Jump to content

Guest

Moon Mission: Russia & US to build space station orbiting Moon

Topic Summary

Created

Last Reply

Replies

Views

Guest -
g@gmail.com -
2
236

Top Posters

  • Guest 1
  • g@gmail.com 1

Recommended Posts


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

  • Similar Content

    • By Jack Ryan
      “All Truth passes through three stages.
      First, it is ridiculed,
      Then it is violently opposed,
      Finally it is accepted as self-evident.”
      -Arthur Schopenhauer-
      “In an age of universal deceit, telling the Truth is a revolutionary act.” “Whoever controls the past, controls the future.” -George Orwell- “One of the saddest lessons of history is this: If we’ve been bamboozled long enough, we tend to reject any evidence of the bamboozle. We’re no longer interested in finding out the Truth. The bamboozle has captured us. It’s simply too painful to acknowledge, even to ourselves, that we’ve been taken. Once you give a charlatan power over you, you almost never get it back.” -Carl Sagan- “It is easier to fool people, than to convince them that they have been fooled.” -Mark Twain- Award winning filmmaker Bart Sibrel (Sibrel.com) presents his highly acclaimed (and much hated) controversial documentary showcasing newly discovered behind-the-scenes out-takes from the first mission to the moon, proving conclusively that the crew never left earth orbit.
      Never before in all of recorded aviation has a flying machine worked on its very first attempt, much less the most complicated one ever created, landing on another planet on its maiden voyage and returning roundtrip with a crew that lived to tell, all with antiquated 1960's technology, even though the feat cannot be repeated today, by any nation on earth, with 50 years more technological advancements in rockets and computers, thus failing the simplest of scientific protocols, that of independent verification and duplication.
      Religious attachment to this blasphemous lie, clouds most peoples' perception of the deplorability reality, that of a government deception, on a universal scale, to boost domestic morale during a time of unprecedented civil unrest from the vastly unpopular Vietnam War, all during the notorious Nixon administration. Ever wonder why they claimed to have walked on the moon, on the very first attempt (even though, right here on earth, Mt. Everest and the South Pole took numerous tries before success), allegedly accomplishing this amazing feat with very rudimentary 1960's technology (a cell phone has one million times the computing power than all of NASA in 1969), yet 50 years later, the farthest an astronaut can travel from the Earth to the moon is only 1 / 1000th  the distance as they claimed 5 decades ago with antique equipment on their very first try? In this newly discovered, unedited, behind-the-scenes footage of outtakes from the first "mission to the moon", the crew is seen using a one foot diameter model of the earth, from earth orbit, in order to create the false illusion for the television viewers that they are half way to the moon, when in fact, they never left earth orbit, which is exactly the farthest limit that NASA can send astronauts today, with 50 years better rocket and computer technology. The CIA is even heard on a private, third audio channel, prompting the crew to respond to Mission Control only after four seconds have elapsed, in order to create the false impression of an increased radio delay, so as to appear farther from the earth than they really were. According to William Kaysing, a senior 6 year NASA contractor for the "Apollo" missions, who had the highest of security clearances, a classified interdepartmental memo rated the odds of a survivable manned lunar mission, on its first attempt with primitive 1960's technology, at only one in ten thousand. The only way to assure success, and not risk killing the crew on live international television, was an artful bluff by the shrewd Nixon administration, along with their well acquainted counterparts in the CIA.
      Sibrel has been interviewed, and his documentary about the moon landings have been featured on, The Tonight Show, The Daily Show, Geraldo at Large, The Abrams Report, Coast to Coast, NBC, CNN, FOX, Time Magazine, The New York Times, The L.A. Times, The Washington Post, and USA Today.
    • Guest
      By Guest
      A video tribute made to a great movie "Arthur". It stars Dudley Moore as the drunken millionaire who is being forced to marry a woman he dispises. He decides to fight for his right to make his own decisions when he meets Linda (played by Liza Minnelli), a wannabe actress who works at a diner. Also stars the great Sir John Geilgud as Hobson, Arthur's protective butler. *Note: I had some volume troubles when making this, because of which I could not do what I wanted during the sax solo. I had a Dudley Moore laugh montage that was really good, but you couldn't hear it next to the music...even when I had the clip volume on the highest setting. 
      Song: Best That You Can Do
      Artist: Christopher Cross
    • By Jack Ryan
      For only $12,500.00 your ashes can be put on the moon or $5,000 for a burial in low-Earth orbit, where a travel-shampoo-size urn can spin for years at 17,000 mph until it gradually descends into the white-hot re-entry atmosphere.They hope to have a cemetery on the moon complete with plots and ceremonial adornments..Just think every time it's a full moon you look up in the sky and you will always see you love one. A thought, you are resurrected on the moon....
       
