<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_07_01_2058202</id>
	<title>Images of Apollo Landing Sites Soon Available</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1246438920000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.4p8.com/eric.brasseur" rel="nofollow">eric.brasseur</a> writes <i>"The <a href="http://www.nasa.gov/mission\_pages/LRO/main/">Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter</a> has entered lunar orbit in perfect shape. From a height of 50 km, it will image the Moon in high resolution. The <a href="http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1905344,00.html">hardware left by the Apollo missions will be clearly visible</a>. The Soviet automatic probes will also be photographed. Previous best images were made by the Japanese probe <a href="http://www.jaxa.jp/press/2008/05/20080520\_kaguya\_e.html">Kaguya</a> and showed a white patch where the dust had been blown away by the blast of the LM engine."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>eric.brasseur writes " The Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter has entered lunar orbit in perfect shape .
From a height of 50 km , it will image the Moon in high resolution .
The hardware left by the Apollo missions will be clearly visible .
The Soviet automatic probes will also be photographed .
Previous best images were made by the Japanese probe Kaguya and showed a white patch where the dust had been blown away by the blast of the LM engine .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>eric.brasseur writes "The Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter has entered lunar orbit in perfect shape.
From a height of 50 km, it will image the Moon in high resolution.
The hardware left by the Apollo missions will be clearly visible.
The Soviet automatic probes will also be photographed.
Previous best images were made by the Japanese probe Kaguya and showed a white patch where the dust had been blown away by the blast of the LM engine.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28551569</id>
	<title>You have no idea what you're talking about</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246450680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>You people think you know what you're talking about. But you don't. You have no - Ahh shit, wrong forum.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You people think you know what you 're talking about .
But you do n't .
You have no - Ahh shit , wrong forum .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You people think you know what you're talking about.
But you don't.
You have no - Ahh shit, wrong forum.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550233</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549657</id>
	<title>If you believe they put a man on the moon</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246442640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Jews are a shitty race, and a shitty people.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Jews are a shitty race , and a shitty people .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Jews are a shitty race, and a shitty people.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550195</id>
	<title>Re:God dammit</title>
	<author>Alsee</author>
	<datestamp>1246444560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>One way or the other, we will finally have proof.</p><p>Either the photos will come back showing no hardware on the moon and we'll finally have proof it never happened, or they will release photos showing landing hardware on the moon and we'll finally have proof of an on going NASA conspiracy to manufacture a moon landing fraud.</p><p>Yes, one way or the other we will finally have proof.</p><p>-</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One way or the other , we will finally have proof.Either the photos will come back showing no hardware on the moon and we 'll finally have proof it never happened , or they will release photos showing landing hardware on the moon and we 'll finally have proof of an on going NASA conspiracy to manufacture a moon landing fraud.Yes , one way or the other we will finally have proof.-</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One way or the other, we will finally have proof.Either the photos will come back showing no hardware on the moon and we'll finally have proof it never happened, or they will release photos showing landing hardware on the moon and we'll finally have proof of an on going NASA conspiracy to manufacture a moon landing fraud.Yes, one way or the other we will finally have proof.-</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549637</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28556329</id>
	<title>Re:The coverup will continue</title>
	<author>pmarcondes</author>
	<datestamp>1246542120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Also what assures me that there is actually a spaceship on lunar orbit or mars orbit or a rover on the surface of mars or the moon, or wherever?
<br>
That could also be doctored. The deserts we see there could be anywhere uninhabited on earth, line the Atacama desert, or places in Morocco or somewhere else...
<br>
(not that I believe that sh!t either)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Also what assures me that there is actually a spaceship on lunar orbit or mars orbit or a rover on the surface of mars or the moon , or wherever ?
That could also be doctored .
The deserts we see there could be anywhere uninhabited on earth , line the Atacama desert , or places in Morocco or somewhere else.. . ( not that I believe that sh ! t either )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Also what assures me that there is actually a spaceship on lunar orbit or mars orbit or a rover on the surface of mars or the moon, or wherever?
That could also be doctored.
The deserts we see there could be anywhere uninhabited on earth, line the Atacama desert, or places in Morocco or somewhere else...

(not that I believe that sh!t either)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549681</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549833</id>
	<title>Well duh.</title>
	<author>SatanicPuppy</author>
	<datestamp>1246443240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I mean, of COURSE they'll be visible...The Illuminati have had decades to fake up an accurate-looking landing site. They might have actually used their mind powers to put a man on the moon at the time, but they were too busy killing Kennedy.</p><p>//Conspiracy theorists will never buy it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I mean , of COURSE they 'll be visible...The Illuminati have had decades to fake up an accurate-looking landing site .
They might have actually used their mind powers to put a man on the moon at the time , but they were too busy killing Kennedy.//Conspiracy theorists will never buy it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I mean, of COURSE they'll be visible...The Illuminati have had decades to fake up an accurate-looking landing site.
They might have actually used their mind powers to put a man on the moon at the time, but they were too busy killing Kennedy.//Conspiracy theorists will never buy it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28554777</id>
	<title>Re:pics and it still didn't happen</title>
	<author>superdana</author>
	<datestamp>1246566300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I've met one, and they're just mind-blowingly stupid. This person said to me with a straight face, "If their spacesuits were designed to..." Fuck, it's so stupid, I can't even remember. Something about how their spacesuits shouldn't have been visible in photographs. Yes really.<br>
<br>
I'd known this person for a few months before this happened. I even <i>liked</i> them.<br>
<br>
Fuck.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've met one , and they 're just mind-blowingly stupid .
This person said to me with a straight face , " If their spacesuits were designed to... " Fuck , it 's so stupid , I ca n't even remember .
Something about how their spacesuits should n't have been visible in photographs .
Yes really .
I 'd known this person for a few months before this happened .
I even liked them .
Fuck .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've met one, and they're just mind-blowingly stupid.
This person said to me with a straight face, "If their spacesuits were designed to..." Fuck, it's so stupid, I can't even remember.
Something about how their spacesuits shouldn't have been visible in photographs.
Yes really.
I'd known this person for a few months before this happened.
I even liked them.
Fuck.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549951</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28555281</id>
	<title>Re:pics and it still didn't happen</title>
	<author>Bongo</author>
	<datestamp>1246529520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>How many such people actually exist?  With every slashdot article mentioning the moon landings, there is a great uproar about these heretics.  I'm sure they exist, but I've never met one, nor do I recall even reading a post from one on slashdot.  It makes me wonder why these people (whoever they are) get under people's skin so much.</p></div><p>I've met one in the street. He was a Hare Krishna and wanted me to buy a few of his books. I'm a nice guy so I listen for a while. He gets on to the subject of the moon landings, and he tells me that the moon landings were faked, because the Gita declares "man cannot walk on other worlds". He was quite exited about this confirmation from the Gita. I pointed out that when the Gita was written, they hadn't invented the space suit.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>How many such people actually exist ?
With every slashdot article mentioning the moon landings , there is a great uproar about these heretics .
I 'm sure they exist , but I 've never met one , nor do I recall even reading a post from one on slashdot .
It makes me wonder why these people ( whoever they are ) get under people 's skin so much.I 've met one in the street .
He was a Hare Krishna and wanted me to buy a few of his books .
I 'm a nice guy so I listen for a while .
He gets on to the subject of the moon landings , and he tells me that the moon landings were faked , because the Gita declares " man can not walk on other worlds " .
He was quite exited about this confirmation from the Gita .
I pointed out that when the Gita was written , they had n't invented the space suit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How many such people actually exist?
With every slashdot article mentioning the moon landings, there is a great uproar about these heretics.
I'm sure they exist, but I've never met one, nor do I recall even reading a post from one on slashdot.
It makes me wonder why these people (whoever they are) get under people's skin so much.I've met one in the street.
He was a Hare Krishna and wanted me to buy a few of his books.
I'm a nice guy so I listen for a while.
He gets on to the subject of the moon landings, and he tells me that the moon landings were faked, because the Gita declares "man cannot walk on other worlds".
He was quite exited about this confirmation from the Gita.
I pointed out that when the Gita was written, they hadn't invented the space suit.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549951</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550661</id>
	<title>Re:pics and it still didn't happen</title>
	<author>MaunaLoa</author>
	<datestamp>1246446360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The problem is that they still could claim the stuff has "been put there later". Really, there is no stopping these people.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem is that they still could claim the stuff has " been put there later " .
Really , there is no stopping these people .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem is that they still could claim the stuff has "been put there later".
Really, there is no stopping these people.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549699</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550345</id>
	<title>Re:God dammit</title>
	<author>Niris</author>
	<datestamp>1246445160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hell, if I was going to be marked redundant, I shoulda gone for my first "OMGZ FIRST POST!"<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:p</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hell , if I was going to be marked redundant , I shoulda gone for my first " OMGZ FIRST POST !
" : p</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hell, if I was going to be marked redundant, I shoulda gone for my first "OMGZ FIRST POST!
" :p</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549637</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28551559</id>
	<title>Re:God dammit</title>
	<author>StikyPad</author>
	<datestamp>1246450680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ah, but is it any coincidence that hi-res images are only becoming available now that Photoshop has made it all but impossible to spot quality fakes?  I mean seriously, in the latest movie, I couldn't even tell which Transformers were CGI and which were real! &lt;/tinfoil&gt;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ah , but is it any coincidence that hi-res images are only becoming available now that Photoshop has made it all but impossible to spot quality fakes ?
I mean seriously , in the latest movie , I could n't even tell which Transformers were CGI and which were real !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ah, but is it any coincidence that hi-res images are only becoming available now that Photoshop has made it all but impossible to spot quality fakes?
I mean seriously, in the latest movie, I couldn't even tell which Transformers were CGI and which were real! </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549637</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28557857</id>
	<title>Re:God dammit</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246550040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ah that's where you went wrong.  I read the Wintery and therefore knew no such posts would be forthcoming.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ah that 's where you went wrong .
I read the Wintery and therefore knew no such posts would be forthcoming .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ah that's where you went wrong.
I read the Wintery and therefore knew no such posts would be forthcoming.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549637</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549637</id>
	<title>God dammit</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246442580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Just reading the summery makes me worried about the slew of "Moon landing never happened!" posts that are on the way</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just reading the summery makes me worried about the slew of " Moon landing never happened !
" posts that are on the way</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just reading the summery makes me worried about the slew of "Moon landing never happened!
" posts that are on the way</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550687</id>
	<title>Re:God dammit</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246446480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Remember, only those with an IQ below 80 and severe head trauma as a child believe the moon landings never happened.</p><p>you have to be incredibly stupid to believe any of their "evidence".  Children in 6th grade can poke holes in their arguments and "proof".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Remember , only those with an IQ below 80 and severe head trauma as a child believe the moon landings never happened.you have to be incredibly stupid to believe any of their " evidence " .
Children in 6th grade can poke holes in their arguments and " proof " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Remember, only those with an IQ below 80 and severe head trauma as a child believe the moon landings never happened.you have to be incredibly stupid to believe any of their "evidence".
Children in 6th grade can poke holes in their arguments and "proof".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549637</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28555649</id>
	<title>Re:God dammit</title>
	<author>mgcarley</author>
	<datestamp>1246535040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can imagine, mainframes throughout NASA are churning, as their displays show messages like "Rendering: 63\% complete..."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I can imagine , mainframes throughout NASA are churning , as their displays show messages like " Rendering : 63 \ % complete... "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can imagine, mainframes throughout NASA are churning, as their displays show messages like "Rendering: 63\% complete..."</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550195</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549699</id>
	<title>pics and it still didn't happen</title>
	<author>RoverDaddy</author>
	<datestamp>1246442820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>[sarcasm off] For the record, I believe 100\% that the landings were real, but I also believe that nothing short of dragging the conspiracy nuts up to the moon themselves will convince them of the fact.  Maybe not even that.</htmltext>
<tokenext>[ sarcasm off ] For the record , I believe 100 \ % that the landings were real , but I also believe that nothing short of dragging the conspiracy nuts up to the moon themselves will convince them of the fact .
Maybe not even that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>[sarcasm off] For the record, I believe 100\% that the landings were real, but I also believe that nothing short of dragging the conspiracy nuts up to the moon themselves will convince them of the fact.
Maybe not even that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28555625</id>
	<title>Re:pics and it still didn't happen</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246534620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>[sarcasm on] yeah! tear them up to the moon and let them have a look! Without a spacesuit *grin*</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>[ sarcasm on ] yeah !
tear them up to the moon and let them have a look !
Without a spacesuit * grin *</tokentext>
<sentencetext>[sarcasm on] yeah!
tear them up to the moon and let them have a look!
Without a spacesuit *grin*</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549699</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549889</id>
	<title>Actornauts</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246443360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'd be very surprised if we actually get a clear image of the lander and camp at the Sea of Tranquility.</p><p>Don't get me wrong. I think that the US government very sincerely tried to make the deadline, but freaking out the Soviets was way more important</p><p>I'm pretty sure we'll find a laser reflector and a robot ship with a tape deck and ham radio, run off a clockwork (think Man from U.N.C.L.E. technology).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd be very surprised if we actually get a clear image of the lander and camp at the Sea of Tranquility.Do n't get me wrong .
I think that the US government very sincerely tried to make the deadline , but freaking out the Soviets was way more importantI 'm pretty sure we 'll find a laser reflector and a robot ship with a tape deck and ham radio , run off a clockwork ( think Man from U.N.C.L.E .
technology ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd be very surprised if we actually get a clear image of the lander and camp at the Sea of Tranquility.Don't get me wrong.
I think that the US government very sincerely tried to make the deadline, but freaking out the Soviets was way more importantI'm pretty sure we'll find a laser reflector and a robot ship with a tape deck and ham radio, run off a clockwork (think Man from U.N.C.L.E.
technology).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549907</id>
	<title>Re:pics and it still didn't happen</title>
	<author>JAZ</author>
	<datestamp>1246443480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>where can I sign up?</htmltext>
<tokenext>where can I sign up ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>where can I sign up?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549699</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28560015</id>
	<title>Re:pics and it still didn't happen</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246558260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A 1999 poll by The Gallup Organization found that 89\% of the US public believed the landings were genuine, while 6\% did not, and 5\% were undecided.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo\_moon\_landing\_hoax\_accusations</p><p>Funny is good, sarcastic funny is even better, but do we really need to float questions like "How many such people actually exist?" and then ruminate on them here?  To the extent that such vague questions can actually be answered, the answers are stored in your keyboard...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A 1999 poll by The Gallup Organization found that 89 \ % of the US public believed the landings were genuine , while 6 \ % did not , and 5 \ % were undecided .
http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo \ _moon \ _landing \ _hoax \ _accusationsFunny is good , sarcastic funny is even better , but do we really need to float questions like " How many such people actually exist ?
" and then ruminate on them here ?
To the extent that such vague questions can actually be answered , the answers are stored in your keyboard.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A 1999 poll by The Gallup Organization found that 89\% of the US public believed the landings were genuine, while 6\% did not, and 5\% were undecided.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo\_moon\_landing\_hoax\_accusationsFunny is good, sarcastic funny is even better, but do we really need to float questions like "How many such people actually exist?
" and then ruminate on them here?
To the extent that such vague questions can actually be answered, the answers are stored in your keyboard...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549951</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28556451</id>
	<title>Re:God dammit</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246542960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They will just claim the lander was photoshopped into the pics</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They will just claim the lander was photoshopped into the pics</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They will just claim the lander was photoshopped into the pics</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550195</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28552025</id>
	<title>Re:God dammit</title>
	<author>backslashdot</author>
	<datestamp>1246453320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Dude, that was brilliant. Though some people who didn't read your posting properly won't see what you did there.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Dude , that was brilliant .
