Comments by "andrew worth" (@andrewworth7574) on "Candace Owens" channel.

  1. It's sad that Candace has fallen for Sibrel's snake oil pitch.
    21
  2. The footage that Bart claims was secret, (actually was in an internal report on the mission, not secret) was originally taken from a 35 minute long live public network broadcast. Everything Bart describes as hidden from the public was in the broadcast, and much more.
    19
  3.  @viera4  and no amount of evidence.
    15
  4. "The lie has captured us" Sibrel's lies have captured many.
    15
  5. Nothing happens the way Sibrel claims.
    12
  6. @ClayCarson-t2l  what amazes me is the hubris of people making judgements without any knowledge, and accepting Sibrel's claims without question.
    10
  7. @Blue-hf7xt  Sibrel is no journalist, he's a grifter.
    9
  8. Sibrel lies as a matter of routine.
    9
  9. Yes, the descent stages and hardware left on the moon has been photographed in recent years by lunar orbiters from several countries.
    9
  10. @jodiealbers1801  you believe Sibrel's claims, his claims were never true. Sibrel's critics have looked at his claims in detail and found them without foundation. In fact, several of his claims can only be lies.
    8
  11. You should check Sibrel's claims against other sources before accepting them as factual.
    8
  12. @marykendle4544  there's nothing insightful about falling for Sibrel's fantasies. Quite the opposite, more like naivety.
    8
  13. If you look at the material debunking Sibrel's claims, you'll realize the betrayal is by Sibrel.
    8
  14. @MarekzAnglii  the question from Patrick Moore was, "Could they see stars when they were looking at the solar corona?" They couldn't. They couldn't see stars from the lunar surface. It was only when the command module was in the moons' shadow, or when they were looking through the optics, that they could see stars. There were no contradictions, only a failure by the conspiracy theorists to understand the context of the question and the context of the answers.
    7
  15. Sibrel's claims are easily refuted. Which is why he recently said that he will not debate anyone with the knowledge to challenge his claims.
    7
  16. SpaceX has successfully launched 134 rockets, mostly Falcon 9's, so far this year.
    7
  17. @tammycrisel8692  I prefer interviewers who challenge their guests' claims. With Sibrel, Candace is like a loyal puppy.
    7
  18. It's called a flight of fantasy.
    7
  19. A scientists way of doing things: Do the research, then based on the evidence, reach a conclusion. Sibrel's way: reach a conclusion, then go look for any evidence that can be dreamed up to support that conclusion, ignoring any evidence that's inconvenient to the cause.
    6
  20. Your husband is correct. Sibrel avoids interviewers with enough knowledge to seriously challenge his claims.
    6
  21. There isn't a single claim he makes that I can't refute, explaining why his claim is nonsense.
    6
  22. You're referring to the Kelly Smith video. Smith is an engineer working on hardening the Orion capsules electronics against radiation, specifically the video focuses on an unmanned test flight of Orion, and he says "we must solve these problems before we send humans through this region of space". Meaning the problems he's working on, on the spacecraft he's working on, must be solved before that spacecraft can be used to send people through that region of space. He's an engineer, not a doctor, he's talking about the issues he's dealing with, which have nothing to do with the direct effects of radiation on people, rather, he's referring to the threat to people on board that a failure of his electronics would pose.
    6
  23. They discussed his experiences going to the moon, then she asked him why no one's been back since? He was answering that question, though he was a bit rambling in his reply.
    6
  24. Unmanned
    6
  25. ​​ @tylerd7330 nasa was established in 1958, explorers like Abel Tasman and James Cook were navigating their way around the globe centuries earlier. There are plenty of commentators on YouTube that refute you other claims, I suggest Dave McKeegan.
    6
  26. ​@isaiahbucur the radiation isn't "insane", specifically what radiation are you talking about? A vacuum doesn't have a temperature, that's why vacuum flasks are such good insulators. The spacesuits had an internal pressure of about 4psi, that's very little pressure, about a quarter of the air pressure at sea level.
    6
  27. @robymaru03  The Selene spacecraft from Japan - photos of evidence of landings. Chandrayaan-2 from India. Photos of hardware at landing sites. Change 2 from China. China confirms seeing evidence of Apollo landings but hasn't released photos. Danuri from South Korea. Photos of hardware at landing sites. An of course there's Nasa's Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter, which has taken many photos of all 6 of the landing sites.
    6
  28. So many of these comments feel like they're from people literally living in a different reality.
    6
  29. "ALSEP was a collection of geophysical instruments designed to continue to monitor the environment of each Apollo landing site for a period of at least a year after the astronauts had departed. Designed for a life of one year (Apollo 17 was for two), they ended up working for up to 8 years, the experiments permanently shut down by Mission Control on 30 September 1977." So there's your radio becon.
    6
  30. Almost everyone with tertiary qualifications in math, physics and engineering know the moon landings happened. It's the scientifically uneducated that fantasize over that conspiracy theory.
    6
  31. Your cell phone service is pretty crap then. The answers to your other questions are easy to find, why haven't you even looked for the answers?
    6
  32. You were duped by Sibrel. All his claims are manufactured, there isn't one that isn't easily refuted.
    6
  33. The Nasa of today is not the Nasa of 60 years ago.😢
    6
  34. If you're looking for truth, don't expect any from Sibrel.
    6
  35. Some claim Santa is real.
    6
  36. So what is a reliable source? Wiki has the attribute of at least providing the sources it uses.
    6
  37. He's a grifter and conman.
    5
  38. Trump is smart enough not to buy Sibrel's nonsense.
    5
  39.  @NataliaBenoit-bd6kh  fire any of Sibrel's claims at me and I'll address them. Sibrel avoids talking to people who seriously challenge his claims.
    5
  40.  @Lostartsradio  I detest those who spread lies and misinformation. Sibrel has never been interviewed by someone knowledgeable enough to challenge his claims. If you disagree, cite an interview where the interviewer was knowledgeable.
    5
  41. Not buying Sibrel's James Bond fairytale.
    5
  42. It's wild because it's fantasy. Sibrel has recently said that he will not debate anyone with the knowledge to challenge his claims.
    5
  43. There have been many unmanned missions to the moon since Apollo. The cost of crewed missions is very high, with insufficient benefits to any country to justify them. Apollo only happened because beating the Soviet Union to the moon became a national goal for the US, with the American people willing to support such massive spending.
    5
  44. Sibrel lies throughout the video. His accusations of lying against others are just demonic.
    5
  45. The footage wasn't faked, and to those who understand what to expect in 1/6 gravity and a vacuum, it doesn't look fake. What do you think is evidence that it's fake?
    5
  46. Lunar orbiters from China, India, Japan and South Korea have confirmed the existence of the landing sites.
    5
  47. Remember that Capricorn 1 was a fictional movie? That Brolin and Simpson were actors acting?
    5
  48. No more lies? But Sibrel was lying about once a minute!
    5
  49. I can refute every one of Sibrel's claims. Sibrel avoids debating anyone who could seriously challenge his claims.
    5
  50. ​​ @isaiahbucur the US manned space program started first with Mercury, a one man capsule to get basic experience. It transitioned to Gemini, a two man capsule that could maneuver, conduct rendezvous and space walks, then to Apollo, the 3 man capsule. There were a least 3 Apollo missions prior to the Apollo 11 moon landing. These did further testing and development of the systems to conduct landings.
    5
  51. ​ @isaiahbucur the claims of vast amounts of equipment and knowledge lost are a Sibrel lie. What has been lost is the will to publicly finance lunar missions, the technology "lost" is equivalent to the technology that's been lost that was used to produce 1960's Ford's and 1960's transistor radios, it would take years to manufacture the equipment that was used in the 1960's to produce those things, the knowledge is still there, the hardware is not.
    5
  52. ​ @isaiahbucur I know of Sibrel's claims and background, he's a grifter, and you've fallen for his grift. Literally none of his claims haven't been refuted.
    5
  53. ​ @gives_bad_advice suit pressure 3.7psi
    5
  54. No one was filming the landing from outside the spacecraft, there's no such film.
    5
  55. If people went around claiming that you're a fraudster, a coward, and liar, would you be pissed?
    5
  56. Amazing how people take the word of one man, who offers no verified support for his claims, over the vast quantities of verified evidence supporting the 6 manned moon landings.
    5
  57. @kaone3151  you don't understand basic physics, it's not the fall that ends you, it's the sudden stop at the bottom. It's not the speed, it's the acceleration/deceleration.
    5
  58. @kaone3151  are you still in school?
    5
  59. @kaone3151  given that the Soviet Union acknowledged the moon landings happened at the time, and that spacecraft from China, Japan, India and South Korea have confirmed the existence of the lunar landing sites in recent years with photos, I'd say there is a lot of evidence that the lunar landings are real. You still have offered no evidence to the contrary.
    5
  60. He lives comfortably because he's gets money through his grifting. If you mean he should be in fear of his life. Well, in that case, your dilemma is explained. He isn't exposing any conspiracy, just telling fantasy stories. The CIA doesn't concern itself with people's fantasies.
    5
  61. Sibrel has never questioned an astronaut politely.
    5
  62. You should do that research, and then you'll discover that your closed minded conclusions are wrong.
    5
  63. Don't be sad, Sibrel made up the evidence he offers. His claims are all easily refuted. He has recently stated that he will not debate anyone with the knowledge to challenge his claims. That's why he gets away with his grift.
    5
  64. The comparison with the 17 minute video of the whole discussion illustrates how the deniers of the lunar landings will edit to lie.
    5
  65. All of Sibrel's claims have been refuted. Ask me about any of them.
    5
  66. There was a camera mounted on the outside of the lander. Look it up.
    5
  67. God has given us the ability to think for ourselves. You choose not to.
    5
  68. Actor Tom Mayk, producer T Patrick Murray.
    5
  69. blueprints and other plans for the Saturn V rocket are available on microfilm at the Marshall Space Flight Center. The Saturn V at the Johnson space center is entirely genuine, all components of it are certified for flight.
    5
  70. Your points are all rationalizations and misrepresentations. Why would we have high quality photos of the landing sites by now? There's no evidence that Nasa gave anyone any fake moon rocks, despite having been handing out thousands of samples to institutions around the world for experiments and scientific tested for over 50 years.
    5
  71. ​@JONCHAIDEZ there isn't a single person who's studied the Van Allen Belts who says that they were impassable.
    5
  72. Pettit says we went to the moon. The press conference was over an hour long. Watch it all before reaching conclusions about how the astronauts handled it.
    5
  73. Sibrel has made a fool of her, and you, and you don't even know it.
    5
  74. If you live in a rural area where city lights don't drown out the stars, satellites are easy to see. Most notable are the ISS and Starlink trains of satellites, easily visible if they pass overhead shortly before dawn or soon after dusk, when you're in darkness but they, at their altitude, are still illuminated by the sun.
    5
  75. Three of the astronauts did swear on the Bible for Sibrel, Sibrel still called them liars. There isn't a claim Sibrel makes that isn't easily refuted, for example the shadows from rocks photo he claims as absolute proof. Anyone can reproduce that photo in their backyard any sunny morning. Many people have.
    5
  76. Rogozen was 5 when Apollo 11 landed on the Moon. None of the Apollo missions lasted more than 12 days, astronauts/cosmonauts that suffer the physical issues you mention have been in zero g for weeks or months.
    5
  77. So you think robotic spacecraft visiting other planets are impossible? Voyager 1 and 2 are 60,000 times as far from us as the moon and still in communication.
    5
  78. Sibrel's claims are easily refuted. Which is why he recently stated that he will not debate anyone with the knowledge to challenge his claims.
    5
  79. If you're capable of looking at the opposing evidence, I suggest watching Dave McKeegan's refutations of Sibrel's claims.
    5
  80. Aldrin has never said they didn't go to the moon.
    5
  81. Everyone whose studied the evidence in detail.
    5
  82. What questions would you like them to answer?
    5
  83. "Once you give a charlatan power over you, you never get it back" So says Sibrel, the charlatan.
    5
  84. They were examined and tested by scientists in over 130 countries.
    5
  85. Oh, Sibrel is the chief hoaxer.
    5
  86. There had been unmanned spacecraft sent to Mars, the X15 had reached 4500mph and the SR71 was flying at Mach 3. All before Apollo 11. What's wrong with 1960's technology?
    5
  87. Yep, Sibrel has honed his story well. But if you're familiar with his claims and the reality of the missions and science, the holes in his stories, which include outright lies, are obvious.
    5
  88. The lies are that Armstrong didn't walk on the moon. Is that what you're teaching her?
    5
  89. Propaganda from your church
    5
  90. The people who hop on the conspiracy bandwagon have no understanding of the science and engineering involved in building Apollo and going to the Moon. After decades of being involved Sibrel should know, but he never debates anyone knowledgeable, he never responds to serious refutations of his claims, many of the claims he makes demonstrate a lack of knowledge of the basic science and engineering involved in Apollo.
    5
  91. Surprisingly, they weren't using cell phones to talk to the astronauts on the moon, they were using nasa's deep space communication and tracking system, with 200 foot radio dishes aimed at the moon.
    5
  92. ​@johnnydlux50 you should watch the entire news conference, and without someone in our ear feeding you a false narrative. No one who's studied the Van Allen Belts claims that they were impassable for the astronauts.
    5
  93. So, over 50 years later and you still haven't managed to find the answers for your easily answered questions??
    5
  94. No one has silenced Sibrel in 20 years, or, in reality, tried to.
    5
  95. The original broadcast from about 2 hours 33 minutes. https://youtu.be/79aCn2hWezo?si=J874VuZiC2LYquti
    5
  96. You'll probably not believe me, but the first transatlantic radio communication happened in 1901. That was actually more challenging than sending an equivalent message to the moon, because the planet Earth happened to be between Europe and America.
    5
  97. @chazaq2010  you really need to look up what they were doing with radio in the 40's, 50's and 60's. You're apparently under the impression that it was first developed about the time you were born.
    5
  98. It's unfortunate that he makes so many untrue claims, about 1 a minute.
    5
  99. Yep, Sibrel lies continuously. To get away with it, he's explained that he will not debate anyone with the knowledge to challenge his claims.
    5
  100. Are they not indisputably real? What evidence do you offer that disputes them?
    5
  101. How is such narcissism created? You know nothing of the science involved but are convinced of your own greater wisdom. Such incredible hubris.
    5
  102. You didn't even bother to Google for an explanation, you just swallowed the grifters fairytale.
    5
  103. Did Sibrel convince you with his lies?
    5
  104. We've never been back because you have never put up the billions to go back, nor has anyone else.
    5
  105. How do you know to judge the radiation is high enough to make the belts impassable?
    5
  106. @backinmyrightmind  no scientist, who has studied the Van Allen Belts, has ever claimed they are impassable.
    5
  107. I can't believe so many people fall for Sibrel's lies. But there you have it.
    4
  108. Bizarre, you claim to "know they're lying" while also claiming "we know nothing".
    4
  109. Don't confuse rationalizations and ignorance with common sense.
    4
  110. Bart Sibrel is a grifter, and you were tricked into financing his fraud.
    4
  111.  @NataliaBenoit-bd6kh  Trump will have nothing to do with Sibrel, Musk will have nothing to do with Sibrel. Sibrel lies through his teeth. He never even addresses the refutations of his claims, he ignores evidence that contradicts his nonsense. You fire any of his claims at me, or any of the others challenging his nonsense in these comments, and we will have no trouble addressing each and ever point of his you raise.
    4
  112.  @NataliaBenoit-bd6kh  the nicest thing I can say about Sibrel is that he reminds me of snakes.
    4
  113. You're referring to a mockumentary produced by T Patrick Murray that featured Tom Mayk as Stanley Kubrick.
    4
  114. Sibrel's claims are easily refuted, I doubt you have anything better to offer.
    4
  115.  @Lostartsradio  "paid well" grow up. Should others accuse you of being paid by Sibrel?
    4
  116. ​ @Lostartsradio Dave McKeegan has a video up that addresses some (not all) of Sibrel's falsehoods.
    4
  117. Sibrel? The truth? Nothing Sibrel says should be assumed to be the truth. Someone should chase him around with a Bible.
    4
  118. Apparently, you think there's a massive conspiracy with hundreds of thousands lying - with none of them spilling the beans.
    4
  119. There isn't a claim Sibrel makes that isn't easily refuted.
    4
  120. ​ @kimberleesimmering6228 Sibrel is the one feeding you lies.
    4
  121. You first.
    4
  122. Sibrel's 007 stories are as fictional as the rest of his claims.
    4
  123. Bart never takes on interviews with people who have the knowledge to challenge his claims, and he has stated that he will not do such interviews. That's because his lies only work against people who know nothing of the science and engineering involved.
    4
  124.  @briantitchener4829  "who were they" Bean, Mitchell and Cernan. Didn't stop Sibrel calling them liars.
    4
  125. Sibrel is the liar.
    4
  126.  @lindysaltwell9628  at the end of his interview with Rogan, Rogan suggested to Sibrel that he line up a debate between Sibrel and someone more knowledgeable, Sibrel's reply was "sure". About a month ago Sibrel had an interview with Bob Frantz, Frantz referenced Rogan's suggestion of a debate, asking Sibrel if it was on the agenda. After much dodging and wriggling, Sibrel came out and said that he will not debate anyone with the knowledge to challenge his claims. His justification was that people who have the knowledge to challenge his claims are just "boyscouts". The implication being that debating them would be beneath him.
    4
  127. The moon landing vehicle (lunar module) doesn't come back to Earth, the descent stages are all sitting on the moon where they landed, the ascent stages all crashed into the moon after bringing the 2 moon walkers back to the command module.
    4
  128. The flag only moves when the astronauts are touching the flagpole.
    4
  129. The high IQ people are able to interrogate the narratives that they'd like to believe as thoroughly as they interrogate the narratives that they find unappealing.
    4
  130. The former is simpler, the latter, faking it, requires the secret to have been kept for 60 years against billions of people and the cooperation of the Soviet Union, Japan, India, China South Korea, and many others from outside of Nasa who tracked the 9 flights that went to the moon.
    4
  131. He was patched through the two-way radio connection mission control was using to talk to the astronauts. It's not rocket science.
    4
  132. Communications with the moon is the easy part, it's bending radio waves around the earth. Getting them to go through obstacles that's tricky. That's why direct satellite to mobile phone is going to replace all the cellphone towers littering the countryside.
    4
  133. Sibrel lies through his teeth about the Apollo 1 tragedy.
    4
  134. Sibrel is a grifter, there's nothing he's said that hasn't been refuted. Even his claims on why Aldrin punched him have been refuted - by Sibrel's own video of the incident.
    4
  135. There isn't a single claim Sibrel makes that isn't easily refuted.
    4
  136. Musk knows we landed on the moon.
    4
  137. @Jessicad9304  anyone can reproduce the appearance of nonparallel shadows with a couple of items like those rocks, I've done it, so have others. There isn't a single person who's studied the Van Allen Belts who says that they were impassable for the Apollo astronauts. The 'secret' video was taken from 2 TV broadcasts done at the time, a 15 minute unscheduled broadcast when they were 50,000 nautical miles out on day 1, and a 35 minute sceduled broadcast on day 2 when they were 130,000 nautical miles out. Those complete broadcasts prove Sibrels claims false. And that the filming was actually through a square window. The word "talk"(?) is heard on the day 1 broadcast, at that distance from Earth the delay is 0.65 seconds, throughout that 15 minute broadcast the delay between Capcom and the astronauts IS less than a second.
    4
  138. @Jessicad9304  the reason why they could do the moon missions with far less mass than the original proposals (or Elon's more recent plans) is because of the radically different mission architecture. The Saturn V stack of Apollo had 7 distinct stages to get them 2 the moon and back, all but the last, the command module, we're thrown away during each mission, the other proposals involved high levels of reusability. Von Braun's original included an entire construction space station in Earth orbit.
    4
  139.  @Jessicad9304  Sibrel has recently stated that he will not debate anyone with the knowledge to challenge his claims. That's why you'll see him talking to friendly nonexperts like Candace and Rogan, never his critics like Tim Dodds or any scientist or engineer who's studied the Apollo's program.
    4
  140. I think Rogan really struggled on unfamiliar territory. Rogan even suggested there needed to be a debate between Sibrel and someone more qualified. A couple of weeks ago, when asked about that by another YouTuber, Sibrel stated that he will not debate anyone with the knowledge to challenge his claims.
    4
  141. Sibrel has to ignore great swaths of evidence to argue his case.
    4
  142. The word "firmament", to non flat earthers (95% of the population) and modern engineers and scientists like Von Braun, just means the expanse of the universe.
    4
  143. ​@SkepticAurora flat Earthers think everyone else is more ignorant than they. They imagine there are only a few smarter than they are and that those few smart people are in on it. Ask them how it is that there's a pressure gradient in the atmosphere, or how it is that tens of thousands of vessels, including small yachts, cross oceans navigating on the globe and get to their destinations in the time and across the distances the crew expect and the flat earther will run away.