  • Forum Statistics

    61,685
    Total Topics
    114,561
    Total Posts
  • Member Statistics

    16,510
    Total Members
    1,592
    Most Online
    Rosjes128
    Newest Member
    Rosjes128
    Joined




  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Unnecessary on his account. He is so bombastic that I can hear him in my sleep.
    • You finally posted something substantive. Good for you. Yes those baptized should consider themselves as ambassadors to Christ. Therefore, the GB are also considered ambassadors with a responsibility of a Shepherd. You might want to rethink the wording and framing of this sentence. If both comments were of substance, they would disagree with each other. I wonder if you will get the same response from JTR! 😊
    • Was Brother Splane speaking against the Watchtower or of Christendom? I would imagine all the older witnesses should now understand, the revisions made that are now understood while it was in its infancy back then. Therefore, I’m not the one disagreeing with the Watchtower. That determination is being made here by a few, it’s just not me. I understand scripture, as well as prophecy. Incorrect, The GB as presented by opposers believe the GB are like the apostles. I happen to believe, they are following the apostles lead to continue Christ works with the same vigor as the apostles. The GB are simply fellow workers that have accepted to a greater degree of responsibility. I have no confusion as to the role God has given those that accept that responsibly. Therefore, it would be a presumption to think otherwise on how they perceive someone's words. I appreciate the push that is drawn. Countless areas are made known how flawed the Watchtower is. But are they all factual enough to sit in Judgement. What I accept is looking for deviations from scripture. I have from none in principle with that by the Watchtower. Therefore, it’s not that I refuse to see human errors, it’s that we all do human errors every day. I just don’t dwell on them as it is done here. What I care about is linkage to false presentations as its made by Christendom (i.e. trinity etc.) Substance if for a better word. I will leave that to your conscience. Frankly, I'm not the one bearing weight on issues, as it is constantly and frequently done here with the same worldly issues.
    • Another reason I follow politics is for its clarification of Pilate’s question: “What is truth?” It is a cynical question, as though mocking ones who say they can find truth. “I will never lie to you,” Trump promises his “base.” ‘He is the most lying President in history,’ opponents say. It doesn’t matter if you like him or not. How can one not look into that? It turns out that a lie is in the eye of the beholder. By May of 2019, the Washington Post claimed to have chronicled 10,000 Trump lies—“false or misleading claims,” and yet by any historical standards, they would not be called lies. NBCNews.com, hardly a Trump-friendly site, gives examples. https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/trump-lies-lot-media-must-focus-what-he-s-lying-ncna1009986 92 times Trump claimed that “NAFTA is one of the worst trade deals ever signed in the history of our country.” That can be called a “lie?” The Post counts it as 92 lies. Speak to those whose interests have suffered on its account. At worst it is an subjective exaggeration.  Trump says, “I have been the most transparent president and administration in the history of our country by far.” A lie? An unprovable boast, at worst. Daily tweets of whatever happens to pop into his head, in any historical context, would be lauded as the epitome of transparency. Here the pundits harrumph mostly because they are bypassed—they are used to spinning a president’s words before he can spin them himself, but here he does end runs around them. In fact, the nbcnews.com article recommends readers not to be so gleeful over counting his “lies” that one becomes like the little boy crying wolf. The “lies” are mostly boast, imprecision, exaggeration, hyperbole—and not actually “lies” at all. The article actually produces no “real” lies, even as it counsels readers to be on the lookout for them. That doesn’t mean there aren’t any. To be sure, that is not the purpose of the article, but you almost think that some would be there, if only for purposes to contrast the “not-really” lies with the “actual” lies. All we hear on media is “the lies of Trump” repeated full-throttle, and yet this article, by someone who is decidedly not a Trump fan, points to none. Now, one must be verrrrry careful in comparing the spiritual and the profane—even more careful