Though some people who did n't read your posting properly wo n't see what you did there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dude, that was brilliant.
Though some people who didn't read your posting properly won't see what you did there.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550195</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28555373</id>
	<title>Re:pics and it still didn't happen</title>
	<author>Yvanhoe</author>
	<datestamp>1246530960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"So what, you brought me there and show me this stuff and want me to believe this was there 50 years ago ? How naive of you..."<br>
I also believe they were real, but in today world, I challenge the idea that a picture or a video can be a proof of anything. If there <i>were</i> a conspiration about anything, government-forged clues could be very convincing. During the Parisian trip of the Olympic torch, they have fabricated a false incident, that was filmed about a paraplegic athlete being agressed by a (presumably) fake protestor. It went to the news in China. No European journalists following the torch ever heard about that before reading the news.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" So what , you brought me there and show me this stuff and want me to believe this was there 50 years ago ?
How naive of you... " I also believe they were real , but in today world , I challenge the idea that a picture or a video can be a proof of anything .
If there were a conspiration about anything , government-forged clues could be very convincing .
During the Parisian trip of the Olympic torch , they have fabricated a false incident , that was filmed about a paraplegic athlete being agressed by a ( presumably ) fake protestor .
It went to the news in China .
No European journalists following the torch ever heard about that before reading the news .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"So what, you brought me there and show me this stuff and want me to believe this was there 50 years ago ?
How naive of you..."
I also believe they were real, but in today world, I challenge the idea that a picture or a video can be a proof of anything.
If there were a conspiration about anything, government-forged clues could be very convincing.
During the Parisian trip of the Olympic torch, they have fabricated a false incident, that was filmed about a paraplegic athlete being agressed by a (presumably) fake protestor.
It went to the news in China.
No European journalists following the torch ever heard about that before reading the news.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549699</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550911</id>
	<title>Re:pics and it still didn't happen</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1246447500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That won't and the conspiracy is already evolving. Now they say they did land, just later and we put the stuff there at that time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That wo n't and the conspiracy is already evolving .
Now they say they did land , just later and we put the stuff there at that time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That won't and the conspiracy is already evolving.
Now they say they did land, just later and we put the stuff there at that time.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549699</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28561181</id>
	<title>Re:God dammit</title>
	<author>CodeBuster</author>
	<datestamp>1246561680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Yes, one way or the other we will finally have proof.</p></div><p>The evidence has been patently clear for any reasonable person who cared to look into the matter since the Apollo 11 crew landed back on earth on July 24, 1969. The people who support the lunar landing hoax conspiracy are the sort of people who would not be satisfied with any "proof" no matter how convincing or carefully collected the evidence was. They will probably argue, for example, that any new images sent back by the probe have been doctored or edited to include the Apollo artifacts in order to "perpetuate the hoax" as part of the conspiracy theory. The people who deny that the lunar landings took place are either crackpots or just looking to stir the pot and be fringe.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , one way or the other we will finally have proof.The evidence has been patently clear for any reasonable person who cared to look into the matter since the Apollo 11 crew landed back on earth on July 24 , 1969 .
The people who support the lunar landing hoax conspiracy are the sort of people who would not be satisfied with any " proof " no matter how convincing or carefully collected the evidence was .
They will probably argue , for example , that any new images sent back by the probe have been doctored or edited to include the Apollo artifacts in order to " perpetuate the hoax " as part of the conspiracy theory .
The people who deny that the lunar landings took place are either crackpots or just looking to stir the pot and be fringe .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, one way or the other we will finally have proof.The evidence has been patently clear for any reasonable person who cared to look into the matter since the Apollo 11 crew landed back on earth on July 24, 1969.
The people who support the lunar landing hoax conspiracy are the sort of people who would not be satisfied with any "proof" no matter how convincing or carefully collected the evidence was.
They will probably argue, for example, that any new images sent back by the probe have been doctored or edited to include the Apollo artifacts in order to "perpetuate the hoax" as part of the conspiracy theory.
The people who deny that the lunar landings took place are either crackpots or just looking to stir the pot and be fringe.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550195</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28554809</id>
	<title>Re:God dammit</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1246566780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This raises a philosophical question: You can't really call it proof, if you have to believe in it, instead of knowing it, can you?<br>(As I said in my other post, there is no thing that you can have proof of. It can all be imaginary, a hallucination, or the whole world stating something wrong. So we have to just trust some things.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This raises a philosophical question : You ca n't really call it proof , if you have to believe in it , instead of knowing it , can you ?
( As I said in my other post , there is no thing that you can have proof of .
It can all be imaginary , a hallucination , or the whole world stating something wrong .
So we have to just trust some things .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This raises a philosophical question: You can't really call it proof, if you have to believe in it, instead of knowing it, can you?
(As I said in my other post, there is no thing that you can have proof of.
It can all be imaginary, a hallucination, or the whole world stating something wrong.
So we have to just trust some things.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550743</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550213</id>
	<title>Re:pics and it still didn't happen</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246444620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>How many such people actually exist?</p></div><p> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo\_Moon\_Landing\_hoax\_conspiracy\_theories" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo\_Moon\_Landing\_hoax\_conspiracy\_theories</a> [wikipedia.org]</p><p>About 6\% of the population, as of 1999.  Not bad, compared to the percentages believing in religion, intelligent design, etc.</p><p>Honestly, I think about 6\% of the population is high or drunk at any given moment, so I'm not sure its a relevant figure.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>It makes me wonder why these people (whoever they are) get under people's skin so much.</p></div><p>Well, sometimes its hard to interpret "get under skin" vs "laughing my * off"</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>How many such people actually exist ?
http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo \ _Moon \ _Landing \ _hoax \ _conspiracy \ _theories [ wikipedia.org ] About 6 \ % of the population , as of 1999 .
Not bad , compared to the percentages believing in religion , intelligent design , etc.Honestly , I think about 6 \ % of the population is high or drunk at any given moment , so I 'm not sure its a relevant figure.It makes me wonder why these people ( whoever they are ) get under people 's skin so much.Well , sometimes its hard to interpret " get under skin " vs " laughing my * off "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How many such people actually exist?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo\_Moon\_Landing\_hoax\_conspiracy\_theories [wikipedia.org]About 6\% of the population, as of 1999.
Not bad, compared to the percentages believing in religion, intelligent design, etc.Honestly, I think about 6\% of the population is high or drunk at any given moment, so I'm not sure its a relevant figure.It makes me wonder why these people (whoever they are) get under people's skin so much.Well, sometimes its hard to interpret "get under skin" vs "laughing my * off"
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549951</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550375</id>
	<title>Sounds like competition</title>
	<author>T Murphy</author>
	<datestamp>1246445280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I bet we'll soon see Bing roll out GoogleMoon to show up Google's GoogleEarth.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I bet we 'll soon see Bing roll out GoogleMoon to show up Google 's GoogleEarth .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I bet we'll soon see Bing roll out GoogleMoon to show up Google's GoogleEarth.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28554799</id>
	<title>Re:By 2080, nobody alive will have witnessed it</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246566600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Think about the war of 1812, or Columbus "discovering" America.</p> </div><p>I prefer not to think about hoaxes brought about by the government, thank you very much.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Think about the war of 1812 , or Columbus " discovering " America .
I prefer not to think about hoaxes brought about by the government , thank you very much .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Think about the war of 1812, or Columbus "discovering" America.
I prefer not to think about hoaxes brought about by the government, thank you very much.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28551191</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28552015</id>
	<title>I know two, actually</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246453260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>One is a man in Las Vegas who doesn't own a car (out of choice), and steadfastly refuses to believe that we landed on the moon. He doesn't give any real reason other than that it's his opinion that we didn't do it, we're not capable of doing it, and we're faking it. He does so calmly and succinctly, leading me to believe his ego is made of adamantium.

The other is a true gun-nut who continues to believe that any day now the United States Senate will pass a bill authorizing the UN to take control of our armed forces (and that Joe Biden was a sponsor of the bill). He insists that it was all a fake, and that he knows guys who ran the soundstage where it was all filmed.

Conversations with these two gentlemen are ALWAYS interesting.</htmltext>
<tokenext>One is a man in Las Vegas who does n't own a car ( out of choice ) , and steadfastly refuses to believe that we landed on the moon .
He does n't give any real reason other than that it 's his opinion that we did n't do it , we 're not capable of doing it , and we 're faking it .
He does so calmly and succinctly , leading me to believe his ego is made of adamantium .
The other is a true gun-nut who continues to believe that any day now the United States Senate will pass a bill authorizing the UN to take control of our armed forces ( and that Joe Biden was a sponsor of the bill ) .
He insists that it was all a fake , and that he knows guys who ran the soundstage where it was all filmed .
Conversations with these two gentlemen are ALWAYS interesting .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One is a man in Las Vegas who doesn't own a car (out of choice), and steadfastly refuses to believe that we landed on the moon.
He doesn't give any real reason other than that it's his opinion that we didn't do it, we're not capable of doing it, and we're faking it.
He does so calmly and succinctly, leading me to believe his ego is made of adamantium.
The other is a true gun-nut who continues to believe that any day now the United States Senate will pass a bill authorizing the UN to take control of our armed forces (and that Joe Biden was a sponsor of the bill).
He insists that it was all a fake, and that he knows guys who ran the soundstage where it was all filmed.
Conversations with these two gentlemen are ALWAYS interesting.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549951</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28551237</id>
	<title>Interesting observaton.</title>
	<author>Paul server guy</author>
	<datestamp>1246449060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What I find interesting is that most of the comments are about the "hoax" hoax, a few about how long it took, and not many about how very cool this tech is? Are we really that jaded?</p><p>I for one think it's very cool. And I am looking forward to seeing the hardware.</p><p>I'm also looking forward to using the date to help plan our mission.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What I find interesting is that most of the comments are about the " hoax " hoax , a few about how long it took , and not many about how very cool this tech is ?
Are we really that jaded ? I for one think it 's very cool .
And I am looking forward to seeing the hardware.I 'm also looking forward to using the date to help plan our mission .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What I find interesting is that most of the comments are about the "hoax" hoax, a few about how long it took, and not many about how very cool this tech is?
Are we really that jaded?I for one think it's very cool.
And I am looking forward to seeing the hardware.I'm also looking forward to using the date to help plan our mission.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549709</id>
	<title>Re:God dammit</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246442880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Moon landing never happened!<br><br>In not like we have some guy in there taking that photos, so we can interview him back on earth. I want to believe!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Moon landing never happened ! In not like we have some guy in there taking that photos , so we can interview him back on earth .
I want to believe !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Moon landing never happened!In not like we have some guy in there taking that photos, so we can interview him back on earth.
I want to believe!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549637</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28552051</id>
	<title>Re:God dammit</title>
	<author>backslashdot</author>
	<datestamp>1246453440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Next time try to carefully read the post you're commenting on before saying something that shows off that you're an idiot.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Next time try to carefully read the post you 're commenting on before saying something that shows off that you 're an idiot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Next time try to carefully read the post you're commenting on before saying something that shows off that you're an idiot.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550495</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28552547</id>
	<title>Re:God dammit</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246456920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Woopie - we get to watch it digitally remastered in HD, tell em to put in surround sound this time and remove some of the wires.</p><p>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zz9Bzi\_GyD0&amp;feature=related</p><p>usual MO at the time like getting Ronny to sell the Star Wars myth to the Ruskies.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Woopie - we get to watch it digitally remastered in HD , tell em to put in surround sound this time and remove some of the wires.http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = Zz9Bzi \ _GyD0&amp;feature = relatedusual MO at the time like getting Ronny to sell the Star Wars myth to the Ruskies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Woopie - we get to watch it digitally remastered in HD, tell em to put in surround sound this time and remove some of the wires.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zz9Bzi\_GyD0&amp;feature=relatedusual MO at the time like getting Ronny to sell the Star Wars myth to the Ruskies.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550743</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550433</id>
	<title>Re:pics and it still didn't happen</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246445460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's the beauty of a conspiracy.  Anything that disproves it is just more proof that the infamous They is still hiding the real truth (because obviously this latest piece of damning evidence was fabricated).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's the beauty of a conspiracy .
Anything that disproves it is just more proof that the infamous They is still hiding the real truth ( because obviously this latest piece of damning evidence was fabricated ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's the beauty of a conspiracy.
Anything that disproves it is just more proof that the infamous They is still hiding the real truth (because obviously this latest piece of damning evidence was fabricated).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549699</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549915</id>
	<title>Obligatory Cheese Reference</title>
	<author>spireite</author>
	<datestamp>1246443480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's Wensleydale, Grommit!!</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's Wensleydale , Grommit !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's Wensleydale, Grommit!
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28562037</id>
	<title>Re:God dammit</title>
	<author>GameboyRMH</author>
	<datestamp>1246564680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think if you sent a ML denier to the moon to see the evidence first hand, they'd say it's all a hoax and they're in a huge secret zero-G warehouse in the Roswell desert right now. Actually I demand that a ML denier be taken as a tourist on the next mission back to the moon, just for lulz.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think if you sent a ML denier to the moon to see the evidence first hand , they 'd say it 's all a hoax and they 're in a huge secret zero-G warehouse in the Roswell desert right now .
Actually I demand that a ML denier be taken as a tourist on the next mission back to the moon , just for lulz .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think if you sent a ML denier to the moon to see the evidence first hand, they'd say it's all a hoax and they're in a huge secret zero-G warehouse in the Roswell desert right now.
Actually I demand that a ML denier be taken as a tourist on the next mission back to the moon, just for lulz.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550665</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28552607</id>
	<title>Hasselblad</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246457580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I doubt it, but it would be cool if the pics were of a high enough resolution that you could see the <a href="http://www.hasselbladusa.com/about-hasselblad/hasselblad-in-space/space-cameras.aspx" title="hasselbladusa.com" rel="nofollow">Hasselblads</a> [hasselbladusa.com] left on the surface.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I doubt it , but it would be cool if the pics were of a high enough resolution that you could see the Hasselblads [ hasselbladusa.com ] left on the surface .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I doubt it, but it would be cool if the pics were of a high enough resolution that you could see the Hasselblads [hasselbladusa.com] left on the surface.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550699</id>
	<title>Re:God dammit</title>
	<author>Lumpy</author>
	<datestamp>1246446600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Oh no it will be there.....</p><p>NASA bought several copies of Photoshop recently to get ready for faking the photos.</p><p>I got my inside information from stanley that works with dave who is a manager at staples near the cape when a guy wearing sunglasses and a dark blue shirt cam in to buy 4 copies.  It's solid proof!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh no it will be there.....NASA bought several copies of Photoshop recently to get ready for faking the photos.I got my inside information from stanley that works with dave who is a manager at staples near the cape when a guy wearing sunglasses and a dark blue shirt cam in to buy 4 copies .
It 's solid proof !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh no it will be there.....NASA bought several copies of Photoshop recently to get ready for faking the photos.I got my inside information from stanley that works with dave who is a manager at staples near the cape when a guy wearing sunglasses and a dark blue shirt cam in to buy 4 copies.
