How fake is the NASA

no idea honestly. i posted ideas of why it could be above. maybe the earth is just flat and they are to emberrassed to admit it. i dont know

for the whistleblowers, some probably did come out, but just werent listened at youtube.com/watch?v=M9j1c4KmiQ4

and for who orders? probably the government. especially when they use the nasa funds for black projects

You mean people get frustrated at bullshit nonsense because it makes them realize how incredibly stupid members of their own race/species can be?
>Yeah, you could say that.

They respond that way because you don't even realize how bereft of intelligence you are.

The moon doesnt have an atmosphere that would cause currents to bring dust back toward the lander. All dust moved away from the lander in a ballistic trajectory uninhibited by air. You can see this happening in the landing videos. You are not being smart or clever, you are displaying your lack of critical thinking skills.

it has a very thin atmosphere. and by so much dust that would have to be blown up something is bound to land on the bads. but they are as clean as it gets. not even dust directly under the capsule is blown away. otherwise you would see a small crater, but there is none

the van allen belt is a fuckin BELT, you dipshit, not a cloud or a layer or a sphere

I think nasa lying is to cover up flat earth and the fact that the universe has a big fingerprint of a creator. Because we actually are the center of the universe. Heliocentrism goes back to sun worship (lucifer worship) and in order for heliocentrism to work, you have to create a crazy model. Flat earth is extremely more simple to comprehend, so heliocentrism creates more jobs, and prolongs Satan/lucifer worship in the name of "science" nasa origins have relations to the occult and Satan worship

>NASA admits we can't through the Van Allen Belts

The astronauts in 1969 just #YOLOd and suffered mild radiation poisoning.

They want more shielding today because modern pussies are afraid of a little radiation.

Also, Apollo capsules traversed the belts very quickly and were heavier construction so radiation dose was mitigated.

Big fat hoax and the greatest lie ever told to mankind. Prepare for much ad hominems from brainwashed gullible globe goys though.

Dust on the landing feet would be the abnormality. It is to be expected they would be completely clean due to the moon's low gravity and (practically) lack of atmosphere.

It is more accurate to say we live underwater (due to the humidity in our atmosphere) than it is to say the moon has an atmosphere.

Oh man, you are really on to something! You must be SUPER smart dude!

but why did it suddenly become a problem? they get the apollo teams through it with a special route (allegedly) which exposed the crewmembers to the radiation for the shortest time. they got advanced electronics already beyond the belt or we wouldnt have curiosity, voyager etc. but now suddenly with orion it is a new problem despite them already overcomming it previously? thats bullshitting. probably to make the work seem harder than it is to justify more funds.

Thanks, bitch.

The atmosphere is 1/100,000,000,000,000 the density of earth's at sea level. The ratio of dust on the feet should be about the same proportion to earth expectation.

Protip: that is not a visible quantity of dust

>NASA admits we cant go through Van Allen belt despite us apparently having been to the moon
Did you not watch your own video?

Or did you not understand the English words spoken in it?

Because one of those two things happened.

Let me ask you a question. Do you honestly think that the stars and the constellations stay in place and all rotate around one star, and for as long as human history has been recorded, these stars have remained in the sky at the same exact locations because of the distance? I think it's hypocritical to insult someone's intelligence while believing that the stars are doing random shit and earth and the sun are moving in random directions yet every star stays the same.

see
I'd say it ain't rocket science, but it actually is.

To win the space race and establish world superpower?

Based on this poster's intelligence,I think we can see why Germany didn't go to the moon.

did they actually get sick though? because i never heard of anything. also you would assume you would be able to shield yourself from radiation even more effectively than back then

and what about the missing crater below the the capsule?

People die of cancer from gmo food, yet the moon astronauts went through van Allen belt more than once and are well into their 70s.

tell me why aren`t the americans going to the moon anymore?
really made my neurological circuits fire up

It would have been mild enough that it wouldn't make the news. But they for sure got a decent dose.

But dose = flux * area * time, so passing the belts quickly on a direct moon intercept substantially reduces dose by reducing time of traversal

The same could be said of people that were near chernobyl. Radiation dose and cancer don't line up so easily, because a healthy immune system can repair a decent amount of radiation damage.

>tell me why aren`t the americans going to the moon anymore?

Because our government today is run by cucks who would rather loot than do great things

hopefully we can change this soon

You're simply wrong bro. People lived there and were fine. When it exploded they all died. Or the radiation didn't effect them (way less than van Allen)

But we went through back n forth through the van Allen radiation belt. And they live in their 70s. And btw have never sweared on the bible that they landed on the moon...

ah yes, that is weird, some scientist wont swear on something they dont care about, that they did something they really did. hmmmm

www.youtube.com/watch?v=o1S0oObHT0c

i would say it`s run by kikes, but cucks and kikes aren`t mutally exclusive

You mean when we prohibited alcohol and marijuana we weren't cucks? You mean when the federal reserve took hold of every individuals prosperity in 1913 we weren't cucked? Or when we fought ww2 for the cucks, we weren't cucked yet? I wonder when we became cucked

Wait, wait, wait..... You think all the stars orbit the sun? OMFG that is the most hilarious thing I have ever heard. Did you learn science in a creation museum or something? Ok now the humor is wearing off and I'm starting to feel sad for you.

>Read a god damn book, please.
>Whoever is teaching you about the universe is doing a horrible job.

All the stars DO move, constellations remain basically stationary because humanity hasn't existed long enough for their movements to be perceptible to the naked eye.

We measure the mostion of stars (relative to us and eachother) all the time, but it takes very sensitive instrumentation to do so.

>Seriously dude, you are not receiving science education, you HAVE TO TAKE IT UPON YOURSELF. Read a book on Isaac Newton, then gradually work your way to "A Brief History of Time" and it will all make sense. You will learn the skills you need to understand the universe without batshit lunatics lying to you (as they obviously are right now)

Apollo went around most of the inner Van Allen belt.

youtube.com/watch?time_continue=141&v=9BEylTGOlQ8

>they all died
telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/environment/9646437/The-women-living-in-Chernobyls-toxic-wasteland.html

fraid not

lots of people survived, and the chernobyl radiation was MUCH heavier than anything you'd get from 10 minutes in the van allen belts

Aerospace Engineer here. I love how space deniers have such little understanding of physics and material science.

