Was the moon landing real? I want to believe but it's just too mindblowing to me seeing photos from the surface of the moon. I think any person, no matter how well trained would instantly get a heart attack just from realizing he's standing on the moon.
>>84602427What significance does it have in your life either way, anon?
>>84602427so your reasoning as to why the moonlanding might not have been real is that it would be too exciting or scary or something?
>>84602437I just can't image a human being being able to process that he's standing on the fucking moon without instantly going insane and passing out or dying.
>>84602457i kinda get that, im that way with deep sea welding, i simply cant imagine anyone being ok 300 meters under the surface, needing pressurised special gas mixtures to stay alive, its fking nuts, but yeah.. ppl still do it.. takes all kinds right?
>>84602491The moon is still a lot of calibers higher than underwater welding, methinks.
>>84602606I mean they train astronauts underwater, the moon and the sea are about the same on the "will kill you rapidly unprotected" scale, just in different ways
It was obviously fake to dunk on the soviets took me until a very grown age to realize it kinda embarrassing
>>84602457Did the first guy on a boat go insane and die? Do airlines have massive amounts of people die from stepping into a plane and dying from shock? Did you actually take two seconds and think maybe the extensive training astronauts do might prepare them for how gravity feels and how to not freak the fuck out in space?
>>84602427yes, it was real.
>>84603044The aha moment for me was when NASA said they no longer had the tech to go back to the moon, like what. You tell me that 1960s America was more advanced then modern day America?It was a lie to dunk on the Soviets and a very famous director was involved. You know the one
>>84603175It's completely fucking asinine. It's actually insulting to the intelligence of citizens.
Tech wasn't there in 1969 to fake the moon landings:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_loUDS4c3CsIn the mid1970s film tech had perhaps caught up with space tech, which is how come we got "Capricorn One". But the early missions could not have been faked. And by Apollo 16-17 the infrastructure was so well entrenched it was cheaper to do it for real then, too.
>>84603282The tech wasn't there to film it for real either nigga. The person who designed the camera they used literally said that it could not withstand the surface temperature on the moon.
>>84603309So what's your solution, nigger-with-hard-r who didn't even watch the video?Maybe the footage was done by the nazis on the far side of the moon and relayed back. pity they can't fly by your place and take you to 1/6-g Dachau
>>84602427who fucking cares if whiteys on the moon
84603343>so mad it skips words
>>84603282the most convincing theory I saw was rear screen projection which was being used in the 30s.
>>84602427It was real. There are satellites orbiting the moon that have taken pics of the flag. China has their own satellites too so not just USA faking pictures.I personally think the film footage and the astronaut-President phone call was fake though.
>>84602427I used to think so, but there's some pretty convincing arguments suggesting otherwise.
>>84602457Apollo 15 did in fact lead to cardio events, which is why they added more citrus to the astro diet in A 16. That seemed to work but it made them fart.
>>84603240>Its asinine that the government could make a mistake Moon landing denier are retarded holy fuck.
>it was faked so the US could win the space race ....and the Soviet just let this happen? They didn't protest. They didn't demand proof. They just rolled over and took it like bitches? Does that make any sense to you?
The moon landing being fake isn't what scares me about the moon. They've been covering up and blurring out structures on it.Also it's made of glass or some shit, the way it refracts light is not natural. We still don't know jack shit about the properties of it.
>>84605405I suspect they did insinuate memes. "Capricorn One".Like "China Syndrome". A lot of that in the 1970s.But all the KGB had was memes. And now we have Slavs in this thread "asking questions"
>>84602427Most people I know would tell me it's real, I have my doubts to say the least.
>>84605391I think it's more retarded to blindly trust such incompetent governments. When has the government looked out for the interest of its people?
It was real the moons not that far away there are Toyota Camrys with more miles than that and it's not like rockets are fake
>>84603044Then why did the Soviets go along with it? Soviets never claimed that it was staged. In fact, they verified its validity, and reported that it had happened to their population. NASA left a reflective prism at their moon landing site, to bounce back lasers from earth, and measure speed and distance more accurately. You'd have to assume that the Soviets teamed up with the Americans, to humiliate themselves in the space-race.
