I read somewhere NASA's budget amount to $54m a day.
The science doesn't change radically in ten years :
"Van Allen didn't win his many awards for discovering a belt of harmless radiation.
The radiation was so strong it stopped his Geiger counters
His experimental equipment was included on Explorer 1, 2 (blew up) and 3
His discovery saved the lives of astronauts who would have tried to go through the Belts.
Dr. Van Allen was under considerable pressure from the pro-moon landing scientists.
He was awarded, wined, dined, and persuaded by NASA to discount his own experiments.
Dr. Van Allen never recanted his findings in a scientific paper.
Only in an alleged email, supposedly from him, later in life.
Scientists publish findings in journals, not an email.
No one has yet done any experiment refuting his 1959 findings"
Source : http://americanmoon.org/
Also Von Braun was saying in 1954 they would have to build a huge space station as a staging post in order to get to the moon, link is in this thread somewhere
You underestimate him and who he has met in this 20 year journey, his original film was financed with $1m by a guy who owned a rocket science company and knew the whole thing was a lie. He has also interviewed people with direct knowledge of the staging of the event which was actually a year before the supposed landing in 1968. I doubt SciMan Dan's experience stacks up in comparison.
MSM talking airheads is something quite different from someone familiar with moonhoax and flatearth lore.
At 4:41 He says:
...simply claiming that they went 1000 times farther 50 years ago on the very first attempt with antiquated 1960s technology. 1000 times farther than astronauts can travel today with 5 decades more advancements in rockets and computers defies logic and the natural exponential progress of technology
Which I believe are unsound arguments
The Apollo missions were not a single, simple attempt, but rather a series of complex missions that involved extensive testing and preparation. Before the first manned Moon landing (Apollo 11), there were several unmanned missions that were designed to test various aspects of the technology and procedures needed for a successful landing. Ranger, Surveyor, Apollo 9, Apollo 10....
The claim that the technology used during the Apollo missions was "antiquated" is a false characterization of the state of technology at the time. The Apollo program was at the forefront of technology development in the 1960s, and represented a significant achievement in engineering, materials science, and other fields.
I would not underestimate for instance the Saturn V technology or the robust, highly reliable and specialized computer hardware that was used.
The objectives of current space programs are different from those of the Apollo missions. The Apollo missions focused on landing humans on the Moon and returning them safely to Earth, current programs are aimed at different goals (scientific research, satellite deployment etc). So it's not accurate to compare the distance that astronauts can travel today with the distance of the Apollo missions.
I don't believe that rocket technology has changed significantly since the Apollo era, and achieving deep space travel is still challenging and even impossible due to propulsion system limitations and the harshness and vastness of space.
Yes, computers have progressed an incredible amount since then but what metrics does Siebrel think that should progress because of this? 100.000x more powerful computer equals what? 100.000x more distance? speed? ability to go to the moon? Price? I don't believe it's that simple...
The USA was buying their rockets from Russia the past few years. I doubt they are allowed to buy them anymore. More likely the next batch of rockets the Russians will send them will be nuclear tipped. Musk's program looks disastrous like early 60's with exploding rockets etc. But its all a charade anyway, they ain't going anywhere apart from a few hundred miles up.
”The” science? Van Allen Belt science particularly? Which particular 10 years? From discovering them in 1958 to 1968? What is the source and proof for this statement?
Why is it a charade because of that?
I've been looking into Musk from quite a few angles. Quite the character. Corbett included him in a recent video titled James Corbett on Obama, Trump, Q, Musk and Hopium
Musk's rocket business isn't all that disastrous if one looks into it; Starlink, reusable rockets that can land are quite impressive.
Somewhere I heard of read that they kind of are brute forcing and letting things explode to learn and make things work robustly. Launching the Starship without a proper launch pad seemed quite stupid though.
His Hyperloop project is pure vaporware, probably impossible to build. Not to mention how he's handled Twitter. Bizarre.
How could they have simulated the tracking and communication with Earth if they were in a low orbit?
If you've not read my posts debunking this, here they are:-
1, 2, 3
And again, this photograph S11-36-5337 (long lens) correlates to the TV footage filmed through the window (rotaed 90 degrees clockwise below). which debunks the whole thing.
and the audio (transcript) correlates to what we see in S11-36-5337
"...And, Houston, you, might be interested that out my left-hand window right now, I can observe the entire continent of North America, Alaska, and over the Pole, down to the Yucatan Peninsula, Cuba, northern part of South America, and then I run out of window.... "
In this video at 17:29 you can see that square with text on it on his left side too, and you can see the silver handdle. At 14:06 when he does the somersault you see it on the right side. (Higher quality of the somersault here)
+Exhibit B (Photo of the background where the sign can be seen)
So it clearly wasn't a damned wire we were seeing, Dave wasn't lying and it wasn't bullshit.