in comparing words of the sacred with words of the politics. You do not want to be confused with the right wing church that mixes politics and religion so thoroughly as to make any smoothie maker envious. The School Guidebook observed that when you give an illustration, your illustration should parallel the reality illustrated in all significant respects. Otherwise, someone will point to the discordancy and the entire illustration goes up in smoke. It is why I do not care for those illustrations likening Witnesses to firemen who are urgent because lives are at stake. True, lives are at stake but they are not at stake at that very hour. Those firemen would not carry on so urgently if it was just to warn you that your smoke detector batteries are getting low. So you have to be cautious comparing the two. Manifestly, they are not the same in many regards. That’s why I like it that Alan brought up the subject (6 times!) and not me. Still, Jesus uses all types of people in illustrations—those “righteous” and those “unrighteous.”—like the “unrighteous” steward who robs his owner blind and the owner ends up commending him for it. (Luke 16:8) So you don’t have to run like a rabbit just because those you use to illustrate points are not saints. The same people that savage Trump for his “lies” would have savaged Jesus for his “lies.” In fact, for the most part, they do—the political left is far more irreligious than is the right. There are many excellent reasons to dislike Trump—reasons that do not hold true at all with Jesus. But here we are dealing with word devices that some would qualify as legitimate and some would qualify as lie. Jesus would have been a consummate liar in the eyes of these critics, and that fact is better appreciated for how they kick back at the commander-in-chief that they loathe. Hyperbole? Jesus uses it all the time. Yes, he puts it to more noble use than Trump, but he is not shy about using it. He thinks it not a “lie” to use hyperbole—it is plainly a tool in his tool box—and it has the added benefit that the critics are separated out—they miss the point completely so as to object to blatant and unprovable exaggeration. Many of Jesus’ parables are not only hyperbole, but they are quirky hyperbole, such as the unrighteous judge who will not grant justice to the widow until she nags him nearly into an early grave—and that judge is used to illustrate how you ought to persist in prayer to the Father! (Luke 18:5) Metaphor? Strictly speaking, a metaphor is a “lie.” “The tongue is a fire,” says James. ‘It is not,’ would counter the Washington Post and you can almost imagine them testing this statement, evaluating the claim with a thermometer. “God is the potter and we are the clay,” says the Word—and the Washington Post logs two “lies.” “He that feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood has everlasting life, and I shall resurrect him at the last day,” declares Jesus at John 6:54. Call that not a metaphor? It is even a metaphor that contributed (says Bart Ehrman) to accusations of cannibalism that served as a pretext for early Christian persecution. Ad hominem attack? That’s a type of lie, Trump’s detractors say, since they are stated “without evidence”—to borrow a media clarification that is now routinely applied to the President but has never been applied to any of the other countless scoundrels and blaggards of history. Jesus used ad hominem attack all the time. Pharisees were the “blind men leading the blind”, the “whitewashed graves hiding every sort of filth.” He would have been called out for lying each time in the Washington Post. Ask Jesus a question, and he will not answer it. He will ask a counter question instead that makes you scared to ask another. This is a major no-no to critical thinkers today, who insist that their questions be answered without resort to raising a “straw man.” Still, Jesus doesn’t care. He raises straw men as readily as he raised Lazerus. (Mark 11:27-33) Head games? I don’t know what in the world was Trump’s claim of huge inauguration attendance, easily debunked as a “lie” by just viewing the photos—so easily that it becomes clear he is playing a head game of some sort, clarified when KellyAnne comes on TV to speak of the “alternative facts” he would like media to pay attention to. Are not Jesus’ parables head games of a sort? He would never explain them to his critics—only afterwards to his disciples would he “explain all things,” and it served as a way of separating the wheat from the chaff. (Mark 4:34) Would he have granted an interview with the Washington Post to explain all those parables? I have my doubts. About this time we can send Trump packing off to the stables. I was never too comfortable bringing him in to begin with, so I waited for someone with TDS to do it, and Alan obliged—allowing me to point out with but diminished spiritual damage that Trump illustrates certain aspects of communication so perfectly that he becomes invaluable for just that reason.  