Comments by "Trevor Crook" (@user-ft2bt9kw7x) on "BBC" channel.

  1. You can see wires holding up the astronauts and Tin foil on the lunar landing craft moon rock that was tested and it was petrified wood from earth . It’s a comedy show
    6
  2. According to the third law of motion it is impossible for any of those buildings to collapse like that . For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction . Meaning that the downward force of the damaged top 15 floors collapsing onto the lower undamaged 95 floors would have created an equal and opposite upward force resisting those top floors . Once the energy of the top floors had expended the collapse would have stopped . Basic physics
    2
  3.  @Asylum31 being hit by falling debris doesn’t make a 500,000 ton building stronger .It just has no effect .
    2
  4. How would any human being survive on the moon when the radiation is 200 to 1000 times stronger than on earth ? Or the radiation from the Van Halen belt . Can anyone explain that . How much fuel is needed to travel 1 million kms?
    2
  5. It shouldn’t be a matter of believing it should be a matter of “ knowing ,“ it should be irrefutable if it happened . Which means it’s like believing in god . Hardly scientific Buzz Aldrin has admitted three times on television that they didn’t go The latest nasa unmanned spacecraft to the moon is out of control and doomed . And yet we’re are supposed to believe that 60 years ago with ancient technology that they managed to fly people to the moon , land and return safely . All went like clockwork . I am calling BS on the whole thing
    2
  6. Buzz Aldrin now admits they didn’t go to the moon . He said it on Conan and other TV shows . Why did NASA destroy the missions data ..? The recent unmanned flight to the moon by nasa is a disaster . Yet 60 Years ago with ancient technology they successfully sent man to the moon with perfect results . .? The only question I have is why haven’t Russia debunked the mission ?
    2
  7. The moon lander looked like it was made by high school kids . That thing never went to the moon or anywhere else
    2
  8.  @ste1bro being a librarian requires a tertiary education . Very few working class go to university . Working class do menial or industrial work .She is most definitely middle class .
    2
  9.  @toonarmy8524  the western media wouldn’t have covered it or called the Russians jealous or conspiracy theorists ..
    2
  10.  @BaeYeou Except the idea we didn’t go to the moon is at least credible . That the moon is fake isn’t
    1
  11. How could the astronauts on the moon survive radiation which is 200 times to a 1000 times stronger than on Earth ? Where did they keep all the fuel for a journey of 1 million kms ? Just wondering
    1
  12.  @theharper1  Radiation is 200 times to a 1000 times more powerful on the moon depending on the time of day . All mammals except a tortious died when sent towards the radiation belt . How did the astronauts survive with no protection from radiation? Also being in zero gravity for such a period would have affected them physically too . Russian scientist said they were amazed at what good condition the Astronauts were in when they got back how mobile after spending so long in space Why did nasa destroy the technology and data from the mission . That makes no sense at all I’m not saying they didn’t go the moon only that I am very skeptical .
    1
  13.  @theharper1  Why did NASA destroy the technology and data from the moon mission . Makes no sense? And you still haven’t answered the question about the astronauts surviving the radiation both on the moon and when passing through the van Halen radiation belt . When mammals got close to the radiation belt in tests they all died ( except a tortious
    1
  14.  @theharper1  I heard a nasa spokesman say the technology and data was destroyed when a journalist asked to see it . Even if the budget was cancelled the technology and data would still exist Why did astronauts say recently that they “ can’t move around the solar system until the problem with the radiation belt is solved “ Did they forget they had already solved ( supposedly ) that problem in 1969? A lot of anomalies in this story that should make one skeptical
    1
  15.  @theharper1  You still haven’t answered my questions
    1
  16.  @theharper1  NASA said the technology and data has been destroyed. You say it hasn’t . That contradiction should make anyone skeptical
    1
  17.  @theharper1  How could the astronauts have been so normal when walking . Time spent in space would have affected them physically ?
    1
  18.  @theharper1  . I am not saying they didn’t go to the moon only that I am skeptical until certain anomalies are addressed. And Van Halen were a top band it would be fitting if the radiation belt was named after them
    1
  19.  @MediaLieDetector  Can you explain where he is wrong . I would be interested ?
