How about the battery technology along with mechanical cameras operating in temperature ranging from -150 to 250f.
More likely somewhere in the middle. They didn't conduct the mission in the lunar night. And they didn't conduct it at lunar high noon:
"The NASA Apollo missions landed at six sites on the Moon between 1969 and 1972. As seen in this visualization, all of the sites are near the equator on the near side (the side facing the Earth), and all of the landings took place fairly soon after local sunrise, when the lunar surface was cool and the shadows threw the terrain into high relief, making navigation easier."
How about that the cameras were bolted to their chest and they couldn’t see the viewfinder but still managed to perfectly frame the photos, adjust F stop, focus and press the tiny shutter button with giant gloves on.
"Oh whoops we lost the original videotapes, telemetry tapes and blueprints."
We have tons of audio, video, and blueprints from the Apollo missions, retard. We lost a better version of the original moon landing -- which is a shame, but retards like you would claim it was fake anyways.
So how did they make a phone call to the president from the moon? How did they film the lunar lander taking off from the moon? how did pictures get back to earth and make into newspapers before the "astronauts" had even landed? And how did they survive the Van Allen radiation belt they didn't know existed? Asking for a spacefag friend
It's been 53 years and ALL technology across the board has advanced by leaps and bounds since the 60's. Why not simply prove his point by going to the moon and waving a flag?
How would doing what was done before prove anything to retarded monkeys? They reject ALL evidence, whether it is from the past or today. They even think we can't go to low Earth orbit, and they think the Mars rovers are fake.
In 1977 Voyager I was launched into space with a power supply that still works today, supposedly. Why didn't they simply put a powered light on the moon that could be seen when the moon is dark with either the naked eye or a small telescope? You know, some sort of evidence to prove, not people, but the ability of ANYONE to reach the moon and leave something there that can be seen by the average person. In all these years with all the niggress geniuses at NASA, absolutely no one ever considered coming up with a simple solution to prove to all people on earth that we can build machines to reach the moon?
In 1977 Voyager I was launched into space with a power supply that still works today, supposedly.
Powered by plutonium. Not fit for manned moon missions.
Why didn't they simply put a powered light on the moon that could be seen when the moon is dark with either the naked eye or a small telescope?
Because NASA didn't go to the moon to convince people who thought they were faking it. NASA did put a reflector on the moon which is used for science experiments, and it's still used for that purpose.
You know, some sort of evidence to prove, not people, but the ability of ANYONE to reach the moon and leave something there that can be seen by the average person. In all these years with all the niggress geniuses at NASA, absolutely no one ever considered coming up with a simple solution to prove to all people on earth that we can build machines to reach the moon?
Well you go further than even most people who think the manned moon landings were a hoax. Given the ample amounts of close-up video and multiple nations that have reached the moon, even among the hoaxers very few people claim that it can't be reached by autonomous vehicles. You guys are a tiny fringe among a fringe, and space agencies don't exist to satisfy your doubts.
That said, I think it would be pretty cool to draw a symbol that can be seen from Earth on the surface of the moon. Basically a "We Were Here" for mankind, should we disappear from existence.
"Plutonium" huh. So "Plutonium" can power something for 45 years. If they had it, they would have put a powered light on the moon, not a golfcart. Nothing would have solidified the moon landing more than a light. Although, that wouldn't prove people were there, only a machine. You know, like a machine that could place a shiny moon rock. A human hand doesn't have to place a reflector on the moon.
That said, I think it would be pretty cool to draw a symbol that can be seen from Earth on the surface of the moon. Basically a "We Were Here" for mankind, should we disappear from existence.
This sentence does more to solidify my point than any of your other ramblings. Do you seriously think nobody has had that exact same thought. Everyone, possibly even niggers, must have had that thought once. "We are Mankind, We were here", would be insanely bad ass. Everyone knows this. Yet they did and CONTINUE to do NOTHING, why?
If they had it, they would have put a powered light on the moon, not a golfcart.
Nobody important gives a fuck about putting a light on the moon to convince retarded monkeys.
A human hand doesn't have to place a reflector on the moon.
Yes, that's true. But I was ignoring that because you don't even think autonomous machines went there. Of course we have video of men on the moon, but there is absolutely zero evidence that satisfies retarded monkeys.
This sentence does more to solidify my point than any of your other ramblings.
