........................ | image tagged in space,funny | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
19,351 views, 248 upvotes, Made by CometHunter 3 months ago spacefunny
Add Meme
Post Comment
reply
16 ups, 1 reply
i.imgflip.com/26hiux.jpg (click to show)
reply
5 ups, 1 reply
CONSPIRACY THEORIES? WHAT A LIGHT HEARTED AND FUNNY TOPIC | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
True
reply
4 ups, 2 replies
Matrix Morpheus Meme | WHAT IF I TOLD YOU CONSPIRACY THEORIES ARE VERY FUN UNTIL YOU FALL SO FAR DOWN THE RABBIT HOLE YOU CAN'T GET OUT? | image tagged in memes,matrix morpheus | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
i.imgflip.com/1gpco3.gif (click to show)
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
A | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
reply
1 up, 4 replies
(CONSPIRE) | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
Now the question is: who are the kings and rulers of the earth?
i.imgflip.com/22vkx7.gif (click to show)
reply
4 ups, 2 replies
REMEMBER THE TOWER OF BABEL? IMAGINE HOW MAD GOD WOULD BE IF HE KNEW WE WENT TO THE MOON | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
Upvoted
reply
2 ups, 2 replies
Creepy Condescending Wonka Meme | IT WAS PROBABLY MORE OF WHAT THEY WERE ATTEMPTING, NOT HOW HIGH THEY WERE GETTING. | image tagged in memes,creepy condescending wonka | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
reply
1 up, 1 reply
You dingus, Eldershire literally said that the height wasn't what it was about. The Tower of Babel was built with the intention of reaching heaven. The Moon Landing happened because we wanted to prove that we could get to the moon.

It wasn't because it was too high, it was because of why they built it. Learn to read, please.
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
:)
1 up
They don't because Babel was about fighting God, and the moon landing was about fighting people.
reply
1 up, 2 replies
It's because of the thoughts and beliefs of the people who were building it; not because of the tower itself or how bad people were at constructing it.

Remember, in the Bible's timeline, God couldn't be talked to directly. People had to use sacrifices and other tools, and in this case, they used the wrong practices.
reply
1 up
Well, yeah, that's what I meant.
reply
1 up
When I say "the Bible's timeline," I meant to put "of Genesis" after it, but my mind drew a blank for a second there...
reply
2 ups, 2 replies
reply
1 up
reply
1 up, 1 reply
reply
0 ups
But you do realize the Apollo 13 was real, had a real and similar malfunction, and had the same names for its astronauts, right? I memed about those real people.
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
reply
2 ups
Ephesians 6:12 We wrestle/fight not against flesh and blood but against principalities, powers, the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.

That doesn't mean that the "kings and rulers of this earth" are not part of spiritual warfare.

Ephesians 2:2 Satan is the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is right now working in the children of disobedience.

That word "worketh" "working" is the Greek word 'energeo' where we get our words 'energy' or 'energized.' So satan is energizing the "children of disobedience." That is every unconverted person, whether it be the dope addict in a ghetto alleyway or the king/potentate/president of any country.

A lot of the conspiracy theories that I am familiar with focus on the presidents, kings/queens, politicians, etc. But I am more concerned about the "influence peddlers" such as musicians, actors/actresses, and other celebrities that masses of people idolize and seem to "foam at the mouth over." Because those along with political rulers, are the ones whom satan is using to influence "the course of this world" (Ephesians 2:2) or 'direct the contemporary age in which we live.' When we were all unsaved we "walked" or 'lived our lives' "according to the course of this world." Which means that we conducted ourselves by the instruction or counsel of the contemporary age in which we live, which was all under the counsel/influence of satan.

I'm not one of those, "We should ban all rock music (or insert whatever genre of music/entertainment you think is worst) and only listen to psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs" type people. But we do need to recognize that if the entertainment or information we take in doesn't exalt Jesus Christ, is is "ungodly counsel" being propagated by someone being energized by satan to push our contemporary generation away from God. So we must not model our lives after that ungodly counsel: "blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly." Psalm 1:1
reply
1 up, 2 replies
In the Bible, these "rulers" are Satan's followers, thus why that verse makes these "rulers" so evil.
reply
2 ups, 3 replies
Ephesians 6:12 We wrestle/fight not against flesh and blood but against principalities, powers, the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.

