Even if we assume those arbitrary low-res lines aren't made by microsoft paint, all that proves is that there is in unmanned robot on the moon. Same as the one Russia put there. Same as the one China put there. It does NOT prove we put men on the moon and got them back safely. Got any more evidence? No ya don't faggot lmao
lmao you're such a simp for the deep state
Yes there is. FFS - you might want to think before you post that what you say is 100% wrong. https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/LRO/images/index.html
imagine thinking this image is proof that men landed on the moon and returned safely to earth: https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/styles/full_width_feature/public/thumbnails/image/vikram_ejecta_1100px_scalebar.png
700 million views (allegedly) of pointing at the moon-landing; while singing "sweet dreams are made of this".
Wrong, you fucking schizophrenic. That's just a music video from the 1980s. Any moon landing skepticism you see there is just you reading into it.
Ahh I know I shouldn't keep going. The poetic way you typed out "Why not just fly the hardware for real?" betrays your dwindling composure. I'm not even sure it's safe for you if I keep going. But I think you genuinely believe this shit and one of my absolute favorite things to do is pop redpill cherries. Ahhhh just one more~
we made all this hardware to aerospace specs, made craft capable of doing the mission (that left piles of technical residue we still poke at today, see "Curious Marc" on youtube), faked imagery from different missions decades later...so we could make a movie to beat the Soviets to the Moon.
First of all, yes, the Cold War was mostly fought with propaganda. Making a movie to convince everyone that Capitalism is better than communism was worth all the trouble and money just for that alone. To this day, landing on the moon is used as shorthand for technological achievement. Cellphones and the internet have probably had more of an impact on the world, but everyone the world over still regards putting men on the moon as the GOAT. I still believe in American Exceptionalism, but thinking we were the only people who ever put men on the moon made me believe a lot harder.
Furthermore, the Space Race functioned as cover for developing Inter-Continental Ballistic Missile technology. In the 1960s there were was a rapidly growing antiwar sentiment, so it wasn't politically viable to say "we're gonna spend your tax money on making even more deadly weapons". Lucky for the feds that most of the technology developed during the Space Race doubled as technology for ICBMs in low-earth orbit. Saying "we're gonna spend your tax money on, uh, GOING TO DA MOON!" struck the public as something admirable, as opposed to evil. All the technology developed in the Space Race that actually works still works to this day. Most people literally cannot function without a GPS. Those ICBMs are still hanging above us like a Sword of Damocles. It's only the technology that enables us to put men on the moon and return them that has suspiciously been lost.
it's not like there's currently no incentive to return to the moon. Growing up, I was told that the reason we haven't yet returned was because there's nothing there. Yet it's now common knowledge that the moon is packed with valuable Helium-3: https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/studies/191/lunar-helium-3-fusion-resource-distribution/
Oh man, thank you much! I never expected to find someone so firmly dug in to the narrative here of all places. It's like finding a virgin on tinder. I'll stop now though, don't worry. I might actually put this on my blog though! Thanks for the content too!
You've debunked nothing because you haven't presented anything but opinions and speculation. I'm still the only one that's posted even a fucking delta-V value in this thread...and it supported my argument.
The burden of proof is on the person making the extraordinary claim. Putting men on the moon and getting them back is such an extraordinary claim, no country not even America has come anywhere close to doing so in 50 years, despite technology getting simultaneously more advanced and cheaper. I have presented evidence; the evidence supplied by NASA itself which is insufficient for any unbiased researcher. The evidence you have supplied is even worse than that.
...and random naturally occurring footpaths, and random naturally occurring objects that just happen to look like the body plan of a Apollo LM.
Is this evidence that there is a man's face on the surface of Mars? https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/image/2107/MartianFace_Viking_960.jpg No? But it looks exactly like a face!
Randomly naturally occuring sites that just happen to look like sketches from the Apollo records.
Oh, my sweet summer child... they sketched the pictures based on the naturally occurring sites. It didn't happen the other way around. WhOa how could they have possibly obtained the resources to pull that one off? lol that's sarcasm in case you couldn't tell.
No, they just got rid of all the smart white people and filled the org with diversity hires and climate fairies.