    4
  144. It's Sibrel making the fake claims.
    4
  145. Why would it be impossible?
    4
  146. You've never seriously examined the evidence against the moon landings. If you do, you find Sibrel's claims fall to pieces like wet paper.
    4
  147. After a good holiday, returning to normal life can be a downer. But they weren't glum, they were in debrief mode, trying to offer concrete data, rather than teenage excitement, and that is as would be expected from test pilots.
    4
  148. ​@LOADING...o.o.o we know there are people who in recent years, have paid modest amounts to visit the Titanic, that cost does not compare to the cost of manned lunar missions.
    4
  149. ​ @suzanneportch113 you watch Tom Mayk in a mockumentary.
    4
  150. As someone who's studied the Flat Earther madness for 10 years. I can confirm that it only survives due the its adherents hubris.
    4
  151. ​@SkepticAurora, unfortunately, your second reply has been restricted to "newest" by youtube, so it isn't visible unless people look for it there.
    4
  152. There's no video of any flags waving in the wind, there is video of flags moving as a result of astronauts moving the flag pole.
    4
  153. "Bart said so"
    4
  154. "You don't just stop cause someone got there first." The Soviets were beaten, so they pretended that they hadn't even been trying. That's politics and toddlers for you.
    4
  155. Great! Let's see the evidence of that.
    4
  156. There are hundreds of photos taken by Apollo astronauts on the moon. All available on the internet.
    4
  157. And the governments of the Soviet Union, China, Japan, South Korea and India who've all confirmed the moon landings.
    4
  158. Do you think a clip of a few seconds, selected for the purpose of discrediting the astronauts, is likely to be a fair representation of them throughout a press conference that lasted for over an hour? Perhaps you should take yourself seriously and watch the entire thing.
    4
  159. @kaone3151  if you watched the whole conference you'd know that they were more relaxed than that. You'd also know why the Van Allen Belts aren't the problem you imagine.
    4
  160.  @kaone3151  "easier to be fooled than admit you were fooled." Sibrel has fooled many people, and, like you, they don't even recognize the possibility that they've been fooled.
    4
  161. Seek help
    4
  162. I see Sibrel played a version missing the abuse and slander he fired at Aldrin.
    4
  163. It's only convincing because you don't know how thoroughly Sibrel's claims have been proven false.
    4
  164. Candace is not a flat earther.
    4
  165. I've thought about it, and, unlike you, I've done the math. So I know that it could be done and how it was done.
    4
  166. ​ @AM-rd9pu Cletus is a flat earther.
    4
  167. There isn't a claim Sibrel makes that isn't easily refuted. He appears to have no difficulty telling outright porkies.
    4
  168.  @AyloynOwlFeather  I've given you the name of a YouTube channel that does a thorough debunking of Sibrel's film.
    4
  169.  @AyloynOwlFeather  n Many hours of video and hundreds of photos that Sibrel claims don't exist or are unavailable are also easy to find on YouTube and on the internet.
    4
  170. @AyloynOwlFeather if you're referring to the photo at 2;54, the shadow you think from the flag is actually from the solar wind composition experiment out of frame to the left of the photo. The shadow of the flag pole is hard to spot, just past Aldrin's shadow, the shadow of the flag out of frame to the right.
    4
  171. There isn't a single person who's studied the Van Allen Belts who says that they were impassable for the Apollo astronauts.
    4
  172. Van Allen said that it was safe for Apollo to transit the belts if they weren't in them long. There isn't a single person who's studied the Van Allen Belts who says that they were impassable for the Apollo astronauts.
    4
  173. @nicholaswheatley8102  24 astronauts went to the moon. The lunar missions were tracked by staff at 3 tracking and communications stations in California, Spain and Australia. The sets would have needed to be built and dismantled, camera crews, editing, lighting security. Sibrel's claims are absurd.
    4
  174. Mockumentary: Shooting Stanley Kubrick (2015)
    4
  175. You must find his story enchanting.
    4
  176. ​ @wakinglife7065 you mean the Aldrin and Zoey discussion? You should watch the whole discussion, rather than the snippet that the grifters misrepresent.
    4
  177. There's a commenter: takeittothelordinprayer, who describes himself as a friend of Sibrel's. Every time I point out that Sibrel never takes on interviews with people knowledgeable enough to challenge his claims, and suggest he look at the evidence against Sibrel's claims, he deletes his comments (and my reply with it), and then reposts his comment a few minutes later. I think his strategy - never allow a dissenting voice and never look at the contrary evidence, very Sibrel-like.
    4
  178. Yeah, others have gone there remotely: China, India, Japan and South Korea. And photographed the landing sites, confirming that 6 times America landed astronauts on the moon.
    4
  179. Including Bart's fairytale.
    4
  180. So, your grandma was an engineer at Nasa? An astronomer? Something to do with the science involved?
    4
  181. Most of those claims of lies are lies themselves.
    4
  182. @garyolsen4160  while I wouldn't trust a politician, why in the world would you trust a grifter like Sibrel? None of his claims stand up to reasonable scrutiny.
    4
  183.  @garyolsen4160  no such people who look "just like them", those claimed to be them have histories, families, since birth. The bodies were found and recovered.
    4
  184. So, you believe in the deceptions.
    4
  185. ​ @mrghettodaddy7245 it's been proven many times, you're just incapable of understanding the proof.
    4
  186. Perhaps you should look up the extensive critiques of Sibrel's claims. His claims fall apart like wet paper. Anyone can arrange a load of rocks in the morning sun as they are in Sibrel's favorite moon photo and get the same shadows. The footage in transit to the moon he claims were secret, was actually taken from 2 tv broadcasts, broadcasts totalling 50 minutes that prove his claims about that footage false.
    4
  187. Makes me sick to my stomach that people are so keen to buy Sibrel's lies.
    4
  188. How can you know the landings didn't happen, have you looked at how Sibrel's claims have been refuted?
    4
  189. Or you could be honest and provide a link to the whole discussion in which he goes into the fact that he, Armstrong and Collins went to the moon together. But then, honesty isn't a strength of the conspiracy theorists. https://youtu.be/Y4UP6nRMuGs?si=b7NXfIeHkGJF0aZa
    4
  190. Lunar orbiters from several countries have confirmed the existence of the landing sites.
    4
  191. Yes that was Sibrel harassing Aldrin. Sibrel has stated that he will not debate anyone with the knowledge to challenge his claims. He only does interviews with people who are sympathetic to his claims or not knowledgeable in that area.
    4
  192. Sibrel has stated that he will not debate anyone with the knowledge to challenge his claims. He only does interviews with people friendly to his claims.
    4
  193. All of his claims are easily refuted.
    4
  194. The various components of the Saturn V stack had the propellant mass ratios and rocket exhaust velocities necessary to make the velocity changes required at each stage of the mission. Those equations are actually junior high school math.
    4
  195. Even most billionaires don't have spare billions, and most aren't interested in a loop around the moon for the cost.
    4
  196. Elon Knows the 6 moon landings happened.
    4
  197. ​@k-mart7475 yes, an absurd lie, one of many Sibrel tells.
    4
  198. You believe God created the universe, but you choose to deny what he actually created. Such hubris.
    4
  199. Fools will believe someone like Sibrel and never even bother to look for corroboration of what he claims.
    4
  200. ​@Naomiwatson8991 lunar orbiting spacecraft from China, India, Japan and South Korea have confirmed the existence of the landing sites.
    4
  201. Yeah, a lie tens of millions of people are in on.
    4
  202. Entirely correct. Sibrel avoids the evidence that contradicts his claims. A common strategy of conmen, grifters and other snake oil salesmen.
    4
  203. Your Italian flight attendant can only speak for herself, not Italians, not the rest of the world.
    4
  204. Why don't you critically examine the evidence, rather than reaching a conclusion before studying the evidence? Would that be too radical, or just too much effort?
    4
  205. It's like this: The conspiracy theorists believe that they're naturally more insightful and smarter than the majority of other people, who they see as sheep, following the narrative laid out by authorities. This need to feel superior leaves them open for people like Sibrel who are willing to supply them with an anti establishment narrative that so strongly appeals to their hubris. They're incapable of understanding that true knowledge and understanding requires time, critical thought and effort, and that there are in fact a lot of people who have questioned the details, looked at the case Sibrel and others try to build, and find that what's on offer from the conspiracy theorists doesn't stack up.
    4
  206. Yes, and?
    4
  207. Well, if you wanted people to go back, why didn't you put up the money to make it happen?
    4
  208. Yes, Newton was on the money, and rockets work in accordance to Newton's Laws.
    4
  209. ​ @user-Rocket-Fest " Newton's third law of motion is primarily responsible for rocket propulsion. A rocket engine ejects hot exhaust gases in one direction, and in response, the rocket experiences an equal and opposite thrust, propelling it forward. This action-reaction pair is the fundamental principle behind how rockets launch into space."
    4
  210. Perhaps you should watch Tim Dodd's recent video that looks at Sibrel's claims.
    4
  211. Several of his claims are flat-out lies. The secret video of Earth on the way to the moon were tv network broadcasts. Not one person who's studied the Van Allen Belts claims that they were impassable for the Apollo astronauts. He often edits video to deceive by removing context.
    4
  212. He certainly knows that the mass needed to be launched to get to the moon and back was reduced from the initial high estimates by using a radically different mission architecture. Throwing stages away rather than reusing them, there were 7 pieces in the Saturn-Apollo stack. The only piece that wasn't thrown away throughout the mission was the tiny command module.
    4
  213. Sibrel manages to get away with his lies because his audience is uneducated, and he avoids any debate in which his claims would be seriously challenged.
    4
  214. No, a shyster and grifter.
    4
  215. The amazing bit is how Sibrel gets away with so many lies.
    4
  216. ​@redflipper992 you're a pet of Sibrel
    4
  217. The evidence is that Sibrel is the one lying. Which is why (he admits) he will not debate anyone with the knowledge to challenge his claims.
    4
  218. Sibrel is the one stealing.
    4
  219. I expect Candace will not notice your generosity, but I appreciate you imposing fines on yourself for your naivety. Well done!
    4
  220. Why do you believe Bart?
    4
  221. @billieu.uuu555tuu8  all the footage I've seen is consistent with my understanding of the environment in space that it was shot in.
    4
  222. "Rocketdyne delivered 98 production engines to NASA, of which 65 were launched. A total of 56 equivalent development engines were tested. The company conducted 2,771 production and R&D firing tests of single engines, 1,110 total full duration tests, and accumulated 239,124 seconds—over 66 hours—of engine firing experience. The five-engine cluster used on the Saturn V was fired at the Mississippi and Alabama test facilities 34 times, with 18 full duration tests for a total of 15,534 seconds of engine experience."
    4
  223. What "data points"? Name some.
    4
  224. The flag was waving when the astronauts touched it.
    4
  225. There are many hours of video of the moon landings available online. As far as I know, while some original footage was taped over, it had been duplicated, so the images not lost.
    4
  226. Lunar space probes from China, India, and South Korea (and Nasa's Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter) have confirmed that the Apollo landing sites are there.
    4
  227. You should watch the video from people who have debunked Sibrel's claims. Dave McKeegan, and Humans of Earth. Both are on YouTube.
    4
  228. No, there was no prestige in being second when there were only 2 countries in the race.
    4
  229. What sources did you look into?
    4
  230. ​@mrghettodaddy7245 the piece of petrified wood was never traced back to nasa, it was discovered in the estate of a Dutch diplomat and it was initially speculated to be a moon rock. Why does air pressure decline with increasing altitude?
    4
  231. No, Sibrel is a liar and a grifter.
    4
  232. All the data required to follow and examine the flights is available.
    4
  233. There was no hoax, unless you count the hoax being perpetrated by Sibrel. Sibrel has stated that he will not debate anyone with the knowledge to challenge his claims.
    4
  234. Yep, he was without doubt, the world's foremost expert on rocketry.
    4
  235. I'm not an American, the moon landings happened because the evidence proves they happened. Sibrel claims are easily proven false.
    4
  236. Please, go watch Dave McKeegan's video on how distorted Sibrel's claims are.
    4
  237. When the word "talk"(?) is heard, it was the day 1 broadcast, the spacecraft was about 95,000km from Earth. At that distance the round trip radio delay is about 0.65 seconds. The day 1 broadcast was about 15 minutes long, and that the delay was less than a second is obvious throughout the conversation between the astronauts and Houston.
    4
  238. Untrue
    4
  239. Dave McKeegan (and many others) has a video that refutes all of the claims that 12 men haven't walked on the moon. Sibrel never does interviews with people with the background and knowledge to seriously challenge his claims.
    4
  240. The Russian's know Apollo took astronauts to the moon.
    4
  241. You're easily convinced.
    4
  242. He spins outlandish tales.
    4
  243. They took risks in life that a loser like you couldn't even imagine.
    4
  244. Sibrel has stated that he will not debate anyone with the knowledge to challenge his claims. The reason is that for such people, his claims are transparently false.
    4
  245. @skilletman16  the astronauts have done many Q&A's. Why doesn't Sibrel ever do Q&A's with people with the knowledge to challenge his claims?
    4
  246. We do know the moon rocks are from the moon. You do not because you know nothing about the topic.
    4
  247. Sibrel is not an accurate source. There are no claims he makes that aren't easily refuted, which is why he avoids debating with anyone qualified or even inclined to challenge him.
    4
  248. You might know that but it's just weird that all the people that have actually studied the Van Allen Belts agree that they were not a barrier to the Apollo missions.
    4
  249. The first transatlantic radio message was sent and received in 1901. Sending radio communication as far as the moon is actually easier, you have a direct line of sight.
    4
  250. There was a camera mounted on the outside of the lander positioned to record Armstrong going down the steps and stepping on to the surface.
    4
  251. Stop embarrassing your wife.
    4
  252. Check Dave McKeegan's video on Sibrel's claims.
    4
  253. Perhaps you should watch the longer version of his discussion with Zoey, then you'll see how the conspiracy theorists have edited it to alter his meaning. He was replying to her question, "Why haven't we gone BACK" since Apollo.
    4
  254.  @backinmyrightmind  no scientist who has studied the Van Allen Belts has claimed that they're impassable.
    4
  255. ​ @backinmyrightmind just stating facts, sorry you find them upsetting.
    4
  256. A faith-based, not evidence-based, claim.
    3
  257. There is no one who has studied the Van Allen Belts who claims they were impassable for the Apollo astronauts.
    3
  258. ​ @Fi-tt7yq you're entitled to believe what ever you want: Santa, pixies at the end of the garden, whatever floats your boat.
    3
  259. Except that those that discovered and mapped the Van Allen Belts say Apollo could and did go past them.
    3
  260.  @helsbels2582  it didn't keep going because each apollo flight cost a fortune and the American people lost interest and weren't willing to keep throwing money at it.
    3
  261.  @helsbels2582  perhaps you are unaware that the landings have been confirmed with photos of the landing sites in recent years by lunar orbiters from China, India, Japan and South Korea.
    3
  262. @helsbels2582  Nasa's budget peaked at over 4% of the federal budget in the mid 60's, by 1974 it was down to 1%, not enough to continue with Apollo.
    3
  263. I've known a couple of compulsive liars, they're always absolute in the certainty of their stories, they're fast talkers, with a lot of distortions that people will let go as hyperbole. Sibrel reminds me strongly of those people.
    3
  264. They can't go now because they haven't, in recent years, built any spacecraft to go. They haven't built them because the government hasn't budgeted the money to build them. The government has budgeted the money the build them because there's no strong public desire to spend money on a return to the moon.
    3
  265. The claims you make about the Van Allen Belts is complete fiction. There isn't a single person who's studied the Van Allen Belts who says that they were impassable for the Apollo astronauts.
    3
  266. ​@TheAdventuresOfAce the Soviets didn't land a man on the moon because their N1 moon rocket kept exploding on the launch pad.
    3
  267. Why does air pressure decline with increasing altitude?
    3
  268. These are the molecular masses of the main components of the atmosphere (excluding H2O): CO2 44 Argon 40 Oxygen 32 Nitrogen 28 Air pressure at 10,000 metres (about the height airliners fly at) is a quarter of the air pressure at ground level. How could we get such a difference in air pressure from the separation of the gases in the atmosphere? If such a separation did happen, people at sea level would be smothered in CO2 and argon, and airliners at 10,000m would be smothered with nitrogen.
    3
  269. It was a flight of fantasy.
    3
  270. He's only credible for people who take his claims at face value. Dig into the details, for example photos of the landing sites taken by space probes from other countries, and you find the credibility he has is that of a conman.
    3
  271. Sibrel has never allowed himself to be interviewed by anyone with the knowledge of science and the Apollo program to seriously challenge his claims.
    3
  272. @Lostartsradio  I've looked at your second interview with Sibrel. You do not know where his falsehoods are obvious. Did you ask him about the photos of the Apollo landing sites taken from Lunar orbiting spacecraft from China, India and South Korea? Did you ask him for an expert on the Van Allen Belts who's claimed that they were impassable for the Apollo astronauts? Did you ask him why he offers material from 2 tv broadcasts during the transit to the moon and ask him why he claims the snippets he shows were secret - when they've been in the public domain for 55 years?
    3
  273.  @Lostartsradio  did you ask him why there should be a 4 second delay (referring to the supposed CIA voice) when the spacecraft was only 95,000km from Earth, when the round trip radio delay is only 0.65 seconds, an obvious reality when you listen to the 15 minute TV transmission in which that word "talk"(?) is included?
    3
  274. ​@Lostartsradio did you ask him why he was claiming video he "released" was secret, when in fact that video had been in the public domain for since July 1969 - after being broadcast live?
    3
  275. ​ @Lostartsradio have you ever looked at the many videos that critique the conspiracy theorists claims?
    3
  276. All of Sibrel's claims about the moon landings have been completely refuted. To make some of his claims, Sibrel has to have knowingly lied.
    3
  277. @dfkuz  the net of enchantment is the one spun by Sibrel.
    3
  278.  @dfkuz  you've been enchanted by Sibrel's fantasy.
    3
  279. @dfkuz  you must think the government amazingly clever to keep the deception going for 60 years.
    3
  280. @dfkuz  I've never thought the government so clever. You must be in awe of it.
    3
  281. @dfkuz  "whacked" Sarcasm, after ejecting him after hearing his accusations of being involved in a huge CIA conspiracy, I'd likely make a similar comment.
    3
  282.  @dfkuz  "whacked" sarcasm.
    3
  283. @dfkuz  you're seeing what you want to see. The deniers want it both ways. Actors that can't act, but did an amazing acting job to fool the world.
    3
  284. And sibrel obliges
    3
  285. How about Antarctica? There were decades between the first successful expeditions and the following expeditions. There are still no permanent residents of Antarctica.
    3
  286. Sibrel has stated that he will not debate anyone with the knowledge to challenge his claims. All his claims are easily refuted by people who know the science and engineering involved in the Apollo missions.
    3
  287. You don't know what you're talking about, the foil was just the thermal insulation over the descent stage structure, there's no evidence of multiple light sources. Stanley Kubrick did not make the statement you claim. You've been misled by grifters like Sibrel.
    3
  288.  @briantitchener4829  "millions like me" Of course not, but your idea of "research" is to go looking on the internet for stuff that confirms your preexisting beliefs and biases. When other people use the term "research", they mean actually running the experiments, and doing the required math, themselves.
    3
  289.  @briantitchener4829  none of what you see as anomalies withstand real scrutiny. Not one. They're manufactured to support grift.
    3
  290. Sibrel is a grifter with no credibility.
    3
  291.  @chiwaled  you know less than him.
    3
  292. Sibrel has never been interviewed by anyone familiar with the technology and science of Apollo. He recently said that he will not debate anyone with the knowledge to challenge his claims.
    3
  293. Musk has done a lot in a short time. He hasn't had time to start colonies on Mars or the Moon.
    3
  294. Very strange, the astronauts all had solid tertiary qualifications, mostly in engineering, they were all test pilots or combat pilots. I was always impressed by them as people who were cool and good at "things", though not necessarily good at people. I think perhaps you just look for different measures of intelligence than me. Perhaps you see intelligence in the ability to talk big, in which case you must think Sibrel an absolute genius.
    3
  295. Science produced all the technology around you that's beyond your comprehension and the wealth that keeps you in comfort.
    3
  296. To fake the Apollo program still required building all the hardware and launching that hardware, as it was tracked to the moon it had to have gone to the moon.
    3
  297. You probably should look at videos debunking Sibrel's claims before buying his claims. Sibrel recently said that he will not debate anyone with the knowledge to challenge his claims.
    3
  298. @mellie5899  don't be sucked in by Sibrel. He's a shyster.
    3
  299. @Achris7703  I've watched all the claims from Sibrel, Kaysing and others. Their claims are easily refuted. Have you done your research? Have you watched Dave McKeegan's video on the topic? Tim Dodd's?
