Statement analysis of the words of Neil Armstrong

[happyuk]

Many Avalonians are aware of the usual avenues of discussion for the moon landing hoax theories - that the Van Allen belts made such a trip impossible, the peculiar photographic images of fluttering flags, and general all-round implausibility etc.

This latest Richard D Hall talk discusses new statement analysis (take a bow, Peter Hyatt) of the famous Apollo astronauts, which will leave most people in no doubt that Buzz Aldrin and Neil Armstrong are both liars. I first encountered some of this analysis this during Hall's Merthyr talk and was left incredulous at size of the confidence-trick that has been inflicted world-wide.

"Attempts have been made to sideline moon hoax evidence. Moon landing mythologists will (rightly) argue that if photographs were filmed on Earth, that does not prove they never went. But it’s far less reasonable to use this argument about the astronauts own words, which reveal that neither of the Apollo 11 “moonwalkers” make any linguistic connection with having been on the lunar surface. Once this new analysis is realised with other well established evidence, only those with severe delusional psychosis will now believe that Armstrong went anywhere near the Moon."

This Hall / Hyatt verbal vivisection is a treat to behold. Enjoy...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfTapJhp_Qw

[Spiral]

Don't forget pts 2 & 3 !

Covers the infamous Bart Sibrel interview with Buzz Aldrin & in pt 3 goes on to cover the book & screen play about the hoax landings by Bill Kaysing that was stolen by Hollywood & made into a film about a fake mission to Mars...

Link http://www.richplanet.net/astronauts.php

qqrnRBEiKsY

6ZwMPFXwJLU

[conk]

One thing stuck with me, that none of the astro-nots would swear on the Bible. For God's sake, why would you object unless you were lying?

[Nasu]

Here's the original... N


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gYTpXHU7Cvc

[enigma3]

I accept the Jay Weidner/Richard Hoagland story. They did go, but they lied about their real mission in front of the cameras. I will always remember one of the more famous behind the scenes stories at NASA involving Armstrong and Aldrin. Armstrong got out of the lunar lander, looked around and saw several ET spacecraft sitting at the edge of the crater, and then got on the redundant communications channel reserved for private discussions and said something like - they're here. And their ships are HUGE. That happened. That is where reality starts for me. Then Kubrick faked it all.

[Daozen]

Is this the "Truth's protective layers" speech?

There's a speech about ten years old where Armstrong really tries to get the truth out. He keeps looking back at his handler for nods.

And watch The Shining = Apollo hoax vids on youtube. I thought they were nuts at first but its very very convincing.

Pre-emptive Merry Christmas.

[Rawhide68]

I allways watch Richrd D Hall on youtube.
I have to ad to this by a coincidence I happened to speak to my 78y old mom yesterday , about the astrounats going to the moon .

She said It was Neil armstrong who she and my dad was listening to back in the 80´s in a Swedish conference. I asked her are you sure it wasn´t Edgar Mitchel ?, "No I´m sure it was Neil Armstrong".

So I asked her what did he talk about?`Mom said , The most important thing I remember about his speak was watching the "earthrise" from the moon, and the whole reason why he was at that coferance in Stockholm was to talk about how important that view from the moon seeing earth was.

"It´s going to change humanity" he said according to mom, and as I finnished the call with her, she said ,their is one more thing he said . He ended the coferance with a poem
" Man sleeps in stone, awakes in plants and walks in humans" I´m parafrasing.
And She said , he was a troubled man, suffered from alcoholism, but my dad and his friend managed to get him over to Sweden for that conference .

[Orph]

One thing stuck with me, that none of the astro-nots would swear on the Bible. For God's sake, why would you object unless you were lying?I would've reacted the same way. The guy asking the question was a real butt-head. If I'm out in public and some joker comes up to me and gets in my face, shoves a bible up my nose and says "Are you willing to swear on the bible that you did such-and-such"? I'd tell him to go take a hike. In fact, I'd be willing to help him on his way.

Not saying that the space guys are telling the truth or lies. Just saying that their resistance to the question could be more with the circumstances rather than the question itself.

[happyuk]

One thing stuck with me, that none of the astro-nots would swear on the Bible. For God's sake, why would you object unless you were lying?I would've reacted the same way. The guy asking the question was a real butt-head. If I'm out in public and some joker comes up to me and gets in my face, shoves a bible up my nose and says "Are you willing to swear on the bible that you did such-and-such"? I'd tell him to go take a hike. In fact, I'd be willing to help him on his way.

Not saying that the space guys are telling the truth or lies. Just saying that their resistance to the question could be more with the circumstances rather than the question itself.

I would definitely agree that what Bart Sibrel (the documentary maker) did in getting all up close and personal with Aldrin was a bad mistake to make at such a late stage in the discussion, as was pointed out by Richard D Hall and Peter Hyatt. Sibrel appeared to be unloading a lot of pent-up frustrations about Aldrin's chicanery and all his tedious, self-congratulatory interviews perhaps? Aldrin has been schooled in a certain way of doing things and was never going to admit to any of these assertions, while Sibrel felt one of Aldrin's interviewers deserved to be treated like an adult for once, and not a star-struck schoolboy.

Besides Sibrel getting thumped, the opportunity for gaining further insights was lost. As pointed out elsewhere Aldrin is a man with issues, so if Sibrel was looking for trouble, he'd come to right place.

Having said this, the work Sibrel has done in pointing out that the Apollo 11 was merely in a low earth orbit is I think a very valuable contribution.

[Cardillac]

all I can say about the official film of the 1st moon landing showing Armstrong emerging from the capsule: who put the camera there?

Larry

[Fellow Aspirant]

re: "those with severe delusional psychosis will now believe that Armstrong went anywhere near the Moon."

Count me in for this affliction. Armstrong (& his buddy) landed on the moon and performed many scientific operations while there. They very likely performed many other operations (scientific and occult) than were reported to the public.

Analysis of lunar astronauts' words and behaviours post mission show evidence of brain washing, from retching during a public speech about his experiences (Aldrin - a mind block) to having no recall of most of the time on the moon, to becoming a recluse (Armstrong).

Those guys went to the moon, alright - they just weren't allowed to remember it.

Brian

[Flash]

all I can say about the official film of the 1st moon landing showing Armstrong emerging from the capsule: who put the camera there?

Larry

Lolll he was emerging from the lan, mot the capsule. The capsule was still rotating above the moon and taking pics. So they say

I remember because i was tiny, sitting in front of the white and black tv with my whole family including grand parents and great grand mother with her recent boyfriend. I then realised that man was on the moon at the same time that i realised that old people could be in love. She was sitting on him loll. Cute aint’it?