Signs of the incoming dark ages: lost technology
(twitter.com)
Comments (22)
sorted by:
outside of a few very specific examples, i call bullshit on "lost technology" from any point in the modern era.
that we don't know how ancient civilization X managed to build thing Y thousands of years ago: sure.
that we can't figure out how to go to the moon from scratch in the 21st century when allegedly NASA did it in just 9 years back in the 20th century? lmao even.
going to the Moon is the story of White excellence.
so they won't let it be told again.
no one else is smart enough to put a manned team together.
anyways.. NASAs always been a breeding ground for occult weirdos and straight up satanists.. their designs for humanity have never been pure.
I am doubtful of the moon hoax and similar NASA conspiracies, but I don't doubt for a minute it has been a cesspit of some of the weirdest degenerates in our society. Especially post Apollo and double especially in the more contemporary era.
Contrary to the conspiracy documentaries (at least the pre-10/7 ones), I have zero reservations for Werner von Braun and his band of Aerospace Aryans. Honestly, the last time I would consider NASA a semi trustworthy organization was when Werner was running the technical matters there.
I don't know if the reason we haven't gone back is due to their aversion to White excellence, though. I think they would love nothing more than to plant a large squad of diversity on the moon and "correct" the history. Honestly, as I said below, I think the issue really just comes down to the difficulty and cost of going to the moon. When you couple that with how incompetent the US is now due to the larger social agenda, I don't think they could get it together. Now that China will soon be there, their hand has been forced and they are trying to go back ASAP.
The only white excellence during the fake Apollo missions was Kubrick's film making genius..
I've always found it hilarious that the people who call every image from space fake will cite that one grainy video with some guy who doesn't even really look or sound like Kubrik for eternity. I mean, maybe that video is fake? Is that unthinkable to you people?
I am personally open to hearing out moon hoax theories, but unfortunately most of them are full of dumb bullshit. Obviously the majority are on flat earth videos, so that is expected.
What can I say to someone on a conspiracy site defending the moon landings as real....
This emoji sums it up....🤣
What can I say to someone on a conspiracy site defending the Kubrik confessions as real...
This emoji sums it up...🤣
Like I said, I'm happy to hear moon hoax arguments out. Most of them are pretty dumb, some are OK. If so many moon hoaxers weren't flat earthers, people might take it more seriously.
I know it won't be very popular to say here, but it is entirely understandable that we never went back to the moon after Apollo. Sending humans to the moon (and arguably space at all) has almost no value. The purpose of the moon landing was about geopolitical imagery. The USA and USSR were competing for dominance in the new field of space travel. Once the moon landing was complete, it was just a very expensive (and dangerous) boondoggle and the political will for it largely died out. It should not be lost on anyone that after 50 years of bullshit excuses we are now likely going back. The reason for that is that the Chinese will soon be there, and if not for that we would not be going.
There is a difference between "lost technology" (like we somehow forgot the basic principles) and just no longer making a really complicated machine that has almost no other use. The Saturn V still holds the record for the largest payload delivered to LEO. Unless you are a full "space is fake" person, we have been sending payload to LEO continually since Apollo. There is just no reason to use something like Saturn V when we can launch twice if we have that much to send up.
Again, I know I will get a lot of flack for this, but the reality is that the moon landing is one of the most pointless things imaginable. This is why we stopped going and very quickly all the "institutional knowledge" that was learned during Apollo was lost. Within 25 years, half the people who worked on Apollo had likely retired.
Unless you think Artemis II was a complicated CGI hoax that went on for a week, then we have been back to the moon. In fact, Artemis II broke the distance record that had been in place since Apollo 13. Not landing the first time is not some big tell, it is normal. Apollo 8 did not land either.
Ok i'll bite.
I hear this repeated all the time with zero supporting evidence. Can you tell us how you arrived at the conclusion that there's "almost no value"? Can you tell us which things you considered along the way? In the next sentence you mention "geopolitical imagery" so are you implying that this is no longer a thing and never will be?
I just want to understand how you are thinking about this. A lot of debunkers just repeat the official "no economic incentive, no scientific research potential, no public interest" statement by the government without explaining how those conclusions were reached. Can you help shed light on any of this? And I'm curious if you can do it from memory or if you're going to google it before responding.
Well, I guess what value do you suppose there is in sending humans to the moon? I don't mean to avoid the question, I am being serious. I suppose if you build a moon base so people can actually live there, you could at least stay awhile and not just fly back and forth. What you do there, I'm not exactly sure.
Going forward, maybe there is some military or industrial use to being there. But that would have been totally impractical in the 1970s. So what exactly could NASA do on the moon that was important? Did they go to the moon to play golf? Or maybe to verify a conjecture of Galileo? LMAO! This is totally ridiculous. We have vacuum chambers in laboratories.
