If we actually landed on the moon 50+ years ago, you know we would be mining the sh^t out of that place today.
-
41
-
gottagofast wrote:
valjean wrote:
So dune buggies require far more advanced tech than observing merging black holes via gravitational waves? That doesn't make sense to me. Why is sending a human to the moon so much harder than building an impossibly precise and fantastical detection instrument? Before you say "van allen radiation" remember that the satellites that discovered the van allen belts were in fact discovered and mapped by the group that later became NASA - so if you think NASA is conspiring against us, then why do you trust their reports about the existence of the van allen belts themselves?
In the 60s before we had circuitboards at scale and with nascent computing? Yes.
If sending a human is so easy, go ahead and send one now after 60 years of technological improvements.
Why is it necessary to have circuitboards made at scale? Were circuitboards the only thing keeping us from going to the moon? I thought that the problem was radiation shielding. What was the problem then?
Luckily for you, there are multiple manned lunar missions planned for the next few years
02 -
Kolsiv wrote:
The hoops you guys have to jump through trying to prove it. Lol
Just because one thing happens doesn’t mean something else happened.
I agree. Can you point out the place where I made a mistaken casual link between that something and that something else?
01 -
valjean wrote:
gottagofast wrote:
In the 60s before we had circuitboards at scale and with nascent computing? Yes.
If sending a human is so easy, go ahead and send one now after 60 years of technological improvements.
Why is it necessary to have circuitboards made at scale? Were circuitboards the only thing keeping us from going to the moon? I thought that the problem was radiation shielding. What was the problem then?
Luckily for you, there are multiple manned lunar missions planned for the next few years
There have been planned missions every decade since the "landings." There are always reasons why they never pan out, but they still keep dangling that carrot out there.
Don't worry, I hear we're going to go "around the moon" very soon.
20 -
gottagofast wrote:
valjean wrote:
Why is it necessary to have circuitboards made at scale? Were circuitboards the only thing keeping us from going to the moon? I thought that the problem was radiation shielding. What was the problem then?
Luckily for you, there are multiple manned lunar missions planned for the next few years
There have been planned missions every decade since the "landings." There are always reasons why they never pan out, but they still keep dangling that carrot out there.
Don't worry, I hear we're going to go "around the moon" very soon.
I guess we'll see. So were circuitboards or radiation shielding the problem or what? And why do you trust NASA to tell you about space at all if you don't trust what they say about the moon landing? For all you know, space might not exist. There might just be a big dome up there
01 -
valjean wrote:
Kolsiv wrote:
The hoops you guys have to jump through trying to prove it. Lol
Just because one thing happens doesn’t mean something else happened.
I agree. Can you point out the place where I made a mistaken casual link between that something and that something else?
A few posts back.
Golf and dune buggies. 😂
00 -
Kolsiv wrote:
A few posts back.
Golf and dune buggies. 😂
can you be more specific
00 -
valjean wrote:
gottagofast wrote:
There have been planned missions every decade since the "landings." There are always reasons why they never pan out, but they still keep dangling that carrot out there.
Don't worry, I hear we're going to go "around the moon" very soon.
I guess we'll see. So were circuitboards or radiation shielding the problem or what? And why do you trust NASA to tell you about space at all if you don't trust what they say about the moon landing? For all you know, space might not exist. There might just be a big dome up thereU
You seem to be under the impression that NASA invented space or astronomy. They didn't.
And just because they faked one thing doesn't mean they faked all things.
I think this is probably where they drew most of their inspiration. Humanity has been interested in faking moon landings for some time:
Check out the highly scientific splashdown at 11:11. How are you going to argue with that? It's on grainy, black and white footage.
00 -
10
-
It's so obvious wrote:
There is absolutely no way the moon landings could have been staged on Earth. Come on. This is obvious. Way too many people would be in the know, far too many witnesses, and everything would have leaked by now. No way.
Instead, the moon landings were faked on the moon. No witnesses nearby. The perfect place to pull off a hoax of this magnitude in absolute secrecy.
Totally obvious once you think about it.
Agreed. THAT was how they faked it!
02 -
Johnny Vohden wrote:
So we can assume the Apollo 1 tragedy and Apollo 13 were also staged to give validity to the Apollo fake landings? That's giving it your all...dying for a hoax.
Nah, those tragedies were all faked. Nobody ever really died in the Apollo program. Those people never even existed. Just like the Sandy Hook "kids".
01 -
Kolsiv wrote:
If we actually landed on the moon 50+ years ago, you know we would be mining the sh^t out of that place today.
Yeah, for sure. Because we all know that would be a really cheap way to get some minerals.
10 -
Gus Grissom was speaking truth.
That was no accident, he was murdered.
10 -
Your smart aleck comments are not helping. These space missions, going back to Soviets and recent years China have been missions 50 to 400 miles from surface of the Earth.
00 -
The actorNOTS could not fake it for the cameras, they lied to the entire world.
OneGiantLie
10 -
gottagofast wrote:
You seem to be under the impression that NASA invented space or astronomy. They didn't.
And just because they faked one thing doesn't mean they faked all things.
I think this is probably where they drew most of their inspiration. Humanity has been interested in faking moon landings for some time:
Check out the highly scientific splashdown at 11:11. How are you going to argue with that? It's on grainy, black and white footage.
My point is - if you say that NASA's claims about the moon are false, then how do you separate those claims from the rest of their claims? If they are lying about the moon, how do you know they are not lying about anything else? Are they lying about the moon missions and ONLY the moon missions? To what extent are they lying about the moon missions? If they see a good reason to lie about the moon missions, why would they not be willing to lie about other missions as well?
04 -
Timothy Foyle wrote:
Kolsiv wrote:
If we actually landed on the moon 50+ years ago, you know we would be mining the sh^t out of that place today.
Yeah, for sure. Because we all know that would be a really cheap way to get some minerals.
It would be. With an additional 50 years of technology you don’t think we could have figured it out?
Apparently all you would need is a tin can, some bottle rockets and a Commodore 64. That’s how we got the dune buggy and golf balls there, right?
00 -
5 years ago, I was just about the only one or two who railed against the NASA narrative on LR. I'm glad that so many of you have seen the light and have joined my side of the argument.
We never landed on the moon- accept this NASA believers. You've been deceived.
20 -
it is interesting ... wrote:
Fakers wrote:
20 astronauts! Mission Control! All their families! It’s more work to fake!
Why hasn’t ANYONE taken a photo of the empty landing sites? It would be so easy! Russia or China could do it tonight!
Twenty so-called space travellers would be on need to know. Their families? You must be joking. Do people at N.S.A., C.I.A., Office of Naval Intelligence tell their wives about their day at work? No! Mission Control? Stove pipe. Need to know only.
They interviewed and made of the show of the families for every launch. You really don’t know how secret projects work. 24 astronauts just kept quiet for their whole lives ok…
Mission Control, “need to know,” simulated data and control for the whole mission, simulated accidents etc.
This stuff is just funny. It’s harder to fake at this point.
00
What People Are Talking About On LetsRun