The only way we could have gone to the moon (and I'm not saying we did or did not) is if the "then" president, was pushing for it… unlike the one we have currently that is pushing for - (you fill in the blank)
Sick of this bullshit propaganda. The artifacts of the Apollo 11 (and subsequent) moon landings are visible from high power earth telescopes, and the reflective laser targets left behind on the lunar surface by the astronauts can still be detected by mere high school science students. My early career mentors were the engineers who developed and built the radios, radars, and antennas that enabled the LEM to operate with the Command Module and to land safely on the lunar surface. Those guys worked double and triple shifts to make schedule, sleeping in cots set up in the dispensaries. Those same technologies are all being reused and refined for current unmanned lunar missions and future mars missions.
None of the armchair 'engineers' who support the alleged moon landings will ever perform the simple tests to prove or disprove their outlandish claims.
Try this: take a photo of a terrestrial target using the cheapest astrophotography gear you can find, at the same distance as the orbital height of the probes you just cited as proof that men landed on the moon in the 1960s. Then compare the image quality of your low cost photos to the orbiter photos of the alleged landing sites. What do you see?
Prediction: ad hominem attack!. It's all that certain brainwashed people are capable of intellectually . And entirely predictable.
Dude, your ignorance is exceeded only by the number of pimples on your face. My aerospace engineering career goes back forty years, five years in power systems research before that. My mentors were the engineers who designed, built, and launched the Apollo moon missions. You obtuse morons deny that “1960s technology” could get us to the moon while you aren’t smart enough to even understand what a transistor is let alone explain how it works, or how it evolved into the microchip. The fact is the Newtonian math and physics that got us to the moon and back was already 300 years old in 1969. The same math and physics used for spaceflight today and the next thousand years. 1969 Apollo or the 2025 SpaceX Starship, they both use the same math, same physics, same pressurized metal tubes with rockets and electronics attached, and the same radios. The only thing that’s different today is that the public has been dumbed down to the point that science and engineering no longer seem real to them, so they make up myths and falsehoods like “We never landed on the moon” in order to cope.
So someone being able to bounce light off of the moon doesn’t prove that there are reflectors there, it just proves that the moon’s surface is reflective!
Could you share an example of earth telescopes viewing Apollo 11 artifacts? IIRC the official story was that they were only viewable from space due to atmospheric distortion.
The reflector argument was covered by Massimo Mazzucco:
By “artifacts” I’m talking about the disturbances of the lunar surface from the Apollo activities at the various sites visible by telescope. Detailed photos of Apollo landing sites hardware are well documented and catalogued by Lunar orbiting cameras. No need for specious theories on the laser reflectors placed by Apollo astronauts. Their placement is well documented, as are the experiments proving their existence. Stories about “faked moon landings” are political lies, not scientific or historical facts.
The sky is blue. The Apollo moon landings happened. I don’t need to provide internet links to prove objective facts. You believe weird religious cult lies.
Hmm…let’s see, there’s Nasa’s Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO). Armstrong and Aldrin planted a lunar laser ranging retroreflector array on the surface. It’s still operational today. 382 kilograms of Moon rock that Apollo astronauts brought back to Earth. These rocks have been independently verified as lunar by laboratories around the world, ruling out a US conspiracy. The list goes on. What drives you so strongly to NOT believe this took place? What’s the payoff?
You actually are spreading bullshit. The old “trilemma” saying that a person making an outrageous claim will be assumed to be either a liar, a nutjob or a truthteller holds here. By intentionally ignoring the overwhelming physical and historical evidence, you moon landing doubters place yourselves squarely in the first two categories.
The outrageous claim is that NASA put men on the moon half a dozen times, and had them drive cars about and play golf, all using 1960s technology in a program which only took 8 years from announcement to completion.
The Apollo program is the anomaly because conventional rocket technology - as used then, and still used now - has only ever been able to get humans into LEO and no further. Even today it can barely manage that.
If nobody had managed to repeat the first trans Atlantic flight AFTER 50 YEARS of progress in aviation technology, it would be right to assume that first flight had been a hoax.