When did I ever say the stars revolve around the sun? You made up a statement I never said and then tried to refute that lol. Lmao. The Stars move, but conveniently we never seen them move? So then how do we know they move... I think it's pretty dumb to believe that.

can someone explain to me how we can see the space station and the flag on the moon with regular consumer grade telescopes

or how we are able to bounce a laser off the mirror we left on the moon

please correct my record

god here, i love how people can claim to be anyone here to support their point of view

come on... this is painful

You said it in this post >the stars and the constellations stay in place and all rotate around one star

I "work" for NASA :^)

I work at Swift which is a space telescope operated by Penn State. We get paid through contract by NASA. I do photometry on UV images of galaxies to find young stars. AMA :^)

I think they have problems with quantitative reasoning

denier reasoning:
>moon has atmosphere 1e-14 the density of earth's
>therefore moon has an atmosphere
>therefore dust on the moon should act just like dust on earth

The fact the 1e-14 is an awesomely small number and that that has consequences is just lost on them.

Now, will you please read a book about how science actually works instead of taking what you learn at the Creation Museum as truth?
>Please.
>You don't have to live this way.

Apollo missions only passed through one of the belts, and they spent very little time in it.

Fuck off, you moron. The Soviets did everything that NASA did (except for manned moon flights, because the N1 was an overengineered rocket that was only understood by the lead designer who died before completing it), yet you idiots never target ROSCOSMOS.

>A Brief History of Time
you mean a shilberger book

>implying there are no secret moon bases

>youtube videos with bad sources debunks the entire NASA

every time. I just love how there are people out there actually believing these videos.

You believe that?

I love how space lovers think we can physically observe space and not guess/run numbers based off other numbers made up to worship the sun and create jobs for aerospace engineers to pocket some money.

believe what

You are a fucking idiot.

He said, we measure stars moving all the time. However, due to the great distances between us and the stars, we have not been alive long enough to notice the movement WITH OUR EYES. We can see that they move with telescopes and other instruments by noticing light dimming. All of the stars in the galaxy revolve around the center of the galaxy. Look up the concept of "galactic year". It is how long it takes the earth to go around the galaxy one time.

We do see them move dumb shit, but for many stars you are seeing light that left the star thousands or even millions of years ago, and the position you see the stars in currently is not where they are "currently" located.

So you are looking at where the star was a long time ago, not where it currently is, so that should tell you how stupid you are. Just because you can't notice something with your eyes doesn't mean nothing is going on.

Think about if you look at bacteria under a microscope and then attempt to look at the bacteria with your eyes only. You would say "isn't it convenient that we can't even see them, it is stupid to even think that bacteria exist.

Your eyes are not able to determine movement of stars the light of which is 4+ years old in all cases and many you see are hundreds of thousands or even more away. So the light you see from them is the far far past. You say they don't move but you are looking at them as they were FUCKING WAY WAY LONG TIME AGO.

Based user.

If anything the Van Allen belt comment speaks to the pussification of later generations.

>Vested interest here

>one star
>omg the sun! Retard!

So one star is the sun now? I meant Polaris.

I love how retarded space flight deniers are when you can literally step outside for an hour at night and spot several satellites and even the ISS itself (depending on orbital conditions).

I've managed to see the ISS using a small refractor telescope and a motor drive. If you know what you're doing it's fairly easy to do.

Or all they just UFOs?

im not saying we never went to space, or to the moon, or that the ISS isnt really there. im just saying a lot of stuff we are shown are faked for whatever reason. why? my guess is as good as yours.

however from those who believe that its all fake i heared its a high altitude plane with a hologram projected on it, or an high altitude balloon in the form of it. i dont even think a hologram would be that ridiculous considering they are probably ahead a few decades with the technology

>idiots that don't know how radiation works

>Apollo capsules traversed the belts very quickly
That would make zero difference considering the belt isnt what causes radiation but whats outside of it.

We need badass astronauts in our space programs again.

The Soviets were planning manned fly by missions of Venus and Mars, and the crazy bastards would have done it if the N1 rocket went anywhere.

Because we know how far the stars are right? And we know how much light they give off.. And all this crazy shit is happening, yet it's irrelevant to life on earth because you're gettin so nitty gritty into the details and spent years and years on a theory, and then you die and the stars didn't move one centimeter.

I actually feel kinda bad for "intellectuals"

correct. and if we look at solar flare data, we find that Apollo 11 was subjected to a nice fat dose of gamma protons

For a minute I was intrigued; but then quickly disappointed.

nigger

Because we planted the flag already, and then, (after Vietnam and The Great Society), decided not to make the enormous investment a productive base would require.

see everyone how the shills come out ridiculing the ideas and not the facts? how apparently people automatically think that all of space is fake despite me never even saying that and providing multiple other reason on why they faking it INCLUDING secret spaceprogramms? common shills, you can do better.

(not saying everyone here is a shill who speaks in favor of nasa. but there are a lot in here already apparently)

low earth orbit isn't shit

apollo went five hundred and eighty times farther than 99% of spacecraft

a battery powered an air conditioner for several days, but there is no evidence on how this actually worked or how they stored that much power to combat the 200+ degree heat

No, sorry retard, the belt is literally made of radiation. It is high energy particles, trapped by the magnetic field of earth.

Just like the amount of time you spend standing in the rain determined how wet you get, the amount of time spent in the belt determines the dose received.

>high altitude plane

nigga, that's full retard. everyone knows airplanes are a lie perpetuated by airplane corporation to teal governement subsidies.

See you retards need to understand that for all of this to happen, a lot of people have to be involved in it. The Apollo Program alone had 400,000 people involved in it. You couldn't even cover that shit up if you tried.

And the fact that you have to come up with nonsensical arguments (holograms) just to prove your nonsensical point means you're pulling at straws.

no, not based

apollo 1, you know, the first mission on which the others were took their namesake?

they killed gus grissholm for trying to explain how unfeasible it is to go 233,000 miles farther than they had ever safely gone

cranked his capsule to 15 PSI of pure oxygen and then set him on fire

and then 40 years later some limpwrist, (you), tries to call him a pussy

i came up with "nonsensical arguments" for a theory i myself dont support. i stated others say that. i said in the very same post i didnt say all of space and spacetravel is fake, and that others who think that claim it. im just saying nasa is lying

Also notice that they NEVER say anything about the Soviet space program or the modern Indian, Chinese, and Japanese space programs.