    3
  300. You obviously mean powerfool.
    3
  301. @Jessicad9304  all these points of mine are easy to verify.
    3
  302. ​@Jessicad9304 a couple of other things Sibrel usually shys away from mentioning. There were 9 apollo missions to the moon including the 6 with landings. Those spacecraft were tracked by several nations and ham radio enthusiasts, if the spacecraft has remainedin low earth orbit that would be obvious. Lunar orbiting spacecraft from China, India, Japan and South Korea have, in recent years, confirmed the existence of the lunar landing sites.
    3
  303. Great! What's the proof?
    3
  304. ​@WinkyFromNorthChicago74 the existence of the 6 landing sites has been confirmed by lunar orbiters from China, India, Japan and South Korea. Your claim that astronauts have said the Van Allen Belts are impassable is false. Kelly Smith is an electronics engineer who was working on the Orion capsule. The video in question was a promotion for an unmanned test flight of Orion to the moon. He was saying that they needed to ensure that the electronics of Orion were safe before they could send people on Orion into that region of space.
    3
  305. ​ @WinkyFromNorthChicago74 "Armstrong told a little girl". The video you're referring to is an edited version of a discussion between Aldrin and Zoey. The original 17 minute video starts with them talking about his experiences going to the moon. Later in the discussion she asks why no one has been back in such a long time. It was that question he was answering, saying he didn't know why no one has been to the moon since Apollo.
    3
  306. ​ @WinkyFromNorthChicago74 all 6 Apollo landings were in the early morning, leaving before local midmorning. In that environment, cooling of the interior of the lander was a simple matter of pumping the ethylene glycol they used for active thermal control to radiators on the side of the lander that was in shadow and therefore exposed to the cold of space.
    3
  307. After many years of successful operation, one crashed after a fuel tank was punctured by a piece of metal off the runway. If you're arguing that any airliner that has one of that model crash is unsuccessful, there aren't many successful airliners.
    3
  308. The word "firmament" has a different meaning to you than it does to astronomers, scientists, and 95% of the rest of humanity.
    3
  309. A classic strawman, claiming a word has been used with the meaning you assign to it rather than the meaning that the person using it assigned to it.
    3
  310. ​ @theeraphatsunthornwit6266 why does my GPS work out in the middle of an ocean, hundreds of miles from land?
    3
  311. Strange that you choose to believe a falsehood over the far more grand reality of creation.
    3
  312. Aldrin was a leader at his Baptist church and performed a communion when they landed on the moon.
    3
  313. A lot of people want a huge moon landing conspiracy to be true.
    3
  314. So you're a flat Earther. That's embarrassing.
    3
  315. In addition to the Nasa Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter, spacecraft of 4 other nations, China, India, Japan and South Korea, have verified, with photographs, that the landing sites exist.
    3
  316. The Soviets sent Zond 5 to the neighborhood of the moon, there were a couple of tortoises aboard, along with some other organisms. They were returned safely to Earth. Only the US sent manned missions to the moon. There was no prestige for the Soviet Union in coming second in a race in which only 2 countries were competing.
    3
  317.  @tylerd7330  they did.
    3
  318. Sibrel makes many claims that are easily proven false.
    3
  319. @lateundercover7481  you're throwing out waffling nonsense. Try to stick together a coherent sentence.
    3
  320. Sibrel has never done an interview with anyone with the knowledge and inclination to challenge his falsehoods.
    3
  321. Since most of Sibrel's claims are fiction, it certainly hasn't been proven true, it's the opposite Sibrel's claims have been proven false many times.
    3
  322. Nine if you include 8 and 10, which orbited the moon.
    3
  323. It must take a lot of hubris for you to be so certain on a subject about which you know nothing.
    3
  324. We have 2 way communications with the voyager spacecraft, which were launched about 50 years ago and are now 60,000 times as far from us as the Moon.
    3
  325. Your feelings count for nothing.
    3
  326. In the pacific, 950 miles south west of Hawaii.
    3
  327. He's too bent to ever be put straight.
    3
  328. There are no "waving flags" other than those that are a result of astronauts moving them.
    3
  329. Yep, he has amazing certainty in his own opinion, like a politician. He never debates anyone with the science and engineering background to challenge his claims, which are actually fairly easily proven false.
    3
  330. The other possibility, that some seem unable to consider, is that Sibrel is a great storyteller
    3
  331. @robymaru03  and I've not gotten angry. I do, as you suggest, offer the evidence that proves them wrong.
    3
  332. @robymaru03  if you assume I haven't been attacked and insulted by moon landing deniers for offering evidence of the moon landings, you would be wrong.
    3
  333. You show signs of serious derangement.
    3
  334. Of course not, don't blindly trust government, verify their claims. But don't blindly trust Uncle Festus either. Verify what he claims. Videos debunking Sibrel's claims are easy to find.
    3
  335. The delta v requirements are well understood, a million people can do the math for mass ratios and fuel requirements, including me. The published figures work and are consistent with the figures for other rocket systems including those sending payloads to other destinations in (and beyond) the solar system.
    3
  336. You have lots of confidence, but what knowledge do you have?
    3
  337. And yet tens of thousands of vessels, from huge cruise ships to small family yachts, manage to navigate across the oceans of the globe, getting to their destinations on the bearings, traveling the distances, and arriving at the times they expect.
    3
  338. Spacecraft from Japan, China, India and South Korea have all confirmed the existence of the landing sites in recent years.
    3
  339. Why haven't you put up the money to go again?
    3
  340. Mysticism really appeals to some.
    3
  341. There isn't a single person who's studied the Van Allen Belts who says that they were impassable for the Apollo astronauts.
    3
  342. There's nothing Sibrel claims that I, and other commenter's, can't refute.
    3
  343.  @paulbeardsley4095  recognizing their mistakes is something Sibrel and his disciples are not capable of.
    3
  344. Compared to you, Sibrel's sharp as a razor, compared to any STEM graduate, Sibrel's as sharp as a spoon.
    3
  345. No one who has studied the Van Allen Belts says that they were impassable for the Apollo astronauts or that the film would be ruined.
    3
  346. It's real, don't be fooled by the snake oil salesman Sibrel.
    3
  347. The only other country in the race was the Soviet Union, and when their N1 booster blew up, they knew they'd lost the race and pretended that they hadn't been even trying to get men to the moon.
    3
  348. The Soviet Union could speak for itself. It acknowledged that the moon landings happened and congratulated the US for the achievement.
    3
  349. There isn't a claim Sibrel makes that isn't easily refuted.
    3
  350. Because they know they happened.
    3
  351. He's in it for the money, a grifter.
    3
  352. How far away are the sun and the moon?
    3
  353. Why is there a pressure gradient in the atmosphere?
    3
  354. Great! But you really need to back that up with details. Otherwise, people will just think you're a blowhard.
    3
  355. The longer version makes it even more clear that he was answering her question as to why we haven't been back since Apollo.
    3
  356. ​ @aleanafox9905 his reply taken as evidence that he admitted not going, was his reply to her question "why haven't we gone BACK".
    3
  357. You probably should look at videos debunking Sibrel's claims. I suggest Dave McKeegan or Tim Dodd's
    3
  358. Elon knows that men landed on the moon.
    3
  359. YouTube channel 'Humans of Earth'
    3
  360. ​ @AyloynOwlFeather presumably part 3. Got a time on that video for your discovery?
    3
  361. @AyloynOwlFeather  have you got the time on that video of your discovery?
    3
  362. ​@SolarChronicle I saw it was missing and found a link back to it from another site. Video had been "taken down due to a copyright claim by Warner" Corp.
    3
  363. As you have been bamboozled by Sibrel and his stories.
    3
  364. I've not seen any claims of the same hills in the background at different landing sites. Because the hills appear so close, due to no atmospheric haze, often they look the same from locations widely scattered around one landing site. No one who has studied the Van Allen Belts say that they were impassable for the Apollo astronauts. The footage from halfway to the moon is from 2 TV broadcasts, on day 1 and day 2 of the mission. That full unedited footage, totaling 50 minutes, reveals Sibrel's claims to be false.
    3
  365. ​​ @aaronbarlow4376 all your claims are false. If you insist that exactly the same hills are in photos from two sites, provide those photos category numbers. Name an expert on the Van Allen Belts who claims that they were impassable. The video I refer to is available both on YouTube and at Nasa's apollo site. You haven't even looked at it.
    3
  366. What delta v is required to go from Earth's surface to LEO? What delta v is required to go from LEO to Earth escape velocity? See, the answers are obvious!
    3
  367. Yep, and there are a lot of people who've looked at Sibrel's claims and found falsehoods throughout.
    3
  368. And some people would even expect you to believe in airliners, with hundreds of ordinary people on board, flying at altitudes even higher than the top of Everest.
    3
  369. Watch the whole 17;22 long interview with Zoey, he was addressing her question "why haven't we gone BACK?"
    3
  370. Yep, the main evidence against the window bs is that if the spacecraft were in low earth orbit with only a small part of the Earth being shown, the clouds visible would be shifting out of frame continuously as the spacecraft passed over them at the orbital speed of 5 miles a second. What is actually seen is the same cloud patterns barely shifting over the several minutes of the video. Sibrel has never addressed this, or other proofs, against his fairy tale.
    3
  371. Sibrel lies through his teeth. A snake oil salesman.
    3
  372. The Soviet Union congratulated the US for the successful moon landings.
    3
  373. Anyone can duplicate Sibrel's favorite shadows and rocks moon photo in their backyard on a sunny morning, and discover his claims that it requires multiple light sources is false.
    3
  374. Sibrel doesn't mention the evidence that refutes his claims. For example, lunar orbiters from China, India, Japan and South Korea have confirmed the existence of the landing sites.
    3
  375. Sibrel insults everyone who disagrees with his claims.
    3
  376. Sadly, you're obviously no brighter now than you were then.
    3
  377. The discussion with Zoe is not as you describe. The snippet that is used to misrepresent Aldrin is from a longer discussion in which he talks to her about his experience of going to the moon. Near the end she asks him why we haven't gone back, and he replies he doesn't know why we haven't gone [back]. Conspiracy theorists, like Bart, are short on honesty.
    3
  378. @denisemcdonald2729  I tried to link, looks like my comment is hidden: Zoey interviews Buzz Aldrin [17;22 minutes long on YouTube]
    3
  379. Yeah, while avoiding proper scrutiny of his claims, Sibrel gets in as many interviews as he can, repeating the same lies over and over again.
    3
  380. ​ @DanFreeman723 yeah, Sibrel counts on that.
    3
  381. ​ @DanFreeman723 yeah, so far Sibrel has only attracted the easily fuuled.
    3
  382. The landings happened, the existence of the 6 lunar landing sites has been confirmed by lunar orbiters from China, India, Japan and South Korea. The Soviet Union and private radio operators tracked the spacecraft to the moon and back.
    3
  383. The Apollo landing sites have been confirmed by lunar orbiters from several countries.
    3
  384. He spins a good yarn
    3
  385.  @Timepiece80  I'm sorry you're hurt
    3
  386. ​ @garyolsen4160 you've listed a load of things without specifying what about them are, in your mind, lies. Yes there was a war in Vietnam, yes, several of those people were assassinated.
    3
  387. ​ @garyolsen4160 the Challenger disaster was a result of a failure of an O ring in one of the SRBs.
    3
  388. ​ @garyolsen4160 there is indeed a country called Afghanistan, there's also a country called Vietnam.
    3
  389. ​​ @garyolsen4160 9/11 was carried out by Al Qaeda.
    3
  390. @garyolsen4160  the astronauts were on board and there's zero evidence to contradict that.
    3
  391.  @garyolsen4160  the WMDs claim to justify the second war against Sadam was false. But more a case of confirmation bias. They were certain that he had them, despite a lack of evidence.
    3
  392. What things don't make sense? Apart from the Soviets and more recently the Chinese, Indians, Japanese and South Koreans confirmation of the moon landings, the later four through observations of the landing sites with spacecraft orbiting the moon in recent years.
    3
  393. You should look into who founded Nasa.
    3
  394.  @Alisonwarr87  it was founded by the Eisenhower Administration.
    3
  395. People rarely challenge Sibrel in interviews, as he avoids such interviews. On the rare occasions he is challenged, he gets very annoyed. Aldrin punched Sibrel when Sibrel called him "a liar, a thief and a coward."
    3
  396. @madcarver4492  facts, do you imagine large rockets rising into the sky, with thousands watching, are holograms? Do you think starlink isn't real?
    3
  397. Photos of the landing sites have been taken by lunar orbiters from China, India, and South Korea in recent years, along with Nasa's LRO. The moon is too far from Earth to see objects as small as 4 metres across, even with the largest telescopes.
    3
  398. The footage is not fake, it may look strange to you, but that's due to it being shot in an environment you've not experienced.
    3
  399. Elon knows we landed on the moon, as does anyone who's looked at the evidence in detail, rather than just swallow a fraudsters claims without question.
    3
  400. On what evidence do you base that claim?
    3
  401. Sibrel is lying about Aldrin. Aldrin is proud of what was achieved by Apollo. Watch the hour long interview between Glenn Beck and Apollo 16 astronaut Charlie Duke. Then tell me Duke is lying about having walked on the moon.
    3
  402. Try broadening your sources, I suggest Dave McKeegan.
    3
  403. You probably shouldn't just accept Sibrel's claims without checking how thoroughly they've been refuted. For example, his video of "secret" material supposedly revealing the astronauts are in low earth orbit, is actually taken from 2 TV broadcasts done at the time totalling 40 minutes. Those broadcasts are available in their entirety on YouTube. It's not Nasa taking edited cuts to mislead, it's Sibrel.
    3
  404. There isn't a single claim from Sibrel about the moon landings that hasn't been completely refuted.
    3
  405. ​@kaone3151 none of the physics involved in spaceflight is surprising or unexpected to physicists.
    3
  406. Sibrel's claims are nothing but a fairytale, almost entirely fictional.
    3
  407. You actually bought Sibrel's fairytale 😅😅
    3
  408. There isn't a single claim he makes that isn't easily proven to be a fantasy. 😂😂
    3
  409. ​ @RenoLaringo  Anyone can easily determine that pressure declines with altitude, it's why you feel pressure decline in your ears going up in a lift. Anyone can make a simple barometer that'll show the pressure fall driving up a hill and rise driving down one.
    3
  410. @RenoLaringo  the pressure gradient in the atmosphere is noticeable in a ride in a lift, driving over hills. Anyone with modest skills can build a pressure gauge that'll show that pressure gradient.
    3
  411. It's certainly amazing that some people are so easily convinced by Sibrel's fairy tales.
    3
  412. You'll never find it, it doesn't exist.
    3
  413. There is no video of the lander landing taken from the surface. The video of the ascent stage departing was taken by the camera on the rover and controlled by an operator in Houston.
    3
  414. Good grief. That wasn't a "moon launch" it was the shuttle Challenger, which was going to low Earth orbit.
    3
  415. Sibrel stated 4 months ago that he won't debate any of those questioning his claims. He only does interviews with people who either don't doubt his stories or know nothing of the evidence against his stories.
    3
  416. ​@Snowman374th I told you where to find Sibrel stating that he would not debate the people challenging his claims. Sibrel is very clear in his meaning. Were you too scared to look to see and hear him say it for yourself? You typify conspiracy theorists. Dishonest to the core.
    3
  417. @mirandasworld  you have no knowledge in the topic but think you know it all. Hubris.
    3
  418. The truth is not as exciting as a huge 60 year old ongoing government conspiracy. The truth is just hard work, science, and engineering.
    3
  419. The transmission in which the word "talk"(?) Is heard occurred on day 1 when the spacecraft was only 95,000km from Earth. The round trip radio delay at that distance is about 0.65 seconds. The original broadcast, which Sibrel doesn't provide, is 15 minutes long, and throughout the conversation between the astronauts and Houston, the fact that the delay is less than a second is obvious. There was no need to fake a 4 second delay, in fact doing so would be incongruous with the rest of the transmission.
    3
  420. In the interview with Zoey he was replying to her question "why haven't we gone BACK?" This after a discussion between them on what it was like for him on the moon.
    3
  421.  @websurfer5772  in the '60's Nasa's budget reached 4.5% of federal spending, compared to 0.5% of federal spending today.
    3
  422. Try to reproduce the layout of those rocks in sunlight that Sibrel claims is impossible. Go look at the original broadcasts from Apollo 11 when in transit to the moon. Calculate the propellant mass ratios of the components of the Saturn V/Apollo stack to determine if they had the required delta V to get to the moon and back. If you do those things, you discover Sibrel's claims are false, every time.
    3
  423. James Van Allen helped with the preparation for the Apollo transit of the Van Allen Belts. They avoided the majority of them and transited the edge of the inner belt in a few minutes.
    3
  424. ​ @bartcartmanthesaltyraven the sheep follow Sibrel. Sibrel recently stated that he will not debate anyone with the knowledge to challenge his claims. That's why he only appears with people with no expertise, like Rogan and Owens.
    3
  425. Perhaps you should watch the whole of his discussion with Zoey (that's the one that is edited with that edited version repeated over and over, becoming multiple instances of him "confessing".) With the uncut version it's clear he was saying he doesn't know why we haven't gone BACK to the moon.
    3
  426. The CIA isn't interested in works of fiction.
    3
  427. ​​ @Naomiwatson8991 why do you believe that the components of the Saturn V - Apollo stack couldn't have taken men to the moon?
    3
  428. Russia, like numerous others, tracked all 9 manned lunar missions (6 of which had lunar landings).
    3
  429. There isn't a single claim Sibrel makes that I can't refute. That is why Sibrel never does interviews or debates any scientists or engineers familiar with the Apollo program, only non-experts like Candace.
    3
  430. @Elvin-m6l  his claim that shadows can't appear to be nonparallel is not true, anyone can go and reproduce the effect of apparently nonparallel shadows with a few items on a sunny morning.
    3
  431. @Elvin-m6l  the video he claims was secret, of the Earth while they were in transit to the moon, was taken from 2 TV broadcasts done at the time, one on day 1 (of 15 minutes), the other on day 2 (of 35 minutes). These are on YouTube, and the full-length broadcasts disprove his claims with clear footage of the camera being moved from the window, and the whole Earth with clear space around it with the window frame visible.
    3
  432. @Elvin-m6l  when the word "talk" is heard, it was the first day, the spacecraft was only 95,000km from Earth, with a round trip signal delay of just 0.65 seconds. That short delay is obvious in that 15 minute broadcast, the "wait 4 seconds" claim is not consistent with the very short delay heard on the rest of that footage.
    3
  433. @Elvin-m6l  Kelly Smith is an engineer who was working on hardening the Orion capsules electronics against radiation. That was what he was talking about, his area of expertise. He was talking about the necessity for the electronics to survive for the crew to survive. He's not talking about crew health. That's not his area of expertise.
    3
  434. @Elvin-m6l you either respect the actual facts available or you choose to believe in things contrary to the facts.
    3
  435. Antarctica is not off limits, it has thousands of tourists visit each year.
    3
  436. The moon landings liars are grifters like Sibrel, trying to cash in on conspiracy claims.
    3
  437. Current astronauts don't say that.
    3
  438. So, having seen Sibrel, who recently stated that he will not debate anyone with the knowledge to challenge his claims, you're (so easily) convinced.
    3
  439. So Sibrel is accusing people of: lying, fraud, embezzlement, cowardice, murder, kidnapping, and other crimes and immoralities, and when they get angry at his baseless accusations, to him, and Candace, that's evidence that those accusations are correct? And Candace claims that if such accusations were made against her, she wouldn't care less. To normal people, Sibrel's and Owens' claims of indifference in the face of such accusations are ridiculous.
    3
  440. ​@TheMaskedBaptist the Van Allen Belts have almost zero heat capacity. Water at 100⁰C will burn you in a second, dry air at 100⁰C will struggle to burn you at all, the heat is taken away by your circulation fast than the skin can be heated (that's why you can stick your arm in a hot oven without being burnt). A vacuum (the Van Allen Belts are more a vacuum than the space where the ISS orbits) will take forever to heat anything.
    3
  441. I've just watched the Patrick Moore interview (again). I see no evidence against the moon landings in it. I've watched the entire post Apollo 11 press conference in the past, I've seen no evidence against the Apollo 11 moon landing in that either.
    3
  442. It happened when it happened. I fail to see what's strange about it. Nasa's budget reached 4.4% of US federal spending, about 10 times what it is now.
    3
  443. ​ @Mrs.Stone99 if you were genuinely intellectually curious you'd do some real research. Watching Candace fawning over someone spouting her own beliefs, and yours, is just looking for confirmation of your preferred narrative. Sibrel has stated that he will not debate anyone with the knowledge to challenge his claims.
    3
  444. Go listen to those who know the science and engineering of Apollo in detail. Those whom Sibrel will not debate.
    3
  445. ​ @gives_bad_advice I don't think he believes himself. He avoids situations in which he has to face refutations of his claims. He knows there are many holes in his narrative. What he wants to keep is an income and some fame, having his name known, getting to rub shoulders with people who are celebrities.