It's solid proof!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550195</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550703</id>
	<title>Re:Google moon?</title>
	<author>arthurpaliden</author>
	<datestamp>1246446600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Remember when you could zoom in on the Moon and see the Swiss Cheese.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Remember when you could zoom in on the Moon and see the Swiss Cheese .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Remember when you could zoom in on the Moon and see the Swiss Cheese.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549887</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550495</id>
	<title>Re:God dammit</title>
	<author>millennial</author>
	<datestamp>1246445760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Unfortunately, the nuts will just say the photos are doctored, of course.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Unfortunately , the nuts will just say the photos are doctored , of course .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unfortunately, the nuts will just say the photos are doctored, of course.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550195</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549887</id>
	<title>Google moon?</title>
	<author>davidwr</author>
	<datestamp>1246443360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Can I have street view?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Can I have street view ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can I have street view?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28553689</id>
	<title>Re:God dammit</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246466700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;I'm sure the nutjobs will find some excuse not to believe this too.</p><p>The nutjobs will believe the the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter images have been done in photoshop.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; I 'm sure the nutjobs will find some excuse not to believe this too.The nutjobs will believe the the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter images have been done in photoshop .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;I'm sure the nutjobs will find some excuse not to believe this too.The nutjobs will believe the the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter images have been done in photoshop.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550743</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28551147</id>
	<title>Re:God dammit</title>
	<author>Tubal-Cain</author>
	<datestamp>1246448700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Either the photos will come back showing no hardware on the moon and we'll finally have proof it never happened...</p></div><p>Or that they don't know how to point the camera where they want to.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Either the photos will come back showing no hardware on the moon and we 'll finally have proof it never happened...Or that they do n't know how to point the camera where they want to .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Either the photos will come back showing no hardware on the moon and we'll finally have proof it never happened...Or that they don't know how to point the camera where they want to.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550195</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28558497</id>
	<title>Re:God dammit</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246553160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Man-made objects on the moon are not proof. Robots visited the moon before man did. They could have been placed by robots.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Man-made objects on the moon are not proof .
Robots visited the moon before man did .
They could have been placed by robots .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Man-made objects on the moon are not proof.
Robots visited the moon before man did.
They could have been placed by robots.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550195</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28555003</id>
	<title>Re:pics and it still didn't happen</title>
	<author>Opportunist</author>
	<datestamp>1246525740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hehe... akin to the old Soviet aera joke?</p><p>"COMRADES! The Russians are on the moon!"<br>(hopeful voice in the back) "All of 'em?"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hehe... akin to the old Soviet aera joke ? " COMRADES !
The Russians are on the moon !
" ( hopeful voice in the back ) " All of 'em ?
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hehe... akin to the old Soviet aera joke?"COMRADES!
The Russians are on the moon!
"(hopeful voice in the back) "All of 'em?
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549699</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28552673</id>
	<title>Re:God dammit</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246458120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wooooooooooooosh.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wooooooooooooosh .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wooooooooooooosh.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550665</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28552901</id>
	<title>Re:God dammit</title>
	<author>Macrat</author>
	<datestamp>1246459620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>&gt; </p><p>I'm sure the nutjobs will find some excuse not to believe this too.</p></div><p>Not that far a reach to know that the US govt will doctor the Japanese data before it is released.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; I 'm sure the nutjobs will find some excuse not to believe this too.Not that far a reach to know that the US govt will doctor the Japanese data before it is released .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; I'm sure the nutjobs will find some excuse not to believe this too.Not that far a reach to know that the US govt will doctor the Japanese data before it is released.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550743</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28556007</id>
	<title>Re:pics and it still didn't happen</title>
	<author>mdwh2</author>
	<datestamp>1246539540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Great, now we have Fake Moon Landing Conspiracy Conspiracy Theorists who say that the Fake Moon Landing Conspiracy Theorists don't exist!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Great , now we have Fake Moon Landing Conspiracy Conspiracy Theorists who say that the Fake Moon Landing Conspiracy Theorists do n't exist !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Great, now we have Fake Moon Landing Conspiracy Conspiracy Theorists who say that the Fake Moon Landing Conspiracy Theorists don't exist!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549951</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550945</id>
	<title>Re:pics and it still didn't happen</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1246447740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's a surprising amount of peple.<br>They get under my skin becasue they try to spread these lies as truths to children and ignorant, and they have no argument. SO they say 'it's a conspiracy' as if that's some sort of good argument.</p><p>And with all self deluding lies, there is a price for everyone.</p><p><a href="http://whatstheharm.net/" title="whatstheharm.net">http://whatstheharm.net/</a> [whatstheharm.net]<br>Granted, the moon hoax isn't very harmful, yet. Wait until the start trying to force schools to teach their 'alternate "Theory"'</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's a surprising amount of peple.They get under my skin becasue they try to spread these lies as truths to children and ignorant , and they have no argument .
SO they say 'it 's a conspiracy ' as if that 's some sort of good argument.And with all self deluding lies , there is a price for everyone.http : //whatstheharm.net/ [ whatstheharm.net ] Granted , the moon hoax is n't very harmful , yet .
Wait until the start trying to force schools to teach their 'alternate " Theory " '</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's a surprising amount of peple.They get under my skin becasue they try to spread these lies as truths to children and ignorant, and they have no argument.
SO they say 'it's a conspiracy' as if that's some sort of good argument.And with all self deluding lies, there is a price for everyone.http://whatstheharm.net/ [whatstheharm.net]Granted, the moon hoax isn't very harmful, yet.
Wait until the start trying to force schools to teach their 'alternate "Theory"'</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549951</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28559335</id>
	<title>Re:The "moon" - a ridiculous liberal myth</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246556400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ann Coulter, I presume?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ann Coulter , I presume ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ann Coulter, I presume?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550233</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28552413</id>
	<title>Re:pics and it still didn't happen</title>
	<author>RiotingPacifist</author>
	<datestamp>1246455900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>How many such people actually exist?</p> </div><p>Of course they don't exist, its something that Europeans (often posing as Americans) make up to make all Americans seam like idiots!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>How many such people actually exist ?
Of course they do n't exist , its something that Europeans ( often posing as Americans ) make up to make all Americans seam like idiots !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How many such people actually exist?
Of course they don't exist, its something that Europeans (often posing as Americans) make up to make all Americans seam like idiots!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549951</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28551099</id>
	<title>Not Soon</title>
	<author>QuantumG</author>
	<datestamp>1246448400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.spaceflightnews.net/article.php?story=20090624192650375" title="spaceflightnews.net">The commissioning phase will end approximately 60 days after launch, when LRO will use its engines to transition to its primary mission orbit.</a> [spaceflightnews.net]<br><a href="http://lroc.sese.asu.edu/news/index.php?/archives/58-LRO-is-now-in-commissioning-orbit!.html" title="asu.edu">LRO is now in a commissioning orbit!  - June 27</a> [asu.edu]</p><p>So we're at least 56 days from "first light" and the mapping program will go for 1 year, and as there's nothing to suggest that the Apollo landing sites will be first or last imaged, a good estimate is 8 months or so from now.</p><p>If that's "soon" to you, then I guess you're older than I am<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The commissioning phase will end approximately 60 days after launch , when LRO will use its engines to transition to its primary mission orbit .
[ spaceflightnews.net ] LRO is now in a commissioning orbit !
- June 27 [ asu.edu ] So we 're at least 56 days from " first light " and the mapping program will go for 1 year , and as there 's nothing to suggest that the Apollo landing sites will be first or last imaged , a good estimate is 8 months or so from now.If that 's " soon " to you , then I guess you 're older than I am : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The commissioning phase will end approximately 60 days after launch, when LRO will use its engines to transition to its primary mission orbit.
[spaceflightnews.net]LRO is now in a commissioning orbit!
- June 27 [asu.edu]So we're at least 56 days from "first light" and the mapping program will go for 1 year, and as there's nothing to suggest that the Apollo landing sites will be first or last imaged, a good estimate is 8 months or so from now.If that's "soon" to you, then I guess you're older than I am :)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550109</id>
	<title>It's amazing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246444200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What a long way we've come since the sixties and seventies. Now we can even photograph the landing sites they used back then.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-/</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What a long way we 've come since the sixties and seventies .
Now we can even photograph the landing sites they used back then .
: -/</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What a long way we've come since the sixties and seventies.
Now we can even photograph the landing sites they used back then.
:-/</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549681</id>
	<title>The coverup will continue</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246442760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>We all know that the photos will all be doctored by NASA before they will be released to the public.</htmltext>
<tokenext>We all know that the photos will all be doctored by NASA before they will be released to the public .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We all know that the photos will all be doctored by NASA before they will be released to the public.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550207</id>
	<title>I know one</title>
	<author>wurp</author>
	<datestamp>1246444560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Oddly, he is not an idiot.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oddly , he is not an idiot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oddly, he is not an idiot.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549951</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550065</id>
	<title>Re:pics and it still didn't happen</title>
	<author>grumbel</author>
	<datestamp>1246444080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It might not convince the weirdos, but it debunks the most plausible part of their story. I always found the whole situation with having having landed men on the moon, 40 years ago, to be rather uneasy when today we don't even have tech to make a picture of the landing site. There are of course perfectly good reasons for it, but being used to having technology advance, a 40 year not-been-to-the-moon gap just doesn't sound right, especially when we have perfectly fine pictures of Mars and the stuff we landed there.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It might not convince the weirdos , but it debunks the most plausible part of their story .
I always found the whole situation with having having landed men on the moon , 40 years ago , to be rather uneasy when today we do n't even have tech to make a picture of the landing site .
There are of course perfectly good reasons for it , but being used to having technology advance , a 40 year not-been-to-the-moon gap just does n't sound right , especially when we have perfectly fine pictures of Mars and the stuff we landed there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It might not convince the weirdos, but it debunks the most plausible part of their story.
I always found the whole situation with having having landed men on the moon, 40 years ago, to be rather uneasy when today we don't even have tech to make a picture of the landing site.
There are of course perfectly good reasons for it, but being used to having technology advance, a 40 year not-been-to-the-moon gap just doesn't sound right, especially when we have perfectly fine pictures of Mars and the stuff we landed there.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549699</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549895</id>
	<title>If you look closely at the picture of the orbiter</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246443420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You can plainly see that only a few feet of the orbiter are devoted to the camera, with the rest being a perfect-size capsule for a single astronaut with a copy of photoshop.</p><p>Explain that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You can plainly see that only a few feet of the orbiter are devoted to the camera , with the rest being a perfect-size capsule for a single astronaut with a copy of photoshop.Explain that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can plainly see that only a few feet of the orbiter are devoted to the camera, with the rest being a perfect-size capsule for a single astronaut with a copy of photoshop.Explain that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28565359</id>
	<title>Not that unlikely that some people will...</title>
	<author>mbessey</author>
	<datestamp>1246533660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In 2080, it'll only have been 108 years since the last moon landing. Some people already live that long currently. Given the current state of research into aging and the human genome, it's likely that some substantial improvements in maximum lifespan will be developed in the intervening time. I wouldn't be surprised if some folks of my generation (who were young kids at the time) will live to see 120 years of age or more. Not me, of course - I'm eating a sausage and cheese sandwich RIGHT NOW, actually. But some of the healthier ones will make it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In 2080 , it 'll only have been 108 years since the last moon landing .
Some people already live that long currently .
Given the current state of research into aging and the human genome , it 's likely that some substantial improvements in maximum lifespan will be developed in the intervening time .
I would n't be surprised if some folks of my generation ( who were young kids at the time ) will live to see 120 years of age or more .
Not me , of course - I 'm eating a sausage and cheese sandwich RIGHT NOW , actually .
But some of the healthier ones will make it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In 2080, it'll only have been 108 years since the last moon landing.
Some people already live that long currently.
Given the current state of research into aging and the human genome, it's likely that some substantial improvements in maximum lifespan will be developed in the intervening time.
I wouldn't be surprised if some folks of my generation (who were young kids at the time) will live to see 120 years of age or more.
Not me, of course - I'm eating a sausage and cheese sandwich RIGHT NOW, actually.
But some of the healthier ones will make it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28551191</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550627</id>
	<title>Re:pics and it still didn't happen</title>
	<author>Supergibbs</author>
	<datestamp>1246446300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Myth Busters did a <a href="http://mythbustersresults.com/episode-104-nasa-moon-landing" title="mythbustersresults.com" rel="nofollow">special on the moon conspiracy</a> [mythbustersresults.com]. They busted all the conspiracy nut's "evidence". I never doubted it, but the episode was well done</htmltext>
<tokenext>Myth Busters did a special on the moon conspiracy [ mythbustersresults.com ] .
They busted all the conspiracy nut 's " evidence " .
I never doubted it , but the episode was well done</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Myth Busters did a special on the moon conspiracy [mythbustersresults.com].
They busted all the conspiracy nut's "evidence".
I never doubted it, but the episode was well done</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549699</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28559185</id>
	<title>Re:pics and it still didn't happen</title>
	<author>jcasman</author>
	<datestamp>1246555860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why bother to try to convince them?  Waste of effort.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why bother to try to convince them ?
Waste of effort .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why bother to try to convince them?
Waste of effort.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549699</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28551173</id>
	<title>Re:God dammit</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246448820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Man, it feels a little wintry in here... *shiver*<br> <br>Protip: The word "summary" is a small bit of text that attempts to highlight all the important parts of a larger article. The word "summery" means something pertains to or is about summer.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Man , it feels a little wintry in here... * shiver * Protip : The word " summary " is a small bit of text that attempts to highlight all the important parts of a larger article .
The word " summery " means something pertains to or is about summer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Man, it feels a little wintry in here... *shiver* Protip: The word "summary" is a small bit of text that attempts to highlight all the important parts of a larger article.
The word "summery" means something pertains to or is about summer.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549637</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28553737</id>
	<title>Re:pics and it still didn't happen</title>
	<author>ignavus</author>
	<datestamp>1246467240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I remember watching the moon landings on TV at school - live.</p><p>At the time, I knew the whole thing would have been possible to do in a Hollywood studio. Thing is, Hollywood would have made it look more "realistic" and dramatic.</p><p>And they would have had to add some cheesy character - like an alien.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I remember watching the moon landings on TV at school - live.At the time , I knew the whole thing would have been possible to do in a Hollywood studio .
Thing is , Hollywood would have made it look more " realistic " and dramatic.And they would have had to add some cheesy character - like an alien .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I remember watching the moon landings on TV at school - live.At the time, I knew the whole thing would have been possible to do in a Hollywood studio.
Thing is, Hollywood would have made it look more "realistic" and dramatic.And they would have had to add some cheesy character - like an alien.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549699</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550337</id>
	<title>Re:pics and it still didn't happen</title>
	<author>Alsee</author>
	<datestamp>1246445160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>How many such people actually exist?</i></p><p>Well, as a point of comparison:<br>Out of about 250,000 degreed scientists across all of the earth and life sciences, there are about 700 who think that evolution-denialist "Creation Science" has any legitimacy.</p><p>Estimating the number of Moon Landing Denialists is left as an exercise for the reader.</p><p>-</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How many such people actually exist ? Well , as a point of comparison : Out of about 250,000 degreed scientists across all of the earth and life sciences , there are about 700 who think that evolution-denialist " Creation Science " has any legitimacy.Estimating the number of Moon Landing Denialists is left as an exercise for the reader.-</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How many such people actually exist?Well, as a point of comparison:Out of about 250,000 degreed scientists across all of the earth and life sciences, there are about 700 who think that evolution-denialist "Creation Science" has any legitimacy.Estimating the number of Moon Landing Denialists is left as an exercise for the reader.-</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549951</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28554805</id>
	<title>Re:God dammit</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1246566660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We must face it: We pretty much have no proof for anything at all. We can only be as sure as we trust your sources, trust our sources to trust their sources, and even truest our own senses.</p><p>How many things have you actually checked for yourself?<br>And at how many of those can you be sure that nobody manipulated/tricked your senses?</p><p>Hell, we can't even prove, that anything except ourself exists. (It could all be a product of our own imagination. And for some people with schizophrenia this sadly really is the case.)</p><p>So in the end, we should learn how to properly handle trust relationships, shouldn't we?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We must face it : We pretty much have no proof for anything at all .
