For the first time since 1972, humans are on their way to our closest neighbour, the Moon. Artemis II launched this afternoon and, assuming
all goes well, will be back in 10 days. It won't be landing but it will
go around the moon, much like Apollo 10 did to prepare for the Apollo 11 mission.
On Apr 1, 2026 at 5:26:54 PM PDT, "Rhino" <no_offline_contact@example.com> >wrote:
For the first time since 1972, humans are on their way to our closest
neighbour, the Moon. Artemis II launched this afternoon and, assuming
all goes well, will be back in 10 days. It won't be landing but it will
go around the moon, much like Apollo 10 did to prepare for the Apollo 11
mission.
Compare the media coverage of Artemis to the media coverage of Katy Perry >going up in her boyfriend's rocket and floating in space for like 11 seconds.
I wonder why Artemis has received hardly any coverage? An entire swath of the >American population doesn't even know their country is going back to the >moon.
Maybe it's because covering it like the momentous event that it is would paint >Trump in a positive light and the corporate legacy media just can't have that. >Do a little thought experiment and imagine if Artemis had launched during >Sleepy Joe's tenure. Would the media coverage have been more extensive and >positive or nah?
I think we all know the answer.
On Thu, 2 Apr 2026 01:24:26 -0000 (UTC), BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com>
wrote:
On Apr 1, 2026 at 5:26:54 PM PDT, "Rhino" <no_offline_contact@example.com> >> wrote:
For the first time since 1972, humans are on their way to our closest
neighbour, the Moon. Artemis II launched this afternoon and, assuming
all goes well, will be back in 10 days. It won't be landing but it will
go around the moon, much like Apollo 10 did to prepare for the Apollo 11 >>> mission.
Compare the media coverage of Artemis to the media coverage of Katy Perry
going up in her boyfriend's rocket and floating in space for like 11 seconds.
I wonder why Artemis has received hardly any coverage? An entire swath of the
American population doesn't even know their country is going back to the
moon.
Not sure why it hasn't received more coverage. Maybe because they
aren't actually going to land on the moon, just pass by? Or because
we've been there and done that. Plus our current President doesn't
seem to give it any attention. Though at least he mentioned the launch
it tonight's speech.
Maybe it's because covering it like the momentous event that it is would paint
Trump in a positive light and the corporate legacy media just can't have that.
Do a little thought experiment and imagine if Artemis had launched during
Sleepy Joe's tenure. Would the media coverage have been more extensive and >> positive or nah?
There might have been more coverage because Biden likely would have
talked about it more.
I think we all know the answer.
Trump doesn't care so the media fails to cover it. Plus there's the
matter of Epstein and a war in Iran to cover. Biden didn't have those distractions.
For the first time since 1972, humans are on their way to our closest neighbour, the Moon. Artemis II launched this afternoon and, assuming
all goes well, will be back in 10 days. It won't be landing but it will
go around the moon, much like Apollo 10 did to prepare for the Apollo 11 mission.
On Thu, 2 Apr 2026 01:24:26 -0000 (UTC), BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com>
wrote:
On Apr 1, 2026 at 5:26:54 PM PDT, "Rhino" <no_offline_contact@example.com> >> wrote:
For the first time since 1972, humans are on their way to our closest
neighbour, the Moon. Artemis II launched this afternoon and, assuming
all goes well, will be back in 10 days. It won't be landing but it will >>> go around the moon, much like Apollo 10 did to prepare for the Apollo 11 >>> mission.
Compare the media coverage of Artemis to the media coverage of Katy Perry
going up in her boyfriend's rocket and floating in space for like 11 seconds.
I wonder why Artemis has received hardly any coverage? An entire swath of the
American population doesn't even know their country is going back to the
moon.
Not sure why it hasn't received more coverage. Maybe because they
aren't actually going to land on the moon, just pass by? Or because
we've been there and done that. Plus our current President doesn't
seem to give it any attention. Though at least he mentioned the launch
it tonight's speech.
Maybe it's because covering it like the momentous event that it is would
paint
Trump in a positive light and the corporate legacy media just can't have
that.
Do a little thought experiment and imagine if Artemis had launched during
Sleepy Joe's tenure. Would the media coverage have been more extensive and >> positive or nah?
