Comments by "MRA" (@yassassin6425) on "How the first Moon landing almost didn't happen - BBC World Service, 13 Minutes to the Moon podcast" video.

Studios of Hollywood? Wow...now that's a thought. Was it your own? - nothing gets past you. In a studio or a basement? Tell me more, because, (at the risk of sounding contrary), I thought that Stanley Kubrick was supposed to have filmed it at Shepperton UK? Wait, some say Pinewood, or was it Elstree?...or maybe Twickenham so as not to arouse suspicion. Hold on, stop right there! - it was definitely Cannon AFB New Mexico, that was it. A converted hangar...or was that at Area 51? No, that was in the desert, Groom Lake. Or was it Arizona? the Utah outback? Death Valley some say. No, without a doubt Devon Island Canada. You complete goons can't even make your minds up. I guess it depends upon which dumb online grifter/conspiracy theorist you allow yourself to be duped by. Got to say though, that must be some 'Hollywood Studio" to convincingly replicate, uncut, and six times, the 1/6th gravity and the vacuum of the lunar surface - not to mention the precise reconstruction of Theophilus in The Sea of Tranquility; the Head Crater vicinity, Ocean of Storms; the Fra Mauro Formation near Cone Crater; the eastern edge of Mare Imbrium, Hadley Rille; The Descartes Highlands; and the eastern edge of Mare Serenitati in the Taurus Littrow Valley. Shout out to the props department too, that managed to fashion fake moonrock consistent which each of those six landing sites and collectively dupe an entire branch of science called geology for over half a century in the process. Any other rays of insight genius?
1
And miraculously, despite being tracked by independent nations all over the planet - no one noticed. You think it is possible to hide in low Earth orbit? Ok. Primitive 1960s technology? Precisely what was lacking. Go ahead.
1
"I swear this is a lie" Then you are taking an oath on a falsity. "how can a car drive on the moon?" It can't. The three lunar rovers however that were taken as part of the later expanded J Class missions (Apollo 15, 16 and 17) were expressly designed to do so. What in particular is your objection to this? "And there is no such thing as going to the moon." I can assure you that there is. There have been nine crewed missions (with six landings) and 131 unmanned flights to the moon. Your ignorance, childish insistence and personal incredulity is not a valid argument. "They say that people went to the moon in 1969." No. The scientific, technical, historical, independent and third party evidence tells us that - which is demonstrable and has voice of its own. And the USA placed two manned landings on the moon in 1969 followed by two in 1971 and two in 1972. It would have been more had it not been for the premature cancellation of the programme resulting in the loss of Apollo 18, 19 and 20 and the aborted Apollo 13 landing in 1970. Presumably NASA saw fit to fake their own failure too? "Now technology is at its peak." No it isn't. What a ridiculous statement. It continues to evolve at a frightening rate. The pace of technological acceleration is exponential. "No one has gone there. Think about it for a bit." Yep did that. No one has returned because the production cycle of the requisite heavy lift capability ceased in 1970 and no one has built a replacement for the Saturn V because no government has been prepared to pledge commitment to the huge level of funding necessary until now. Concorde was designed in the 1960s. It was retired 23 years ago. Yet since then, in spite of today's technology it has not been possible to fly passengers at supersonic speeds and this is likely to be the case until well into the next decade. Presumably that was fake too? "Don't believe such lies." Let's mindlessly listen to dumb online conspiracy theory instead. "I swear that mankind has never set foot on the moon." You tell 'em genius. And meanwhile the rational world and reality couldn't give two shits about your personal incredulity.
1