A light on the moon would last decades, at most. I'm talking about something visible from Earth, plain as day, that would last the eons. Something that scale would take decades or centuries to achieve, and I'm sure there would be plenty of bickering that would ensure it would never happen -- at least not for the foreseeable future.
We have video of big spaceship chasing another spaceship over Tatooine. We have video of a huge monolith on the moon, recorded a year before "man walked on the moon". Are these events also true in your mind?
A year would have been more than enough to convince every man, woman, child and tranny on earth that, at a minimum, a machine was able to reach the moon and put a light on it. It just had to be bright enough to be seen with a small telescope during a new moon, possibly with the naked eye. This, with all their niggress scientists doing math, they couldn't figure out how to do, yet they did figure out how to get a golfcart on the moon?
We have video of big spaceship chasing another spaceship over Tatooine.
You can analyze any movie from that time period and see it's Hollywood. There's tons of unedited video from the moon that wouldn't hold up under the same scrutiny. Plus the number of people involved would be similar to making a Hollywood movie. It wouldn't have been kept secret.
A year would have been more than enough to convince every man, woman, child
You keep ignoring the main point: Nobody of importance gives a fuck about convincing retarded monkeys about whether we went to the moon. For the vast majority of people, video was more than enough.
So the government can't lie and cover things up because they simply can't stop enough people from talking, got it. What's your thoughts on the Holohoax, 9/11, weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and covid?
So the government can't lie and cover things up because they simply can't stop enough people from talking, got it.
Depends on the scale on what's being done. Do I think the huge team of engineers, movie production, managers, and all sorts of people involved would have kept their mouth shut to fake a moon landing for all these decades? No.
What's your thoughts on the Holohoax
Six million number is fabricated. Auschwitz has been thoroughly exposed as not being a death camp -- it literally was a work camp. But jews were rounded up and persecuted, many died from starvation and disease, and there's some credible evidence that there was some kind of termination program. I can believe a few million died, but who knows for sure.
9/11
Dancing Israelis are hard facts. To what extent things were allowed to happen, engineered, etc. is hard to say. I think the guys who hijacked the planes were legit Islamic terrorists.
weapons of mass destruction in Iraq
Exposed as non-existent. Are you arguing against yourself?
covid
Lab-leak theory credibly exposed. Lots of whistle-blowers on vaccines. NPCs can still believe mindless establishment narratives, but it's easy to see through.
Didn't Pettit say in an interview that it is currently impossible to return? I forget the precise reason he gave, but I specifically recall him saying something along these lines, i.e. we lack the technology to return. There are a lot of claims about what people are going to do, but like a good deal of the world-of-tomorrow material, promises and reality often don't line up. I'm not claiming to know anything about this coming trip, and I'm not saying it won't happen...but I've been listening to the media techno sweethearts like Musk promising things for years that are, today, still just one year away.
safety standards are way higher today. we could easily go to the moon today, but it would be too risky... back in the day, they just didnt care that theres a 50/50 chnace the whole thing blows up.
We are supposed to have lost the Columbia shuttle in 2003, a shuttle that was only used in Earth orbit for research mostly. That was a controversial event with a damning result in the subsequent investigation. It doesn't seem that event shut down the space program because of risk concerns, and the ISS is supposed to remain in operation for another 8 years or so.
I am also really skeptical about the 'back in the old days' claim that says NASA would have been really cavalier about space flight. That just defies common sense, and that's not to mention the intense scrutiny they faced after the Apollo 1 disaster, right on the damn launch pad. Any further disasters that would result from cavalier risk ignorance would have been the kind of publicity to shutter NASA entirely.
I do agree that a trip to the moon would have been unequivocally risky. Given that we had so many problems just getting a shuttle to get off the ground successfully, the probability calculations for exiting earth orbit, making it to the moon, and landing successfully, plus getting back off again for the trip back...well, you'd have to imagine the probability would be close to zero. We had how many trials, across how many years, just to get off the ground? Now we'd be talking about doing the rest of the mission (ya know, the more insane parts like successfully navigating 240k miles into space and landing on a lunar surface) right on the very first try!?
Nobody with an IQ consisting of three digits could possibly wager any of the astronauts on such a trip would make it out alive.
But hey, why not play golf on the surface and, while you're at it, feel glad that the NASA geniuses included a go-cart in the payload so you could have a little fun before your imminent death.
Don't forget the return rocket made of cardboard stuck together by scotch tape that made it through the radiation belts without so much as giving it's passengers the sniffles.
