Faked Moon landing would have been exposed within four years, scientist concludes

First topic message reminder :

A scientist has used mathematics to disprove popular conspiracy theories.

Dr David Grimes, of the University of Oxford, developed a formula which showed that the numbers of people involved in sophisticated conspiracies, such as fake moon landings, would have led to them being exposed. He worked out that for something to stay a secret for over one hundred years could have involved a maximum of 125 people. However, a plot involving more than 2,521 people could stay covert no longer than five years. Therefore, the moon landings, which took place in 1969 and involved at least 411,000 Nasa employees, could not have been faked and kept secret until now, according to the formula. Dr Grimes said: "It is common to dismiss conspiracy theories and their proponents out of hand but I wanted to take the opposite approach, to see how these conspiracies might be possible. To do that, I looked at the vital requirement for a viable conspiracy-secrecy."

His theory is based on the notion that a certain number of people can keep a secret only for a limited amount of time. The more people involved, the less time it remains a secret. His equation takes into account the probability of a conspiracy being accidently revealed or deliberately leaked by a whistle-blower. It was informed by evidence from real conspiracies, including Edward Snowden’s exposure of the NSA Prism project. Dr Grimes says that a plot to fake the moon landings would have been revealed in three years, eight months and a climate change conspiracy would have leaked in three years, nine months.

The research also scrutinised medical conspiracies. A vaccination conspiracy would have emerged in three years and two months, Dr Grimes claims, and a suppressed cancer cure would be exposed in three years and three months. For conspiracies that do not require active maintenance, there are various factors involved in the calculation: the number of plotters, the length of time, and the effects of conspirators dying. Dr Grimes added: "A number of conspiracy theories revolve around science. While believing the moon landings were faked may not be harmful, believing misinformation about vaccines can be fatal. However, not every belief in a conspiracy is necessarily wrong - for example, the Snowden revelations confirmed some theories about the activities of the US National Security Agency.


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/faked-moon-landing-would-have-been-exposed-within-four-years-scientist-concludes-a6835721.html

Didge wrote:

Fuzzy Zack wrote:
Maybe understanding plain English is a problem for you. 

As my initial post was addressed to Les, I'll let him reply.   You're clearly not understanding my point.  

If you want to reply, then try understanding what I'm saying.  Don't pretend.

1) Deflection again and emotive

2) he will say the same as me, wanna bet?

Lol! If he does say the same as you then I'll be accusing him of lacking basic comprehension skills too. So what exactly do you want to bet on, that Les is stupid? HA HA!

Fuzzy Zack wrote:

Didge wrote:

1) Deflection again and emotive

2) he will say the same as me, wanna bet?

Lol! If he does say the same as you then I'll be accusing him of lacking basic comprehension skills too. So what exactly do you want to bet on, that Les is stupid? HA HA!

No we will both agree that you have failed to reason why all the truther claims he posted up would not require countless people

You screwed up and I know it because it was you that simply did not read his post properly

So you can continue to attempt to weasel out of this all you like

You are banged to rights mate
You can of course attempt to prove based off the truther claims he posted, it would not need many people knowing.

Didge wrote:

Fuzzy Zack wrote:
Lol! If he does say the same as you then I'll be accusing him of lacking basic comprehension skills too. So what exactly do you want to bet on, that Les is stupid? HA HA!

No we will both agree that you have failed to reason why all the truther claims he posted up would not require countless people

You screwed up and I know it because it was you that simply did not read his post properly

So you can continue to attempt to weasel out of this all you like

You are banged to rights mate
You can of course attempt to prove based off the truther claims he posted, it would not need many people knowing.

Show me where I defended the "truther claims". HA HA! 

Go on, take Les's list and show me how I defended each one. Failure for you to do so will just prove you have no idea what I'm talking about. 

Sorry but I think Les we way more educated than you. Since you can't understand basic Englsih, clearly more intelligent also.

Fuzzy Zack wrote:

Didge wrote:

No we will both agree that you have failed to reason why all the truther claims he posted up would not require countless people

You screwed up and I know it because it was you that simply did not read his post properly

So you can continue to attempt to weasel out of this all you like

You are banged to rights mate
You can of course attempt to prove based off the truther claims he posted, it would not need many people knowing.

Show me where I defended the "truther claims". HA HA! 

Go on, take Les's list and show me how I defended each one. Failure for you to do so will just prove you have no idea what I'm talking about. 

Sorry but I think Les we way more educated than you. Since you can't understand basic Englsih, clearly more intelligent also.

Oh dear point over your head again

The point he made is off all the claims he listed this would have involved many people

DOH

Tell me how did the CIA get their hands on a cruise missile?
And how is it not recorded missing Zack?

Do you really want me to belittle you further lol?