That doesn't mean that the "kings and rulers of this earth" are not part of spiritual warfare.

Ephesians 2:2 Satan is the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is right now working in the children of disobedience.

That word "worketh" "working" is the Greek word 'energeo' where we get our words 'energy' or 'energized.' So satan is energizing the "children of disobedience." That is every unconverted person, whether it be the dope addict in a ghetto alleyway or the king/potentate/president of any country.

A lot of the conspiracy theories that I am familiar with focus on the presidents, kings/queens, politicians, etc. But I am more concerned about the "influence peddlers" such as musicians, actors/actresses, and other celebrities that masses of people idolize and seem to "foam at the mouth over." Because those along with political rulers, are the ones whom satan is using to influence "the course of this world" (Ephesians 2:2) or 'direct the contemporary age in which we live.' When we were all unsaved we "walked" or 'lived our lives' "according to the course of this world." Which means that we conducted ourselves by the instruction or counsel of the contemporary age in which we live, which was all under the counsel/influence of satan.

I'm not one of those, "We should ban all rock music (or insert whatever genre of music/entertainment you think is worst) and only listen to psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs" type people. But we do need to recognize that if the entertainment or information we take in doesn't exalt Jesus Christ, is is "ungodly counsel" being propagated by someone being energized by satan to push our contemporary generation away from God. So we must not model our lives after that ungodly counsel: "blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly." Psalm 1:1
reply
1 up, 1 reply
Just kidding. That’s very perceptive. I haven’t studied that verse in depth yet. Good discernment...
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
Yes, there is a whole lot of ungodly counsel on this site, but I'm not here for that. I'm here to make memes!
reply
2 ups
Amen to that! : )
reply
1 up, 1 reply
Same idea I had... but you still put it waaay better! ;D
reply
1 up, 1 reply
reply
[deleted]
0 ups, 1 reply
0 ups
Look into the probability of just eight prophecies being fulfilled in the life of one individual. There were at least three hundred fulfilled in the life of Jesus of Nazareth.
If you have ever read Nostradamus' "prophecies" you will see they are vague at best so there are actually more than one historic event that could be pressed into the "fulfillment."
The prophecies of Scripture, especially those fulfilled by Jesus Christ, are very specific. Just read Psalm 22, it is an exact recounting of a Roman crucifixion thousands of years before it was invented.
reply
[deleted]
0 ups, 1 reply
reply
0 ups
Yeah, I think that is bait, so you can accuse God of "being more evil than satan."
Satan is a created being, a fallen angel, who has no power on his own. Everything he does is by permission of God. Job 1:6-12 satan has to have permission from God to afflict Job.
If you try to accuse God of "being more evil than satan" or being a tyrant or some other such, God has a purpose for the evil he allows AND if you hold to a materialistic worldview you have NO reason complain about morality because your worldview can't account for morality.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
The "rulers" and "Kings of the Earth" aren't the same people in this verse.
reply
[deleted]
0 ups, 1 reply
reply
0 ups
Because he was punishing his children for using Him to their advantage.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
reply
1 up, 2 replies
"Their" is the referring to the Lord and his Messiah, so I guess the bible app I copy and paste from has "Their" capitalized?
reply
1 up, 1 reply
You GUESS??? I think I'd want to do my homework and know this stuff for sure before I went proselytizing out in public!
reply
1 up
That was an ironic reply. The NASB capitalizes antecedents that refer back to deity.
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
I am having trouble adding my meme... hmm ? so if he/ your God, is real and he is a loving parent, then why would he allow bad things to happen to good people. Would you as a parent , if you had the power, take away the pain and heartache and bring goodness and happiness to your children?
reply
0 ups
Sorry you can't add your meme. Sometimes threads "close" so you can't respond to the last comment someone made and you have to go to a previous comment they made to respond to them. I don't know why that is. Some users have issues with the meme generator.

There are no "good people." I'm not saying, "there are no good people apart from Jesus Christ," as if I'm good because I'm a Christian and other Christians are "good." I am not good, nor are other Christians, neither are you. Jesus Christ was the only "good" person and he voluntarily suffered the torment of men and the wrath of God. That is the biblical position that I hold as a bible believer. Other Christians who think that they are "good" because they are Christians don't know the bible very well.

