On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 20:11:03 +0000 Razer <rayzer@riseup.net> wrote:
juan:
On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 18:38:52 +0000 Razer <razer@riseup.net> wrote:
Don't cherrypick my writings dick.
I didn't cherrypick anything. I merely highlighted what you said. Feel free to call people who challenge any official story nutjobs, but don't expect much sympathy from me...
This is 'highhlighting'... Notice the rest of what you said below...
Come on Rayzer. 'Everybody' saw your complete message. I then just copied a part of it, but your whole message is in plain sight in the list's archive.
ps: your message came from razer@riseup, not rayzer@riseup. I replied (automatically) to razer@ and the reply bounced...
550 5.1.1 <razer@riseup.net>: Recipient address rejected: User unknown
Now here's the rest of what I said:
Which doesn't erase the fact that, according to you, "Simply, anyone who doesn't think Armstong walked on the moon is a nutjob." So yes, 'simply', anyone who doesn't parrot the party line is a 'nutjob'. Impressive.
One of the things my dad bequeathed me was an Omega "Moon Watch"... at least that's the way Omega advertised them. What was unique about the one I had vs the advertised store variety was the fact that it was an old fashioned wind-up, as opposed to the retail version, a self-winder.
Why the difference? As my dad put it "We didn't know if a self-winder would work in zero-gravity", and they weren't willing to take the risk.
If the moon landing was a hoax, it was such an intricate one it would have cost more to execute then actually landing someone on the moon.