Comments by "MRA" (@yassassin6425) on "neo"
channel.
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@davidlawrence8803
"so where is the real footage of the Apollo 17 moon landing and the astronauts walking on the moon?"
Beamed live via unified S-Band to earth, archived, present in multiple films and documentaries about Apollo, and also available online for anyone to see.
"You ask me why do I believe the van Allen belts exist? That's a good question and I only believe they exist because they have been publicised in media as something that is real."
Let's face it, be honest here, the only reason that you heard about them in the first place is because online conspiracy theory told you what to think. The VABs were discovered by NASA - so it is fine to accept that, but not the fact that they can be successfully traversed from the same source?
To answer your question, no the VABs do not pose an issue or a barrier to manned spaceflight which passes through their sparsest region in a short space of time and at a high velocity.
"just like man made global warming"
Anthropogenic climate change is demonstrable and supported by evidence based science and empirical data.
"the moon landing"
The scientific and independent evidence in support of the manned lunar landings has a voice of its own and is incontrovertible. Incidentally, there were six, you appear to think that there was only one.
"Port Arthur in Tasmania was the work of 1 man with the IQ of a 6 year old"
Incorrect, According to a forensic psychiatrists, Martin Bryant was borderline mentally disabled with an I.Q. of 66, equivalent to an 11-year-old. And yes, although disturbed, of course he was capable of coordinating a mass shooting despite the hard-right One Nation Party's vile leader Pauline Hanson's baseless claims of a 'false flag.
"The USA didn't blow up the nordstream pipeline"
There is zero evidence that they did. There is no explanation. A series of reports has variously accused Russia, the United States and Ukraine of sabotage.
"Hunter Biden was not doing deals with china and the Ukraine for favorable financial outcomes for the big guy Joe Biden."
Again, none of that has been evidenced. Hunter Biden was charged in connection with a long-running Justice Department investigation into his taxes. In the process, they uncovered some evidence that Hunter Biden leveraged his father’s position to make money. But their impeachment inquiry is largely based on their unproven claims that Joe Biden was involved in “corrupt” business deals with his son which again, is completely unsubstantiated. Shall we discuss Donald Trump now?
What does any of this have to do with the Apollo Programme?
"And here is my answer - Why should i believe the moon landing is real, let alone the astronauts returning to earth alive."
Because known science and technology is not a question of belief. The actual question is, why should you hold and attempt a viewpoint about something that you demonstrably know absolutely nothing about? You weren't even aware that there was more than one landing.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@fendermarshallbluesbox3407
"show me all the blueprints off the moon lander, that is just 1 example oooooooooo wait a minute, they lost it 😂😂, the biggest technical achievement off the century , and the lost it"
Nothing was lost. All the technical data was copied, The full schematics are freely available in the Apollo Program Summary Report (April 1975) and a wide variety of sources. Some of the original blueprints were even suctioned off to private collectors at Southeby's since they are no longer required.
"i don´t need to clever , i can think for my self"
You clearly struggle to compose a coherent sentence - but whatever you want to believe. Guess what? Those specialist fields and entire branches of science worldwide, such as rocketry, orbital mechanics, aerospace engineering, they've all seen them. Is it vaguely possible that they have a higher level of understanding than you? Just a thought.
"show me tests, oooo wait, the test moon lander crashed, but hey, it does not matter."
No LM was lost out of the nine flown in space. You are referring to the LLRVs and later LLTVs. Bill Anders was quoted as describing the LLTV as "a much unsung hero of the Apollo Program". Although Neil Armstrong had to eject from the LLRV due to a jammed thruster, no other astronaut ever had to eject, and every Lunar Module pilot through to the final Apollo 17 mission trained in the LLTV and flew to a landing on the Moon successfully.