So now you claim education levels to your massive error ha ha ha ha

In Search of a Lost Cruise Missile

A Tomahawk cruise missile is not easy to lose. The very reason the U.S. military is willing to spend $750,000 a piece on the precision-guided munitions is precisely that they go exactly where they?re told. But in the past week, three U.S. Tomahawks have gone missing in the rocky plains of southeastern Turkey en route to Iraq, several hundred miles from the war zone. Five more went astray in Saudi Arabia, and a handful of others have broken up in Iran and, reportedly, Syria.

http://content.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,439517,00.html

korban dallas wrote:In Search of a Lost Cruise Missile

A Tomahawk cruise missile is not easy to lose. The very reason the U.S. military is willing to spend $750,000 a piece on the precision-guided munitions is precisely that they go exactly where they?re told. But in the past week, three U.S. Tomahawks have gone missing in the rocky plains of southeastern Turkey en route to Iraq, several hundred miles from the war zone. Five more went astray in Saudi Arabia, and a handful of others have broken up in Iran and, reportedly, Syria.

http://content.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,439517,00.html

Have a thanks

The point i was making.
Not only that, where did it fire from?
Who fired this?
Was it from an aircraft?
This plane would be recorded and witnessed in the daily logs.
So would it be if armed.
Was it fired from a launcher
Did defense systems pick up such a missile firing?
Like I say when you start to look at the implications here many people would need to know and be kept silent

korban dallas wrote:

eddie wrote:KD are you saying that it's entirely possible to only have a few very top secret people know something huge?

yea of course it is all it takes is like minded people and it doesn`t need to be a huge amount of people

Thank you.
I agree totally and absolutely.

Didge wrote:

korban dallas wrote:In Search of a Lost Cruise Missile

A Tomahawk cruise missile is not easy to lose. The very reason the U.S. military is willing to spend $750,000 a piece on the precision-guided munitions is precisely that they go exactly where they?re told. But in the past week, three U.S. Tomahawks have gone missing in the rocky plains of southeastern Turkey en route to Iraq, several hundred miles from the war zone. Five more went astray in Saudi Arabia, and a handful of others have broken up in Iran and, reportedly, Syria.

http://content.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,439517,00.html

Have a thanks  

The point i was making.
Not only that, where did it fire from?
Who fired this?
Was it from an aircraft?
This plane would be recorded and witnessed in the daily logs.
So would it be if armed.
Was it fired from a launcher
Did defense systems pick up such a missile firing?
Like I say when you start to look at the implications here many people would need to know and be kept silent

Not sure why the thanks as my post was to the point you made

"Tell me how did the CIA get their hands on a cruise missile?"
and as i pointed out pretty much anywhere its the CIA
a
A cruise missile in a shipping box on sale to rogue bidders

Defence experts are warning of a new danger of ballistic weapons proliferation after a Russian company started marketing a cruise missile that can be launched from a shipping container.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/7632543/A-cruise-missile-in-a-shipping-box-on-sale-to-rogue-bidders.html

Didge wrote:

korban dallas wrote:

Didge wrote:So where I make it light hearted you take it personal again

Quelle surprise

maybe you can tell me how a intelligence service that monitors everyone, is then not going to have intel on all those involved in such a cover up, even if they were not involved?
Seriously? They would pick up intelligence on this

So again he is a person with access and the means to access highly secret information, the point you miss.

Considering again as part of studying history I have study around intelligence in conflicts, i think I know what I am talking about

oh dear !!  not pre 9/11 they would`t no way near as much intelligence gathering

plus that`s the same as asking the fox to guard the chicken coop

if the people in high government are the ones planning this as they believe  sweeping it under the carpet is easy
plus you don`t write it down  i can not stress that enough you don`t write it down
unless your a stupid terrorist

And again you cannot answer my points on every single post and show even more you are emotional compromised
Sorry you just look for the fight in debates so may I suggest something more fitting like rag doll, as that will be more down to your level.
You are not that savvy but technically intelligent, like I say a complete shelden lol
Again it takes far more than some people at the top to implement such a plan, that involves a claim to explosives in many buildings, missiles, planes, passengers vanishing, air traffic controls, pilots and all this going on and you are telling me the NSA pick up the terrorists that carry this out but not anything from the people involved with them within the Government?.


Dude you watch too many films

Speaking of films, think of all,the twists and turns in a decent film whereby spies and governments hatch intricate plots and send the public out other signals etc (think of all,those clever films!)

Now think this: if a person or groups of people who are just "lowly" screenwriters, novelists and idea people....if they can think of intricate plots, you don't think it possible for powerful groups of rich people can think of even better intricate plots etc?

