General statistics
List of Youtube channels
Youtube commenter search
Distinguished comments
About

Kevin Skinner
PowerfulJRE
comments

Comments by "Kevin Skinner" (@kevinskinner4986) on "Stanley Kubrick and The Moon Landing" video.

@Tiger4ever89 They're ALL scams. Fortune telling is just making shit up you think people want to hear and most "witchcraft" is psychosomatic or pure superstition. And then most accusations of Witchcraft are just lies. So um.... on that subject of demons.... have you guys found where Tamamo-No-Mae went yet? You should be really worried about that one. One of Japan's most powerful and famous youkai broke her seal and split the rock her spirit was trapped in last year. I mean... that's real too right and not just a superstitious story?
3
@Tiger4ever89 "do you think i will spit nonsense here if i didn't know too many cases to be able to deny it?" Absolutely. I have no doubt that supposedly religious people, either individual persons or government officials, religious officials, or other persons of power,, would lie and make up fake claims to push their religious beliefs, either issuing false accusations against real people or making up a fictional scapegoat. After all, Christianity did that for centuries. Spread lie after lie about pagans and then sacrifice... er... "deliver divine justice" to "witches" and Jews when they needed somebody to blame for their problems for or just wanted to get rid of unwanted people and steal their stuff.
3
@Tiger4ever89 Because there's EVIDENCE of the Big Bang and basically none for god except appealing to "it couldn't happen on its own". Even if there is a god, that does NOT mean that Biblical Creationism has any merit. An all-powerful being could create a Big Bang, and an all-powerful being could allow evolution to happen. Even if there is a god, that does not mean it's the Christian god. It could be another religion, like Hinduism or Shinto. It could be a being that has never contacted the humans, or one so powerful and beyond humans that they don't even notice us like you don't notice your own dandruff. It could be a god with no humanoid form and no consciousness, a pure force of nature whose power is so great that life forms around it purely through its existence. It could even be a religion that a more well-armed religion crushed out of existence, resulting in the truth being lost forever. It would be an awful shame if those witches were the REAL religion and Christianity's False Church stamped them out....
3
Dark Side of the Moon uses chopped up pieces of stock footage.
2
@createbelief8678 ....... the blazes are you talking about? YOU asked: "Also could you give me your best logical argument for a globe" I gave exactly what you asked for. My proof, one of many, many issues, involves maps. As far as my argument having "nothing logical," let me explain this in a way a child can understand. Do you believe that the same object can be: A) In front of you B) Behind you C) To your left and D) To your right AT THE SAME TIME? Yes or no. Because that's what happens on ANY Flat Earth map, no matter which one it is.
2
And the issue currently with the belts is that they'll destroy the COMPUTERS on board because modern electronics components are weaker to radiation due to the side effects of circuit miniaturization But... but... but that can't be! There's no way that a machine is more fragile than a precious human body! Better pretend they're talking about human lives (and not just because everybody inside will die if the ship malfunctions) and lie like it's tax season.
2
@trendynow1369 ....... how wouldn't they know? Are you saying that YOUR OWN SIDE is lying when they claim "The Russians didn't go to the moon because they knew they couldn't get through the Van Allen Belts?"
2
Head's up, Armstrong refusing to swear happened after Bart got arrested for stalking him and sneaking around outside his house. You can watch Alan Bean, Gene Cernan, and Edgar Mitchell swear in the original cut of Astronauts Gone Wild assuming Bart hasn't edited it out yet.
2
@Tiger4ever89 "I been studying witchcraft from a far and seen the effect of curses that works through people.. but atheist scientists label everything they cannot measure with an observation tool.. hallucinations, effects of depression and more" ..... you mean like how the Salem Witch Trials are now believed to be caused by ergot, a black fungus that grows on grain and causes seizures and hallucinations because it's poisonous? Fun fact, did you know that one of the judges in Salem deliberately executed innocent people so that he could buy their land? We all know that the claims of "witchcraft" are just lies so that you can kill and steal without a guilty conscience.