Now I see you're trying to deflect this into something about race? Is that really rational? Listen, you're clearly getting upset, just like I was, so I think it's best for now that I let you sit and chew on the world-shattering information I provided. I genuinely can empathize though. It took me over half a fucking year to work through this emotionally. I'll be the first to admit I behaved as irrationally as you are right now:
"ME? Wrong about something so big for so long? POPPYCOCK! It is THEY the CoNsPiRaCy ThEoRiStS who are wrong. I can solve differential equations! Can THEY? NO! Therefore I AM RIGHT!!!"
Even if it takes you a year to admit that you don't have a good reason to believe the US government put men on the moon in 1969, that's still better than most people. You never have to explicitly concede defeat to me, but going forward remember that there is no real need for you to maintain the lie to everyone else. Perhaps you could try doing some investigating on your own instead of relying on youtube videos, hm?
Here are the absolute highest res images NASA provides of the moon landing sites. Do you really think you couldn't make these in Microsoft paint? Actually, it looks like they just put labels and arrows next to random naturally occurring craters: https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/apollo/revisited/index.html
If they have higher res images, why not share them? NaTiOnAl SeCuRiTy ReAsOnS? Furthermore, what would be the purpose of hiding them from the public until long after Photoshop is perfected?
And that's your final piece of evidence debunked. Again, it's okay to admit you were tricked. Hey man, I get it. It took me months and months to come to terms with the fact that I bought the deep state's bullshit hook, line, and sinker just like you for the first 30 years of my existence. Just like you, I fought against reality tooth and nail. But after I calmed down I accepted the fact that Nixon faked the moon landing and that's okay because he had to in order to beat communism.
PS: what do you make of the info OP posted i.e. NASA claims to no longer have the ability to go to the moon? Do you think they accidentally deleted all the design documents that led to the "crowning technological achievement of humanity" like a bunch of bumbling buffoons? Or is the more parsimonious explanation that they never had that ability to begin with? I won the lottery btw, but I lost the ticket! Can't prove that I didn't ;)
Do you concede that, because the Soviets also put a retroreflector on the moon, it does not follow that retroreflectors are sufficient evidence that we put men on the moon? So far, other than that you have provided nothing but theory. You need extraordinary evidence to back up your extraordinary claim. The time to believe something is AFTER sufficient evidence has been supplied for it. You're asking me to prove a negative which is not logically possible. I'm asking you to defend your extraordinary claim. Sorry, the word of disgraced president Richard Nixon, 12 astronauts (who also claim there are aliens), and that blurry video is not enough.
You might want to sit down for this.
The retroreflector is not sufficient evidence of putting men on the moon and returning them to earth because the Soviets put one there too: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_retroreflectors_on_the_Moon Do you think Soviets also put men on the moon? If not, you may no longer use the retroreflectors as evidence.
I understand the coasting thing, I was more saying that just because we have things in space it doesn't mean we put men on the moon, which is orders of magnitude more difficult. Consider the resources required to get a rocket off of earth. The moon has a 1/6 the gravity and no atmosphere, sure, but it would certainly have required more than what they claim was present in the moon lander. The fuel allegedly used in the moon lander to propel it off a small planet is either magic or insufficient to get something of its size off the moon. Of course, we "no longer have access to the magical propellant" so you can't check their work. Just like the HD footage of the moon landing they accidentally taped over. Just like the telemetry data they accidentally deleted.
There is no shame in changing your view on something. You were duped. We all were. It's time to be honest now.
No one (who isn't a shill) is claiming it's all fake. Getting in low-earth orbit is trivial; you can practically do it with a balloon. That's where all the satellites, space stations, and ICBMs are. But the moon is 100x further away than that. Getting there, landing on the moon (which is nearly the size of a planet), rocketing off the moon, and safely returning is the extraordinary claim for which is there is insufficient evidence.
Man, I question the narrative about the moon landing just a tiny bit and shills come out of the woodwork, making sure to double post each time.
I must be over target 😉
PS: gravity and the atmosphere bends light ships disappear over the horizon, GPS's work, every visible celestial object is a globe, water forms a ball shape in zero G
link for the lazy?