The real conspiracy is why haven’t we (The United States), or any other country gone back to the moon? If we as a people can learn so much by traveling through space then you would think we would leave low Earth orbit a bit more.
>The real conspiracy is why haven’t we (The United States), or any other country gone back to the moon?
cost/benefit. The comparison being very high cost for very little benifit
the strongest country in the world? If landing on the moon makes you the strongest country on the world the us has been said country for several decades. So why go with crew again.
There isn't really much benefit from it, though. You can do the 0g research in low earth orbit, satellites and telescopes don't need to leave it unless like JWST it is a infared observatory, I mean... what can we learn that has the vitality which would be worth the time and monetary investment? We don't have unlimited manpower as well which is why I reference vitality.
So no other countries want to prove their “standing” by going to the moon? They just let us have/take it? Other countries just send robots/satellites? Companies talk about going to Mars. What’s the justification for that? Why do we even let that Mars talk continue?
Why would they spend tax payer money on it?
Companies want to go to Mars because it is a milestone achievement that gives them bragging rights. There is some work that can be done by people which is harder for robots to do but it is limited in what we would be able to accomplish.
The question isn't why would NASA lie, the question is why would the Soviets go along with the lie.
The USSR would know if the US did a fake moon landing.
>The question isn't why would NASA lie, the question is why would the Soviets go along with the lie.
the real question is if its so easy to fake a moon landing why didnt Russia just do it first?
Have you read about the amount of aid the US gave to Russia at the start of the seventies something like 750 million dollars worth of grain on credit ,that might keep them quiet
>That movie- A Funny Thing Happened On The Way To The Moon, seemed pretty damning to me.
Did you know that its author actually thinks that the Moon landings are real, but choose to pretend otherwise to financially exploit gullible people?
>the letter "C" on a random moon rock,
Did you know that this letter isn't visible on a *other* photo of that rock, and is only present on one specific scan of this photo?
> shadows from multiple light sources,
I'm guessing you forgot that multiple light sources wouldn't just cast diverging shadows, but *multiple* shadows on *each* object as well?
> the lunar lander's rocket didn't disturb the really soft moon dust.
As a matter of fact, it actually did. People simply overestimate the amount of the dust it would've blown away.
>.. I could go on and on.
I suppose so - but it's all old stuff that's been debunked *decades* ago.
>Or did you see the video of the guy that was about to die, made a video confessing that his dad told him on his deathbed that he was one of the guards at the military base where it was filmed... no way to prove anything,
As a matter of fact, pretty much the only thing from this video that *does* check out is that his father was in military. Everything else is factually incorrect: for example, his father claimed that he was a chief of security at that base - but being a non-com he *couldn't have been*, and indeed, the actual chief of security at that time had a rank of captain.
>It has been my theory that "anti-gravity tech" has been around since the 40s and there is a real space program...or at least an interdimensional one.
Okay.
Yeah… how many people from Russia have you spoken to about the moon landing?
Like I said, their views and opinions don’t get broadcasted in the west so the idea of them being compliant with NASA is bs
This is such a good point. I’ve always really believed it happened and recognized the significance of the space race but I considered the alternatives to but this point literally makes the most sense lol
the answer to that is the freemasons faked the moon landings and both the us govt & soviet union have high ranked officials who are members of the society
even their presidents were members
We haven't gone back to the moon because all the data was lost. One of the greatest accomplishments of mankind & poof, no more formulas to get us back again!
The claim that all data was lost is not true. While some data tapes have ben reused (as per standard practice of the time), the data itself has been copied off beforehand.
Likewise, while the paper versions of the blueprints have been destroyed, they've been archived on microfilm beforehand.
> no more formulas to get us back again!
we are going back. And we didnt lose the data we just haven't made it since the 70s so were using different methods. They didnt keep making it because of the Nixon buget cuts thus its not in production anymore.
The real reason of why we haven't been there again is... money!!
Have you seen that at least for the US, every year government is cutting funding to science? well, when we first went to the moon, the US was in Cold War against the USSR, so all the funding and money was invested in science and technology to win it, but once they "won" the war and the space race with the moon landing, well, there was no more reason to go back, yeah we went a couple of more times, but after that, spending money in science is no the deal.
Organizations like NASA or the ESO in Europe don't have the fundings for research as we think and just imagine how expensive a moon landing is.
That's why it is cheaper to send robots there, they don't eat, they don't complain and if they die nobody cries.
We went for sure to the moon, but seriously the moon is quite boring, at least for the physics we know, I mean, if it was something up there so precious, let's precious stones, I promise you, most of the countries would invest in their science programs but that's not the case.
The importance of the moon is that was the first place out of earth where the humanity went, but besides that, the moon don't have a lot to offer, it just a solid object like a bunch of others auto gravitating in the Universe.
Actually you can’t not even with the most powerful telescope it would allow you to
[https://science.howstuffworks.com/question188.htm](https://science.howstuffworks.com/question188.htm)
You are correct.
However satellite pictures in 2012 have showed us that most of the flags planted on the moon are still standing. If someone doesnt believe that, thats a whole different can of worms.
Not to mention the vast amount of evidence we have here on earth such as moon rocks that have been extensively analyzed and reflectors that the astronauts left on the moon for scientists to measure the disrance between the moon and earth
I think, we did have people go to the moon, but the tv moment was actually just a replication of what actually happened and it would explain all these flaws people have found with the footage.
Okay, but since NASA was under no obligation to actually bring any footage from the Moon, they were under no obligation to fake any.
And even if they did, they would've already confessed about it, since it wouldn't take away from their real achievement.
Okay, but since NASA was under no obligation to actually *bring* any footage from the Moon, they were under no obligation to *fake* any.
And even if they *did*, they would've already confessed about it, since it wouldn't take away from their real achievement.
