 | | Re: Moon Landing Hoax
|
|
(...) Like James said my post was meant as Fun Mocking not nasty mocking. It wasn't meant as bashing at all. Fox is what it is and I was making Fun of it. If you took it another way then I am sorry but I won't apologize for directing it where I did (...) (24 years ago, 14-Feb-01, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Moon Landing Hoax
|
|
(...) Uh...sorry. I honestly didn't mean it that way. I just like to make fun of Fox because they're always running something that they try to make sound all official and astounding and stuff. Although that's possibly because Fox is SUCH and (...) (24 years ago, 14-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Moon Landing Hoax
|
|
(...) This message has been nothing more than the Fox News Channel bashing, that is why, hence debate. (...) Because I do not like seeing debate material outside where it belongs, among others. Scott S. -- ***...*** Please visit (URL) (24 years ago, 14-Feb-01, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Moon Landing Hoax
|
|
(...) Probably because some people think that a program about the moon landing being a hoax is funny, and not fodder for serious debate. I've certainly been under the impression that the messages in this thread have been ranging from tongue-in-cheek (...) (24 years ago, 14-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Moon Landing Hoax
|
|
Folks, Why is this in fun? Please take it to off.topic.debate where it belongs. Scott S. ***...*** Please visit (URL) (24 years ago, 14-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Moon Landing Hoax
|
|
To All, Why is this in off.topic.fun? (...) This sounds like quite an opinionated statement, rather than a "fun" statement. I could say the sme thing about CNN, MS-NBC, etc. FUT off.topic.debate Scott S. ***...*** Please visit (URL) (24 years ago, 14-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Moon Landing Hoax
|
|
(...) This is why I love FOX. They arn't afraid of telling the truth and exposing government conspiracies. I hear that they are working right now on "The Earth really is flat" to be followed up by "We are the Center of the Universe". Nice, (...) (24 years ago, 14-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Interview with LEGO at Toy Fair
|
|
(...) The real issue/problem is Lego's inconsistency in their position. Really, it's inconsistency to the point of absurdity. I don't have a problem with weapons in Lego, and I wouldn't have a problem if weapons were absent. It's just hard for me to (...) (24 years ago, 14-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Moon Landing Hoax
|
|
(...) Nonsense! They must have gone to the moon--otherwise, where would they have gotten the alien for that autopsy? Dave! (24 years ago, 14-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Moon Landing Hoax
|
|
(...) Sweeps. What happened to simply having Buzz Aldrin in a hot tub surrounded by bikini-clad models? ;-) Bruce (24 years ago, 14-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Moon Landing Hoax
|
|
Thursday on Fox (9pm/8 Central) they are presenting a one hour program on why the moon landing was a hoax. They claim to have new evidence! See, proof! They wouldn't show it if it wasn't true! :~) Bill (24 years ago, 14-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Literal Creationism--a non sequitur!
|
|
(...) to himself or others. Perhaps an intervention is in order. However, at the bottom of the page Dr. D does make an interesting and absolute refutation of literal readings of the Bible when he indicates: GODISNOWHERE There are two obvious (...) (24 years ago, 12-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | My Underwear Buying Philosophy! (Re: was -- er whatever...)
|
|
You know, you guys really need to get out more. You're worried about my *touching* a rolled up undergarment as if I could infect it or something? Let's talk about ladies underwear for a second...most of the women's undergarments for sale in stores (...) (24 years ago, 11-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Just finished....
|
|
...Formatting my hard drive. Hence I am just now recovering and lost track of the messages that I was involved in with the Creation/Evolution debate. Anyhow I think I read most of them on the web interface and I don't really have much to say in (...) (24 years ago, 11-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: 6769 Fort Legoredo on sale at Shop At Home!!
|
|
(...) Sans quite that invective, I agree. Yeah, it sucks that they don't make the assortment you want, but it's selfish, crude, and technically illegal to go about opening packages. It's called product tampering at the very least, theft and fraud at (...) (24 years ago, 11-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: 6769 Fort Legoredo on sale at Shop At Home!!
|
|
(...) You know, looking at this as "the consumer who reaches the underwear department after Richard", it would make me kind of sick. The impression would be that someone went to the dressing room with said three-pack of underwear and tried them on! (...) (24 years ago, 11-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Was T-Rex a herbivourous animal?(was: Re: Why not Both?)
|
|
(...) It's not the grey matter, it's how the grey matter is wired. The last study I've seen (admittedly only in the mainstream) suggests that it's the brain's ability to cool and warm itself--e.g., the blood flow--that determines a species's (boy, (...) (24 years ago, 11-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Reuters report on Lego at New York Toy Fair
|
|
Folks, This WWF discussion should not be in general. FUT to off.topic.debate or off.topic.fun, whatever suits your fancy. Thanks! Scott S. -- Want LEGO Elements at Great Prices? Visit The Sanburn Systems Company www.sanburnsystems.com Scott E. (...) (24 years ago, 11-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun, lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Was T-Rex a herbivourous animal?(was: Re: Why not Both?)
|
|
(...) Just because a certain species of primates shows a significant enlargement of brain doesn't mean it always uses it: (...) As long as they can match in speed with their victims it's no problem - or do you want to tell me that the giant (...) (24 years ago, 11-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: 6769 Fort Legoredo on sale at Shop At Home!!
|
|
(...) Well, actually -- I repackage the underwear I don't want so it's identical to it's original packaging except for the color varieties, perfectly fit for selling and I doubt anyone even notices. I do actually pay for the assortments I have (...) (24 years ago, 11-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