If nobody had climbed Everest after Hilary’s first summit, despite all the improvements in climbing equipment, it would be right to doubt that claim as well.
The new generation of young NASA engineers are currently scratching their heads with cognitive dissonance because they cannot figure out how Apollo achieved what it (supposedly) did using the technology available.
The rational, reasonable and scientific explanation is that it didn’t.
The ‘outrageous claim’ is that it did.
In fact the official Apollo history is nothing but a string of outrageous claims. Not only were the F1 engines unable to reach full power, we now know that analogue film does not work in a vacuum. One of the designers of spy satellites of the cold war era recently gave a lecture on his designs. He casually mentioned that all analog cameras used in space were put in a pressurised housing because the vacuum of space destroys analog film (the emulsion outgases, similar to how a bowl of water ‘boils’ in a vacuum).
The Hasselblad cameras were not pressurised, nor does anybody claim they were. All the moon photos they took had to have been taken in a pressurised environment. Either the moon has an atmosphere or they were taken on Earth.
However, the problems with Apollo do not mean man has never landed on the moon. There are probably men on the moon right now. All the major aerospace corporations were openly working on anti gravity propulsion systems in the 1950’s and mainstream newspapers reported that the age of the jet/ rocket engine was about to come to an end as this new technology was only a few years away. Everyone was expecting a Jetsons age within a few decades.
Then all of a sudden the topic of anti gravity technology (cough, which would liberate humanity from dependency on oil, cough) was dropped, never to be spoken of again….
At the same time the general public (who were now expecting hover cars and moon bases by the end of the century) were given the improbable Apollo program to keep them satisfied instead. It was a great TV show (actually it was rather boring).
Then after everyone got bored with that they gave us the Shuttle which didn’t even bother trying to get to the moon. Then nothing. Then several failed NASA programs to get ‘back’ to the moon. Then Elon Musk’s rebranded rockets - still using 1940’s rocket technology!
After anti gravity became a taboo topic at the end of the 1950’s, thousands of people have been observing silent black triangular craft (and other shapes) making ‘impossible’ moves in the sky. They have even been chased by the military jets and clocked on radar pulling 30G turns.
The most common day of the week for these sightings has always been a Thursday. An aerospace engineer once explained the reason for this. Mon, Tue and Wed would be prep. Thurs would be test flight. And Fri would be debrief.
It appears that NASA’s actual role since the 1960’s (now passed on to Musk) has been one of PR (entertainment). rather than innovation or space exploration. All the cool toys are being kept hidden.
Speaking from my perspective as a complete layman, wouldn't the dangers posed by the Van Allen belts pose an insurmountable barrier to mamned space travel to the moon?
“insurmountable” I don’t know, future will tell. But to me is enuf that Nasa is still sending (or had plans to, I think they the delayed the flight) DUMMY with sensors to test if they can get through radiations and electromagnetic fields, before trying any human.
So that explains they never had the tech in 1960’s to make it.
I think I have a link on a short doc video on that, if I’ll find it I’ll post you.
But the Erik post on the supposed photographs shot by the astronauts are a very good proof they never be there. As Erik linked, Mazzucco did a nice doc on all the story and the part with two famous photographers going through the photos and laughing is lovely!
The only way we could have gone to the moon (and I'm not saying we did or did not) is if the "then" president, was pushing for it… unlike the one we have currently that is pushing for - (you fill in the blank)
Very interesting details on this smoky story.
And the comparison with the actual rockets it’s even more interesting and clarifying.
Like your technical and pragmatical approach to those analysis! Txs a lot!
Sick of this bullshit propaganda. The artifacts of the Apollo 11 (and subsequent) moon landings are visible from high power earth telescopes, and the reflective laser targets left behind on the lunar surface by the astronauts can still be detected by mere high school science students. My early career mentors were the engineers who developed and built the radios, radars, and antennas that enabled the LEM to operate with the Command Module and to land safely on the lunar surface. Those guys worked double and triple shifts to make schedule, sleeping in cots set up in the dispensaries. Those same technologies are all being reused and refined for current unmanned lunar missions and future mars missions.
Propaganda helps make the world (go) round
You've seen these artifacts? Well, good for you.