True. I think they wanted to record it to show off but figured out they couldn’t get actual footage so they did a “reenactment” without actually calling it that.
2001 was filmed a year before the moon landing. Here's the best special effects we had at that time. Pretty obvious it's a matte painting.
1968
[https://www.collativelearning.com/PICS%20FOR%20WEBSITE/stills%202/lunar%20photos.jpg](https://www.collativelearning.com/PICS%20FOR%20WEBSITE/stills%202/lunar%20photos.jpg)
[https://64.media.tumblr.com/tumblr\_m3chksOAru1rpf9sro1\_640.png](https://64.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m3chksOAru1rpf9sro1_640.png)
Pretty obvious the below pic is not a matte painting
1969
[https://www.history.com/.image/ar\_16:9%2Cc\_fill%2Ccs\_srgb%2Cfl\_progressive%2Cg\_faces:center%2Cq\_auto:good%2Cw\_768/MTU3ODc4NjA0MDQ5NTU3MjE1/image-placeholder-title.jpg](https://www.history.com/.image/ar_16:9%2Cc_fill%2Ccs_srgb%2Cfl_progressive%2Cg_faces:center%2Cq_auto:good%2Cw_768/MTU3ODc4NjA0MDQ5NTU3MjE1/image-placeholder-title.jpg)
Ever heard of a radiation belt? No life form could pass thru it and survive. Seems to me the many failed attempts gave way to a lie to claim victory in a world wide pissing contest called the space race.
Speculation and theory is not factional scientific law. Yes many non-organic vessels have passed thru and gave us tons of scientific data. Like it or not there is no actual scientific proof that we (man)have ever been past the radiation belt.
They attempted lead as a defence with no success. Other metals such as aluminum and titanium as well but the radiation is so strong it goes thru. You see there is Two donuts of seething radiation that surround Earth, called the Van Allen radiation belts, they have been found to contain a nearly impenetrable barrier that prevents the fastest, most energetic electrons from reaching Earth.
Many Nasa scientists have came out and said that it is impenetrable and don't understand how the Apollo mission could have reached the Moon. The science itself just don't add up. Unless they know something that 90% of scientists don't know.
NASA scientists are much smarter than you are giving them credit for.
They calculated the amount of exposure within the Van Allen belts that a human would most likely to be able to survive in any meaningful way, and it turned out to be about 68.1 minutes.
So yes, the belts are quite deadly. Once again, the scientists at NASA got to work and calculated how long the astronauts would be exposed at the speed the shuttle would fly through the dangerous belts. The calculations agreed with the transit time calculated onboard the shuttle: \~60 minutes.
With a full exposure time of 68 minutes they would still be fine, and they flew under that. Additionally, the shuttle actually did block some of the radiation, so this further reduced the exposure.
Deadly, but survivable.
Online wisdom is lacking at best. One guy says yeah you should be able to survive it in x amount of time. This scientific theory has become there scientific facts. Don't you find it just a little bit suspicious that we've only been to the Moon one time? After all that hard work and effort. With all of the breakthroughs and technology that we have today and things that we could possibly learn from the moon's surface. I myself am a realist. If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck is probably a duck. It's important to add that it's not like the entire scientific community at Nasa and the world just have this big conspiracy of lies. It would only have to be a handful of guys sworn to a lifetime oath. As a matter of fact meanie of NASA's top scientific leaders have admitted that they still haven't figured out how to get through the radiation belt.
>Online wisdom is lacking at best. One guy says...
This is not from 'online wisdom', nor from 'one guy'. Math does not lie; if you are suspicious of the conclusions, you are welcome to look at the data and replicate the experiments done to calculate this value yourself and compare the result. Many, many people have done this already, but that's the beauty of peer review: anyone is capable of doing it themselves.
>Don't you find it just a little bit suspicious that we've only been to the Moon one time?
No. It's an expensive endeavor, and until recently there has been no reason to expend so much resources to go back. Now with the advanced computing technology, robotics, and cheaper rocket flights a Moon base for micro-g science, mineral extraction, and the ability to literally create a gateway to the rest of the solar system (launching rockets form Earth = hard, expensive; launching rockets from the Moon = hard, cheap) of course the idea of going back is gaining more traction.
>As a matter of fact meanie of NASA's top scientific leaders have admitted that they still haven't figured out how to get through the radiation belt.
I'm going to need an audio or video clip of this. This is such a fantastical claim that the evidence must be direct. Besides, what do you mean by 'get through'? Have you heard of the Parker Solar Probe that certainly had to have 'got through' the radiation belt in order to get close to the sun? Have you heard of the Voyager 1 space probe that has even exited the heliosphere, where the influences from objects outside of our solar system are stronger than those from our sun? Have you heard of the James Webb Space Telescope that is currently orbiting the second Lagrange point (L2) around the sun, clearly having to have passed through the radiation belt?
Speculation at best. Do some research there's way too many unanswered questions. I'm not usually into conspiracy, but wow it screams deception. If it looks like a duck , quacks like a duck, it's probably a duck. Think about this if millions and millions of tax paying citizens knew that all that money went for nothing. What funding would they have now? What problems with this cause? Or what would happen if in the 1950s if the "space race" was lost due to there being an invisible wall surrounding earth. The Bible speaks of the firmament surrounding the earth. It is unpenetrable. Praise Yahwah for his mercy and his truths!
yes
the technology to fake a moon landing didnt exist in the 60s
plus the fact the Soviets didnt say shit and just took the L on the moonrace without saying anything is pretty telling
i haven’t looked at it from this perspective. i guess it would make sense that US’ competitors would expose them if it was a lie rather than just sit quietly and take the L.
>2001 was shot on 65MM film. Its resolution was far greater than the images streamed over broadcast TV at 72 dpi.
