Something I never questioned until this idiot told me not to
(media.communities.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (44)
sorted by:
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.
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.
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.
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.
A lot of people here keep doing this. They'll say the landing is fake, so therefore all landings are fake and impossible because Earth is flat and therefore Earth is flat because science doesn't work. It's getting ridiculous.
I'm saying the scientific principles are sound. Maybe the technology doesn't exist at certain times to do certain things with that information, but it does exist. I just don't know about the specifics of the technology used back then since I wasn't around back then and even if I were, the technology would not have been something I could get at my local pharmacy.
The Flat Earther was trying to get me to explain the intricacies of space travel because he doesn't understand the basic scientific principles found in high school textbooks. Your questions were kind of a pile on since I was having to show him he was wrong on the basics and now I had to figure out specifics as if I were a 70 year-old world class photographer engineer astronaut because the Flat Earther was trying to disprove science.
No accusations or hard feelings though. I just don't want to get stuck defending their positions and have them think they've beaten science because I didn't want to keep looking into something because their basics are wrong and it's not even my position.
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.
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".
And yet we illuminate inside vacuum chambers.
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.
Show me these in space, working please
It’s astonishing how confident you are while being so obviously wrong.
Guess you missed my post on the Dunning Kruger effect.
Wow