If you can think for yourself, you can see, with all the technology today, they hardly can do a vertical landing with a rocket today, it was a fake moonlanding"
Again, you clearly think that you know more that the tens of thousands of aerospace engineers across the planet that would disagree with you. Why? because they've actually dedicated their lives to study, amounted to something and achieved and they don't squander their lives posting asinine brainless comments on You Tube unlike a conspiratorially addled nobody afflicted by gross illusory superiority and a chronic case of Dunning Kruger syndrome in a desperate attempt for attention and recognition in an otherwise insignificant existence.
Returning and remotely landing an unstable rocket with near dry tanks on the surface of the earth with the variables of the atmosphere and reacting and adjusting to these behaviors and centre of mass and drag is indeed challenging. The Falcon 9 needs to be tall and thin so that it can be an efficient launch vehicle, but that exact configuration makes it exceedingly hard to control as it comes back down. Much easier then to pilot a squat small craft in a vacuum, with no atmosphere and 1/6th of the gravity on the Earth it is not even comparable.
Perhaps you should visit a college of aeronautical engineering. Tell them that you can think for yourself, you understand technology today, the moonlanding was fake...and don't forget to let them know that the University of You Tube sent you.
Clever lad!
1
-
1
-
@fendermarshallbluesbox3407
"i do have some understanding off this topic, for instance, the shadow lines must be parallel"
Why? You observe non-parallel shadows in earth due to the terrain.
"and for instance, to much radiation in the van allen belts"
For what? Explain why backed by measurements and data.
"nasa have said it themselves indeed they lost the technology to go back to the moon."
As I have already patiently explained to you, NASA said no such thing.
"it never ceases me to amuse me , people believe everything they have been told on tv, radio , msm, believing the government can cause you to loose your life, and that of your family , look at the lemonade in the arm they have given people"
Because of course online conspiracy theory in the meantime is entirely honest, accurate and consistent, not in the least bit deceptive, misleading, fallacious, exploitative, opportunistic or manipulative and with your best interests at heart is entirely free of vested interest and agenda. Righto.
"your high school comment: who rely decides what you learn at school?"
Of course curricula can be flawed or badly designed, but no 'government' can subvert mathematics or physical laws which are axiomatic in nature. You live in a world that has been shaped by the effectiveness of the scientific method. You live off the spoils of it. Science accounts for and bids to explain the natural phenomena around you.
"small example: i was told at school, pearl harbour was a complete surprise attack, which turned out to be bull-poo usa let it happen, because the elites wanted the war, they lie about anything."
It has been contended that the attack could have been avoided altogether had certain American officials heeded advanced warnings - but even this is a stretch. The notion that it was allowed to happen is pure conspiratorial nonsense. Roosevelt was totally caught off guard by it. The record is clear. There was no evidence of the Japanese moving toward Pearl Harbor that was picked up in Washington.
The problem clearly lies in the fact that just as you disregard independent specialist expertise in terms of the Apollo missions, you again prefer to place your faith in junk online conspiracy theory and social media as opposed to what history tells us. Even if used responsibly, the internet can only supplement an education - it does not supplant for one.
"now tell me, what club all these astronauts belong to? don't tell me it doesn't matter"
What "club" are you referring to?
"btw, why do talk about parroting?"
Because that's precisely what you do, about subjects and topics that you clearly have no actual understanding of. You have an internet connection which you don't understand how to use responsibly. That's all. None of these claims and misconceptions are your own.
"i am just stating the obvious, it never happened, like i said they "lost" 5 tons off data, total bs"
As I said, you can barely compose a sentence of your own accord.
Please may you clarify precisely why there is 'too much radiation in the Van Allen Belts' for manned transit to take place - and why you claim to know more than an entire branch of science called astrophysics, each of the 77 space agencies in existence and James Van Allen himself?
Let me guess, you saw it on Tik Tok.
1
-
@fendermarshallbluesbox3407
"usa NEW japan was going to attack, and they let it happen , because they wanted the war, it has been documented, they new it"
Mate, you can't even spell 'knew'. And no credible historian on the planet agrees with this which is why, and you still don't get it, that you'll only find this nonsense through junk online conspiracy theory which you think substitutes for actual knowledge. Because, guess what? contrary to the claims you have gullibly consumed - it hasn't been "documented" at all.