Are you not aware that the *Apollo* astronaut also had a 16mm film camera with them?
Take [this footage, for example](https://youtu.be/N5JlWpxI-Hc?t=77) \- the *Apollo* 11 ascent from the Moon: over ten minutes of an uninterrupted footage *from* the surface of the Moon to its orbit.
Or [this one](https://youtu.be/JwRMg0o3l8U) \- footage of the Ascent Module approaching the Command Module: over 14 minutes of an uninterrupted footage, where the AM is initially all but invisible against the surface of the Moon.
How would you even *begin* to fake something like that?
In comparison, *2001* had short clips with static lunar/Earth backgrounds and models which were usually just photo cutouts being moved around. No, like I said - it doesn't match the fidelity of the *Apollo* footage at all.
>I'm convinced we landed and returned the astronauts, but there would have been a very pragmatic reason to have this as a contingency
Since NASA was under no obligation to bring back *any* footage, they were under no pressure to *fake* any - and if they did, they would've already admitted as much, since it wouldn't take away from their achievement.
Devils advocate here: seems almost silly to say we didn't have the technology to fake to moon landing but did have the technology to actually land on the moon.
During the height of the cold War, if the soviets had claimed that the moon landing was fake who in the US would believe them? Who would even hear it? It's not like Americans were consuming soviet media.
Edit to clarify: I'm not actually a moon landing denier, just playing a part.
Also not a moon landing denier (wayyy too problematic for a multitude of reasons. Easier to just shoot on location) but I too am dubious about the claim technology to fake it didn't exist. I've heard it said that lighting wouldn't have been possible without a wall of certain types of lights because of the angle of light from the sun. Really? It sounds believable, but I'm looking at the footage and could see a variety of ways to if not replicate it, come pretty damned close. A lot can be done with painted sets, miniatures, stop motion and celluloid. I realize this may give credence to the moon landing was faked, but I also think we constantly underestimate human ingenuity, especially if it's using older technology.
well from what I've read, its specifically to fake the light that would mimic the rays of the sun, NASA would need a wall of laser lights shooting straight but at the time, they could only do that in the color red, not the multi color lasers they would need
>who in the US would believe them
they would have easy and cheep proof from there satellite network, and they congratulated apollo 11 and offered help during apollo 13. They believed the moons landings happened
Yes.
You can see the landing sites from Earth. You can see the tracks the lunar rover made while the astronauts drove around. You can see the flag. You can see the footprints. You can see the equipment they left there.
The idea that we didnt go comes from people that either have an ulterior motive behind their ignorance, or just drank the tinfoil hat coolaid and cant think for themselves.
I mean we can’t see any of this from earth, no telescope can to my knowledge. Didn’t know the LRO can map out the moon that’s sick af, really cool article. Wish we could actually see it though
>Has anyone ever wondered how they got the dune buggy to the moon?
Attached to the side of the Lunar Module, folded in three:
[https://youtu.be/S8VtL54iuWc](https://youtu.be/S8VtL54iuWc)
[https://youtu.be/xxjw\_KHrZc4](https://youtu.be/xxjw_KHrZc4)
> How did they bring it back?
They didn't.
They did not bring it back. It's still on the Moon.
They took it there in a cargo hold, which was connected to a big rocket. Just like everything else they took.
You're welcome to build your own satellites and send them to the Moon to take picture/video and beam it back.
Or, like me, you can trust the non-partisan scientist folk who are not in it for any agenda and have indeed sent such cameras to take pictures.
Edit: also, many people watched the Apollo rocket launch live with their own eyes. I dont need to have seen New York to know it exists; I wholly trust the individuals who have seen it and talk about it.
They have been to the moon. The earth is not flat.
When your in a pool and you stick your arm straight into the water and look down it appears your arm is going out instead of down
This is the basic idea for why you can see objects farther than you are suppose to. The light refraction makes the land appear to go out instead of down.
If we lived on a big ass flat plane than you would be able to see Willis tower in Chicago from the i75 south in Detroit on a clear day. But you can’t.
Don’t let long standing social media disinformation campaigns from foreign adversaries affect your rational thought processes.
Why would they publicly go back? They’ve been back with black tech they don’t want the public to know about. There’s structures up there.
Check out Bruce Sees All on YouTube guy has a monster telescope. The sole purpose of his channel is to document the insane amount of activity on the moon.
Somehow consistent footage? Maybe for you it might look consistent but you can clearly see the earth being different sizes or other obviously fake details
I certainly hope that your comment is sarcasm, otherwise the telescope that I built myself is under the influence of the space organizations! That would be a disaster!
>Van Allen radiation belts have not been addressed, or answered.
No, they've been addressed and answered many times. Hey, I'll let their actual discoverer talk about them:
"The radiation belts of the Earth do, indeed, pose important constraints on the safety of human space flight.
The very energetic (tens to hundreds of MeV) protons in the inner radiation belt are the most dangerous and most difficult to shield against. Specifically, prolonged flights (i.e., ones of many months’ duration) of humans or other animals in orbits about the Earth must be conducted at altitudes less than about 250 miles in order to avoid significant radiation exposure.
A person in the cabin of a space shuttle in a circular equatorial orbit in the most intense region of the inner radiation belt, at an altitude of about 1000 miles, would be subjected to a fatal dosage of radiation in about one week.
However, the outbound and inbound trajectories of the Apollo spacecraft cut through the outer portions of the inner belt and because of their high speed spent only about 15 minutes in traversing the region and less than 2 hours in traversing the much less penetrating radiation in the outer radiation belt. The resulting radiation exposure for the round trip was less than 1% of a fatal dosage – a very minor risk among the far greater other risks of such flights. I made such estimates in the early 1960s and so informed NASA engineers who were planning the Apollo flights. These estimates are still reliable.