Just this YouTube guy sounds like that. I can't stand his voice either and it makes me pass on his videos but thinking a flag doesn't wave when you move it in space is fucking retarded (they don't understand physics if they think such BS). Not a good argument from the 'space is fake and gay' retards.
[ - ] HughBriss 1 point 1.9 yearsJun 14, 2022 20:47:51 ago (+2/-1)
The flag was reinforced on all four sides. It wouldn't flap in the wind like on Earth because it couldn't. What it did do, however, was wag about to and from when it was affected by the wind caused by studio fans. You can see that in other video that shows it moving even after the astronaut actor let it go. If there was 1/6 gravity, it would hang straight down and wouldn't move back and forth. Even 1/6 gravity means some gravity, and without air resistance, it wouldn't move back and forth constantly, as it did in the video.
It was only held on the top and on the pole. You have no idea what you're talking about. It was also made of thin plastic.
The footage does nothing but prove people landed on the moon. The hours of footage of movements of the astronauts and the dust they kicked up shows there was 1/6 gravity, and the dust mpvement shows there was NO atmosphere. There is no way to fake it. None. Stop embarrassing yourself.
They also brought a lot of lunar dust back. You can't just make that shit. It is lunar dust bombarded by solar wind for millions of years.
Lunar rocks are composed of rock from the early earth from over 3 billion years ago.
Guess a lot of fags believe in the Apollo moon landings happened, too. You know, most of the world saw through the televised moon landing theater when it happened and still don't believe the US ever put men on the moon. Cope and seethe with that. (By the that, you misspelled seethe.)
What will I find? Green cheese? A Futurama theme park? Hey, good telescopes are expensive, especially the lenses and eyepieces. How 'bout you send me one? Or maybe post pictures of what you think I should see to spare me the expense.
I'm open to having my mind changed, but as someone who knows about geology and the fact that actual moon rocks are given or lent out all the time to universities around the world, I'm going to bet you can't convince me.
I wasn't talking to you. I was talking to Nosferatjew. I'm not interested in changing your mind. I don't care about what you think. But if you're interested in butting in, tell me what I'll find if I get a telescope and look at the moon. That's what we were talking about, not alleged moon rocks.
There are limits to optics and the moon is way too far away to see even meter resolution from earth. The best modern spy satellites struggle to get 12" resolution from low earth orbit.
Some lunar meteorites and even a few Mars meteorites have been found. Those were burnt up meteorites though and not pristine samples like the hundreds of pounds brought back from the Apollo missions.
Robotic technology to do that in 1969 without humans landing wasn't available, still hasn't been done.
That is absolutely false. The Soviet Union sent two rovers, which they called tanks, to the moon. One took a sample and sent it back to earth for analysis.
They didn't have the technology to pick up rocks, but had the technology to launch humans through impossible to pass radiation belts and back again using spaceships made out of scotch tape and cardboard. Got it.
Unlike many/most conspiracy theories, you can see the evidence of the moon landings with your very own eyes, not by doing hours of in depth research online or at some library, or by talking to experts or scientists or witnesses, but instead simply by looking through a telescope pointed at the right spots on the moon. If the moon landings were fake, then why would they all be on the side of the moon facing earth, plainly visible to anyone who cares enough to take the time to literally see for themself? This is really one of, if not the dumbest of all conspiracy theories, even dumber than flat erf shit. I can't personally see the Earth from space, so I can't see that it is a sphere. I can make observations and calculation from the surface that prove that it's round, but I can't step back and see it clearly as the sphere that it is. The moon on the other hand is right fucking there. All I have to do is look at it through a sufficiently magnified optic, and blammo, proof. You don't even need to own a telescope to do this, all you need to do is find someone who owns a telescope, and say, "hey, wanna look at the moon through your telescope tonight?", and if you aren't a complete faggot retard towards them in general, they will probably say something along the lines of, "fuck yeah".
Now stop being such a fucking a faggot retard, and go look at the moon. Should be full, if not nearly full tonight.
I already told you. I'm not going to do that. I don't want to get a telescope (or borrow one) just to prove YOUR point. YOU post some pictures. So, in other word, pics or GTFO. You carry the burden of proof, not I. YOU show me what you want me to see.