2
@Tiger4ever89 There are no demons influencing the way you think. There are no devils controlling your mind. Anybody that claims otherwise is lying and too dishonest to admit their faults Love and respect should be earned, not demanded. Any being that demands to be loved has no love for anything but themselves and does not deserve it. Or is a cat. Only those who follow Jesus can get into heaven. That is the rule, correct? So do the millions of children that God kills every year that are born by God's design into non-Christian families and die by God's design before they can learn of him get dumped into hell by default? If the answer is yes, then God deserves no love.
2
Um.... they did their practice simulations out in the desert, six thousand miles from Pinewood, so your series is lying.
2
.... you mean the ELECTRICAL ENGINEER who became executive through his development of audio engineering technology that allowed the studio to pioneer their early non-silent films, who then got recruited into the Navy during WW2 and became the director of their Underwater Sound Laboratories working on military audio and sonar equipment?
2
@goodnight360 Buzz became an alcoholic because his life is dogshit. His mother committed suicide from depression and depression is hereditary His marriage fell apart. He lost the opportunity to be First Man on the Moon by NASA changing it to Armstrong and making excuses as to why. And he could NEVER FLY AGAIN because NASA refused to clear them for any more missions to keep their precious heroes safe like a helicopter parent, meaning staying at NASA would mean a life of administrative desk work. But that can't possibly be why he started drinking. The astronauts should act like gods, perfect and immortal and unaffected by mundane things that would cause you or me to drink like a lowly human.
2
Room 237? It's more stretching than a yoga class.
1
Ah, yes the smoking gun, proving that your "truth movement" is a scam. Guessing you didn't hear that Bart got caught red-handed skipping over parts of it that disproved him, including shots of them filming without his trick. Ooops!
1
I look forward to the day when all of you "true believer" turn your back on God when he dunks Eric Dubay and the rest of his lying fraud in the Lake of Fire. And as Rob Skiba who spread lies in the name of God lay upon his death bed, dying of a disease he deceieved the masses into believing did not exist, the Angel of Death did sit upon his chest for a month, choking the life out of him.. And as hecalled out for help, the Angel did lean in and whisper "You who deceived the masses and did so in my Father's name shall have no reprieve save death. The Lord has spoken, False Prophet. Amen."
1
...... that's a training model. You hook a camera controlled by the rail, and the person in the simulator can practice before they get launched into space. You don't think they're doing this completely blind, do you? Maybe you should put.... you know.... more than 5 seconds of thought in before going "Why would they do this" with something a child would be able to figure out.
1
You do realize that the moon does not rotate at the same speed as the Earth, right? One day on the moon is approximately 27 days long because it is tidal locked and has one side facing at the Earth at all times.
1
You know, i once saw a Flat earther try and prove (badly) that the lunar seas match the continents on their map because it's a reflection. They got very angry when I pointed out that the objects in a mirror are reversed.
1
@ikediamond The people who made the videos? This is true of reflections in general, not just mirrors. Just saying.
1
.... but Armstrong's almost exactly like he is in his other post-mission press conferences, so why did they hire somebody they knew couldn't act?
1
Fact: the real reason the room number was changed has nothing to do with Apollo. The hotel they used for some of the shots requested they use a fake room number because they were concerned about losing business if people saw the movie and refused to stay in the room.
1
See, this is what happens when you drive around the barrier like an idiot, and considering that you can go on any of the idiots in cars dashcam channels and see ten people in a row do it, people still haven't learned their lesson.
1
And yet the people claiming it wasn't have to constantly lie. Gee, why is that?
1
Which is stupid and shows that Flat Earthers can't do grade school math. 25,000/360 is approximately 70 miles for one degree of arc, so how much curvature are you expecting to see on an object that's literally one millionth of that size?