We can only be as sure as we trust your sources , trust our sources to trust their sources , and even truest our own senses.How many things have you actually checked for yourself ? And at how many of those can you be sure that nobody manipulated/tricked your senses ? Hell , we ca n't even prove , that anything except ourself exists .
( It could all be a product of our own imagination .
And for some people with schizophrenia this sadly really is the case .
) So in the end , we should learn how to properly handle trust relationships , should n't we ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We must face it: We pretty much have no proof for anything at all.
We can only be as sure as we trust your sources, trust our sources to trust their sources, and even truest our own senses.How many things have you actually checked for yourself?And at how many of those can you be sure that nobody manipulated/tricked your senses?Hell, we can't even prove, that anything except ourself exists.
(It could all be a product of our own imagination.
And for some people with schizophrenia this sadly really is the case.
)So in the end, we should learn how to properly handle trust relationships, shouldn't we?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550195</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28555973</id>
	<title>Re:God dammit</title>
	<author>mdwh2</author>
	<datestamp>1246539060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Actually proving a manned moon landing is difficult. It's a lot like trying to prove/disprove the existence of god.</i></p><p>Well, except that one has overwhelming evidence, and the other does not. Just because two things can't be proven with 100\% certainty, doesn't mean that they are in any way comparable.</p><p><i>The difference is that it's fairly popular these days to take the skeptical side of the god debate. </i></p><p>Outside of Europe at least, this (sadly) is still not yet true. (I'm not sure why you would label this as a "difference", anyway - I'm sceptical about God, for rather much the same reasons that I'm sceptical about a fake moon landing conspiracy: lack of evidence.)</p><p><i>But the truth is really orthogonal to how popular a side of a debate is at a point in time.</i></p><p>Indeed, something that the "But billions of people all believe in God" crowd would do well to remember. There is just as much likelihood of Zeus, of the Flying Spaghetti Monster existing - that fewer people believe in such entities doesn't affect the likelihood of their existence.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually proving a manned moon landing is difficult .
It 's a lot like trying to prove/disprove the existence of god.Well , except that one has overwhelming evidence , and the other does not .
Just because two things ca n't be proven with 100 \ % certainty , does n't mean that they are in any way comparable.The difference is that it 's fairly popular these days to take the skeptical side of the god debate .
Outside of Europe at least , this ( sadly ) is still not yet true .
( I 'm not sure why you would label this as a " difference " , anyway - I 'm sceptical about God , for rather much the same reasons that I 'm sceptical about a fake moon landing conspiracy : lack of evidence .
) But the truth is really orthogonal to how popular a side of a debate is at a point in time.Indeed , something that the " But billions of people all believe in God " crowd would do well to remember .
There is just as much likelihood of Zeus , of the Flying Spaghetti Monster existing - that fewer people believe in such entities does n't affect the likelihood of their existence .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually proving a manned moon landing is difficult.
It's a lot like trying to prove/disprove the existence of god.Well, except that one has overwhelming evidence, and the other does not.
Just because two things can't be proven with 100\% certainty, doesn't mean that they are in any way comparable.The difference is that it's fairly popular these days to take the skeptical side of the god debate.
Outside of Europe at least, this (sadly) is still not yet true.
(I'm not sure why you would label this as a "difference", anyway - I'm sceptical about God, for rather much the same reasons that I'm sceptical about a fake moon landing conspiracy: lack of evidence.
)But the truth is really orthogonal to how popular a side of a debate is at a point in time.Indeed, something that the "But billions of people all believe in God" crowd would do well to remember.
There is just as much likelihood of Zeus, of the Flying Spaghetti Monster existing - that fewer people believe in such entities doesn't affect the likelihood of their existence.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28552551</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28551887</id>
	<title>I repeat...</title>
	<author>davidwr</author>
	<datestamp>1246452540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I repeat: Can I have street view?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I repeat : Can I have street view ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I repeat: Can I have street view?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549887</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549933</id>
	<title>Lunakhod 1</title>
	<author>mbone</author>
	<datestamp>1246443540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Lunakhod 1 carried a French retroreflector array for <a href="http://www.iers.org/documents/publications/tn/tn34/tn34\_097.pdf" title="iers.org">Lunar Laser Ranging (LLR)</a> [iers.org] but unfortunately, contact was lost and no one knows where it is. There are good returns for Lunakhod 2, so I (and others) want Lunakhod 1 back !</p><p>Finding this would be a great help for Lunar science (assuming it didn't get crushed in a landslide or something). I know that this is on their list, so good luck !</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Lunakhod 1 carried a French retroreflector array for Lunar Laser Ranging ( LLR ) [ iers.org ] but unfortunately , contact was lost and no one knows where it is .
There are good returns for Lunakhod 2 , so I ( and others ) want Lunakhod 1 back ! Finding this would be a great help for Lunar science ( assuming it did n't get crushed in a landslide or something ) .
I know that this is on their list , so good luck !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Lunakhod 1 carried a French retroreflector array for Lunar Laser Ranging (LLR) [iers.org] but unfortunately, contact was lost and no one knows where it is.
There are good returns for Lunakhod 2, so I (and others) want Lunakhod 1 back !Finding this would be a great help for Lunar science (assuming it didn't get crushed in a landslide or something).
I know that this is on their list, so good luck !</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28552551</id>
	<title>Re:God dammit</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246457040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>For one thing, they left reflectors on the moon that can bounce back laser signals.</p></div></blockquote><p>
Because placing a reflector on the moon absolutely requires a human as opposed to a robot. You damn your case with faint proof.
<br> <br>
Actually proving a manned moon landing is difficult. It's a lot like trying to prove/disprove the existence of god. Most people feel they have to make a decision on the matter, even if there is a chance that they end up being wrong. The difference is that it's fairly popular these days to take the skeptical side of the god debate. But the truth is really orthogonal to how popular a side of a debate is at a point in time.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>For one thing , they left reflectors on the moon that can bounce back laser signals .
Because placing a reflector on the moon absolutely requires a human as opposed to a robot .
You damn your case with faint proof .
Actually proving a manned moon landing is difficult .
It 's a lot like trying to prove/disprove the existence of god .
Most people feel they have to make a decision on the matter , even if there is a chance that they end up being wrong .
The difference is that it 's fairly popular these days to take the skeptical side of the god debate .
But the truth is really orthogonal to how popular a side of a debate is at a point in time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For one thing, they left reflectors on the moon that can bounce back laser signals.
Because placing a reflector on the moon absolutely requires a human as opposed to a robot.
You damn your case with faint proof.
Actually proving a manned moon landing is difficult.
It's a lot like trying to prove/disprove the existence of god.
Most people feel they have to make a decision on the matter, even if there is a chance that they end up being wrong.
The difference is that it's fairly popular these days to take the skeptical side of the god debate.
But the truth is really orthogonal to how popular a side of a debate is at a point in time.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550743</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550943</id>
	<title>Re:Lunakhod 1</title>
	<author>DNS-and-BIND</author>
	<datestamp>1246447680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So...what...you'll be able to tell how far away the moon is, then?  <p>Sorry, if this is the cutting edge of lunar science, then we're all doomed.  Who cares about some junky old probe?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So...what...you 'll be able to tell how far away the moon is , then ?
Sorry , if this is the cutting edge of lunar science , then we 're all doomed .
Who cares about some junky old probe ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So...what...you'll be able to tell how far away the moon is, then?
Sorry, if this is the cutting edge of lunar science, then we're all doomed.
Who cares about some junky old probe?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549933</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28556607</id>
	<title>Re:God dammit</title>
	<author>Jason Levine</author>
	<datestamp>1246544100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>One of the conspiracy nuts who popped into BadAstronomer's comments one time tried to argue that the International Space Station was a fake and didn't actually exist.  I'm sure that level of conspiracy nuttery is extreme even among moon landing denialists, but it was still an impressive display of ignorance to see someone argue that something you can see with a decent telescope actually isn't there.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One of the conspiracy nuts who popped into BadAstronomer 's comments one time tried to argue that the International Space Station was a fake and did n't actually exist .
I 'm sure that level of conspiracy nuttery is extreme even among moon landing denialists , but it was still an impressive display of ignorance to see someone argue that something you can see with a decent telescope actually is n't there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One of the conspiracy nuts who popped into BadAstronomer's comments one time tried to argue that the International Space Station was a fake and didn't actually exist.
I'm sure that level of conspiracy nuttery is extreme even among moon landing denialists, but it was still an impressive display of ignorance to see someone argue that something you can see with a decent telescope actually isn't there.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28553279</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549759</id>
	<title>That's cool and all</title>
	<author>Idiot with a gun</author>
	<datestamp>1246443000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>But let's not pretend for a second that it'll stop the theorists. They want to disbelieve, so nothing will prevent them. As was mentioned on the Conspiracy Theories episode of <i>Penn and Teller's Bullshit</i>, when someone says "You can't convince me," those aren't the words of a skeptic, merely of a jerk. That being said, they should be some neat photos.</htmltext>
<tokenext>But let 's not pretend for a second that it 'll stop the theorists .
They want to disbelieve , so nothing will prevent them .
As was mentioned on the Conspiracy Theories episode of Penn and Teller 's Bullshit , when someone says " You ca n't convince me , " those are n't the words of a skeptic , merely of a jerk .
That being said , they should be some neat photos .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But let's not pretend for a second that it'll stop the theorists.
They want to disbelieve, so nothing will prevent them.
As was mentioned on the Conspiracy Theories episode of Penn and Teller's Bullshit, when someone says "You can't convince me," those aren't the words of a skeptic, merely of a jerk.
That being said, they should be some neat photos.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550869</id>
	<title>Re:God dammit</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246447320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This just in: 4 out of 5 Slashdot posters lack reading comprehension skills (congrats "Paul server guy" for being the stand-out).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This just in : 4 out of 5 Slashdot posters lack reading comprehension skills ( congrats " Paul server guy " for being the stand-out ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This just in: 4 out of 5 Slashdot posters lack reading comprehension skills (congrats "Paul server guy" for being the stand-out).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550195</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550669</id>
	<title>Re:It's amazing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246446360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why is something so sad modded as funny?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why is something so sad modded as funny ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why is something so sad modded as funny?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550109</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28558075</id>
	<title>Re:God dammit</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246551120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>NASA has anticipated this and released these photos as proof: <br>
&nbsp; <br>http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=87630&amp;id=54971236771&amp;ref=nf</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>NASA has anticipated this and released these photos as proof :   http : //www.facebook.com/album.php ? aid = 87630&amp;id = 54971236771&amp;ref = nf</tokentext>
<sentencetext>NASA has anticipated this and released these photos as proof: 
  http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=87630&amp;id=54971236771&amp;ref=nf</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549637</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28553331</id>
	<title>Non Technical Prof of Moon Landings</title>
	<author>arthurpaliden</author>
	<datestamp>1246463160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
In 1969 the Americans first landed men on the moon.  Now some people have made names for themselves by saying that this and subsequent landings never happened.  Their position is that NASA faked them in order to save face and fool the public. To prove their point they rely on explanations of the reported events using dubious science and lay explanations that any first year science major would and does, laugh at.
</p><p>
However, they always miss or purposely avoid the  the one piece of irrefutable proof that it did in fact happen. That is that the Soviet government never refuted the American claims and they were in a unique position to do so. For even after the Americans landed on the moon the Soviets still continued to send orbiters, landers and rovers to the moon.
</p><p>
<a href="http://www.russianspaceweb.com/spacecraft\_planetary\_lunar.html" title="russianspaceweb.com">http://www.russianspaceweb.com/spacecraft\_planetary\_lunar.html</a> [russianspaceweb.com]
</p><p>
Now if they wanted to get the goods on the Americans all they had to do was to land, photograph or explore with a rover the American landing sights.  Just imagine the embarrassment not to mention the the damage to American credibility, at the height of the cold war no less, that such information would generate.  Records even show that they never landed or even explored that areas that that American landings happened. So they did not even go and look to make sure because they knew it really happened.
</p><p>
But they did not. They did not use it to pressure the Americans to stop bombing North Vietnam and Cambodia where Soviet military advisers were being killed as a result. They did not use it to pressure the United States to stop sending military advisers to and providing Stinger missiles to the Afghan fighters during the Soviet occupation.  They did not use it to stop the Star Wars program of the Regan administration.
</p><p>
In fact they did not even use it to turn the West's attention away from the Soviet Union during the Soviet Coup of 1991 when members of the Soviet government briefly deposed Soviet president Mikhail Gorbachev and attempted to take control of the country.
</p><p>
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet\_coup\_attempt\_of\_1991" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet\_coup\_attempt\_of\_1991</a> [wikipedia.org]
</p><p>
Which every body knew was the last death throws of the Soviet empire.  If they did not use the information then to turn the attention of the American, and world public, inward to their own governments lies and thus corruption and force it to ignore the events in the Soviet Union in order to deal with a damaging domestic and international issue.  Then the proof of faked moon landings did not and never existed.
</p><p>
One final thought.  After the fall of the Soviet Union the Russian economy tanked.  People were selling all kinds of stuff owed by the crumbling state, ships, weapons, artworks and knowledge but nobody ever approached any Western news agency or tabloid to sell them this information.  And to say that one would buy it but not publish is foolish.  The seller could just keep peddling it until someone did and then it would be old news and worthless until then it would still be worth something.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In 1969 the Americans first landed men on the moon .
Now some people have made names for themselves by saying that this and subsequent landings never happened .
Their position is that NASA faked them in order to save face and fool the public .
To prove their point they rely on explanations of the reported events using dubious science and lay explanations that any first year science major would and does , laugh at .
However , they always miss or purposely avoid the the one piece of irrefutable proof that it did in fact happen .
That is that the Soviet government never refuted the American claims and they were in a unique position to do so .
For even after the Americans landed on the moon the Soviets still continued to send orbiters , landers and rovers to the moon .
http : //www.russianspaceweb.com/spacecraft \ _planetary \ _lunar.html [ russianspaceweb.com ] Now if they wanted to get the goods on the Americans all they had to do was to land , photograph or explore with a rover the American landing sights .
Just imagine the embarrassment not to mention the the damage to American credibility , at the height of the cold war no less , that such information would generate .
Records even show that they never landed or even explored that areas that that American landings happened .
So they did not even go and look to make sure because they knew it really happened .
But they did not .
They did not use it to pressure the Americans to stop bombing North Vietnam and Cambodia where Soviet military advisers were being killed as a result .
They did not use it to pressure the United States to stop sending military advisers to and providing Stinger missiles to the Afghan fighters during the Soviet occupation .
They did not use it to stop the Star Wars program of the Regan administration .
In fact they did not even use it to turn the West 's attention away from the Soviet Union during the Soviet Coup of 1991 when members of the Soviet government briefly deposed Soviet president Mikhail Gorbachev and attempted to take control of the country .
http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet \ _coup \ _attempt \ _of \ _1991 [ wikipedia.org ] Which every body knew was the last death throws of the Soviet empire .
If they did not use the information then to turn the attention of the American , and world public , inward to their own governments lies and thus corruption and force it to ignore the events in the Soviet Union in order to deal with a damaging domestic and international issue .
Then the proof of faked moon landings did not and never existed .
One final thought .
After the fall of the Soviet Union the Russian economy tanked .
People were selling all kinds of stuff owed by the crumbling state , ships , weapons , artworks and knowledge but nobody ever approached any Western news agency or tabloid to sell them this information .
And to say that one would buy it but not publish is foolish .
The seller could just keep peddling it until someone did and then it would be old news and worthless until then it would still be worth something .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
In 1969 the Americans first landed men on the moon.
Now some people have made names for themselves by saying that this and subsequent landings never happened.
Their position is that NASA faked them in order to save face and fool the public.
To prove their point they rely on explanations of the reported events using dubious science and lay explanations that any first year science major would and does, laugh at.