None of the armchair 'engineers' who support the alleged moon landings will ever perform the simple tests to prove or disprove their outlandish claims.
Try this: take a photo of a terrestrial target using the cheapest astrophotography gear you can find, at the same distance as the orbital height of the probes you just cited as proof that men landed on the moon in the 1960s. Then compare the image quality of your low cost photos to the orbiter photos of the alleged landing sites. What do you see?
Prediction: ad hominem attack!. It's all that certain brainwashed people are capable of intellectually . And entirely predictable.
“Armchair engineers”. Lol! 🤣
Dude, your ignorance is exceeded only by the number of pimples on your face. My aerospace engineering career goes back forty years, five years in power systems research before that. My mentors were the engineers who designed, built, and launched the Apollo moon missions. You obtuse morons deny that “1960s technology” could get us to the moon while you aren’t smart enough to even understand what a transistor is let alone explain how it works, or how it evolved into the microchip. The fact is the Newtonian math and physics that got us to the moon and back was already 300 years old in 1969. The same math and physics used for spaceflight today and the next thousand years. 1969 Apollo or the 2025 SpaceX Starship, they both use the same math, same physics, same pressurized metal tubes with rockets and electronics attached, and the same radios. The only thing that’s different today is that the public has been dumbed down to the point that science and engineering no longer seem real to them, so they make up myths and falsehoods like “We never landed on the moon” in order to cope.
As predicted -- no picture, but ad hominems galore ! You must be an offshore armchair engineer.
You’re stupid. That’s not intended as an ad hominem attack. It’s just an unfortunate but accurate observation.
People were successfully bouncing laser beams off the moon in the early 60s, long before the Apollo crew supposedly installed those reflectors: https://www.nytimes.com/1963/11/05/archives/soviet-bounces-light-beam-off-moon-in-a-laser-test.html
So someone being able to bounce light off of the moon doesn’t prove that there are reflectors there, it just proves that the moon’s surface is reflective!
Could you share an example of earth telescopes viewing Apollo 11 artifacts? IIRC the official story was that they were only viewable from space due to atmospheric distortion.
The reflector argument was covered by Massimo Mazzucco:
https://odysee.com/@alens:9/AmericanMoon:f8?r=2weXHv1Ck4tTjjydcmDAZS5BpS2Bsadm&t=2342
By “artifacts” I’m talking about the disturbances of the lunar surface from the Apollo activities at the various sites visible by telescope. Detailed photos of Apollo landing sites hardware are well documented and catalogued by Lunar orbiting cameras. No need for specious theories on the laser reflectors placed by Apollo astronauts. Their placement is well documented, as are the experiments proving their existence. Stories about “faked moon landings” are political lies, not scientific or historical facts.
Don't move the goal posts. Re-read your original statement and back up your claims
You’re no better than a flat-earther.
And you're a shill who's inability to back up what you claim emboldens them and makes their arguments appear more valid
The sky is blue. The Apollo moon landings happened. I don’t need to provide internet links to prove objective facts. You believe weird religious cult lies.
You accuse me of spreading “bullshit” yet you have no proof for your first claim, that remnants of Apollo are visible from earth telescope.
Hmm…let’s see, there’s Nasa’s Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO). Armstrong and Aldrin planted a lunar laser ranging retroreflector array on the surface. It’s still operational today. 382 kilograms of Moon rock that Apollo astronauts brought back to Earth. These rocks have been independently verified as lunar by laboratories around the world, ruling out a US conspiracy. The list goes on. What drives you so strongly to NOT believe this took place? What’s the payoff?
You actually are spreading bullshit. The old “trilemma” saying that a person making an outrageous claim will be assumed to be either a liar, a nutjob or a truthteller holds here. By intentionally ignoring the overwhelming physical and historical evidence, you moon landing doubters place yourselves squarely in the first two categories.
“outrageous claim”
The outrageous claim is that NASA put men on the moon half a dozen times, and had them drive cars about and play golf, all using 1960s technology in a program which only took 8 years from announcement to completion.
The Apollo program is the anomaly because conventional rocket technology - as used then, and still used now - has only ever been able to get humans into LEO and no further. Even today it can barely manage that.