You can even go further. Trump, by all accounts, represents “flyover country”—the common working people usually ignored by policymakers who are pursuing their own ends and careers. His enemies? Those policymakers—the “swamp,” the “elites,” the wonks that hail from Harvard and who live for the machinations of the beltway. And if you really want to get sacrilegious, you can recall that he descends on the golden escalator from his high and mighty perch, and announces to his “base:” “I am your voice.” You can even liken media’s relentless efforts to separate Trump from his “base” to the efforts of JW critics to separate the GB from its “base”—and for the same reason—that both might be better neutralized. I can think of only one other President who offered some of these same parallels: “The buck stops here,” “give em hell, Harry” Truman , who was despised by the “elites” then—even blue blood FDR kept his distance from his own “inferior” VP—on account of his crude demeanor and businessman origin. Like Trump, Truman’s elite enemies even gloated that they had won the election and later had to eat crow!—one of the iconic photos of American history is Truman holding aloft the (wrong) headline of his own defeat. He offers many of the same object lessons, but not as strikingly as Trump, mostly because people were more civil back then and opponents didn’t seek to gouge each other’s eyes out as they do now—a nod to the further applicability of 2 Timothy 3:1-5. (Wow. I just thought up the Truman parallel as I was writing this remark. The day I throw my hat in the ring to form my own sect, I will spin some sort of an anti-type out of both names beginning with ‘Tru”—what are the chances of that? And I will play on Truman being “True Man”—same as they did with Jim Carrey on the Truman Show. And wait till I get done with the fact that Truman started as a haberdasher-, the same as you-know-who. Yes, I like the idea more and more. Only....I cannot do this Mighty Ministry on my own! Send me your contributions—large or small!—(but large is preferred)—for the Lord’s sake I would gladly walk around in rags, but the fact of the matter is, I look so much better in the two-thousand dollar suit that I will buy with them)  
    • For he must reign until he puts all his enemies under his feet. 1 Cor 15:25 This is the declaration of the LORD to my Lord: "Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies your footstool." 2 The LORD will extend your mighty scepter from Zion. Rule over your surrounding enemies.  Ps 110:1,2 Then Pilate went back into the headquarters, summoned Jesus, and said to him, "Are you the King of the Jews? ""My kingdom is not of this world," said Jesus. "If my kingdom were of this world, my servants would fight, so that I wouldn't be handed over to the Jews. But as it is, my kingdom is not from here. "You are a king then? " Pilate asked. "You say that I'm a king," Jesus replied. "I was born for this, and I have come into the world for this: to testify to the truth. Everyone who is of the truth listens to my voice." John 18:33,36,37  Now when they drew near Jerusalem, and came to Bethphage, at the Mount of Olives, then Jesus sent two disciples, 2 saying to them, “Go into the village opposite you, and immediately you will find a donkey tied, and a colt with her. Loose them and bring them to Me. 3 And if anyone says anything to you, you shall say, ‘The Lord has need of them,’ and immediately he will send them.” 4 [b]All this was done that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying: 5 “Tell the daughter of Zion, ‘Behold, your King is coming to you, Lowly, and sitting on a donkey, A colt, the foal of a donkey.’ ”  Matt 21:1-5 All of the above scriptures show action performed by a ruling king – a King of Truth.  John 14:6 Therefore, we are ambassadors for Christ, since God is making his appeal through us. We plead on Christ's behalf: "Be reconciled to God." 2 Cor 5:20 Can anyone be an ambassador for a king of a nation,  if the King is not in power? He has been putting his enemies at his feet since the first century, when the harvest began.  John 4:35  
  • Popular Now

  • Recently Browsing

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Who's Online (See full list)

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.