There might have been more coverage because Biden likely would have
talked about it more.
I think we all know the answer.
Trump doesn't care so the media fails to cover it.
Plus there's the matter of Epstein and a war in Iran to cover. Biden didn't have those
distractions.
On 4/1/2026 8:26 PM, Rhino wrote:
For the first time since 1972, humans are on their way to our closest
neighbour, the Moon. Artemis II launched this afternoon and, assuming
all goes well, will be back in 10 days. It won't be landing but it will
go around the moon, much like Apollo 10 did to prepare for the Apollo 11 >> mission.
Hell, I go around the moon every month.
On Apr 1, 2026 at 6:30:17 PM PDT, "shawn" <nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> >wrote:
On Thu, 2 Apr 2026 01:24:26 -0000 (UTC), BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com>
wrote:
On Apr 1, 2026 at 5:26:54 PM PDT, "Rhino" <no_offline_contact@example.com> >>> wrote:
For the first time since 1972, humans are on their way to our closest >>>> neighbour, the Moon. Artemis II launched this afternoon and, assuming >>>> all goes well, will be back in 10 days. It won't be landing but it will >>>> go around the moon, much like Apollo 10 did to prepare for the Apollo 11 >>>> mission.
Compare the media coverage of Artemis to the media coverage of Katy Perry >>> going up in her boyfriend's rocket and floating in space for like 11 seconds.
I wonder why Artemis has received hardly any coverage? An entire swath of the
American population doesn't even know their country is going back to the >>> moon.
Not sure why it hasn't received more coverage. Maybe because they
aren't actually going to land on the moon, just pass by? Or because
we've been there and done that. Plus our current President doesn't
seem to give it any attention. Though at least he mentioned the launch
it tonight's speech.
Maybe it's because covering it like the momentous event that it is would >>> paint
Trump in a positive light and the corporate legacy media just can't have >>> that.
Do a little thought experiment and imagine if Artemis had launched during >>> Sleepy Joe's tenure. Would the media coverage have been more extensive and >>> positive or nah?
There might have been more coverage because Biden likely would have
talked about it more.
I think we all know the answer.
Trump doesn't care so the media fails to cover it.
LOL! Okay, sure. Whatever. Since when does the media take its cues about >whether to cover a story from the White House? They have newsrooms-- or at >least they used to-- whose editors decided what stories got covered, not the >president.
If Trump doesn't like the Epstein coverage, according to you, he should just >not talk about Epstein and the media would stop covering it. Somehow I don't >think it works that way.
Plus there's the matter of Epstein and a war in Iran to cover. Biden didn't >> have those
distractions.
You're right. Biden didn't have Epstein coverage to worry about. I wonder why >that is? He had those same files for all four years of his presidency and >never released them yet none-- emphasis: not one-- of the Dem politicians and >pundits who are currently having strokes and aneurysms over Epstein gave even >the tiniest shit about Epstein and Biden's failure to release the files during >his tenure.
So yeah, Biden didn't have Epstein to worry about because curiously no one >cared about Epstein until Trump was elected.
On Apr 1, 2026 at 6:46:42 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/1/2026 8:26 PM, Rhino wrote:
For the first time since 1972, humans are on their way to our closest
neighbour, the Moon. Artemis II launched this afternoon and, assuming
all goes well, will be back in 10 days. It won't be landing but it will >>> go around the moon, much like Apollo 10 did to prepare for the Apollo 11 >>> mission.
Hell, I go around the moon every month.
No, you don't.
On Apr 1, 2026 at 6:30:17 PM PDT, "shawn" <nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:
On Thu, 2 Apr 2026 01:24:26 -0000 (UTC), BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com>
wrote:
On Apr 1, 2026 at 5:26:54 PM PDT, "Rhino" <no_offline_contact@example.com> >>> wrote:
For the first time since 1972, humans are on their way to our closest >>>> neighbour, the Moon. Artemis II launched this afternoon and, assuming >>>> all goes well, will be back in 10 days. It won't be landing but it will >>>> go around the moon, much like Apollo 10 did to prepare for the Apollo 11 >>>> mission.