"no, look at the pictures "on the moon", light source from different angles, can't happen on the moon, because NASA said they didn't use lamps on the moon"
There is a single light source from the sun but also albedo and reflectivity. The supposed anomalies with the 'non parallel' shadows are due to the terrain. You can observe exactly the same on the Earth.
"what club ? do the research and you will be amazed impossible to be a coincidence."
My reply remains the same as before. I was thinking that you're possibly about to parrot the same old nonsense that they were all masons, but no one could be that stupid. And actually, so what if they were? (which they were not). Who gives a shit?
"yes to much radiation to go trough , van Allen measurements in 1959/60"
You mean provisional measurements and estimations then. By 1962 James Van Allen still suspected that the protons present in the inner VAB could pose serious harm to astronauts, hence the Starfish Prime experiment. When NASA commenced its lunar spaceflight program, its scientists already knew about the belts and their spatial and energy distribution. The energies - electrons below about 1 MeV were unlikely to be dangerous, as were protons below 10 MeV. For example, a proton with an energy of 3 MeV could penetrate about 6 mm of aluminium (a typical spacecraft material) whereas one of 100 MeV could penetrate up to 40 mm. So engineers developed shielding that consisted of a spacecraft hull and all the instrumentation lining the walls. Further, knowing the belts’ absence above the poles, the altitude of the lower edge of the inner belt being ~600 km (well above the LEO) and the location of the South Atlantic anomaly, where doses are at a high 40 mrads/day at an altitude of 210 km allowed NASA to design the Apollo translunar injection (TLI) orbit in a way that the spacecraft would avoid the belts’ most dangerous parts.
"i have understanding off what i am talking about"
Of course you do - whilst an entire branch of science called astrophysics, each of the 77 space agencies on the planet, those that have dedicated their lives to the study or particle radiation and James Van Allen himself do not? Mate, you can barely compose a coherent sentence so I'd suggest to you that an understanding of alpha and beta radiation shielding and particle physics is a tad premature at this stage.
"there is to much radiation to go trough."
Yes, yes, so you keep saying. You have yet to explain why.
"do some real research"
Appreciating that "real research" does not involve self-proclaimed overnight armchair 'expertise' following a squandered evening consuming junk You Tube videos, cherry picked click bait confirmation bias, quote mining, false equivalence and circular self-referencing pseudoscientific conspiracy websites, do feel free to share - how precisely did you do yours?
"and find out who controls the school system eventual, it's by the same people that tell lies on TV, msm"
And who precisely are "they"?
"look at what bullpoo kids are learnt today,"
The difference between 'new' and 'knew'? or "to" and 'too"?
1
-
@fendermarshallbluesbox3407
"usa KNEW it, it has been documented . just search for it"
You still fail to comprehend that you can return practically whatever you wish on the internet. A search engine will return whatever you ask it to. And no, nothing of the sort has been 'documented'.
"no, clearly there are several light sources, pro photographers can tell you about it."
Incorrect. There is one light source which creates albedo and reflection. And no, junk conspiracy videos tell you what you want to hear.
"who gives a s..t is a nonsense thing to say"
Well you certainly don't for one.
"because it matters very much, it can not be a coincidence , and btw, you know what club i am referring to"
Maybe you should mention it so I can effortlessly debunk that too for you?
"they would need 6 foot off lead to protect them against the radiation"
Said no astrophysicist, aerospace engineer or expert on radiation ever. Why would you need '6 feet of lead' to protect against the particle radiation in the VABs? Lead shields X Rays and Gamma Rays. Come back when you understand Bremsstrahlung. Seriously, why are you doing this to yourself?
