You do know there were 5 more Apollo missions to the moon after the first one?
That means they would have had to fake not only the first one, but all the other ones as well.
Moon Landing Hoax
- Thread starter Nimrod
- Start date
You do know there were 5 more Apollo missions to the moon after the first one?
That means they would have had to fake not only the first one, but all the other ones as well.
The Berean
Well-known member
The ignorance in this thread is astounding. There are no geosynchronous satellites orbiting the earth? I guess that means I've spent 14 years wasting my time designing and building geosynchronous telecommunications satellites. I've worked on more than 30 different satellites ranging from XM Radio, Sirius Radio, DirecTV, Intelsat, and many more European and Asian satellites. These satellites were mostly launched from either Kazakhstan or French Guiana. None of these satellites have anything to do with NASA. These launch facilities have nothing to do with NASA either. So we are to believe that the Russians and the French are also involved in faking satellite lauches? Also apparently all these satellite customers are paying upwards of $150 million for space junk and receive nothing in return for their investment? Really??
Last edited:
I've been reading a lot about geocentrism.
Is it possible for a geostationary satellite to do what it does if the earth does not rotate, but space itself rotates around the earth?
Geocentrists say yes, it is possible.
Moon Landing Hoax
These moon hoax threads always crack me up. I leave you to your non-job of building non-satellites that don't exist...:rotfl:
These moon hoax threads always crack me up. I leave you to your non-job of building non-satellites that don't exist...:rotfl:
Okay, watched the vid.
He didn't say they couldn't get past the belts.
This is a video about Orion's first test flight and how they will go thru the belts and back to test the shielding. The poster seems to think that means they haven't done it before. That's just wrong headed, of course they would send it out unmanned first to test it because it's a brand new design.
You got a sketch of that?
Nimrod
Member
If I said that, I was paraphrasing. You know the point I was getting at.
Yet you choose to focus on the non-issue of sending non-manned space crafts through the VAB.
He said "We must solve these challenges BEFORE we send people through this region of space".
Yea, it would be great to use the 1969 technology. I guess they lost it.
Nimrod
Member
Having a degree means nothing. Trillion dollars in debt these students are who think a higher degree really means something.
They got that right.
Nimrod
Member
Your point is?
Nimrod
Member
Hi Berean.
How far up in space are these satellites.
Again, I have no issues with Non-manned space things going up. The issue is with the Apollo missions and the images they provided as truth.
Faking 6 moon landings over 3 years would require a lot more people to fake it.
Do you remember the press conferences with the astronauts after each moon landing?
Instead of 3 astronauts faking those press conferences, it would mean 18 astronauts faked those press conferences.
When at least 3 people commit a crime, usually 1 sings.
Think about how many people it would have required to fake 6 moon landings? And think about what the odds would be that not one of those people would tell the truth after 45 years.
Nimrod
Member
Manhattan project. This is a good example how secrecy works in the government. Over 100,000 people worked on the project and yet the Vice President didn't know about it. Read about it here http://www.atomicheritage.org/history/security-and-secrecy
The number of astronauts is small compare to the 911 hoax. It is like a fraternity. Gus Grissom ended up dying as he was going to speak out. If they know you are going to speak out, like the parrot in Neil Armstrong speech, they will take care of you.
He also said that the most dangerous part of the flight is reentry, not the Van Allen belts. I wonder if Nimnoo thinks reentry is faked too.
You're ignoring the context and focusing on the wrong word.
We must solve these challenges before we send PEOPLE through this region of space (in this brand new design)
When they build a new airliner do they fill it up with passengers for it's maiden flight? Does that mean they lost the technology from all the previous airliners? Or does it mean all previous airliners were fake?
Mocking You
New member
Yep. My Dad designed power supplies for the lunar lander. Apparently if the kooks are to be believed he went to a fake job every day, got paid, and they ended up putting his circuitry in airplanes, I guess.
The fact that the U.S. spent billions of dollars on the moon shot employing millions of people over almost a decade is something that you can't fake.
Nimrod
Member
Certainly it is a new design. The shape looks very similar, so it shouldn't take too long. Unless they never did this before.
1969 technology should be easily incorporated into the design with ease.
Kind of like putting Atari 2600 in my tablet.
Which of the following two choices do you think is more likely:
1) NASA was stupid enough to admit on video that they've never sent astronauts through the Van Allen belt; or
2) You don't actually know what you are talking about?
musterion
Well-known member
Nimrod
Member
You know you are on the right path when the opponent say things like this.
Apparently you can not discuss Moon hoax theory without it.
Why do they behave like this? imo. Pride. They don't like it when they are told they are wrong. AND. With evidence as damning as this, they really, Really, REALLY hate it.
For those who are still sitting on the fence about the Moon. See the video in the first post. The Evidence confirms the hoax.
Apparently you can not discuss Moon hoax theory without it.
Why do they behave like this? imo. Pride. They don't like it when they are told they are wrong. AND. With evidence as damning as this, they really, Really, REALLY hate it.
For those who are still sitting on the fence about the Moon. See the video in the first post. The Evidence confirms the hoax.