There are still laser reflectors on the moon that amateurs with the right equipment can use to exactly measure the distance. The only still functioning experiments from the Apollo missions
He doesnt understand optics or the actual distance of the moon
No, he does not, and I knew that, but I wanted Nosferatjew to admit he was wrong about being able to see detail on the moon's surface with an ordinary telescope. From your article link:
"As you're well aware, no telescope on Earth can see the leftover descent stages of the Apollo Lunar Modules or anything else Apollo-related. Not even the Hubble Space Telescope can discern evidence of the Apollo landings. The laws of optics define its limits."
The footage does nothing but prove people landed on the moon. The hours of footage of movements of the astronauts and the dust they kicked up shows there was 1/6 gravity, and the dust mpvement shows there was NO atmosphere. There is no way to fake it. None. Stop embarrassing yourself.
They also brought a lot of lunar dust back. You can't just make that shit. It is lunar dust bombarded by solar wind for millions of years.
Stop embarrassing yourself. You have no idea what you're talking about.
You also have no idea how optics work or how far away the moon actually is. The drawings in your shitty highschool weren't to scale
I think your comment may have been for a different user, because I don't think the moon landing was fake, and have been defending its legitimacy in this thread.
[ + ]deleted
[ - ] deleted 10 points 1.9 yearsJun 14, 2022 18:17:41 ago (+13/-3)
[ + ] Unreasonable
[ - ] Unreasonable 6 points 1.9 yearsJun 14, 2022 19:54:09 ago (+7/-1)
[ + ] heroinwinsagain
[ - ] heroinwinsagain 2 points 1.9 yearsJun 14, 2022 22:34:38 ago (+3/-1)
[ + ] chrimony
[ - ] chrimony 0 points 1.9 yearsJun 15, 2022 00:23:45 ago (+0/-0)
More likely somewhere in the middle. They didn't conduct the mission in the lunar night. And they didn't conduct it at lunar high noon:
"The NASA Apollo missions landed at six sites on the Moon between 1969 and 1972. As seen in this visualization, all of the sites are near the equator on the near side (the side facing the Earth), and all of the landings took place fairly soon after local sunrise, when the lunar surface was cool and the shadows threw the terrain into high relief, making navigation easier."
https://moon.nasa.gov/resources/392/apollo-landing-sites-with-moon-phases/
[ + ] Unreasonable
[ - ] Unreasonable 0 points 1.9 yearsJun 15, 2022 09:20:15 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] chrimony
[ - ] chrimony -1 points 1.9 yearsJun 14, 2022 23:52:25 ago (+0/-1)
We have tons of audio, video, and blueprints from the Apollo missions, retard. We lost a better version of the original moon landing -- which is a shame, but retards like you would claim it was fake anyways.
[ + ] ItsOk2bArian
[ - ] ItsOk2bArian 2 points 1.9 yearsJun 15, 2022 04:33:47 ago (+2/-0)
[ + ] chrimony
[ - ] chrimony 0 points 1.9 yearsJun 15, 2022 08:29:00 ago (+0/-0)
They were in constant radio contact with mission control. It was routed through Houston:
https://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/houston/article/How-did-President-Richard-Nixon-place-a-phone-14108185.php
When given the command remotely (which was timed with takeoff), the camera would automatically tilt up:
https://gizmodo.com/how-nasa-captured-this-iconic-footage-of-apollo-17-leav-1671650186
They knew the Van Allen radiation belts existed. They mapped out a path to limit exposure:
https://cstuarthardwick.com/2017/05/24/apollo-astronauts-get-van-allen-belts/
The answers are there. Instead of just assuming man's greatest achievement is a hoax, you can look for the answers yourself.
[ + ] Clubberlang
[ - ] Clubberlang 6 points 1.9 yearsJun 14, 2022 21:06:07 ago (+6/-0)
[ + ] chrimony
[ - ] chrimony 0 points 1.9 yearsJun 14, 2022 23:46:00 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] SilentByAssociation
[ - ] SilentByAssociation 6 points 1.9 yearsJun 14, 2022 20:12:57 ago (+8/-2)
[ + ] Sleazy
[ - ] Sleazy 0 points 1.9 yearsJun 14, 2022 22:34:49 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] cyclops1771
[ - ] cyclops1771 4 points 1.9 yearsJun 14, 2022 19:39:59 ago (+7/-3)
[ + ] totes_magotes
[ - ] totes_magotes 0 points 1.9 yearsJun 14, 2022 20:01:14 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] PeckerwoodPerry
[ - ] PeckerwoodPerry 1 point 1.9 yearsJun 14, 2022 22:57:45 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] Swej_Ehtsag
[ - ] Swej_Ehtsag 3 points 1.9 yearsJun 14, 2022 20:54:46 ago (+4/-1)
[ + ] chrimony
[ - ] chrimony 0 points 1.9 yearsJun 14, 2022 23:49:17 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] Swej_Ehtsag
[ - ] Swej_Ehtsag 0 points 1.9 yearsJun 15, 2022 21:25:39 ago (+0/-0)*
[ + ] chrimony
[ - ] chrimony 0 points 1.9 yearsJun 15, 2022 22:58:06 ago (+0/-0)
Powered by plutonium. Not fit for manned moon missions.
