Huh? The live television broadcast did not run for "hours".
Your statement is ambiguous. You say it started before breakfast and television broadcast (via Parkes) started just before lunch and fail to say when you stop watching or when it ended for you.
How hard is it for you to pay attention to something written on the same page you're replying to?
Without any accuracy and specificity in your response my level of attention is irrelevant. "did not run for hours" implies sometime less than 1 hour and 59 minutes, before breakfast to just before lunch implies at least 3 hours, even though you didn't connect the two statements. Therefore, based on the information you supplied, I can imply that you watched it for between 1 and 119 minutes. How long you watched and listened to whatever broadcasts were made was what I was interested in.
From the wiki:
Apollo 11 was the spaceflight that landed the first humans on the Moon, Americans Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin, on July 20, 1969, at 20:18 UTC. Armstrong became the first to step onto the lunar surface six hours later on July 21 at 02:56 UTC. Armstrong spent about two and a half hours outside the spacecraft, Aldrin slightly less
The people I am talking about took the *entire* day off to watch and listen to *everything*. From the duration of the mission on the moon perhaps more than two hours was broadcast from the surface of the moon. Maybe they saw something you did not *see* or *listen* to or it was an earlier broadcast, considering the duration of the landing. I was simply giving you the benefit of the doubt with your answer. As I said, I'm not committed to any opinion on the matter, I was just wondering what other people saw and heard and you have told me that so thank you.
Do you even think about the things you say? Them words have meanings - have you considered that and what they mean? It's a rhetorical question.
Yes. I considered that now-a-days, instead of calling you a 'fucken little smart arse' and giving you a slap in the head, they medicate you and fuck your head instead. It wasn't about you.
Undoubtedly you don't like "smart arses" and prefer the company of the opposite - for obvious reasons - given that the opposite of a smart arse is a dumb prick.
Sometimes smart arses are entertaining. The opposite could also be a dumb cunt, a smart cunt or a dick head, however the obvious the reason appears to be you taking the conversation too seriously. Again, not having a go at you.
That must of been a slow news day....
yes, they were slow news days, I was incredibly fortunate that no-one had anything better to do, than me.
Because they're both competing for election funding from the same business interests? According to the AEC the party who spends the most gets the most votes.
Agree, I was speculating about the motives.
It's a conspiracy if you don't know about it
Indeed, so I generally focus on the the things I can do something about. Unfortunately the general public's apathy isn't a problem I can solve.