Compare the media coverage of Artemis to the media coverage of Katy Perry >>> going up in her boyfriend's rocket and floating in space for like 11 seconds.
I wonder why Artemis has received hardly any coverage? An entire swath of the
American population doesn't even know their country is going back to the >>> moon.
Not sure why it hasn't received more coverage. Maybe because they
aren't actually going to land on the moon, just pass by? Or because
we've been there and done that. Plus our current President doesn't
seem to give it any attention. Though at least he mentioned the launch
it tonight's speech.
Maybe it's because covering it like the momentous event that it is would >>> paint
Trump in a positive light and the corporate legacy media just can't have >>> that.
Do a little thought experiment and imagine if Artemis had launched during >>> Sleepy Joe's tenure. Would the media coverage have been more extensive and >>> positive or nah?
There might have been more coverage because Biden likely would have
talked about it more.
I think we all know the answer.
Trump doesn't care so the media fails to cover it.
LOL! Okay, sure. Whatever. Since when does the media take its cues about whether to cover a story from the White House? They have newsrooms-- or at least they used to-- whose editors decided what stories got covered, not the president.
If Trump doesn't like the Epstein coverage, according to you, he should just not talk about Epstein and the media would stop covering it. Somehow I don't think it works that way.
Plus there's the matter of Epstein and a war in Iran to cover. Biden didn't >> have those
distractions.
You're right. Biden didn't have Epstein coverage to worry about. I wonder why that is? He had those same files for all four years of his presidency and never released them yet none-- emphasis: not one-- of the Dem politicians and pundits who are currently having strokes and aneurysms over Epstein gave even the tiniest shit about Epstein and Biden's failure to release the files during
his tenure.
So yeah, Biden didn't have Epstein to worry about because curiously no one cared about Epstein until Trump was elected.
On Thu, 2 Apr 2026 02:14:06 -0000 (UTC), BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com>
wrote:
On Apr 1, 2026 at 6:30:17 PM PDT, "shawn" <nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> >> wrote:
On Thu, 2 Apr 2026 01:24:26 -0000 (UTC), BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com>
wrote:
On Apr 1, 2026 at 5:26:54 PM PDT, "Rhino" <no_offline_contact@example.com>
wrote:
For the first time since 1972, humans are on their way to our closest >>>>> neighbour, the Moon. Artemis II launched this afternoon and, assuming >>>>> all goes well, will be back in 10 days. It won't be landing but it will
go around the moon, much like Apollo 10 did to prepare for the Apollo 11
mission.
Compare the media coverage of Artemis to the media coverage of Katy Perry >>>> going up in her boyfriend's rocket and floating in space for like 11
seconds.
I wonder why Artemis has received hardly any coverage? An entire swath of >>>> the
American population doesn't even know their country is going back to the >>>> moon.
Not sure why it hasn't received more coverage. Maybe because they
aren't actually going to land on the moon, just pass by? Or because
we've been there and done that. Plus our current President doesn't
seem to give it any attention. Though at least he mentioned the launch
it tonight's speech.
Maybe it's because covering it like the momentous event that it is would >>>> paint
Trump in a positive light and the corporate legacy media just can't have >>>> that.
Do a little thought experiment and imagine if Artemis had launched during >>>> Sleepy Joe's tenure. Would the media coverage have been more extensive and
positive or nah?
There might have been more coverage because Biden likely would have
talked about it more.
I think we all know the answer.
Trump doesn't care so the media fails to cover it.
LOL! Okay, sure. Whatever. Since when does the media take its cues about
whether to cover a story from the White House? They have newsrooms-- or at >> least they used to-- whose editors decided what stories got covered, not the >> president.
If the President keeps mentioning it then it will get some coverage in
the media. We see it with Trump and every other President.
If Trump doesn't like the Epstein coverage, according to you, he should just >> not talk about Epstein and the media would stop covering it. Somehow I don't >> think it works that way.
That's not the case at all. The President can help initiate coverage
of a topic that isn't being mentioned if he or she keeps bringing it
up. Stopping the coverage of something is an entirely different
matter. Though you have to admit Trump seems to be doing an admirable
job of trying to distract from the Epstein files with some new issue
every week.