We are not all "children of God." Scripture teaches, "For you are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus." Galatians 3:26
Apart from faith in Christ we are only God's creatures and God has a purpose for suffering in the lives of his creatures and children. God uses suffering in our lives to bring higher goodness and happiness than just the temporal pleasures a human parent can give to their child.

Like I said, God has a purpose for the evil he allows AND if you hold to a materialistic worldview you have NO reason to complain about "evil" or "bad things" happening to people because your worldview can't account for "good" or "evil" or "right" or "wrong" because all of that is just subjective to feelings of the individual. If there is no standard of morality and good and evil, why should I even care that people are suffering if I'm not the one suffering?
reply
1 up
reply
9 ups, 3 replies
Upvoted - even though the HD format did not exist during the Apollo Program.

Only off by about a half century or so... close enough!
reply
7 ups, 1 reply
Anecdote: I'm old enough to have watched the moon landing live in '69. I remember the video quality was so poor, it almost looked like you were looking THROUGH the lunar lander. LOL
reply
4 ups, 1 reply
I watched it live also (streaming, I guess). I'm an old geezer too!
reply
6 ups, 1 reply
I don't think they called it "streaming" back then. Streaming was what you did with ribbon back during ticker tape parades.

BTW: And 'ticker tape". How many people today know what ticker tape was? LOL x 5
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
Ticker tape! I forgot about it until now... lost in the mist of time!

Now I feel ancient. Thanks for cheering me up! ;-p
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
I've been to a ticker tape parade once. In lower Manhattan. It was around 1990 or 1991.

Even THAT was a long time ago...
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
That's all right. It's one more TT parade than I can say I've seen. We don't get them high-falutin' VIPs that you big city slickers get! Our last big moment in the spotlight was hosting the 1995 European Ryder Cup team with HRH Prince William as Honorary Team Captain. Which doesn't mean squat if you're not a golf enthusiast. :)
reply
3 ups, 2 replies
If I recall correctly, the parade was for the released Iranian hostages.

It's amazing how much the wind and cavernous skyscrapers grab the paper and they twirl it upwards between the buildings. Like a blizzard in reverse, almost.

I'd hate to have to clean it up, though. ;-)
reply
3 ups, 2 replies
1 up
And yet where are the feminists complaining about lack of women in THAT job? XD
0 ups
You again...
reply
1 up, 1 reply
Hey- we have a connection to the hostages!. Reporter/hostage Terry A. Anderson had a sister (Peggy Say) who lived just a couple miles from me. She was on the local news so much, she was getting more TV time than Rochester's mayor! LOL
1 up
Coincidence?

YOU decide! ;-p
reply
4 ups, 1 reply
Originally, yes...you're right. But I think the author was referring to the process of digitally turning raw footage into HD imagery (or whatever the proper terminology would be).
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
You can't do that... you literally can't. There is a huge loss/lack of data. You can't just MAKE IT UP.
reply
5 ups, 2 replies
OK, now I'm confused. If you can digitally remaster sound recordings, why cant you do that with images?
reply
7 ups, 3 replies
Because such recordings had a *master*, which contained a significantly higher sampling rate than mass market cassettes could support. Masters were usually dual-spool, slow-turning, and heavier and thicker tape than what you bought at the record store. I don't know what LP Masters were made of, but it was sturdier (and more expensive) than vinyl.They were usually stored under controlled conditions and used very infrequently to preserve their integrity.

Images on the other hand, were 35mm chromium film (or 65mm or 70mm or whatever the movie was originally shot in) that only gets just so good. Still better that what your old analog NTSC television could support, or even your standard movie theater projector. But when compared to today's 4K UHD resolution, you just can't get there from here. You can do contrast enhancements and histogram adjustments and stuff which will help, but you only have just so much information to work with.

