What would it take for you all to admit that I am right, that man never set foot on the moon?

Video evidence  :)

It would take you to not be wrong about lots of other stuff...

But since you frequently promote utter nonsense I don't value your opinion on such matters.  You are not qualified to judge.  You are just latching onto the conspiracy theories of others.

If you didn't have such a track history of being led by your own bias and being selective about what is "evidence" and what is not,  AND there was not huge amount of evidence that NASA went to the moon such as images of the tracks left there by lunar orbiters and several hundred pounds of moon rocks which are given and lent to universities around the world to examine under spectrometry, then I might consider it possible.

But given all the evidence, it seems certain to me that it is just another fool theory you latch onto because it gives you a feeling of control or understanding about the plans of the "star council" of evil men.  You like to think you know how the world operates.  It makes you feel powerful.

And I am not just picking on you Matthew.  Everyone I know, including my elder sister, who believes in such nonsense is unreasonable and unbalanced and makes poor decisions in other aspects of their life.  If I met someone wise, accomplished and with very good judgement on other things who believed the moon landings were faked then I'd listen to what they had to say, but I have never met such a person.

And I am not just picking on you Matthew.  Everyone I know, including my elder sister, who believes in such nonsense is unreasonable and unbalanced and makes poor decisions in other aspects of their life.  If I met someone wise, accomplished and with very good judgement on other things who believed the moon landings were faked then I'd listen to what they had to say, but I have never met such a person.

So it's all about the messenger, huh? It's all about people rather than ideas? You know what gender thinks that way?

What happened to being a man and arguing IDEAS? So I could have powerful arguments but if I'm dressed in rags you totally dismiss my arguments with a good old "ad hominem"? How feminine.

For what it's worth, I have the same respect for your judgment that you have for mine. So the feeling is mutual.


But nevertheless, I just burst your bubble. I guess I don't fit the mold at all.

I am highly educated and intelligent. I'm a software developer. I spent 3.5 years at a traditional seminary and got good grades (hint: not everyone did). I completed the 3-year Latin program in 2 years. Besides an English teacher's command of English, a decent grasp of Latin, I also can speak/understand a lot of Spanish and Japanese. I studied German enough to know the basics.

If you can pretend you're a man and enter the world of facts/evidence for a few minutes, the evidence suggests I don't have bad judgment either. I have excellent credit, have zero debt, I live on acreage with an average sized house (stone exterior) plus outbuildings, all paid for. We've never received a late notice, much less had any utilities threatened. I married my wife 14 years ago and we're still living in harmony with our 8th child on the way. Our children are all happy, healthy, and well adjusted. I don't have a criminal record, not even misdemeanors. I haven't even received a traffic ticket since my early 20's. I don't drink or smoke, much less use drugs.

I don't make as much as you because I choose to be more aloof from the World than you. It was/is my choice. Money doesn't equal good judgment or wisdom, much less sanctity, or else we should canonize or at least idolize Ted Turner, Oprah, Mark Zuckerberg, Jeff Bezos, etc.

What other yardsticks do you have to measure "bad judgment"? I'd love to hear them.

I'm no mental patient, damaged goods, or someone that can be accused of having bad judgment.

It would take you to not be wrong about lots of other stuff...

But since you frequently promote utter nonsense I don't value your opinion on such matters.  You are not qualified to judge.  You are just latching onto the conspiracy theories of others.

If you didn't have such a track history of being led by your own bias and being selective about what is "evidence" and what is not,  AND there was not huge amount of evidence that NASA went to the moon such as images of the tracks left there by lunar orbiters and several hundred pounds of moon rocks which are given and lent to universities around the world to examine under spectrometry, then I might consider it possible.

But given all the evidence, it seems certain to me that it is just another fool theory you latch onto because it gives you a feeling of control or understanding about the plans of the "star council" of evil men.  You like to think you know how the world operates.  It makes you feel powerful.

And I am not just picking on you Matthew.  Everyone I know, including my elder sister, who believes in such nonsense is unreasonable and unbalanced and makes poor decisions in other aspects of their life.  If I met someone wise, accomplished and with very good judgement on other things who believed the moon landings were faked then I'd listen to what they had to say, but I have never met such a person.

Star council of evil men? Try the Freemasons. You know that little group that pre-Vatican 2 Popes warned us about and banned Catholics from joining, the very same little group who the last couple Popes just so happen to be members of. It beggars belief why you're even a Trad at all when you seem to love Jєωs and Masons. 

Some of the stuff in the thread reminds of an amusing story told by E. Michael Jones.  He was disputing some important matters with a very rich man.  The very rich man in exasperation finally sarcastically asked of Jones why if he was "so damn smart" he wasn't "rich."  Without losing a beat Jones responded by asking him why if he was "so damn rich" he wasn't "smart."

One Solitary Life

“HE WAS born in an obscure village, the child of a peasant woman. He grew up in still another village, where he worked in a carpenter’s shop until he was thirty. Then for three years he was an itinerant preacher.

“He never wrote a book. He never held an office. He never had a family or owned a house. He did not go to college. He never visited a big city. He never traveled two hundred miles from the place where he was born. He did none of the things one usually associates with greatness. He had no credentials but himself.

“He was only thirty-three when the tide of public opinion turned against him. His friends ran away. He was turned over to his enemies and went through the mockery of a trial. He was nailed to a [stake] between two thieves. While he was dying, his executioners gambled for his clothing, the only property he had on earth. When he was dead, he was laid in a borrowed grave through the pity of a friend.

“Nineteen centuries have come and gone, and today he remains the central figure of the human race, and the leader of mankind’s progress. All the armies that ever marched, all the navies that ever sailed, all the parliaments that ever sat, all the kings that ever reigned, put together, have not affected the life of man on this planet so much as that one solitary life.”*—An anonymous commentary on the life of Jesus Christ.

But given all the evidence, it seems certain to me that it is just another fool theory you latch onto because it gives you a feeling of control or understanding about the plans of the "star council" of evil men.

Methinks that you're rather cozy with said "star council" ... probably on a first-name basis with George Soros.  Such connections are the most likely source of your affluence, given that you have not demonstrated any kind of intelligence here on CI.