Comments by "Sebastian Nolte" (@sebastiannolte1201) on "Thunderf00t" channel.

  1. People could fly in airliners with more than 2000 km/h already in the 1980s, until 2001. If the Concorde was real, then why can't we do it now but are stuck with less than 1000 km/h? LOL LOL
    3
  2. We have that in many fields of classic hard technology. The Concorde made its first flight in 1969. From 1977 on it flew regulary. So you could just book a flight with an airliner from Lonodn to New york with 2,200 km/h. But today in 2024 there is nothing like that, we just fly again with less than 1000 km/h, like in the 1960s.
    2
  3. It was the working title for the rocket, that later get the name "Starship".
    1
  4. I often think exactly that. Also for the Space Shuttle it was promised that it can be get ready for the next flight quickly and cheap. But that did not work. And SpaceX still have to prove that their claim of superquick and cheap reusability will be true. Most people just seem to think that the landing works and think: "Cool, the starship landed after coming from orbit! revolutionary! Now it just can be launched tomorrow again!" But also the Space Shuttle landed after coming from orbit. So that doesn't say much..
    1
  5. "I knew he's bs when they claimed they put a car in space. " What is a problem with that? It was the first flight of the rocket and usually you put some other dummy payload like a block of concrete or somthing like that for that purpose. They took a car instead. Nice marketing action to get media attention, but what is bullshit about it?
    1
  6. "Im no expert " Then better listen to the expert, instead to random guys on youtube. 😉 "because we cant go through the radiation belt." A typical "argument" that moon landing deniers come up with (and of course they all just parrot it, they don't do research about it, they don't think about it,...) And it makes no sense. Yes, there are region with higher radiationa around the earth, they are called "Van-Allen-Belt", named after the guy who discovered it. What makes this argument so stupid: How do these guys even know that the radiation belt exist in the first place? Have they sent up their own probes to measure it? No! So instead they believe NASA when they say, that there are these radiation belts around the earth, but they don't believe NASA, when the say that you can fly through it. That doesn't make any sense. It only would make sense when there are contradictions. So when you take all the official data about the Van Allen Belts, all the official data about the flight path of the Apollo spacecraft, the shielding of the spacecraft, and then calculate how high the radiation dose would have been on the astronauts. And sho that they are deadly. But no of these deniers could show that. "The longer i live the more that seems to be true.." That would be sad. The problem is that more and more bullshit is spread on social media. And people consume that, but don't just look into the actual information about the Apollo missions (which are all public, it is documented in high detail).
    1