Because NASA didn't go to the moon to convince people who thought they were faking it. NASA did put a reflector on the moon which is used for science experiments, and it's still used for that purpose.
Well you go further than even most people who think the manned moon landings were a hoax. Given the ample amounts of close-up video and multiple nations that have reached the moon, even among the hoaxers very few people claim that it can't be reached by autonomous vehicles. You guys are a tiny fringe among a fringe, and space agencies don't exist to satisfy your doubts.
That said, I think it would be pretty cool to draw a symbol that can be seen from Earth on the surface of the moon. Basically a "We Were Here" for mankind, should we disappear from existence.
[ + ] Swej_Ehtsag
[ - ] Swej_Ehtsag 0 points 1.9 yearsJun 16, 2022 01:46:08 ago (+0/-0)
This sentence does more to solidify my point than any of your other ramblings. Do you seriously think nobody has had that exact same thought. Everyone, possibly even niggers, must have had that thought once. "We are Mankind, We were here", would be insanely bad ass. Everyone knows this. Yet they did and CONTINUE to do NOTHING, why?
[ + ] chrimony
[ - ] chrimony 0 points 1.9 yearsJun 16, 2022 04:59:40 ago (+0/-0)
Nobody important gives a fuck about putting a light on the moon to convince retarded monkeys.
Yes, that's true. But I was ignoring that because you don't even think autonomous machines went there. Of course we have video of men on the moon, but there is absolutely zero evidence that satisfies retarded monkeys.
A light on the moon would last decades, at most. I'm talking about something visible from Earth, plain as day, that would last the eons. Something that scale would take decades or centuries to achieve, and I'm sure there would be plenty of bickering that would ensure it would never happen -- at least not for the foreseeable future.
[ + ] Swej_Ehtsag
[ - ] Swej_Ehtsag 0 points 1.9 yearsJun 16, 2022 11:19:17 ago (+0/-0)
We have video of big spaceship chasing another spaceship over Tatooine. We have video of a huge monolith on the moon, recorded a year before "man walked on the moon". Are these events also true in your mind?
A year would have been more than enough to convince every man, woman, child and tranny on earth that, at a minimum, a machine was able to reach the moon and put a light on it. It just had to be bright enough to be seen with a small telescope during a new moon, possibly with the naked eye. This, with all their niggress scientists doing math, they couldn't figure out how to do, yet they did figure out how to get a golfcart on the moon?
[ + ] chrimony
[ - ] chrimony 0 points 1.9 yearsJun 16, 2022 12:19:30 ago (+0/-0)
You can analyze any movie from that time period and see it's Hollywood. There's tons of unedited video from the moon that wouldn't hold up under the same scrutiny. Plus the number of people involved would be similar to making a Hollywood movie. It wouldn't have been kept secret.
You keep ignoring the main point: Nobody of importance gives a fuck about convincing retarded monkeys about whether we went to the moon. For the vast majority of people, video was more than enough.
[ + ] Swej_Ehtsag
[ - ] Swej_Ehtsag 0 points 1.9 yearsJun 16, 2022 19:46:16 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] chrimony
[ - ] chrimony 0 points 1.9 yearsJun 16, 2022 20:21:54 ago (+0/-0)
Depends on the scale on what's being done. Do I think the huge team of engineers, movie production, managers, and all sorts of people involved would have kept their mouth shut to fake a moon landing for all these decades? No.
Six million number is fabricated. Auschwitz has been thoroughly exposed as not being a death camp -- it literally was a work camp. But jews were rounded up and persecuted, many died from starvation and disease, and there's some credible evidence that there was some kind of termination program. I can believe a few million died, but who knows for sure.