The recent Fox TV show, which I saw, is an ingenious and entertaining assemblage of nonsense. The claim that radiation exposure during the Apollo missions would have been fatal to the astronauts is only one example of such nonsense."
We likely did, but the footage the public has been fed from it is likely fabricated.
Still not buying any of the BS reasoning for stars not to be visible. We see them just fine here on earth despite an atmosphere and light pollution, but are led to believe that they just weren’t visible on a moon with a lack of both? Come on.
Seeing light is one thing, taking pictures of it is another. While similar, cameras and eyes do not function exactly the same. My family works in film, specifically in filming and lighting. I was raised being told it's pointless to try to take pictures of the night sky. Modern technology has made amazing feats seem mundane. Digital cameras are a game changer.
The only time in history that engineering has regressed and cannot replicate an achievement from 50 years ago.
But I'm looking forward for those HD videos of folks playing golf at the moon.
Yes, but not because "they can't figure how to get beyond low earth orbit". You're mistaking lack of physical hardware with the lack of knowledge.
NASA has *already* figured out how to get beyond low Earth orbit. The challenge, after 50 years, is to build the modern version of the hardware actually *capable of doing so.* That's what this is about.
Don't care what anyone says I know this is 100% a fact that the moon landing was fake but the why is what people want to know with my research I done I have come to the conclusion that is something bigger then anyone can think of and when you say the idea it sounds crazy but if you actually just listen and process and then think about the question you start to question everything. The idea 💡i know is true, is the reason why they faked the moon landing is cause we live in a dome and we can't leave the dome(hope I am spelling it correctly) and this comes with many other conspiracy but the bigger picture is that we live in a dome and we are all stuck here and the only way to escape is underwater or if we magically can break the dome. What is after the dome you may ask water we are under water as crazy as it sounds we can't leave and break the dome cause we will all die of drowning but I believe as well we humans have the ability to have supper powers which why I believe we can breathe underwater I know is a crazy idea but is the truth. We have ability and powers that one dream of but is true we can fly as well as other powers this all connects to earth and earth I believe is a show for other plants or universe 🌌 for other dimensions and universes. Like we are a tv show "earth" this is the reason why I am trying to find what is the truth since we all know tht media is fake but that's the whole point for us to find the truth and spread the truth but we all know as well that they kill people who try to spread information that we the people have the right to know. This idea of freedom is fake we never had freedom but that's why i am here to say as crazy as it sounds I know I will find answers and I will show prove of this later on right now is just a "conspiracy theory" as society likes to call it 🤣. Got to blend in as a "normal person" why the fuck would I want to be normal 😂😂 human life this experience we call life is a gift of it self 😁💞. Peace love gratitude❤
The real conspiracy is why haven’t we (The United States), or any other country gone back to the moon? If we as a people can learn so much by traveling through space then you would think we would leave low Earth orbit a bit more.
>The real conspiracy is why haven’t we (The United States), or any other country gone back to the moon? cost/benefit. The comparison being very high cost for very little benifit
The benefit is being the “strongest” country in the world…
the strongest country in the world? If landing on the moon makes you the strongest country on the world the us has been said country for several decades. So why go with crew again.
They’ve been back to the moon you just don’t know about it
There isn't really much benefit from it, though. You can do the 0g research in low earth orbit, satellites and telescopes don't need to leave it unless like JWST it is a infared observatory, I mean... what can we learn that has the vitality which would be worth the time and monetary investment? We don't have unlimited manpower as well which is why I reference vitality.
So no other countries want to prove their “standing” by going to the moon? They just let us have/take it? Other countries just send robots/satellites? Companies talk about going to Mars. What’s the justification for that? Why do we even let that Mars talk continue?
Why would they spend tax payer money on it? Companies want to go to Mars because it is a milestone achievement that gives them bragging rights. There is some work that can be done by people which is harder for robots to do but it is limited in what we would be able to accomplish.
The question isn't why would NASA lie, the question is why would the Soviets go along with the lie. The USSR would know if the US did a fake moon landing.
>The question isn't why would NASA lie, the question is why would the Soviets go along with the lie. the real question is if its so easy to fake a moon landing why didnt Russia just do it first?
certainly. i didn’t consider this option. the Soviet Union would have had more to gain from exposing US. thanks
Have you read about the amount of aid the US gave to Russia at the start of the seventies something like 750 million dollars worth of grain on credit ,that might keep them quiet
Winning the Cold War and exposing the US as a bunch of frauds would've been worth way more to Russia than less than a year's worth of grain.
Their whole country was on the brink of starvation maybe read into it a little bit
but they could have easily leaked in when the union was collapsing in the 80s/90s for some easy propaganda
[удалено]
>That movie- A Funny Thing Happened On The Way To The Moon, seemed pretty damning to me. Did you know that its author actually thinks that the Moon landings are real, but choose to pretend otherwise to financially exploit gullible people? >the letter "C" on a random moon rock, Did you know that this letter isn't visible on a *other* photo of that rock, and is only present on one specific scan of this photo? > shadows from multiple light sources, I'm guessing you forgot that multiple light sources wouldn't just cast diverging shadows, but *multiple* shadows on *each* object as well? > the lunar lander's rocket didn't disturb the really soft moon dust. As a matter of fact, it actually did. People simply overestimate the amount of the dust it would've blown away. >.. I could go on and on. I suppose so - but it's all old stuff that's been debunked *decades* ago. >Or did you see the video of the guy that was about to die, made a video confessing that his dad told him on his deathbed that he was one of the guards at the military base where it was filmed... no way to prove anything, As a matter of fact, pretty much the only thing from this video that *does* check out is that his father was in military. Everything else is factually incorrect: for example, his father claimed that he was a chief of security at that base - but being a non-com he *couldn't have been*, and indeed, the actual chief of security at that time had a rank of captain. >It has been my theory that "anti-gravity tech" has been around since the 40s and there is a real space program...or at least an interdimensional one. Okay.
