It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
So either Cernan or Schmitt has feet the size of a woman's! Strange, what? Or is that the boot of a third astronaut?
Originally posted by Mintwithahole. The astronauts over shoe's were a standard fit. One size fits all.
Originally posted by Mintwithahole.
Yes it is hard to grasp as they shouldn't be! The astronauts over shoe's were a standard fit. One size fits all.
Originally posted by Phage
Overall: 7 3/4 in. tall x 7 in. wide x 1 ft. 1 in. long (19.69 x 17.78 x 33.02cm)
Overall: 7 in. tall x 7 in. wide x 1 ft. 1 1/2 in. long (17.78 x 17.78 x 34.29cm)
Overall (Approximately): 12 1/2 in. tall x 6 in. widevx 8 in. deep (31.8 x 15.2 x 20.3cm)
Originally posted by Mintwithahole.
reply to
WHAT! What type of gibberish is this? Did we leave English. . . You're argument is as flawed as your grammar. I'm through arguing with someone who can't see the obvious when it's suspended right under his nose. You seem incapable of grasping the point of this thread which centres around the differing sizes of the boot prints. Once you accept they are different then the question which immediately springs to mind is why are they different?
Originally posted by mikesingh
reply to post by angel of lightangelo
Thanks for your very valuable scientific photographic analysis, but it doesn't impress at all!
But oh Master, since you claim to be an authority on the hows and the whys of analyzing footprints, and I'm an idiot (So what's new? ) and don't know the subtle differences between photographic footprints and the real ones, the case can be considered closed! Thank you!
Cheers!
Originally posted by angel of lightangelo
Originally posted by Mintwithahole.
reply to
WHAT! What type of gibberish is this? Did we leave English. . . You're argument is as flawed as your grammar. I'm through arguing with someone who can't see the obvious when it's suspended right under his nose. You seem incapable of grasping the point of this thread which centres around the differing sizes of the boot prints. Once you accept they are different then the question which immediately springs to mind is why are they different?
So does this mean you are not going to address the fact that you claim they "are not similar at all" or when you said that you never said that? I was really hoping you were man enough to either admit you lied or come up with an explanation. Go ahead and pick on my grammar on and internet forum if that makes you feel smart. It certainly makes you the coolest kind in your WoW clan, I am sure. Athe question and try your best to keep personal insults out of this.
Originally posted by Mintwithahole.
I claimed they were not similar sized,
or at least that's what I meant.
I suppose to you it could literally mean anything you choose it to mean!
And as for the personal insults and picking you up on your grammar. . . Take another look you moron as it was you who started it. My advice to you - get a life!
Originally posted by angel of lightangelo
Originally posted by Mintwithahole.
I claimed they were not similar sized,
No you did not.
or at least that's what I meant.
Did I tell you I was a mind reader? If so, sorry. I am not. I can read what you write but not see what you think you should have said to better convey what you meant.
I suppose to you it could literally mean anything you choose it to mean!
Not really. I just went with what the words you used mean in the context you put them in. "they are not similar at all." Sorry, was I supposed to add 'sized' myself? You never mentioned your posts were DIY.
And as for the personal insults and picking you up on your grammar. . . Take another look you moron as it was you who started it. My advice to you - get a life!
Hmmmm. Not sure what that means. Look, you said they were not similar and then backpeddled. You made an etire post on how they are not similar at all. Then you contradicted yourself. I am here to learn new things and if I have to wade through posters that contradict themselves, the least they could do is admit it when it is clearly written down.
Sorry I read your words the way you typed them.
They are actually similar in size as well though so...ya know. Or you can prove they are not, whatever. Anyone that cannot admit that they made a mistake that is such an obvious one, can babble all he likes from now on. I am all done listening there.
Originally posted by Mintwithahole.
I claimed they were not similar sized
or at least that's what I meant
Those boot prints, to me, don't look similar at all
"WHAT?" Look, now you're just talking gibberish. You say something about DIY, I never mentioned DIY! The you say you're not a mind reader when I didn't say you were! Then, to finish (your post was a hard read) you say you're here to learn yet you can't see the obvious when it is placed under your nose.
Originally posted by angel of lightangelo
Originally posted by Mintwithahole.
I claimed they were not similar sized
or at least that's what I meant
Those boot prints, to me, don't look similar at all
"WHAT?" Look, now you're just talking gibberish. You say something about DIY, I never mentioned DIY! The you say you're not a mind reader when I didn't say you were! Then, to finish (your post was a hard read) you say you're here to learn yet you can't see the obvious when it is placed under your nose.
LOL, ok. Don't admit you mis-spoke. Try insulting me instead. If that helps. I am going back to the topic now. You have fun pretending you did not say things you said and that as a result I am somehow talking gibberish. I think your words speak for themselves very very nicely.
Originally posted by NavalFC
you are aware the hoaxed moon landing theory has been debunked several times