However, they always miss or purposely avoid the  the one piece of irrefutable proof that it did in fact happen.
That is that the Soviet government never refuted the American claims and they were in a unique position to do so.
For even after the Americans landed on the moon the Soviets still continued to send orbiters, landers and rovers to the moon.
http://www.russianspaceweb.com/spacecraft\_planetary\_lunar.html [russianspaceweb.com]

Now if they wanted to get the goods on the Americans all they had to do was to land, photograph or explore with a rover the American landing sights.
Just imagine the embarrassment not to mention the the damage to American credibility, at the height of the cold war no less, that such information would generate.
Records even show that they never landed or even explored that areas that that American landings happened.
So they did not even go and look to make sure because they knew it really happened.
But they did not.
They did not use it to pressure the Americans to stop bombing North Vietnam and Cambodia where Soviet military advisers were being killed as a result.
They did not use it to pressure the United States to stop sending military advisers to and providing Stinger missiles to the Afghan fighters during the Soviet occupation.
They did not use it to stop the Star Wars program of the Regan administration.
In fact they did not even use it to turn the West's attention away from the Soviet Union during the Soviet Coup of 1991 when members of the Soviet government briefly deposed Soviet president Mikhail Gorbachev and attempted to take control of the country.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet\_coup\_attempt\_of\_1991 [wikipedia.org]

Which every body knew was the last death throws of the Soviet empire.
If they did not use the information then to turn the attention of the American, and world public, inward to their own governments lies and thus corruption and force it to ignore the events in the Soviet Union in order to deal with a damaging domestic and international issue.
Then the proof of faked moon landings did not and never existed.
One final thought.
After the fall of the Soviet Union the Russian economy tanked.
People were selling all kinds of stuff owed by the crumbling state, ships, weapons, artworks and knowledge but nobody ever approached any Western news agency or tabloid to sell them this information.
And to say that one would buy it but not publish is foolish.
The seller could just keep peddling it until someone did and then it would be old news and worthless until then it would still be worth something.
</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550645</id>
	<title>Re:The coverup will continue</title>
	<author>arthurpaliden</author>
	<datestamp>1246446300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>-1, Troll?? </p><p>Ok, so I forgot the &lt;Sarcasm&gt; tags.  Actually they will not believe it even after they are standing on the surface and looking at the old sites. They will then say that they were the first since all those before were just faked.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>-1 , Troll ? ?
Ok , so I forgot the tags .
Actually they will not believe it even after they are standing on the surface and looking at the old sites .
They will then say that they were the first since all those before were just faked .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>-1, Troll??
Ok, so I forgot the  tags.
Actually they will not believe it even after they are standing on the surface and looking at the old sites.
They will then say that they were the first since all those before were just faked.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549681</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550355</id>
	<title>They'll believe what they want to believe</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246445220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In my experience, people who are adamant about the moon landing being a conspiracy seem to act that way merely because it gets them attention. They seem to feed off of the conflict. Since claiming these pictures are also a fake will continue to give them attention, this type of people will continue to hold onto their beliefs.</p><p>If people want to believe that the moon landing was a hoax, that's their prerogative. But when they become combative towards anyone who thinks otherwise, that's when they've stepped over the line. It's called basic tolerance and respect. The same applies to other subjects which are debated--science/religion, windows/mac/linux, music, sports, etc. You're entitled to your opinion and the defense of it, but you are not entitled (or at least you're credibility is not entitled) to disrespect or belittle people merely for having different opinions or beliefs.</p><p>People who feel the need to constantly attack or belittle different opinions/beliefs merely show how insecure they in their own anyways.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In my experience , people who are adamant about the moon landing being a conspiracy seem to act that way merely because it gets them attention .
They seem to feed off of the conflict .
Since claiming these pictures are also a fake will continue to give them attention , this type of people will continue to hold onto their beliefs.If people want to believe that the moon landing was a hoax , that 's their prerogative .
But when they become combative towards anyone who thinks otherwise , that 's when they 've stepped over the line .
It 's called basic tolerance and respect .
The same applies to other subjects which are debated--science/religion , windows/mac/linux , music , sports , etc .
You 're entitled to your opinion and the defense of it , but you are not entitled ( or at least you 're credibility is not entitled ) to disrespect or belittle people merely for having different opinions or beliefs.People who feel the need to constantly attack or belittle different opinions/beliefs merely show how insecure they in their own anyways .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In my experience, people who are adamant about the moon landing being a conspiracy seem to act that way merely because it gets them attention.
They seem to feed off of the conflict.
Since claiming these pictures are also a fake will continue to give them attention, this type of people will continue to hold onto their beliefs.If people want to believe that the moon landing was a hoax, that's their prerogative.
But when they become combative towards anyone who thinks otherwise, that's when they've stepped over the line.
It's called basic tolerance and respect.
The same applies to other subjects which are debated--science/religion, windows/mac/linux, music, sports, etc.
You're entitled to your opinion and the defense of it, but you are not entitled (or at least you're credibility is not entitled) to disrespect or belittle people merely for having different opinions or beliefs.People who feel the need to constantly attack or belittle different opinions/beliefs merely show how insecure they in their own anyways.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28554475</id>
	<title>Re:God dammit</title>
	<author>amn108</author>
	<datestamp>1246476540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You worry about your signature, I'll worry about those posts.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You worry about your signature , I 'll worry about those posts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You worry about your signature, I'll worry about those posts.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549637</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28551331</id>
	<title>Re:pics and it still didn't happen</title>
	<author>MobileTatsu-NJG</author>
	<datestamp>1246449480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><blockquote><div><p>I also believe that nothing short of dragging the conspiracy nuts up to the moon themselves will convince them of the fact. Maybe not even that.</p></div></blockquote><p>How many such people actually exist?  With every slashdot article mentioning the moon landings, there is a great uproar about these heretics.  I'm sure they exist, but I've never met one, nor do I recall even reading a post from one on slashdot.  It makes me wonder why these people (whoever they are) get under people's skin so much.</p></div><p>When somebody gets noisy about something Slashdot disagrees with, it's assumed that the number of people that follow said noisy person are a multiple of a million.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I also believe that nothing short of dragging the conspiracy nuts up to the moon themselves will convince them of the fact .
Maybe not even that.How many such people actually exist ?
With every slashdot article mentioning the moon landings , there is a great uproar about these heretics .
I 'm sure they exist , but I 've never met one , nor do I recall even reading a post from one on slashdot .
It makes me wonder why these people ( whoever they are ) get under people 's skin so much.When somebody gets noisy about something Slashdot disagrees with , it 's assumed that the number of people that follow said noisy person are a multiple of a million .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I also believe that nothing short of dragging the conspiracy nuts up to the moon themselves will convince them of the fact.
Maybe not even that.How many such people actually exist?
With every slashdot article mentioning the moon landings, there is a great uproar about these heretics.
I'm sure they exist, but I've never met one, nor do I recall even reading a post from one on slashdot.
It makes me wonder why these people (whoever they are) get under people's skin so much.When somebody gets noisy about something Slashdot disagrees with, it's assumed that the number of people that follow said noisy person are a multiple of a million.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549951</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28552063</id>
	<title>Re:God dammit</title>
	<author>LanceUppercut</author>
	<datestamp>1246453500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>One can argue that reflectors were left there by Soviet Lunokhod rovers, or, more precisely, the rovers are themselves reflectors.</htmltext>
<tokenext>One can argue that reflectors were left there by Soviet Lunokhod rovers , or , more precisely , the rovers are themselves reflectors .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One can argue that reflectors were left there by Soviet Lunokhod rovers, or, more precisely, the rovers are themselves reflectors.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550743</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28551227</id>
	<title>Re:pics and it still didn't happen</title>
	<author>PitaBred</author>
	<datestamp>1246449000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Enough of them that <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZOo6aHSY8hU" title="youtube.com">Buzz Aldrin</a> [youtube.com] had to forcefully give one of them a clue...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Enough of them that Buzz Aldrin [ youtube.com ] had to forcefully give one of them a clue.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Enough of them that Buzz Aldrin [youtube.com] had to forcefully give one of them a clue...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549951</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28552277</id>
	<title>Re:God dammit</title>
	<author>camperdave</author>
	<datestamp>1246454880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>they left reflectors on the moon that can bounce back laser signals.</i> <br> <br>Oh come now.  Obviously the laser is bouncing off some crystals on the moon's surface.  The whole "they left reflectors on the moon" story is just part of the hoax.<br> <br>
Kidding, of course.  But unless you've got proof that there wasn't some sort of retroreflective surface before the Apollo missions, the "they left reflectors on the moon" story is not validation of a landing.</htmltext>
<tokenext>they left reflectors on the moon that can bounce back laser signals .
Oh come now .
Obviously the laser is bouncing off some crystals on the moon 's surface .
The whole " they left reflectors on the moon " story is just part of the hoax .
Kidding , of course .
But unless you 've got proof that there was n't some sort of retroreflective surface before the Apollo missions , the " they left reflectors on the moon " story is not validation of a landing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>they left reflectors on the moon that can bounce back laser signals.
Oh come now.
Obviously the laser is bouncing off some crystals on the moon's surface.
The whole "they left reflectors on the moon" story is just part of the hoax.
Kidding, of course.
But unless you've got proof that there wasn't some sort of retroreflective surface before the Apollo missions, the "they left reflectors on the moon" story is not validation of a landing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550743</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28553639</id>
	<title>I put on my tinfoil hat</title>
	<author>CuteSteveJobs</author>
	<datestamp>1246466040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; Images of Apollo Landing Sites Soon Available</p><p>Why not visit them in person? They're in the desert just outside Los Angeles.</p><p>My personal theory is The Pirate Bay was shut down just to ban the documentary, Capricorn One.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Images of Apollo Landing Sites Soon AvailableWhy not visit them in person ?
They 're in the desert just outside Los Angeles.My personal theory is The Pirate Bay was shut down just to ban the documentary , Capricorn One .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; Images of Apollo Landing Sites Soon AvailableWhy not visit them in person?
They're in the desert just outside Los Angeles.My personal theory is The Pirate Bay was shut down just to ban the documentary, Capricorn One.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550811</id>
	<title>Re:That's cool and all</title>
	<author>pipingguy</author>
	<datestamp>1246447080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>But P&amp;T's Bullshit is also a program that doubts Global Warming/Climate Change, so it must be ignored.<br> <br>
This post modded down in 3, 2, 1...</htmltext>
<tokenext>But P&amp;T 's Bullshit is also a program that doubts Global Warming/Climate Change , so it must be ignored .
This post modded down in 3 , 2 , 1.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But P&amp;T's Bullshit is also a program that doubts Global Warming/Climate Change, so it must be ignored.
This post modded down in 3, 2, 1...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549759</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550149</id>
	<title>Re:pics and it still didn't happen</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246444380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>[sarcasm off] For the record, I believe 100\% that the landings were real, but I also believe that nothing short of dragging the conspiracy nuts up to the moon themselves will convince them of the fact. Maybe not even that.</p></div><p>Lies! You have simply kidnapped me and whisked away to an entirely convincing sound stage. And I weigh about 1/6th as much as I normally do. This is simply conclusive proof that you have invented antigravity. Will you not stop at any length to perpetuate this vile lie?!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>[ sarcasm off ] For the record , I believe 100 \ % that the landings were real , but I also believe that nothing short of dragging the conspiracy nuts up to the moon themselves will convince them of the fact .
Maybe not even that.Lies !
You have simply kidnapped me and whisked away to an entirely convincing sound stage .
And I weigh about 1/6th as much as I normally do .
This is simply conclusive proof that you have invented antigravity .
Will you not stop at any length to perpetuate this vile lie ?
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>[sarcasm off] For the record, I believe 100\% that the landings were real, but I also believe that nothing short of dragging the conspiracy nuts up to the moon themselves will convince them of the fact.
Maybe not even that.Lies!
You have simply kidnapped me and whisked away to an entirely convincing sound stage.
And I weigh about 1/6th as much as I normally do.
This is simply conclusive proof that you have invented antigravity.
Will you not stop at any length to perpetuate this vile lie?
!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549699</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550765</id>
	<title>For the Fans!</title>
	<author>QuantumG</author>
	<datestamp>1246446840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Forget the conspiracy theorists.  Those guys are haters.  As a giggling space cadet I'm looking forward to "first light" from LRO because these images are going to be the best <b>ever</b>.  This will happen sometime this month, or early next month.  In regards to Apollo, the LM was 4.27m in diameter.. so that's just over 4 pixels.. I don't know how great that is gunna look<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Forget the conspiracy theorists .
Those guys are haters .
As a giggling space cadet I 'm looking forward to " first light " from LRO because these images are going to be the best ever .
This will happen sometime this month , or early next month .
In regards to Apollo , the LM was 4.27m in diameter.. so that 's just over 4 pixels.. I do n't know how great that is gunna look : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Forget the conspiracy theorists.
Those guys are haters.
As a giggling space cadet I'm looking forward to "first light" from LRO because these images are going to be the best ever.
This will happen sometime this month, or early next month.
In regards to Apollo, the LM was 4.27m in diameter.. so that's just over 4 pixels.. I don't know how great that is gunna look :)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28552587</id>
	<title>hmmm</title>
	<author>Mr\_Nitro</author>
	<datestamp>1246457400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Putting everyone in the same mix is not fair imho. There are 'conspiracy' ppl out there, and they will find all possible tricks to keep on believing everything is fake or whatever. BUT there are also some perfectly normal and rational ppl who have some serious doubts about the first landing.
There are some totally undeniable 'flaws' in those pictures, ok nasa said they doctored those, fine then they show us the originals, pretty simple, I think it's a shame if they really have been there in the first flight to have citizens doubt that. Just show those ugly originals, not matter what.
But hearing a nasa researcher say that with nowadays technology it will take about 20 years of r&amp;d to put someone on the moon... well<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...that stinks.
They lost most of contractors projects... schemes...everything... that's a nice scientific way of conducting a mission/experiment... not.
Anyway, I hope they will provide some CLEAR pictures for the landing site...to shut up all the crackpot. If they don't then it's time for the citizens to inquiry officially into this.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Putting everyone in the same mix is not fair imho .
There are 'conspiracy ' ppl out there , and they will find all possible tricks to keep on believing everything is fake or whatever .
BUT there are also some perfectly normal and rational ppl who have some serious doubts about the first landing .
There are some totally undeniable 'flaws ' in those pictures , ok nasa said they doctored those , fine then they show us the originals , pretty simple , I think it 's a shame if they really have been there in the first flight to have citizens doubt that .
Just show those ugly originals , not matter what .
But hearing a nasa researcher say that with nowadays technology it will take about 20 years of r&amp;d to put someone on the moon... well ...that stinks .
They lost most of contractors projects... schemes...everything... that 's a nice scientific way of conducting a mission/experiment... not . Anyway , I hope they will provide some CLEAR pictures for the landing site...to shut up all the crackpot .
If they do n't then it 's time for the citizens to inquiry officially into this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Putting everyone in the same mix is not fair imho.
There are 'conspiracy' ppl out there, and they will find all possible tricks to keep on believing everything is fake or whatever.
BUT there are also some perfectly normal and rational ppl who have some serious doubts about the first landing.
There are some totally undeniable 'flaws' in those pictures, ok nasa said they doctored those, fine then they show us the originals, pretty simple, I think it's a shame if they really have been there in the first flight to have citizens doubt that.
Just show those ugly originals, not matter what.
But hearing a nasa researcher say that with nowadays technology it will take about 20 years of r&amp;d to put someone on the moon... well ...that stinks.
They lost most of contractors projects... schemes...everything... that's a nice scientific way of conducting a mission/experiment... not.
