Comments by "MRA" (@yassassin6425) on "Why Apollo Astronauts Trained in Nuclear Bomb Craters" video.

  1. Essentially, money and political will. Since the cancellation of Apollo, the emphasis was placed upon low earth orbit (through the development of the space shuttle and the construction of the ISS) and duration of missions. NASA has yielded huge amounts of data from this as the focus turns again to manned space exploration. Also, with the ending of Apollo, the technology, tooling, production processes and plants were all closed and the hardware left to lie fallow. Boeing, who manufactured the Saturn SI-C have spent years reconfiguring and upgrading their old facility for the production of the SLS core stage. As the old technology of Apollo is now obsolete it has been superseded by modern composites, materials, manufacturing techniques and systems that all have to be validated. This has taken years and the grants from congress have been drip fed. In other words, 'rebuilding' - which has been a 'painful' and protracted process. Artemis 3 pledges to return man to the moon this decade
    7
  2. Seriously - can you not find something a tad more original to parrot?
    4
  3.  @windolite  Bleated the online conspiracy believer.
    2
  4. What specifically are you referring to?
    1
  5.  Hvar Ksata   Known science is not a question of 'opinions'. Additionally, invariably, those that doubt the moon landings do so via arguments from ignorance consumed and regurgitated from junk conspiracy theory, personal incredulity and zero in the way of knowledge of the science, technology and history of the Apollo programme.
    1
  6.  Hvar Ksata   Known science is not as I said a question of "opinions" as asserted by the original commenter - (unfortunately, the post is shadow banned). The even did happen because it is supported and substantiated by overwhelming evidence and proof positive. This needs to be falsified which to date is has not been. Don't fall for the ludicrous claims of conspiracy theorists and their believers which can be routinely debunked by objective and independent verification and the proven science, technology and history of the Apollo programme.
    1
  7. Original then. Crawl back under your rock fool. Preferably in a nuclear bomb crater.
    1
  8.  @nothingheretowatch7371  In respect what precisely?
    1
  9.  @windolite  "nothing wrong with being simple minded" Confirmed the crap online conspiracy believer. "the government tells you something happened and you take it as fact." Because the junk online conspiracy theory that you mindlessly parrot is of course entirely scientifically accurate, honest, truthful, not in the slightest bit misleading, dishonest, disingenuous or exploitative and being entirely bereft of agenda or bias, has your best interests at heart. Ok then. I am irrelevant to this exchange, so is "the government" - not interested in that. The science that you are woefully ignorant of is axiomatic and therefore has a voice of its own. "I think for myself though so yeah." Said the gullible believer in junk moronic online conspiracy theory. Of course you do - absolutely no reliance whatsoever upon crap You Tube conspiracy videos, clickbait confirmation bias, cherry picked quote mining and circular self-referencing pseudoscientific conspiracy websites going on here. I'd stick to your gaming, it's more grounded in reality. "So yeah"
    1
  10.  @windolite  You've regurgitated the same post. As I said, I am irrelevant. The science that you are completely ignorant of yet attempting to dispute has a voce of its own. Conspiracy believer branding someone a "sheep". That's some weapons grade irony going on there pal.
    1
  11.  @windolite  Let's try again. I am irrelevant and so utterly impervious to your desperate and predictable ad-hominem attempts at rebuke. The science that has eluded you and are utterly unable to comprehend has a voice of its own and is incontrovertible. Stick to parroting your dumb conspiracy theory whilst attempting to convince people over the comments section of a video entertainment platform that you "think for yourself".
    1
  12.  @windolite  As I said, I am irrelevant. The science that you attempt to dispute speaks for itself. You are welcome to attempt to falsify any aspect of it given that you claim to "think for yourself" It thereby goes without saying that none of it will be mindlessly regurgitated online conspiracy theory. In your own time.
    1