Its harder to fake space travel and missions than to actually go through with the mission itself.

>200+ degree heat
Space thermal design isn't like earth. There isn't any atmosphere to conduct heat, so all you need to keep something cool is a high albedo coatings(e.g. white paint)

youtube.com/watch?v=MxNk48lnA6o

how do you feel about the military telling you what and when and where you can and cannot point your instruments at

This isn't a cartoon dumbass, they don't have the rockets going full blast when they land

>so much dust that would have to be blown up something is bound to land on the bads
Why?
Because that's how it happens on Earth?

NASA deniers are retards

>prohibiting marijuana
>cucked

DUDE

they probably fake as much themselves as the nasa does. imagine it is for the black project funds. do you think they would call nasa out or use the new source of income themselves for blackprojects without any people asking where that money went since they think it goes to spacetravel and research. i only took nasa since its the one with highest reputation, with the most material on it.

space x is also full of shit.

youtube.com/watch?v=QrWVDtQgf28 check 15:10 with just 5 billion a year in government funds they created the quickest sunset of all time.

Fluxliner is real.
Focus on that.

>lets trust the organisation that is funded by the same people that gave hillary clinton a job

publick worker dane, thats you

HEY GERMANY

HOW ABOUT YOU FUCK OFF WITH THIS SAME SHIT THREAD OVER AND OVER AND OVER

THANKS PAL!

archive.4plebs.org/pol/search/image/BafqS-8TvbbhNP1qarebtQ/

so thrusters being able to stop a few hundred pound landing capsule have not enough power to blow up some dust in a visible manner to see the missing dust beneath the capsule? if you tell me "it doesnt happen because there is no atmosphere" the ignited gas would act like one in this case, and the expansion of it would create a blowing wind in all directions. you wouldnt be able to feel the "wind" for a long distance since it would go poof into the vaccuum quickly, but you should see some dust missing beneath the capsule

IT'S ALMOST LIKE YOURE POSTING FROM A SCRIPT AND START EVERY THREAD OFF THE SAME EXACT WAY

>the capsule wasn't a pressurized bubble of air completely susceptible to thermal radiation

regardless, why won't they explain how the batteries worked, or the a/c?

so "which country is the whitest" "is racemixing with asians ok?" and "what movie/music/book is Cred Forums approved every day is fine, but something whith actual matter isnt?

OH HEY LOOKEY HERE AT THIS PICTURE SEEMS YOU USE THIS ONE FOR YOUR OP SOMETIMES

archive.4plebs.org/pol/search/image/2-KJPyvwogmwMSNB2YWmxA/

>why won't they explain how the batteries worked

Because anyone who's passed 5th grade science knows how batteries work?

Why are space exploration deniers so fucking retarded?

i have some information gathered and like to use it. after that i look what fits the discussion currently, or when i see its stopped i pop in another thing to discuss about. so not really a script, but a certain system is behind it to keep it going. yes

reminder that the channel owner was a NASA insider and he is officially been missing for past 4 years

youtube.com/watch?v=X-RPWhigpQg

Have you read it?

They landed where there was very little dust so there is no reason why there should be a crater.

the same could be said for some of the people posting against him.

>how do batteries work?
you can't be this dumb, can you?
ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19720024228.pdf

parallax scrolling depends on distance from the observer
The Sun is 93 million miles away, the next closest star after that is trillions of miles away and the majority are billion of lightyears away from us. The stars have moved exactly the distance that one would expect, given this distance.

Got a source for that, or are you just spewing NASA denier horseshit?

The stars do not rotate around Polaris. The Earth is spinning. How could you not know this?
>Thinking science learned at the Creation Museum is accurate.
>Thinking Astrology is Astronomy.

what do you mean stars aren't moving? astrology is completely fucked up now because all those constellations fall under different months in our sky now.

beforeitsnews.com/alternative/2013/07/jose-escamilla-for-cary-martynuik-2702312.html

Some did die of cancer look at Apollo 13

Wow their source is from a blog, really got my noggin joggin

Don't forget landing on an object with 1/6th the gravitational pull and using a low thrust rocket engine for the descent.

You get the same answers in every one of these threads

Do you understand how dust and debris move in a vacuum? If the lander pushed the dust out, how could it land on top of the pads? What force would be acting upon it?

Ever play Phoenix Wright? You remind me of that shitty Circus case with the cape and the bust.

a tesla car powers 4 efficient electric motors with a giant battery and will last several hours. You can actually look at the schematics yourself, they are quite elegant

the 1969 a/c system would have a compressor, a motor, a capacitor, and a battery, none of which are efficient, and it would be fighting the highest temperatures faced by a conventional a/c. and it lasted in excess of 72 hours and they won't show us a shred of how it actually worked

also I noticed you got BTFO when you tried to claim the 200+ degree heat would not effect the capsule. get used to that feeling

It works like this, user; the other poster pointed out the fact that you can bounce a laser off the mirror on the moon (which you can) and with a telescope, you can see the old equipment and lander module (which you can). You then presented a theory to explain his points and thus, that has become a part of your argument. And for reference, faking your landing gear or using a hologram which somehow covers the entirety of the night sky on earth (it would presumably have to rotate with the Earth) would be infinitely more difficult than just putting a fucking man on the moon.

Also I find when people come up with conspiracy theories, it's because they can't wrap their head around the intelligence of people who completed the nearly impossible. For example, "I know fuck all about structural engineering sor explosives brought down the twin towers" Or "I know fuck all about spaceflight so clearly everyone else knows fuck all and I'm not just a retard".

Just for reference though - quiz me on this. So according to you, NASA spent billions on building the most powerful machine ever (Saturn V) with the costs of every single worker included. They then went through the logistical nightmare of getting that into space without a problem. There is documented proof of the above, you can watch it on YouTube. So TL;DR, why the fuck would they fake it when the billions they spent would allow them to do it anyways without faking it?

As for the Van Allen belt, read - braeunig.us/apollo/VABraddose.htm

Also I don't want it to seem like I'm just blatantly not taking in your evidence. It's just got to the stage where I've seen it all and I'm convinced of my theory that people don't want to believe it because it's too complicated for them.

