You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Apollo 17 Astronaut takes on the "Climate Change" scaremongers.
I'm like 52-48 we didn't go... Used to be because of the Van Allen belt stuff, but I learned more about how the right inclination of ascent and the dosages, etc., could be survivable. There's a lot of proof a set was used for some of the photography, but that may have just been because they couldn't GET any real transmissions from the moon, and so they wanted to get theatrical and had no other way to do it.
There are too many reasons for me to list, but my top two for not believing in the moon landing is the temperature swing
“When sunlight hits the moon's surface, the temperature can reach 260 degrees Fahrenheit (127 degrees Celsius). When the sun goes down, temperatures can dip to minus 280 F (minus 173 C).”
Show me the ac & heating unit that was used to stabilize that swing, & lets test it down here.
& how does a rocket or any thrust work in a vacuum? There is nothing to push off of, no atmospheric friction like there is here that allows things to push off & change direction. I’ve been looking for a rocket in a vacuum test for proof either way, but have only seen tests where the vacuum chamber is very small, so rockets can achieve thrust from the wall of the chamber, not a good representation of the giant vacuum of space.
NASA might be the worst of all the alphabet gangs, but the herd has been sold that they are smart honest scientists, free from all of the flaws that trap every other human with too much power.
I did see one rocket-in-a-vacuum-test on Youtube once that looked pretty convincing, but can't put my finger on it now. The thrust is against ITSELF, and the "opposite-equal-reaction" still applies. Hadn't heard about the temperature differential you've mentioned. I'll have to look into that one.
I'm with ceattlestretch on this - but moon landing 100% fake - not even 1% chance!
ok, you guys...I'm now 55-45 we didn't go.
I say 1% because i know I am capable of being wrong, no matter how right I feel.
I is human 😂
The only vacuum expirements I could find bounced off the back of the box creating a thrust.
I don’t believe the “opposite equal reaction” theory applies to motion in a vacuum without proof. There is no resistance to reflect force back & no expirement to show it is even remotely possible that I have found. They can’t even get big budget space movies to work in a way that makes any sense with what we are told.
Seems like sci fi posing as science to me. Star Trek happened to come out 3 years before the moon landing. Such interesting timing
Here's a decent vid;
I have seen one of his videos before. Do you see the gas bouncing off the back of the chamber & flowing back towards the source? The thrust shown does not happen without a wall behind the rocket to provide resistance. There are no chamber walls in the sci fi theories of space travel
I'd like to see it done in a really big vacuum chamber, for sure. I'll stick with my 45-55 for now, though...lol.
Part of the reason for that is that I strongly suspect that space-based advanced DEW was used way back on 911, suggesting we are pretty advanced, technologically speaking, beyond what the public has been told. I think that could extend backward in time before 1969, as well.
As long as you’re not convinced you know for fact, I think you’re thinking correctly.
If I were an astronaut I’d want nasa to be constantly doing large vacuum tests for safety, but they never do & prefer to practice in water for some reason 🤔
I believe there is a lot of hidden technology like DEW & weather modification, but I have almost no reason to believe any of it exists outside our atmosphere. Too many lies & logical inconsistencies in the details.
I was a big astronomy fanboy for about 20 years before the solar eclipse a few summers ago. When I started looking for eclipse models that make any scale sense. I found zero models that made any logical sense & nothing even close to scale. So I started looking into the moon landing & saw so many holes in the story.
The best explanation available is they went in secret & filmed fakes to share. That is too hard for me to believe.
If I told you I had sex with the most beautiful woman in the world & I made a cgi video to prove it, would you believe me? Would you have more or less reason to believe my future sex tapes are real?
Strange analogy, but can I have some tax money to make more sex tapes please? CGI is expensive
Yeah...Well. I gotta have one thing that I believe MAY not be a conspiracy...lol...