    3
  446.  @ihartsacto  no, they haven't been back for the same reason there was a 52 year gap between the first expedition to Challenger Deep and the next, and a 46 year gap between the first overland expeditions to the South Pole and the next. There's a lot of prestige in being first, none in being second. There isn't a single person who's studied the Van Allen Belts who says that they were impassable for the Apollo astronauts. Despite what Sibrel claims, the structure, energy and concentration of the charged particles in the belts is public knowledge.
    3
  447. Slander is a lie, those committing slander often receive threats and retaliation. Insults are also often lies, they can attract violent retaliation.
    3
  448. @prakkari  wot?! Movies show stuff that's not true?
    3
  449. @prakkari  someone's probably mentioned it, but when they were on the moon, communications were maintained through dishes in Spain, the US and Australia, whichever location had the moon in the sky at the time. Amateur, and professional radio and astronomy people listened in unofficially by pointing receivers at the moon. None of that is remotely possible for a spacecraft in low earth orbit circling Earth every 90 minutes.
    3
  450. What makes the Apollo landings ridiculous?
    3
  451. Of course we went to the moon, there's not a single argument that Sibrel offers against the moon landings that stands up to reasonable scrutiny.
    3
  452. He lies through his teeth.
    3
  453. No astronaut has said the moon landings didn't happen. Watch the full discussion, not just a clip that removes context (aldrin was telling Zoey he didn't know why we hadn't gone BACK.)
    3
  454. Whatever Bart wishes becomes his reality.
    3
  455. He imagined he escaped them and it was true! A miracle.!
    3
  456. Sibrel has stated that he will not debate anyone with the knowledge to challenge his claims.
    3
  457. Some on the right are just as prone to fall for extreme narratives that appear to fit their ideology as some on the left.
    3
  458. All of Sibrel's claims have been refuted. Sibrel recently said that he will not debate anyone who has the knowledge to challenge his claims. He only does interviews with people who haven't seriously studied the Apollo program.
    3
  459. There isn't a single person who's studied the Van Allen Belts who says that they were impassable for the Apollo astronauts. The Saturn v third stage only had to change the velocity of itself and the other components (Command &Service module and the 2 lunar vehicle components), to raise them into an elliptical orbit the lowest point being low earth orbit and highest point being the moons orbit. After that, very little fuel is used to get into lunar orbiter.
    3
  460. You make baseless allegations against people without evidence. What an evil woman.
    3
  461. 15. The crosshairs in the cameras were etched into a glass plate called a Reseau plate in front of the photographic film. It allows examiners to see whether the film is warped, determine sizes from angular resolutions etc. These lines are pretty thin. That means that they can disappear if you make a bad or lo-res scan, or if the light into the camera is bright.
    3
  462. Sibrel is not particularly honest with his claims. Anyone can recreate his favorite lunar photos of rocks and shadows to prove to themselves how deceptive perspectives can be. In short, the photos are genuine, even though to some people they don't look quite right, especially with Sibrel in their ear confidently proclaiming them faked.
    3
  463. @billieu.uuu555tuu8  "see it"? In person? How much of the world, how many world leaders, have you seen in person?
    3
  464.  @billieu.uuu555tuu8  Sibrel spins a good story, but it falls to pieces if you actually do the work to investigate his claims.
    3
  465. And how about the confirmation of the existence of the landing sites from Lunar orbiting spacecraft from China, India, Japan and South Korea?
    3
  466. Do you question Sibrel's claims?
    3
  467. You have been indoctrinated, but you don't see it.
    3
  468. Aldrin has never said they never went to the moon. Armstrong didn't like being called a fraud and a liar by people (like Bart) who got to him through fraud and lies.
    3
  469. Sibrel tells the lies that the gullible want to hear. So they never bother to check his claims against any evidence other than Sibrel's "evidence".
    3
  470. Sibrel likes to quote Twain: "It is easier to fool people than convince them that they have been fooled" None of the people who buy his stories consider the possibility that he's the one doing the fooling.
    3
  471. Wise not to believe it. Spacecraft from China, India, Japan and South Korea have confirmed the existence of the landing sites. Sibrel recently said that he will not debate anyone with the knowledge to challenge his claims.
    3
  472. No, he did not. He did produce 2001: a space odyssey. Perhaps that's the movie you had in mind.
    3
  473. "Will do some research and decide for themselves". If they want to do research, I suggest Dave McKeegan, who addresses Sibrel's claims directly, and Tim Dodds, who does one of the most thorough analysis of such claims that I've seen. Sadly, few people who buy the stories of the Sibrel's of this world do any such research.
    3
  474. So Sibrel's fooled you, what's your point?
    3
  475. You don't have the skills to understand the simple physics of motion.
    3
  476. I would hope you would have more respect for Tom Stafford than Bart Sibrel. The reality of the moon landings is supported by the hundreds of thousands who worked to achieve them. Bart Sibrel's story is supported only by a tissue of his own lies.
    3
  477. The Challenger disaster that killed Christa McAuliffe happened in 1986, over a decade after the last Apollo moon mission.
    3
  478. Nasa will fight to maintain their budget just as any bureaucracy, in the private or in the public sector, will.
    3
  479. Strange, I've done the fuel calculations, and math says that they had the fuel required. Are you sure you were using the correct delta V's, Isp's, and propellant ratios in your calculations?
    3
  480. Grifters like Bart also need trickery, to generate income.
    3
  481. Sibrel has stated that he will not debate anyone with the knowledge to challenge his claims.
    3
  482. Why is there a pressure gradient in the atmosphere?
    3
  483. Did you watch the entire Apollo 11 press conference, or just some selective editing?
    3
  484. @sebastianellis6110 to most people they look initially nervous but soon became more relaxed with the situation.
    3
  485. An excellent debunking of Sibrel's film, from Humans of Earth/Gempanda: https://youtu.be/8aP_z8F10oQ?si=zjhrEt9E0u3U9-il
    3
  486. Your comment is complete bs.
    3
  487. Name these two guys.
    3
  488. Sibrel has produced just 2 films, both denouncing the Apollo missions. In the first he recorded no footage, it was all footage from other people, mostly Nasa. In the second he produced most of the footage, but that footage was just interviews, requiring no professional camera skills. Sibrel is a charlatan, his claims other people providing evidence to support his views are unsupported. The shots in transit to the moon he claims as secret, are actually from broadcasts done live at the time! A 15 minute TV broadcast on day 1 and a 35 minute broadcast on day 2. If you click my thumbnail you should be able to find them.
    3
  489. Yep, Sibrel tells his 007 story and people fall for it. They don't even think about all the holes in it, the ridiculous improbabilities, and the lack of support he offers.
    3
  490. The flag was moving as the astronauts tried to screw the flagpole into the surface. No experts on the Van Allen Belts, including James Van Allen, claim that they would have stopped Apollo.
    3
  491. So what evidence convinced you the 6 landings didn't happen?
    3
  492. The authors of those books lied to you.
    3
  493. The only thing on your list that is primarily an American achievement is the moon landings: The British, and other Europen countries, had democracy before America, the British and others outlawed slavery long before America, the middle class developed globally, defeating the Nazis was a global effort with the British Empire and Soviet Union contributing, in many respects, more than America, and communism fell over under the weight of its own economic incompetence.
    3
  494. If you're genuine about research, there's Dave McKeegan, and Humans of Earth, both on YouTube.
    3
  495. Sibrel's claims have proven to be false. For example, the footage of Earth while in transit to the moon that he claims was secret, was taken originally from 2 TV broadcasts viewed by millions, the first 15 minutes long, the second 35 minutes long. It's Sibrel who edits to create a false narrative.
    3
  496. Surveys suggest it's the young who're the more skeptical of the moon landings.
    3
  497. Misinfo
    3
  498. He's blind to the masses of evidence that contradict his beliefs, so blind that, even though he's aware of evidence that makes his beliefs about the moon landings impossible, he won't give them up.
    3
  499. So, wrong all your life so far. You now have the chance to change that.
    3
  500. People familiar with the Apollo program have offered to debate Sibrel. Sibrel has declined to debate with anyone knowledgeable about the moon landings.
    3
  501. Yeah, they probably don't even know how to spell sciense.
    3
  502. There have been many, many interviews with astronauts describing the details of their experiences on the moon. What we have never seen is Sibrel being interviewed by, or having a debate with, someone who has a deep understanding of the missions and is able to challenge his claims. Candace was just his lap dog in this interview.
    3
  503. @chermainemadison2729  what heat in what atmosphere?
    3
  504. @chermainemadison2729  who's been killed on sight there?
    3
  505. Are you open to Sibrel lying to you?
    3
  506.  @angelinalouis4356  China intends to get men to the moon in the next few years, so does the US. SpaceX has dropped the cost to orbit to a tenth of what it used to be, China is copying SpaceX's reusablity. You truly are desperate to create rationalizations to support your beliefs.
    3
  507. ​@wakinglife7065 can believe you fell for the snake oil salesman's con.
    3
  508. Personally, I prefer interviewers who challenge the interviewees' narrative. Candace, in this discussion, was like a loyal puppy.
    3
  509. Yes, the other astronauts and all the wives knew that there were 6 Apollo missions that landed on the moon.
    3
  510. There are excellent debunkings of Sibrel's claims, perhaps you should see them before reaching conclusions. I suggest Dave McKeegan, also Humans of Earth/Gempanda.
    3
  511. Yep, and Sibrel's fooled a lot of people.
    3
  512. Everyday Astronaut has a new video up on the topic. The Truth About The Moon Landings.
    3
  513. Sibrel never offers evidence to support his claims. Anonymous witnesses? Yes. Falsehoods? Yes. All of his claims are easily refuted.
    3
  514. Sibrel is a grifter, none of his claims hold up to scrutiny.
    3
  515.  @backinmyrightmind  sorry that facts upset you.
    3
  516. ​@mohx2847 you don't answer such simple questions because there are no answers that don't contradict FE. FEer's can't even offer a distance to the Sun, they ignore the question, as no figure for that distance is possible on the FE, any figure is contradicted by observation.
    2
  517. ​ @AL-sb9ch what's fake are Sibrel's claims, he avoids interviews with people knowledgeable enough to point out his lies.
    2
  518. His flight from the CIA was a flight of fantasy, along with most of everything else he claims.
    2
  519. Owens and Sibrel are disgusting, slandering the astronauts with zero evidence supporting their lies against those men.
    2
  520. Trump ain't that crazy.
    2
  521. No one who has studied the Van Allen Belts says that they were impassable for the Apollo astronauts.
    2
  522. Yeah, sure, a global conspiracy with a billion people in on it. SMH
    2
  523.  @BTFREEDOM1776  what evidence do you offer to support your claim?
    2
  524. @berntyson3641  no evidence? So your belief is faith-based.
    2
  525. @berntyson3641  well, I've more respect for flat earthers who say their belief is faith based and leave it at that, than flat earthers who try to argue the evidence, including by using misrepresentations of basic science.
    2
  526. Not visible from Earth because of the distance, but the existence of the landing sites has been confirmed by lunar orbiters from several countries.
    2
  527. "Power was provided by two 36-volt silver-zinc potassium hydroxide non-rechargeable batteries with a capacity of 121 amp-hr." They were rated for a distance on the moon of about 57 miles. The rovers were powered by 4 electric motors each of a quarter horsepower, designed top speed was 8.5mph.
    2
  528. @annaheart7731  there is no one who has studied the Van Allen Belts who says that they were impassable for the Apollo astronauts.
    2
  529. @Lostartsradio  seen your interview, you have no knowledge, and in fact you are a cheerleader for Sibrel's claims.
    2
  530.  @Lostartsradio  so my position stands. Sibrel never does interviews with people with the background and knowledge to challenge his claims.
    2
  531. ​ @Lostartsradio the comments you deleted were all pointing out false claims Sibrel made, point by point, throughout the first 20 minutes of your interview with him, which is why there were about 20 comments. You had the option of addressing my points, I would have read every rebuttal you offered. You offered none.
    2
  532. ​ @Lostartsradio one other point, I'm not a government employee, I never have been. For most of my life I've been self-employed, I'm on the right politically, though not the conservative right, and I'm not an American. So, as with your take on Sibrel's claims, you're keeping your perfect record of being consistently wrong. The certainty you possess, with an absence of knowledge, is a symptom of excessive levels of hubris.
    2
  533. You reversed what he actually said, the flights appear to be curved on a flat map, but are straight lines on a globe.
    2
  534. Yep, many times.
    2
  535. @dfkuz  the net of enchantment catching people is the one spun by Sibrel and a few others. You must have incredible respect for the government if you think it could pull off such a deception, keep it secret for 70 years, and deceive/get the cooperation of all the other governments in the world.
    2
  536. @dfkuz  the reality is that the Apollo 11 crew were serious people who handled their difficult jobs better than they handled dealing with people. They were more introverted than you understand.
    2
  537. @dfkuz  not like Bart, Bart loves to spin a good story.
    2
  538. @bapyongukgukguk2352  much as they lost the technology to build late 1960's Ford's. There's not a factory anywhere that could start building 1960's Ford pickups again, not without year's of preparation - and it'll never happen because the automobile technology has moved on. Ditto Saturn V's and space technology.
    2
  539. @robymaru03  there was a space of 400 years between European discovery of Antarctica and the first group to winter over, and there are still no permanent inhabitants.
    2
  540. Sibrel lies, he has said that he will not debate anyone with the knowledge to challenge his claims. His claims are easily refuted. Name any of his claims and I'll point out why it's false.
    2
  541. Perhaps you should look at videos debunking Sibrel's claims. I suggest Dave McKeegan.
    2
  542. Sibrel likes to quote Twain "it's easier to fuul people than to convince them that they have been fuuled." Sibrel doesn't go on to explain that he's the one doing the fuuling.
    2
  543. Fire away, I'll answer all of your questions.
    2
  544. @SolarChronicle  on Strictly Speaking with Bob Frantz. About 4 and a half minutes in. He offers the excuse that debating people other than the likes of Charles Duke (who's now 89), would be beneath him.
    2
  545. @elitaiglesias117  its easy to create shadows that appear at different angles. Go out side, stand with your back to the Sun, and hold your arms above your head in a "Y". The shadows of your arms will be diverging, so at different angles. If you have shadows on a surface that isn't dead flat the angles of the shadows will appear to be all over the place. Evidence of multiple light sources is multiple shadows from the same object.
    2
  546. Buzz Aldrin, not Armstrong.
    2
  547. ​ @ashleighmiller4101 he avoids debating people with the knowledge to challenge his falsehoods. There are no claims he makes that I can't refute with better evidence.
    2
  548. ​@randyschissler5791 careful, he probably thinks that Capricorn 1 was a documentary.
    2
  549.  @briantitchener4829  I've seen Jarrah White's claims, they're nonsense.
    2
  550.  @briantitchener4829  one example was that he had a co-conspiracy theorist on claiming some photos were impossible without multiple light sources. But you or I can set up a similar arrangement of rocks to reproduce the observed shadows with only the Sun as a light source. Try it sometime, I have, so have others.
    2
  551.  @briantitchener4829  here's a tip: the overhang on the rock at the top right enhances the effect.
    2
  552.  @briantitchener4829  there isn't a single "anomaly" that isn't easily refuted.
    2
  553. None of the evidence refuting Bart's claims was heard, for instance, the photos of the Apollo landing sites taken in recent years by lunar orbiters from China, India, Japan and South Korea, along with Nasa's Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter.
    2
  554. ​@randyschissler5791 at the time Drees received it he had been out of office for 10 years, Nasa has never handed out chunks of moonrock that size to anyone. Interestingly both Drees and John Middendorf, who gave it to him, lived to over 100. (Middendorf is still alive), amazing stuff that petrified wood.
    2
  555. You know the Pope travels around the globe right?
    2
  556. Pioneer 10 and 11 launched in 72 and 73 went to Jupiter and Saturn and were still in contact when beyond the orbit of Pluto.
    2
  557.  @jimrocket3452  he does what he can to make a living out of what has become his full-time career and occupation.
    2
  558. @jimrocket3452  he's done what he can to make a career from his grift.
    2
  559.  @jimrocket3452  which government? You realize it has to be both parties in on it? And the Soviets, and several other space agencies?
    2
  560. ​@gangsterdave2000 people like wakinglife have no life, so choose to believe in conspiracies because it makes them feel clever.
    2
  561. The moon is Earth's satellite.
    2
  562. Sibrel has stated that he will not debate anyone with the knowledge to challenge his claims.
    2
  563. @AM-rd9pu  Bob Frantz, 4 and a half minutes in
    2
  564. @AM-rd9pu  acknowledge if you can see my reply
    2
  565. ​@RudeDogRanch James Van Allen has said the Van Allen belts radiation wasn't enough to stop Apollo passing them.
    2
  566. ​@RudeDogRanch it's 3 days to get to the Moon, the spacecraft leaves low earth orbit at nearly 11km per second, it slows as it climbs away from the Earth. It's average speed during transit is about 1.5km/s.
    2
  567. A conman, onto a good grift, nothing more.
    2
  568. I'm a boomer, I was 6 when they set foot on the moon, it was inspirational. Since then, I've learned a huge amount about what was required, I understand how it was done and the risks. I've looked closely at the claims of people like Sibrel. Those claims fall apart if examined by people who understand the science and engineering involved. There are no claims he makes that aren't easily refuted.
    2
  569. Why would it be impossible to leave Earth's atmosphere?
    2
  570.  @lindysaltwell9628  Sibrel knows damn well that his claims are easily refuted by people familiar with the science, technology and history of Apollo. I have no difficulty refuting all of his claims. Dave McKeegan has done an excellent job dismantling Sibrel's bs.
    2
  571. Jonathan Haidt, a psychologist, has a book, The Righteous Mind, it explains how humans rationalize whatever it is they want to believe in, abandoning rational strategies to reach preferred conclusions.
    2
  572. Stop telling God what to do!
    2
  573. To you, anyone who disagrees with you and provides evidence that's damaging to your beliefs is a troll.
    2
  574. @debbiehellionandtheapocaly845  hard to believe someone as old as you claim to be could be so immature. Yes petal, they could patch phones into two-way radio. That's old, 1940's, technology. I suspect your actual age is about 13.
    2
  575. @debbiehellionandtheapocaly845  phone to two-way radio is 1940's technology. I suspect your actual age is about 13. No one with a mental age of more than 15 uses so many emojis. Edit: since the 1930's, rather than 1940's.
    2
  576. @G-ra-ha-m  I checked your claim. You're wrong, there is dust on the rocks. Not thick, but dust is formed from small micrometeor impacts over billions of years, such action shifts dust downwards, the heating and cooling cycle also would move dust, causing it to slip from angled surfaces.
    2
  577. @G-ra-ha-m  I can only agree with you on the "true believer" point. Did you know that most of the 382kg of moon rocks brought back by Apollo are stored in a specially built repository, that those rocks have never been exposed to water or oxygen, having been kept in a dry nitrogen atmosphere? That thousands of samples have been handed out routinely to universities and other institutions around the world for microscopic examination and analysis? That if those rocks had been collected in Antarctica, as is commonly claimed, that would be obvious to those doing those analysis?
    2
  578. @emilycatherine446  the footage that Sibrel claims was done in LEO was from 2 tv broadcasts, one on day 1 of the mission, when they were 95,000km from Earth, that broadcast was 15 minutes long, and a second broadcast on day 2, at about 250,000km, that broadcast was 35 minutes long. There was nothing "secret" about that footage as Sibrel claims, the footage was publicly broadcast across the world at the time. The word "talk"(?) is heard on the day 1 broadcast. The round trip radio delay at that distance is 0.65 seconds. That the radio delay was less than a second is obvious from the rest of that 15 minute broadcast. Sibrel's claim of a 4 second delay is nonsense.
    2
  579. @jamelswain5289  "technology was better back then". Using your logic, yes. The X15, SR71 and Concorde all first flew back then. There are no aircraft flying today that can do what those aircraft could do.
    2
  580. @G-ra-ha-m  so now you're deflecting, choosing to talk photos. The astronauts were on the moon to study the moon, they had a list of tasks to perform and were required to photographically document the process. Photos of Earth were not on the agenda.
    2
  581.  @G-ra-ha-m  Charles Bukowski: "The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts while the stupid ones are full of confidence".
    2
  582. Communism always fails. It fails because it is inefficient at producing wealth. The people of the East European formerly communist countries have no intention of restoring communist rule. Under Deng Xiaoping, China also abandoned Communist economics, China now has more entrepreneur billionaires than any other country.
    2
  583. @karungarimaina7613  until SpaceX got it's launch operations running routinely, the cost of getting into space hadn't dropped since Apollo. Now that it is becoming more affordable, we are seeing proposals that will likely see a return to the moon, especially as China is also aiming to get there in a few years.
