Is NASA stupid, or are they lying?

Is NASA incompetent or lying, or do you trust NASA?


  • Total voters
    28

Jack Condon

Well-Known Member
How do you think we know exactly how far away the moon is at any given moment?

Lasers. But here's the payoff: you have to have the signal come back to you to determine distance. So how is that working? Mirrors. The Apollo missions set up mirrors on the moon that were then targeted by earth so that we could keep tabs on its position, rotation and any other changes by shooting lasers at the mirrors and getting the signal back.
And that blows any chance of a hoax out of the water.
Reflectors on the moon are not proof that there were people on the moon as remote-controlled landers can have adjustable reflectors attached to their sides. If the Surveyor* missions were real, they had this technology.


*
 

Jack Condon

Well-Known Member
How do you suppose this phot was published in early 1969 a couple of weeks after it was taken around Christmas time by Apollo 8? The technology did not exist to fake it then or make it with an un manned space probe, this was taken by a Hasselblad camera by astronauts.
Give me a break. There are plausible scenarios that would explain that photo.

An unmanned probe could have taken that photo. They could have added a photo of Earth to a bogus moon. There might have been an unmanned craft orbiting the moon which took the photo. That photo isn't proof that there were people on the moon.
 

Jack Condon

Well-Known Member
We didn't have landers technology in the late 60's. We didn't have that until the mid 70's with Viking in 1976.
Go back and look at post #201.

Also, we don't know what kind of classified technology they had. You're basing all your opinions on what the mainstream press says.
 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
Reflectors on the moon are not proof that there were people on the moon as remote-controlled landers can have adjustable reflectors attached to their sides. If the Surveyor* missions were real, they had this technology.


*
Grasping for straws and rationalizing bullshit.

Why the obsession with a historical event that is 50 years old and one that there is subsequent photographic evidence of that I posted here? The moon landings were faked, now the LRO mission team is in on the conspiracy 50 years after. Everybody it seems was part of the conspiracy from independent scientists in the UK to the Russians who lost the space race to the moon. Next, when they go back to the moon and provide more evidence of the original landings that will be faked too.

I lived the Apollo landings, stayed up at night as a 14 year old kid and watched Apollo 11 on TV, all the newspapers had it in their largest headline font. Millions showed up for the launch including the president of the USA. It happed idiot, I and millions of people alive now witnessed it.

It is far better documented than the WW2 battle of midway, are you saying that that was faked too? I mean there's not nearly the evidence that exists for the moon landing.

Here's an earth rise from LRO, 50 years after the original

1620047591659.png
 

Jack Condon

Well-Known Member
The proof of a hoax* is clear. There's nothing you shills** can do to make the viewers think otherwise.


*


**
 
Last edited:

Jack Condon

Well-Known Member
I lived the Apollo landings, stayed up at night as a 14 year old kid and watched Apollo 11 on TV, all the newspapers had it in their largest headline font. Millions showed up for the launch including the president of the USA. It happed idiot, I and millions of people alive now witnessed it.
I watched it too. I was thirteen. It was a big letdown. I expected to see clear footage of jumps in lunar gravity. I got bored and went to bed before it ended.

They used a crude fifty percent slow-motion to fake lunar gravity in Apollo 11. Double the speed of this video and everything will look like it happened in Earth gravity.

Historic Apollo 11 Moonwalk Footage
 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
Give me a break. There are plausible scenarios that would explain that photo.

An unmanned probe could have taken that photo. They could have added a photo of Earth to a bogus moon. There might have been an unmanned craft orbiting the moon which took the photo. That photo isn't proof that there were people on the moon.
The simplest solution that fits the evidence is the most likely one to be true, Occam's razor.
You are grasping for straws because your ego is tied to this boat anchor of an idea and you're drowning in a sea of truth and fact. The chain that binds you to this incredibly stupid notion is held fast by the sources you cite.

You cannot think critically or logically and I suspect you are poorly educated as well and as a result of your mental deficiencies. You are a shining example of the Dunning Kruger effect.
 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
I watched it too. I was thirteen. It was a big letdown. I expected to see clear footage of jumps in lunar gravity. I got bored and went to bed before it ended.

They used a crude fifty percent slow-motion to fake lunar gravity in Apollo 11. Double the speed of this video and everything will look like it happened in Earth gravity.