1
@createbelief8678 No, it finds the lowest point of gravitational potential, which on a sphere forms a sphere. it just looks like a plane because our field of view is too small. This Best logical argument for a globe? Okay. Flat Earth geometry and astronomy is f-d like a hooker when the Navy's on shore leave. For starters, there's two celestial poles. It is physically impossible for a flat Earth to have two celestial poles; there should only be one in the middle and the Southern stars should move horizontally parallel to the horizon. The fact that the Southern stars are seen circling around a point in the sky due south of each location in the Southern Hemisphere would cause the stars to be in both multiple places at once and overlapping if you draw their positions on a flat map.
1
@createbelief8678 You're not very smart are you? Unless you're from Bizarro World, "Objects cannot be in multiple places at the same time" should be a pretty red flag A flat map cannot display the position of the stars without the same stars being in multiple places. This is true of any flat map, whether it's the standard Gleason one or a Mercator where objects teleport side to side like Pacman. You want logic? Okay If the Earth is flat, then the stars are in multiple places simultaneously. Objects cannot be in multiple places at the same time. Therefore, Flat Earth must be false. If A, then B. B is false, therefore A is false. This is called a "contrapositive" and it is one of the most basic fundamentals of logic.
1
@createbelief8678 Siiiigh. First of all, water does NOT form a perfect plane so your premise is false. Second, a water level cannot determine the shape of the Earth. You need three points to determine curvature, two on the side and one between them, and even if you had a level with three points, it is too small. You lack the precision needed to make an accurate measurement in nanometers. Forming a horizontal plane with a water level proves nothing. A water level cannot tell the difference between a plane that is parallel to the ground forever and one that is tangent to it. A tangent is ALWAYS horizontal compared to the radius that it intersects. ----------------- As far as the stars, you can tell where you are and where an object is based its direction, height, and position from you. This is why you can use the stars to navigate. From three or more locations, you can determine its position. This is called "triangulation." In order for the same stars to be seen due south of every location the Southern Hemisphere, these locations must be pointed towards each other with the stars in or above the middle. Since there are two locations like this - one in the North and one in the South - the Earth MUST be three dimensional because it has to wrap together on both sides.
1
There are no instances of the same place. It's very easy to, however, lie and claim that pictures of the same place were from different missions.
1
Head's up, by the way, that specific man is the leading reason as to why your "truth movement" has the reputation of being a group of crooks and con artists. He got caught faking evidence over ten years ago.
1
@jamesgrant3578 It's cute how touchy people get about "your movement" and "your leaders" when these "independent thinkers" continually say the exact same things and promote the exact same people.
1
A con artist popularized the term "sheeple".
1
No, Nixon speaks to NASA in real time. NASA are the ones recording the call. The astronauts take several seconds to respond to him and you can hear Nixon echoing several seconds later.
1
........... Harold. You can't simply print money at will from scratch. If you do this, you cause inflation and ruin your economy. This is why Hitler was able to take control of Germany: because they printed money to pay for WW1 reparations and drove their currency into the ground. If they're just going to print money, there are far, far more important things that they would spend their made up money on first. Where's the infinite money being pumped into education?
1
@nicolagianaroli2024 And Russia and China would have laughed in America's face because if America attacks them, COMMUNISM WINS in the ideological aspect of the Cold War and all of America's allies will abandon whatever's left of its ashes. It is extremely well known by this point that if Russia and America get into a war, both sides lose and any "victory" is purely symbolic.
1
Van Allen called you all morons that have no clue what you're doing after Fox whined about them many years ago.
1
I'm pretty sure he's more mad about Bart calling him hundreds of miles out of his way, trying to physically prevent him from leaving, then chasing him through the street hurling insults.
1
 @almilligan7317 Would you prefer being like the people who deny shootings that make death threats against grieving family members?