Come on didge! If a film maker can imagine it......well...????

eddie wrote:

Didge wrote:


And again you cannot answer my points on every single post and show even more you are emotional compromised
Sorry you just look for the fight in debates so may I suggest something more fitting like rag doll, as that will be more down to your level.
You are not that savvy but technically intelligent, like I say a complete shelden lol
Again it takes far more than some people at the top to implement such a plan, that involves a claim to explosives in many buildings, missiles, planes, passengers vanishing, air traffic controls, pilots and all this going on and you are telling me the NSA pick up the terrorists that carry this out but not anything from the people involved with them within the Government?.


Dude you watch too many films

Speaking of films, think of all,the twists and turns in a decent film whereby spies and governments hatch intricate plots and send the public out other signals etc (think of all,those clever films!)

Now think this: if a person or groups of people who are just "lowly" screenwriters, novelists and idea people....if they can think of intricate plots, you don't think it possible for powerful groups of rich people can think of even better intricate plots etc?

Come on didge! If a film maker can imagine it......well...????

Films lol i have done it in real life
i personally blew up a navy establishment and a row row ferry terminal and out foxed a bunch of armed marines 1990`s

was a op planed out side the exercise by some of the crew of one ship 5 people knew me ,my boss,his boss the exercise adjudicator an my mate who was in the gemini with me ,Jamie as i remember  
........i kinda miss those days

korban dallas wrote:

Didge wrote:

Have a thanks  

The point i was making.
Not only that, where did it fire from?
Who fired this?
Was it from an aircraft?
This plane would be recorded and witnessed in the daily logs.
So would it be if armed.
Was it fired from a launcher
Did defense systems pick up such a missile firing?
Like I say when you start to look at the implications here many people would need to know and be kept silent

Not sure why the thanks as my post was to the point you made

"Tell me how did the CIA get their hands on a cruise missile?"
and as i pointed out pretty much anywhere its the CIA
a
A cruise missile in a shipping box on sale to rogue bidders

Defence experts are warning of a new danger of ballistic weapons proliferation after a Russian company started marketing a cruise missile that can be launched from a shipping container.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/7632543/A-cruise-missile-in-a-shipping-box-on-sale-to-rogue-bidders.html

So prey tell Korben, where is the report and the log showing a Cruise missile stolen or missing within a year of 9/11
I mean surely this is recorded.
How did they then fire it?
And from where did they fire it unseen?
Where they held this container and fired it from?
Your link is 2010 and thus would not invented by this point this firing mechanism?
The intelligence of Rogue misses, which would not be probable for the time, pre 2001 using your link?
So really your link is moot unless you can find something similar for the time

Possible answers:

Report "lost" during the kerfuffle of 9/11 or due to that new secretary they hired to file it....?
They fired it unseen, from a building site that they had closed three months prior and watched to make sure they couldn't be seen (really this is a lame question just use imagination or watch a film lol)
Where they held the container - se above or think of a good hiding place and someone in power will get 100 better than your hiding place

Anything is possible with power and unlimited money.

Now I turn those questions on you:

Where would a group of highly skilled professions with money and power, hide a missile, bearing in mind these people have the power to move people and things around at their own will - please use your imagination for that bit ie they can get any building shut down due to let's say "asbestos" or whatever

Now you tell me. Where could they hide a missile?

Didge wrote:

korban dallas wrote:
Not sure why the thanks as my post was to the point you made

"Tell me how did the CIA get their hands on a cruise missile?"
and as i pointed out pretty much anywhere its the CIA
a
A cruise missile in a shipping box on sale to rogue bidders

Defence experts are warning of a new danger of ballistic weapons proliferation after a Russian company started marketing a cruise missile that can be launched from a shipping container.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/7632543/A-cruise-missile-in-a-shipping-box-on-sale-to-rogue-bidders.html

So prey tell Korben, where is the report and the log showing a Cruise missile stolen or missing within a year of 9/11
I mean surely this is recorded.
How did they then fire it?
And from where did they fire it unseen?
Where they held this container and fired it from?
Your link is 2010 and thus would not invented by this point this firing mechanism?
The intelligence of Rogue misses, which would not be probable for the time, pre 2001 using your link?
So really your link is moot unless you can find something similar for the time

Moot is it ? lol how the fuck would i have any clue of any missing /sold missile ,its not like they would run it past me is it ?? ...or you for that matter

and once again you conflate my answer, your point and the one i was addressing was how they the CIA could get one if they so wanted
i don`t think they did, i think this conspiracy of domestic actors who are responsible for what  is a good holiwood script nothing more

but in principle as to your point i replied to
yes they "the CIA"  in all likelihood could if they wanted get there hands on a cruse missile

check craigs list

i proved it was easy if not on the black market butwith some  bureaucraticl jiggery pokery we did it all the time with engine parts

ps

where is the report and the log showing a Cruise missile stolen

well when my security clearance reaches the level to be read in i will let you know ..............................
































fortunately i will then have to shoot you

eddie wrote:Possible answers:

