Tip jar

If you like CaB and wish to support it, you can use PayPal or KoFi. Thank you, and I hope you continue to enjoy the site - Neil.

Buy Me a Coffee at ko-fi.com

Support CaB

Recent

Welcome to Cook'd and Bomb'd. Please login or sign up.

March 29, 2024, 11:29:54 AM

Login with username, password and session length

Hacking group says it has 9/11 legal documents that will 'burn down deep state'

Started by biggytitbo, January 06, 2019, 01:56:12 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Lance My Grey Horsecock (4th Edition in Braille)

Yup:  'ang your clems.  Sweng your swangy nutsops.  Look loose, light shite an' lamps.  Align your haunches with Damp Haloumi an' dance.
19 (55.9%)
Nein:  Shüsterfore für geld ist ein cooting-edge IJ technique or Grandfather's First Packed Lunch and Urine.
1 (2.9%)
| Wanking of Thirst. (Parched.)
2 (5.9%)
  |- Pipe music  (Infernal Badadook.)
4 (11.8%)
    |-Roosevelt (Milk Teeth, Second Amendment)
1 (2.9%)
     | - nonce        x
1 (2.9%)
        | - Anus Rigs.mov
0 (0%)
Bury me in a Pam St. Clement coffin, or alongside Noel Edmonds.
2 (5.9%)
The only conspiracy I'm interested in is a coinspiracy!!
0 (0%)
The only conspiracy I'm interested in is a cockspiracy!!
0 (0%)
Puff the Magic Wanker Wanks Himself To Death
0 (0%)
I CHOOSE RED LEICESTER AS MY MANY SPLENDOURED THING
3 (8.8%)
SteVIe "TOAST THIS IRON ON THE FIRST MORNING SPIRE" sPaRkLe
1 (2.9%)
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||::::||||||SHOUT||||||||::::||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
0 (0%)
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||::::||||||GOURANGA!||||||||::::||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
0 (0%)
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||::::||||||ANDBEHAPPY!||||||||::::||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 34

phantom_power

Quote from: Crisps? on January 12, 2019, 12:40:38 AM
Question for all the sheeplez, government shills  and paid NASA trolls of Cook'd and Bomb'd:

How many decades of nobody being able to put someone on the Moon would have to elapse since 1969 before you started to think they might have indeed faked it?


I can't answer that questing because the two things aren't closely enough related to draw any causation. What might make me change my mind would be even the slightest bit of compelling evidence that any faking had occurred. Or some convincing refuting of all the evidence that shows they did actually land on the moon

mothman

Interesting that nobody's questioning whether the Chinese really did land on the far side of the moon. Or does their being proper socialists put their probity beyond question? Or, is it because their craft was unmanned? Sure, land a tin can in the moon, that's easy. But do so with somebody inside? Why, that's unicorn talk, wake up sheeple!

Love buzby's mini-lectures on old tech. So what are the main problems with just putting newer computers in, say, the F-35s?

phantom_power

Quote from: mothman on January 12, 2019, 10:38:53 AM


Love buzby's mini-lectures on old tech. So what are the main problems with just putting newer computers in, say, the F-35s?

Massive certification costs for one thing, with negligible benefit.

Uncle TechTip

With today's computing power, we could get to the Moon in half an hour. That we don't is proof that we never did.

Crisps?

Quote from: Mr_Simnock on January 12, 2019, 02:13:35 AM
the idea that something isn't possible because it hasn't been repeated for a given length of time is interesting (I'm being kind) to say the least

Ah, this must be about when I said "something isn't possible because it hasn't been repeated for a given length of time".


Quote from: Shit Good Nose on January 12, 2019, 08:28:20 AM
I note you also completely ignored buzby's exhaustive commentary on the matter...

I seem to have written just as much about buzby's posts as you have. What is it I was supposed to say, exactly?

Crisps?

Quote from: Buelligan on January 12, 2019, 08:11:54 AM
Also, why does it matter?

A typical complaint about conspiracy nuts is they never change their minds. I'm just wondering if nobody being able to repeat or better the Apollo landings, despite trying, is enough to cause people to become sceptical. The answer not only seems to be a categorical no - or "fuck that" - but some people seem get very touchy or angry about being asked about it.

monolith

Anyone who thinks they had aircraft in World War 2 needs to wake up, they didn't have the computer power, you morons.

Crisps?

Quote from: phantom_power on January 12, 2019, 10:31:55 AM
I can't answer that questing because the two things aren't closely enough related to draw any causation.

Then you are answering it. Even if states continue trying to land men on the Moon and continue failing to do so, you will still fully believe that a single government administration of a relatively primitive country in the middle of the previous century was able to do it repeatedly.

Blumf

Quote from: monolith on January 12, 2019, 11:28:07 AM
Anyone who thinks they had aircraft in World War 2 needs to wake up, they didn't have the computer power, you morons.

Plus, has anybody fire-bombed Dresden to the ground recently? No, because it never happened in the first place!

Crisps?

Remember when one government made aircraft for a couple of years and then nobody was ever able to make an aircraft again?

monolith

China have literally, literally, just landed on the moon, you cretin.

mothman

Quote from: Crisps? on January 12, 2019, 11:37:08 AM
Remember when one government made aircraft for a couple of years and then nobody was ever able to make an aircraft again?