1
The ones that the hoaxers literally made up bogus claims about needing "six feet of lead" to cross? Even Van Allen himself called you people out as having no clue what you were doing.
1
@dodibenabba525 .... but that requires an even greater technology and a hell of a lot more money. As a reminder, it took 40 years to return the South Pole.
1
@dodibenabba525 And it took 52 years to return to the Marianas Trench, the deepest part of the ocean. 52 years of technological advancements on a much, much cheaper achievement and not a single one of you can think of any reason why that's suspicious because you can't spin it into a government conspiracy. Wakey Wakey, your "truth movement" is a fakey.
1
He's referring the model demonstrations that the networks played alongside the radio chatter because there was no camera outside to watch the ship land.
1
.... why the fuck would they ever do that? There's nothing there to constantly watch. Even if they pointed at the Earth, which is stupid because any actual study of it would be done from a closer vantage point, the Earth only rotates a few degrees per hour. Unless your name is Kal-El, you won't see anything happen without a time lapse. You'd miss nothing by taking a still photograph every 15-30 minutes, which is what many of the weather satellites do. Besides, you'd simply claim that it was CGI and you'd be going to hell for lying if you claimed otherwise.
1
@jeffs4483 And yet you can't refute a single word I said.
1
@jeffs4483 Any from Apollo-era. Even if they were fake, they'd have been hand drawn as the software needed for CGI pictures hadn't been invented. Besides, all you idiots can do is shout "CGI CGI CGI!" If I were to select a picture at random that wasn't one of about three pieces of known, credited artwork, bet you couldn't prove it beyond just shouting "CGI CGI CGI!" By the way, you just proved that you were lying in your initial post. Checkmate.
1
.... the ISS is only designed to be used in orbit. It would be unusable if you tried to land it. It'd crash on impact. It's not shaped to sit on anything. Half of the shit inside is probably upside down or rotated 90 degrees. And good luck supplying it, since that would require building cargo transporters heavier than Apollo.
1
And the voice actor for the Joker for 30 years was Mark Hamill aka Luke Skywalker. Mark Hamill mARK HAMill Arkham Asylum COINCIDENCE? I THINK NOT!
1
4 minutes in, he calls it "Project Slam Dunk". That's really f-ing sketchy because the term "slam dunk" was coined in the 1970s, AFTER Apollo.
1
You've been had. We know for a fact that the "shut up elbow" is 100% baloney. There's TWO camera angles. The other one is from the front and you can see that not only does no such elbowing occur (Armstrong moves his arm backwards towards himself), but they're sitting too far apart for him to do so unless he leans his entire body over to do so.
1
@robertamaral2349 This is the frontal camera https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XeAGGpRYmKY The "shut-up elbow" had it actually happened would have been at about 44:40 You can clearly see that no elbowing actually occurs.
1
@robertamaral2349 I mean.... Michael's talking to him? It's not unusual to look at somebody that's talking to you.
1
Yes, in reference to the fact that the belts can destroy the ELECTRONICS as mentioned a few sentences earlier. Modern electronics component are weaker to radiation than 1960s computer parts due to the side effects of circuit miniaturization, but don't tell that to a hoaxer because they'll throw a tantrum and call you a shill.
1
@giacomocapodellago3246 And considering that your fellow hoaxers have spent twenty years making up fake claims about needing "six feet of lead to cross" because they don't have the slightest clue what they're doing and taking every opportunity to lie and twist this, the question that any reasonable person should be asking is "Why should I believe you?" They also can't survive their ship crashing or getting lost in space because all of their equipment stopped working. Just saying.