Dancing Israelis are hard facts. To what extent things were allowed to happen, engineered, etc. is hard to say. I think the guys who hijacked the planes were legit Islamic terrorists.
Exposed as non-existent. Are you arguing against yourself?
Lab-leak theory credibly exposed. Lots of whistle-blowers on vaccines. NPCs can still believe mindless establishment narratives, but it's easy to see through.
[ + ] Boardallday3
[ - ] Boardallday3 [op] -1 points 1.9 yearsJun 14, 2022 22:19:04 ago (+0/-1)
[ + ] CHIRO
[ - ] CHIRO 2 points 1.9 yearsJun 15, 2022 00:52:42 ago (+2/-0)
[ + ] Artificial_Intelligentile
[ - ] Artificial_Intelligentile 0 points 1.9 yearsJun 15, 2022 10:53:12 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] CHIRO
[ - ] CHIRO 0 points 1.9 yearsJun 15, 2022 11:31:17 ago (+0/-0)*
"We could easily go to the moon."
"..it would be too risky."
We are supposed to have lost the Columbia shuttle in 2003, a shuttle that was only used in Earth orbit for research mostly. That was a controversial event with a damning result in the subsequent investigation. It doesn't seem that event shut down the space program because of risk concerns, and the ISS is supposed to remain in operation for another 8 years or so.
I am also really skeptical about the 'back in the old days' claim that says NASA would have been really cavalier about space flight. That just defies common sense, and that's not to mention the intense scrutiny they faced after the Apollo 1 disaster, right on the damn launch pad. Any further disasters that would result from cavalier risk ignorance would have been the kind of publicity to shutter NASA entirely.
I do agree that a trip to the moon would have been unequivocally risky. Given that we had so many problems just getting a shuttle to get off the ground successfully, the probability calculations for exiting earth orbit, making it to the moon, and landing successfully, plus getting back off again for the trip back...well, you'd have to imagine the probability would be close to zero. We had how many trials, across how many years, just to get off the ground? Now we'd be talking about doing the rest of the mission (ya know, the more insane parts like successfully navigating 240k miles into space and landing on a lunar surface) right on the very first try!?
Nobody with an IQ consisting of three digits could possibly wager any of the astronauts on such a trip would make it out alive.
But hey, why not play golf on the surface and, while you're at it, feel glad that the NASA geniuses included a go-cart in the payload so you could have a little fun before your imminent death.
[ + ] Swej_Ehtsag
[ - ] Swej_Ehtsag 1 point 1.9 yearsJun 15, 2022 21:19:40 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] Artificial_Intelligentile
[ - ] Artificial_Intelligentile -1 points 1.9 yearsJun 16, 2022 00:54:30 ago (+0/-1)
[ + ] CHIRO
[ - ] CHIRO 0 points 1.9 yearsJun 16, 2022 08:42:03 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] heroinwinsagain
[ - ] heroinwinsagain 1 point 1.9 yearsJun 14, 2022 22:33:02 ago (+2/-1)
[ + ] xmasskull
[ - ] xmasskull 1 point 1.9 yearsJun 14, 2022 17:58:10 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] asdf23
[ - ] asdf23 0 points 1.9 yearsJun 15, 2022 07:09:19 ago (+1/-1)
[ + ] TheSimulacra
[ - ] TheSimulacra -1 points 1.9 yearsJun 14, 2022 18:31:49 ago (+0/-1)
Good thing you had all this backup footage.
[ + ] HughBriss
[ - ] HughBriss -5 points 1.9 yearsJun 14, 2022 18:37:43 ago (+2/-7)
[ + ] 9000timesempty
[ - ] 9000timesempty 2 points 1.9 yearsJun 14, 2022 20:17:15 ago (+2/-0)
[ + ] HughBriss
[ - ] HughBriss 1 point 1.9 yearsJun 14, 2022 20:47:51 ago (+2/-1)
[ + ] Boardallday3
[ - ] Boardallday3 [op] 1 point 1.9 yearsJun 14, 2022 22:06:15 ago (+1/-0)
The footage does nothing but prove people landed on the moon. The hours of footage of movements of the astronauts and the dust they kicked up shows there was 1/6 gravity, and the dust mpvement shows there was NO atmosphere. There is no way to fake it. None. Stop embarrassing yourself.
They also brought a lot of lunar dust back. You can't just make that shit. It is lunar dust bombarded by solar wind for millions of years.