You can't turn a 640x480 picture with a 256 color palette into a 4K UHD image, no matter what you think you saw them do on CSI: Miami.
reply
4 ups
LOL, very impressive response!!!!
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
The Apollo missions were equipped with 70mm Hasselblad cameras. You can find a catalog of the images here https://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/catalog/70mm/

According to IMAX, 35mm film has a digital equivalent of 6000 lines of horizontal resolution (6K), while 70mm film has the equivalent of 18,000 lines of digital resolution (more like 12,000 in reality)
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
Thanks for the link. Those are some impressive shots. But the Hasselblad cameras were only for still images. The movie cameras (made by Westinghouse and RCA) ran at 10fps, and had a scan resolution of maybe 320 scan lines. They had to upscale the framerate to show it on television, which is why it looks so terrible.
reply
1 up
Recordings where done frame by frame by capturing PHOTONs. A PHOTON is nowhere near the same size as a pixel, my friend; in fact; about 100 million times smaller! Therefore, because the image doesn't have a "resolution" but rather, a "blend" that ran slowly, pixels can represent just a tiny area of that Photon exposure, thus why it can be digitally made.

It's the same idea with Disney's remastered Blu-ray disks. It is able to be done, because the frames were drawn one by one by a speed artist. Because the paper itself didn't have the tendency to form a grid-like affect that a 4K pixel has, it is possible to capture an area that equals (1/3840)x(1/2160) of each frame into a single data pack (which on 32-bit TVs is 4 Bytes.) Since each movie type isn't RAW, but COMPRESSED, the processor only changes pixel colors that are changed after each frame. Digital television works the same way, thus why bad or interrupted signals are a collection of squares that combine 5 to 25 frames within the same moment.
reply
4 ups, 1 reply
According to howtogeek:

"35mm film, the kind of film used for most old movies, can easily be considered around 20 megapixels or greater in resolution. The lesser used but absolutely enormous 65-70mm film has, as you’d guess, roughly double the potential resolution of 35mm film and could be converted into a 30-40 megapixel image."

and as a frame of reference:

"The resolution of a 1080p movie, when translated into a “megapixel’ count, for example, is a mere 2 megapixels (as there are roughly two million pixels in each frame). Even the new 4K video that blows everyone away with its realism only provides a little under the equivalent of nine megapixels of resolution per frame."

From https://www.howtogeek.com/199182/ask-htg-how-can-studios-release-high-definition-versions-of-decades-old-movies-and-tv-shows/
reply
1 up, 1 reply
Yes, all this is true.

The movie cameras on the Lunar Lander wasn't exactly Panavision or Cinemascope, was my point. This is why the Apollo 11 movies aren't going to get much better than what you've already seen.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
That may be true, but if anything it's more due to the "handling" the film itself went through. NASA would naturally have had the highest quality equipment possible, and even if they only used 16mm film, that's still a potential base resolution that's equivalent to 4K, at around 9-10 megapixels.

However that film had to go through things like the turbulence of atmospheric re-entry and handling by scientists rather than film experts and such, all of which MAY have caused degradation.

The difference between film and digital recording is that film doesn't use pixels, it doesn't take a digital representation of the scene, it captures the scene entirely. So with good enough original recording equipment and a powerful enough scanner, the moon landing could absolutely be viewed in HD. Hell, I once took a wallet sized photo I had of my mother, who died in the 70's, and scanned it to near poster size with absolutely no loss of picture quality, and the picture became much more visible, with previously unseen details.
reply
0 ups, 3 replies
"...NASA would naturally have had the highest quality equipment..."

Except that it wasn't. Well, it was, but not in the way you're thinking. They were more concerned with the thing surviving extreme temperature ranges, and operating on only 7 watts of power. They were custom designed movie cameras specifically designed by RCA and Westinghouse to operate in space.

The camera itself recorded film at 10 fps, and a very low number of scan lines.
reply
0 ups
Dude, no camera uses scanlines to produce a picture. Scnalines are only used for electrical video output CRTs. LCDs and LEDs don't do that, giving the manufacturer the chance to put much higher resolutions in a smaller box more easily. When a camera (even digital ones, but instead of going onto film, photons strike against nano-level color sensors) is taking a picture, it is capturing PHOTONS. PHOTONS are much smaller than an electron (which it is electron movement that displaces photons) and an electron is approximately 1.0x10^-16 (100 femto-meters, 10 billion times smaller than a meter.) Therefore, when the image is converted to work on a television, the converter takes a look at a small area of the photons (about 80 micrometers) and puts the color data it sees as the brightest.