    2
  584. @karungarimaina7613  those "poor astronauts" are probably very happy to get to spend so much extra time on the ISS, getting into space is why they became astronauts. There simply is no urgent reason to get them back, they're now just members of the ISS crew. Which usually has far less people aboard than it is designed for.
    2
  585. @karungarimaina7613  none of Sibrel's claims stand up to scrutiny by those who've spent years learning about spaceflight, even amateurs. That is why Sibrel, when pushed about a proper debate recently, stated that he will not debate anyone with the knowledge to challenge his claims.
    2
  586.  @karungarimaina7613  if you're interested, Dave McKeegan has done a couple of videos debunking Sibrel, using his clear, step by step approach.
    2
  587. @ChristChickAutistic  Sibrel makes claims of things in the report that were not in the report (oily rags), and that there were modifications done to the door the day before that did not happen. North American were the contractors and they were held responsible for the shoddy work on the command module. Betty Grissom sued North American for negligence and won. There has never been a claim of the deliberate killing of the crew by Betty Grissom or anyone else other than grifters like Sibrel.
    2
  588. @ChristChickAutistic  Sibrel lies as a matter of routine, his lies are transparent to anyone willing to look at the evidence. People like you do not look at the evidence because Sibrel's fabrications appeal to them.
    2
  589. Why are you so keen to believe Sibrel? Have you checked to make sure it's not him who lies? Lunar orbiters from China, India, Japan and South Korea have confirmed the existence of the landing sites.
    2
  590. @noellesherman4824  common sense is the understanding of our environment that are the result of our common, everyday experiences. Unless your common everyday experiences are advanced aerospace engineering and being an astronaut, your common sense is irrelevant, and likely misleading.
    2
  591. @Achris7703  they haven't gone back because you haven't offered to foot the bill, nor has anyone else. What data do you imagine they lost?
    2
  592. There have been plenty of photos taken of and from the lunar surface by unmanned spacecraft from several countries.
    2
  593. YouTube channel: Smarter everyday. Where does nasa keep the moon rocks?
    2
  594. "Shadows not parallel" Go outside in the morning, stand with your back to the Sun, form a Y with your arms. The shadows of your arms are not parallel. All of the claims about shadows can be proven wrong by anyone with the ability to think for themselves. "Astronauts don't move and jump sometimes." I've no idea what you mean. "Air pushes dust" There are no examples of that in any of the videos on the moon, the best examples of dust moving is the dust kicked up by the rovers wheels, falling straight back to the ground, there's no air to support or move dust clouds. "Too much humidity" The regolith is fine and jaggered, it interlocks and there's no air to separate the particles. You get the same ability of dry dust to hold together with Portland cement.
    2
  595. Sibrel lied from start to finish.
    2
  596. ​@YedderBedder-kx5lj what is your belief based on? You know that the existence of the landing sites has been confirmed by lunar orbiters from China, India, Japan and South Korea?
    2
  597. ​@WinkyFromNorthChicago74, another of Sibrel's claims, is that they faked being halfway to the moon, that he had gotten hold of "confidential" video. In fact, the video in question was taken from 2 broadcasts, the first a 15-minute unscheduled broadcast on day 1, the second a scheduled 35-minute broadcast. Those unedited broadcasts show that Sibrel's claims of them being in LEO are false. The Earth rotates slightly, as expected, between the start and end of each broadcast.
    2
  598. ​ @WinkyFromNorthChicago74 when the word "talk"(?) is heard, it is on the day 1 broadcast, the spacecraft was at that time 95,000km from Earth. So why would they be faking a 4 second radio delay, when at that distance the delay was only 0.62 seconds, as is obvious from the remained of that 15-minute broadcast?
    2
  599. ​ @WinkyFromNorthChicago74 people say that Sibrel is a liar and grifter because that is exactly what he is. He makes up stories, he edits to deceive, and he ignores evidence that he can't refute.
    2
  600.  @SolarChronicle  indeed.
    2
  601. Why don't you Google it? SMH.
    2
  602. @seanmcnamara9326  there is no wind because there is no atmosphere, without an atmosphere parachutes don't parachute.
    2
  603. The lunar rocks have never been exposed to the environment on Earth, they're not contaminated by water and oxygen. The thousands of scientists doing microscopic examination of the samples would quickly realize they'd been contaminated if, for example, they'd been collected from somewhere like Antarctica.
    2
  604. Sheep follow without question. You don't question the narrative you've bought into.
    2
  605. You should watch the whole video, rather than the edited version, he was saying he didn't know why we haven't gone back to the moon.
    2
  606. ​ @paulbeardsley4095 looks like my comment is only visible in newest, so they may not be seeing it.
    2
  607. ​ @theeraphatsunthornwit6266 there are plenty of satellite services, including GPS, that are still available with no loss of quality a thousand miles from land.
    2
  608. Well, that explains why so many commenters have been misspelling his name.
    2
  609. Sibrel is a great storyteller, he throws in so much of his imagination. Before buying his offerings as fact, check out videos that debunk his claims.
    2
  610. "Get the CIA to wack him" was a sarcastic comment made after they'd finally ejected the aggressive intruder who'd accused them of committing various crimes in collusion with the CIA.
    2
  611. Sibrel is a grifter, he recently stated that he will not debate anyone with the knowledge to challenge his claims. That includes Tim Dodd, who recently put up a 2 hour 20 minute video shredding Sibrel's various pieces of bs.
    2
  612.  @paulabevan  have you seen the full conference yet?
    2
  613. There was a mockumentary 'Shooting Stanley Kubrick' that starred Tom Mayk, written and directed by T Patrick Murray. It was a fictional account in which Kubrick (Mayk) confessed to producing the moon landing fakery. A lot of people were fooled, and the claim it was genuine evidence of a conspiracy has been much repeated.
    2
  614. Sibrel has stated that he will not debate anyone with the knowledge to challenge his claims. Nothing he says isn't easily refuted by people who know the science and engineering involved in the Apollo missions.
    2
  615. The velocity change required to go from low earth orbit to the elliptical orbit to reach the moon is 3000m/s At one g of acceleration, the spacecraft would make that velocity change in 300 seconds, i.e., 5 minutes.
    2
  616.  @tylerd7330  they traveled North to South in the Atlantic, from Europe to Cape Horn and the Cape of Good Hope. Some traveled South to North in the Pacific, and then back South. What particular route are you looking for? In the '80's there were yacht races that circumnavigated Antarctica. Today tens of thousands of vessels, from huge passenger and cargo ships to small yachts circumnavigate the globe, and the world has to be a globe for them to get where they're going in the times and distances they expect.
    2
  617. I wish you were right, but Candace is smitten with the moon landing conspiracy theory, and Sibrel is the high priest.
    2
  618. Only the US has landed men on the moon, several countries have landed unmanned probes, several have had lunar orbiters.
    2
  619. No, you cannot see the 6 landing sites from the Earth, even the Hubble can't. There are however recent photos from probes orbiting the moon.
    2
  620. @AlexandersLostTomb 9 trips, 6 landings.   I'm not interested in seeing people spreading easily disproven nonsense. From either side of the debate.
    2
  621. It's not to late, you can learn all about Sibrel's lies from Dave McKeegan. The Challenger disaster was a result of O-ring failure on one of the SRB's, due to the O-rings being below their designed operating temperature after a freezing cold night before launch.
    2
  622. @artsonigaming  you mean going against all the evidence. In your eyes, very brave, I'm sure.
    2
  623. The cost of a ticket to Challenger Deep is reputed to be $750,000. The cost of a ticket to orbit the moon is at least 200 times as much, the cost of a ticket to land on the moon would have to be $500,000,000, and 10 years ago, it would have been 10x as much.
    2
  624. Won't happen. Sibrel has said that he will not debate anyone with the knowledge to challenge his claims.
    2
  625. No, only lunar orbiters are able to see material left at the landing sites
    2
  626.  @BALD75  yes in terms of harm to people the Van Allen Belts are a solved issue, in terms of causing problems for microelectronics, not so much.
    2
  627. ​ @ΑλλόφρωνΚαρχαρίαςΜπαταρίας none of Sibrel's claims stand up to proper scrutiny, which is why Sibrel never allows serious questioning of himself and his fantasies. Only lightweights on the topic like Owens and Rogan.
    2
  628. The Russian's know the moon landings happened. They congratulated the US on the achievement.
    2
  629.  @whooked  what you said is that you think evidence is irrelevant.
    2
  630. There are none of Sibrel's claims that aren't easily refuted, which is why Sibrel never does interviews with people who have the knowledge to point out his falsehoods.
    2
  631. Sibrel claims that was done from low earth orbit, with, as you say, only a tiny portion of the Earth visible through a window. That's false. If it were done that way, the clouds would have been moving quickly across the visible disc as the spacecraft orbited earth at the low earth orbit speed of 8km per second.
    2
  632. @citizeng7959  Sibrel does not claim they used a "transparency of the Earth" backlit by the Earth, his claim is as I described: that the camera was positioned across the width of the spacecraft while the spacecraft was in low earth orbit, with part of a round window blocked by a cresent infill, so that only a small portion of the Earth could be seen.
    2
  633. @citizeng7959  I based my description on Sibrel's movie A Funny Thing Happened on the way to the Moon. At the 36 minute mark in the movie he offers his original version, which is as I described. The camera was across from the window with only a small portion of the Earth visible. There was no mention of any transparency. He now has a new version, introducing the transparency to his story.
    2
  634. @citizeng7959  the strongest evidence of the landings Sibrel will never mention: photos of the hardware at the landing sites taken by Indian and South Korean spacecraft. Chinese and Japanese spacecraft have also verified the existence of the landings, China has claimed verification but has not released the details, the Japanese spacecraft cameras didn't have the resolution to see hardware, but were able to reproduce images of the terrain around the sites using 3D mapping that match photos taken by the Apollo astronauts on the surface.
    2
  635. Concrete evidence? From Sibrel? I see nothing but bs from him. What "evidence"?
    2
  636. He did get punched in the face by Buzz - and it was glorious!
    2
  637. Aldrin does not tell people we didn't walk on the moon, I know nothing of this Alderon person you mention.
    2
  638. Is this where people are supposed to nod slowly in agreement with your deep wisdom?
    2
  639. Musk knows we went to the moon, You're projecting your fantasy conspiracy onto him.
    2
  640. Rather than just believe Sibrel, why not look at the many debunkings that have been done of his claims?
    2
  641. ​@ChadJohnson-pu4fu you probably mean operation starfish. Every year tens of thousands of voyages are made across the oceans of this globe, by vessels from oceanliners to small yachts. They all navigate on the basis of the world being a globe, and the travel distances and the time taken are as they expect with their globe navigation.
    2
  642. It's also a good idea to examine claims from people like Sibrel so as not to be taken in by their grift.
    2
  643. @davidfrankenfurter5800  why do you just repeat the claims of people like Sibrel, never checking to see if they've been less than honest with their claims?
    2
  644. Dave McKeegan refutes Sibrels claims. The footage in transit to the moon was taken originally from live network broadcasts, those broadcasts are available on YouTube and refute Sibrel's edited claims. No, we didn't have superior technology in the 60's, no one has gone beyond LEO since because no one has put the effort into going beyond LEO. The Apollo 11 astronauts were a little slow to relax at the first press conference after their 2 weeks in quarantine, but if you look at the entire press conference, rather than edits done to give a negative impression, you see they were relaxed and accurate in their description of their experience.
    2
  645. There is no evidence of death bed confessions. Sibrel's claims of being kidnapped by the CIA are ridiculous. The claimed operation "slamdunk" is named after a term that wasn't created until years after the supposed operation "slamdunk". Anyone can go outside into the morning or evening sun and create the appearance of nonparallel shadows, uneven ground and overhang, objects not precisely vertical, will all create shadows that appear to go in nonparellel directions. Stand with your back to the Sun between 2 objects, and the 3 shadows will appear to converge.
    2
  646. ​@lostman1ful there is no evidence offered by Sibrel that hasn't been refuted.
    2
  647. Yeah, it's hard not to see Sibrel's claims as other than lying. He has persisted in making factually false claims after the falsehood has been pointed out to him. Also he has stated that he will not debate anyone with the knowledge to challenge his claims. So I find it difficult to give him the benefit of the doubt, especially when he so casually accuses others of lying.
    2
  648. ​@kasairb8563 we have the technology, we just don't have the vehicles at this time.
    2
  649. What a sad little universe you flat earthers live in. Most of us live in a vast and glorious universe.
    2
  650. They didn't fake video. The footage from the transit to the moon is part of 2 TV broadcasts totaling 40 minutes. Shots in the footage Sibrel doesn't show proves it genuine.
    2
  651. SpaceX has successfully launched rockets into orbit and beyond 134 times so far in 2024. That's far more than the US launched in any previous year.
    2
  652. 134 rockets have been successfully launched by SpaceX so far in 2024.
    2
  653. In what way was the descent engine a "huge" rocket engine? It's roughly comparable to the tiny Rutherford engines of RocketLab's Electron launch vehicle.
    2
  654. What's a "Maricon"?
    2
  655. ​@paulbeardsley4095 reread the comment you're replying to.
    2
  656. @oneg1970  heh, when you said "sword fighter" my initial assumption was that you were calling me a Dungeons and Dragons nerd. Thanks for adding "gay" as clarification. You paint a disturbing picture, but one I've no doubt that appeals to you, the evidence being that that's obviously your go-to, you really must like that imagery.
    2
  657. The people who claim the Van Allen Belts were impassable have no expertise in them. They're charlatans.
    2
  658. Thousands of scientists in over a hundred countries. Yeah, right.
    2
  659. The father allegedly claimed the fraud was called Operation Slam-dunk. The term Slam-dunk wasn't invented until years after the supposed fraud happened.
    2
  660. The radiation trapped in the Van Allen Belts are charged particles, mostly protons (hydrogen nuclei) in the inner belt, and mostly electrons in the outer belt. Photons (electromagnetic radiation, like UV, X-rays, gamma rays, and visible light) are not captured in the Van Allen Belts.
    2
  661. Because you haven't put the money up for more landings, and nor has anyone else.
    2
  662. There isn't a single claim offered by Sibrel or anyone else against the moon landings that hasn't been refuted. Sibrel recently stated that he will not debate anyone with the knowledge to challenge his claims.
    2
  663. How do tens of thousands of vessels, including small yachts, get to their destinations after going the distance, and taking the time expected, using navigation based on a globe?
    2
  664. ​ @aleanafox9905 there's a 17;22 minute video Zoey interviews Buzz Aldrin. That shows how their discussion has been misrepresented.
    2
  665. ​@billhesford6098 they didn't lose the original footage. That's another of Sibrel's lies.
    2
  666. When you start to believe that almost everyone is in on the conspiracy, you've moved past skepticism and into mental health territory.
    2
  667. You shouldn't believe the Apollo 11 landing and the 5 other lunar landings were fake, Sibrel's claims are made up: No one who's studied the Van Allen Belts claim they were impassable for the Apollo astronauts. The video clips taken during the transit to the moon that Sibrel claims were secret are his short edits from 2 TV broadcasts done on day 1 (15 minutes duration) and day 2 (35 minutes duration). In those original broadcasts, the footage Sibrel hides makes it obvious that the footage is of the Earth from tens of thousands of miles.
    2
  668. I can go through every one of Sibrel's claims and point to similar misrepresentations and lies. Sibrel never does interviews with people who have the inclination and knowledge to challenge his claims, only with lap dogs.
    2
  669. Non flat earthers sometimes refer to the expanse of the night sky as the firmament.
    2
  670. "It is easier to fool . . ." A truth Sibrel utilizes to the fullest extent possible.
    2
  671. There are plenty of videos that examine Sibrel's claims. I suggest Tim Dodd's recent video.
    2
  672. Nothing coming out of Russia today (or RT, Russia Today) should be trusted.
    2
  673. They didn't "destroy all the technology", there's still a complete flight certified Saturn V rocket on display at the Johnson Space Center, all the blueprints still exist.
    2
  674. Most 1960's American cars were very reliable.
    2
  675. What, like how the US accused the Soviet Union of lying about Yuri Gagarin and numerous other Soviet achievements in space? //
    2
  676. Yep, Sibrel's stories are fake from start to finish.
    2
  677. ​@danialkaan the "secret" video he discovered was cut from TV broadcasts from the capsule on its way to the moon, a 15 minute broadcast on day one and a 35 minute broadcast on day two. It was Sibrel doing the selective editing, not Nasa. The original 50 minutes proves Sibrel's claims false, both broadcasts are available on YouTube.
    2
  678. Russia invaded several of her neighbors. Countries invite the US in for protection against Russian aggression. Russian aggression is why East European countries, and recently Sweden and Finland, join Nato.
    2
  679. ​@lorifairhead8124 Putin's power has become "entrenched" over more than 20 years. Democratically elected president's don't stay in power that long.
    2
  680. ​ @stacey-leehattingh6957 she's still losing contact with reality.
    2
  681. ​@Anna-Gunilla1792 there are no facts supporting your skepticism.
    2
  682. ​ @takeittothelordinprayer there's no supporting evidence for Aker juniors claims. The term "slam-dunk" the supposed name of the plot to fake the moon landings, wasn't invented until years later.
    2
  683. Sibrel is telling a lot of people what they want to hear, including Candace.
    2
  684. @Timepiece80  I can tell you like your fantasies.
    2
  685.  @Timepiece80 you're reaching conclusions without evidence - again.
    2
  686.  @Timepiece80  time stamp if it's mentioned in the above video?
    2
  687. @Timepiece80  I want to look at this evidence you refer to, where can I see it? Is it in the above video? If so, at what time in the video?
    2
  688.  @Timepiece80  the word "talk"?? The evidence for a massive conspiracy is the word "talk"?? Could there be any other possible explanations that are more likely, how about someone reminding their neighbor that they forgot to press talk on their microphone?
    2
  689.  @Timepiece80  if you go to the youtube channel lunarmodule5, find Apollo 11 day 2 (full mission) watch from time stamp 2;33;30. The footage is recorded from the Houston end, so the 2 second delay occurs when the astronauts reply to Charlie Duke, the Capcom at Houston. That footage was broadcast LIVE. Sibrel edits it for his own purposes.
    2
  690. @Timepiece80  4 times I've tried to direct you to the original, without even offering a link. The original was broadcast live. Sibrel is the one doing the editing.
    2
  691.  @Timepiece80  nothing is passing the censorship now.
    2
  692.  @Timepiece80  apollo 11 day 2
    2
  693.  @garyolsen4160  The Everyday Astronaut put up a video a couple of hours ago that is the most comprehensive debunking of the moon landing conspiracy theorists claims I've seen. It's there if you have the courage to watch it.
    2
  694.  @garyolsen4160  "who would even think they didn't die?" Sorry, YouTube won't let me answer that one.
    2
  695. @garyolsen4160  no, the correct answer, obviously, is flaky conspiracy theorists.
    2
  696. Candace knows nothing about the engineering and science involved, and her guest, Bart Sibrel, is lying with just about every sentence.
    2
  697. If you were an aerospace engineer you'd know that Sibrel is talking skit.
    2
  698. @Alisonwarr87  oh, you're a flat Earth fantasist.
    2
  699. @madcarver4492  sorry, I don't have such confidence in you figuring it out.
    2
  700.  @madcarver4492  I take it you deny the moon landings, and also deny the confirmation from the Soviet Union when it happened, and from China, India, Japan, and South Korea, all of whom have confirmed the existence of the landing sites with their own spacecraft?
    2
  701. He's found a neat trick to make himself famous and to make money.
    2
  702. ​@JennaEzze Sibrel has stated that he will not debate anyone with the knowledge to challenge his claims. All of the claims he makes about the moon landings are easily refuted. For the claim you refer to, he has Zero evidence. Over and over again, when he wants to bolster his claims, he will reference support from anonymous people.
    2
  703. Did you not watch the original version with audio?
    2
  704. Since no one has put up the money to send anyone to the moon since 1972, it would be amazing if there had been missions since then.
    2
  705. All the astronauts were not freemasons, 2 or 3 out of the 24 who went to the moon. You psychos should try to rein in your insanity.
    2
  706. The Soviets confirmed the landings at the time. Rogozen was 5 years old when Apollo 11 landed.
    2
  707.  @bikingcopenhagen4068  I've watched a few minutes, Nixon was trying to initiate a warming of relations, that would be beneficial to both the Soviets and the West, as the building of the pipeline to Germany was, Germany benefitted hugely from the cheap Soviet oil when the OPEC oil price rises occurred soon after.
    2
  708. I'm not an American. I know the Apollo landings happened because the evidence that they happened is overwhelming. Sibrel fabricates his claims and avoids debating anyone with the knowledge to challenge his fabrications.
    2
  709. @kairoperu1587  comments with links don't usually appear on YouTube in main feed. You'd have to good to "newest" comments, then scroll back a day to your opening comment and look at the replies under it.