Anyway, I hope they will provide some CLEAR pictures for the landing site...to shut up all the crackpot.
If they don't then it's time for the citizens to inquiry officially into this.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28556371</id>
	<title>Re:God dammit</title>
	<author>terrapin44</author>
	<datestamp>1246542480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think you are fake.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think you are fake .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think you are fake.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28553279</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28555129</id>
	<title>Iron Sky</title>
	<author>Geheimagent</author>
	<datestamp>1246527360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Teaser can be found <a href="http://www.ironsky.net/site/" title="ironsky.net" rel="nofollow">here</a> [ironsky.net].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Teaser can be found here [ ironsky.net ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Teaser can be found here [ironsky.net].</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550569</id>
	<title>mod UP</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246446060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><A HREF="http://goat.cx/" title="goat.cx" rel="nofollow">for el3ction, i</a> [goat.cx]</htmltext>
<tokenext>for el3ction , i [ goat.cx ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>for el3ction, i [goat.cx]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549967</id>
	<title>Re:God dammit</title>
	<author>FlyingSquidStudios</author>
	<datestamp>1246443660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Oh, come on. Everyone knows that the Moon landings were filmed in a movie studio... on Mars.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh , come on .
Everyone knows that the Moon landings were filmed in a movie studio... on Mars .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh, come on.
Everyone knows that the Moon landings were filmed in a movie studio... on Mars.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549637</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549665</id>
	<title>eh</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246442700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I prefer pictures of a freshly shaved asian teen pussy, but whatever float your boat, weirdos.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I prefer pictures of a freshly shaved asian teen pussy , but whatever float your boat , weirdos .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I prefer pictures of a freshly shaved asian teen pussy, but whatever float your boat, weirdos.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28554715</id>
	<title>Re:God dammit</title>
	<author>Optimus6128</author>
	<datestamp>1246565340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How about the conspiracists believing anoother side. That the moon landing really did happened and there were more secret landings and we have build a base there (in mars too!) and already found intelligent extraterrestrials there or there is a huge fleet of flying saucer lying on the dark side of the moon, but they hide it all from the public and also the moon is not a physical satellite but a camouflaged big alien spaceship. If you are a lot into paranormal/conspiracy theories like I was in the past, you hear a lot of these insane stuff already!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How about the conspiracists believing anoother side .
That the moon landing really did happened and there were more secret landings and we have build a base there ( in mars too !
) and already found intelligent extraterrestrials there or there is a huge fleet of flying saucer lying on the dark side of the moon , but they hide it all from the public and also the moon is not a physical satellite but a camouflaged big alien spaceship .
If you are a lot into paranormal/conspiracy theories like I was in the past , you hear a lot of these insane stuff already !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about the conspiracists believing anoother side.
That the moon landing really did happened and there were more secret landings and we have build a base there (in mars too!
) and already found intelligent extraterrestrials there or there is a huge fleet of flying saucer lying on the dark side of the moon, but they hide it all from the public and also the moon is not a physical satellite but a camouflaged big alien spaceship.
If you are a lot into paranormal/conspiracy theories like I was in the past, you hear a lot of these insane stuff already!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549637</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28555363</id>
	<title>Re:How about open-sourcing the transmission instea</title>
	<author>Paul server guy</author>
	<datestamp>1246530840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>For this reason, I would say the only way the public would actually accept "public" photograph data as real deal, is if NASA "open-sourced" spacecraft broadcasting interface - frequencies, protocol, encoding, where to set up a dish, size of dish required - so that whoever actually doubts the authencity of such photos, may instead doubt whether NASA is faking a signal from the Moon that carries digital image data. After all, if the information is pubic, it is public. Nothing in the transmission is really secret or falls under NDA anyway? It involves radio waves, some archaic encoding scheme of some color channels and a wrapping protocol for transmission. The open-sourcing of the transmission would force the hoax game onto a whole new level of complexity, where it would not be so easy for the skeptics to cry fake.</p></div><p>As "rlseaman" said, OpenSource isn't the right term, I would say open protocols and standards, with all data sent in the clear. (You'd have to keep a secured control channel though.) </p><p>Which is exactly what <a href="http://www.openluna.org/wiki/index.php/Mission\_Plan" title="openluna.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.openluna.org/wiki/index.php/Mission\_Plan</a> [openluna.org] intends to do, Send back every bit of data open and clear. The world's paying for it, the world should have the data.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>For this reason , I would say the only way the public would actually accept " public " photograph data as real deal , is if NASA " open-sourced " spacecraft broadcasting interface - frequencies , protocol , encoding , where to set up a dish , size of dish required - so that whoever actually doubts the authencity of such photos , may instead doubt whether NASA is faking a signal from the Moon that carries digital image data .
After all , if the information is pubic , it is public .
Nothing in the transmission is really secret or falls under NDA anyway ?
It involves radio waves , some archaic encoding scheme of some color channels and a wrapping protocol for transmission .
The open-sourcing of the transmission would force the hoax game onto a whole new level of complexity , where it would not be so easy for the skeptics to cry fake.As " rlseaman " said , OpenSource is n't the right term , I would say open protocols and standards , with all data sent in the clear .
( You 'd have to keep a secured control channel though .
) Which is exactly what http : //www.openluna.org/wiki/index.php/Mission \ _Plan [ openluna.org ] intends to do , Send back every bit of data open and clear .
The world 's paying for it , the world should have the data .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For this reason, I would say the only way the public would actually accept "public" photograph data as real deal, is if NASA "open-sourced" spacecraft broadcasting interface - frequencies, protocol, encoding, where to set up a dish, size of dish required - so that whoever actually doubts the authencity of such photos, may instead doubt whether NASA is faking a signal from the Moon that carries digital image data.
After all, if the information is pubic, it is public.
Nothing in the transmission is really secret or falls under NDA anyway?
It involves radio waves, some archaic encoding scheme of some color channels and a wrapping protocol for transmission.
The open-sourcing of the transmission would force the hoax game onto a whole new level of complexity, where it would not be so easy for the skeptics to cry fake.As "rlseaman" said, OpenSource isn't the right term, I would say open protocols and standards, with all data sent in the clear.
(You'd have to keep a secured control channel though.
) Which is exactly what http://www.openluna.org/wiki/index.php/Mission\_Plan [openluna.org] intends to do, Send back every bit of data open and clear.
The world's paying for it, the world should have the data.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550997</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28554729</id>
	<title>Re:pics and it still didn't happen</title>
	<author>TheTurtlesMoves</author>
	<datestamp>1246565700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>No it won't. They will assume that you faked it to trick them--ie constructed it just prior to them going there....
<br> <br>
They way to deal with moon landing conspiracy dudes, is to ignore them.</htmltext>
<tokenext>No it wo n't .
They will assume that you faked it to trick them--ie constructed it just prior to them going there... . They way to deal with moon landing conspiracy dudes , is to ignore them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No it won't.
They will assume that you faked it to trick them--ie constructed it just prior to them going there....
 
They way to deal with moon landing conspiracy dudes, is to ignore them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549699</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28556965</id>
	<title>hoax?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246546140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Duh? Seem like everybody is making fun of comments indicating skepticism or "conspiracy theories" regarding moon landings, but i havent read a single such sceptical  comment yet. And btw, a little skepticism  would be totally apropriate. Isn't it a bit hypocritical making fun of religious "cretionists" zealots, but bashing everybody attacking ones own beliefs? (and apollo debate IS mostly a matter of myths and beliefs, and not facts, on BOTH SIDES, let's face it...)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Duh ?
Seem like everybody is making fun of comments indicating skepticism or " conspiracy theories " regarding moon landings , but i havent read a single such sceptical comment yet .
And btw , a little skepticism would be totally apropriate .
Is n't it a bit hypocritical making fun of religious " cretionists " zealots , but bashing everybody attacking ones own beliefs ?
( and apollo debate IS mostly a matter of myths and beliefs , and not facts , on BOTH SIDES , let 's face it... )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Duh?
Seem like everybody is making fun of comments indicating skepticism or "conspiracy theories" regarding moon landings, but i havent read a single such sceptical  comment yet.
And btw, a little skepticism  would be totally apropriate.
Isn't it a bit hypocritical making fun of religious "cretionists" zealots, but bashing everybody attacking ones own beliefs?
(and apollo debate IS mostly a matter of myths and beliefs, and not facts, on BOTH SIDES, let's face it...)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28551935</id>
	<title>Re:God dammit</title>
	<author>MozeeToby</author>
	<datestamp>1246452780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>To be fair, that only prooves that we got 'something' to the moon, not that we landed human beings there and brought them back.  NASA probably has the technology to put one of those reflectors on Phobos as well, but I don't think I'd be volounteering for the manned mission any time soon.</p><p>(Note: I am not a nutjob.  The moonlanding happened, get over it.  If you really don't believe it (and want to get punched in the face by an old man, go tell one of the Apollo astronauts that it never happened.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To be fair , that only prooves that we got 'something ' to the moon , not that we landed human beings there and brought them back .
NASA probably has the technology to put one of those reflectors on Phobos as well , but I do n't think I 'd be volounteering for the manned mission any time soon .
( Note : I am not a nutjob .
The moonlanding happened , get over it .
If you really do n't believe it ( and want to get punched in the face by an old man , go tell one of the Apollo astronauts that it never happened .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To be fair, that only prooves that we got 'something' to the moon, not that we landed human beings there and brought them back.
NASA probably has the technology to put one of those reflectors on Phobos as well, but I don't think I'd be volounteering for the manned mission any time soon.
(Note: I am not a nutjob.
The moonlanding happened, get over it.
If you really don't believe it (and want to get punched in the face by an old man, go tell one of the Apollo astronauts that it never happened.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550743</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550997</id>
	<title>How about open-sourcing the transmission instead,</title>
	<author>amn108</author>
	<datestamp>1246447860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>To give skeptics a harder time being skeptics about this? I am not one of the hoax believers, even though I am naturally skeptical to all things space and military we are told about, given the rich history of fuckups and coverups of these fuckups, but you have got to admit that in this age where its getting hard to tell in the movies what has been cg-enerated and what was in fact real, a bunch of pictures supposedly from the Moon will not proove ANYTHING to either hoax believers or those who believe we landed there. If anything, more scrutiny will be asked for with regard to photo material, to which bizarre rules will or will not apply ("no, you cannot have original data!" -NASA)</p><p>For this reason, I would say the only way the public would actually accept "public" photograph data as real deal, is if NASA "open-sourced" spacecraft broadcasting interface - frequencies, protocol, encoding, where to set up a dish, size of dish required - so that whoever actually doubts the authencity of such photos, may instead doubt whether NASA is faking a signal from the Moon that carries digital image data. After all, if the information is pubic, it is public. Nothing in the transmission is really secret or falls under NDA anyway? It involves radio waves, some archaic encoding scheme of some color channels and a wrapping protocol for transmission. The open-sourcing of the transmission would force the hoax game onto a whole new level of complexity, where it would not be so easy for the skeptics to cry fake.</p><p>From the movie "Contact":</p><p>KITZ<br>Oh, I do think you may have suffered some kind of episode, yeah. I do. Doctor, I'd like to propose an alternate hypothesis, if I may, and I'd like you to bring your considerable scientific expertise to bear on it. To fake a signal from Vega, what would you need?<br>ELLIE<br>You would need a satellite to transmit the signal, but it would be impossible to simulate something...<br>KITZ<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...you would need a satellite, and you would need launch capabilities to put the satellite into orbit. And of course the message itself. To put something like this together, so complex, drawing on so many different disciplines...<br>ELLIE<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... would be impossible.<br>KITZ<br>Impossible? Impossible? Is there anyone who might have been up to the challenge? Someone with extraordinary technical expertise. Enormous financial resources. Someone perverse enough, eccentric enough to have come up with the idea in the first place?<br>ELLIE<br>Hadden?<br>KITZ<br>S. R. Hadden.<br>ELLIE<br>You're implying that this was all some kind of a hoax, that he engineered this...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To give skeptics a harder time being skeptics about this ?
I am not one of the hoax believers , even though I am naturally skeptical to all things space and military we are told about , given the rich history of fuckups and coverups of these fuckups , but you have got to admit that in this age where its getting hard to tell in the movies what has been cg-enerated and what was in fact real , a bunch of pictures supposedly from the Moon will not proove ANYTHING to either hoax believers or those who believe we landed there .
If anything , more scrutiny will be asked for with regard to photo material , to which bizarre rules will or will not apply ( " no , you can not have original data !
" -NASA ) For this reason , I would say the only way the public would actually accept " public " photograph data as real deal , is if NASA " open-sourced " spacecraft broadcasting interface - frequencies , protocol , encoding , where to set up a dish , size of dish required - so that whoever actually doubts the authencity of such photos , may instead doubt whether NASA is faking a signal from the Moon that carries digital image data .
After all , if the information is pubic , it is public .
Nothing in the transmission is really secret or falls under NDA anyway ?
It involves radio waves , some archaic encoding scheme of some color channels and a wrapping protocol for transmission .
The open-sourcing of the transmission would force the hoax game onto a whole new level of complexity , where it would not be so easy for the skeptics to cry fake.From the movie " Contact " : KITZOh , I do think you may have suffered some kind of episode , yeah .
I do .
Doctor , I 'd like to propose an alternate hypothesis , if I may , and I 'd like you to bring your considerable scientific expertise to bear on it .
To fake a signal from Vega , what would you need ? ELLIEYou would need a satellite to transmit the signal , but it would be impossible to simulate something...KITZ ...you would need a satellite , and you would need launch capabilities to put the satellite into orbit .
And of course the message itself .
To put something like this together , so complex , drawing on so many different disciplines...ELLIE ... would be impossible.KITZImpossible ?
Impossible ? Is there anyone who might have been up to the challenge ?
Someone with extraordinary technical expertise .
Enormous financial resources .
Someone perverse enough , eccentric enough to have come up with the idea in the first place ? ELLIEHadden ? KITZS .
R. Hadden.ELLIEYou 're implying that this was all some kind of a hoax , that he engineered this.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To give skeptics a harder time being skeptics about this?
I am not one of the hoax believers, even though I am naturally skeptical to all things space and military we are told about, given the rich history of fuckups and coverups of these fuckups, but you have got to admit that in this age where its getting hard to tell in the movies what has been cg-enerated and what was in fact real, a bunch of pictures supposedly from the Moon will not proove ANYTHING to either hoax believers or those who believe we landed there.
If anything, more scrutiny will be asked for with regard to photo material, to which bizarre rules will or will not apply ("no, you cannot have original data!
" -NASA)For this reason, I would say the only way the public would actually accept "public" photograph data as real deal, is if NASA "open-sourced" spacecraft broadcasting interface - frequencies, protocol, encoding, where to set up a dish, size of dish required - so that whoever actually doubts the authencity of such photos, may instead doubt whether NASA is faking a signal from the Moon that carries digital image data.
After all, if the information is pubic, it is public.
Nothing in the transmission is really secret or falls under NDA anyway?
It involves radio waves, some archaic encoding scheme of some color channels and a wrapping protocol for transmission.
The open-sourcing of the transmission would force the hoax game onto a whole new level of complexity, where it would not be so easy for the skeptics to cry fake.From the movie "Contact":KITZOh, I do think you may have suffered some kind of episode, yeah.
I do.
Doctor, I'd like to propose an alternate hypothesis, if I may, and I'd like you to bring your considerable scientific expertise to bear on it.
To fake a signal from Vega, what would you need?ELLIEYou would need a satellite to transmit the signal, but it would be impossible to simulate something...KITZ ...you would need a satellite, and you would need launch capabilities to put the satellite into orbit.
And of course the message itself.
To put something like this together, so complex, drawing on so many different disciplines...ELLIE ... would be impossible.KITZImpossible?