Report "lost" during the kerfuffle of 9/11 or due to that new secretary they hired to file it....?
They fired it unseen, from a building site that they had closed three months prior and watched to make sure they couldn't be seen (really this is a lame question just use imagination or watch a film lol)
Where they held the container - se above or think of a good hiding place and someone in power will get 100 better than your hiding place

Anything is possible with power and unlimited money.

lol that did not answer many of my questions Eddie
As again people make reports and more than one person would know of a missing cruise missile. No matter if the reports wee missing, are the people missing also who knew?
Again where did they fire it from and how did they fire it Eddie?
How did a cruise missle that flies at the speed of 500 mph not be seen by then countless witnesses from where it fired to then hitting the target?
How about then those on radar, the air traffic controllers.
Do you see how as we go on more and more people would know if a missile was fired?

korban dallas wrote:

Didge wrote:


So prey tell Korben, where is the report and the log showing a Cruise missile stolen or missing within a year of 9/11
I mean surely this is recorded.
How did they then fire it?
And from where did they fire it unseen?
Where they held this container and fired it from?
Your link is 2010 and thus would not invented by this point this firing mechanism?
The intelligence of Rogue misses, which would not be probable for the time, pre 2001 using your link?
So really your link is moot unless you can find something similar for the time

Moot is it ? lol how the fuck would i have any clue of any missing /sold missile ,its not like they would run it past me is it ?? ...or you for that matter

and once again you conflate my answer, your point and the one i was addressing was how they the CIA could get one if they so wanted
i don`t think they did, i think this conspiracy of domestic actors who are responsible for what  is a good holiwood script nothing more

but in principle as to your point i replied to
yes they "the CIA"  in all likelihood could if they wanted get there hands on a cruse missile

check craigs list

i proved it was easy if not on the black market butwith some  bureaucraticl jiggery pokery we did it all the time with engine parts

Yes moot you pulled off a new invention to firing the cruise missile in 2010 lol
You then fail to grasp the point that a certain number of personal and records would state in a missile was missing or stolen
Not conflating anything because this is about one of the claims made by truthers that a cruise missle hit the pentagon, which was one of the points Eilzel stated..
So pointing how a cruise missle could be obtained in 2010 when  the attack happened in 2001 is about as moot as it gets
You would need to show how it was possible for the time
Then show how to fire this?
How it was not picked up Radar
Not visually seen by witnesses
So understand this is about proving that Eilzel is fundamentally right on many people would need to be involved

Didge, I've got a good idea.
Pretend you have been employed to oversee the 9/11 "pretend attack" and let's see if you can answer your own questions.

You have access to any amount of money
You have access to top-secret highly-skilled professionals.
You have top-secret weapons

I bet you can devise an answer to all the questions you ask.
Do it.
I bet you can do it.

And if you can, then "they" can go one better.

eddie wrote:Didge, I've got a good idea.
Pretend you have been employed to oversee the 9/11 "pretend attack" and let's see if you can answer your own questions.

You have access to any amount of money
You have access to top-secret highly-skilled professionals.
You have top-secret weapons

I bet you can devise an answer to all the questions you ask.
Do it.
I bet you can do it.

And if you can, then "they" can go one better.

How do I have access to skilled loyal people?
How do I have access that goes unknown of now secret weapons in 2001?
Yeah you tell me, either people do watch to many films or have never read of many covert ops carried out to see how their claims are quite emphatically bonkers

See if you can do it.
That's all.

eddie wrote:See if you can do it.
That's all.

Well there is a problem Eddie
I need to devise in my plan to tell the BBC that they have to say a building has fallen down, before it has fallen down and for the entire BBC working that day to be in on this and work out how many millions I would need to buy their silence.. 
You do realise I have to devise this plan based on the truthers claims to make fit, is that fair?

That's one possibility
Try to find another

Try looking at it from your own angle of what you will do and not what you remember from the actual day

eddie wrote:That's one possibility
Try to find another

Try looking at it from your own angle of what you will do and not what you remember from the actual day

I think the point being here on people knowing just went over your head by the last point alone Eddie
The way to carry out this attack would be to do exactly how Al-Qaeda had done this. Which would then render the truthers claims redundant. I would then to make it possible as a red flag carry this out the one way it did happen by Al-Qaeda.  I would need to find enough men willing to commit suicide who are also willing to murder thousands as Al Qaeda did.
Considering I have no ideology to go off or even a reason what I hope to achieve by carrying out this attack, unlike Al-Qaeda who did.
How do I then obtain enough suicidal men, willing to murder for no purposeful objective other than me wanting to go to war with Afghanistan?
So you tell me how that could be done?

Anyway it is interesting to think how it could be done hypothetical off the truthers claims and also off none of their claims, which to me makes it even more easier to show why the truthers claims are wrong Eddie
Though open to anyone's possibilities if they reason them out for a small number being involved

Have to go so have a good evening

x