    2
  710. @kairoperu1587  comments with links won't appear, actually there are several replies to you that you won't see unless you scroll back a day under "newest" comments.
    2
  711. In the unedited original version, Kelly Smith is talking about an upcoming unmanned test flight of the Orion capsule, part of that test is to determine how the electronics of the Orion capsule handles the Van Allen Belt radiation. Smith is explaining that they need to conduct that test flight before they can send people through the belts on board Orion. Smith's job was to ensure the electronics were safe, he's an engineer, he's talking about what his job was on Orion. Sibrel editing to misrepresent is central to his grift.
    2
  712. Sibrel is a grifter and compulsive liar.
    2
  713. Seek help
    2
  714. To anyone who's studied the Apollo program, Sibrel's claims are easily refuted. This is why Sibrel stated in an interview 2 weeks ago that he will not debate anyone with the knowledge to challenge his claims.
    2
  715. 5 return trips occurred (plus Apollo 13, which didn't land).
    2
  716. ​@kaone3151 the evidence that moon landing deniers offer can be summed up as: "That doesn't look right to me." From people with no basis to know what "it" should look like.
    2
  717. @kaone3151  most of the trip to and from the moon was in freefall. The maximum g force they were exposed to was, from memory 7g, after reentry into Earth's atmosphere. I could go through all the math with you, using the rocket equation and explaining exhaust velocities, mass ratios, and the delta V's required and achievable with the stages of the Saturn V stack throughout the voyage It's an exercise I did years ago. But I'm not going to bother because it would require a decent spreadsheet, a couple of hours, and at the end of it you wouldn't have followed the math anyway.
    2
  718. @kaone3151  there's a simple piece of math you might cope with, though: To leave low earth orbit and achieve the velocity required to reach the altitude of the moon requires a change in velocity of about 3km/s. If a vehicle is accelerated at 10m/s² (about 1g) the time it would take to achieve the required velocity to coast all the way to the moon is 3000m/s ÷ 10m/s² = 300s. 300 seconds divided by 60 seconds in a minute = a burn of just 5 minutes to make the required velocity change.
    2
  719. @kaone3151  there aren't differing opinions on the changes of velocity required to achieve an Apollo mission or on whether or not the Saturn V stack could do the job. There are also not differing opinions of whether or not the Van Allen Belts could be transited by the crews without them suffering remotely near-fatal radiation exposure. By "opinions", obviously I don't include the ravings of religious fanatics or dishonest grifters.
    2
  720. ​@paulchafin6318 from Eli Levine Goldberg: "Hebrew is my native language and the answer is no. NASA does not mean “to deceive” in Hebrew. The word NASA is written נאסא in Hebrew and has no meaning. However, the Hebrew word נסה is pronounced NASAH and it means “(she) runs away” or “(she) ran away” depends on the context."
    2
  721. "Turned away with destroyer ships" Utter nonsense. Whose ships? There is no navy patrolling the Southern Ocean, tourists regularly travel to Antarctica.
    2
  722. ​@Saeedmustapha-v1l the temperature is only the temperature of the surface, not the space above the surface, which, as a vacuum, doesn't have a temperature, and is in fact a great insulator. Add to that the much smaller temperature range during the Apollo missions than that which you claimed, and the protection required wasn't so excessive.
    2
  723. You "reviewed" the spacesuits? And what design and engineering faults did you discover?
    2
  724. Neither of them challenge his bs.
    2
  725. Swallowed the bs did you?
    2
  726. @DTRIPLESOWKOW  if you didn't swallow his bs, why would you think he's going to not survive the next 9 days?
    2
  727. I'm in my sixties, I studied the US space program, even learnt the math in my spare time, so I could calculate what performance could be achieved from different rocketry systems. Then I watched something from Sibrel. Sibrel's claims do not stand up to scientific or engineering scrutiny. This is why Sibrel has stated that he will not debate anyone with the knowledge to challenge his claims.
    2
  728. A globe is just too complex for you, all that math and science and stuff. It must make your head hurt just thinking about such things.
    2
  729. ​ @Snowman374th Bob Frantz 4 months ago. Calling people liars when you have no evidence is just a reflection on your character.
    2
  730. None of the "evidence" Sibrel offers stands up to scrutiny, you can test his claims about the Apollo 17 photo, which he says is impossible, for yourself with little effort. The video from the Apollo 11 spacecraft in transit to the moon wasn't "confidential", the clips he offers were taken from 2 broadcasts one of 15 minutes on day 1 of the mission, the second of 35 minutes on day 2. That longer original footage proves his low earth orbit claims false.
    2
  731. The moment that the word "talk" is heard on the video I refer to, is on the day 1 broadcast, they were having communications issues and had been switching channels to try to improve things. At that stage, the spacecraft was 95,000km from Earth, the round trip radio delay would be 0.6 seconds, not the 4 seconds Sibrel suggested.
    2
  732. Why not be honest and just admit that there's no doubt in your mind, even though you know nothing about such matters other than that which it suits you to believe.
    2
  733. You're referring to the communications blackout that happens when a plasma sheath builds up around spacecraft traveling through the atmosphere at hypersonic speeds. Elon has gotten around that problem by using satellites above the reentering vehicle to maintain communications, avoiding the thickest part of the plasma sheath below and around the sides of the reentring spacecraft. Other operators were communicating with reentering vehicles downwards, through the plasma sheath, to ground stations.
    2
  734. It's because you're not a logical thinker.
    2
  735. Successful conmen are always persuasive.
    2
  736. Perhaps you should use the internet to see how Sibrel's claims have been refuted. I've gone through his claims and he has nothing. His misrepresentations and outright lies are disgraceful.
    2
  737. The "secret footage" from the transit to the moon was taken from 2 live broadcasts from the Apollo crew, totaling 50 minutes. Not 10 seconds, as Sibrel claims.
    2
  738. @covey999999999  you've made the claim, now give us the supporting evidence you base that claim on. Was Skylab real? The Pioneer missions to Jupiter? How about the Viking Mars landers? Was the X15 hypersonic aircraft real? What pieces of necessary technology didn't exist in the later 1960's?
    2
  739. @covey999999999  the first flight of the SR71 was in 1964, was the SR71 impossible?
    2
  740.  @websurfer5772  in the '60's Nasa's budget reached 4.5% of federal spending it's at 0.5% today.
    2
  741.  @websurfer5772  in the '60's nasa got 4.5% of the federal budget, today it gets 0.5%
    2
  742.  @websurfer5772  obviously there was vastly more government money for nasa in the 60's.
    2
  743.  @websurfer5772  the figures for nasa's budget are easy to find.
    2
  744.  @websurfer5772  so look up what nasa's budget has been since the 50's
    2
  745.  @websurfer5772  look it up.
    2
  746.  @websurfer5772 so look up nasa's budget since then.
    2
  747.  @websurfer5772  it's public information.
    2
  748.  @websurfer5772  public knowledge
    2
  749. No one's proven fake footage, or even good evidence of fake footage.
    2
  750. Waffle, nothing to do with string theory
    2
  751. You're a bot.
    2
  752.  @bartcartmanthesaltyraven  you said everything is fake, was thst claim fake too?
    2
  753. We'll be back there in 3-5 years.
    2
  754. @Lildoug_456  I say "back" because an objective study of the evidence makes it certain that there have been 6 manned landings on the moon, 2 manned orbital flights and 1 flight that used a "free return" trajectory.
    2
  755. Yep Sibrel tricks a lot of people, unfortunately, that includes Candace.
    2
  756. Aldrin punched Sibrel after Sibrel called him a liar, a thief and a coward. Sibrel was projecting his own character.
    2
  757. Sibrel has stated that he will not debate people who have the knowledge to challenge his claims.
    2
  758. ​@56fairbank from what I can tell, your link doesn't make the front page, so @prakkari would have to go to newest and scroll back to his opening comment to see it.
    2
  759. ​@Mrs.Stone99 I don't have to assume you've done no research. You make it obvious.
    2
  760. What would have been a better example?
    2
  761. What evidence is there that Aldrin told Musk that his rockets were impossible?
    2
  762. Tim Dodd's recent video should be watched if you're interested in the counter to Sibrel's claims.
    2
  763.  @ihartsacto  I haven't seen any photos that appeared staged to me.
    2
  764. ​​ @user-Rocket-Fest sure.
    2
  765. ​@user-Rocket-Fest yeah, well, just me, and 95% of the people on the planet - including every physicist.
    2
  766. ​ @user-Rocket-Fest a century ago it was the same as I said, and in another century it'll still be the same. Yes, Newton was right: for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.
    2
  767. ​ @user-Rocket-Fest  "Concorde proves . . ." Nonsense.
    2
  768. My dishwasher works fine, you probably just don't understand how to use such sophisticated technology properly.
    2
  769. ​@demidvfedorov which of his claims do you find most convincing?
    2
  770. Which claims of his do you find the most convincing?
    2
  771. @randyschissler5791  Everyday Astronaut has just put up: The truth about the moon landings.
    2
  772. The film How To Train Your Dragon shows how the vikings used to fly around on dragons.
    2
  773.  @prakkari  art is personal preference, gender is usually semantics or ideology. Whether or not 12 people walked on the moon between 69 and 72 is either true or false. Like the Earth being flat or an oblate spheroid.
    2
  774. @londonbabe2467 what evidence? Give me something specific. There isn't one piece of "evidence" that Sibrel offers that I can't refute.
    2
  775. @e11even01 Rogan admitted he didn't know enough to challenge Sibrel, so he suggested a debate between Sibrel and someone more qualified. Since then Sibrel has stated that he will not debate anyone with the knowledge and ability to challenge his claims.
    2
  776. The sun was out, so the stars were too faint to see.
    2
  777. Indeed, Candace has neither the inclination nor the ability to challenge Sibrel's lies.
    2
  778. Most of his "good" points are fictional.
    2
  779. You want Sibrel's lies to be everywhere?
    2
  780. ​@sassafras8677 the images of the landing sites that you saw were from Lunar orbiters. Probably Nasa's Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter. Though there are also images from South Korean and Indian Lunar orbiters.
    2
  781. The shadows are as would be expected. The evidence of multiple light sources is multiple shadows from the same object. If you struggle with shadows that aren't parallel, stand with your back to the Sun and extend your arms in a Y, the shadows of your arms will not be parallel.
    2
  782.  @Blue-hf7xt  there are far better authors than Sibrel for when I want to read fiction.
    2
  783. I've not seen a video with studio props being offered as genuine.
    2
  784. Still a conman, the self censorship makes him look better, so don't read too much into it.
    2
  785. There was no filming of the landing other than from inside the lander.
    2
  786.  @josegoncalves1565  you think that having a camera mounted on the outside of the lander to record Armstrong descending the ladder ridiculous?
    2
  787. Have you fallen for Sibrel's nonsense?
    2
  788. ​@BigVin6588 the SR71 Mach 3 strategic reconnaissance aircraft first flew in the early 1960's. There is no equivalent or superior aircraft flying today. The computing power in the early SR71's was less than is in my wife's car. It's not so much what you've got as how you use it.
    2
  789. @billieu.uuu555tuu8  there's little you can know with absolute certainty, but confidence in the knowledge you have should be increased through analysis of all the data available, not just the data that supports your preferred beliefs.
    2
  790. @billieu.uuu555tuu8  when I ask people what evidence convinces them that the moon landings were faked, 95% of them offer nothing. If I ask people what evidence they have that they were real, they offer material in abundance.
    2
  791.  @billieu.uuu555tuu8  Tim Dodd's has put up a video that addresses the claims Sibrel makes.
    2
  792. Satire? You understand that the TV program Stargate, and the Stargate film before it, are fictional??
    2
  793. What evidence do you offer that the F1 exploded in "all" tests? Does that include tests to destruction, in which the engine was run outside of normal operating conditions?
    2
  794. ​ @lubryce1971 because no one has offered to foot the bill to go back.
    2
  795. The "get the CIA to wack him" was sarcasm, Sibrel had gotten into their home under false pretenses and accused Mitchell of working for the CIA. If something similar had happened to me, an accusation of having such a close relationship with the CIA, I'd succumb to making a similar sarcastic quip after the clown had finally left.
    2
  796.  @Lauraaaaa719  I've pulled the information on Apollo apart from both perspectives, I know all of Sibrel's claims, I know all of the evidence Nasa and third parties offer. Sibrel's claims are the ones that are full of holes. There isn't a claim he makes to deny the lunar landings that isn't disproven. In contrast, Nasa's evidence holds.
    2
  797. You're, what, 12?
    2
  798. Satire, right?
    2
  799. You don't recognize a conman when he's right on front of you. Have you looked at the refutations of Sibrel's claims?
    2
  800. If you're in your house with the lights on at night, if you look out the window, you also won't be able to see the stars, but they're still there.
    2
  801. Sibrel used to drive cabs, does that count?
    2
  802.  @JaniceMorgan-on1kx  the three apollo 11 astronauts were top quality pilots. Armstrong flew the hypersonic X15, Aldrin was a combat pilot in Korea with 2 kills, Collins was also a fighter pilot.
    2
  803. Sibrel never does interviews with people with the knowledge to seriously challenge his falsehoods. So he gets a free run.
    2
  804. There is no fuel problem.
    2
  805. In producing his work of fantasy, Sibrel has created an amazing work of fiction.
    2
  806. Ever considered that the quote from Twain that Sibrel is so fond of, might apply to those buying Sibrel's claims?
    2
  807. @NinaAgua there isn't a single person who's studied the Van Allen Belts who says that they were impassable for the Apollo astronauts.
    2
  808. Sibrel never debates people who've studies the science and engineering involved, only ever people with more political interests.
    2
  809. It's you that thinks others see you as useless. Why do you think that is?
    2
  810.  @Richard44BC  youtube sure doesn't want me to refer you to Tim Dodd's video on this topic. Forth attempt.
    2
  811. @Richard44BC  "how do you know what you know?" A question I've considered. You receive information about the world through your senses, to have high confidence that what you know is factual, smart people test their "knowledge" against multiple sources. For me, knowledge is built on the foundations of the laws of nature, humans evolved under those laws as social animals. So if actions are consistent with the laws of nature and human nature, as I understand them, I have higher confidence in that knowledge than in knowledge that is inconsistent with those laws.
    2
  812. @Richard44BC  Bart Sibrel makes multiple claims that I know to be false, like the lunar photos he claims impossible in sunlight, but that I have reproduced in my backyard in the morning sun.
    2
  813. I can imagine Sibrel being untruthful, actually, I know he's untruthful.
    2
  814. ​@sarahmurphy-nf4yl there is no one who's studied the Van Allen Belts who claims that they were impassable for the Apollo astronauts. Sibrel likes to point out they've been described as "deadly" and "dangerous", well, no one is going to raise an eyebrow if I described the roads using similar terms.
    2
  815. There isn't a single claim offered by Sibrel that isn't easily refuted. I'm left doubting you ever did any research to debunk the conspiracy, rather, all your "research" was aimed at confirming your conspiracy beliefs.
    2
  816. She only searches for confirmation of what she already believes.
    2
  817. I suggest starting with the "secret" video showing Earth from halfway to the moon that are actually clips taken from live public broadcasts seen by millions. The original footage,available on YouTube, refuting Sibrel's claims.
    2
  818. My Starlink is great!
    2
  819.  @hollymyrup  it's your opinion that's flying out of your butt. Try using your head.
    2
  820. The moon and Earth are the same distance from the Sun.
    2
  821.  @nicolestanford4955  according to all scientists who have had anything to do with physics and astronomy for the last 500 years.
    2
  822.  @nicolestanford4955  regarding your reply to dansv. What does your God say about hubris?
    2
  823. No it wasn't, you've been lied to, there is no such video.
    2
  824. Only convincing because you haven't heard all the refutations of his claims.
    2
  825.  @angelinalouis4356  there were 6 landings between 69 and 72. There was no prestige in other nations being second. No one has offered up the hundred billion dollars to go since then.
    2
  826. @angelinalouis4356  it's a similar story for Challenger Deep and the South Pole. Several decades between the first expedition to Challenger Deep with James Cameron being the second. Decades between the first successful overland expeditions to the South Pole and the next.
    2
  827.  @angelinalouis4356  China is planning to put men on the moon in the next few years, as is the US. SpaceX has cut the cost to orbit by 90%. The Soviets could not better the US at the time by being second.
    2
  828.  @angelinalouis4356  Sibrel lies through his teeth.
    2
  829.  @angelinalouis4356  Sibrel has said that he will not debate anyone with the knowledge to challenge his claims.
    2
  830. Sibrel has stated that he will not debate anyone with the knowledge to challenge his claims. Every single claim he makes in the discussion about the moon landings is easily refuted.
    2
  831. The demonic liar would be Sibrel trying to promote his latest book.
    2
  832. Yes, there is radiation in space. What to you define as a "massive" amount? There is no one who has studied the Van Allen Belts who says that they were impassable for the Apollo astronauts.
    2
  833. So much for the conspiracists "they got the rocks from Antarctica" rubbish.
    2
  834. Sibrel is just a grifter who's less than honest and smart enough to avoid debate with anyone with the knowledge to expose his dishonesty.
    2
  835. Sibrel's claims shouldn't be believed without checking them out. Which his critics have done.
    2
  836. What lies from Nasa?
    2
  837. Even his own church (7th day Adventist) thinks he's nuts.
    2
  838.  @thereisnospoon3595  Sibrel has stated that he will not debate anyone with the knowledge to challenge his claims. Why? Because his claims are easily proven false by the facts he hides.
    2
  839. Well obviously it's impossible to patch a phoneline into a radio trasmitter, and obviously it's impossible to remotely control a camera. Even today we can't connect cellphones to landlines and control surveillance cameras remotely, right?
    2
  840. @mohx2847 Flat Es cannot offer a distance to the Sun, they cannot offer a reasonable explanation for pressure gradients in the oceans and atmosphere, they cannot explain how, every year, tens of thousands of vessels, from small yachts to oil tankers can find their way across oceans to their destinations with the speed and time expected on a globe. Flat E requires an international conspiracy that's been going on with the cooperation of millions of people for thousands of years.
    1
  841. @mohx2847  how far away is the Sun?
    1
  842. @mohx2847  how do tens of thousands of vessels, from small yachts up, get to their destinations navigating for a globe if it's a flat Earth?
    1
  843.  @mohx2847  scientists have to have been in on the conspiracy for thousands of years.
    1
  844.  @mohx2847  scientists have to have been in on the deception for thousands of years
    1
  845.  @mohx2847  globe Earth is thousands of years older than nasa
    1
  846. @mohx2847  soo many comments not appearing. Frustrating.
    1
  847. You've thought you've known.
    1
  848. Landings, 6 of them.
    1
  849.  @Butterfliesandblossoms  you must be referring to Sibrel.
    1
  850. Sprites are a form of lightning. Meteorites are a form of asteroid.
    1
  851. ​@williamroberti there were 9 manned flights to the moon, including 6 that had landings.
    1
  852. ​@wakinglife7065 Sibrel's claims have all been refuted, it's sad Candace doesn't challenge him with those refutations. She just sucks it all up.
    1
  853.  @BTFREEDOM1776  now's when you offer the proof to support your confident claim. . .
    1
  854. Have you considered watching videos from people, like Dave McKeegan, that refute Sibrel's claims?
    1
  855. ​ @amybella I understand most flat earthers don't believe in gravity. Can you explain why atmospheric pressure declines with increasing altitude? Cam you explain why flat earthers never offer a distance to the Sun and the moon? Can you explain how it is that tens of thousands of vessels travel across Earth's oceans, from huge ships to small yachts, navigation on the basis of a globe Earth, and get to their destinations in the time and distance expected?
    1
  856.  @amybella  I'm not sure if you can see the comment I made a few minutes ago. I was asking for explanations of facts that flat earthers can't offer or explain.
    1
  857.  @amybella  the atmospheric pressure gradient. The distance to the Sun and Moon. The ability of ships and yachts navigating on a globe to get to their destinations.
    1
  858.  @amybella  if you want an idea of how convincing CGI was in 1969, watch Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey.
    1
  859. That's a reasonable basic video debunking Sibrel's claims, there are many others, for example from Dave McKeegan, that address Sibrel's claims in far more detail.
    1
  860.  @annaheart7731  no one who's studied the Van Allen Belts has ever claimed that they were impassable for the Apollo astronauts. Out of all Sibrel's false claims, the problems posed by the radiation in the Van Allen Belts is his biggest.
    1
  861. ​@randyschissler5791 it's the sort of thing Sibrel claims. Often it's based on the fact that after data was transferred to newer forms of storage (microfilm etc) the older storage medium wasn't retained.
    1
  862. @chrissuggs8521  your God didn't write the Bible either.
    1
  863. @chrissuggs8521  "Men God himself appointed to write it." Is English not your first language? Men wrote the Bible, most of the New Testament was written years, even decades, after Christ was crucified. Edit: Ahh, you were trying to say "by Men, that God himself, appointed to write it." So, just poor literacy. It's hard to believe you've read much of the Bible.