Impossible? Is there anyone who might have been up to the challenge?
Someone with extraordinary technical expertise.
Enormous financial resources.
Someone perverse enough, eccentric enough to have come up with the idea in the first place?ELLIEHadden?KITZS.
R. Hadden.ELLIEYou're implying that this was all some kind of a hoax, that he engineered this...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28552197</id>
	<title>Re:pics and it still didn't happen</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246454340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>"laughing my * off"</p></div></blockquote><p>Laughing your <i>what</i> off?  Your left big toe?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" laughing my * off " Laughing your what off ?
Your left big toe ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"laughing my * off"Laughing your what off?
Your left big toe?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550213</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28553395</id>
	<title>Re:pics and it still didn't happen</title>
	<author>DrDitto</author>
	<datestamp>1246463940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I went to graduate school at a well-regarded Computer Science department.  The moon landings came up in conversation before class started.  Nearly every student from India thought they were faked.  I was disgusted.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I went to graduate school at a well-regarded Computer Science department .
The moon landings came up in conversation before class started .
Nearly every student from India thought they were faked .
I was disgusted .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I went to graduate school at a well-regarded Computer Science department.
The moon landings came up in conversation before class started.
Nearly every student from India thought they were faked.
I was disgusted.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549951</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28551987</id>
	<title>Re:God dammit</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246453140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why didn't you bother to read what he said before commenting??</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why did n't you bother to read what he said before commenting ?
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why didn't you bother to read what he said before commenting?
?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550665</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28553027</id>
	<title>Re:That's cool and all</title>
	<author>ModernGeek</author>
	<datestamp>1246460640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I wouldn't give them the honour that comes with the title, "theorists".  "Nut jobs" is much better.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I would n't give them the honour that comes with the title , " theorists " .
" Nut jobs " is much better .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wouldn't give them the honour that comes with the title, "theorists".
"Nut jobs" is much better.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549759</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549999</id>
	<title>Lunar ruins</title>
	<author>Nonillion</author>
	<datestamp>1246443780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><b>"Just reading the summery makes me worried about the slew of "Moon landing never happened!" posts that are on the way"</b></p><p>As for me, I think we <b>did</b> go to the moon. However I feel that these so called images will be doctored to remove evidence of the alleged <b>"ruins"</b> that are littered across its surface..</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Just reading the summery makes me worried about the slew of " Moon landing never happened !
" posts that are on the way " As for me , I think we did go to the moon .
However I feel that these so called images will be doctored to remove evidence of the alleged " ruins " that are littered across its surface. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Just reading the summery makes me worried about the slew of "Moon landing never happened!
" posts that are on the way"As for me, I think we did go to the moon.
However I feel that these so called images will be doctored to remove evidence of the alleged "ruins" that are littered across its surface..</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550233</id>
	<title>The "moon" - a ridiculous liberal myth</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246444680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It amazes me that so many allegedly "educated" people have fallen so quickly and so hard for a fraudulent fabrication of such laughable proportions. The very idea that a gigantic ball of rock happens to orbit our planet, showing itself in neat, four-week cycles -- with the same side facing us all the time -- is ludicrous. Furthermore, it is an insult to common sense and a damnable affront to intellectual honesty and integrity. That people actually believe it is evidence that the liberals have wrested the last vestiges of control of our public school system from decent, God-fearing Americans (as if any further evidence was needed! Daddy's Roommate? God Almighty!)</p><p>Documentaries such as Enemy of the State have accurately portrayed the elaborate, byzantine network of surveillance satellites that the liberals have sent into space to spy on law-abiding Americans. Equipped with technology developed by Handgun Control, Inc., these satellites have the ability to detect firearms from hundreds of kilometers up. That's right, neighbors<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.. the next time you're out in the backyard exercising your Second Amendment rights, the liberals will see it! These satellites are sensitive enough to tell the difference between a Colt<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.45 and a<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.38 Special! And when they detect you with a firearm, their computers cross-reference the address to figure out your name, and then an enormous database housed at Berkeley is updated with information about you.</p><p>Of course, this all works fine during the day, but what about at night? Even the liberals can't control the rotation of the Earth to prevent nightfall from setting in (only Joshua was able to ask for that particular favor!) That's where the "moon" comes in. Powered by nuclear reactors, the "moon" is nothing more than an enormous balloon, emitting trillions of candlepower of gun-revealing light. Piloted by key members of the liberal community, the "moon" is strategically moved across the country, pointing out those who dare to make use of their God-given rights at night!</p><p>Yes, I know this probably sounds paranoid and preposterous, but consider this. Despite what the revisionist historians tell you, there is no mention of the "moon" anywhere in literature or historical documents -- anywhere -- before 1950. That is when it was initially launched. When President Josef Kennedy, at the State of the Union address, proclaimed "We choose to go to the moon", he may as well have said "We choose to go to the weather balloon." The subsequent faking of a "moon" landing on national TV was the first step in a long history of the erosion of our constitutional rights by leftists in this country. No longer can we hide from our government when the sun goes down.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It amazes me that so many allegedly " educated " people have fallen so quickly and so hard for a fraudulent fabrication of such laughable proportions .
The very idea that a gigantic ball of rock happens to orbit our planet , showing itself in neat , four-week cycles -- with the same side facing us all the time -- is ludicrous .
Furthermore , it is an insult to common sense and a damnable affront to intellectual honesty and integrity .
That people actually believe it is evidence that the liberals have wrested the last vestiges of control of our public school system from decent , God-fearing Americans ( as if any further evidence was needed !
Daddy 's Roommate ?
God Almighty !
) Documentaries such as Enemy of the State have accurately portrayed the elaborate , byzantine network of surveillance satellites that the liberals have sent into space to spy on law-abiding Americans .
Equipped with technology developed by Handgun Control , Inc. , these satellites have the ability to detect firearms from hundreds of kilometers up .
That 's right , neighbors .. the next time you 're out in the backyard exercising your Second Amendment rights , the liberals will see it !
These satellites are sensitive enough to tell the difference between a Colt .45 and a .38 Special !
And when they detect you with a firearm , their computers cross-reference the address to figure out your name , and then an enormous database housed at Berkeley is updated with information about you.Of course , this all works fine during the day , but what about at night ?
Even the liberals ca n't control the rotation of the Earth to prevent nightfall from setting in ( only Joshua was able to ask for that particular favor !
) That 's where the " moon " comes in .
Powered by nuclear reactors , the " moon " is nothing more than an enormous balloon , emitting trillions of candlepower of gun-revealing light .
Piloted by key members of the liberal community , the " moon " is strategically moved across the country , pointing out those who dare to make use of their God-given rights at night ! Yes , I know this probably sounds paranoid and preposterous , but consider this .
Despite what the revisionist historians tell you , there is no mention of the " moon " anywhere in literature or historical documents -- anywhere -- before 1950 .
That is when it was initially launched .
When President Josef Kennedy , at the State of the Union address , proclaimed " We choose to go to the moon " , he may as well have said " We choose to go to the weather balloon .
" The subsequent faking of a " moon " landing on national TV was the first step in a long history of the erosion of our constitutional rights by leftists in this country .
No longer can we hide from our government when the sun goes down .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It amazes me that so many allegedly "educated" people have fallen so quickly and so hard for a fraudulent fabrication of such laughable proportions.
The very idea that a gigantic ball of rock happens to orbit our planet, showing itself in neat, four-week cycles -- with the same side facing us all the time -- is ludicrous.
Furthermore, it is an insult to common sense and a damnable affront to intellectual honesty and integrity.
That people actually believe it is evidence that the liberals have wrested the last vestiges of control of our public school system from decent, God-fearing Americans (as if any further evidence was needed!
Daddy's Roommate?
God Almighty!
)Documentaries such as Enemy of the State have accurately portrayed the elaborate, byzantine network of surveillance satellites that the liberals have sent into space to spy on law-abiding Americans.
Equipped with technology developed by Handgun Control, Inc., these satellites have the ability to detect firearms from hundreds of kilometers up.
That's right, neighbors .. the next time you're out in the backyard exercising your Second Amendment rights, the liberals will see it!
These satellites are sensitive enough to tell the difference between a Colt .45 and a .38 Special!
And when they detect you with a firearm, their computers cross-reference the address to figure out your name, and then an enormous database housed at Berkeley is updated with information about you.Of course, this all works fine during the day, but what about at night?
Even the liberals can't control the rotation of the Earth to prevent nightfall from setting in (only Joshua was able to ask for that particular favor!
) That's where the "moon" comes in.
Powered by nuclear reactors, the "moon" is nothing more than an enormous balloon, emitting trillions of candlepower of gun-revealing light.
Piloted by key members of the liberal community, the "moon" is strategically moved across the country, pointing out those who dare to make use of their God-given rights at night!Yes, I know this probably sounds paranoid and preposterous, but consider this.
Despite what the revisionist historians tell you, there is no mention of the "moon" anywhere in literature or historical documents -- anywhere -- before 1950.
That is when it was initially launched.
When President Josef Kennedy, at the State of the Union address, proclaimed "We choose to go to the moon", he may as well have said "We choose to go to the weather balloon.
" The subsequent faking of a "moon" landing on national TV was the first step in a long history of the erosion of our constitutional rights by leftists in this country.
No longer can we hide from our government when the sun goes down.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28560051</id>
	<title>Godwin on the moon</title>
	<author>halber\_mensch</author>
	<datestamp>1246558380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hopefully the orbiter will discover the lair of the <a href="http://www.ironsky.net/" title="ironsky.net">Nazis on the moon</a> [ironsky.net] and we can launch a preemptive nuclear strike before they come back in 2018.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hopefully the orbiter will discover the lair of the Nazis on the moon [ ironsky.net ] and we can launch a preemptive nuclear strike before they come back in 2018 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hopefully the orbiter will discover the lair of the Nazis on the moon [ironsky.net] and we can launch a preemptive nuclear strike before they come back in 2018.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28553039</id>
	<title>Kinda like that Metric System Scam</title>
	<author>Macrat</author>
	<datestamp>1246460700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/07/01/feehery.franken/index.html</p><p>"(CNN) -- The metric system is the kind of thing that you can expect from the 60-vote filibuster-proof majority Democrats now have in the United States Senate."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/07/01/feehery.franken/index.html " ( CNN ) -- The metric system is the kind of thing that you can expect from the 60-vote filibuster-proof majority Democrats now have in the United States Senate .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/07/01/feehery.franken/index.html"(CNN) -- The metric system is the kind of thing that you can expect from the 60-vote filibuster-proof majority Democrats now have in the United States Senate.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28553595</id>
	<title>Re:Like Paul Revere's Ride</title>
	<author>arthurpaliden</author>
	<datestamp>1246465680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Most people know the poem and the myths but few people know the real facts.  If we never go back, the moon landings may well be remembered in the same way.  Mind you I think we will be going back since we will be needing the uranium that has been discovered there.  Well at least the Chinese will since they are the ones that are building the most reactors in the near term.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Most people know the poem and the myths but few people know the real facts .
If we never go back , the moon landings may well be remembered in the same way .
Mind you I think we will be going back since we will be needing the uranium that has been discovered there .
Well at least the Chinese will since they are the ones that are building the most reactors in the near term .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most people know the poem and the myths but few people know the real facts.
If we never go back, the moon landings may well be remembered in the same way.
Mind you I think we will be going back since we will be needing the uranium that has been discovered there.
Well at least the Chinese will since they are the ones that are building the most reactors in the near term.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28551191</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549789</id>
	<title>Re:pics and it still didn't happen</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246443120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>NO THEY WERE NOT! I know that fer sure, because my mother's uncle's niece knew someone who worked in the studio where they staged the whole thing.</p><p>Besides, I can tell that the pictures from the Lunar whatever are doctored even before seeing them. You can see it if you look at the pixels. Anyone who has used photoshop will know that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>NO THEY WERE NOT !
I know that fer sure , because my mother 's uncle 's niece knew someone who worked in the studio where they staged the whole thing.Besides , I can tell that the pictures from the Lunar whatever are doctored even before seeing them .
You can see it if you look at the pixels .
Anyone who has used photoshop will know that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>NO THEY WERE NOT!
I know that fer sure, because my mother's uncle's niece knew someone who worked in the studio where they staged the whole thing.Besides, I can tell that the pictures from the Lunar whatever are doctored even before seeing them.
You can see it if you look at the pixels.
Anyone who has used photoshop will know that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549699</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550599</id>
	<title>Re:Google moon?</title>
	<author>QuantumG</author>
	<datestamp>1246446180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>actually yes, Google will be integrating the LRO data into Google Moon in realtime.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>actually yes , Google will be integrating the LRO data into Google Moon in realtime .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>actually yes, Google will be integrating the LRO data into Google Moon in realtime.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549887</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549951</id>
	<title>Re:pics and it still didn't happen</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246443600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I also believe that nothing short of dragging the conspiracy nuts up to the moon themselves will convince them of the fact. Maybe not even that.</p></div></blockquote><p>

How many such people actually exist?  With every slashdot article mentioning the moon landings, there is a great uproar about these heretics.  I'm sure they exist, but I've never met one, nor do I recall even reading a post from one on slashdot.  It makes me wonder why these people (whoever they are) get under people's skin so much.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I also believe that nothing short of dragging the conspiracy nuts up to the moon themselves will convince them of the fact .
Maybe not even that .
How many such people actually exist ?
With every slashdot article mentioning the moon landings , there is a great uproar about these heretics .
I 'm sure they exist , but I 've never met one , nor do I recall even reading a post from one on slashdot .
It makes me wonder why these people ( whoever they are ) get under people 's skin so much .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I also believe that nothing short of dragging the conspiracy nuts up to the moon themselves will convince them of the fact.
Maybe not even that.
How many such people actually exist?
With every slashdot article mentioning the moon landings, there is a great uproar about these heretics.
I'm sure they exist, but I've never met one, nor do I recall even reading a post from one on slashdot.
It makes me wonder why these people (whoever they are) get under people's skin so much.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549699</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549919</id>
	<title>tourism?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246443480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>so....the primary focus of this mission is checking out the trash we left 40 years ago?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>so....the primary focus of this mission is checking out the trash we left 40 years ago ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>so....the primary focus of this mission is checking out the trash we left 40 years ago?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28553279</id>
	<title>Re:God dammit</title>
	<author>Citizen of Earth</author>
	<datestamp>1246462620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The conspiracy nuts will just say that the photos of the landing site have been altered to include the equipment.  Hell, they might just say that this whole mission is fake.  And that everything is fake.  An that they themselves are fake.  And that this is all a dre*pop*</htmltext>
<tokenext>The conspiracy nuts will just say that the photos of the landing site have been altered to include the equipment .
Hell , they might just say that this whole mission is fake .
And that everything is fake .
An that they themselves are fake .
And that this is all a dre * pop *</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The conspiracy nuts will just say that the photos of the landing site have been altered to include the equipment.
Hell, they might just say that this whole mission is fake.
And that everything is fake.
An that they themselves are fake.
