Re: Men on the moon?
From: tj Frazir (GravityPhysics_at_webtv.net)
Date: 02/07/05
- Next message: tj Frazir: "Re: Men on the moon?"
- Previous message: mmeron_at_cars3.uchicago.edu: "Re: Lost Mass in Chemical Reactions"
- In reply to: Mark Fergerson: "Re: Men on the moon?"
- Next in thread: Mark Fergerson: "Re: Men on the moon?"
- Reply: Mark Fergerson: "Re: Men on the moon?"
- Reply: Mark Fergerson: "Re: Men on the moon?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2005 17:42:57 -0500
No conspieracy bull***.
I have 2 facts.
1 the speed of fall on the moon nasa claims is 1/6
2 .. the fact nasa used a side thuster when all the thusters MUST point
down .
You are ignoring the facts like you think Ill forget them.
Why would I post the facts again ? You will just forget the facts
befor you get to the end of the page .
I dont care what you think happend under the pier.
Your not trying to argue any facts so you wount have to deal with the
facts.
Youll take the libral way out andcall me a conspearacy thieorist .
The conspearacy morons cant do the math.
beside the fact you are stupid and dont understand the facts ...
- Next message: tj Frazir: "Re: Men on the moon?"
- Previous message: mmeron_at_cars3.uchicago.edu: "Re: Lost Mass in Chemical Reactions"
- In reply to: Mark Fergerson: "Re: Men on the moon?"
- Next in thread: Mark Fergerson: "Re: Men on the moon?"
- Reply: Mark Fergerson: "Re: Men on the moon?"
- Reply: Mark Fergerson: "Re: Men on the moon?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]