more interesting stuff, any chance you can tell me what lies NASA have made about that original clip?
Told you, I think its interesting but am unsure if it is genuine. What is probably more interesting is your response to my question.
Very interesting , you are opening up some good stuff. Light takes time to bounce off the object to our eyes down the optic nerve to be decoded in the brain, all of which takes time. So nothing is live , even the life we perceive
You posted the clip and made claims about it. I asked a question about it you reply that NASA lie etc etc , yet when pushed you have no idea what NASA have even said about it.
Oh I see , NASA dismiss such incidents as ice particles and lens flares. If that is the case why do they cut the feeds when such things happen ?
I do not know but then neither do you, as you said yourself you don't even know what NASA have said about that clip. I ask this, what sort of person posts a video as proof of something without even having checked the validity of the video first?
So to be more specific , the clip I am about to upload NASA claim to be ice particles moved by the positioning system (jet) of the craft. In my opinion they are lying.
I never claimed you did, however you did use the phrase " If this NASA footage doesn't convince you nothing will" so you were clearly using the video in an attempt to prove your point. All sort of irrelevant really, as what I was after was information on the video but now realise I am unlikely to get that from you.
So if I was to tell you the video was captured by a radio ham called Alan Stockheim , a personal friend of mine , from a NASA downlink and verified by Kodak as genuine would that suffice ?
Can we invent our own conspiracy for a laugh? Here's the claim I've just made up. The hole in the ozone layer was created deliberately as an attempt to minimise the effects of global warming. In support, the hole was effectively making our atmosphere 'bigger', giving more space for existing molecules to expand into. A consequence of this would be a lower average atmospheric pressure, which would cause a rise in sea levels, but counter intuitively, more land, as the rise in sea levels wouldn't be supplemented by land bound ice, due to the lower temperatures, so the rise would be in the middle, just like when the tide goes out. I haven't decided why they've stopped yet, but I only invented this 5 minutes ago. I'm thinking of something related to it disproving other science, possibly supporting the well known myth of gravity. I mean, how can gallons of water float as a cloud, when the same atmosphere can't hold a rain drop against the power of gravity? Talk about things being in plain sight. If gravity affects the tides, clouds should go in and out too, surely. Come on then debunkers, let's hear your propaganda to try to call this a myth.