Moon hoax theories aside, the actual valuable science from the moon is not an argument for sending people. The constant reply against the theories "there are mirrors on the moon and we bounce lasers off of them" and "we have rocks from the moon that geologists study" may be an argument against "space is fake" but not against the moon hoax. Other countries have put mirrors on the moon and collected rocks that were returned to earth without sending people on this ludicrous trip to drop hammers and feathers. So this means we did not need to do the moon landing for laser reflecting mirrors or rock collecting.
People say after 1972 NASA stagnated and even went backwards. This is not true. Most honest scientists will say that everything of real scientific value from NASA came after Apollo was over. None of it was manned. The scientists who promote moon trips, and other manned missions, are people like Neil Degrass Tyson. He says it is important because it inspires the public or whatever. This is basically an admission that it has no real scientific value. If it did, he would be appealing to that rather than something intangible like "inspiring muh children."
I am actually saying that nowadays it is the opposite, but yes after Apollo there was no longer any value to the politicians. It is completely unsurprising to me that after 50 years it looks sort of likely that we are going back to the moon now, and would you know it, the Chinese are going too. So in the 1960s, the moonshot was a proxy propaganda war between the USA and USSR, and nowadays it is a proxy propaganda war between the USA and China. The more things change, as they say.
As long as there is no geopolitical foe to project dominance over, there is little reason to do the moonshot, which is why governments don't care to go during those times.
I mean, that isn't just "the official statement" it is reality. I know some people deny all of the space program, and that is a separate issue. But NASA claims to have been very active since 1972, and that activity has been extremely valuable. By any objective metric, it has been more valuable.
A short and incomplete list would be (1) Robotic exploration: Voyager (1 and 2), Mariner, Galileo, Cassini, Juno, Curiosity, Opportunity, MRO, New Horizons, etc. (2) Space based telescopes: Hubble, Chandra, Kepler, Webb, Roman, etc.. (3) Earth surveys: all the low satellites mapping and studying every square inch of the earth. (4) Heliophysics and space weather: all the satellites monitoring the sun and its output in the local interplanetary medium. (5) Long term manned missions: the ISS and the shuttle (many people consider this to not have much scientific value compared to the other 4, however it is worth noting that it was a (LEO) manned mission that fixed Hubble after it went up dysfunctional and manned missions have done maintenance and dragged it out of orbital decay for 35 years).
Maybe you propose that all of this is fake too, that's fine. But the claim that space stopped after 1972 is just wrong. The issue is exactly what you asked me evidence for. The public was interested (initially) in the moon landing. They are not interested in the dynamics of the Saturn system, whether there is water on Mars, the minor rings of the other giants, or the glacial activity of Pluto, let alone deep telescopic imagery. So most people, apparently you too, don't seem to understand that NASA has been very active for the past 50 years. And by any honest metric their output has been much more important and valuable to humanity than Alan Shepard golfing on the moon.
You can't anymore when the UN starts declaring everyone with even a brain cell to be a sinner unfit for the real world and is thus only fit for the concentration camp. At one point humanity will even forget how to use electricity and create plastic.
We absolutely did not lose the technology for reverse image search.
At worst, laypeople lost access to reverse image search. The technology is still very extant.
What do you think stable diffusion, Blip, and Clip are?
AI generation tools are not reverse image search.
Also if the only reverse image search that works is google (mind you, SauceNAO used to work but now it just stopped updating or whatever), you have a problem.
dude.. use arxiv.. find the papers.
the technology is just sitting there. implement it in any one of it's dozens of forms that have been fully detailed for you and anyone else who cares to look.
what you need is a database of images to actually run the comparison against. that's the limiting factor.
no one ever landed on the fckng moon.
that's first lesson in reality school.
Ikr 😆...they're all talking in here like it actually happened..
Am I on reddit right now?
"rettard it."
and this site is for langley interns.
Reminder that the Roman Empire is famous for its aqueducts but after the Christians destroyed it from the inside, most people don't even know what an aqueduct is anymore before it got reinvented in the 19th century.
History repeats.
The Eastern Roman Empire was Christian.
The use of techno (artifice) + logy (logic) tempts one to ignore loss aka the flow of nature allowing one to form growth.
Forget implies "getting forwarded"...that's the loss (inception towards death) of growth (life) one forgets when using technology.
A specific can only come into being inside...few suggest examples to tempt many to imitate outside (suggestion), while ignoring inside (perception).
Ignoring perception for suggestion transforms a specific into a common.
EVERYONE implies the UNITING of each NATION into every...a collectivization aka tikkun olam (repairing the world by bringing together).
If you view humanity as "everyone"; then you are holding the UN together.
??? Its literally available on google right now