Jump to content
Evolution Fairytale Forum
KillurBluff

Where Are We To Find The Truth?

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, mike the wiz said:

Because if occultists did start NASA logically my answer is, "so what", . . .

well see, that's the thing.

NASA contracted with JPL and various other places such as grumman and boeing but these places had nothing whatsoever to do with the management or administration of NASA.

even von braun was left out of the loop until just shortly before his death.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, KillurBluff said:

Your simply wrong and trying to use half truths to bolster your claim the Parsons somehow has and had nothing to do with NASA...

 

he didn't.

parsons never even left home plate in regards to making NASA policy. he had ZERO to do with NASA administration and management.

JPL, like grumman and boeing, was sub contracted by NASA for various hardware components. none of these companies was managed by NASA.

about your "satanic" clams:

most of this comes from the fact that a lot of the "thelemite" movement was rooted in freemasonry and this (freemasonry) was a closely guarded secret. when secrets abound you start seeing ghosts in the shadows.

added to that fact that parsons was a genius and we can drum up some pretty bizzare circumstances. it's been said it's a fine line between genius and insanity.

for those that want to know, just follow the hyperlinks in my last post on the previous page.

you'll be hard pressed to find the word "satanic".

i think mike is right on this one KB, "satanic" is a bare assertion.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/12/2020 at 4:29 PM, mike the wiz said:

But what you need to see is that whether he did or didn't basically it's the genetic fallacy KB, if you imply that because occultists began or had something to do with NASA that therefore NASA is bad. Or are you arguing something else? It's hard to know because you never state your argument clearly you just seem to ASSERT things ABOUT NASA, or heliocentricity and we are it would seem, then supposed to endow your statements with great meaning when they seem like fallacies of irrelevance. That's not an insult it's just a type of argument.

Just for once can you tell us what your argument specifically is and tell us the reasoning by actually writing it out so I can examine it? 

Because if occultists did start NASA logically my answer is, "so what", until you provide an argument saying why this should be consequential or meaningful. Logically I can see no reason why it should be meaningful as it seems like a fallacy of irrelevance.

The genetic fallacy;

EXAMPLE of fallacy;

Mom; "oh boy I am happy a cowboy and indian movie is on."

Daughter; "that's racist to call them indian."

Conclusion; Genetic fallacy, in fact the mom only knows the term, "indian" FROM the westerns she watched as a child and knew nothing about the original use of the term. (hence the blue highlighted part)

KB, if I am wrong about any of this can you actually address my points and show how I am wrong? Rather than saying something like this as a pretend example; "Mike the UTTER NONSENSE you BABBLE wearing a DUNCES CAP, is UNBELIEVABLE to ME. YOU ARE UTTERLY refuted in your inane BABBLINGS. Tis st8 clear to see, LMBO."

You see, that isn't a real response, friend. If you want to convince me conspiracy theorist reasoning is something I should consider you really have to provide a proper rebuttal my lad. (mischief)So far all it seems you are doing is parroting a lot of internet horse manure written by monkeys(/mischief).

:P 

(I'm actually addressing your posts not to oppose you I am just hoping you will eventually see there is nothing to conspiracy theorists arguments. You don't have to take it personally because it isn't.)

After all how did I know how the genetic fallacy would directly apply? Do you think for example any of the c-theorists that tell you these things would know about such a fallacy? Not likely is it, they usually know about as much as the contents of the back of a chewing gum wrapper at best. :rotfl3:

My dearest Brother, what i am saying is that with 'All Things' we MUST take into account the literal 'Foundations' regarding all things pertaining to 'All Things' as to 'Get A Sense' of it's validity..

Just as we Christians literally have Our Rock, Foundation set upon Jesus Christ it is MOST important to see the foundations of EVERYTHING as to 'Judge' it's validity..

Just as daves claim that 'The Spirit Of God' does NOT interact with us today, in our modern times we MUST validate or Rebuke his claim right??

Just as i pointed out Einsteins 'Upbringing' and personal 'Thoughts' regarding God etc. as to show that his personal ideology was 'Un Godly', hence his 'Foundation' was built upon sand....

Likewise NASA's literal foundations are indeed built upon  a LONG well know history of satanic peoples whom DID in fact built 'Their' houses foundation on sand..

That is exactly what i'm saying in regards....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, KillurBluff said:

My dearest Brother, what i am saying is that with 'All Things' we MUST take into account the literal 'Foundations' regarding all things pertaining to 'All Things' as to 'Get A Sense' of it's validity..

I appreciate what you're saying, it can be true that some things are intended but there is an underlying and sinister and pernicious intent and that can be ultimately the purpose it achieved but perhaps not in all things. For me NASA and it's motives can't all be traced back to this anyway IMHO in that wasn't it Kennedy's idea to go to the moon anyway?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i found a couple of files that goes into the origins of NASA and how it all came about.

both are NASA monographs.

monograph 2

an annoted bibliography of the apollo program (NASA-TM-109852)

by roger d. launius and j. d. hunley

this publication has an entire chapter dedicated to NASA management.

monograph 8

legislative origins of the national aeronautics and space act of 1958.

this file specifically discusses how the space act came about.

i have both of these files but i can't seem to be able to delete previous uploads.

-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, KillurBluff said:

Likewise NASA's literal foundations are indeed built upon  a LONG well know history of satanic peoples whom DID in fact built 'Their' houses foundation on sand..

That is exactly what i'm saying in regards....

sorry KB, JPL isn't now nor was it ever managed by NASA.

the same can be said of grumman, boeing, and an entire horde of sub contractors.

what about REAL influences such as von braun?

this man was a bonifide hard core nazi SS.

