We're going back to the moon ...

Sponsored Links
Dork Lard said:
If you think that we went to the moon with 1960's technology then I'm happy for you. If your belief structures are geared towards believing everything that they tell you is fact, then I'm absolutely ecstatic that people like you exist.
Click to expand...

Jackanory, Jackanory....

Well, you will jump in with both feet and believe just about any conspiracy story - don't you think had this not happened, that the Russians, who were desperately following the process, would have realised the radio signals were not coming from where they were supposed to be from - then they would have been delighted to let the world know?
 
transam said:
Probably going back to the moon as it may have some military purpose ????

Missile system or laser system staioned on the moon pointing at
Moscow
Peking
Tehran
Paris

????
Click to expand...
I think it'll be interesting to see how this plays out over coming decades. Unfortunately we won't see it :( or should that be fortunately?

If things reach a stage of permanent bases on the moon, will countries start to claim areas as theirs?

I think if anyone believes it'll be the start of a global love-in (let's all enjoy the moon equally), they're deluded.
 
Dork Lard said:
There is a once famous but now mostly redacted video clip of a female NASA astronaut all but practically admitting that we have not yet landed on the moon thus far . . . .

If you think that we went to the moon with 1960's technology then I'm happy for you. If your belief structures are geared towards believing everything that they tell you is fact, then I'm absolutely ecstatic that people like you exist.

I don't know anyone who still believes that we have landed on the moon.
Click to expand...
So says the great story teller.
 
Sponsored Links
I think Dork and Codswallop are one and the same, or at least from the another planet.
 
The math & the physics simply doesn't make any sense. The weight of the craft that needs the 1960's shielding to pass thru the Van Allen radiation belt means that the Apollo & Saturn rockets would have needed to be 100x the size they were. Whatever returned to Earth would have looked pretty much like a very over baked potatoe at best. It would need a rocket far larger than a Saturn to launch a life supporting pod off of the moon to land on earth.

If you think that man has landed on the moon then I'm happy for you. Much like your mummy was when you did your first poo in the potty.

Flags, not even the good ole' stars & stripes, are able to flutter in the moons breeze.

Those Hasselblad camera's . . . . I'm gobsmacked that Hasselblad didn't sue the @r$e off NASA for claiming that they couldn't possibly have captured the light from the stars . . . . What? The light from those stars would've overwhelmed the almost perfect studio lighting of those astronauts boing boing boinging over the surface of that studio. (If you slow it down a bit it looks even more fake).

It is a good job that the dust on the moon was only a few inches thick, & it didn't cloud the view of those Hasselblads & fell back to the surface with almost perfect earth like physics albeit in defineable 'slow motion'.

Did man land on the moon? Go forth & multiply, who are you trying to fool?
 
Dork Lard said:
The math & the physics simply doesn't make any sense. The weight of the craft that needs the 1960's shielding to pass thru the Van Allen radiation belt means that the Apollo & Saturn rockets would have needed to be 100x the size they were. Whatever returned to Earth would have looked pretty much like a very over baked potatoe at best. It would need a rocket far larger than a Saturn to launch a life supporting pod off of the moon to land on earth.

If you think that man has landed on the moon then I'm happy for you. Much like your mummy was when you did your first poo in the potty.

Flags, not even the good ole' stars & stripes, are able to flutter in the moons breeze.

Those Hasselblad camera's . . . . I'm gobsmacked that Hasselblad didn't sue the @r$e off NASA for claiming that they couldn't possibly have captured the light from the stars . . . . What? The light from those stars would've overwhelmed the almost perfect studio lighting of those astronauts boing boing boinging over the surface of that studio. (If you slow it down a bit it looks even more fake).

It is a good job that the dust on the moon was only a few inches thick, & it didn't cloud the view of those Hasselblads & fell back to the surface with almost perfect earth like physics albeit in defineable 'slow motion'.

Did man land on the moon? Go forth & multiply, who are you trying to fool?
Click to expand...

Mr Trollman throws out another baited hook, and waits for bites.
 
Artemis and SLS are a massive waste of money.

SLS will cost a billion a time to launch, if we were serious about going to the moon on a regular basis then we need modern reusable rockets that cost a tenth of that to launch.
 
We aren't going to the moon & we most certainly aren't going to mars.

You f00kw1ts need to think about why they want you to think that we might be.

There, said it.
 
Dork Lard said:
There is a once famous but now mostly redacted video clip of a female NASA astronaut all but practically admitting that we have not yet landed on the moon thus far . . . .

If you think that we went to the moon with 1960's technology then I'm happy for you. If your belief structures are geared towards believing everything that they tell you is fact, then I'm absolutely ecstatic that people like you exist.

I don't know anyone who still believes that we have landed on the moon.
Click to expand...
kin ell........... another one....... are you a flat earth believer also
 
OK, so earth is fubar. Elon, Wichard & Jeff is building rocketships that will take anyone who can afford the fare away from all of this madness . . . . .;

Can you afford the fare???
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Sponsored Links

Similar threads

EFCLee1
10 Facts That Prove The Bin Laden Fable Is a Contrived Hoax
2 3
Replies
32
Views
3K
adlplumbing
adlplumbing
Back
Top