Comments by "Juzu Juzu" (@juzujuzu4555) on "CNN" channel.

Anybody who really wants to test Apollo program. Google the amount of fuel, the amount of thrust the rocked produces and how much it uses the fuel. Now you can check out with matlab if that thrust can provide enough speed and leave enough fuel for coming back to earth. Or you can do the same with lunar lander, but now you have to use the rockets to slow down the speed and leave from moon. Essentially both use the same amount, so you can half the amount of fuel and test if the lander achieve enough speed. There are much more of these test that is based on the official information and physics. You can download free matlab codes that test those things, and all the official documents that prove correct variables are used, and official physics functions were used. Those can be found in apollo hoax collections that is shared through torrents, for example in pirate bay. Probably can be found in public internet also. And the conclusion. Everything is completely impossible. Actually by using the rocket fuel, there isn't big enough rocket that could achieve the round trip to moon. Most of the fuel burn to raise the fuel itself. And building ever bigger rockets would cause the structure to constantly weight more.
9
Why not 77 times poisoned? Obviously it would have been better. The only people believing this propaganda would believe that 77 times as well, and it would be a higher number so Putin would be more bad.
4
There pretty much is nothing as easy as to see lunar rover spinning its tires and that dust forming clouds, not perfect parabolic trajectory, that would happen in moon. There is no difference if it was dust or if it was ball bearings, it would fly perfect parabolic trajectory determined only by initial speed and angle. Same thing can be found in SO many times when astronauts kick the dust. Also, there is no ditch where the lunar lander is sitting. It should have constantly deepening ditch till the lander. But what I really like the most is the fact that all of the photos are shot with frontscreen projection, that leaves same telltale marks on each of the photos. There is no way to even try to deny that, when there is geometric patterns in blackness of space on every photo. So that evidence is thus mostly silenced, and infact using those evidences on media like they used on mythbusters is the main defense against those that are clear 100% mathematical proofs that photos are shot in studio. If you find somewhere the original much better quality video "Kubricks odyssey one" watch that, but here is poor quality part of that video that explains what I explained. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CPqROrDwEeQ
3
+Nicholas Nowak - You seem to forget that most conspiracy theories start within universities, often with professors having publicly spreading those, thus the reason its gone public in the first place and we even know about those conspiracies. Also "no research, no experience" is what really describes those that believe what TV is telling to them. They think scientist believe something because TV is telling them that they are. While having no friend in scientific community, or any experience themselves. My knowledge come from my background in physics and math. Just by common physics and math, you can prove that Apollo program is fake, JFK was not shot by Oswald and 911 inside job using directed energy technology (like Dr. Judy Wood has popularized). What helps is to understand that small cabal had control over creation of money (Aka central banks) in the 18th century on. They also got in charge of freemasons and Illuminati (that hides inside masonry), so buying everything, controlling everything, is really pretty simple thing. Small number of hidden insiders get to help others in an each other to the top.
3
+christianege - I thought exactly as you, until I started investigate it through physics and math. I dont blame you for having doubts of my background, but if you truly are interested in the truth, you should not be afraid of investigating "crazy theories" or "crazy evidence" 911 clearly isnt just controlled demolition, or thermite. Best videos on the subject is by Dr. Judy Wood who has done huge research on the subject. Tahere is so much evidence on new tech that any other conclusion is just impossible. For example the melted cars and engine blocks with lots of unburned paper over those cars. And the fact that most of the material from WTC vaporized, steel melted but still people could survive without burning and rescue operation was possible. How long do you think that molten steel would have prevented such operation? The best evidence, the easiest evidence, that apollo program is pure fiction has never been debunked or discussed anywhere. Also nobody can debunk physics and math. But I understand that your subconscious is making you believe that it must be the case, because it has already figured out that accepting the truth on apollo fakery is infact the worst conspiracy to accept. It will shatter your world view worse than any other because you have to acknowledge the level of deception into whole another scale. That video is in poor quality, but still if you have some physics/math knowledge, what Richard Hoagland represents is complete nail in the coffin of apollo footage. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CPqROrDwEeQ
3
@john - I have researched the subject hundreds of hours, but your logic is that Im ignorant cos I don't see what you claim to see? As I said before, I have degrees on math and physics. And you probably have degree on information psyops because what you say is utter BS. But if you want, you can always forget all the video/photo evidence and just go and use math. Check the official data they give and insert it to matlab etc and check out what happens. Anybody who tries logic "I challenge you to create whats on the video" is proving how dumb they are. I challenge you to fly to moon and back. Do you really think that flying to moon and back is easier than faking it? That logic is so dumb and ignorant, that I actually hate myself for even answering to it. You say that "everything is indictive of them being in moon", have you done calculations? I would sure like to see your math, or are you just saying what you feel? cos feelings are so good proofs. "Why do we never see dust blowing like in deserts", because we are on the fucking studio. Even if they would have filmed it in desert, do you really think they would choose windy day? What you are suggesting is to that I watch videos to prove that something that is impossible by physics/math is actually truth. I would suggest for you to learn physics and math. The great point of physics and math is that when someone says 2+2=79 you can actually know for sure its bullshit, you have all the science behind you and no authority can override that. Because Im almost certain you are not going to do that, I have another suggestion. Think for a moment that you are the one responsible for filming the most important and most expensive exploration of human history. And you know that people are thinking its fake, cos lots of people said that its fake and impossible even before Apollo 11. Then how would you suggest filming should be done to prove that its actually real mission? I have asked this from many people and they all come up at least 2-4 of the 6-7 easy answers, that would be extremely hard to fake, but as easy to film as any other clip. Do you think its all just coincidence that all what we see is exactly the easiest possible thing to fake, and ALL of the hard ones are missing. And I give you a hint, those hard ones are actually also the most interesting things to film and show for public.