If nobody had managed to repeat the first trans Atlantic flight AFTER 50 YEARS of progress in aviation technology, it would be right to assume that first flight had been a hoax.
If nobody had climbed Everest after Hilary’s first summit, despite all the improvements in climbing equipment, it would be right to doubt that claim as well.
The new generation of young NASA engineers are currently scratching their heads with cognitive dissonance because they cannot figure out how Apollo achieved what it (supposedly) did using the technology available.
The rational, reasonable and scientific explanation is that it didn’t.
The ‘outrageous claim’ is that it did.
In fact the official Apollo history is nothing but a string of outrageous claims. Not only were the F1 engines unable to reach full power, we now know that analogue film does not work in a vacuum. One of the designers of spy satellites of the cold war era recently gave a lecture on his designs. He casually mentioned that all analog cameras used in space were put in a pressurised housing because the vacuum of space destroys analog film (the emulsion outgases, similar to how a bowl of water ‘boils’ in a vacuum).
The Hasselblad cameras were not pressurised, nor does anybody claim they were. All the moon photos they took had to have been taken in a pressurised environment. Either the moon has an atmosphere or they were taken on Earth.
However, the problems with Apollo do not mean man has never landed on the moon. There are probably men on the moon right now. All the major aerospace corporations were openly working on anti gravity propulsion systems in the 1950’s and mainstream newspapers reported that the age of the jet/ rocket engine was about to come to an end as this new technology was only a few years away. Everyone was expecting a Jetsons age within a few decades.
Then all of a sudden the topic of anti gravity technology (cough, which would liberate humanity from dependency on oil, cough) was dropped, never to be spoken of again….
At the same time the general public (who were now expecting hover cars and moon bases by the end of the century) were given the improbable Apollo program to keep them satisfied instead. It was a great TV show (actually it was rather boring).
Then after everyone got bored with that they gave us the Shuttle which didn’t even bother trying to get to the moon. Then nothing. Then several failed NASA programs to get ‘back’ to the moon. Then Elon Musk’s rebranded rockets - still using 1940’s rocket technology!
After anti gravity became a taboo topic at the end of the 1950’s, thousands of people have been observing silent black triangular craft (and other shapes) making ‘impossible’ moves in the sky. They have even been chased by the military jets and clocked on radar pulling 30G turns.
The most common day of the week for these sightings has always been a Thursday. An aerospace engineer once explained the reason for this. Mon, Tue and Wed would be prep. Thurs would be test flight. And Fri would be debrief.
It appears that NASA’s actual role since the 1960’s (now passed on to Musk) has been one of PR (entertainment). rather than innovation or space exploration. All the cool toys are being kept hidden.
You’re pathetic.
Very interesting and informative - thank you.
I like big boosters and I cannot lie.
Is the dialogue between Kennedy and Webb real or imagined?
Is it live or is it memorex?
https://www.jfklibrary.org/about-us/news-and-press/press-releases/jfk-library-releases-recording-of-president-kennedy-discussing-race-to-the-moon
Speaking from my perspective as a complete layman, wouldn't the dangers posed by the Van Allen belts pose an insurmountable barrier to mamned space travel to the moon?
https://erikbuilds.substack.com/p/van-allen-belts-an-obstacle-to-a
“insurmountable” I don’t know, future will tell. But to me is enuf that Nasa is still sending (or had plans to, I think they the delayed the flight) DUMMY with sensors to test if they can get through radiations and electromagnetic fields, before trying any human.
So that explains they never had the tech in 1960’s to make it.
I think I have a link on a short doc video on that, if I’ll find it I’ll post you.
But the Erik post on the supposed photographs shot by the astronauts are a very good proof they never be there. As Erik linked, Mazzucco did a nice doc on all the story and the part with two famous photographers going through the photos and laughing is lovely!
If the Van Allen belts are insurmountable, that means the Apollo landing was staged and all the talk of traveling to Mars is a lie.
no.
Why?
Because no one yet has duplicated a Flux Capacitor.
If it was real, undoubtedly.
By "it" you mean manned space travel to the moon?
That, or the Van Allen belt 😉