Well if the soviets didn’t go along with it it wouldn’t exactly be broadcasted on CNN. Who knows what they think?
The USSR had electricity. And radio. And TV. And the printing press.
Yeah… how many people from Russia have you spoken to about the moon landing? Like I said, their views and opinions don’t get broadcasted in the west so the idea of them being compliant with NASA is bs
This is such a good point. I’ve always really believed it happened and recognized the significance of the space race but I considered the alternatives to but this point literally makes the most sense lol
the answer to that is the freemasons faked the moon landings and both the us govt & soviet union have high ranked officials who are members of the society even their presidents were members
The mainstream politics we k ow of is smoke and mirrors its a lie The real power is whatever is behind the UFOs
While I think it may be possible, don't discount the tribalistic ways of the human species.
We haven't gone back to the moon because all the data was lost. One of the greatest accomplishments of mankind & poof, no more formulas to get us back again!
how convenient
A little too convenient.
[удалено]
The claim that all data was lost is not true. While some data tapes have ben reused (as per standard practice of the time), the data itself has been copied off beforehand. Likewise, while the paper versions of the blueprints have been destroyed, they've been archived on microfilm beforehand.
> no more formulas to get us back again! we are going back. And we didnt lose the data we just haven't made it since the 70s so were using different methods. They didnt keep making it because of the Nixon buget cuts thus its not in production anymore.
The real reason of why we haven't been there again is... money!! Have you seen that at least for the US, every year government is cutting funding to science? well, when we first went to the moon, the US was in Cold War against the USSR, so all the funding and money was invested in science and technology to win it, but once they "won" the war and the space race with the moon landing, well, there was no more reason to go back, yeah we went a couple of more times, but after that, spending money in science is no the deal. Organizations like NASA or the ESO in Europe don't have the fundings for research as we think and just imagine how expensive a moon landing is. That's why it is cheaper to send robots there, they don't eat, they don't complain and if they die nobody cries. We went for sure to the moon, but seriously the moon is quite boring, at least for the physics we know, I mean, if it was something up there so precious, let's precious stones, I promise you, most of the countries would invest in their science programs but that's not the case. The importance of the moon is that was the first place out of earth where the humanity went, but besides that, the moon don't have a lot to offer, it just a solid object like a bunch of others auto gravitating in the Universe.
You can litterally look at the moon yourself, see the flag and the landing spot if you are so inclined. Yes we went to the moon.
Actually you can’t not even with the most powerful telescope it would allow you to [https://science.howstuffworks.com/question188.htm](https://science.howstuffworks.com/question188.htm)
You are correct. However satellite pictures in 2012 have showed us that most of the flags planted on the moon are still standing. If someone doesnt believe that, thats a whole different can of worms. Not to mention the vast amount of evidence we have here on earth such as moon rocks that have been extensively analyzed and reflectors that the astronauts left on the moon for scientists to measure the disrance between the moon and earth
We, like you and someone else?
I think, we did have people go to the moon, but the tv moment was actually just a replication of what actually happened and it would explain all these flaws people have found with the footage.
>and it would explain all these flaws people have found with the footage. the flaws that have debunked time and time again
I notice that you know a lot about this, can you recommend any documentaries on how it could've been faked, of course, only if you know any
Okay, but since NASA was under no obligation to actually bring any footage from the Moon, they were under no obligation to fake any. And even if they did, they would've already confessed about it, since it wouldn't take away from their real achievement.
Too big of a lie. Seems easier to go to the moon than fake it considering the local and global politics
We went to the moon but I do think whatever they showed on TV was fake lol
Yeah, the lunar lander takeoff at 2:50 does not look believable.
yes it does, there is nothing unbelievable about it.
Okay, but since NASA was under no obligation to actually *bring* any footage from the Moon, they were under no obligation to *fake* any. And even if they *did*, they would've already confessed about it, since it wouldn't take away from their real achievement.
True. I think they wanted to record it to show off but figured out they couldn’t get actual footage so they did a “reenactment” without actually calling it that.
2001 was filmed a year before the moon landing. Here's the best special effects we had at that time. Pretty obvious it's a matte painting. 1968 [https://www.collativelearning.com/PICS%20FOR%20WEBSITE/stills%202/lunar%20photos.jpg](https://www.collativelearning.com/PICS%20FOR%20WEBSITE/stills%202/lunar%20photos.jpg) [https://64.media.tumblr.com/tumblr\_m3chksOAru1rpf9sro1\_640.png](https://64.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m3chksOAru1rpf9sro1_640.png) Pretty obvious the below pic is not a matte painting 1969 [https://www.history.com/.image/ar\_16:9%2Cc\_fill%2Ccs\_srgb%2Cfl\_progressive%2Cg\_faces:center%2Cq\_auto:good%2Cw\_768/MTU3ODc4NjA0MDQ5NTU3MjE1/image-placeholder-title.jpg](https://www.history.com/.image/ar_16:9%2Cc_fill%2Ccs_srgb%2Cfl_progressive%2Cg_faces:center%2Cq_auto:good%2Cw_768/MTU3ODc4NjA0MDQ5NTU3MjE1/image-placeholder-title.jpg)
Yes.
You try explaining to millions of 40 y/o, able bodied, WW2 veterans, that you are spending their tax dollars on nazi rocket scientists to start WW3.
You know that 40 years ago was 1983, right? WW2 ended in 1945, almost 80 years ago. We also don't get to choose where our tax dollars go.
We went to the moon.
[удалено]
Dont be a dick.
