We Probably Never Made it to the Moon

a reply to: firerescue
The way that he gets up just seems so unnatural, and is exactly how someone on a wire would be hoisted up.

With 1/6 gravity, I would weigh 26kg on the moon or about the same as an 8 year old, yet have the strength of a fully grown man. I'd be jumping around like a good 'un! Certainly wouldn't need help getting up.

originally posted by: baggy7981
a reply to: firerescue
The way that he gets up just seems so unnatural, and is exactly how someone on a wire would be hoisted up.

With 1/6 gravity, I would weigh 26kg on the moon or about the same as an 8 year old, yet have the strength of a fully grown man. I'd be jumping around like a good 'un! Certainly wouldn't need help getting up.

Stop laughing...

originally posted by: Grenade
a reply to: xollo6

Wait, you're Jesus?

I'd like you to explain your theory on the moon landings in more than one sentence and with some substance.

Yes, I really am the one they call Jesus and I can prove it.

a reply to: xollo6

Never seen these before. WTF

Well, that right there proves to me that at least some of the ISS stuff is total and utter BS.

Well played, even if you are a nutter.

originally posted by: Grenade
a reply to: xollo6

Never seen these before. WTF

Well, that right there proves to me that at least some of the ISS stuff is total and utter BS.

Well played, even if you are a nutter.

It is not that I am mad, it is only that my head is different from yours.

Her hair though lol

a reply to: xollo6

Actually, the messiah complex is a psychological condition, which technically means you’re mental. Still, making me laugh, so keep it up.

originally posted by: Grenade
a reply to: xollo6

Actually, the messiah complex is a psychological condition, which technically means you’re mental. Still, making me laugh, so keep it up.

NOEL is LEON

Wanna play?

JESUS real name is ZEUS ... JESUS without the J...

originally posted by: cooperton
I want to go over some recent developments that show we actually have no clue how to get to the moon. First off, NASA astronaut Don Pettit admits that we "lost the technology (to get us to the moon) and it's a long and painful process to get it back"

Next is a NASA engineer saying we still have yet to figure out how to get through the Van Allen Belts:

"radiation like this can harm the guidance system..shielding will be put to the test as the vehicle goes through the radiation.. sensors aboard will detect radiation from this region for scientists to study.. we must solve this problem before we send people through this region of space" (starts at 3:00 in the video below)

The Van Allen Belts are about 3,400 miles high above earth's surface. To put things in perspective, the International Space Station (ISS) is only about 1/15th of the way to the van allen belts. Jeff Bezos' Blue Origin flight only made it about 60 miles high, which is about 1/60th of the way to the van allen belts. To actually get to the moon is a 239,000 mile journey, which is about 4,000x further than Jeff Bezos's Blue Origin went, and 1000x further than the ISS. So we have NASA astronauts and engineers admitting the difficulty in barely getting outside of earth's atmosphere, as well as private ventures not really getting close at all to the moon.

It would be no easy task to make it through the Van Allen Belts. The Van Allen Belts range from temperatures of 2,000-20,000 degrees Celsius. That's as much as 4x hotter than the surface of the sun. Take for example rock solid meteors that get liquified and dissipate in this layer. This layer is so hot that it can destroy dense solid nickel-iron compounds (the main elements of meteors), so how could the Apollo modules have survive with such skimpy protection?

Look^ the return module even had a window so if the astronauts wanted to they could look into the star-hot radiation that was violently permeating all around them. There's really no excuse for this. If solid meteors can rarely make it through this layer, then that flimsy ship could not. Besides, with temperatures ranging from 2,000-20,000 degrees Celsius that is far more than enough to melt the aluminum alloy that shielded the return module. The melting point of aluminum is 660 degrees Celsius. For perspective, The melting point of iron (meteors) is 1,538 degrees Celsius. No amount of ablative material can help a spaceship withstand temperatures as hot as the sun.

It's not just the trip to and from that would have been arduous. It turns out the moon itself has plasma winds of its own. Something that we simply didn't know at the time of Apollo, and either got lucky or more likely we just faked it. Or the information was known, and simply repressed to make it a more believable fake landing. Japan released information that plasma hot 'solar winds' are constantly bombarding the lunar surface at 500km/second, or 112,000 mph. Yes that's right, 112,000 mph lava-hot plasma winds continually bombarding that lunar surface (link). These winds are so hot they cannot maintain a normal material form, and instead exist in the 4th state of matter known as "plasma". Solar winds can get as hot as 1,000,000 degrees Celsius(source), This proves the following scene was conducted in a Hollywood basement, and not on the moon:

A scientist before the moon filming even called it that we would be unable to land on the moon, due to the plasma nature of outer space:

go to 3:30 to see him discuss how you can't land on the moon because its plasma.

Interestingly enough, The Japanese scientists cited before found that of the immense amount of plasma bombarding the lunar surface, only 0.1-1% gets reflected (same source as above). This may have been the kind of data that the scientist above was referencing when he said the moon itself is actually a plasma. One thing is for clear though, since the moon does not have an atmosphere or magnetic field to dissipate this energy, anything on the lunar surface is going to get destroyed.


If 1,000,000 degree plasma winds continually bombarding the lunar surface isn't sufficient for you, I'm not sure what would convince you we didn't land on the moon. If it were as inhabitable as we were led to believe in the late 60's and early 70's, we would most definitely have a moonbase there by now. If we got the process down so seamlessly that we made it there multiple times in a row without problems, we should be using it by now as a strategic base. But we don't, because like Don Pettit said, we don't know how to get there. The Artemis Project is supposed to have a moonbase by 2025, but that seems like its not happening.