They built ONE Bell X-1 to break the sound barrier, and once they did that they didn't build anymore to break the sound barrier again. Therefore they didn't break the sound barrier at all.

monolith

Actually I do believe they were faked, just waiting on a scientist to confirm it. Just one will do. Just a single actual scientist and not "Crisps?" from Cookdandbombd. I'm sure there must be one somewhere as it was so obviously faked.

phantom_power

Quote from: Crisps? on January 12, 2019, 11:32:23 AM
Then you are answering it. Even if states continue trying to land men on the Moon and continue failing to do so, you will still fully believe that a single government administration of a relatively primitive country in the middle of the previous century was able to do it repeatedly.

Define "trying". Making a statement of intent is not the same as trying.

Soup Dogg


Blumf


phantom_power

Quote from: Crisps? on January 12, 2019, 11:32:23 AM
Then you are answering it. Even if states continue trying to land men on the Moon and continue failing to do so, you will still fully believe that a single government administration of a relatively primitive country in the middle of the previous century was able to do it repeatedly.

Oh and well done on ignoring the second part of my post, the bit that you can't answer

Soup Dogg

Crisps mate you should feel ashamed of yourself here. Like honest to god, red in the face, groaning to self in the shower, waking up in cold sweat shame.

bomb_dog


mothman

Quote from: Blumf on January 12, 2019, 11:52:23 AM
Has anybody used a supersonic passenger plane service recently?

As we have demonstrated using Crispian Logic, the breaking of the sound barrier by Chuck Yeager in 1947 was faked. But don't worry, Crisps will be along shortly to reassure us that any sonic booms we think we may have heard are solely due to mind-altering substances in chemtrails.

Soup Dogg


Pingers

I haven't been back to Slough for 31 years, therefore I've never been to Slough.

And at least there might be some reason to go to Slough. I bet it has a Poundland or something. Beat that, the moon.

Crisps?

Quote from: phantom_power on January 12, 2019, 11:45:03 AM
Define "trying". Making a statement of intent is not the same as trying.

Yeah, mate, when a country says it intends to put men on the Moon that's all they do. Just say it. Nothing else. Job done.

Quote from: phantom_power on January 12, 2019, 11:52:51 AM
Oh and well done on ignoring the second part of my post, the bit that you can't answer

There's no question in the second part of your post.

Captain Z

The Great Wall of China never happened, look at how difficult it is proving for Trump to build one even in this modern age.

phantom_power

Quote from: Crisps? on January 12, 2019, 12:08:07 PM
Yeah, mate, when a country says it intends to put men on the Moon that's all they do. Just say it. Nothing else. Job done.

There's no question in the second part of your post.

Obviously governments always do what they say they will and can be trusted implicitly in this regard

And my second part may not have had a question but there was a point to be spoken to. Is evidence of moon landings/faking and refutation of existing evidence more important in determining what happened than some vague idea of "why haven't they been back since?"

Pingers

Quote from: Captain Z on January 12, 2019, 12:24:19 PM
The Great Wall of China never happened, look at how difficult it is proving for Trump to build one even in this modern age.

I haven't had a Curly Wurly for ages. I bet they're straight really.

Replies From View

Quote from: MojoJojo on January 12, 2019, 07:36:23 AM
What exactly is the logic that goes from "they haven't gone back" to "they never went there"?

I know exactly what it is.

When moon-truthing first came about, a big part of their argument was that there were no missions to the moon after Apollo 11 that involved landing humans on it.  They thought NASA had faked this one thing, got away with it, and not gone back because to do so would risk further scrutiny and they'd be caught out.  In itself that makes a logical sense, apart from the fact it's founded on provable bollocks.

You know what moon-truthers are like when they are presented with facts; they think it's part of the wider conspiracy or dismiss people as brainwashed.  People told them "they did go back though, loads of times in the 70s," and the moon-truthers put their fingers in their ears, turning "they haven't gone back" into a mantra.  It took decades for them to glance sufficiently beyond their conspiracy literature to realise that NASA did, in fact, land more humans on the moon after Apollo 11, risking further scrutiny and everything, and somehow getting away with it each and every time.

Rather than admit they got that bit wrong the moon-truthers have changed the meaning of "we haven't gone back" so that it means "since the 70s," but as you've pointed out it no longer connects together logically, and none of them seem to have noticed.



Replies From View

Quote from: Pingers on January 12, 2019, 12:45:07 PM
I haven't had a Curly Wurly for ages. I bet they're straight really.

To be fair, they actually are.  Straight but with holes.

phantom_power

NASA TOP BRASS: Phew we got away with that moon landing faking stuff. It was a bit touch and go there when we fucked up the flag and shadows a bit but I don't think anyone who matters noticed. Best do it five more times then just to be sure

Buelligan

Quote from: Blumf on January 12, 2019, 10:28:23 AM
Point of order! Teflon was discovered in the late 1930s. It's main big-government project use was in the Manhattan Project, protecting valves and that from uranium hexafluoride. Even the cooking pan use pre-dates NASA, with some French geezer creating the Tefal brand (TEFlon ALuminium).

I did not know that.  Tefal are great though, you have to get their top end stuff, the cheapy range is absolute shite. 

We test them to destruction at work and those pricey weighty ones, can't remember the particular model name, outlast all comers by a million miles.  I would not lie to you about something so important.

Every time you tell a truth, a bit of the deep state burns down (this might not be true).