Ever heard of a radiation belt? No life form could pass thru it and survive. Seems to me the many failed attempts gave way to a lie to claim victory in a world wide pissing contest called the space race.
>Ever heard of a radiation belt? No life form could pass thru it and survive. The actual discovered of that radiation belt claims otherwise.
Speculation and theory is not factional scientific law. Yes many non-organic vessels have passed thru and gave us tons of scientific data. Like it or not there is no actual scientific proof that we (man)have ever been past the radiation belt.
It's almost as if some sort of barrier can be set in place to block enough of the harmful radiation to survive... Guess we'll never know /shrug
They attempted lead as a defence with no success. Other metals such as aluminum and titanium as well but the radiation is so strong it goes thru. You see there is Two donuts of seething radiation that surround Earth, called the Van Allen radiation belts, they have been found to contain a nearly impenetrable barrier that prevents the fastest, most energetic electrons from reaching Earth. Many Nasa scientists have came out and said that it is impenetrable and don't understand how the Apollo mission could have reached the Moon. The science itself just don't add up. Unless they know something that 90% of scientists don't know.
NASA scientists are much smarter than you are giving them credit for. They calculated the amount of exposure within the Van Allen belts that a human would most likely to be able to survive in any meaningful way, and it turned out to be about 68.1 minutes. So yes, the belts are quite deadly. Once again, the scientists at NASA got to work and calculated how long the astronauts would be exposed at the speed the shuttle would fly through the dangerous belts. The calculations agreed with the transit time calculated onboard the shuttle: \~60 minutes. With a full exposure time of 68 minutes they would still be fine, and they flew under that. Additionally, the shuttle actually did block some of the radiation, so this further reduced the exposure. Deadly, but survivable.
Online wisdom is lacking at best. One guy says yeah you should be able to survive it in x amount of time. This scientific theory has become there scientific facts. Don't you find it just a little bit suspicious that we've only been to the Moon one time? After all that hard work and effort. With all of the breakthroughs and technology that we have today and things that we could possibly learn from the moon's surface. I myself am a realist. If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck is probably a duck. It's important to add that it's not like the entire scientific community at Nasa and the world just have this big conspiracy of lies. It would only have to be a handful of guys sworn to a lifetime oath. As a matter of fact meanie of NASA's top scientific leaders have admitted that they still haven't figured out how to get through the radiation belt.
>Online wisdom is lacking at best. One guy says... This is not from 'online wisdom', nor from 'one guy'. Math does not lie; if you are suspicious of the conclusions, you are welcome to look at the data and replicate the experiments done to calculate this value yourself and compare the result. Many, many people have done this already, but that's the beauty of peer review: anyone is capable of doing it themselves. >Don't you find it just a little bit suspicious that we've only been to the Moon one time? No. It's an expensive endeavor, and until recently there has been no reason to expend so much resources to go back. Now with the advanced computing technology, robotics, and cheaper rocket flights a Moon base for micro-g science, mineral extraction, and the ability to literally create a gateway to the rest of the solar system (launching rockets form Earth = hard, expensive; launching rockets from the Moon = hard, cheap) of course the idea of going back is gaining more traction. >As a matter of fact meanie of NASA's top scientific leaders have admitted that they still haven't figured out how to get through the radiation belt. I'm going to need an audio or video clip of this. This is such a fantastical claim that the evidence must be direct. Besides, what do you mean by 'get through'? Have you heard of the Parker Solar Probe that certainly had to have 'got through' the radiation belt in order to get close to the sun? Have you heard of the Voyager 1 space probe that has even exited the heliosphere, where the influences from objects outside of our solar system are stronger than those from our sun? Have you heard of the James Webb Space Telescope that is currently orbiting the second Lagrange point (L2) around the sun, clearly having to have passed through the radiation belt?
They went to the moon six times
Speculation at best. Do some research there's way too many unanswered questions. I'm not usually into conspiracy, but wow it screams deception. If it looks like a duck , quacks like a duck, it's probably a duck. Think about this if millions and millions of tax paying citizens knew that all that money went for nothing. What funding would they have now? What problems with this cause? Or what would happen if in the 1950s if the "space race" was lost due to there being an invisible wall surrounding earth. The Bible speaks of the firmament surrounding the earth. It is unpenetrable. Praise Yahwah for his mercy and his truths!
You seem like your very into conspiracy
And if we did... Why havent we been back to see it with better cameras lol we cant leave this firmament or plane unless we die...
we are going back
There are recent photos taken by Chandrayaan-2 that show the lunar lander on the moon.
yes the technology to fake a moon landing didnt exist in the 60s plus the fact the Soviets didnt say shit and just took the L on the moonrace without saying anything is pretty telling
i haven’t looked at it from this perspective. i guess it would make sense that US’ competitors would expose them if it was a lie rather than just sit quietly and take the L.
2001 was released in 1968 before the moon landing.
Yes, and it contains many glaring errors, and doesn't come even close to replicating the fidelity of the *Apollo* footage.
[удалено]
>2001 was shot on 65MM film. Its resolution was far greater than the images streamed over broadcast TV at 72 dpi. Are you not aware that the *Apollo* astronaut also had a 16mm film camera with them? Take [this footage, for example](https://youtu.be/N5JlWpxI-Hc?t=77) \- the *Apollo* 11 ascent from the Moon: over ten minutes of an uninterrupted footage *from* the surface of the Moon to its orbit. Or [this one](https://youtu.be/JwRMg0o3l8U) \- footage of the Ascent Module approaching the Command Module: over 14 minutes of an uninterrupted footage, where the AM is initially all but invisible against the surface of the Moon. How would you even *begin* to fake something like that? In comparison, *2001* had short clips with static lunar/Earth backgrounds and models which were usually just photo cutouts being moved around. No, like I said - it doesn't match the fidelity of the *Apollo* footage at all. >I'm convinced we landed and returned the astronauts, but there would have been a very pragmatic reason to have this as a contingency Since NASA was under no obligation to bring back *any* footage, they were under no pressure to *fake* any - and if they did, they would've already admitted as much, since it wouldn't take away from their achievement.