    1
  20.  @theharper1  Questioning obvious anomalies and a lot of them , is not being a flat Earthier . It’s being a critical thinker You still can’t explain how the astronauts survived such high levels of radiation on the Moon without protection . That is the biggest hole in your argument. Also astronauts recently saying that the Van Allen radiation belt is preventing space travel within the solar system. And until that problem is solved manned flight is impossible.. Why don’t they just do what the astronauts did in 1969 to get around the issue? Until you answer these two basic questions you have no case
    1
  21.  @theharper1  You get censored by you tube for asking logical questions about radiation . Which makes the moon story even more doubtful . Why not just answer my question?
    1
  22.  @theharper1  My question . How did the astronauts survive the radiation on the moon which is at least 200 times stronger than on earth ?
    1
  23.  @theharper1  You do know that Newtonian physics ( third law of motion ) makes the collapse of the twin towers impossible the way they said it happened ? But you will no doubt ignore physics in regards to that?
    1
  24.  @theharper1  What you are saying is if the scientist did say it ( he did ) your argument is in deep trouble?
    1
  25.  @theharper1  I didn’t see your response . I am after the truth . If you give me a logical scientific explanation I will accept that The other questions was why did the astronauts recently say they haven’t found a solution to the radiation belt in regard to manned missions inside the solar system . “ when they supposedly had done in 1969 ..? And why would they destroy the technology that supposedly took them to the moon successfully in 1969? Those two questions need answering logically before the truth can be ascertained . If they can be I am more than willing to accept we went to the moon
    1
  26.  @theharper1  The third law of motion makes the official reason for the collapse of the towers impossible . So it’s not a conspiracy theory . As a man of science ( lol) you should know that
    1
  27.  @theharper1  Shall I explain the third law of motion to you ? . If you are sitting on a chair that is a perfect example
    1
  28. Based on woke politics not comedy . A sad future for comedy
    1
  29.  @kasperkjrsgaard1447 lots
    1
  30.  @margaretwilson8736  Alex jones predicted 9/11. His credibility is far better than the western media who lie about everything
    1
  31.  @margaretwilson8736  But many conspiracy theories have been proven correct eg MK Ultra, The Bilderberg group , operation Northwoods Gulf of Tonkin and many more
    1
  32.  @sillandrix  Lying and wrong are different
    1
  33. Need to have more diverse material
    1
  34.  @marksprague1280  They supposedly got to the moon and back . Isn’t that working like clockwork ?
    1
  35.  @marksprague1280  Calling people names doesn’t strengthen your argument. I can give you a long list of “ conspiracy theories” that turned out to be true . Eg Operation Northwoods , operation Gladio , The gulf of Tonkin
    1
  36.  @eventcone  Nothing is irrefutable especially when there is evidence to the contrary. Unmanned missions in 2024 are a little different than manned missions in 1969 with primitive technology . That is way more complex The fact that you keep calling people with a different view “ conspiracy nuts “ shows a weakness in your argument. No need to name call if you have the facts on your side And historical examples of conspiracy theories turning out to be true shows that some conspiracy theories are more credible than others You lump them all together which is somewhat disingenuous
    1
  37.  @eventcone  Manned missions in 1969 with primitive technology is way more complex than unmanned missions 60 years later
    1
  38.  @eventcone  Nothing is irrefutable in science other than the laws of physics
    1
  39.  @marksprague1280  Name calling is a sign of a poor argument. And there are lots of conspiracy theories that are now proven to be fact
    1
  40.  @eventcone  why would Buzz Aldrin say more than once that they never went to the moon ? That alone makes the official story very refutable
    1
  41.  @eventcone  Going to the moon is based on physics ( science )
    1
  42.  @eventcone That’s true . But there were things happening on the moon with the astronauts that defied physics .Falling over and then getting up in a most unnatural way And a rock with a letter on it . Who put the letter C on it ? It was later removed . A piece of “ moon “ rock sent to Holland was later found to be a piece of petrified wood ( from Earth) . Can you explain any of this?