And that this is all a dre*pop*</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550195</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28552797</id>
	<title>Re:How about open-sourcing the transmission instea</title>
	<author>rlseaman</author>
	<datestamp>1246459020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <i>"the only way the public would actually accept "public" photograph data as real deal, is if NASA "open-sourced" spacecraft broadcasting interface - frequencies, protocol, encoding, where to set up a dish, size of dish required"</i> </p><p>Open source is the wrong term, of course, but none of this information is hidden away:  <a href="http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewsr.html?pid=16926" title="spaceref.com">http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewsr.html?pid=16926</a> [spaceref.com]  The inverse-square law ensures that you need a very large antenna beyond Low Earth Orbit, but the public has been eavesdropping on satellites since Sputnik.  In this case, just point the antenna at the Moon<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</p><p> <i>KITZ<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... To fake a signal from Vega, what would you need?  [...]  you would need a satellite, and you would need launch capabilities to put the satellite into orbit. And of course the message itself. To put something like this together, so complex, drawing on so many different disciplines...</i></p><p> <i>ELLIE<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... would be impossible.</i></p><p>Actually it would most definitely be impossible.  The parallax of Vega is a bit over a tenth arcsecond.  This is straightforward to measure with 19th century technology.  More to the point, any spacecraft of Earth origin will be much, much (much, much (much, much)) closer than Vega.  Simple trigonometry would reveal the scale of the distance to the origin of the signal with zero chance of being spoofed.  This is the antithesis of any Moon Hoax.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" the only way the public would actually accept " public " photograph data as real deal , is if NASA " open-sourced " spacecraft broadcasting interface - frequencies , protocol , encoding , where to set up a dish , size of dish required " Open source is the wrong term , of course , but none of this information is hidden away : http : //www.spaceref.com/news/viewsr.html ? pid = 16926 [ spaceref.com ] The inverse-square law ensures that you need a very large antenna beyond Low Earth Orbit , but the public has been eavesdropping on satellites since Sputnik .
In this case , just point the antenna at the Moon : - ) KITZ ... To fake a signal from Vega , what would you need ?
[ ... ] you would need a satellite , and you would need launch capabilities to put the satellite into orbit .
And of course the message itself .
To put something like this together , so complex , drawing on so many different disciplines... ELLIE ... would be impossible.Actually it would most definitely be impossible .
The parallax of Vega is a bit over a tenth arcsecond .
This is straightforward to measure with 19th century technology .
More to the point , any spacecraft of Earth origin will be much , much ( much , much ( much , much ) ) closer than Vega .
Simple trigonometry would reveal the scale of the distance to the origin of the signal with zero chance of being spoofed .
This is the antithesis of any Moon Hoax .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> "the only way the public would actually accept "public" photograph data as real deal, is if NASA "open-sourced" spacecraft broadcasting interface - frequencies, protocol, encoding, where to set up a dish, size of dish required" Open source is the wrong term, of course, but none of this information is hidden away:  http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewsr.html?pid=16926 [spaceref.com]  The inverse-square law ensures that you need a very large antenna beyond Low Earth Orbit, but the public has been eavesdropping on satellites since Sputnik.
In this case, just point the antenna at the Moon :-) KITZ ... To fake a signal from Vega, what would you need?
[...]  you would need a satellite, and you would need launch capabilities to put the satellite into orbit.
And of course the message itself.
To put something like this together, so complex, drawing on so many different disciplines... ELLIE ... would be impossible.Actually it would most definitely be impossible.
The parallax of Vega is a bit over a tenth arcsecond.
This is straightforward to measure with 19th century technology.
More to the point, any spacecraft of Earth origin will be much, much (much, much (much, much)) closer than Vega.
Simple trigonometry would reveal the scale of the distance to the origin of the signal with zero chance of being spoofed.
This is the antithesis of any Moon Hoax.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550997</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550665</id>
	<title>Re:God dammit</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246446360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What makes you think the deniers will accept pictures as proof? They'll just cry that they are photoshopped.</htmltext>
<tokenext>What makes you think the deniers will accept pictures as proof ?
They 'll just cry that they are photoshopped .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What makes you think the deniers will accept pictures as proof?
They'll just cry that they are photoshopped.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550195</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28555017</id>
	<title>Images of Apollo Landing Sites Already Available</title>
	<author>multi io</author>
	<datestamp>1246525860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Images of the Apollo landing sites are already available by the thousands, shot from just a few meters away, with the "artifacts" covering not just a few pixels, but a few tens of thousands of pixels. Whoever believes that all those pictures were faked up 20 years before Photoshop was even invented isn't going to believe that NASA images made 20 years *after* Photoshop was invented, and in which the artifacts cover just a few pixels, are not doctored.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Images of the Apollo landing sites are already available by the thousands , shot from just a few meters away , with the " artifacts " covering not just a few pixels , but a few tens of thousands of pixels .
Whoever believes that all those pictures were faked up 20 years before Photoshop was even invented is n't going to believe that NASA images made 20 years * after * Photoshop was invented , and in which the artifacts cover just a few pixels , are not doctored .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Images of the Apollo landing sites are already available by the thousands, shot from just a few meters away, with the "artifacts" covering not just a few pixels, but a few tens of thousands of pixels.
Whoever believes that all those pictures were faked up 20 years before Photoshop was even invented isn't going to believe that NASA images made 20 years *after* Photoshop was invented, and in which the artifacts cover just a few pixels, are not doctored.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550743</id>
	<title>Re:God dammit</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246446780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We've had proof for a long time. The nutjobs just don't want to believe it. For one thing, they left reflectors on the moon that can bounce back laser signals. <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VmVxSFnjYCA" title="youtube.com">Mythbusters even did it.</a> [youtube.com]</p><p>I'm sure the nutjobs will find some excuse not to believe this too.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We 've had proof for a long time .
The nutjobs just do n't want to believe it .
For one thing , they left reflectors on the moon that can bounce back laser signals .
Mythbusters even did it .
[ youtube.com ] I 'm sure the nutjobs will find some excuse not to believe this too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We've had proof for a long time.
The nutjobs just don't want to believe it.
For one thing, they left reflectors on the moon that can bounce back laser signals.
Mythbusters even did it.
[youtube.com]I'm sure the nutjobs will find some excuse not to believe this too.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550195</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28552201</id>
	<title>Re:God dammit</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246454340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Those reflectors could have been placed without humans going there. Also, why should we believe what we see in NASA pictures of the moon landing site? It'd be more convincing if another country showed us the pix.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Those reflectors could have been placed without humans going there .
Also , why should we believe what we see in NASA pictures of the moon landing site ?
It 'd be more convincing if another country showed us the pix .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Those reflectors could have been placed without humans going there.
Also, why should we believe what we see in NASA pictures of the moon landing site?
It'd be more convincing if another country showed us the pix.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550743</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550609</id>
	<title>And What If...</title>
	<author>Nom du Keyboard</author>
	<datestamp>1246446240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>And what if it doesn't find anything? Did we not do it, or did the aliens steal it afterwards for recycling?<br> <br>
The funniest result of this would be if they found it, but not where the astronauts actually thought they landed.<br> <br>
And while it's up there mapping, can it find that B-17 on the Moon that I saw the pictures of decades ago?</htmltext>
<tokenext>And what if it does n't find anything ?
Did we not do it , or did the aliens steal it afterwards for recycling ?
The funniest result of this would be if they found it , but not where the astronauts actually thought they landed .
And while it 's up there mapping , can it find that B-17 on the Moon that I saw the pictures of decades ago ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And what if it doesn't find anything?
Did we not do it, or did the aliens steal it afterwards for recycling?
The funniest result of this would be if they found it, but not where the astronauts actually thought they landed.
And while it's up there mapping, can it find that B-17 on the Moon that I saw the pictures of decades ago?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28554839</id>
	<title>Re:pics and it still didn't happen</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1246567080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No. You don't understand their logic. Nothing will work on them. They can always say that you staged it all for them. That you tricked their senses. Etc. Always! ^^</p><p>The problem here is, that their indicator of trust is defective. Which does not surprise me at all, considering how much you can get tricked by assholes, scammers, partners, the government, companies, etc.<br>So you have to work on fixing that indicator, if you really want them to believe it.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p><p>Of course, you have no right to do this, without their consent. And doing without asking them, actually proves their view of not trusting you. ^^</p><p>So you have to</p><p>1. Win their trust. Really. Deeply.<br>2. Use this trust to get their consent, to fix the indicator, in case it were wrong.<br>3. Fix the indicator.<br>Only then can you finally show them what you call proof, and expect them to believe it.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No .
You do n't understand their logic .
Nothing will work on them .
They can always say that you staged it all for them .
That you tricked their senses .
Etc. Always !
^ ^ The problem here is , that their indicator of trust is defective .
Which does not surprise me at all , considering how much you can get tricked by assholes , scammers , partners , the government , companies , etc.So you have to work on fixing that indicator , if you really want them to believe it .
: ) Of course , you have no right to do this , without their consent .
And doing without asking them , actually proves their view of not trusting you .
^ ^ So you have to1 .
Win their trust .
Really. Deeply.2 .
Use this trust to get their consent , to fix the indicator , in case it were wrong.3 .
Fix the indicator.Only then can you finally show them what you call proof , and expect them to believe it .
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No.
You don't understand their logic.
Nothing will work on them.
They can always say that you staged it all for them.
That you tricked their senses.
Etc. Always!
^^The problem here is, that their indicator of trust is defective.
Which does not surprise me at all, considering how much you can get tricked by assholes, scammers, partners, the government, companies, etc.So you have to work on fixing that indicator, if you really want them to believe it.
:)Of course, you have no right to do this, without their consent.
And doing without asking them, actually proves their view of not trusting you.
^^So you have to1.
Win their trust.
Really. Deeply.2.
Use this trust to get their consent, to fix the indicator, in case it were wrong.3.
Fix the indicator.Only then can you finally show them what you call proof, and expect them to believe it.
:)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549699</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28551191</id>
	<title>By 2080, nobody alive will have witnessed it</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246448880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>BY 2080, nobody alive will have seen first-hand the media coverage of the Apollo landings.   Heck, I was born in 1970 and I don't remember them even though they happened when I was alive.</p><p>Anyway, there will come a time when nobody will have first hand memories of the event.  The only memories will be those gleaned from videos, reading about it, etc.  At some point, the fact that it happened will change from a fact into just something people have read about or heard about.</p><p>Eventually many of the people alive will doubt it ever happened at all because the story of the moon landings will have become indistinguishable from a fable.</p><p>Think about the war of 1812, or Columbus "discovering" America.  We have a pretty good idea these things happened.  But all we know about them is stuff we have read or heard.  We have also heard many works of fiction from those same times.   At some level, it's all similar.</p><p>This ignores the concept of revisiting the moon, which may or may not ever happen.  I have my doubts about NASA on this.  But if we ever do go back and build a city, then those people will doubt it was ever such a big deal.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>BY 2080 , nobody alive will have seen first-hand the media coverage of the Apollo landings .
Heck , I was born in 1970 and I do n't remember them even though they happened when I was alive.Anyway , there will come a time when nobody will have first hand memories of the event .
The only memories will be those gleaned from videos , reading about it , etc .
At some point , the fact that it happened will change from a fact into just something people have read about or heard about.Eventually many of the people alive will doubt it ever happened at all because the story of the moon landings will have become indistinguishable from a fable.Think about the war of 1812 , or Columbus " discovering " America .
We have a pretty good idea these things happened .
But all we know about them is stuff we have read or heard .
We have also heard many works of fiction from those same times .
At some level , it 's all similar.This ignores the concept of revisiting the moon , which may or may not ever happen .
I have my doubts about NASA on this .
But if we ever do go back and build a city , then those people will doubt it was ever such a big deal .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>BY 2080, nobody alive will have seen first-hand the media coverage of the Apollo landings.
Heck, I was born in 1970 and I don't remember them even though they happened when I was alive.Anyway, there will come a time when nobody will have first hand memories of the event.
The only memories will be those gleaned from videos, reading about it, etc.
At some point, the fact that it happened will change from a fact into just something people have read about or heard about.Eventually many of the people alive will doubt it ever happened at all because the story of the moon landings will have become indistinguishable from a fable.Think about the war of 1812, or Columbus "discovering" America.
We have a pretty good idea these things happened.
But all we know about them is stuff we have read or heard.
We have also heard many works of fiction from those same times.
At some level, it's all similar.This ignores the concept of revisiting the moon, which may or may not ever happen.
I have my doubts about NASA on this.
But if we ever do go back and build a city, then those people will doubt it was ever such a big deal.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549699
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550911
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549637
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550195
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28555649
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549759
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28553027
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28551191
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28554799
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549933
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550943
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549699
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549951
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28551227
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549637
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549967
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_71</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550109
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550669
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_73</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549887
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550703
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549699
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28559185
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549699
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28553737
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549699
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549951
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550207
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549637
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550195
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550743
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28551935
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_72</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549699
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549951
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28552413
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549699
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549951
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550337
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549699
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550627
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549699
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28555003
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549699
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549951
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550213
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28552197
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549637
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550195
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550665
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28551987
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549637
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550195
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550743
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28552547
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549699
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549951
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28556007
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549887
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550599
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549699
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549951
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550945
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549699
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550065
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28551191
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28565359
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550233
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28551569
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549699
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550149
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549637
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550195
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28558497
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549637
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550195
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550665
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28552673
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549637
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550195
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28552025
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549699
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550661
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549637
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550195
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550743
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28552551
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28555973
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549681
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28556329
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_77</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549637
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550195
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550743
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28552201
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549699
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549789
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549699
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549951
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28560015
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_76</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549637
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28554475
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549699
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28555625
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549699
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549907
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_70</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549699
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549951
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28551331
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549637
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550195
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28561181
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_69</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550997
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28552797
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549637
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28554715
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549637
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550195
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28554805
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549637
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550687
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549699
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549951
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28553395
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549637
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550345
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549887
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28551887
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549759
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550811
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_75</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549637
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28558075
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550233
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28559335
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549637
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550195
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550495
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28552051
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549637
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550195
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550869
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549699
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549951
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28554777
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549637
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550195
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28556451
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549699
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549951
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28552015
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549699
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549951
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28555281
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549637
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28551559
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549699
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28555373
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549637
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550195
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550743
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28554809
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28551191
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28553595
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549699
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28554729
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549637
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28557857
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549637
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549709
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549637
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550195
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28553279
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28556371
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549637
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28551173
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549699
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550433
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549637
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550195
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550665
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28562037
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549637
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550195
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550743
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28552277
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549699
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28554839
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549637
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550195
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28553279
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28556607
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550997
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28555363
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549637
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550195
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28551147
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549637
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550195
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550699
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_74</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549681
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550645
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549637
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550195
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550743
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28552901
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549637
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550195
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550743
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28553689
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_01_2058202_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549637
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550195
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550743
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28552063
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_2058202.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549919
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_2058202.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549665
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_2058202.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28552587
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_2058202.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549759
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28553027
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550811
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_2058202.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549887
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28551887
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550599
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550703
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_2058202.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550355
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_2058202.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549915
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_2058202.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549657
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_2058202.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549895
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_2058202.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28551191
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28554799
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28553595
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28565359
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_2058202.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550375
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_2058202.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549933
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550943
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_2058202.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550109
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550669
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_2058202.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550233
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28551569
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28559335
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_2058202.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550997
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28555363
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28552797
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_2058202.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549681
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28556329
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550645
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_2058202.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549699
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550065
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28555373
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28555003
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549951
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28551227
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550213
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28552197
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550945
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28560015
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28551331
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28553395
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550207
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550337
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28552413
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28556007
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28554777
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28552015
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28555281
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28554839
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550149
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28559185
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28555625
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550661
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549907
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28554729
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549789
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550911
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550433
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28553737
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550627
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_2058202.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549637
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550687
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28557857
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549709
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28551173
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28554715
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549967
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28554475
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550195
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550665
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28552673
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28551987
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28562037
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28556451
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550495
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28552051
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550699
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28552025
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550743
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28552551
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28555973
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28552901
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28551935
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28552547
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28552201
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28552063
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28552277
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28553689
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28554809
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28554805
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28551147
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550869
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28558497
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28553279
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28556371
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28556607
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28555649
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28561181
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28551559
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28550345
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28558075
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_01_2058202.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_01_2058202.28549999
</commentlist>
</conversation>
