You are very ignorant of the truth. Do you think we landed a probe on the moon that was able to take apart and bring back parts of Surveyor 3in 1969? That would be way more unbelievable than humans doing it instead. What a incredibly stupid and moronic hill you’ve chosen to die on.
That’s based on the assumption of that being the process of what went on. As I said elsewhere, there seems to be a very unbreakably second-hand nature to this. It is my conclusion, just as yours, your hill, is yours. I’m not attempting to crusade on your own hill so much as I’m stating how people react to hearing what I think.
They react that way because its unbelievable how someone could actually be as stupid as to deny the moon landing in 2024. “You weren’t there first hand” is not as good as a defense as you think, and you’ve used it over and over. Is that all you’ve got? I haven’t been to the war in Ukraine, but I sure as hell know it’s happening. Are you unable to know something is happening without it being in your face?
Then I guess a quarter of Europe is stupid to you. A lot of things fall under the definition of “first-hand”; if I said “here is a moon rock, you can test its properties out”, that would be first-hand, as opposed to “I got a moon-rock as proof, but that doesn’t matter because NASA has it and they’ll never let you test it” or “here is footage, footage means it happened”.
Yes, anyone that can’t comprehend that we landed on the moon is stupid, like you. Correct! That is indeed how statistics work.
Hilarious that you’d link an article that says that it actually happened, too.
NASA has sent moon rock samples around the globe. They’ve been compared to rocks retrieved by probes and are the same (this was discussed at length in my previous Wikipedia link). But I guess that’s suddenly not going to be good enough for you, you’ll just come up with another reason to die on this hill. At least I can be happy knowing that we really did go to the moon, I’m sorry your brain will never be able to comprehend that amazing fact. It’s sad, when it comes down to it. I feel bad for you.
There is more to me that a conclusion the two of us disagree on, and I would say to say otherwise is to look way too much into it, especially if you’re going to phrase it as some sort of crusade, as when you ask if it’s a hill I’ll “die on” when I mention the difference between things gathered first-hand and second-hand, which still applies when you are talking about the minerals supposedly collected. Or to go by your own figure of speech, it’s my own hill and you are the guest, so it’s on you if I die on it. I also don’t have to agree 100% with the articles I link to, I was simply showing you it’s not simply something you can boil down to me being stupid. You speak of being happy about going to the moon and feeling sorry for me for not agreeing with you as if you confronting me about this disagreement demonstrates a happy mindset when I would be completely happy to agree to disagree.
You are very ignorant of the truth. Do you think we landed a probe on the moon that was able to take apart and bring back parts of Surveyor 3 in 1969? That would be way more unbelievable than humans doing it instead. What a incredibly stupid and moronic hill you’ve chosen to die on.
That’s based on the assumption of that being the process of what went on. As I said elsewhere, there seems to be a very unbreakably second-hand nature to this. It is my conclusion, just as yours, your hill, is yours. I’m not attempting to crusade on your own hill so much as I’m stating how people react to hearing what I think.
They react that way because its unbelievable how someone could actually be as stupid as to deny the moon landing in 2024. “You weren’t there first hand” is not as good as a defense as you think, and you’ve used it over and over. Is that all you’ve got? I haven’t been to the war in Ukraine, but I sure as hell know it’s happening. Are you unable to know something is happening without it being in your face?
Then I guess a quarter of Europe is stupid to you. A lot of things fall under the definition of “first-hand”; if I said “here is a moon rock, you can test its properties out”, that would be first-hand, as opposed to “I got a moon-rock as proof, but that doesn’t matter because NASA has it and they’ll never let you test it” or “here is footage, footage means it happened”.
At least a quarter, and I’d say that about the world in general.
The last 5 years have shown me that a sizable minority of the human race is dumber than a brick.
Yes, anyone that can’t comprehend that we landed on the moon is stupid, like you. Correct! That is indeed how statistics work.
Hilarious that you’d link an article that says that it actually happened, too.
NASA has sent moon rock samples around the globe. They’ve been compared to rocks retrieved by probes and are the same (this was discussed at length in my previous Wikipedia link). But I guess that’s suddenly not going to be good enough for you, you’ll just come up with another reason to die on this hill. At least I can be happy knowing that we really did go to the moon, I’m sorry your brain will never be able to comprehend that amazing fact. It’s sad, when it comes down to it. I feel bad for you.
There is more to me that a conclusion the two of us disagree on, and I would say to say otherwise is to look way too much into it, especially if you’re going to phrase it as some sort of crusade, as when you ask if it’s a hill I’ll “die on” when I mention the difference between things gathered first-hand and second-hand, which still applies when you are talking about the minerals supposedly collected. Or to go by your own figure of speech, it’s my own hill and you are the guest, so it’s on you if I die on it. I also don’t have to agree 100% with the articles I link to, I was simply showing you it’s not simply something you can boil down to me being stupid. You speak of being happy about going to the moon and feeling sorry for me for not agreeing with you as if you confronting me about this disagreement demonstrates a happy mindset when I would be completely happy to agree to disagree.