Ultimately...Lucifer.

its almost like the astronauts were in peak physical condition

If Lucifer is so good a tricking people, how did you figure him out?

ah, heard about him last time that luna cognita channel stuff. forgot to look into it. will do for sure

while we are at symbology see pic related

yeah source should've been fox news

Any evidence that contradicts my conclusion was faked

Its actually just further proof of the conspiracy

>ctrl-f air conditioner
>no results found

did you really think you could just post a summary of how the batteries engaged thrusters and that would be all? my argument specifically hinges on air conditioning, and how the batteries were able to power it

in fact, your dumbass pdf you linked shows that my argument is even stronger, because not only did these batteries have to power thruster actions, but they had to fight the heat as well!

Well let me make it simple for you then

Speed of light is appr 300000000 km/s

A star is for example 100000000000000^100000000 etc km away. Do the math yourself

If NASA wants to trick us, why would they call themselves deception?

In the first video, the uploaded asserts that it was filmed on a zero-g aircraft (such as the Vomit Comet.) however, the apex of the parabola only produces about 25 seconds of weightlessness before the plane must descend for the next parabola. How do they get 11 straight minutes of zero-G on this plane to film that video?

>they won't show us a shred of how it actually worked
you really are that dumb, aren't you?

hq.nasa.gov/alsj/plss.html

No, it should have been a source with at least a semblance of credibility

the soviets placed a retroreflecter on the moon, and it actually delivers better return data

they didn't need a manned mission to do it, so there goes your dumb talking point

also manhattan project was discovered AFTER we dropped the bomb. another dumb talking point destroyed

Q: Why did NASA director James Webb resign a few months before the Apollo-11 landing? Probable answer: He couldn't live with a lie that big.

see

>oh they actually did provide tons of documentation on the batteries, I'll pretend I never demanded that and demand documentation on air conditioning

yup, ur retarded

I imagine retarded people don't understand that they're retarded, it must be difficult for you to walk around the world in a constant state of bewilderment, fear, and confusion

So before a light of a star reaches the earth, we are dead

Omfg lol this is my point. You believe space just conveniently works out for earth. The FACT is, that all stars rotate around Polaris. Why ? This is where the theories come in.

Jesus Christ how fucking retarded are you?
Someone already showed you the schematics of the battery systems used on the Apollo spacecraft, and another pointed out your heat claim was retarded because you don't understand the relationship between pressure and heat transfer.

But this is how you operate, whenever someone disproves you or brings real evidence to light, you either dismiss it or ignore it and then move on to another bullshit claim.

>a portable life system

so first you show me batteries that are on the rover, not attached to the personal life systems

now you are showing me personal life systems not attached to the rover

are you just flinging random, vaguely related links at me and expecting me not to read them?

how do you leave the rover if you have to stay connected to the battery? Thats literally all you can say after the two retarded things you linked

>source is Jose Escamilla, which was a close friend of him, whom also credited him at his 2016 documentary
>Cary's activities in internet stops in 2012, he was a very active user until that time

nothing suspicious until NASA writes "we kidnapped cary LMFAO" in their website i guess.

they used this advanced technology called a cable, broseph

that user has no idea what he linked

but please, explain why they would need cooling if there is no "heat transfer"?

cover up military spaceprogramms for an example. they already told the nasa where to point the telescope. the hubble for example came from the military. they gave it nasa since they couldnt use it anymore (because it was outdated and they have already better ones?) and told them to never point it down. that shows the military already is more advanced than the nasa is. now if you have fake all that civillian spacetravel stuff you can show "space" all the time without having to fear to show any military satallites for information gathering or even attack. you wont have to fear stations on the moon or the mars made for the elites to get shelter when shit down here hits the fan, become public.

to go even deeper into tinfoil hat mode there are theories that most (or even every) rocket launches is made with a ballon and the fire being projected onto the smoke they are blowing out of it. to be fair some of the rockets really seem to go left and right in the wind, and the fire doesnt always look like fire as well. but for that im really not quallified enough to make assumptions on that

the light you see from the sun is 8 minutes old
the light you see from the next nearest star is about 4.5 years old
the furthest light you can see with the naked eye is about 16 years old
the furthest light you can see with a telescope is 14 billion years old

holy shit you haven't even watched the footage at all?

Are you on meth or something? Nothing I said is in support of an Earth-centric model. Are you aware how unintelligent you are acting?

NASA fucks dolphins on tax payer money

theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/06/how-a-science-experiment-led-to-sexual-encounters-for-a-woman-and-a-dolphin/372606/

>The FACT is, that all stars rotate around Polaris. Why ?
Because polaris rests above the axis of Earth's orbit

Why would they orbit around it in a flat earth model?

source

Because humans give off heat, which you would know if you weren't retarded.

I'm pretty high but that was a fucking terrifying video to watch wtf

boy all that asymmetrical damage sure created a nice symmetrical collapse

>Are they just taking the funds of NASA for black projects and use only a small part for fakery, so they have a fund for black projects without anyone asking where that money went?
But why would they defund their massive money laundering scheme so much?

The Apollo module had shielding though. And it worked. It has to be different based on how fast you plan to be going through the Van Allen belt so you'd probably need a new one.

Fuck off. All of your arguments are this fucking stupid.

Questions aren't arguments. There are numerous reasons the moon landing might have been fakes, numerous people who could have 'ordered' it, and numerous reasons you haven't heard any whistle-blowers. Please go ahead and think of three possibilities for each so I don't have to.

youtube.com/watch?v=P6MOnehCOUw

>If NASA wants to trick us, why would they call themselves deception?
honestly? i believe the establishment is using their own version of mememagic for some time now.

i mean 9/11 hat hints in simpsons (pic related), in matrix on neos ID you can see the date 9/11, i think it even says 2001. king of the hill or beavis and butthead (not sure which one) allegedly had one very early account of this already, and then recently i found this where it seems like they made the schoolclass bush read his book in meme for the success
youtube.com/watch?v=Gllsgu1HoFA

look at reality tv, did they try to meme dumb people into existence to make them more controllable? are all the voting campangeposters with "vote me for president" and stuff also a form of mememagic? maybe^^

so by calling nasa "to decieve" they maybe try to make the decieving even greater.