    1
  864. @chrissuggs8521  as you say, Men wrote the Bible. Most of the New Testament was written years, or even decades, after Christ was crucified.
    1
  865.  @chrissuggs8521  a story that got better by the telling.
    1
  866.  @chrissuggs8521  who said those men were appointed by God? Oh, those men did.
    1
  867. Sibrel recently said that he will not debate anyone with the knowledge to challenge his claims.
    1
  868. I saw that comedy skit years ago. I'm disappointed that I haven't been able to find it more recently.
    1
  869. @Blue-hf7xt  Sibrel is not "honest and truthful" he knows of many reasons why his claims are false, which he never addresses. He never has interviews with people with the background and knowledge to seriously dispute his claims. Being called a coward and liar is seriously offensive to people with integrity. Are you not of this planet?
    1
  870. @Blue-hf7xt  Sibrel isn't a journalist, he's a grifter, a con man.
    1
  871. I guess that means she's only half crazy.
    1
  872. ​@chiwaled they got to the moon, landing 6 times, after spending a huge amount of money. The US taxpayer has had no interest in spending another hundred billion to send people back. How could anyone have been back without the money to do so?
    1
  873.  @chiwaled  "that's the story they have told the world". No that's what American taxpayers have told the world. It was several decades between the first overland expeditions to the South Pole and the next, once it had been reached there was no great incentive for further expeditions. There were several decades between the first expedition to Challenger Deep in the Marianas Trench and James Cameron who was second, again, because once it had been reached there was no real prestige in going back.
    1
  874. @chiwaled  of course! It's part of your religion.
    1
  875.  @RudeDogRanch  if you google: "The Apollo 11 Flight Journal David Woods, Ken MacTaggart and Frank O'Brien." You can follow the record of that mission.
    1
  876.  @RudeDogRanch  see if you can find the Apollo 11 Flight Journal.
    1
  877. Where's that?
    1
  878. @homesteadjenz  if it's the young earth creationist Dr. Walt Brown, I see no point. He has, by definition, abandoned science.
    1
  879. If your eyes have bright objects in their field of view they don't have the sensitivity to see objects as faint as stars. Same with cameras.
    1
  880. @habarizenuTV  20 seconds means everything else in the image is grossly over exposed.
    1
  881. @habarizenuTV  either you can see stars with a highly exposed film that would overexpose brighter objects, or you don't see the stars with the correct exposure for brighter objects. If they bothered to take photos of stars from inside the CM above the lunar night side you'd see those stars with a long enough exposure - as long as they'd turned off all the interior lights.
    1
  882. Dad's can be wrong too.
    1
  883.  @debbiehellionandtheapocaly845  you haven't seen the evidence. Sibrel has stated that he will not debate anyone with the knowledge to challenge his claims.
    1
  884.  @ChelseaChfy-ex1po  it's a hobby for now. I detest dishonest people like Sibrel, more so when they dress up their own lies by so casually falsely accusing others. He deserves to be challenged.
    1
  885.  @ChelseaChfy-ex1po  I'm not a Christian, but I recognize that Charlie Duke is. I respect other people's honestly held beliefs, Sibrel accuses Duke of faking his Christianity. To me that's one of the lowest things Sibrel has said. With Sibrel there are many such lows.
    1
  886. How bright Earth would appear depends on how wide the camera aperture is set. It's dialed down, only letting in a small amount of light. The Earth from that distance would reflect about 200 times as much light as the moon seen from Earth. Stars are difficult to see in full moonlight, they would be impossible to see with that much Earthlight.
    1
  887. ​ @emilycatherine446 there isn't a single person who's studied the Van Allen Belts who says that they were impassable for the Apollo astronauts.
    1
  888. ​ @G-ra-ha-m how is dust supposed to get onto the rocks?
    1
  889. @G-ra-ha-m  in the photos I can see the only surfaces of those rocks visible are sloped. On Tracy's rock there is dust on the rock on one of the shallower sloped surfaces.
    1
  890. @emilycatherine446  it's an impossibility for them to have been in LEO when they were en route to the moon. Communications was through tracking stations in California, Australia, and Spain. Communications and telemetry were continuous between the spacecraft and the ground. In LEO the spacecraft would be in line of sight with those stations only occasionally, and for less than 10 minutes at a time. The tracking dishes were pointed at tge spacecraft en route to the moon, they weren't following rapidly moving spacecraft traveling across the sky in LEO.
    1
  891. @emilycatherine446  there isn't a single person who's studied the Van Allen Belts who says that they were impassable for the Apollo astronauts.
    1
  892. @G-ra-ha-m  I thought you'd given up on your weird argument after I'd explained how the hot/cold cycle would have caused dust to slide from sloping surfaces. Another factor being micrometeors, over billions of years, blowing dust off of highers surfaces, causing it to settle on lower surfaces, those effects have led to the rounded nature of the lunar topography. The petrified wood sample didn't come from Nasa or any astronauts.
    1
  893.  @G-ra-ha-m  dust has been shifted off of sloping surfaces by the temperature cycle and micrometeorite impacts.
    1
  894. @G-ra-ha-m  you're waffling, making no definable point. Yes, there are rocks on the moon.
    1
  895. @G-ra-ha-m  I don't know how many photos of the Earth were taken from the lunar surface, but there're certainly more than 2. The astronauts were working to a schedule to achieve as much science as they could in the time available. They probably weren't anticipating your demands for more photos of Earth. There were plenty of photos taken from Lunar orbit and while in transit between the Earth and the moon.
    1
  896.  @G-ra-ha-m  several photos with Earth and the Flag, photo of Earth above Tracy, photos of Jack Schmitt trotting across the moon with the Earth above him. Several photos of Earth rise from Lunar orbit, numerous photos of Earth while they were in transit.
    1
  897. @isobel361  they have not been "showing up alive and well".
    1
  898.  @G-ra-ha-m  I suppose fantasizing about such things brings some excitement into your basement.
    1
  899.  @G-ra-ha-m  you can offer no evidence to support that conspiracy theory, or the rest. You choose to buy it because the belief brings something exciting into your life.
    1
  900.  @G-ra-ha-m  I'll go with: A belief that an organization has successfully conspired to create a false narrative in the public mind to conceal a large deception.
    1
  901.  @G-ra-ha-m  of course, most conspiracy theorists think they "know" the truth, they have certainty, but without evidence.
    1
  902.  @G-ra-ha-m  comment didn't appear. A conspiracy theory is a belief that some organization is creating a false narrative to conceal an important truth from the public.
    1
  903.  @G-ra-ha-m  my reply to your question keeps disappearing
    1
  904.  @G-ra-ha-m  a belief that some organization is working to creat a untrue narrative on an important topic to hide the truth.
    1
  905. @karungarimaina7613  there were bragging rights for the US getting there first. There isn't much prestige in being second. In 1960 the first expedition was made to Challenger Deep, the deepest point in Earth's oceans. No one went back until James Cameron 52 years later in 2012. After the successful first expeditions to the South Pole in 1911-12, there were no further overland expeditions to the south pole until 1958.
    1
  906.  @ChristChickAutistic  were you? There was a report done, Sibrel literally lies about the contents of that report.
    1
  907. @lovelyrita1760  Armstrong was a test pilot who flew the X15 hypersonic aircraft before he switched to being an astronaut. Aldrin was a combat pilot in Korea with 2 kills. Collins was also a fighter pilot. He also trained to be a test pilot. These men demonstrated extreme courage before they were astronauts. Sibrel was a cab driver who progressed to being a criminal before moving on to his lies and grift.
    1
  908. @sarahvee6777  Sibrel likes to point at an Apollo 17 photo, which he claims is proof of multiple light sources. Have you tried to reproduce that photo in the morning sunlight? I know you haven't. Rather than doing the simplest of experiments to test his claims, you just accept them without question.
    1
  909.  @ClayCarson-t2l  that was 2 weeks after they returned.
    1
  910.  @Achris7703  Sibrel has recently stated that he will not debate anyone with the knowledge to challenge his claims. Guess why.
    1
  911.  @Achris7703  common sense is based on someone's everyday life experiences, so common sense is different for different people. What was common sense in 1800 is not common sense today. What is common sense for a villager in Africa is not common sense for a New Yorker. What is common sense for someone who has depth of knowledge in terms of the Apollo missions is not common sense for someone like you who knows little about them. Your everyday experiences are of no relevance to whether or not men landed on the moon.
    1
  912. @lanakim2537  it's a grift for Sibrel, from cab driver to minor celebrity.
    1
  913. Please tell me you don't believe everything Sibrel just said.
    1
  914. He was being cynical when he said that. Someone gains entry to yourhome under false pretenses, creates a ruckus, accuses you of many crimes in the employment of the CIA, eventually you manage to eject him. I'd probably say the same thing.
    1
  915. Good, others have also done so. Once Sibrel was confronted with the evidence of a similar photo, his response "it was done with a cellphone, cellphones have fisheye lenses" (false). Yours is a better example, because the straight lines visible prove there's no distortion.
    1
  916. @seanmcnamara9326  obviously you'd know.
    1
  917. How about confirmation of the landing sites in the form of photos taken from Lunar orbit by spacecraft from China, India, Japan and South Korea?
    1
  918. @paulabevan  so what you're relying on are clips of a few minutes taken out of a conference that lasted over an hour, clips that were deliberately selected to give the impression that the astronauts were acting guilty. Clips that supported a narrative that appealed to your preconceptions. There are literally hundreds (thousands?) of hours of video interviews of apollo astronauts available. But you watch only that which supports you bias.
    1
  919.  @paulabevan  so all you've seen of the conference are short clips intended to support the narrative that was sold to you and that appeals to you.
    1
  920. @CEDD913 there are no videos of them standing away with the flag waving. The grifters use of the power of suggestion has given you a false memory.
    1
  921. ​ @rutexas7157 China, India, Japan and South Korea.
    1
  922. @lateundercover7481  looking at a pew survey done in November: About a quarter of Americans say the US is providing too much support to Ukraine. About a quarter say about the right amount. About a quarter say too little, and a quarter don't know. That's why the politicians are providing the money they are. Democrats are much more in favor of providing the support than Republicans. If a survey asked people if the US should spend hundreds of billions on new moon missions (there probably are such surveys), I expect a clear majority would say no.
    1
  923. @lateundercover7481  the figures for the SLS are BS. The development costs so far are around $20 billion.
    1
  924. ​ @lateundercover7481 development costs because the SLS is a new rocket.
    1
  925. ​@lateundercover7481 where's the money coming from to recoup that expenditure?
    1
  926. ​​ @lateundercover7481 how is the appropriation of more money going to be a return on earlier expenditure? You don't run a business do you. In fact with your logic, I doubt you run your own finances.
    1
  927. ​ @lateundercover7481 what's with you conspiracy theorists and nonsensical waffle? It's rhetorical.
    1
  928. Sibrel is also terrible at math - but he spins a good yarn.
    1
  929. @franciscosarmiento7058  what light source is 160,000km away?
    1
  930.  @franciscosarmiento7058  if you want an easy example of shadows from one light source appearing to not be parallel, just go outside on a sunny morning or evening, stand with your back to the Sun, and hold your arms up in a "Y", the shadows of your arms will not appear to be parallel. Now switch from a "Y" to an "A", now the shadows of your arms will appear to be converging.
    1
  931.  @franciscosarmiento7058  shadows that appear not to be parallel are easy to make from one distant light source.
    1
  932. @timeforcoffee485  they haven't made an attempt at another moon landing, the money hasn't been there. If there's no commercial incentive, no political incentive, and no multi-billionaire keen to do it and allowed to do it (the US government, until recently, hasn't provided a friendly environment for private efforts in space), it ain't going to happen.
    1
  933. @Welcome_To_Life  where is the evidence it's fake? Perhaps you should look up: "who filmed the Apollo 17 lunar module takeoff."
    1
  934. @marcusaureliusss  the footage has no been destroyed, original material was transferred to more modern forms of information storage. The information all exists and is publicly available.
    1
  935. @emersonrose2102  have you looked up information on the Apollo spacesuit?
    1
  936. I did like and recommend 'The moon landing: Stanley Kubrick's greatest film'
    1
  937. @citizeng7959  Why couldn't it have been done in transit to the moon?
    1
  938. @citizeng7959  obviously, Sibrel does not cover the strong evidence that contradicts his story: in recent years lunar orbiting spacecraft from China, India, Japan and South Korea have verified the existence of the landing sites, with photos of the hardware left at those sites.
    1
  939. @citizeng7959  you can get a good idea of the direction of the Sun in relation to the Earth and spacecraft by how much of the Earth is in shadow. As we see the majority, but not all, of the surface of the Earth is lit, we know that the spacecraft is off center between Earth and Sun. If exactly 50%of the Earth was lit, the Sun-Earth-spacecraft would form a right angle.
    1
  940. ​ @k6maz "video footage . . . other Apollo missions?" All over youtube.
    1
  941. In an interview with Bob Frantz, Frantz asked Sibrel about Sibrel debating with someone more knowledge about Apollo and astronautics, as had been suggested by Rogan at the end of his interview with Sibrel. Sibrel replied that he will not debate anyone with the knowledge to challenge his claims. This is why you only see Sibrel interviewed by political commentators like Owens, Rogan and Frantz.
    1
  942. There isn't a single p Claim Sibrel makes that hasn't been refuted many times by many people.
    1
  943. He makes it believable by avoiding debate with anyone familiar with science and the space program. Recently he stated that he will not debate anyone with the knowledge to challenge his claims.
    1
  944. Message to supreme command: The paranoia is strong in this one.
    1
  945. ​ @WinkyFromNorthChicago74 Sibrel's claims are only ever going to deceive people like you, people with little training in engineering, math and science.
    1
  946. Buzz punched him after he called Buzz a liar and a coward. Go watch what actually happened.
    1
  947. ​@banned4life-o5q thanks, I tried Google, it means something different in Spanish.
    1
  948. I had no idea I could be paid to comment, any idea to whom I should apply to be put on the payroll?
    1
  949.  @shelliejones434  did you misread my comment?
    1
  950. ​@gives_bad_advice the link you offer isn't going to the right video.
    1
  951. @gives_bad_advice  when the word "talk" is heard, was about ten 33 am on day 1, an earlier video to the one referenced. At that stage the spacecraft was about 93,000 km out, 2 way delay about 0.62 seconds, rather than the 4 seconds Sibrel claims.
    1
  952. @oneg1970  you say "Nasa fan". You, being a little girl, won't understand that the Nasa of today is not the Nasa of 60 years ago. In the sixties, Nasa had the task of sending men to the moon. Today, unfortunately, Nasa's main function is keeping politicians in power through pork.
    1
  953. Or Sibrel could be willing to say and believe anything to support his decades long fantasy. The claims he makes aren't supported by any evidence.
    1
  954.  @Karlrainer  name the deal.
    1
  955. ​ @flippos "electromagnetic waves is all it is" None of the Van Allen Belt radiation is electromagnetic radiation.
    1
  956. @Blessed_by_Yeshua  to believe in a flat earth in this age requires exceptional hubris.
    1
  957.  @Blessed_by_Yeshua  perhaps you should consider the possibility that God's creation is far greater and more glorious than you choose to believe.
    1
  958. @dargo8178  "bamboozled" was the word Sibrel was attributing to Sagan. Sibrel's message was that Nasa has bamboozled people, you reference that quote in your timestamp. My position is that it is Sibrel who is bamboozling people with his bs, including you.
    1
  959.  @dargo8178  if you bought Sibrel's bs, he has bamboozled you.
    1
  960.  @dargo8178  if you bought Sibrel's bs, he has bamboozled you.
    1
  961. @dargo8178  "above [your] level of thinking" On this topic, bet on it.
    1
  962. Sibrel's critics don't "trust" the government, we've looked at the evidence offered by him and by Nasa and third parties in detail. There isn't a single claim offered by Sibrel that stands up to informed scrutiny. And he knows this, which is why he recently told another youtube host that he would not debate anyone with the knowledge and inclination to challenge his claims.
    1
  963. @ChiicoLachowskii  I don't trust the government or Sibrel. So I look at the evidence. Sibrel's evidence is BS. Nothing he claims stands up to scrutiny.
    1
  964.  @MyNameIsntChico  why do you have such trust in Sibrel? He recently said that he will not debate anyone with the knowledge to challenge his claims.
    1
  965. Sarcasm.
    1
  966. The moon looks like that too a lot of the time, a result of part of the planet you're looking at being the night side.
    1
  967. ​​ @Abundantlyfamous one example of his lies was the claim that the footage of the Earth on the was to the moon was secret. That entire footage was taken from 2 TV broadcasts, one of 15 minutes on day 1, the second of 35 minutes on day 2. That footage shows everything he claims hidden. And it's all now on YouTube.
    1
  968.  @psier11  there isn't a claim Sibrel has made about the moon landings that hasn't been refuted.
    1
  969. I had a look at the article you refer to. It takes just a few minutes on the internet to find the information to address the claims made. After TLI, the C/S module disconnected from the interstage, turned around, docked nose to nose with the LM, and pulled the LM from the interstage. To do the calculations for fuel requirements requires using the rocket equation. The LM and CM were depressurized each time someone exited to space, then repressurized after they were back inside.
    1
  970. ​@JosephOlson-ld2td so use the rocket equation to check if each component of Saturn-Apollo had enough fuel. I don't see the problem.
    1
  971. Do you know the difference between the arctic and antarctic?
    1
  972. @Anna-Gunilla1792  with half of the Ascent Stage liftoff mass being fuel, the Ascent stage could theoretically reach 2.1km/s, to rendezvous with the C/S module it needed to be able to reach 1.7km/s. So, yes, it had adequate fuel.
    1
  973. @mickjames7962  rocket technology is useful because rockets go to space, putting up satellites and sending spacecraft throughout the solar system.
    1
  974.  @mickjames7962  it's useful because rockets go to space.
    1
  975.  @Timepiece80 youtube: lunarmodule5
    1
  976.  @Timepiece80  the full live broadcast is at lunarmodule5
    1
  977.  @Timepiece80  find lunarmodule5
    1
  978.  @Timepiece80  lunar module 5 As oneword on YouTube
    1
  979. @Timepiece80  lunarmodule5 is the site with the broadcast footage.
    1
  980.  @Timepiece80  lunarmodule5 is the site with the footage
    1
  981.  @Timepiece80  I can see it by going to "newest" comments, then scrolling back 2+ days to your opening comment.
    1
  982.  @Timepiece80  you can see some of my missing comments the same way.
    1
  983.  @Timepiece80  it's not nasa doing the editing to misrepresent, it's Sibrel
    1
  984. @Timepiece80  the unedited broadcast is about 35 minutes long, and shows everything Sibrel claims it does not.
    1
  985. @Timepiece80  it was broadcast LIVE, there was no unshowen part.
    1
  986. @Timepiece80  people don't comprehend that Sibrel has no reservations about telling blatant lies.
    1
  987.  @Timepiece80  there was a 35 minute live broadcast that can be found in its entirety at lunarmodule5. It appears that Sibrel has gotten hold of an internal "report film" that includes snippets of the original public broadcast. While the report film wasn't for wider distribution, the video in question was.
    1
  988.  @Timepiece80  the original 35 minute film was broadcast live, elements of that original footage was incorporated into an internal report film that wasn't intended for public distribution.
    1
  989.  @Timepiece80  "not for general public distribution" means just that, it does not mean "confidential", "secret" or "top secret"
    1
  990. @Timepiece80  how about you go to "newest" comments, scroll back to where many of my comments are that you're not seeing under "top" comments, and go look at the original broadcast footage?
    1
  991. @Timepiece80  https://youtu.be/79aCn2hWezo?si=xq2imVnAOliiohN4
    1
  992. @Timepiece80  thanks for checking, most wouldn't. The footage is recorded at the mission control end, this means that the delay is heard after the Capcom speaks to the astronauts, he has to wait the 2 seconds for the delay, then he speaks, and is heard, speaking immediately after he hears the astronauts.
    1
  993. @Timepiece80  I think I heard the missing word, it was fainter than on Sibrel's version, I had to hunt for it, it sounded more like "touch" than talk, and after hearing it and going back and listening to Sibrel's version, it sounds more like "touch" than "talk" when I ignore his telling me what the word is.
    1
  994. @Timepiece80  in his original "documentary", a funny thing happened .." and in his interview with Bett-David several years ago, Sibrel claims that the image seen is the Earth, a small portion of it from low earth orbit. With the rest hidden behind the window frame and walls of the spacecraft. It was subsequently pointed out, by several people, that in such a shot the movement of the spacecraft over the Earth's surface at the LEO speed of about 8km/s would cause the small section of the Earth visible to rapidly change, which isn't what we see. So, as is the case with the above interview, Sibrel has quietly introduced a "transparency", claiming we're not looking at the Earth, but at a transparency over the window illuminated by the Earth behind it.
