Did Neil Armstrong ever admit his roal in that affair?
Were PUMBLENUTS ever discovered on the surface of the moon?
I wonder about things like that all day. Oh yes, I surely do.
Name:
Anonymous2015-03-21 1:21
>>3 Oscar, lover, don't you see this is hurting you? Save your pumblenuts, shave those pumblenuts, trim them neatly and spare them now, fold them sweetly and tuck them down, and Oscar, lover, pull them out, only when a NEED is about.
Name:
RedCream2015-03-21 1:26
I prefer you would call me Oscar oanly after a rough bout of brazen bisexuality.[1]
>>5 Oscar, darling, you're not intimate with my comings and goings. How can you say what I've been up to? You filthy scoundrel! You wouldn't dare!
Name:
Anonymous2015-03-21 3:36
He didn't. The moon landing was faked from a movie set in the Sea of Tranquility on Mars. Hitler was director of cinematography and Schinler was the executive producer. It was all a ploy to get the nation's of Old Earth to send tribute to their Aryan Overlords.
Name:
Anonymous2015-03-21 8:57
The moon landing was faked, they faked it on the moon.
Name:
Anonymous2015-03-21 9:27
>>8 No, they faked it in Hollywood, not on the moon (since no American has ever been to the moon).
Name:
Anonymous2015-03-21 10:54
>>9 No, they faked it on the moon with humanoid robots.
No, the landing of Murricans on the moon was one of the few things that the US didn't fake.
The question is: why have all moon operations been shut down since then? Is it because the Moon is actually an alien ship in disguise, and the aliens have warned Murica to back the fuck off?
Name:
Anonymous2015-03-22 20:15
>>12 Lunarians beat the shit out of Murricans in the Lunar War. The two moon rabbits who landed on Gensokyo are evidence of this.
Name:
Anonymous2015-03-22 20:34
Seriously, they send a robot to Mars and keep hyping up the future Mars expedition, but nobody seems to care about the Moon anymore. What's up with that? Why work towards establishing a colony on Mars when we've got a whole uncolonized Moon right by our side?
Name:
Anonymous2015-03-23 13:10
>>14 Mars is more habitable and once you're off the planet it isn't a huge detour.
>>15 Except Mars isn't at all habitable due to radiation and likely monsters already there. Reality is, we don't know how many monsters are on Mars or what they might look like. We've landed a few robots on the surface, but only on the relatively rare flatlands, never on the numerous hills and crevices where monsters most likely lurk.
Name:
Anonymous2015-03-23 15:37
>>13 Exactly. So is it that insane to think that it was a Lunarian who filmed Neil Armstrong? And he got to see lunar rabbits too.
According to NASA, a vessel with humans on it would take roughly six months to travel to Mars and another six months to travel back from Mars. In addition, astronauts would have to stay 18-20 months on Mars before the planets re-align for a return trip. In all, the mission would take roughly 2 1/2 years.
That is a pretty huge detour, actually. For comparison, getting a crew to the Moon would take about 5 days with modern technology.
Name:
Anonymous2015-03-23 18:59
The months a journey to Mars takes will probably mean a difference between life and death for the crew in case something goes wrong. And let's face it, something probably will go wrong, because no one on Earth has field-tested planet colonization technologies. Why not test it all out with a Moon colony? That would be much safer as well as cheaper. Besides, the Moon is attractive for its He3 deposits.
So why all the Mars hype all of a sudden? I'm looking at you, NASA, ESA, Russia, China etc.
Name:
Anonymous2015-03-24 14:04
>>19 Mars is novel, plus the idea of terra forming Mars is more attractive because when the sun becomes a red giant, the moon is getting swallowed up with the Earth.
>>18 Okay, okay, I know this is going to sound like a shitpost, but: who are you quoting? I'd like to read more.
Name:
Anonymous2015-03-24 15:34
>>19 They are probably expecting private initiative to fund space travel to the moon at this point.
Name:
Anonymous2015-04-01 14:31
I've just read an interview of Alexei Leonov (the first man to conduct extra-vehicular activity in space) and he says that Neil Armstrong did land on the Moon for real. In fact, he said that he was one of the few people in USSR who watched it in real-time (at a far-space communications base in Moscow). He said that only stupidity didn't allow USSR officials to actnowledge this event.
>>11 No, they built a fake Hollywood on the moon and faked it with humanoid robots.
Name:
Anonymous2015-04-03 14:51
>>28 No, they faked building a fake Hollywood on the Moon and then faked it all in the real Hollywood.
The purpose of all that was stealing government funds for building a Hollywood on the Moon.
Name:
Anonymous2015-04-04 8:28
A moon, wow you're all stupid. If there was really a moon, it would fall down. Now you'll claim it has jet engines attacted to keep it moving or something equally ridiculous. Have any of you actually been to this so-called moon, or are you just accepting the words or others that it's there? What do lights in the sky prove? There's millions of them that no one cares about. The jews are laughing at the gullible goyim right now.