Or the elite just likes to fuck aroun with us and feel even mightier when we dont get those clues

There was nothing symmetrical about the collapse. The roof caved in several seconds before the shell, the building leaned and bowed in the middle as it fell, one side clearly fell more quickly than the other.

You're testing my patience lol. What I'm saying, is that the stars form constellations BY CHANCE to our perceptions and that a star directly above the North Pole never moves BY CHANCE so that we can navigate. You're supporting a heliocentric model while accepting that everything conveniently works out for life on earth.

Why wouldn't it?

Indeed they did, but the Soviets strangely didn't plant a flag or bring back rocks from the moon. The Soviets did those missions to put a lander there, the US did it to put a human there. Also my point isn't void, they spent billions making the rocket habitable and suitable for three astronauts. So did they fake the entire thing and just put the Saturn V into orbit or did they put an unmanned ship onto the moon? Make your mind up, user.

As for your third point, I have no fucking idea what that means. Indeed we did discover the Manhattan Project after we dropped the bomb. The entire world noticed it. What relevance that has to this argument? Very little.

Also while speaking of the Soviets, I'd like to point out their intelligence. They landed two unmanned drones on the moon. What remarkable fellows, clearly more intelligent than all of us. So, imagine this, my tinfoil-toting friends, if the Soviets (intelligent guys) even thought for a second that the landings were fake, would they not have went on ahead with their own program to prove they were faked? They didn't, coincidentally.

>honestly? i believe the establishment is using their own version of mememagic for some time now.
how old are you? be honest

Ever been in a full car with faulty climate control on a cold day, and notice how it gets warm after a while? That's why.
Except in space, you don't have the surrounding air to dump that extra heat into, so instead your capsule gets warmer and warmer unless you have a thermal managment system.

Just apply yourself and read up on engineering and physics instead of wallowing in your own retardation.

No, I am not. You are injecting what you hope I am saying into words that do not say what you hope I am saying.

NASA is real, deal with it, or sterilize yourself please.

Polaris actually does move, it's just in a "good enough" position for us to navigate by.

And even without it, we'd still use astronomy for navigation, it would just be slightly more complicated.

>There was nothing symmetrical about the collapse. The roof caved in several seconds before the shell, the building leaned and bowed in the middle as it fell, one side clearly fell more quickly than the other.

i dont have any. of course not. that user asked me why they would, and i told some things why they could do it. its just speculation of course. of course they wouldnt tell anything about that to us or it wouldnt be secret.

>Why wouldn't it?
Clearly it does. What I'm asking you is the mechanism through which these stars move in the sky. For that matter, what moves the sun and the moon?

I understand why they would move in the heliocentric model. Everything follows a predictable pattern, given the Earth's axial spin and the relative distance between Earth and the stars.

>the NASA
It's just NASA. Can you please correct this for your future shitposts

And I do know that I am being an insufferable asshole, but this type of discussion is just depressing to me, and I refuse to believe I am exceptionally intelligent, although that's what the numbers say.

youtube.com/watch?v=37Fidl06-UY

Holy shit the autism. Why does it always come back to the fucking devil with these autistic conspiracy theories?

I guess it makes sense; Illuminati originally opposes religious dogma and shit, religious cucks get assblasted and smear them as satanists and now in 2016 every 2spooky autistic conspiracy has to be related to muh evil personified.

You know what we call people who believe things based on faith, with zero evidence?

retards

But but why does OP believe in the Van Allen belt? More lying scientists!

>that most rocket launches is made with a balloon and the fire being projected onto the smoke
I've had enough of pol today. You're all fucking bonkers. Ciao.

thats what i dont know. maybe they just had in general no money left to spend, thus couldnt effort any high cost black ops in the first case, so they dont need to fund nasa that much as they would just spent all the money they get and dont spent on fakery on coke and hookers. but than again, how i know the government they will always have a need for black funds

A plainly obvious flaw with flat earth theory is the uniform speed at which the Sun moves through the sky.

Imagine a circular race track, floating just above your head. You see the car speeding towards you from a distance and it may take a while, but the closer it gets the faster it seems to move up until it passes directly overhead and you have to crane your neck to follow. This would be the Sun's path if it were as close as Flat Earthers claim.

Now imagine a larger circular racetrack, with you situated directly in the middle. Since the car is always an equal distance from you, it appears to move at a uniform speed all the way around the track. This is what we observe with the Sun.

I see you had my comment highlighted. Pretty cool senpai. Were you trying to respond to me? Either way, I love you, Homie, I just get frustrated when people are thinking in faulty manners in order to be "onto something."

This is just trolling/shilling to try and distract Cred Forums from substantive topics.

Of course, sounds very convenient.

I'm saying I don't know. Maybe if we actually unbiasedly studied it instead of assuming they're so far away in space. There could be plenty of reasons why. It might make earth look more like it was created instead of that its a random occurrence.

is there by the way why most spaceagancies and spaceprogrammbades have the same red thing, or at least a closely similar to it on them?

Also the precession of the equinox and the motions of the planets along the ecliptic. Maybe only people in big cities are flat earthers because they cannot see the sky?

Didn't Phil Plait from Bad Astronomy fucking destroy you Moon hoaxers in a definitive thunderfucking many times over?

no, sorry was meant for

>I'm saying I don't know.
And yet you know that the Earth is flat?

That's the bullshit here. You cling to your conclusion, and the moment something contradicts you either claim that its fake or biased. You're not interested in any evidence that leads you away from your version of the truth.

NASA is definitely a fake and an obvious one
ROSKOSMOS is the only company who can actually reach space, non-russians are just not strong enough for that

I don't know it's flat, I just believe it is. Just like you believe it's a ball. The evidences are pretty similar. The math works out in both models.

Your moon rocket sucked, it was a piece of shit.

Sandy hook here, can confirm.

>The math works out in both models.
It really, really doesn't

lol

m.youtube.com/watch?v=nBgmC_USeoM

The sun is not a race car. How about airplanes? Airplanes look like they're going the same speed the whole way if they're high enough.

we simply don't know the nature of the sun because we can't even study it without it going through some heirarchical companies guidelines first.

>NASA admits we cant get through the Van Allen Belt
>youtube.com/watch?v=IDBBUwdyz4I
NASA doesn't "admit" that they can't go into space. The viewer draws his own conclusions using the seemingly inconsistent information that is presented to us. Does the viewer actually know anything on his own, or is his only source of information about the topic this video?