From 1959 to 1969, there is no proof because Apollo didn't go through them, the Science didn't change, they remained dangerous to life.
It's a charade to keep pretending they are going back to the moon at some given date in the future, they have been stating this for years,
It was footage obtained from NASA by mistake, any forgery is on their part you would have to take it up with them, good luck with that...
I will find the original tape full length reel
Even IF he is right about this, he has lied about every claim he has made about the moon landing because quite simply it NEVER happened. The fact is Doug, as Rusty's owner calls him ( these pro-NASA narrators seem to know all these 2 bit astronauts by name ), when he pulls on what is obviously a wire, the other guy moves towards him, perhaps he has kinetic powers and there is no wire there at all? I know which I think is the most logical answer.
So Cybe are you not able to tell here that Alan Bean is lying through his teeth? Forget your rationalizations about the Van Allen Belt being safe, these guys who supposedly went were not even briefed on phenomena like this because they were so used to softball, kid glove questions from MSM presstitutes. He is just making it up as he goes along...
NASA Never Meets Moon Schedules
NASA fans are always full of excuses why they never went back to the moon. Countless Presidents said they were going back, but they haven't, which in itself destroys the too costly argument. IMHO they haven't gone back because they couldn't pull it off with the increased scrutiny, the fraud would be self evident, they wouldn't have the excuse of grainy 60's analog TV this time.
Remember Orion? Maybe they really didn't figure out those pesky Van Allen belts which was a pre-requisite for going, after all, with the EXTREME RADIATION ( Kelly Smith - NASA). What exactly are they spending $54m a day on?
NASA Fan PROVES Moon Landing Fraud – MM13
This MSM presentation would work with 95% of humanity who are incapable of critical thinking.
I ask you for a source and proof of your claim that the science didn't change and your reply is that there is none because they didn't go through them?
Yes they are dangerous but can be skirted.
All space missions, ISS, satellite deployment, space telescopes, etc are just a charade to keep pretending they are going back to the moon?
"Charade - an absurd pretence intended to create a pleasant or respectable appearance"
If someone is stating to do something in the future but cancelling/postponing, then stating it again it still doesn't automatically mean that they aren't going to do it.
No, NASA didn't publish that footage by mistake. It's been clearly explained and shown what the footage is in the debunkings that I've provided, and the faking of distance is also debunked by the higher resolution photographs they took through the window.
Not sure I understand your reasoning. The faking of the distance is clearly debunked so why take it up with NASA?
This is flat-earther style circular reasoning. "Everything that he says is a lie because we didn't go there" and thus you pretend to "win" any arguments by default
I debunked that wire by identifying it as the square box with text behind him. If the debunking isn't clear enough I could transpose the image of the background onto it to demonstrate even more clearly that it is the box?
Obviously a wire? Previously you thought it was a wire because you thought you could see it, but it is obviously most likely the background text-box as I've proven, and not a wire.
I recommend playing it at 0.3 speed (or see my video clip below) To me it looks like USMC guy is trying to grab hold of sumersaulter and his finger gets stuck in his pocket. You can see the pocket move. Why would a wire harness system make the pocket move? And where is the wire harness system, btw? No one appears to wear one. (Summersault guy btw has some kind of toolpack velcroed on to his thigh)
This again is focusing at a roughly 100x100 pixels area and 0.5 seconds instead of the whole video. If this was done with wires then how are they able to move in many different axes,? Why is the woman's jewellery floating? etc.
( AFK, TTYL)
Some repetition but this whole thread is full of it:-
So you KNOW that humans can not get passed the Van Allen Belt?
And your source is the pioneering astrophysicist NASA-collaborator James Van Allen's early findings from 1958 (and claim, without a source that research from 58-69 didn't change) and they are somehow your one special "they didn't go to the moon" joker card?
Sibrel features this image (source) on his site along with the text "Possible Safe Route - Through the Poles of the Earth"
And this is in fact the route Apollo 11 took. Does Sibrel acknowledge thta?
Here's another visualisation of it:-
A plot of the Apollo TLI orbit showing the transition through the Van Allen Belts. The belts are shown in the following contours Blue=0.0001 rads/sec; green 0.001 rads/sec; yellow 0.005 rads/sec; orange 0.01 rads/sec; red 0.05 rads/sec. These levels are for an unprotected target in open space. Total transit time across the blue zone is approximately 90 minutes.