Plus there's the matter of Epstein and a war in Iran to cover. Biden didn't
have those
distractions.
You're right. Biden didn't have Epstein coverage to worry about. I wonder why
that is? He had those same files for all four years of his presidency and
never released them yet none-- emphasis: not one-- of the Dem politicians and
pundits who are currently having strokes and aneurysms over Epstein gave even
the tiniest shit about Epstein and Biden's failure to release the files
during
his tenure.
Yeah, Trump and his people kept bringing up the files. If they hadn't
then we might not have it as an issue being brought up every week.
Also there's the issue of an on-going investigation that was underway
during Biden's time in office that prevented they from opening the
files up.
So yeah, Biden didn't have Epstein to worry about because curiously no one >> cared about Epstein until Trump was elected.Because the files were closed while Biden was in office.
On 4/1/2026 8:26 PM, Rhino wrote:
For the first time since 1972, humans are on their way to our closest
neighbour, the Moon. Artemis II launched this afternoon and, assuming
all goes well, will be back in 10 days. It won't be landing but it will
go around the moon, much like Apollo 10 did to prepare for the Apollo
11 mission.
Hell, I go around the moon every month.
And around the earth every day. So do you.
On Apr 1, 2026 at 5:26:54 PM PDT, "Rhino" <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
For the first time since 1972, humans are on their way to our closest
neighbour, the Moon. Artemis II launched this afternoon and, assuming
all goes well, will be back in 10 days. It won't be landing but it will
go around the moon, much like Apollo 10 did to prepare for the Apollo
11 mission.
Compare the media coverage of Artemis to the media coverage of Katy Perry going up in her boyfriend's rocket and floating in space for like 11 seconds.
I wonder why Artemis has received hardly any coverage? An entire swath of the American population doesn't even know their country is going back to the moon.
On Thu, 2 Apr 2026 02:17:01 -0000 (UTC), BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com>
wrote:
On Apr 1, 2026 at 6:46:42 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 4/1/2026 8:26 PM, Rhino wrote:
For the first time since 1972, humans are on their way to our closest >>>> neighbour, the Moon. Artemis II launched this afternoon and, assuming >>>> all goes well, will be back in 10 days. It won't be landing but it will >>>> go around the moon, much like Apollo 10 did to prepare for the Apollo 11 >>>> mission.
Hell, I go around the moon every month.
No, you don't.
True. The moon adores me so much it revolves around me.
On Thu, 2 Apr 2026 01:24:26 -0000 (UTC), BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com>
wrote:
On Apr 1, 2026 at 5:26:54 PM PDT, "Rhino" <no_offline_contact@example.com> >> wrote:
For the first time since 1972, humans are on their way to our closest
neighbour, the Moon. Artemis II launched this afternoon and, assuming
all goes well, will be back in 10 days. It won't be landing but it will >>> go around the moon, much like Apollo 10 did to prepare for the Apollo
11 mission.
Compare the media coverage of Artemis to the media coverage of Katy Perry >> going up in her boyfriend's rocket and floating in space for like 11
seconds.
I wonder why Artemis has received hardly any coverage? An entire swath of >> the
American population doesn't even know their country is going back to the
moon.
Most of the population couldn't care less either, whether they know
about it or not. Even to many of those who do know about it, it is a
massive waste of tax-payer money.
For the first time since 1972, humans are on their way to our closest neighbour, the Moon. Artemis II launched this afternoon and, assuming
all goes well, will be back in 10 days. It won't be landing but it will
go around the moon, much like Apollo 10 did to prepare for the Apollo 11 mission.
On 4/1/2026 8:26 PM, Rhino wrote:
For the first time since 1972, humans are on their way to our closest
neighbour, the Moon. Artemis II launched this afternoon and, assuming
all goes well, will be back in 10 days. It won't be landing but it will
go around the moon, much like Apollo 10 did to prepare for the Apollo 11
mission.
Hell, I go around the moon every month. And around the earth every day.
So do you.
BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
"Rhino" <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
For the first time since 1972, humans are on their way to our closest
neighbour, the Moon. Artemis II launched this afternoon and, assuming
all goes well, will be back in 10 days. It won't be landing but it will >>> go around the moon, much like Apollo 10 did to prepare for the Apollo 11 >>> mission.