    1
  43.  @eventcone  I said nothing is irrefutable apart from the laws of physics . You said the moon landing was “ irrefutable “ .which is not true
    1
  44.  @eventcone  Answer it anyway . The Nixon call is just one of many anomalies can you explain all of them ? It only takes one not to be explained to cast doubt on whole story . More 1/ Why has Buzz Aldrin repeatedly said they didn’t go to the Moon 2/. Why would NASA destroy the technology that they supposedly took them to the moon ? That makes no sense at all 3/. How did the astronauts survive the Van Halen radiation belt How did the film they took to the moon survive such harsh temperatures Just a few more questions of many more .
    1
  45.  @eventcone  There are numerous clips of astronauts and NASA scientists talking about the inability of spacecraft passing through the Van Halen radiation belt and that once this problem is overcome we can travel outside our own field of gravity to the moon and other planets Had they forgotten we had already done that in 1969 . ?
    1
  46.  @marksprague1280  I’ve seem buzz aldrin clip today . He says they didn’t go Prove me wrong.
    1
  47.  @marksprague1280  Operation Himmler , the burning down of the Reichstag , the sinking of the Lusitania . A few more “ conspiracy theories “ from us nuts that turned out to be 100% true
    1
  48.  @marksprague1280  A snippet that was 20 minutes long. Calling people names doesn’t strengthen your argument. Would you like a list of “ conspiracy theories “ that were true ..? MK Ultra , Bohemian Grove, the Reichstag fire , operation Northwoods . Us nuts are usually right
    1
  49.  @eventcone  Yes I lied in my opening post but have been telling the truth in the rest 😂😂
    1
  50.  @thewildcellist  if you’ve seen the videos ( three ) you must have watched it with the sound off And NASA said they destroyed the “ technology “ not the data . I just played the clip again to make sure Now why would they destroy the technology . That makes no sense at all ? Unless they were trying to avoid scrutiny If there are doubts about the first mission there must be doubts about every mission The advances in technology since 1969 are massive Hair raising misses ? There was nothing hair raising if nothing happened How did the spacecraft and astronauts get through the Van Halen radiation belt ?
    1
  51.  @jmp4177  you may be right in regard to aldrins interviews . BUT . NASA was asked why we haven’t been back to the moon . The nasa spokesperson said “ that they didn’t have the technology . They had destroyed it “ . Please explain why they would have destroyed the technology . It is absurd ..?Maybe because they didn’t want it scrutinised . That is only logical reason There are dozens of anomalies which makes the entire story doubtful .eg one astronaut saying he saw stars and the other one saying he didn’t . Astronauts asked to swear on the bible that they had been on the moon and their response was to run away NASA sending alleged moon rock to Holland which turned out to be petrified wood “ from Earth “ The film clips I have watched where wires are seen holding up Astronauts to give the appearance they were in zero gravity Stanley Kubricks footage as well . And the Russians coming out recently and saying a photo was fake Too many anomalies,The list is endless
    1
  52.  @williammann9176  I agree with you about the Aldrin interviews . However far too many other anomalies to accept the official story of the moon landing as the truth . There is plenty of room to be skeptical Eg . NASA claims that they destroyed the technology used in the Apollo missions . That makes no sense . Why would they do that ? Stanley Kubricks film showing many many anomalies “ moon rock “ sent to Holland that turned out to be petrified wood from earth . Please explain that one ? Russia has come out recently and said Apollo 11 pictures were fake . That was filmed with Putin in attendance
    1
  53.  @williammann9176  So you admit we did not see the moon landing live. All animation . How do you explain one astronaut saying he saw stars when he was on the moon and another one saying he didn’t ? How could they get that wrong .? What about film surviving such harsh temp on the moon or the radiation passing through the Van Halen radiation belt And astronauts saying when we have the answer to the Van Halen belt we can travel to the moon . They forgot that we had already done that in 1969. Very odd and I am interested in your explanations
    1
  54. @ Some do most do not
    1
  55.  @rosieraven2617  not sure if the truth has a class
    1
  56. Gag free zone
    1