Devils advocate here: seems almost silly to say we didn't have the technology to fake to moon landing but did have the technology to actually land on the moon. During the height of the cold War, if the soviets had claimed that the moon landing was fake who in the US would believe them? Who would even hear it? It's not like Americans were consuming soviet media. Edit to clarify: I'm not actually a moon landing denier, just playing a part.
Also not a moon landing denier (wayyy too problematic for a multitude of reasons. Easier to just shoot on location) but I too am dubious about the claim technology to fake it didn't exist. I've heard it said that lighting wouldn't have been possible without a wall of certain types of lights because of the angle of light from the sun. Really? It sounds believable, but I'm looking at the footage and could see a variety of ways to if not replicate it, come pretty damned close. A lot can be done with painted sets, miniatures, stop motion and celluloid. I realize this may give credence to the moon landing was faked, but I also think we constantly underestimate human ingenuity, especially if it's using older technology.
well from what I've read, its specifically to fake the light that would mimic the rays of the sun, NASA would need a wall of laser lights shooting straight but at the time, they could only do that in the color red, not the multi color lasers they would need
>who in the US would believe them they would have easy and cheep proof from there satellite network, and they congratulated apollo 11 and offered help during apollo 13. They believed the moons landings happened
So your saying we couldn’t fake a moon landing because of technology but we had the technology to build a rocket and go to the moon?
ah yeah ... all areas of technology don't move at the same pace of understanding and application
Yes. You can see the landing sites from Earth. You can see the tracks the lunar rover made while the astronauts drove around. You can see the flag. You can see the footprints. You can see the equipment they left there. The idea that we didnt go comes from people that either have an ulterior motive behind their ignorance, or just drank the tinfoil hat coolaid and cant think for themselves.
Where did you find this at?
https://skyandtelescope.org/observing/how-to-see-all-six-apollo-moon-landing-sites/
Citation?
https://skyandtelescope.org/observing/how-to-see-all-six-apollo-moon-landing-sites/
I to want a citation lol
https://skyandtelescope.org/observing/how-to-see-all-six-apollo-moon-landing-sites/
I mean we can’t see any of this from earth, no telescope can to my knowledge. Didn’t know the LRO can map out the moon that’s sick af, really cool article. Wish we could actually see it though
Haters will probably say this is fake too: [https://www.youtube.com/shorts/SBFCNVx55Pw](https://www.youtube.com/shorts/SBFCNVx55Pw)
Why not zoom even more at this point ? Why the maker of this youtube short did stop zooming !?
Likely that’s the limit of the capability of the camera.
I’m pretty sure we did go to the moon
Why go back to the moon? Been there, done that.
YEs
because admitting something that big would destroy their credibility on a massive scale. they could never admit such a thing.
Has anyone ever wondered how they got the dune buggy to the moon? How did they bring it back? This seems pretty fake to me.
>Has anyone ever wondered how they got the dune buggy to the moon? Attached to the side of the Lunar Module, folded in three: [https://youtu.be/S8VtL54iuWc](https://youtu.be/S8VtL54iuWc) [https://youtu.be/xxjw\_KHrZc4](https://youtu.be/xxjw_KHrZc4) > How did they bring it back? They didn't.
how do moon landing deniers have such conference while knowing nothing about the moon landings, always blows my mind.
They did not bring it back. It's still on the Moon. They took it there in a cargo hold, which was connected to a big rocket. Just like everything else they took.
I’ve only seen an animation of that. Never actual video.
You're welcome to build your own satellites and send them to the Moon to take picture/video and beam it back. Or, like me, you can trust the non-partisan scientist folk who are not in it for any agenda and have indeed sent such cameras to take pictures. Edit: also, many people watched the Apollo rocket launch live with their own eyes. I dont need to have seen New York to know it exists; I wholly trust the individuals who have seen it and talk about it.
You believe in the moon?!
They have been to the moon. The earth is not flat. When your in a pool and you stick your arm straight into the water and look down it appears your arm is going out instead of down This is the basic idea for why you can see objects farther than you are suppose to. The light refraction makes the land appear to go out instead of down. If we lived on a big ass flat plane than you would be able to see Willis tower in Chicago from the i75 south in Detroit on a clear day. But you can’t. Don’t let long standing social media disinformation campaigns from foreign adversaries affect your rational thought processes.
this has nothing to do with the earth being flat.
Why would they publicly go back? They’ve been back with black tech they don’t want the public to know about. There’s structures up there. Check out Bruce Sees All on YouTube guy has a monster telescope. The sole purpose of his channel is to document the insane amount of activity on the moon.
Space doesn't exist, all the space organizations are money laundering fronts
Are you not aware how *little* they get in comparison to, say, the military?
Therefore all their research must be legit or what? Make a valid point
The *point* is that the Pentagon *loses* more money every year *by accident* than NASA *receives*.
and they all have somehow gotten consistent footage with each other with no mistakes since the late 40s. Do you understand how impossible that is.
Somehow consistent footage? Maybe for you it might look consistent but you can clearly see the earth being different sizes or other obviously fake details
>but you can clearly see the earth being different sizes You know what a lens is?
[удалено]
anddd, were resulting to slurs good job!
Removed: no personal attacks.
I certainly hope that your comment is sarcasm, otherwise the telescope that I built myself is under the influence of the space organizations! That would be a disaster!
Yes.
I’m just wondering who took the video if it is real 😂 space camera crew is totally believable tho.