Budget shouldn't be an excuse either. Take for example the 2MHz of RAM that was used on the Apollo mission. To put things in perspective, a Nintendo 64 has 250MHz of RAM. You can get something 1000x as strong and its 475$. The Apollo computer had a memory of 32kb, that's smaller than even a basic Microsoft Word document. Not to mention the vast advancement of technology that has occurred over that past 50 years+

There's also footage from Apollo 14 of a third astronaut manning the camera. Go to the 2:22 mark and wait and tell me if you can see the boot of the mysterious 3rd astronaut: third astronaut on the moon

Many will argue we already have rovers on mars, which is further than the moon. But they actually got ratted out by a lemming located on Devon Island in Northern Canada:

The top photo is supposedly a picture from the Mars rover, but if you zoom in you can see there is clearly a rodent in the picture. These specific types of rodents are native to Devon Island in Northern Canada. But surely this must be a mistake? Nope... NASA is actually stationed in Devon Island:

"In addition to communications, equipment testing, and vehicular and extra-vehicular operations, Devon Island is the site of the Exploration program, which aims to develop new technologies, strategies, and operational protocols to support the future exploration of the moon, Mars, and other planets." -NASA

So that about wraps it up. They're just another bureaucratic agency that has been robbing the American people of 10s of billions of vital funds each and every year.

This is kinda good and exciting news though, who knows what space is ACTUALLY like???

NASA launders more money than the Vatican. (When I say NASA I mean the government...)

Wouldn't it be wild if there's actually no such thing as solid rock BUT on the earth? We wouldn't be able to fathom such an idea, due to how much the "space program" has nerfed astronomy and theoretical physics. The Manhattan project was to test the U.S. and it's government....

a reply to: visitedbythem

Its not like our government never lies to us....

Shrugs…

Third-party evidence for Apollo Moon landings

en.m.wikipedia.org...


Observers of all missions Edit
The Soviet Union monitored the missions at their Space Transmissions Corps, which was "fully equipped with the latest intelligence-gathering and surveillance equipment".[7] Vasily Mishin, in an interview for the article "The Moon Programme That Faltered", describes how the Soviet Moon programme dwindled after the Apollo landing.[8]

The missions were tracked by radar from several countries on the way to the Moon and back.[9]

Kettering Grammar School Edit
A group at Kettering Grammar School, using simple radio equipment, monitored Soviet and U.S. spacecraft and calculated their orbits.[10][11] According to the group, in December 1972 a member "picks up Apollo 17 on its way to the Moon".[12]

Apollo 8 Edit
Main article: Apollo 8
Apollo 8 was the first crewed mission to orbit the Moon, but did not land.

On December 21, 1968, at 18:00 UT, amateur astronomers (H. R. Hatfield, M. J. Hendrie, F. Kent, Alan Heath, and M. J. Oates) in the UK photographed a fuel dump from the jettisoned S-IVB third rocket stage.[6]
Pic du Midi Observatory (in the French Pyrenees); the Catalina Station of the Lunar and Planetary Laboratory (University of Arizona); Corralitos Observatory, New Mexico, then operated by Northwestern University; McDonald Observatory of the University of Texas; and Lick Observatory of the University of California all filed reports of observations.[6]

Wikipedia down and dirty list of sighted sources. Looking forward to evidence why I should trust or not trust third party verification of the lists individuals and cited sited sources.

Let me see the car on the surface and that will settle it.

Once the Manhattan Project was a success like nothing seen before... the powers that be changed the game.
Just speculating but I believe that became top priority, exploiting the public and NASA is their darling.

So the motives are definitely there.

originally posted by: visitedbythem
Let me see the car on the surface and that will settle it.

they played golf on the Moon


Stop, don''t laugh

a reply to: cooperton

So we live in a simulation where the moon landing is a construct that is faked.

Whatever…..

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: cooperton

So we live in a simulation where the moon landing is a construct that is faked.

Whatever…..

And space is filled with plasma. It isn’t a vacuum.

originally posted by: Grenade
a reply to: xollo6

Even that photo begs the question, what light source is illuminating objects in the shadow of the LEM?

Most importantly probably the moon's albedo:
en.wikipedia.org...


www.youtube.com...

originally posted by: xollo6

Stop laughing...

Nothing to laugh about, the one at around 18 seconds clearly shows his pink pulling him up from his pocket. No wires there.

If everything burns up roughly 3-4 thousand miles out how do all the satellites used for tv work as some say are out in a fixxed orbit at around 22thousand miles out ?? What about that unmanned thing called voyager they sent out that now is supposed to be beyond pluto and still sends pics back here..

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: cooperton

Despite the evidence that we did?

People are free to choose to believe as they wish all the same.

Maybe its made of Cheese.

There is also "evidence" that a bullet flew circles around a card and went through several people and bones and ended up being found in pristine condition. It is called the "Magic bullet" @JFK.

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Akaspeedy
probably by this guy 'editing' it constantly en.wikipedia.org...

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: cooperton

How did we (and the Russians) leave stuff there, then?

Stuff like the five laser retroreflectors that we can now shine lasers off, and get very accurate distance measurements with?

Lunar Laser Ranging experiment From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

probal

When I was at University, we bounced a beam off one of the retroreflectors using the Universities' old 0.6m reflector telescope.

The retroreflectors must be there.

Nope. You can point a laser beam at any spot on the moon and it will bounce back no matter what.

a reply to: everyone

But there is a noticeable difference between the surface of the moon, and the reflectors.