It is impossible to make a camera that does "scanlines" that only happens during output. A printer is "scanlining" but on paper, not a phosphor CRT.
reply
0 ups
The camera was not digital or electrical for capture. It used actual film; which is not used digitally or electrically, but rather by the laws of particle physics themselves.

Do you realize that cameras were about since 1876, and the world's first microprocessor wasn't until 1971, and even then it could only process a 320x200 image at 0.2fps?
reply
1 up, 1 reply
Ah well, fair enough. I guess it does make sense they'd be more concerned with actually being ABLE to film it, and less with image quality.
0 ups
Right, and in 1969 color TV was just starting to become a thing. Most homes were still running B&W TVs. The idea of a movie camera in space sending LIVE footage from the f**king MOON was just short of a miracle by itself.

But I think people focus too much on resolution anyway. You can have all the resolution in the world, HD, UHD, 8K, etc. But of you're using a 256 color palette and recording at 6 fps, guess what you're gonna get? Crap, that's what.
reply
1 up
You can, NASA has done that with the film that came back.
reply
2 ups, 2 replies
The HD format didn't exist, but the raw footage on film is of a much higher quality than current HD can achieve, if the film is properly stored and maintained.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
Good info.

Upvoted. :-)
reply
0 ups
reply
0 ups
Frame rate is also a factor. Most movies are filmed at 24 FPS.
reply
8 ups, 1 reply
reply
6 ups
reply
5 ups, 3 replies
The people who don't believe in the moon landing usually don't believe it's possible to travel into space because of radiation/angels/whatever, so they're not likely to believe in UFOs either.
reply
12 ups
reply
3 ups
Or because the sky is one big solid dome around the earth, known as "the firmament"
reply
0 ups
oh I am a devoted christian and believe in our moon landing. this is different than the tower of babel because babel was to deny God, and the moon landing had nothing to deal with God, but to deny Russia's power.
reply
[deleted]
5 ups, 1 reply
What I find hard to believe is that the moon-buggy had DirectTV back then...
reply
7 ups, 2 replies
reply
[deleted]
1 up, 1 reply
OK then, why doesn't Buzz Lightyear have his wings extended?
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
Before he became a self proclaimed super-hero.
reply
[deleted]
1 up
And he charged, "To infinity and beyond!!!"
reply
0 ups
reply
[deleted]
5 ups, 1 reply
https://imgflip.com/i/26qdsn (up vote for you)
reply
5 ups
reply
4 ups
reply
5 ups, 3 replies
reply
7 ups
"...It was created to have rigid, extendable support pieces on the top and bottom so that the flag would look taut. However, when the astronauts were setting the flag up, the bottom rod was jammed, and would not fully extend. Then, as they were twisting the pole into the ground, the motion caused the ripples we see..." https://www.thoughtco.com/did-men-really-land-on-moon-3072611
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
Don't you also think that if they were trying to fake it, they wouldn't have mistakes like that
reply
4 ups, 2 replies
You never know, NASA is a US Government agency.
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
True, the government is stupid, they tried to get Hillary elected!
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
They let Trump into office. Isn't that enough?
reply
3 ups
Nah, Trump is better than Obama was
reply
3 ups
oomph, savage
reply
0 ups
Just kidding good point:)
reply
4 ups, 1 reply
reply
1 up, 2 replies
reply
3 ups, 2 replies
reply
1 up, 1 reply
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
reply
1 up
reply
1 up
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
reply
1 up, 1 reply
reply
1 up
reply
4 ups
reply
4 ups
reply
3 ups
reply
3 ups
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
WHAT are you talking about? Stop what?
reply
2 ups
You know too much
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
reply
2 ups
I'd look the same way after answering the same damn dumb questions on 25 different interview sessions!
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
reply
0 ups
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
See, this proves the landings were fake. With no air, the tires should not have been able to make noise.
reply
1 up
reply
2 ups
reply
2 ups, 2 replies
Or the fact that a flag is blowing in SPACE.
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
Read KDDubz's thread.
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
Oh. But still...
reply
1 up, 1 reply
But still what?
reply
0 ups
I just mean it must be pretty obvious if an idiot like me noticed it.
reply
0 ups
the moon has been proven to have its own wind. It isn't very fast, but because gravity is weaker, it allows flags to fly much easier. This is true for anything with a gaseous layer.
reply
1 up
reply
1 up
reply
1 up, 1 reply
reply
1 up
Savage
reply
[deleted]
1 up, 1 reply
to all ppl who think we did NOT land on the moon, simplify things- the USSR would have called BS and it would have been on every newspaper... The Rocket was basically an ICBM being launched during a very heated "cold war". also China found evidence of our 1972 landing.
reply
1 up, 3 replies
How would China find any evidence?