2
@john You just described yourself, using word salad and lies. If you would be using the same level of evidence as the apollo hoax theorists, you would be using math and physics. You could be completely blind and still use math and physics, but that doesnt work for you. FACT: You are lying. Im not stating that there is no parabolic trajectory, I said there would be perfect parabolic trajectory that follows simple function where we use speed and gravity. There isn't and anybody who bothers to see those videos can see that. For some reason you are claiming the opposite even when there is clear evidence. FACT: your bulky space suit claim is embarrasing fiction. There isn't anything of what you claim. But most importantly, you do not even try to present how it proves anything. "its impossible on earth", so me your math that proves that? "Even in vacuum", so me your math, because in vacuum its all about speed. The speed is the same as it would be on the moon, the ratio of mass is the same, so only difference is how fast gravity effects. It could go much longer distance. If you truly are defending your own belief, then Im sorry if I offend you. I understand how hard topic this is. After all, I was finishing my major on math when I still laughed at apollo hoax. It made me feel like complete idiot at first when I finally saw all the impossibilities. And Im sure everyone has had those feelings.
2
People who still believe anything CNN says should all be jailed for being a danger to humanity. At least most people in this comment section deserve the hell that is coming on the their way when they finally figure out what the elites did to them with these mRNA shots that make your cells essentially bioweapon factories. You know the thing Alex Jones tried to warn us all for years? But I guess some people are just too far gone to be helped at this point. No amount of facts change anything, no statistics, no research papers, nothing.
2
I guess acknowledging one's race is now racism. And the public eats that total BS argument as media brainwashes people 24/7 to advance the agenda of the owners/controllers of media companies.
2
RIP to the common sense on the brainwashed westerners who defend the true nazis of Ukraine and believe everything MSM tells them even after 911, "war on terror", coof scamdemic. You are fighting to get the great reset going on the west. WEF is the enemy, not Russia, please research things before it's too late.
2
@john "Why would mythbusters go any deeper", well if they want to have any scientific credibility, they should test the SCIENTIFIC claims that originated the whole apollo hoax. What they tested were not the evidence presented when the hoax became popular. Those are most likely evidence that was spread by the cabal to hide the original SCIENTIFIC evidence, so that they can express that apollo hoax is all about moving flags and jumping astronauts etc. If they did any research at all, they would know what are the prime evidence, but choose not to even mention about them, as have done EVERY TV show that ever addressed the subject. That is prime example of cover-up and controlled media. It seems John that you think you know who the "hoax conspiracy people" are, so please explain where it started? What you actually know is just what they want you to know. Without spreading those "moving flags" evidence these decades, everybody would know the truth. The same method has been applied to many other conspiracies, 911 for example. Focusing on evidence that doesn't leads away from the damning evidence.
2
@john Actually YES, exactly as physics professors etc researches do. Where the hoax originated. To bust any myth, you should research it and find the best claims they have, or the ones that can be tested. Here clearly only the same BS was tested as always, completely forgetting the scientific evidence as always.
1
Flat earth psyop probably was created because too many people start to figure out that Apollo program was giant hoax. It started like immediately when Room 237 was released. Ofcourse flat earth is total carbage. But those who think people who know that Apollo footage is faked are ignorant should understand that most of the people that promoted that were very educated people. It spread through universities. And I myself laughed at that idea, even after having spend years in university studying physics and math. Until I heard that we never went to the moon from such an intelligent person that I had to really investigate. Moon landings are story of Santa claus for the adults. Its very hard to stop believing in that, because its so positive thing like santa is for children.
1