A Conversation for Conspiracy Theories
Dyson spheres
Peet (the Pedantic Punctuation Policeman, Muse of Lateral Programming Ideas, Eggcups-Spurtle-and-Spoonswinner, BBC Cheese Namer & Zaphodista) Posted Jan 9, 2003
Conflict of interests
Oh_sigh00 Posted Jan 10, 2003
I disagree entirely. Star Trek is way too hung up me humanity. The definition makes the very term an oxymoron. Almost evey being in the galaxy looks quite human and speaks english(sure they say universal translator but their lips still move to english and not whatever other language). And, almost every leading character who is inhuman wants to be human, even Data who is PERFECT. The concepts of warp drive, teleportation and phasers(stun and bleeding wounds) are all skewed beyond reality or even fiction(a believable scenario with fictitious characters that never happened), it is a fantasy through and through. They are constantly contradicting themselves and giving little or no explanation.
Conflict of interests
Amanda Posted Jan 10, 2003
At least Star Trek has humanity issues in it. All the stories have morals and good comes out of it all.
Star Wars is all about war! Not good in this day and age.
The Moon landings
The Artist Formerly Known as Nerd42 Posted Jan 10, 2003
to anyone who believes that we didn't land on the moon:
You are probably a russian, and probably very very old.
The Moon landings
The Artist Formerly Known as Nerd42 Posted Jan 10, 2003
If we didn't land on the moon, and NASA was a conspiricy, explain why they did the Challenger like that.
The Moon landings
The Artist Formerly Known as Nerd42 Posted Jan 10, 2003
No. I think we did land on the moon. If we didn't, challenger must have been deliberate to end the deception because they couldn't keep it up.
The Moon landings
The Artist Formerly Known as Nerd42 Posted Jan 10, 2003
but of course, since we DID land on the moon, all such things happening to astronauts were completely accidental and genuine.
I think it stinks we aren't going back to the moon anymore.
The Moon landings
Amanda Posted Jan 11, 2003
There are many arguements for and against the moon landings.
The photographs may have been faked, but this could have been due to the atmospheric and temperature effects on the original film.
I think we did go, and I agree, we should go more, but what for? There is nothing there that we can not observe from space. Its is very costly to go to the big rock and slightly less expensive to send unmanned craft up.
Amanda
The Moon landings
Oh_sigh00 Posted Jan 13, 2003
for one you can't have atmospheric effects on a planetoid with no atmosphere. and two we couldn't have gone to the moon because of the belt of deadly radiation surrounding the earth. And if we did go to the moon why are we now only staying in orbit as far as space exploration goes. Why wait so long.
And by the way, Star Wars is about stopping war, not about war itself.
The Moon landings
Amanda Posted Jan 13, 2003
Why go to the moom again?
Nothing there we aint seen already.
Costs too much to land and stuff.
Also crewles crafts can be sent up with less risk to human safety.
I must be confused I thought it was called Star WARS.
The Moon landings
Peet (the Pedantic Punctuation Policeman, Muse of Lateral Programming Ideas, Eggcups-Spurtle-and-Spoonswinner, BBC Cheese Namer & Zaphodista) Posted Jan 13, 2003
Why go to the moon again? Well...
First, we have only examined a tiny proportion of the surface. Also, technology has improved greatly in the 30 years or so since we were last there; with the technology developed for the ISS we could, if we chose to, set up a permanently manned base with facilities for low-gravity manufacture, experimentation etc. Finally, as was mentioned on Radio 4 this morning, we are rapidly approaching the first generation who will be born when there's no-one left living who has walked on the moon; I find that a little sad.
And there was far more war in Star Trek: Deep Space Nine...
The Moon landings
Blizita Posted Jan 14, 2003
I agree with Peet.
Humanity not only has the tech to go to the moon, but I feel that we need to go to the moon, there is so much to know there yet we haven't been there enough to learn how much there is to learn, not only on the moon, but elsewhere in the solar system too.
There is the small problem of propulsion, I think that there must be a better, cheaper, more efficient, and safer way than strapping ones self to a missile and blasting ones self in the general direction of wherever you want to go.
Now that I think about it, Peet, I guess you're right, almost all of the Apollo astronauts are either elderly or dead, its not just sad, its a tragedy!
Also, what do you all think of China's bid to go to the moon, will it start a new space race? Would that be a good thing?
I think maybe and most definatly.
Blizita
The Moon landings
Oh_sigh00 Posted Jan 14, 2003
It is a good idea to go to the moon because of the possible mining opprotunites(spelling right?) there. I'm not sure about China going to the moon. If they tried to afford the venture their economy would suffer to the extremes.
About the earlier comment about "If you think we didn't go to the moon you are probably a Russian", I think it to be racist and disagree with it completely.
The Moon landings
Researcher 216133 Posted Jan 18, 2003
1) at least one American would brag about how they were involved in the greatest conspiracy of all time. (americans think they're the best at everything)
2)Apollo 13 went haywire astronauts came back very ill. why would the US fake a failed mission
Key: Complain about this post
Dyson spheres
- 101: Peet (the Pedantic Punctuation Policeman, Muse of Lateral Programming Ideas, Eggcups-Spurtle-and-Spoonswinner, BBC Cheese Namer & Zaphodista) (Jan 9, 2003)
- 102: Amanda (Jan 9, 2003)
- 103: Oh_sigh00 (Jan 10, 2003)
- 104: Amanda (Jan 10, 2003)
- 105: The Artist Formerly Known as Nerd42 (Jan 10, 2003)
- 106: The Artist Formerly Known as Nerd42 (Jan 10, 2003)
- 107: Amanda (Jan 10, 2003)
- 108: The Artist Formerly Known as Nerd42 (Jan 10, 2003)
- 109: Amanda (Jan 10, 2003)
- 110: The Artist Formerly Known as Nerd42 (Jan 10, 2003)
- 111: The Artist Formerly Known as Nerd42 (Jan 10, 2003)
- 112: Amanda (Jan 11, 2003)
- 113: Oh_sigh00 (Jan 13, 2003)
- 114: Amanda (Jan 13, 2003)
- 115: Peet (the Pedantic Punctuation Policeman, Muse of Lateral Programming Ideas, Eggcups-Spurtle-and-Spoonswinner, BBC Cheese Namer & Zaphodista) (Jan 13, 2003)
- 116: Blizita (Jan 14, 2003)
- 117: Oh_sigh00 (Jan 14, 2003)
- 118: Amanda (Jan 14, 2003)
- 119: Researcher 216133 (Jan 18, 2003)
- 120: Amanda (Jan 18, 2003)
More Conversations for Conspiracy Theories
Write an Entry
"The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy is a wholly remarkable book. It has been compiled and recompiled many times and under many different editorships. It contains contributions from countless numbers of travellers and researchers."