"and no they did not flew around them"
At no stage did I suggest that they did. Read what I put. To clarify again, The inner Van Allen Belt extends typically from an altitude of 0.2 to 2 Earth radii or 620 mi to 7,500 mi) above the Earth.The VAB are toroidal and trace the shape of the earth's magnetic field, so you need to think of the actual trajectory in terms of the three-dimensional transit. Each mission flew a slightly different trajectory in order to access its landing site, but (with the exception of Apollo 14), the orbital inclination of the translunar coast trajectory was always around the vicinity of 30°. Stated another way, the geometric plane containing the translunar trajectory was inclined to the earth's equator by about 30°. A spacecraft following that trajectory would bypass all but the sparse edges of the Van Allen belts. Furthermore, the hull of an Apollo command module rated 7 to 8 g/cm2. Do you understand what that means in terms of attenuation? Of course you don't.
"because there is to much radiation, van allen proved it"
"the outbound and inbound trajectories of the Apollo spacecraft cut through the outer portions of the inner belt and because of their high speed spent only about 15 minutes in traversing the region and less than 2 hours in traversing the much less penetrating radiation in the outer radiation belt. The resulting radiation exposure for the round trip was less than 1% of a fatal dosage – a very minor risk among the far greater other risks of such flights. I made such estimates in the early 1960s and so informed NASA engineers who were planning the Apollo flights. These estimates are still reliable."
James Van Allen 2004.
"and one thing i found out is that they "lost" 5 tons of data"
What the hell does this even mean?
"you damn sure KNEW what i meant"
Nope - your written English is so dire that your comments are borderline incomprehensible. Add in a large helping of junk delusional conspiracy theory and gross illusory superiority and you are left with a stream of garbled of badly parroted nonsense spewed forth form a Dunning Kruger afflicted buffoon armed only with an internet connection that they have no idea how to use responsibly. You are simply the consequence of granting online access to very dim people.
"about the cia comment, did you know family of Apollo 1 say the crew was murdered? they were not allowed to tell the truth. and the truth was is that they would never make it, so they had to be eliminated."
Sigh, yes, you are not special - it's the same garbage spouted over and over and over again. Scott Grissom is a disgrace to his Father's legacy, whilst there are no such claims from the White or Chaffee families. The criticism of the early Apollo project was not simply the crew of Apollo 1, it came far more vehemently from other sources withing the programme, such as engineers, contractors and even press. Again, you are simply regurgitating one-sided conspiratorial nonsense about subjects that you have no knowledge of whatsoever.
"just as the many 9/11 truth tellers "suddenly"have died for speaking out"
Name them.
"yes many hours of research on 9/11 too"
As I explained previously, "research" does not involve self-proclaimed overnight armchair 'expertise' following squandered evenings consuming junk You Tube videos, cherry picked click bait confirmation bias, quote mining, false equivalence and circular self-referencing pseudoscientific conspiracy websites
"It's a shame you are a troll"
As the one posting unsubstantiated claims, spamming junk conspiracy theory and ad hominem abuse on this video, then by virtue of the very definition of the term, the 'troll' would be none other than yourself. A simple concept that even you can surely comprehend. I am simply challenging your ludicrous claims - and how you people loath that.
No one asked you to bring your garbage here. if you used the internet for its intended purpose, you would challenge the nonsense that you gullibly and uncritically accommodate instead of using it to substitute for your own insignificance and inadequacies.The problem is that you don't consider any answer valid that doesn't confirm to the notion of an enormous conspiracy about which you are one of a special minority who is clued-up enough to know, and are therefore superior to the brainwashed mass of 'sheeple'. The real, valid, non-conspiratorial answers to your questions - true knowledge - doesn't allow you to pretend that you are amongst the privileged few to be privy to this information, and hence doesn't stoke your ego in the way that you desire. The tragedy is, that you are so dim and so lacking in self-awareness, that you are incapable of perceiving how absurd you sound to others that are equally capable of looking up this nonsense on the internet, but sufficiently sceptical and wise to avoid it.