1
@giacomocapodellago3246 .... no. Because they didn't. ONE, just one, "moon rock" was found to be petrified wood. And guess what? It wasn't even from NASA. It was a completely unrelated rock that NASA did not give out that morons ASSUMED to be a moon rock and donated without appraising.... despite not resembling their other samples and despite being given a year before the moon rocks were actually given. Oh, and what's funny is that the country it was in is one of the countries that still have both of their actual gifts. They received two rocks, but have three, and this doesn't cause red flags because hoaxers are too dumb to do Sesame Street-level math. It's pretty sad that your best "proof" is to blame NASA for something they have nothing to do with. Now that's pathetic. --------- Edit. And no, the Apollo 11 astronauts did not give out that rock despite what the one single copy of that article says. The website's lying in their headline to get you to click on it.
1
That tin foil is called "mylar" and "kapton". Mylar is used to make hypothermia blankets and portable fire shelters. Kapton is used in aircraft insulation. Also, as a reminder, satellites often have that same "foil" covering them too.
1
The movie NASA helped make with plot holes large enough to sail an ocean liner through?
1
How the bloody hell would it have worked? The Soviets already knew about the "impassible" Van Allen Belts that are supposed to have made the flights impossible and were the first to put animals through them (successfully, might I add). They would have known that it was fake during Apollo 8, six months in advance.
1
@KingRahiem No. He didn't say "back" in one sentence. He then keeps talking about needing to know why you stop in order to continue next time, says you need even more money in order to do new things instead of repeating the old, and says they went several more times. The hoaxers simply lie and cut the footage off so you can't see the latter half of the response.
1
@KingRahiem You know, I'm not entirely sure where that "NASA lost technology" claim even came from. They claim to have lost recordings yes, but technology? Are you sure you didn't make that up and/or amalgamate it together from other things like you're playing telephone? Let's use an even simpler logic here: if Apollo were actually faked, you "truth" seekers wouldn't need to twist and lie like a snake running for Congress.
1
@KingRahiem I'm going to be blunt: if you want people respond, make it seem like you do. I've never once seen anybody use laughing emojis that actually wanted a serious answer. I'll write a proper response in the morning, I've got stuff to do tonight.
1
@KingRahiem First of all, Apollo cost about 130 billion dollars, and their current budget is HALF of what it was in the 60s and another half of that is devoted to non-spaceflight research. It's extremely expensive and nobody really wants to pay for it. Second, only three countries have manned space programs at all: the US, Russia, and China. Russia's own moon attempts ended in disaster. The truth is that they spent more time and money than they should have trying to show up the Americans to the point of neglecting the N-1, their equivalent to the Saturn V, and when they rushed development to try and get back on schedule, they wound up with a piece of garbage that blew up when they tried to launch it. The N-1, it turned out, had a fatal design flaw in their engine design where a single rocket would cause too much vibration. In order to fix this, they would have basically scrap much of it and start over, and so they shelved it because like any sane and reasonable person would notice, wasting any more time on this failed endeavor would result in them being behind in everything else forever and never being relevant again because the Americans weren't going to sit there waiting for them to catch up. The reality is that today, 50 years later, neither Russia nor China have any MOTIVE not to take their sweet ass time. You can only be first ONCE and the moon ain't going anywhere, at least not very fast. Without the Cold War space race driving it, you are essentially spending a very, very large amount of money for ultimately not a whole lot of actual gain. Robots would be cheaper and can last years on the moon because they don't need food, air, or water, and for all the talk people give about mining, the only resource of any actual value (helium 3) is both able to be synthesized in a lab and primarily desired for a hypothetical energy source that doesn't work and isn't expected to be commercially viable for another fifty years. Do you know WHY we built the space shuttle, by the way? Because the Apollo-era technology was deemed too inefficient and too expensive to justify long-term operations. Especially since Apollo and before are all single-use spacecraft. You need to build a new one every single launch because they can only be used once. And so they tried to work on technology to make spaceflight cheaper (which failed by the way) and built the first REUSABLE spacecraft. But building reusable spacecraft is "moving backwards". Working on long-term medical experiments before committing to long-term colonization plans is "moving backwards". Developing water and air reclamation systems that work in space and physics experiments that will be used to design future equipment and all of the other shit they do on the ISS is "moving backwards". Never let a conspiracy theorist program your computer. They'll stick to the first method they find that works no matter how much of a memory hog it is, evolve it into a convoluted mess, and never ever rework anything because optimization and bug fixing is "moving backwards."