Compare the media coverage of Artemis to the media coverage of Katy Perry >>going up in her boyfriend's rocket and floating in space for like 11 >>seconds.
I wonder why Artemis has received hardly any coverage? An entire swath of >>the American population doesn't even know their country is going back to >>the moon.
Maybe it's because covering it like the momentous event that it is would >>paint Trump in a positive light and the corporate legacy media just can't >>have that. Do a little thought experiment and imagine if Artemis had >>launched during Sleepy Joe's tenure. Would the media coverage have been >>more extensive and positive or nah?
I think we all know the answer.
Trump doesn't care so the media fails to cover it.
BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
I wonder why Artemis has received hardly any coverage? An entire swath
of the American population doesn't even know their country is going back
to the moon.
Most of the population couldn't care less either, whether they know
about it or not. Even to many of those who do know about it, it is a
massive waste of tax-payer money.
On Apr 1, 2026 at 5:26:54 PM PDT, "Rhino" <no_offline_contact@example.com> >wrote:
For the first time since 1972, humans are on their way to our closest
neighbour, the Moon. Artemis II launched this afternoon and, assuming
all goes well, will be back in 10 days. It won't be landing but it will
go around the moon, much like Apollo 10 did to prepare for the Apollo 11
mission.
We only have eight more days to get everyone on the recovery ship a Planet of >the Apes costume to seriously prank them when they return and splash down in >the ocean.
BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
On Apr 1, 2026 at 5:26:54 PM PDT, "Rhino" <no_offline_contact@example.com> >>wrote:
For the first time since 1972, humans are on their way to our closest
neighbour, the Moon. Artemis II launched this afternoon and, assuming
all goes well, will be back in 10 days. It won't be landing but it will >>> go around the moon, much like Apollo 10 did to prepare for the Apollo 11 >>> mission.
We only have eight more days to get everyone on the recovery ship a Planet of >>the Apes costume to seriously prank them when they return and splash down in >>the ocean.
Need to put the Statue of Liberty in a deep hole too.
BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
On Apr 1, 2026 at 5:26:54 PM PDT, "Rhino" <no_offline_contact@example.com> >> wrote:
For the first time since 1972, humans are on their way to our closest
neighbour, the Moon. Artemis II launched this afternoon and, assuming
all goes well, will be back in 10 days. It won't be landing but it will >>> go around the moon, much like Apollo 10 did to prepare for the Apollo 11 >>> mission.
We only have eight more days to get everyone on the recovery ship a Planet of
the Apes costume to seriously prank them when they return and splash down in >> the ocean.
Need to put the Statue of Liberty in a deep hole too.
On 4/1/2026 8:26 PM, Rhino wrote:
For the first time since 1972, humans are on their way to our closest
neighbour, the Moon. Artemis II launched this afternoon and, assuming
all goes well, will be back in 10 days. It won't be landing but it will
go around the moon, much like Apollo 10 did to prepare for the Apollo
11 mission.
Hell, I go around the moon every month. And around the earth every
day. So do you.
BTR1701 wrote:
On Apr 4, 2026 at 1:29:44 PM PDT, ""Adam H. Kerman"" <ahk> wrote:
BTR1701 <atropos> wrote:
On Apr 1, 2026 at 5:26:54 PM PDT, "Rhino" <no_offline_contact@example.com
wrote:
For the first time since 1972, humans are on their way to our closest
neighbour, the Moon. Artemis II launched this afternoon and, assuming
all goes well, will be back in 10 days. It won't be landing but it will
go around the moon, much like Apollo 10 did to prepare for the Apollo 11
mission.
We only have eight more days to get everyone on the recovery ship a Planet of
the Apes costume to seriously prank them when they return and splash down in >> the ocean.
Need to put the Statue of Liberty in a deep hole too.
We may have a problem...
https://ibb.co/HTL5f5Vp
| Sysop: | Scott Duensing |
|---|---|
| Location: | Freeburg, IL, USA, Earth |
| Users: | 5 |
| Nodes: | 16 (0 / 16) |
| Uptime: | 493213:11:28 |
| Calls: | 5 |
| Messages: | 18,934 |