100's of concentration camp workers died in his fabrication facilities of peemunde.

what happened when he came here?

he renounced ALL of that and practically transformed huntsville.

this is all a matter of the public record of the history of huntsville and i suggest you educate yourself before you go throwing wild butt claims around like so much sand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, mike the wiz said:

I appreciate what you're saying, it can be true that some things are intended but there is an underlying and sinister and pernicious intent and that can be ultimately the purpose it achieved but perhaps not in all things. For me NASA and it's motives can't all be traced back to this anyway IMHO in that wasn't it Kennedy's idea to go to the moon anyway?

But Kennedy was a Democrat which makes him an evil Satanist. Not to mention he was a Catholic, which makes him a double Satanist and in on the NASA conspiracy with all the other Jesuit priests.

But, yes, KB's "memes" are little more than genetic fallacies and thinking waaaaaaaaay too deep about inconsequential facts like many craters on the moon being named after Jesuit priests or the planets being named after Roman gods. (No one tell him that many stars have Arabic names and that many prominent constellations are Greek.) All these things have mundane explanations that don't require any world-wide, multi-millennium conspiracies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Goku said:

But Kennedy was a Democrat which makes him an evil Satanist. Not to mention he was a Catholic, which makes him a double Satanist . . .

kennedy was also entertaining the idea that the US and russia pool their efforts to go to the moon, which makes him a TRIPLE satanist.

the man was downright evil !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Goku said:

But Kennedy was a Democrat which makes him an evil Satanist. Not to mention he was a Catholic, which makes him a double Satanist and in on the NASA conspiracy with all the other Jesuit priests.

But, yes, KB's "memes" are little more than genetic fallacies and thinking waaaaaaaaay too deep about inconsequential facts like many craters on the moon being named after Jesuit priests or the planets being named after Roman gods. (No one tell him that many stars have Arabic names and that many prominent constellations are Greek.) All these things have mundane explanations that don't require any world-wide, multi-millennium conspiracies.

But why accept a mundane explanation when one can develop huge unwieldy conspiracies instead?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

here is a 3 hour 30 minute video that has a lot of information relevant to the moon hoax.

there are a number of things i find curious but what interests me the most is presented at 1:56:15. wires on the moon

in my opinion this looks highly suspicious.

keep in mind that this is official NASA footage.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=2&v=KpuKu3F0BvY&feature=emb_logo

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎9‎/‎14‎/‎2020 at 6:39 PM, Goku said:

But Kennedy was a Democrat which makes him an evil Satanist. Not to mention he was a Catholic, which makes him a double Satanist and in on the NASA conspiracy with all the other Jesuit priests.

But, yes, KB's "memes" are little more than genetic fallacies and thinking waaaaaaaaay too deep about inconsequential facts like many craters on the moon being named after Jesuit priests or the planets being named after Roman gods. (No one tell him that many stars have Arabic names and that many prominent constellations are Greek.) All these things have mundane explanations that don't require any world-wide, multi-millennium conspiracies.

 

"But Kennedy was a Democrat which makes him an evil Satanist."

 

Nah.. Kennedy wouldn't recognize the DemonRats of today.

He would be a Staunch Republican by todays standards..

You should keep up with the times! They are a changing....

 

Modern Democrats Would View John F. Kennedy As A Reaganite Extremist

https://www.forbes.com/sites/kylesmith/2013/11/08/modern-democrats-would-view-john-f-kennedy-as-a-reaganite-extremist/#25b07fb43beb

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/15/2020 at 2:39 AM, Goku said:

But Kennedy was a Democrat which makes him an evil Satanist. Not to mention he was a Catholic, which makes him a double Satanist and in on the NASA conspiracy with all the other Jesuit priests.

But, yes, KB's "memes" are little more than genetic fallacies and thinking waaaaaaaaay too deep about inconsequential facts like many craters on the moon being named after Jesuit priests or the planets being named after Roman gods. (No one tell him that many stars have Arabic names and that many prominent constellations are Greek.) All these things have mundane explanations that don't require any world-wide, multi-millennium conspiracies.

Exactly, you can basically just link it back in some way to occultism but like you say it's to take mundane facts and to give fantastic reasons, it's essentially to build a house of cards.

I wish KB could see that this is the theme with all conspiracy theory, they all rely on the same type of reasoning.

I have spotted the most common type, because I watched shows on 9/11 conspiracy, Kennedy conspiracy and moon landing conspiracy.

In each the false conditional implication was always used. You will know all about it because it goes like this;

"If they had went to the moon, then this thing P would have happened.

It didn't, so they didn't go to the moon."

It was the same with the 9/11 crash where the plane crashed in the field;

"Had it crashed as they said it did, it wouldn't make that crater shape it made."

Amusingly one example you will get a chuckle out of was this;

"If that plane had crashed like they say, debris wouldn't have been found six miles away."

And they would have been right Goku, had the debris travelled by road.:blink:

:rotfl3:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NASA could prove conclusively that we went to the moon by performing a relatively simple experiment.

that would be by launching a satellite designed by a group of universities and having the downlink sent DIRECTLY to those universities.

so far, NASA has not done that.

 

i don't know, something about this just doesn't make sense.

there is no question in my mind that we had the capability to get there.

why wouldn't we go if we had the capability to do so?

there are only 2 reasons i can think of

1. radiation.

2. once on the moon we didn't have the capability to get them back.

the problem is, both of these have a work around. we could have assembled a heavier craft in LEO but this would require multiple launchings and would take longer than the 10 year span envisioned by kennedy.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×

Important Information

Our Terms