1
@KingRahiem Are you fucking serious? Big words and lots of words to "throw you off??? I gave you an intelligent, thought out answer answer. If using the goddamned name of the goddamned rocket, a basic fact, is too "big words" for you, then you are not ready for an intelligent conversation.
1
Bart Sibrel got caught lying about his air force base bs. Just like he gets caught lying about everything else. The idiot he got filled his story with anachronistic details, accused of people who had no business being there of being part of it, and forgot to mention to Bart that his family put up a GoFundMe for the house fire (which has a posting date), resulting in Bart trying to claim it was filmed a year and a half before the fire mentioned in it happened. Ooops. Don't try and claim that Bart's "hated by NASA" without mentioning that he's hated for being the most prolific fraud you have. ---------- Also, front screen projection works by using a camera filming through a one-way mirror. It requires a stationary camera, otherwise, you're not pointing at the screen and mirror, and the camera in Apollo is picked up or spun around, in some cases 360 degrees, in most of the footage. By the way, if you ever drive through places that have lots of hills and no trees, you'll see your "Front screen projection line" literally everywhere.
1
...... what is people's fascination with this. He called NASA and they relayed the call over their radio broadcasts. It's not some sort of magic. How dare NASA use technology that civilian radio stations have been using since the 1930s.
1
Ah yes, the movie that went crawling to NASA begging their help in making it because they ran out of budget and needed to borrow their training props.
1
@samsonbabayan6894 Yeah, that's why the fake Mars lander is identical.
1
Stevie.... one of the most important rules in physics is that when an object is launched from a second moving object, it maintains its momentum. It travels at the COMBINED speeds. A ship won't be left behind because it continues moving forward with the solar system PLUS whatever speed and direction it was launched. This has been tested to death, and if you take a college-level physics course, this concept (also applied to applications on Earth) is half of the midterm.
1
@stevieray7920 Nothing. Rockets don't work by pushing on things. There's another law of physics called the Conservation of Momentum which states that the total momentum of a system (Mass x Velocity) is constant unless an outside force alters it. This means that if you eject a part of an object's mass, it will speed up (or slow down if it's fired forwards) proportional to amount of mass that's lost and the speed and direction you eject so that the total combined momentum for both parts will stay the same as when it was whole. Fun fact, by the way, there's a principle in fluid dynamics known as "choked flow". this causes a gas or liquid to speed up when you force it through a more narrow opening. that's why rocket engines are shaped lie hourglasses - to force the exhaust to come out much faster.
1
@joeluebbers5474 Plus the time where an oxygen tank blew up and they limped back on duct tape and prayers. I can't imagine how faking Apollo 13 makes any amount of sense unless NASA recruits from the Asylum. You don't actually steal any more money because your missions are budgeted in advance, and all you do is hurt your own operations. Congress shut Apollo down faster, there will absolutely be an investigation with outside meddlers looking into your stuff so you just willingly drew attention to yourself, and if you ever try and use anything from it on a real disaster, people will die for real.
1
Dust clouds (or any other type of cloud for that matter) don't form in a vacuum. Without air resistance, any displaced dust won't hang in the air around the ship. It'll be blasted outward at high speed and not come back.
1
Nobody, nobody at all, says that we need three feet of lead. There is not one single real scientist on this entire planet that claims that. That claim was MADE UP BY YOU PEOPLE and the number was pulled straight out of your ass still reeking of bullshit. You will look for a thousand years and you will never find the studies claiming this because they don't exist. By the way, no space agency would ever use lead as the primary shielding. Do you know why that is? Because Beta Radiation - the type inside the Van Allen Belts - CREATES secondary radiation when it hits heavy metals like lead. That's why it is industrially shielded primarily with low-density materials. This process is how your dentist makes their x-rays in the first place.