Historic Apollo 11 Moonwalk Footage
That's because you are stupid and easily bored by things you did not understand and apparently still don't.

CBS NEWS COVERAGE - APOLLO 12 MOON LUNAR LANDING (11-19-1969)
 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
Hey @potroast, here's your chance to become part of the conspiracy and even cancel culture! :lol: Does a fruitcake conspiracy thread belong in the politics section? I think it would be appropriate to move this piece of trash to a more appropriate section of RIU, some dusty corner of toke'talk perhaps? It's not really about politics, but a tenuous grasp on reality and is just more disinformation that has little to do with politics.

Help this fellow and the OP to stop making a fool's of themselves in the politics section.
 

Unclebaldrick

Well-Known Member
Here's some psychology.


McCann's Embedded Confessions - PART 1 OF 3


He does the Apollo astronauts' interviews too.

Analysing The Astronauts - PART 1 OF 3


Analysing The Astronauts - PART 2 OF 3

Analysing The Astronauts - PART 3 OF 3
Thank you. That was hilarious. Only watched the first five minutes but I will get to the rest when I have some time that I do not respect.

I can honestly say that I would trust the views of Richard Hell before your thought guide Richard Hall.
 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
Every aspect of the Apollo era is a subject of academic historical study, there are hundreds of historians who specialize in this particular field and many work in archives. Here is an example of the kinds of details they cover. In this case it's the American Geophysical Union doing a review of the work done after the lighting strike at the launch of Apollo 12 and subsequent research
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Apollo 12 Lightning Incident: Fifty Years of Advancing the State of the Art

Less than a minute after lift-off from Kennedy Space Center on 14 November 1969, the Apollo 12 vehicle triggered two lightning flashes as it ascended through an otherwise non-thunderstorm cloud system. The flashes caused critical upsets in circuits, indicators, power, and telemetry which might have required the second Moon-landing mission to be aborted if not for the quick action of ground engineers and astronauts. The incident immediately spawned an enormous body of research, starting with discussions at the AGU Fall Meeting in December 1969, into exactly how to detect and avoid the cloud electrical conditions that might interact with rockets and their exhaust plumes to trigger lightning. In a series of brief talks, this session will discuss lessons learned, current best practices, and still-needed research to maximize launch safety and availability.
 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
How do we know this isn't fake? At 41 seconds they say it's 13 (39 ft) meters away, it sure looks closer than 13 meters to me! I mean this could all be CGI these days, unlike the 60's and 70's, they have the technology these days to do this stuff! The space station conspiracy! Just because you can see it in the sky and in some detail with binoculars, doesn't mean anything, don't believe what your lying eyes are telling you!

Are they just making sacrifices to the lizard aliens to keep them off earth? :lol: Note the fake round earth, everybody knows the earth is flat! :lol: Besides, Jesus lives above the sky with God, took over the franchise a few years back, at least people are saying he did...
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SpaceX Crew-2 docks with space station in these awesome views

Watch the soft capture of the SpaceX Crew-2's Crew Dragon Endeavour on April 24, 2021 in these International Space Station camera views.
 

potroastV2

Well-Known Member
Hey @potroast, here's your chance to become part of the conspiracy and even cancel culture! :lol: Does a fruitcake conspiracy thread belong in the politics section? I think it would be appropriate to move this piece of trash to a more appropriate section of RIU, some dusty corner of toke'talk perhaps? It's not really about politics, but a tenuous grasp on reality and is just more disinformation that has little to do with politics.

Help this fellow and the OP to stop making a fool's of themselves in the politics section.

Why would I do that? Then all of you guys would not be able to respond to every idiotic post he makes! :lol:

:mrgreen:
 

TacoMac

Well-Known Member
Whoooooooole lotta bullshit.
You know, it's appropriate this thread gets made when here is this months issue of Popular Mechanics:

Pop Mech April.jpg

And you fit the mold of the article to absolute perfection.

Here's a good excerpt from the article:

A 2016 Chapman University survey of American adults found most respondents believed the government is covering up information regarding 9/11, while an alarming 33 percent believed the government is concealing information about the legendary "North Dakota Crash".​
Now, go ahead and Google up the "North Dakota Crash" and what do you see?

You see links like this:



But here's the rub: There is no such thing as the North Dakota Crash. The research group made it up. Most of the shit you're spewing is the same: made up junk.
 
Top