Fuck, that’s a great band name.
You POOR fools ,the faking of the moon landings was faked !
At that time the U.S. just didn’t have the technology in model making to make us all believe that there had been a moon landing .
But what had been kept secret was that the U.S. HAD developed C.G. to the degree where they could fake ,fake moon landings and so they faked the moon landings ,confident in the fact that nobody would discover that they had C.G.
You can tell it’s the solstice because you can balance eggs on their ends.
As I understand it, the Russians made extensive preparations for their space missions-including filming extra-vehicular excursions inside a specially equipped sound stage. This was done in case the actual films came out badly. The russians also announced launches after they actually took place (in case something went wrong). So that is how the whole mythology (faked moon landings) got started.
I find your ideas intriguing and would like to subscribe to your newsletter.
Stranger
Actually, the lunar surface is the one thing that even modern CGI has trouble rendering realistically - there have been breakthroughs in many other areas such as particles, fur and fluids, but for now, accurate depiction of cheese remains defiantly out of reach for even the leaders in the field.
Think about it - how many cheese-based CGI movies have you seen lately? I rest my case.
As much as I admire the Chinese and ex-Soviets for declaring their own interprative version of moon landings, I am afraid that it won’t live up to the hipe. Both are still less developed countries and I am scared that it will be less like modern CGI and more like cutting edge Claymation. It won’t play well to westernized audiences except maybe for the PBS pre-school set. It may be interesting to watch but not for the right reasons. Knowing their history, I doubt the production assists will have enough sense to remove the Play-Do cans out of the background. Another tipoff will be studio audio that says “That One Small Step For This Man, a Girant Reap Fo Mank Ind”.
Well, yes, but those are hardly photorealistic. Name a live-action movie in which all of the cheese was CGI, and was convincing - see? You can’t.
The Trilateral Commission ordered them to shut up about it.
But it IS round. It just isn’t spherical.
<mod>
Moving to MPSIMS
GQ>MPSIMS
</mod>
Say, that’s a good point! Has anyone out there ever seen a so-called “nuclear war?” Do we have any real proof that these magical “nuclear bombs” even exist?
Don’t even get me started on the whole USSR hoax. (Hint: in the rural American Northwest, not far from the University of Idaho, lies the remains of a gigantic soundstage. I know a guy who knows a guy who has literature.)
Can too. I’d call it “The Live-Action Convincing Cheese Movie”.
Hah. Wasn’t even hard.
Oh really? Then perhaps you can explain why the title of your movie doesn’t cast a visible shadow?
You never actually named a cheese movie at all! It was all electronic trickery wasn’t it? WASN’T IT?!
Well, duh. Didn’t you read **Mangetout’s ** post to which I was responding? Let’s face it, even this thread is purest CGI. What shadow does it cast?
So, Bart Sibrel is saying that the Soviet Union didn’t develop radio until the mid-seventies.
Somehow, this guy still manages to surprise me.
They had to stop faking them. Otherwise, people would think a trip to the moon was routine and no one would consider it a remarkable accomplishment anymore.
Don’t try to confuse the issue, Potemkin! You’d have us all just blindly accept that you somehow “named” a “movie” about “cheese.” Let’s review this “claim” “again,” shall “we” “?”
First of all, why does anyone need to know whether or not you were hard while naming a cheese movie? Have you never heard the expression “Too Much Information?” You’re just trying to distract us with your perverted anecdote. This is disgraceful.
Furthermore, under closer scrutiny, I note that the time elapsed between Mangetout’s historic challenge and your response was only 1 hour 37 minutes. This is all a matter of public record. Are we meant to believe that your hypothetical “cheese-movie-naming” technology was able to deploy in so short a time, despite no nation having any record of such highly specialized technology? Why would anyone develop such technology, if live-action convincingly-realistic CGI-cheese movies don’t even exist? And why wouldn’t a title to a nonexistent movie obey the laws of optics just like any other physical object? What excuse does your little puppet-god “Science” give for these inconsistencies?
Lastly, I couldn’t help but notice that under extremely high magnification and computer enhancement, the first sentence of your most recent response appears to incorporate subliminal imagery:
Perhaps you thought none of your victims would notice the face of Hillary Clinton! Eh, Princhester? Or should we just call you… “Herr Weishaupt!”