1
Um... an object in space will move FOREVER until it hits something once it's reached escape velocity. There's no friction and drag in a vacuum to slow it down, so in the absence of an opposing force, it'll never stop as per Newton's First Law of Motion.
1
What others? What crater? They didn't land in a crater. They landed on a flat plain with small craters on the ground around them. Anybody watching them from the rim of a crater is the size of Tinkerbell. Now, if the moon is infested with fae, that is a very good reason not to go there.
1
What about it? He called NASA and NASA relayed the call over their radio transmissions. Radio stations have been doing this since the 1930s. I would like to remind your high tech cell phone doesn't use a transmission or receiving dish the size of a house.
1
Have you considered the possibility that the bible might be wrong?
1
How exactly are you judging the distance?
1
@donniev8181 Donnie.... first of all, you didn't answer my question. HOW are you determining that the horizon is actually close and not 3/4 of a mile away. How re you judging the distance. Second, you just shot yourself in the foot. the guy you linked to, Bart Sibrel, is a known con artist. He is singlehandedly the biggest reason why people don't trust you. That first video you posted, A Funny Thing? Bart GOT CAUGHT not only blatantly lying about his footage, but selectively editing his "faking the distance" video to skip over parts of it that disproved him. This includes shots of them filming without his trick, which he has done everything in his ower to hide. Why do you think he doesn't let people comment?
1
Just making sure, you realize that's an Earth phone call right? Nixon didn't call the astronauts. He called NASA and they recorded the phone call here on Earth while relaying the call to them over their radio transmissions. That's why Nixon has an echo about 3 seconds later.
1
Make sure to ask him to his face, on stream, about how he got caught faking evidence.
1
I'm going to tell you the truth of the space race that the hoaxers don't want you to know. You ready for this? Russia blew their lead fucking around. The reality is: Russia was NOT vastly ahead of us. They were a few months tops, and they spent vast amounts of money, time, and effort to keep it that way. Rather than let the Americans get some inconsequential firsts, they went out of their way to show them up - putting their own cosmonauts in danger to do so on occasion - and neglected their long-term plans for short term press coverage. By the time they started serious development on the N-1, the Americans had been quietly working on the Saturn V for several years. They they tried to rush development and cut corners to compensate and wound up with a piece of shit that blew up every time they tried to launch it due to a fatal design flaw that would have required them to scrap half their work to fix. It didn't help that their lead designer responsible for their early deaths died in January of 1966 of surgery complications with rumors that one of his rivals may have made a power play and assassinated him.
1
Also even without radiation concerns, a moon base would be much more expensive and a billion times more difficult. A ship in orbit is going less than 1/100th the distance, doesn't need to reach escape velocity, doesn't require anywhere near as powerful of a rocket, and can just float back to Earth. It doesn't need to be able take off from solid ground a second time to leave.
1
@kidwave1 ... the delay you people constantly lie about? "No delay in the footage!" Actual footage show constant delays AND periods where the astronauts and Houston talk over one another as though they aren't hearing one antoher in real time. "No delay in the nixon phone call" 8 seconds to respond "Shut up shill!" Come on man, if you were Pinocchio, you'd already be dead because your nose would be through the Van Allen Belts.
1
@kidwave1 Fun fact, by the way, did you ever listen to the Nixon phone call and turn up the audio? Nixon has an echo about 3 seconds later.
