that scientists there are doing actual science and not grinding political axes.
What people like Robitaille are up against are institutionally-entrenched ideas. As a result, people like himself find it nigh-impossible to publish a peer reviewed paper in any of the mainstream scientific journals. So we're not talking about conspiracies here, but rather an attribute of human nature to stick with orthodoxy. Otherwise they risk being side-lined, ridiculed or even fired. That's just the way it is.
I have no dog in the fight; I'm just convinced that Robitaille is onto something because I've spent a lot of time reviewing his material. There's no more to it than that; take it or leave it.
 

DaveA

Well-known member
Old World Underground
πŸ‘‘
🐸 Citizen of the Internet 🐸
🎩
β°β˜•πŸš¬πŸš½πŸšΏπŸͺ’πŸ‹πŸ»πŸ₯“πŸ’»β›ͺοΈπŸ–
What people like Robitaille are up against are institutionally-entrenched ideas. As a result, people like himself find it nigh-impossible to publish a peer reviewed paper in any of the mainstream scientific journals. So we're not talking about conspiracies here, but rather an attribute of human nature to stick with orthodoxy. Otherwise they risk being side-lined, ridiculed or even fired. That's just the way it is.
I have no dog in the fight; I'm just convinced that Robitaille is onto something because I've spent a lot of time reviewing his material. There's no more to it than that; take it or leave it.
New scientific theories don't gain acceptance by scientists all saying, "Golly gee whiz, you're right, let's change the textbooks!" Instead, there's a gradual process of old scientists dying off and younger scientists replacing them. As Max Planck put it, "Science advances one funeral at a time."
 

Mark

Well-known asshole. Don't mess with MarkieBoy!
Old World Underground
🐸 Citizen of the Internet 🐸
β°β˜•πŸš¬πŸš½πŸšΏπŸͺ’πŸ‹πŸ»
New scientific theories don't gain acceptance by scientists all saying, "Golly gee whiz, you're right, let's change the textbooks!" Instead, there's a gradual process of old scientists dying off and younger scientists replacing them. As Max Planck put it, "Science advances one funeral at a time."
Yes, I agree with that. In this case, science took a wrong turn a long time ago. In fact, Robitaille's very first video addresses this subject, "A History of the Gaseous Sun."
 
Top