You want to know the truth about the moon landing?

Google "Van Allen Radiation Belt." The 3rd belt was discovered only in 2012. As you know, the radiation belt becomes stronger as they are further from Earth's protective magnetic field. Those astronauts would've fried in their own seats.

NASA's explanation? - We got lucky.

No. Just no.
reply
0 ups
China has sent unmanned missions to the moon. There is footage of one of their landers touching down and deploying a rover. But I'm sure you think they are faking too and covering for us cause they just love us so much. Lol
reply
[deleted]
0 ups
they have a big telescope and had pictures of it
reply
1 up, 1 reply
Let me further explain NASA's explanation:

They claimed "we got lucky" because the measure they took to protect the astronauts from the first 2 radiation belt was more than adequate to protect from the 3rd. They got lucky b/c they "overcalculated" the protection they needed.

We're talking about NASA and planning a 1st man on the moon mission. They do NOT miscalculate anything. Someone would be FIRED if they miscalculated something.

Whole thing is just a show.

Also, yes, look at the HD photo of the man on the moon. Now, look at Star Wars remastered by George Lucas. Star Wars was made in 1977. No matter how much you remaster it, change the format, etc... release it in HD, it never looks as crisp and clean as the new trilogy filmed with modern technology. Those photos are obviously fake.
reply
0 ups
you do realize the calculation required only a few more rads of protection to withstand the third layer, right? anything heading towards mars is more like what you're talking about. so, unless you have a link to the article on www.nasa.gov that explains this, your theory is fake.
reply
1 up
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=z8AhqUyumnY
reply
1 up
reply
1 up, 1 reply
Both are real. And your broad-brush-taint argument that anyone who believes in any conspiracy must disbelieve the Apollo missions convicts you of - sorry - extreme stupidity.
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
Staring at the above photograph while my attention wandered, I found myself half expecting that "eye" to wink. Then it hit me why it seemed familiar.
reply
0 ups
Congratulations on your completely anti-rational non-response. You lose.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
Bop it! Twist it! Turn it! Kill your parents!
reply
3 ups
That last bit was uncalled for.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
reply
1 up, 1 reply
reply
1 up
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
Comet, this meme really took off!

One could say it has... legs (gold plated).

Congratulations! :-)

Creating memes, and livin' the dreams.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
Thanks. And thank you for your part in this success!
I think that's twice the numbers generated compared to my second-best meme.
(Not that I've made that many successes!)
reply
1 up, 1 reply
I would like to state for the record that I had no part in your success.

All I did was upvote your original meme, plus every single one of the dozens of comments and meme responses you added in this thread (so far - and boy are my arms tired!).

Oh, and inspired a minor debate on the photo and video technologies of the late 1960's.

But YOU are the man.. even the meme is consistent with your outta space handle!

And I enjoyed your comment about believing in a landing if there hadn't been one. I think I enjoyed that one more than the original. I suggest you put that text on the same image for another winner.

Anyway, here... maybe this will bring you down to Earth. This is how the other half memes...

imgflip.com/i/270wkd
reply
1 up, 1 reply
The Record shall so reflect you as Officially Not Participating in any of the aforementioned success of Said Meme. Let the record further show that I withdraw my appreciation of any and all participation you may or may not have performed.

(Unofficially, I offer a fistbump for the upvotes. And I'll mail you a coupon for some sore muscle balm.)
reply
1 up
Groovy!

And to quote Senator Palpatine... "So it's muscle balm then!"!

Thank you, thank you, thank you. Catch you soon on a meme near you... ;-p
Flip Settings

Created with the Imgflip Meme Generator

Show embed codes
IMAGE DESCRIPTION:
........................
hotkeys: D = random, W = like, S = dislike, A = back