1
@kidwave1 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9HdPi9Ikhk Nixon call's just after 55:00. You can actually hear the echo other times Mission Control talks as well, not just him. The astronauts take 8 seconds and 4 to respond to him. Other fun things the hoaxers will never show you in this footage. 5:20 Armstrong directly calls out the lack of the crater. During this entire time he does so, he's moving a cord around with normal arm speeds so he's clearly not at slow motion. 22:00. Aldrin jumps off the lander. he immediately attempts to jump back on, misses, then does it again, hoisting himself about 3 feet with basically no effort. Normal Earth speed arm movements and body movements immediately after "slow motion" fall so he's not slowed either. Both astronauts do a mobility test directly in front of the camera and you can see their arms are not slowed. 25:15 Both astronauts comment on the lack of a crater again. 34:00 The camera is moved away from the ship. It spins a full 360 degrees while doing so, though is very blurry, then is spun about 270 back afterwards once the camera's in place. Nobody else is there. You can also skip the footage around and see that after the flag is placed, it doesn't move even a centimeter for the entire rest of the footage despite the lies about there being wind. There's also a segment I didn't find the timestamp for quickly (and can't be bothered to look) where the astronauts deliberately kick the dust around. Between that and the camera mounted in the LEM window, you can see the dust fly at least a good 15 feet.
1
@kidwave1 I mean..... you're the ones that think that dust on the moon should act like Wile E walking off a cliff and just float there for no good reason without any air resistance to hold it up.
1
@kidwave1 Hmm, you're right. Let me guess.... wait, nope, Acme physics. I answered that very question for the hundredth time about three days ago. Sorry. Do you have anything other than mindless rebellion like a teenager that never grew up? Because I'm pretty sure not a single one of you has actually taken a physics course.
1
And when they do go back, it won't even be five minutes before you people start lying that the new missions are faked too.
1
@jamesaaron2111 And it took 52 years to return to the deepest part of the ocean, a much easier feat that didn't require 130 billion dollars (adjusted for inflation) and politicians to cooperate. Not a single one of you can provide even a single reason why that length of time is suspicious because you can't spin it into evil government freemason illuminan lizardmen conspiracies. You'll never admit that they went back, and you'll never admit that future missions went either. Once your "truth" movement's lies about Artemis start spreading, you'll eagerly slurp them up like a plate of spaghetti.
1
And there's at least one instance where the astronauts walk right up to that "seam", disappear partially behind it, and keep walking, so either that ain't a backdrop line, or Kubrick got the Apollo 1 astronauts to help fake the landings and fucking ghosts. How does this even work anyways? Front screen projection uses a stationary camera to film a stationary backdrop through a mirror, so how the bloody hell does this work with a camera that turns around (constantly in the later missions) to face not only the direction the projector should be in, but 180 degrees from where your screen is?
1
@DamienNeverwinter "You assert that the USSR would know that the landing had been faked and know how to prove it. Based on what evidence?" ..... well, your own side's claim is that they didn't go because it was impossible to cross the Van Allen Belts, so therefore by logical extension, should have automatically known that the Americans were lying during Apollo 8, half a year in advance.
1
You're really gullible aren't you? The creator edited the footage to remove the parts where he blamed not returning on needing more money to do new stuff instead of just repeat the old and says they went several more times. But that's okay, you'll tell them he "confessed" anyways because lying is more addicting than crack and more self-satisfying than viagra..
1
When are you people going to stop kissing Bart's ass? A Funny Thing and its dirtbag creator Bart Sibrel are the #1 reasons that people view you people as a bunch of lying frauds. That "faking the distance" video in it? Bart edited it to mute audio and skip over parts of it that disproved his story and GOT CAUGHT because people weren't stupid and compared versions. This includes shots less than 20 seconds after clips he used where you can see them filming without his supposed trick.
1
The problem is that you people don't actually ask the cosmonauts. You just lie and claim you did. By the way, Russia was the first to put animals around the moon.
1
@Tiff Bannen They sent a pair of tortoises and a batch of plants, bacteria, and algae around the moon on Zond 5 in 1968.
1
@Vamanaswastika You're not very good at reading comprehension, are you? I said around, not on. Zond 5 went through the "impossible to cross distance and circled the moon; it didn't land.
1