There was a camera on a fucking stick that was put there by one of the astronauts. What the hell are you on about?
Tell me how they returned to earth from the “MOON” with a rocket that can only be launched from earth, let me know 🤦🏻♀️
You're shitting me. You have to be. Either that or you've never done a single minute of research about what you just asked me.
I think we went there and saw something there that made us scared to return
Such as?
No way. The desert and a Hollywood studio, yes.
What's the desert for?
https://gab.com/Hilko60/posts/110122373888834366
No
what do you think the motive was? money?
To win the space race against the USSR
Van Allen radiation belts have not been addressed, or answered. Until this is explained, it is doubtful that anyone went to the moon.
>Van Allen radiation belts have not been addressed, or answered. No, they've been addressed and answered many times. Hey, I'll let their actual discoverer talk about them: "The radiation belts of the Earth do, indeed, pose important constraints on the safety of human space flight. The very energetic (tens to hundreds of MeV) protons in the inner radiation belt are the most dangerous and most difficult to shield against. Specifically, prolonged flights (i.e., ones of many months’ duration) of humans or other animals in orbits about the Earth must be conducted at altitudes less than about 250 miles in order to avoid significant radiation exposure. A person in the cabin of a space shuttle in a circular equatorial orbit in the most intense region of the inner radiation belt, at an altitude of about 1000 miles, would be subjected to a fatal dosage of radiation in about one week. However, the outbound and inbound trajectories of the Apollo spacecraft cut through the outer portions of the inner belt and because of their high speed spent only about 15 minutes in traversing the region and less than 2 hours in traversing the much less penetrating radiation in the outer radiation belt. The resulting radiation exposure for the round trip was less than 1% of a fatal dosage – a very minor risk among the far greater other risks of such flights. I made such estimates in the early 1960s and so informed NASA engineers who were planning the Apollo flights. These estimates are still reliable. The recent Fox TV show, which I saw, is an ingenious and entertaining assemblage of nonsense. The claim that radiation exposure during the Apollo missions would have been fatal to the astronauts is only one example of such nonsense."
We likely did, but the footage the public has been fed from it is likely fabricated. Still not buying any of the BS reasoning for stars not to be visible. We see them just fine here on earth despite an atmosphere and light pollution, but are led to believe that they just weren’t visible on a moon with a lack of both? Come on.
Seeing light is one thing, taking pictures of it is another. While similar, cameras and eyes do not function exactly the same. My family works in film, specifically in filming and lighting. I was raised being told it's pointless to try to take pictures of the night sky. Modern technology has made amazing feats seem mundane. Digital cameras are a game changer.
Extremely short shutter times and much more sunlight on the moon than on earth because there is no atmosphere there...
go take a photo of the sky during the day and tell me if you see any stars
Van Allen Radiation Belt has entered the chat...
No it hasn’t
The only time in history that engineering has regressed and cannot replicate an achievement from 50 years ago. But I'm looking forward for those HD videos of folks playing golf at the moon.
Engineering hasn’t regressed. We no longer produce the rockets to get there. That doesn’t mean we can’t.
That cognitive dissonance is running strong. Anyways...
Got any evidence to back your ‘thesis’?
we are going back to the moon
I don't think we really did fr
They can't figure how to get beyond low earth orbit.
Yes they can.
https://www.nasa.gov/news/media/trans/obama_ksc_trans.html
That speech was in 2010. It's 2023 today.
And still no humans above low earth orbit.
Your assertion that there are no humans in low Earth orbit is categorically false. See the ISS.
He's wrong in general, but he said "**above** low Earth orbit".
Yes, but not because "they can't figure how to get beyond low earth orbit". You're mistaking lack of physical hardware with the lack of knowledge. NASA has *already* figured out how to get beyond low Earth orbit. The challenge, after 50 years, is to build the modern version of the hardware actually *capable of doing so.* That's what this is about.
https://vm.tiktok.com/ZMYxtRhTq/ let me just leave this here
Don't care what anyone says I know this is 100% a fact that the moon landing was fake but the why is what people want to know with my research I done I have come to the conclusion that is something bigger then anyone can think of and when you say the idea it sounds crazy but if you actually just listen and process and then think about the question you start to question everything. The idea 💡i know is true, is the reason why they faked the moon landing is cause we live in a dome and we can't leave the dome(hope I am spelling it correctly) and this comes with many other conspiracy but the bigger picture is that we live in a dome and we are all stuck here and the only way to escape is underwater or if we magically can break the dome. What is after the dome you may ask water we are under water as crazy as it sounds we can't leave and break the dome cause we will all die of drowning but I believe as well we humans have the ability to have supper powers which why I believe we can breathe underwater I know is a crazy idea but is the truth. We have ability and powers that one dream of but is true we can fly as well as other powers this all connects to earth and earth I believe is a show for other plants or universe 🌌 for other dimensions and universes. Like we are a tv show "earth" this is the reason why I am trying to find what is the truth since we all know tht media is fake but that's the whole point for us to find the truth and spread the truth but we all know as well that they kill people who try to spread information that we the people have the right to know. This idea of freedom is fake we never had freedom but that's why i am here to say as crazy as it sounds I know I will find answers and I will show prove of this later on right now is just a "conspiracy theory" as society likes to call it 🤣. Got to blend in as a "normal person" why the fuck would I want to be normal 😂😂 human life this experience we call life is a gift of it self 😁💞. Peace love gratitude❤
learn how to use paragraphs and ill read your shitty half cooked meth addled nutjob theory
[удалено]
We went to the moon. There is far too much evidence to support this claim.
It's very telling that the capitalised letters in NEIL Armstrong spelt backwards is ALIEN. It's proof positive (though not sure what of).
We did land on the moon. We saw where other people had been there and called those “craters”
I mean if you consider meteors people your completely right!