>Hair is fixed rather than floating
>youtube.com/watch?v=Zhzjx8TsuQk
This one seems pretty legit. The woman really does appear to be on a "zero G" airplane, going up and down, not following the usual protocols for water safety and oddly "floating" and sometimes appearing to have gravity. I do wonder how they edited out the engine noise, though, which would have been extremely loud and noticeable (i.e., from constantly switching on and off)

>Bubbles in space
>youtube.com/watch?v=X9-Vroe9G_I
Anti-glare coatings on camera lenses are not all equal.

>Some other footage
>youtube.com/watch?v=W2jqtzCKKh8
I'm about 2 minutes into this and the narrator is obnoxious and stupid. I give up.
>why are there no stars?
The Earth's surface is as bright as daylight. Digital cameras are not able to pick up the faint light of stars when having to expose for light that bright. Go sit out on your back deck at night with a bunch of lights on and take a picture of something well illuminated with the sky in the background. There won't be any stars in your photo.
>the Earth isn't moving, the clouds aren't moving
In a 10 second clip, I doubt people would be able to notice this movement.
>there appears to be a water drop on the window
Doesn't really prove anything. Could be clear glue or caulk, or it could be a water droplet from condensation. That glass is probably very cold and the air inside is probably very humid.
>this is serious business, but the reporter is SMILING during an interview??? Oh, the humanity!!
Yeah, reporters smile a lot. What else is new?

how do you explain the chinese space station if only russians are capable of going to space?

Above my pay grade. Also why would the military dictate where we point the telescope (points into space)?

Can you guys help me? What does the side of this rocket say? I cannot make out the letters.

If the earth is flat then explain why my area gets three hours of sunlight in the dead of winter.

BAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAaaaaaaaaa
>Flat earthers should sterilize themselves.

That math assumes it knows the lighting abilities of the sun.

It must be like 4 am in Germany and this nigga high af posting conspiracy theories on an anime forum.

Where's ur area

ITT: retards who deny global warming.

>That math assumes it knows the lighting abilities of the sun.
Flat Earth theory assumes no one knows anything.

>If the earth is flat then explain why my area gets three hours of sunlight in the dead of winter.
God

Fairbanks, Alaska.

Thank you for summarizing this thread. You have brought a garnish of humor to this frustration of mine. I appreciate your comment, I appreciate you.

I used to think flat earthers were some sort of troll community but then I realized it was a christfag thing along the same lines of denying evolution and saying the earth is only 6000 years old, their version of virtue signaling is showing how literally they take the bible (even though I'm pretty sure the bible mentions heavenly bodies being spherical lmao)

please note all these ideas only ever come from americans

>the math doesn't check out
>but I refuse to change my conclusion
>therefore the SUN must be wrong

germans don't believe in anime forums

Kek those first two videos were genuinely kind of weird. Ok you have my attention. Why are they doing this? Cold war propaganda? Budget black holes? Why carry on doing it now? Haven't they made contact with extraterrestrials? Surely that should've made them think about space exploration more seriously. Or is this just some kind of left wing shilling to make us stop wanting to colonise the galaxy and spend all our taxes on welfare?

About the celestial bodies yeah.

Because the sun is farther from Alaska and the light only reaches it for 3 hours.

Well no, those mathematics we're assuming a lot of things, nothing really factual in the assumptions. Basing math on what "other" flat earthers believe to disprove the earth being flat is part of science. Doesn't mean the earth is a ball.

this

Be in London 72 years ago.

V-2 comes from space and kills you

Find on on Cred Forums that you were killed by a hoax

Left wing shilling to keep the evidence of a CREATOR from us and to keep gobbling up money while pretending to explore space, at the same time keeping knowledge from us that creator exists so we can keep being humans ignorant to our spiritual Godly nature. Aka to keep worshipping Satan and evil

So you are telling me that Godzilla is a hoax?

>americans hating on space shit
you faggots literally made it to the moon, and now you're saying "oh no we're not that great we actually lied about that"
what a bunch of commie anti america you fucks are

The question you should be asking yourself, is where did the gold go?

Find the answer to this, and you will find the answer you're looking for.

>Well no, those mathematics we're assuming a lot of things
like basic trigonometry? You sound like a highschool dropout.

The sun lights the Earth from dawn til dusk. When the Sun isn't visible, it's lighting up the moon. There is nothing to suggest that the Sun would not be visible in the sky from 11,000miles away.

You're not interested in the truth. You're come to your conclusion and you're going to outright deny anything that contradicts you. You won't even attempt to offer a counter-explanation.

all the people who got killed were just very dedicated actors. you got pranked bruv! look at any street corner, that's a camera!

>what are portable batteries?
they're literally in the PLS diagrams that I linked

279/360 W-hr Ag-Zn non-recharable batteries

its 1:30am. early night for me

you just forgot you were wearing a hat user

If all dust is moved away as you say ... how did Armstrong make a distinct footprint in thick dust just outside the lander!? Thinking skills needed...

FOR ALL THE MOON LANDING HOAX PEOPLE:
1.You can see with a telescope the scorch marks/disturbances where the lander landed and even the equipment.
2. You can use lasers to verify the equipment is there by bouncing them back to your detector (Bigged Banged Teory)

Contradicts me? I just don't fuckin believe in all these celestial distances and powers of light. I think the sun gives a very specific portion of light down, and that the moon gives off its own light while the sun doesn't. The sun like an hour hand and the moon like a minute hand. Because the shadows are in a different spot CAN also yield the same results if the sun was 3000 miles up directly above the city that erosthanes first did the experiment. Not that it factually is 3000 miles up.

Be honest with yourself, the sun certainly doesn't look or feel like it's 93 million miles away

do you know my dad? he works there too.

Do you think you'll ever get bored of making these threads, German-chan?

I mean its the same "evidence" and the same "counter-evidence" every time.

