Win / Conspiracies
Conspiracies
Communities Topics Log In Sign Up
Sign In
Hot
All Posts
Settings
All
Profile
Saved
Upvoted
Hidden
Messages

Your Communities

General
AskWin
Funny
Technology
Animals
Sports
Gaming
DIY
Health
Positive
Privacy
News
Changelogs

More Communities

frenworld
OhTwitter
MillionDollarExtreme
NoNewNormal
Ladies
Conspiracies
GreatAwakening
IP2Always
GameDev
ParallelSociety
Privacy Policy
Terms of Service
Content Policy
DEFAULT COMMUNITIES • All General AskWin Funny Technology Animals Sports Gaming DIY Health Positive Privacy
Conspiracies Conspiracy Theories & Facts
hot new rising top

Sign In or Create an Account

31
Something I never questioned until this idiot told me not to (media.communities.win)
posted 4 years ago by eagleheart585 4 years ago by eagleheart585 +33 / -2
44 comments download share
44 comments share download save hide report block hide replies
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (44)
sorted by:
▲ 2 ▼
– frazzledrip 2 points 4 years ago +8 / -6

oh my.... you know about the dog. You have NO idea how many people I bring that up to and they never heard of it. I actually was taught that in grade school.

But the landings were faked. Artificial lights, of any kind, won't work in a vacuum, period. You can't be out on the moon when the sun's out - you'd die instantly.

The moon landings were just compilation footage of the training videos. If you dig, you can find some engineers standing near a VERY large, full scale moon with a track going around it. Hook a camera to that track, and you can easily make it look like you're "landing" on the Moon.

Van Allen radiation belts, start between 360 and 400 miles up. Can NOT be passed through by a human. We need 3 ft, of concrete all around you to be protected from Gamma radiation alone ; sun puts out ALL wave lengths of light = radiation. You'd instantaneously evaporate.

Fire / combustion of any kind won't work in a vacuum either. How'd they get off?

Why do we watch Neil Armstrong set up a FILM video camera on a tripod, get back in the LEM, and it's 'blasts off' back to the module..... nobody pays attention that the camera PANS UP to follow the LEM.

How they remote controlled a FILM camera, on the Moon, from Earth in 1969 is amazing because we don't have the tech to do that today.

Just a few points.

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 6 ▼
– jubyeonin 6 points 4 years ago +6 / -0

Light works in a vaccum because it doesn't need a medium. You're thinking of sound. Sound needs a medium.

The Van Allen belt is not solid at all. It's like a thin cloud.

Combustion works with oxygen, so you only need an oxidizer to supply oxygen to get combustion.

They had technology they didn't share with the public back then. I think the moon landing being faked with the technology is not outside possibility, but I won't disregard everything else over the possibility it could be or the possibility it couldn't.

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 4 ▼
– turtlebam 4 points 4 years ago +5 / -1

I used to think the same, but once you really look into it you start to get the idea that for it to be a real landing it would have to be nothing short of a miracle of impossible proportions.

The late Dave McGowan really did write an excellent piece on it: http://centerforaninformedamerica.com/moondoggie/ If you have the time to go through it you will start seeing all the really "incredible" feats they have done.

If you do not have time, think of it like this: The best fighter jet from the sixties will be a sitting duck compared to any modern fighter jet. One would think with all of the advances of the last 50 years, going to the moon would be a piece of cake, except for the fact that they really can't do it again at the moment, and no, the typical brainwashed excuse of: "it cost too much" or "we don't need to" is bullocks.

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 1 ▼
– deleted 1 point 4 years ago +2 / -1
▲ 3 ▼
– jubyeonin 3 points 4 years ago +3 / -0

The film would be shielded until it was being used and it would be affected by radiation, but still usable. But it's not even my position to defend.

I don't know much about film. I would need to be an expert in multiple specific fields to defend a position that isn't even mine. I just don't think that one possible fake moon landing means flath Earth. It's a stupid connection to make.

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 3 ▼
– Blackbeans 3 points 4 years ago +3 / -0

Whoa! No flat earth here. But maybe faked footage, even if a landing did occur. It seems to be a recurring theme these days. Someone said since I didn't like vaccines I was like a flat earther.

permalink parent save report block reply
... continue reading thread?
▲ -5 ▼
– frazzledrip -5 points 4 years ago +3 / -8

wrong.

Artificial light can NOT work in a vacuum. Take a clear tube, a flashlight and a vacuum cleaner. Real simple. Artificial light reacts with oxygen. No oxygen in space. You can even go to NASA's website and read, for yourself, the ENTIRE equipment lists for the Moon landings - no artificial lights.

The VA Radiation belts aren't clouds. Do know what radiation is? It's a form of light, doesn't have a physical property you can touch.

Take a container. Fill half with fuel, half with oxygen. Place an igniter inside. Place entire container in a vacuum. Ignite, and open a vent for exhaust ( or all you have is a bomb ). The nanosecond the vent opens, the vacuum rushes in and separates all atoms. Process fails.

Combustion of any kind can not work in a vacuum.

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 10 ▼
– deleted 10 points 4 years ago +10 / -0
▲ -4 ▼
– frazzledrip -4 points 4 years ago +2 / -6

I think you better check who the 'fuckin retarded' one is. Artificial light, as in a flashlight, studio lights, CERTAINLY will not work in a vacuum. Go back to school "fucking retard".

permalink parent save report block reply
... continue reading thread?
▲ 7 ▼
– TheDigger 7 points 4 years ago +7 / -0

By your logic, vacuum sealed beam headlights, standardized in 1940, wouldn't work because the light would never leave the vacuum sealed unit. But they do work, because regardless of source, light can travel through a vacuum.

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ -3 ▼
– frazzledrip -3 points 4 years ago +1 / -4

Show me these in space, working please

permalink parent save report block reply
... continue reading thread?
▲ 5 ▼
– deleted 5 points 4 years ago +5 / -0
▲ 3 ▼
– ScutFarkus 3 points 4 years ago +4 / -1

It’s astonishing how confident you are while being so obviously wrong.

Guess you missed my post on the Dunning Kruger effect.

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 1 ▼
– PepeWins2020 1 point 4 years ago +1 / -0

Wow

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 3 ▼
– deleted 3 points 4 years ago +3 / -0

GIFs

Conspiracies Wiki & Links

Conspiracies Book List

External Digital Book Libraries

Mod Logs

Honor Roll

Conspiracies.win: This is a forum for free thinking and for discussing issues which have captured your imagination. Please respect other views and opinions, and keep an open mind. Our goal is to create a fairer and more transparent world for a better future.

Community Rules: <click this link for a detailed explanation of the rules

Rule 1: Be respectful. Attack the argument, not the person.

Rule 2: Don't abuse the report function.

Rule 3: No excessive, unnecessary and/or bullying "meta" posts.

To prevent SPAM, posts from accounts younger than 4 days old, and/or with <50 points, wont appear in the feed until approved by a mod.

Disclaimer: Submissions/comments of exceptionally low quality, trolling, stalking, spam, and those submissions/comments determined to be intentionally misleading, calls to violence and/or abuse of other users here, may all be removed at moderator's discretion.

Moderators

  • Doggos
  • axolotl_peyotl
  • trinadin
  • PutinLovesCats
  • clemaneuverers
  • C
Message the Moderators

Terms of Service | Privacy Policy

2025.03.01 - 9slbq (status)

Copyright © 2024.

Terms of Service | Privacy Policy