- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Weren't we supposed to be on the moon again* by now?
Posted on 10/4/22 at 9:10 am to jonnyanony
Posted on 10/4/22 at 9:10 am to jonnyanony
quote:
jonnyanony
Don't try to delete that post. At 9:01am you replied to yourself then brought your alter in to essentially regurgitate the same dumb shite. BUSTED
1
Posted on 10/4/22 at 9:10 am to Tomatocantender
quote:
Don't try to delete that post. At 9:01am you replied to yourself then brought your alter in to essentially regurgitate the same dumb shite. BUSTED
You are unbelievably dumb.
Posted on 10/4/22 at 9:11 am to jonnyanony
Yeah, I'm not the dumbass that replied to himself and forgot to switch alters. Stupid fvcking shite. 
Posted on 10/4/22 at 9:13 am to Tomatocantender
quote:
Yeah, I'm not the dumbass that replied to himself and forgot to switch alters. Stupid fvcking shite.
I'm not sure if you can't read or if you've had a traumatic brain injury.
I copied and pasted their post and modified it to make a different point. Are you really too dumb to understand that?
Posted on 10/4/22 at 9:13 am to jonnyanony
quote:
Ok, so ... this advanced tech could disprove the fakes used with advanced tech but not footage and evidence from the 1960s? This is what you're going with?
In the 1960s most people's evidence was what they saw broadcast on TV and printed in newspapers. Their ability to verify stopped there. Today with computers, internet, satellites, etc... people have access to technology that can proven or disprove a lot more than they could then.
Posted on 10/4/22 at 9:14 am to Smeg
quote:
In the 1960s most people's evidence was what they saw broadcast on TV and printed in newspapers. Their ability to verify stopped there. Today with computers, internet, satellites, etc... people have access to technology that can proven or disprove a lot more than they could then.
Ok, but ... all that stuff footage and recovered moon material still exists ...
Posted on 10/4/22 at 9:15 am to jonnyanony
quote:
I copied and pasted their post and modified it to make a different point.
No one replies to themselves with whatever gaslight attempt you're making above. Hi alter boy! BUSTED
Posted on 10/4/22 at 9:16 am to Tomatocantender
quote:
No one replies to themselves with whatever gaslight attempt you're making above. Hi alter boy! BUSTED
Just to be clear, you think that smeg and I are the same account even as we continue to argue in this thread.
You are retarded.
Posted on 10/4/22 at 9:17 am to jonnyanony
quote:
Just to be clear, you think that smeg and I are the same account even as we continue to argue in this thread.
No one replies to themselves with whatever gaslight attempt you're making above. Hi alter boy! BUSTED
Posted on 10/4/22 at 9:17 am to jonnyanony
quote:
Ok, but ... all that stuff footage and recovered moon material still exists ...
Does the existence of this footage prove it wasn't shot on a closed movie set and not actually on the moon?
Posted on 10/4/22 at 9:19 am to Smeg
quote:
Does the existence of this footage prove it wasn't shot on a closed movie set and not actually on the moon?
This is known as proving a negative.
Posted on 10/4/22 at 9:20 am to Tomatocantender
quote:
Tomatocantender
I think you need to go back and re-read his post. You can see it was never edited, so the post still contains the original text as-is. He changed the words in my original post to mock my post.
Posted on 10/4/22 at 9:21 am to jonnyanony
quote:
This is known as proving a negative
So the footage isn't really "proof" because it COULD basically be a movie.
Posted on 10/4/22 at 9:22 am to Smeg
quote:
Smeg
Look how cute, one alter covering for another. It's clear as frick, your alter thought he switched back to you and replied to himself at precisely 9:01AM Central in this very thread. You stupid bastards got BUSTED.
Posted on 10/4/22 at 9:22 am to Smeg
quote:
I think you need to go back and re-read his post. You can see it was never edited, so the post still contains the original text as-is. He changed the words in my original post to mock my post.
Pft, that's EXACTLY what my alter might say
Posted on 10/4/22 at 9:23 am to Smeg
quote:
So the footage isn't really "proof" because it COULD basically be a movie.
It isn't proof, it's evidence.
Posted on 10/4/22 at 9:23 am to Tomatocantender
quote:
Tomatocantender
Holy frick are you stupid.
Posted on 10/4/22 at 9:24 am to jonnyanony
quote:
It isn't proof, it's evidence
And I would say it's very weak evidence because it could have been very easily falsified.
Posted on 10/4/22 at 9:24 am to Smeg
B U S T E D
Posted on 10/4/22 at 9:28 am to Tomatocantender
Jesus frick.
I posted this at 8:59am
He posted this at 9:01am
I posted this at 8:59am
quote:
It would seem to me that it we could safely get people on the moon in the '60s using a computer with the power of a pocket calculator... it shouldn't be very difficult to get a person on the moon today, with all the advances in computers.
He posted this at 9:01am
quote:
It would seem to me that if we could easily fake getting people on the moon in the '60s using a computer with the power of a pocket calculator... it shouldn't be very difficult to fake getting a person on the moon today, with all the advances in computers.
This post was edited on 10/4/22 at 9:29 am
Page 5 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News