so why didnt soviets expose fake moon landing?

BradGuth schreef:



but why isn't there a us base on 'mars' or the 'moon' if it all was a hoax?
why go to the 'moon' and end the hoax?
it's is all so simple right?
so a trip to mars would have been also easy,why didn't they do that?
explain..

On Oct 7, 6:37 am, stefan <bng> wrote:

Your LSD is running a tad low. Increase the IV drip and we'll talk.

In other words, you'd have no idea as to how we'd manage to keep
10,000 spare/surplus military, including DARPA and their civil service
cartel up and running, much less of Russia sustaining 10 fold more.

Why didn't you just say that you couldn't say?

You do realize that our physically dark Selene/moon offers way more
gamma than our Van Allen belts can muster up. That impressive gamma
bandpass image was after all, obtained while having to look through
most all 70,000 km worth of our Van Allen badlands. Don't otherwise
forget that GSO offers 2e3 Sv/year, as shielded by 2 g/cm2 (5/16"
aluminum), and it's why such satellites need to be configured as rad-
hard.

~ BG

BradGuth schreef:

kookoo..



the moon landings are all a HOAX right???
they NEVER went to the moon RIGHT?
so why wine about the van allen radiation if they NEVER went to the
moon,they were never exposed to the radiation RIGHT?
they allready fooled us so why don't they keep fooling us with
'landings' on mars or 'bases' on the moon ?
you must have a good explanation right?

On Wed, 8 Oct 2008 04:29:59 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth <[Registered users can see links. ]>
wrote:


Yes. You'll need to be as high as ~ BG to understand what follows.


DARPA, DARPA, DARPA...


Babble babble babble...

--
Shill #2

Ears on the loon go round and round, round and round, round and round...
theobviousgcashman

On Oct 8, 4:48 am, stefan <bng> wrote:

You really should change you medication dosage.

Even those having failed 5th grade are smarter than you.

~ BG

On Oct 8, 8:46 am, Government Shill #2 <[Registered users can see links. ]> wrote:

In other words, I'm right.

~ BG

On Wed, 8 Oct 2008 09:08:30 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth <[Registered users can see links. ]>
wrote:


You could be. Who would know? Only others who speak Babbleonian.

--
Shill #2

Ears on the loon go round and round, round and round, round and round...
theobviousgcashman

On Oct 8, 9:19 am, Government Shill #2 <[Registered users can see links. ]> wrote:

In other words, you're saying that even though our Government via
DARPA, NASA, TRW and Raytheon are lying to us about the moon and Van
Allan radiation, all because you'd prefer that it's not 0.1% as bad
off, that you believe everything else they and of what most any other
mainstream has to say, as though it's the one and only word of your
pretend-Atheist God...

I'll buy that, because I know that you are a moron of an idiot, if
that good.

~ BG

On Wed, 8 Oct 2008 10:28:54 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth <[Registered users can see links. ]>
wrote:


No, no, no.

In other words, I'm saying that you are an incomprehensible nut bag. The
words that you string together seem to make sense to you. The rest of us
are sitting here going "WTF?"



You have those words around the wrong way too. It should be your
pretend-god. God is made up. Fiction. Fantasy.

--
Shill #2

We are all atheists about most of the gods that societies have ever
believed in. Some of us just go one god further.
Richard Dawkins (1941 - ), "The Root of All Evil"

On Oct 8, 11:07 am, BradGuth <[Registered users can see links. ]> wrote:

Try answering the question Brad if the faked landing were so good, why
not keep it up?