FW: Daily Telegraph’s 30 conspiracy theories!

From: Andrew Johnson

Date: 2008-11-30 18:35:12

2 or 3 people have sent me this link:   www.telegraph.co.uk/…   Some have said “it helps to wake people up” or remarks similar to that. I have some sympathy with this view, but at the same time, the telegraph has already been supplied with a great deal of information that should allow them to make a MUCH better job of a series of this type – even while maintaining a “skeptical view”. See below.   I did receive a hit on my website from “telegraph.co.uk” – a few days ago (i.e. someone from there was looking at my website)    Sadly, the people who put that together use the word “theory” and “evidence” interchangeably, despite there being 1 or 2 interesting photos and passages. They also make egregiously false statements such as:   “Those who think that Nasa faked some or all of the landings base their theories on photographs from the lunar surface which they claim show camera crosshairs partially behind rocks, a flag planted by Buzz Aldrin moving in a strange way, the lack of stars over the lunar landscape and shadows falling in different direction. ”   Sadly, this untrue – we only have to listen to Neil Armstrong own words from his speech at the Whitehouse in 1994, on the 25th anniversary of the Moon “landing”:     “Today we have with us a group of students, among America’s best. To you we say we have only completed a beginning. We leave you much that is undone. There are great ideas undiscovered, breakthroughs available to those who can remove one of the truth’s protective layers. ”   And of course, there’s lunar rover specification (it couldn’t have worked on the moon according to NASA’s own data – the battery would not have worked in the heat of the moon’s surface – neither did the rover fit into the known available space in the command module) – on and on.   Duncan Gardham (of said Daily Telegraph) entirely failed to reference this when he attempted to ridicule me in 2006 because I said the Liquid Airline Bombers plot was fake – he actually phoned me then printed something different in the article to what we discussed on the phone.   www.checktheevidence…   (and now one of the defendants has, in fact, been acquitted – seems I was right and Dunky Babes was wrong.)   business.timesonline…   It all helps the bubbling “truth muddle soup” I suppose…  

Related articles...

Comments are closed.