No you can't. I've tried.

my guess is as good as yours. i even thought about it being a huge psy op. like you go to the moon for real, but always show fake footage of everything, the moonlanding, iss, earth (like even the round earth pictures are either composits of multiple smaller pictures put together, or made with fisheye lenzes (sometime you see that on the ISS footage when the suncollectors which are supposed to be straight curve with the movement of the camera). that way you create 2 kinds of people. first the fewer ones, that think critically and see its bullshit. they come to the conclusion it is all faked, probably even the earth is flat. than they have the other group, seeing the undeniable evidence we were on the moon (because we probably really were) and that group is usually a lot bigger as long as you propagate it through mainstream media. that way you will have for all eternety the moonlanding deniers and flat earthers to ridicule all conspiracy theories like "you think 9/11 is an inside job? next thing you tell me the earth is flat idiot" and some stuff along those lines, with neither side ever considering the other is right because of the unrefutable evidence. yet both sides are kinda right.

we can see rover tracks, not foot prints

and like I said earlier, the russians placed mirrors on the moon as well

that debunks both your points, because the russians made rover tracks AND placed a mirror

prove we sent men to the moon

I like this leaf

>I think the sun gives a very specific portion of light down
why? is it because you need it to be that way for a flat Earth to make sense?
>and that the moon gives off its own light while the sun doesn't
why? is it because you need it to be that way for a flat Earth to make sense?

>Be honest with yourself, the sun certainly doesn't look or feel like it's 93 million miles away
This the kind of argument that a retard would come up with. The Sun literally supplies our entire planet with the energy that sustains life. You can't conceive the amount of power it would need to give off to do this. You have no frame of reference.

Yes you can. I've tried

>the same "counter-evidence" every time.
that doesn't give you any pause at all?

They landed on the Mare Tranquilitatis, the surface at that spot just has a very thin layer of dust, and under that it's hard.
What kind of crater should be created there, retard?

You can't disprove a conspiracy.

Any evidence given will be met with a claim that it was fabricated.

But can't you just believe in God AND post-ptolemaic cosmology? I do.

>what a bunch of commie anti america you fucks are
like the gold in fort knox? or the gold we germans gave you to store some time ago, but you now claim cant give back all at once and thus got only lik 1% of it after they hat to be remelted again? or which gold? i even heard of a huge miningship that allegedly got photographed on moon. you have to be more specific user x)

>I think
>believes in flat earth
Pick one

What powers the moon?
How do you explain solar and lunar eclipses?
How do you explain the phases of the moon?
Are the sun and moon spheres or discs?
What is gravity?
Why can we visibly see that the other planets are spheres?

I'll think of more :^)

>we can see why Germany didn't go to the moon.

Who knows, maybe because it was occupied by the US since the end of WW2 and basically became America's bitch who has to ask for allowance before doing anything.

...

people on the internet like to argue?

The only reason we're here is to feel better about ourselves.
Some people do this by perpetuating conspiracy theories.
Some people do this by shitting on conspiracy theorists.

Does it give you pause that German-chan has posted this same thread every couple days for nearly a month now?

...

You're really good at 19d chess.

All of the world's gold, user.

There is a reason none of the economies are backed by it anymore.

There's only one currency backed by it left, and they don't like to play with us.

Neil

Number One

Back when America Was Great and Obama was repeating First Grade in Indonesia

Keep it up, leaf of truth, I am losing my resolve and have shit to do IRL. Do not let the horde pass unfettered. Convince as many of them as possible to castrate themselves for the good of humanity and the future of our species.

>Ve're all livingck een Uhhmehrica, Uhhmehrica, Uhhmehrica

Fuck off jelly America-hating piece of shit.

Why would we half ass an attempt to make you believe we put people on the moon by sending shit to the moon? That's like a child's attempt at conceiving some scheme to lie to their parents

Yes.

Yes.

And no, it's not an argument I want you to THINK. Yes the sun is the source of most energy on earth, so Howcome earth has so much biodiversity while nothing else does. Stuff to think about. so why does the sun have to be so far away? And that a couple degrees of Tilt make the earth experience crazy temperature differences. To support a heliocentric model? That's giving the sun's light a very specific role just like a flat earth. so much power given to the sun.

USA USA USA
>USA
>USA
>USA

Why didn't your parents do the right thing and abort you?

I'm about to go observe double and triple stars :^)

Please carry on leaf in my stead

>prove we sent men to the moon
Prove to me you're not sucking a black cock, right now.

Nasa is a lie. Nasa is goyim tax.

When will be allowed to leave quarantine again?

Who knows...

Black Knight won't let us far.

>but but muh murrican occupation
A better country, a smarter people, would haven't gotten their asses kicked and occupied. You didn't do great things because you come from of country of butthurt autistic losers.

>Ve're all livingck een Uhhmehrica, Uhhmehrica, Uhhmehrica

TFW when there's no Chuck Yeager for your generation and just puss balls

Well Howdy Faggots!

Just wanted to plant my flag on this here thread, before I vacate the prem :^)

No you can't see that unless you're imaging it.

HOLY FUCK IS THAT YOURS????
I am so fucking jealous!

I just got an 8in SCT from 1985 that I am learning on (first scope). I have it on a horseshoe mount (pic related) which I think should be replaced with an equatorial or something else that makes navigating easier.
>Have a fucking good night, user.

Can you imagine what we would have found out if all this stuff wasn't force fed to science?

USA USA USA

Always love how flags that have never flown to space with their own efforts are so jealous of space-faring nations that they have to make up convoluted, incomplete, and contradictory theories to argue that the successes of others never happened.

Just how deep does the shame of your failure run?

i dont really make it for fun. i do it so people do their own research. this here is basically just to show them that there is something fishy going on. if you, or anyone else reviewed this, and still think nasa is based, even after looking more into this, then go on. i dont mind. i could be wrong just as every else could be. so if someone just considers the nasa being fake, does some research and comes to the conclusion it is legit im happy about it actually because at least he had an indipendent thought and came to the conclusion himself instead of being told what to think. on the contrary i dont want anyone to believe the nasa is fake just because i say so, because then again he didnt think for himself and just didnt let himself by the media get told what to think but by me/ Cred Forums which isnt necessarily better.

also many of the counterevidence doesnt proof the stuff i claim is faked is real, but that we were actually into space which im not denying at all, and thus is useless for the discussion. then there are the same kind of responses to the sources of which some seem logical, others dont, but certainly dont debunk it at a whole. then there are just the shills claiming im an idiot without any further argumentation what so ever, but i like them since they keep bumping me and make me able to distribute the information even further

That's a beauty, brother :')

Jesus Christ, can he really be that stupid user? Can he? The "I think" really makes it a beaut.