1
-
@fendermarshallbluesbox3407
"yes it has been documented"
Present it then.
"professional photograph people can tel you there are different light sources"
Nope, that would be junk online conspiracy theory, which as I have explained tells you precisely what you want to hear.
"in fact anyone can see there is light coming from different directions, just look and think for yourself"
The sun is the single light source, but this is both reflected and there is also the albedo of the lunar surface to consider.
"if you take the fact not seriously, that the astronots all belong to a certain club, it´s hard to have a discussion in the first place and you sure know what club i mean"
Perhaps, as suggested, you could actually specify at some stage what this supposed 'club' is. As I have also speculated, if you are referring to Masonic connections, the by all means say so and I can debunk that for you too.
"they "lost" 5 tons of data"
Again, what does this even mean?
"so the biggest technical achievement off the century can't be reproduced because they "lost" the technology ? those are nasa words, not mine."
They are not NASAs words though. So you are lying again.
"you sure knew what i meant."
No, I really didn't. Like I said, your command of written English is so poor it is a challenge to make sense of anything that you type - not to mention, the nonsensical content.
"yes there are indeed such claims, family says they were murdered"
Scott and Betty Grissom. Nothing from the families of White and Chaffee.
"nano termite was found in the dust off 9/11 and there is enough proof off that too but you wouldn't know, because you believe the government bs"
Why are you changing the subject again? - and incidentally, I think you mean 'thermite'. A termite is a small insect not dissimilar in appearance to an ant. There is no evidence of individual elemental aluminum particles that you would expect to see from a thermite burn. The red/gray chips found in the WTC dust at four sites in New York City are consistent with a carbon-steel coated with an epoxy resin that contains primarily iron oxide and kaolin clay pigments. And there is no evidence of individual elemental aluminum particles of any size in the red/gray chips, so the red layer of the red/gray chips is not thermite or nano-thermite. All debunked years ago.
"you must be a troll"
As the one posting unsubstantiated nonsense, junk conspiracy theory and ad hominem logical fallacy on this page, by definition, the troll would in fact be none other than yourself. A simple concept that I'm sure even you can comprehend.
"because you betray your country by holding back the truth to people"
The perpetration of disinformation for profit and gain is as bigger betrayal as it gets. Particularly when gullible and impressionable individuals such as yourself that are susceptible to these fruads are the target market.
"they "lost" 5 tons off data, ABSOLUTE BULLSHIT"
Correct, it is. So why do you keep typing it?
"tell the people where we can find the blueprints off the whole deal. if you can't this is an impossible discussion isn't it ?"
All the schematics, technical drawings and specifications for the Apollo programme can be freely accessed online. Thousands of documents are available on NASA historical websites, publications or on archive sites around the internet. Some of the original blueprints have been auctioned off at great expense to private collections, but this is all archived anyway.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
We don't have satellites that can read number plates - that simply isn't true.
Moreover, there is no telescope in existence that can resolve a flag of that size on the moon which is 125cm long. You would require a telescope around 200 meters in diameter to see it. To explain why understand that the expression of the resolution of a telescope used visually is called the Dawes limit, which tells us that the smallest angle we can resolve (in arcseconds) equals 116/D, where D is the aperture’s diameter in millimeters. If we were to train say the Hubble telescope on the Moon (for which D is 2,400 mm), we’d be able to discern surface features as small as 0.05 arcsecond. When the Moon is closest to Earth (221,000 miles away), 0.05 arcsecond equates to about 85 meters (280 feet). Not only is this insufficient to resolve a discarded flag on the Moon, but it’s not even sufficient to detect the 10-meter-wide Apollo landers at the six landing sites.
However, the Apollo 12, 14, 15 and 17 landing sites have been photographed by the LRO. The Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) SELENE lunar probe has also imaged the sites which have also been confirmed by India's Chadrayaans 1and 2 and China's second lunar probe, Chang'e 2.
1
-
1
-
1