Do you believe we never went to the moon?

Radrook said:
So why are they so tentatively finicky and extremely nervous and constantly hesitating about attempting the same procedures that they were nonchalantly and routinely doing back then, and without the enormous advantage of the technology presently available? One would expect a greater confidence instead.
Click to expand...
Well, I'd posit the following - IMHO:
  • NASA, like all government agencies, is a bureaucracy full of bureaucrats (especially at the upper levels) who don't want to be in charge when a catastrophic failure occurs -- to wit the Challenger explosion, Columbia's breakup on reentry, and lately, the Boeing/NASA Starliner debacle.
  • For these bureaucrats, the risk of something going massively wrong is a career-ender (sorta, but not really since there is no accountability in the federal government at present), and to these jokesters who are pulling down huge bucks, their career is far more important than actually getting it right.
  • The impetus as expressed by JFK at his inaugural address in 1961 of putting a man on the moon and bringing him safely back to Earth is gone. We've done that several times. Not much more to be gained by doing that. But to keep the cash flowing to the level that the lobbyists want, it's far better to scale back effort, initiate new "programs" that promise lots of goodies but deliver very little, dangle the carrot so to speak, and stay in power. That word "power" is critical and it's the operative word.
  • Bureaucracies at all levels, and that includes NASA, Congress, even local school boards, exist to perpetuate themselves, despite their "expressed goals". We see it over and over and over again.
YMMV
 
Keep in mind that over $100 billion has been blown on Ukraine already in 2024, and that's just one case of the ongoing warmongering at present. NASA's budget is under $25 billion, and didn't kill people or destroy cities and transportation.
 
Well I hope this ridiculous Moon debate is behind us. We did put a man on the moon. Far more important are questions we face concerning UFOs and the frequent reports of high speed underwater objects. I don‘t believe we have any definitive answers on either subject.
 
ElCastor said:
Well I hope this ridiculous Moon debate is behind us. We did put a man on the moon. Far more important are questions we face concerning UFOs and the frequent reports of high speed underwater objects. I don‘t believe we have any definitive answers on either subject.
Click to expand...
Don’t feel so bad @ElCastor
There really ARE some people that still think the earth is flat.
 
U do know that Atmospheric re-entry vehicles are basically flying saucers, just not as wide as a Interstellar one would have to be to carry all the crap it would need to do the trip. Still the aerodynamics show the saucer shape is needed to efficiently dissipate the friction of re-entry at low power levels into an atmosphere after a long - long trip. .

Even most kites are sort of saucer shaped to work well on the string, a tail just keeps it pointed up into the breeze cause they have no forward momentum to sustain the direction of travel into the wind.
 
Paco Dennis said:
Well, if you would just look at the evidence, instead of taking everybody's "word" for it. :)

View attachment 370226
Click to expand...
The fault to the logic is that the Earth is not a perfect circle ball, its fatter in the middle. Reason the sun goes down quicker. If it was square you could drive off a cliff for 1000 miles when you got to California or East Coast. FM radio waves prove it, Ships on the Horizon prove it, Airplanes have to properly always fly uphill to stay in level flight. Look to the nose of a plane flying at 15,000' and all you see is blue sky. look to the left down and you see ground or clouds. Why do Jets pilots need to navigate when they can't see what's up ahead? Yea, flying is sort of boring.
 
Last edited:
papa tiger said:
U do know that Atmospheric re-entry vehicles are basically flying saucers, just not as wide as a Interstellar one would have to be to carry all the crap it would need to do the trip. Still the aerodynamics show the saucer shape is needed to efficiently dissipate the friction of re-entry at low power levels into an atmosphere after a long - long trip. .

Even most kites are sort of saucer shaped to work well on the string, a tail just keeps it pointed up into the breeze cause they have no forward momentum to sustain the direction of travel into the wind.
Click to expand...
The guy who told me his story was a Navy Ensign who had no reason to lie. His story happened pre Navy in the MidWest - I don’t recall where. After dark he walked out to a foot bridge in a wooded area. He was alone and saw a saucer with some lights around the perimeter hovering above the bridge. He watched it and after awhile a second saucer flew up and the two flew off together. True? I have no way of knowing, but I do know that he told the same story to another officer.
 
Paco Dennis said:
Well, if you would just look at the evidence, instead of taking everybody's "word" for it. :)
Click to expand...
View attachment 370226
Has it occurred to you that Pythagoras' theorem (c^2 = a^2 + b^2) only applies to 2 dimensional right triangles? Therein lies the mathematical fallacy in the argument that the earth is flat.
You are applying 2 dimensional maths to a 3 dimensional situation.
 
Mike said:
The World, watched the flight that went to the
moon.

There were no "Computer Generated Images",
(CGI), then.

Mike
Click to expand...
Exactly, Mike.
And Australia was commissioned to track the whole expedition when the US tracking stations did not have line of sight.

Australia delivered the footage of Armstrong stepping down onto the Lunar surface. I watched it in real time.

Does anyone really think that Australia had anything to gain by taking part in a conspiracy?
Or that a conspiracy on that scale is even possible?
 
Radrook said:
Did you see the film Capricorn One?
Click to expand...
An admittedly fictional film is not, by the widest stretch of imagination, proof that the claims of a fake Moon landing have any validity.

The Internet is replete with proof of the moon landing​

Moon landing conspiracy theories aren't true - here's how we know
https://www.iop.org/explore-physics/moon/how-do-we-know-we-went-to-the-moon
7 easy ways you can tell for yourself that the moon landing really happened
Here's Your Proof That We Landed On The Moon, Steph Curry

Lots more if you are open to proof?
 
officerripley said:
Scientists in the 1990s: We cloned a sheep! We landed a craft on Mars!

Scientists now: For crying out loud, the Earth is not flat.
Click to expand...
Ever hear of the man who went around claiming to be Napoleon Bonaparte and was being interviewed by a psychiatrist?

"So I am not Napoleon Bonaparte?!" the delusional man asked suspiciously with a quavering upper lip similar to a snarl..

"No, you are definitely not Napoleon Bonaparte!" the psychiatrist said while calmly puffing on his pipe.

"Oh really? How can you be so damned sure that I am not Napoleon Bonaparte? Huh? How can you be so damned sure?" the delusional man shouted.

"Very simple!" the psychiatrist responded.

"Because I am Napoleon Bonaparte."
 
Last edited:
ElCastor said:
So what’s next In this endless argument? The Earth is flat? Life is an illusion? I give up.
Click to expand...
The ones claiming that life might be an illusion are physicists who have observed certain baffling holographic characteristic during their investigation of the quantum universe.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top