We can't see Polaris from the southern hemisphere. We also see an inverted moon compared to you.

>Reminder: Buzz Aldrin punching OP

youtube.com/watch?v=wptn5RE2I-k

> i could be wrong just as every else could be.

Oh don't be coy, you're as wrong as anyone could possibly be.

>also many of the counterevidence doesnt proof the stuff i claim is faked is real

If the explanations have gone over your head you should just admit it.

Other countries can't handle this much dV.

this German again you post this every other day give it a rest....

I know. Could be just the angle of the sky. Could be the angle you view the moon compared to anyone else. I'm saying that flat earth isn't even that far fetched if you try to figure out how things work. For example, Polaris moving through space in a different direction that we move through space so fast yet never moves an inch to our perception because it's just too far to tell is absurd to me.

to be fair, there is some footage that looks like its not the sun illuminating the moon, and some people messured the temperature of something exposed to the moonlight, and in the shadow of the moonlight, abd those exposed to the moonlight were a few degrees colder. could be meassurment error, or some wind exposure or anything, but it indicates that its not the usual light that we know

youtube.com/watch?v=hLTbc-gaKVA
here it looks like it isnt the sun illuminating the moon for example

also at some videos you see stars shine through the dark part of the moon

when the cognitive dissonance hit hard

AHAHSHSHSHSH

horseshoe mounts without a finding scope are fucking cancer.

> and some people messured the temperature of something exposed to the moonlight, and in the shadow of the moonlight, abd those exposed to the moonlight were a few degrees colder. could be meassurment error, or some wind exposure or anything, but it indicates that its not the usual light that we know

I hope you've got this text somewhere on your resume.

Hnnnng, F-1 engines make my dick hard

Wow, sure seems fake to me...

...

agreed.

I gotta put a rail on it to change the mount and my finder scope is a useless red dot for a smaller tube that can't even be sighted correctly. I'll have to spend another couple hundred $'s on it but it will be worth it. The images I was able to to resolve have me convinced DSO's are within the scopes reach.

thats what i dont get about flat earth to be honest. they clim the globemodel was to drive us away from god and make us feel unspecial since we are just some organism on a rock. but honestly i find the idea of being on a giant spaceship, orbiting an everoccuring nuclear fusion at several thousand miles at our, which revolves around a mass so dense that everything will get sucked into it and never be seen again, which again travels through space at a few million kilometers per hour makes us even more awesome than living on a flat earth being gods chosen. also a all mighty god could just create globe earth just like flat earth. it isnt any disprove to god.
i get where the flat earthers come from, honestly. but i think they are a bit too quick with their conclusions.

Definitely isn't going onto space, no sir.

holy fuck. got me all hot and bothered.

You can tell by the way the pixels are.

This rocket really just disappears or something instead of going into space?

Really makes me think

Obviously going to the Sun, which is obviously 3000miles away. DUH!!!

Flat earth is just a honeypot to get people to not dig deeper. To get mired in something easily dismissed.

Those are some nice chemical engines. I love the invisible flame and blue shock cone.

im quite more suprised we still have a currency backed by gold left o.O

but did you see cowboys vs aliens? is it like there that the aliens came to take/mine our gold? or is the government using it for something secret (you have to guide me into at least the right direction user)

Nah, dude, that's underwater, can't you see the wake of bubbles behind it?

Waiting for answers cuck

Same with (((911 truthers))).

definitely a fake picture

this is shot in a studio or some shit

>is it like there that the aliens came to take/mine our gold? or is the government using it for something secret

Both, government has been giving it away for tech, most of it isn't even on Earth anymore.

Fun fact, the rocket never reaches space. According to nasa math and nasa claims.

Looks like a 1989 Chevy Blazer in some random garage to me.

i made like 5-6 threads in the last 2 weeks about this. if there are other nasa threads they arent from me mate

>Its just a little radiation!!! They'll be fine!!!!!!

American education everyone

How could anyone possibly think that this looks real?

I don't think NASA is hiding ayyy lmaos but I know for a fact they're desperate not to find them.

They refused to put apparatus to detect life on the next Mars rover. They'd rather take samples and store them for months long journeys rather than just test them on the spot. Guaranteed to kill and decompose any micro organisms in Mars soil.

There was also a relatively famous experiment, adding water to Mars soil decades ago that momentarily registered life, but then they just wrote it off without further testing, even though some people suggested Mars life may have evolved differently and the solution used in the test could have been poisonous to it.

Many scientists believe the earliest life on Earth evolved by under sea volcanic vents. There's a couple volcanically active moons in the solar system with shells of ice miles thick protecting from radiation, with vast oceans below. Basically guaranteed to harbour some sort of life but they're barely trying to investigate at all.

And finally, they constantly move the goal posts for "life". Their definition basically excludes anything that isn't water based, oxygen using, earth life. There's caves on earth with bizarre, small creatures that breathe poisonous air and don't need light. There's caves all over Mars, and when it lost it's atmosphere, the water would have receded into the ground. It's almost certain there's probably life underground on Mars and yet they're obsessed with surface water.

I think other life would be too ground breaking. Islam would fucking flip shit for one thing. Shame we live in the era of space exploration and the people in charge are blatantly trying to avoid significant discovery.

I try

>What is lethal dose?
Australian education, everyone.

Reminder that this picture is 100% fake.

Those are just dressed up salt and pepper shakers hung by string above someone's toilet bowl with diarrhea and toilet paper in the water.
>OPEN YOUR EYES SHEEPLE

The reason it is absurd to you is because you are failing to grasp just how FUCKING HUGE distances are in space.

Here, let me try to explain this using an example I know you'll understand. Have you ever been sitting in a car driving down a freeway, and noticed that things closer to you appear to be moving faster than things farther away? A sign on the road will fly by in a second, but you could look at a mountain in the distance for a minute or two before it moves from your perspective any significant amount. That's because the mountain is farther away, so you will need to move much farther to generate the same change in angle, when compared to something very close like the sign.

Now, blow up this example by billions and trillions of times. The stars are truly astronomically far away, now can you see how something that is literally billions of LIGHTYEARS away would require us to move an obscene amount of distance to cause a noticeable change in our viewing angle

Octaweb too sexual for primetime television.

>commonwealth education
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_no-threshold_model