Board Thread:Off-Topic/@comment-38518555-20190716013635/@comment-38518555-20190729044921

Powerup777 wrote: This is about the moon landing OK...but that guy's an [I can't say it on this wiki] starts with i ends with t, dio in the middle. See Rob, that's not entirely fair. Okay, you disagree with his premises on the basis of what you were taught.

Google/Youtube recently changed their algorithim for avery specific reason. This subject matter isnt a danger to people beyond maybe pulling back a curtain. It is #2 on their A.I hit list to be buried, hidden away under all the main stream media that just parrot things like "that's just a conspiricy theory" or sited journals that were written on the basis of repeating the original theory that cannot, and will never be proven. Oh, NASA proves everything!

The Moon supposedly always having been in our atmoshpere came along this year mate. What, they didn't know that 5 yrs ago, let alone when they 'walked on the moon'. Scientific theory keeps changing about these things of late. Why is that? They hadnt known about such things before? New theory of gravity trying to reconcile 'dark matter' isnt even 4 years old mate(entropic gravity)

This kind of subject is a threat to what people have always thought was true. But what if it isnt Rob?

What if the Moon isnt what the "scientific community" claims it is? I was nuts about science and the stars as a child, all the way into my very late 40's. Science still cannot explain the singularity. Last I looked they cannot actually observe the first 300,000 years following the big bang with there best 'telescopes' in 'space'.

Think simple "cause and effect" on that alone. Big bang, infinite mass exploding outwards for  in all directions. Singulairty is the cause, big bang is the effect. What's the cause for the singularity then?

Let alone the 2nd law of thermodynamics shows that we either live in a vacuum or an atmosphere. THAT is why all of a sudden the moon is found to have been in our atmosphere all along, so "mainstream science" can try pass of "incremental vacuum" as to why alleged atmosphere isnt sucked off this spinning ball. All they use is theory after more created theory to try reconcile older BS theory.

Oops, wall-o-txt