Lunar rocks are composed of rock from the early earth from over 3 billion years ago.
[ + ] CHIRO
[ - ] CHIRO 1 point 1.9 yearsJun 15, 2022 00:55:09 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] Nosferatjew
[ - ] Nosferatjew 1 point 1.9 yearsJun 14, 2022 18:39:00 ago (+3/-2)*
Edit: I added an 'e' :)
[ + ] HughBriss
[ - ] HughBriss 0 points 1.9 yearsJun 14, 2022 18:52:08 ago (+3/-3)
[ + ] Nosferatjew
[ - ] Nosferatjew 0 points 1.9 yearsJun 14, 2022 18:55:51 ago (+2/-2)
[ + ] HughBriss
[ - ] HughBriss 2 points 1.9 yearsJun 14, 2022 19:31:43 ago (+3/-1)
[ + ] Boardallday3
[ - ] Boardallday3 [op] -1 points 1.9 yearsJun 14, 2022 20:01:41 ago (+1/-2)
I'm open to having my mind changed, but as someone who knows about geology and the fact that actual moon rocks are given or lent out all the time to universities around the world, I'm going to bet you can't convince me.
You people are embarrassing.
[ + ] HughBriss
[ - ] HughBriss 0 points 1.9 yearsJun 14, 2022 20:10:36 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] Boardallday3
[ - ] Boardallday3 [op] 0 points 1.9 yearsJun 14, 2022 22:15:52 ago (+0/-0)
The LRO has imaged the landing sites many times:
https://skyandtelescope.org/observing/how-to-see-all-six-apollo-moon-landing-sites/
[ + ] Swej_Ehtsag
[ - ] Swej_Ehtsag 0 points 1.9 yearsJun 14, 2022 20:56:50 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] Boardallday3
[ - ] Boardallday3 [op] 0 points 1.9 yearsJun 14, 2022 22:17:59 ago (+0/-0)
Robotic technology to do that in 1969 without humans landing wasn't available, still hasn't been done.
[ + ] HughBriss
[ - ] HughBriss 0 points 1.9 yearsJun 15, 2022 09:02:07 ago (+0/-0)
https://infogalactic.com/info/Tank_on_the_Moon
[ + ] Swej_Ehtsag
[ - ] Swej_Ehtsag 0 points 1.9 yearsJun 15, 2022 21:16:28 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] Nosferatjew
[ - ] Nosferatjew -2 points 1.9 yearsJun 14, 2022 21:14:54 ago (+1/-3)
Now stop being such a fucking a faggot retard, and go look at the moon. Should be full, if not nearly full tonight.
[ + ] HughBriss
[ - ] HughBriss 3 points 1.9 yearsJun 14, 2022 21:22:03 ago (+3/-0)
[ + ] Boardallday3
[ - ] Boardallday3 [op] 0 points 1.9 yearsJun 14, 2022 22:14:14 ago (+0/-0)
https://skyandtelescope.org/observing/how-to-see-all-six-apollo-moon-landing-sites/
There are still laser reflectors on the moon that amateurs with the right equipment can use to exactly measure the distance. The only still functioning experiments from the Apollo missions
[ + ] HughBriss
[ - ] HughBriss 0 points 1.9 yearsJun 15, 2022 09:13:10 ago (+0/-0)
No, he does not, and I knew that, but I wanted Nosferatjew to admit he was wrong about being able to see detail on the moon's surface with an ordinary telescope. From your article link:
"As you're well aware, no telescope on Earth can see the leftover descent stages of the Apollo Lunar Modules or anything else Apollo-related. Not even the Hubble Space Telescope can discern evidence of the Apollo landings. The laws of optics define its limits."
[ + ] Boardallday3
[ - ] Boardallday3 [op] 0 points 1.9 yearsJun 14, 2022 22:09:55 ago (+0/-0)
They also brought a lot of lunar dust back. You can't just make that shit. It is lunar dust bombarded by solar wind for millions of years.
Stop embarrassing yourself. You have no idea what you're talking about.
You also have no idea how optics work or how far away the moon actually is. The drawings in your shitty highschool weren't to scale
https://skyandtelescope.org/observing/how-to-see-all-six-apollo-moon-landing-sites/
[ + ] Nosferatjew
[ - ] Nosferatjew 0 points 1.9 yearsJun 14, 2022 23:03:46 ago (+0/-0)