>>84605771>It was real the moons not that far away there are Toyota Camrys with more miles than that and it's not like rockets are fakeYep 100%
>>84603175>t. has never designed or manufactured anything beforeIf you ask Mercedes-Benz if they can still make a Panther they're going to say no, and not just because of the political issues. That doesn't mean Panther never existed.The reality is most of the Apollo era hardware was handcrafted, made to order with only a handful of units. The people who designed and manufactured it are dead now. The documentation is not complete and manufacturing capabilities/techniques have changed. If you want a new Saturn V or LEM, you're going to have to basically start from scratch when it comes to actually building it.
>>84602427I think it's real. The Soviets had all the incentive to call out the US and say it was fake and the rockets didn't do anything.Now you could make a more schizo argument that both the US and the Soviet Union had good reasons to hide the truth regarding what's there beyond the observable, but that's neither here nor there.
Not only did we land on the moon we went back a couple of times. Look up videos of apollo 16 and 17.
>>84602457You sound like a raped faggot.
>>84603175It's kind of scary to think but 1960s America was considerably more advanced. Technology can live and die, or more specifically be forgotten. The systems and processes involved are more fragile than one might expect. You could probably get famous just by trying to recreate renaissance machines, but it would be challenging because the education and manufacturing ability during the dark ages alone were already incredible. The monks dragged Europe into the future with their obsessive level of dedication to math, medicine, engineering, agriculture, all the same things we rely on now. A key difference though, they could actually do things. With enough time and money I'm sure you could assemble a team of very old people whose minds are not yet consumed by dementia and bodies not fully ravaged by time. There's probably a handful of autists who have in their libraries out of print books. Hobbyists with a full blown machining shop or foundry. Even with them much of what they did in the past would be challenging even with computers and lasers to aid.Most manufacturing has moved out of the country people with neither the knowledge, intelligence, nor character for the positions and roles they occupy are barely holding things together. Even food models have turned into one of destructive extraction where output exceeds input. The current trajectory of mankind is not one resulting in orbit. Once over the hill and enters descent it gains acceleration until it is stopped by the back of a headstone.Assuming don't panic and kill each over for trivial reasons, rebuilding requires a unique intersection of knowledge, intelligence, and character. It is rare to encounter an individual with only two of these three traits.
>>84607068Competency Crisis is very real and is happening right before our eyes
>>84602427Come on, anon if it was fake Soviet Union would have denounced it, they were itching to prove themselves better than the capitalists and wouldn't let the US steal their glory with fake images
>>84607110Maybe they just fell for it too.
hey guys. unfortunately the reality is a lot more grim.>we really did go to the moon >the footage both was degraded and had UAPs>they recreated the footage>the astronauts were completely mind broken by what they sawsince then NASA has been covering up shit nonstop and communicating with multiple species.
>>84607178You had me until the multiple species part. Well poisoning at its finest.
>>84602427Im all for questioning every action of the govermint given their track record. But this is the one thing I believe completely and think the discourse around it is braindead retarded.Deniers fall for flat earther tier arguments, usually not even knowing the full story or context around certain details just to paint it in a questionable light.Meanwhile all it takes is basic logic to realize that the Soviets or really any anti american power would have immediately called it out if it were even questionably fake. The tech to convincingly fake it didn't exist back then, and if it did, its use would have likely left a paper trail that somehow was never found. The US also would have blown loads of money on building a rocket and paying people to design and operate said rocket all the way up into space anyways. I could go on and onAnd ultimately it barely effects anything even if the moon landing was faked. It's such a nothing debate.
>>84602427If the moon landing was fake the USSR and China would have said so. They were free independent 3rd party verifyers
>>84607185ok, well, maybe it's just 2. But everything else is the truth. the narrative will never change even after first contact.
>>84607178this, but I doubt we are communicating with multiple species