    1
  995. @Timepiece80  in the 35 minute broadcast the Earth should rotate about 7⁰ between the first and last shots we see of it. It does (though it's hard to spot, I picked a spot of cloud near the equator at the limb of the Earth on the left side of the image, it was touching the limb in the first images, was detached from the limb in the last images).
    1
  996. @Timepiece80  there is no one who has studied the Van Allen Belts who says that they were impassable for the Apollo missions.
    1
  997. @Timepiece80  I had a look at a few of the recent videos at the site you linked to and commented. I saw no claims on the science or observations on the moon not easily refuted.
    1
  998. @Timepiece80  I visited the moon landing hoax site you linked to and left 3 simple comments pointing out basics. They were all deleted within a couple of hours.
    1
  999.  @Timepiece80  my comments at the site you linked to have been deleted.
    1
  1000. @Timepiece80  Dr rasa 2019 interview. I'll watch in a few hours. In exchange you can watch: Dave McKeegan: Exposing the lies of Bart Sibrel. Cheers.
    1
  1001. @Timepiece80  I've read some of the transcript. A spacecraft can launch into any orbit that passes over the launch site. Polar orbits, which travel from pole to pole, can be launched to from anywhere between the poles, i.e., anywhere on Earth. The Apollo suits had multiple layers of dacron for protection against micrometeorites. The number of micrometeorites might be as high as some claim, but not the size, think micrograms, not milligrams. The multiple layers of dacron acts as standoff shields (look up standoff shields) the first layers vaporize impactors, so lower layers only have to deal with vapor.
    1
  1002. @Timepiece80  the shape of the Van Allen Belts is easy to look up. Also check South Atlantic Anomaly, a product of Earth's magnetic field being offset, bringing the Van Allen Belts down to low earth orbit over the south Atlantic, creating a part of the Van Allen Belts that the ISS regularly passes through.
    1
  1003. @Timepiece80  electromagnetic radiation (rather than partical radiation) is ony dangerous to humans if there's so much of it that it heats the body so much we become hyperthermic (body temperature rises, think microwave oven) Or if it's of such high frequency that it damages us (ultraviolet and higher frequencies, all the way up to xray and gamma ray). UV and lower frequencies are easily blocked, and there aren't enough of the higher frequencies to cause serious harm in a few days.
    1
  1004. @Timepiece80  the tortoises survived, they lost about 10% of their body mass compared to 5% in the control group on Earth. I was replying to the claims regarding electromagnetic radiation. I didn't say the astronauts were exposed to none of higher frequency, I said they were well short of a lethal dose in their few days in space. In fact, electromagnetic radiation isn't blocked by Earth's magnetic field, so years of exposure are not a serious issue. The particle radiation, from the Sun and cosmic rays, are a separate issue.
    1
  1005. @Timepiece80  the radiation exposure the turtles experienced was not more than 3.5rad according to the scientific analysis done on them. They were alive when they landed, but didn't survive the autopsy done about 20 days after they returned to Earth.
    1
  1006. @Timepiece80  my comment that they didn't survive the autopsy was tongue in cheek. The only information we have on the turtles is from the Soviets, the information they provided was that the turtles survived the voyage. Rasaviharii states that he doesn't believe the Soviets, he offers no justification for his disbelief other than his own opinion.
    1
  1007. @Timepiece80  Kelly Smith isn't talking about protecting the astronauts, Kelly Smith is an engineer specializing in radiation proofing the electronics aboard Orion. The Apollo missions didn't have silicon chips, it was all transistors, transistors are much cruder, and their performance not subject to degradation by radiation. Smith's job has nothing to do with directly protecting the crew from radiation, but indirectly has everything to do with protecting them - by ensuring the electronics aren't affected. Again, the full video makes his meaning clear - he talks about the effects of radiation on electronics and protecting the electronics.
    1
  1008. @Timepiece80  I've tracked down the time and distance for when the word "talk" is heard. It's on day one at about ten 33 am (so a different video to that of the live broadcast discussed earlier) the spacecraft was about 93,000km from earth.
    1
  1009.  @Timepiece80  93,000km gives a round trip signal delay of about 0.65 seconds, so Bart's 4 second delay is way off.
    1
  1010. @Timepiece80  there are no scientists that have studied the Van Allen Belts that say that they were impassable for the Apollo astronauts.
    1
  1011. @Timepiece80  of course Rasaviharii's story makes more sense to you, you're convinced it was all a conspiracy. The evidence from Indian, Chinese, South Korean and Japanese spacecraft that the landing sites exist doesn't convince you, and nothing will.
    1
  1012. @Timepiece80  you mean if I prefer to believe everyone in a position to reasonably assess whether or not men landed on the Moon. Sibrel stated, over 20 years ago, unequivocally, that men did not walk on the moon. Such certainty, along with his never acknowledging evidence contrary to his "knowledge," (verification of the existence of landing sites by spacecraft of other countries), means he's not reasonable.
    1
  1013. Scrubbing the CO2 makes the difference, the pressure also affects things, the Apollo suits worked at less than 4psi, a diver 10 meters down is at an ambient pressure of 30psi. The deeper a diver goes, the more quickly his tanks run out, at a depth where the pressure is 60psi they last half as long as at 30psi.
    1
  1014. @gives_bad_advice  you'd better Google apollo spacesuit plss. I've never really understood why with increasing pressure an increasing proportion of the oxygen is wasted, you'd think scuba divers could just breath more slowly, given at twice the pressure there's twice as much oxygen in a lung full.
    1
  1015.  @gives_bad_advice  the Apollo plss used compressed O2. I've never understood why the O2 use is less efficient at higher pressure, but that's how it is.
    1
  1016. ​ @brucegorst8005 because you're a flat earther.
    1
  1017.  @brucegorst8005  to be a flat earther you have to deny the evidence of the globe, making crazy claims of there being a worldwide and centuries old mega-conspiracy involving tens or hundreds of millions of people.
    1
  1018.  @brucegorst8005  to be a flat earther you have to believe in a centuries old mega-conspiracy involving hundreds of millions of people, all coordinating the same story. SMH
    1
  1019.  @brucegorst8005  to believe in a flat Earth, you have to believe in a centuries old mega-conspiracy involving hundreds of millions of people.
    1
  1020. Investigative journalism? She did no research of his claims beforehand and never challenged his narrative.
    1
  1021. A couple of weeks ago, Sibrel did an interview with Bob Frantz. Four and a half minutes in Frantz brought up the suggestion, made by Rogan at the end of his interview with Sibrel, that Sibrel debate someone more expert in Apollo and things space. After dodging and wriggling for several minutes, Sibrel claimed that debating anyone but (89 year old) Charlie Duke would be beneath him.
    1
  1022. @Alisonwarr87  Nasa superseded the NACA. It was founded by the Eisenhower Administration in 1958. I guess if you find Eisenhower so bad, you must be some sort of extremist Democrat.
    1
  1023. If some crazy man came into my house under false pretenses accusing me of being part of a huge CIA conspiracy. After we'd finally ejected them, after much acrimony, I'd likely make the same comment. It was sarcasm.
    1
  1024. If you've watch any of Sibrel's obnoxious confrontations with his targets, you'd understand the reason for that sarcastic comment.
    1
  1025. @LH23511  I had a look at Bruce Sees All. I understand your problem.
    1
  1026. @masterxofficiel  oh, the power of suggestion. Before reaching a conclusion, an objective person would look at the film in its entirety and search for evidence of similar features in the film to those he claims are wires, but that he ignores because they don't suit his preferred narrative. Watching just the short clips he offers, there were many such features, lines, and brief flashes that were not above the astronauts at exactly the right time for them to be interpreted as wires. I suspect that if I were to look at the entire EVA video footage, which would be about 100 times as much as he shows, there would be thousands of such imperfections in the film, the vast majority not above the astronauts and so not wires supporting them.
    1
  1027.  @masterxofficiel  the image anomalies are common, with many that have as much of the appearance of being a wire as the select few he prefers.
    1
  1028. @masterxofficiel  picking out a frame with your preferred anomaly over the several hours of film that have anomalies that you don't prefer is known as confirmation bias.
    1
  1029.  @masterxofficiel  your confirmation bias is showing.
    1
  1030.  @masterxofficiel  questioning their conclusions is one skill conspiracy theorists repeatedly demonstrate that they lack.
    1
  1031. @masterxofficiel  I know a great deal about the lack of rigor, the selective editing, the blatant misrepresentations of those who deny the moon landings happened. I also know that Sibrel has stated that he will not debate anyone with the knowledge to challenge his claims. This is why he only talks to the likes of Rogan and Owens.
    1
  1032. @ApolloKid1961  taboo conspiracy also deleted my comments, this was after a brief conversation in which I explained that the solar corona was only photographed by the astronauts from the command module in transit to the moon. Like many of his ilk, they cannot accept that they could be wrong about anything. As with Sibrel, unbelievable hubris.
    1
  1033.  @bikingcopenhagen4068  at the 43 minute mark he claims the moon is brown. No it isn't, some photos show a brown tinge, but it's mainly just grey. There are plenty of photos of the moon for outside Earth's atmosphere, including from lunar orbiting satellites from several countries, that show that grey.
    1
  1034.  @bikingcopenhagen4068  there are plenty of photos from many spacecraft orbiting the moon that show the colour of the moon is grey.
    1
  1035.  @bikingcopenhagen4068  the video of the Saturn V launch he shows is in slow motion. There are plenty of Saturn 5 launch videos at normal speed to compare with.
    1
  1036.  @bikingcopenhagen4068  there are plenty of photos of the moon from lunar orbiting satellites that show the moon's color.
    1
  1037.  @bikingcopenhagen4068  showing Saturn V liftoffs in slow motion is common.
    1
  1038.  @bikingcopenhagen4068  there are many photos of the moon taken from space showing its color.
    1
  1039. 6 comments I've made addressing the moons color and Saturn V slow motion video in response to the video you link, none of them appear.
    1
  1040. To make his stories survive Sibrel: lies without hesitation, sites evidence from people he never identifies, and never accepts debate with people qualified to challenge his inaccuracies.
    1
  1041. @kairoperu1587  the chances of any reply with a link being visible to you, unless you check newest comments, is zero.
    1
  1042.  @kairoperu1587  how many comments do you see under your opening comment?
    1
  1043. @kairoperu1587  https://youtu.be/7Djbjx89rLU?si=4bSElFcAkugRJ7CW
    1
  1044. Now 25 replies visible under "newest", including links, 11 or 12 under "top".
    1
  1045. @kairoperu1587  after much searching I thought I'd found a video of Bean swearing on the Bible, a link offered on another video, clicked only to see "this video has been removed due to a copyright claim by Bart Sibrel"
    1
  1046. @kairoperu1587  after another approach I found Bean swearing on the Bible: Channel: phase52012 Video: A review/critque of: Apollo discussions . . . 7 minutes long.
    1
  1047. @lauragrace5622  McKeegan dismantles most of Sibrel's claims in a very step by step manner, detailing how Sibrel is mistaken or misleads in each case. I'll add that Sibrel has recently stated that he will not debate anyone with the knowledge to challenge his claims, McKeegan included.
    1
  1048.  @robertdefazio2885  Buzz is not.
    1
  1049.  @robertdefazio2885  you should actually check what evidence exists against Sibrel's claims. Click my thumbnail for several videos, including the 2 TV broadcasts done at the time that feature the footage that Sibrel claimed was secret.
    1
  1050. @robertdefazio2885  did you know that the existence of the landing sites has been confirmed by lunar orbiters from China, India, Japan and South Korea?
    1
  1051. @robertdefazio2885  Sibrel has a favorite photo taken by an astronaut showing his shadow and some rocks, Sibrel claims there needs to be 3 light sources. But anyone can reproduce the image and the angle of the shadows with the morning or evening Sun and a few random objects.
    1
  1052. @robertdefazio2885  Sibrel is convincing because he speaks with certainty and no one checks his claims. He has never been interviewed by anyone with a strong science background, just political people like Owens and Rogan.
    1
  1053. @robertdefazio2885  several astronauts did. For men of that era, questioning their integrity and honesty is offensive. For some of us slightly younger people (born in the 60's), that remains the case.
    1
  1054.  @RenoLaringo  if you're claiming that the atmospheric pressure gradient is fake, you've expanded the size of the conspiracy to millions of everyday people. Not just engineers, surveyors, scientists pilots, seamen, the world's militaries, airline manufacturers, and countless others.
    1
  1055. Where's the evidence of blackmail? It would have to be something really big, and on-going for over 50 years. What huge apparently inexplicable favors has the US been doing for the Soviets/Russians all this time?
    1
  1056.  @mirandasworld  "LOL" Still no one home.
    1
  1057. ​ @mirandasworld you know nothing of the level of technology they had or how it was used.
    1
  1058. @mirandasworld  specifically what technology didn't they have that was required?
    1
  1059. @mirandasworld  that's the thing, I'm not trusting, I accept the moon landing because I've studied the issue and the evidence that they happened is overwhelming. Nothing Sibrel offers stands up to educated scrutiny. Name 2 of his claims that you think are proof, and I'll explain why they're false.
    1
  1060.  @mirandasworld  I've looked at the evidence in detail, both sides. Name 2 of Sibrel's claims that you think are proof, and I'll explain why they're not.
    1
  1061. ​ @mirandasworld offer whatever you can, I can find your missing comments in this thread under newest if I scroll back a day.
    1
  1062. ​ @mirandasworld I see 11 of Your comments in the thread, the 6 you see, plus another 5. I'm not an American, so the apple pie thing isn't it.
    1
  1063.  @mirandasworld  I said I could see 11 of your comments, I didn't claim I could see all of them. I suspect you haven't offered links, because you could just name the platform and title and then I could find them. My work day has just started. You are the one making assumptions without evidence, with those assumptions being incorrect.
    1
  1064. ​​​ @mirandasworld as I said, I can easily refute any of Sibrel's claims. But I'm not going to spend hours refuting every one of his claims. If you look at the internet you can find that people have already done that. I was offering to address specific claims of his, or others, that you find convincing.
    1
  1065. ​ @mirandasworld why do people use phrases like "truthteller" and "truthseeker" when those things are exactly what they're not doing?
    1
  1066. @AM-rd9pu  it'll be because you don't need to imagine a fantasy land to have meaning in your life.
    1
  1067. ​@56fairbank "this guy" I think you're referring to Sibrel. Not the person you're replying to.
    1
  1068. I go with science and faith are incommensurable, shouldn't be compared. As an example of Sibrel's creative techniques for the evidence he offers, do you know that the "secret" video he offers in his "talk" and "faking Earth while actually in low earth orbit" claims is originally from 15 and 35 minute public broadcasts sent down on the first and second days of the mission?
    1
  1069. The lengthy broadcasts prove that it's Sibrel, rather than Nasa, that's doing the creative editing. When the word "talk"(?) is heard, the spacecraft is only 95,000km from Earth, the round trip radio delay is about 0.65 seconds, not the 4 seconds Sibrel claims, and throughout the rest of that particular broadcast, the communications delay IS obviously less than a second.
    1
  1070.  @SebastianDeSouza-w3m  he means Bart.
    1
  1071. @heartsky  Sibrel is a reptile. There's not a single one of his claims that isn't easily debunked, and as he's been pushing his nonsense for 50 years, he knows this. As an example, it's easy to show that shadows often don't appear parallel: stand with your back to the Sun and hold your arms up in a 'Y', the shadows cast by your arms aren't parallel. Go look at some footage from the ISS looking down at Earth. The planet appears to rotate rapidly below the space station. There was no such movement over the Earth seen in the across the cabin through the window video taken on the way to the moon.
    1
  1072. @lauralauren6432  they were built with the engineering required to do their mission. You, who knows nothing of aerospace engineering, are just demonstrating your lack of knowledge in that area - and your hubris for imagining yourself expert enough to make an assessment.
    1
  1073. He did have integrity, you don't. Don't project your own conspiracy fairytale onto him.
    1
  1074. Name the pipeline to Western Europe built in the 70's.
    1
  1075. @alexkurakin9497  how is a deal between West Germany and the Soviet Union that was beneficial to both, a payoff to the US for Soviet silence?
    1
  1076. ​@uche007us conmen have to "make sense" to be successful. You'd be less impressed by him if you were more familiar with the science and engineering involved.
    1
  1077. Tom Mayk looks nothing like Kubrick.
    1
  1078. Buran flew once, unmanned. It was inferior to the US shuttle as the US shuttle at least reused its main engines, Buran was simply an attachment to an expendable rocket.
    1
  1079. ​@Lildoug_456 I guarantee that after Elon lands on the moon near one of the Apollo landing sites, they take lots of photos, and we all get to see those photos, the fanatics like Sibrel will still be claiming it's all fake.
    1
  1080. ​ @Lildoug_456 compare it to "The Final Experiment" recently where a group including flat Earthers went to the Antarctic to observe the 24 hour sun, an impossibility according to most flat earthers. The response of the global(!) Flat Earth community? It was faked with giant screens, and the flat earther who went and changed his mind was denegrated as a traitor to their cause.
    1
  1081. But following the narrative that you most like is not doing research, it's hunting for confirmation of already held opinions.
    1
  1082. @BwanaFinklestein  her analogy was that she wouldn't do what Buzz did to someone for asking her to swear on the Bible. That's not why Sibrel got the imprints on his nose, he got those for, calling Buzz a coward and a liar.
    1
  1083. ​ @ApolloKid1961 I would have liked to have seen such a debate. I think it's good evidence that he knows he lies, rather than him just being, ah, mistaken.
    1
  1084. @56fairbank  Strictly Speaking. Bob Frantz. About 4;30 Sibrel wriggles and wriggles for about 5 minutes trying to dodge the question. To his great credit Frantz persists.
    1
  1085. @56fairbank  Frantz persisted on that one issue: would Sibrel debate the people who were knowledgeable about the Apollo program and who've offered to debate Sibrel. He eventually gets his answer. I think we can say that Frantz doesn't himself claim to have the knowledge to address Sibrel's claims, so yes, the balance of the discussion very much followed the same course of all the other discussions Sibrel has had, with him appearing convincing only because of the interviewers lack of expertise, and Sibrel's certainty. If someone were to be able to confront Sibrel with solid evidence, they could label him a liar and fraud to his face.
    1
  1086. @larncieldarknciel440  there are no claims made by the moon landing conspiracy theorists that aren't easily refuted. So, to continue to believe their nonsense requires a lack of good research.
    1
  1087.  @larncieldarknciel440  3rd time trying to reply: there are no claims that Sibrel and others make that aren't easily refuted.
    1
  1088.  @larncieldarknciel440  so you haven't really done much in the way of research.
    1
  1089. @larncieldarknciel440  name two specific claims of Sibrel's that you think are evidence that the moon landings are fake, and I'll explain why that evidence is false.
    1
  1090.  @larncieldarknciel440  name 2 pieces of evidence that you think are proof of faked moon landings.
    1
  1091.  @larncieldarknciel440  give 2 examples, I'll refute them.
    1
  1092. "James Van Allen was there at the hanger where this was staged?" That guy, reporting on what his father allegedly told him, said that the deception was called "operation slam-dunk" The term "slam-dunk" wasn't invented until years after the claimed deception is supposed to have happened.
    1
  1093. ​ @prakkari the footage of the Earth when in-transit to the moon was from 2 TV broadcasts on day 1 and day 2 totaling 50 minutes. That unedited footage disproves Sibrel's scenario.
    1
  1094. ​@prakkari, you've got plenty of rocks in Iceland. Grab some, and on a sunny morning an hour or so after sunrise, try to reproduce Sibrel's shadow conundrum. It's not hard to do. It helps a lot if the big rock on the right has an overhang on its left side.
    1
  1095. I think you mean Starfish Prime, the radiation it released did temporarily raise the levels of radiation in the Van Allen Belts. Those elevated levels dropped long before the Apollo missions.
    1
  1096. Yes, and they, and the material left on the moon by Apollo, have been photographed by spacecraft, like the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter, from Lunar orbit in recent decades. Sibrel ignores facts that don't suit his conspiracy fairytale.
    1
  1097. @ihartsacto  I haven't seen any photos that appeared staged to me. Sibrel's shadows and rocks photo can be easily reproduced by anyone with a backyard and morning or evening sunlight, and has been, many times. The claimed secret footage in low earth orbit was actually taken from tv broadcasts done at the time, a 15 minute broadcast on day 1, and a 35 minute broadcast on day 2 of the mission. Those unedited broadcasts make it clear that Sibrel's claim of faking being in transit to the moon is false. When the word "talk"(?) is heard it was the day 1 broadcast. The spacecraft was 95,000km from Earth at the time, the round trip radio delay at that distance is 0.65 seconds. Throughout the rest of that broadcast it's obvious, in the conversation between the astronauts and Houston, that the delay is indeed less than a second, not the 4 seconds Sibrel claims. When the flag was waving it was in contact with an astronaut. Sunlight reflected from the lunar surface and other objects helped illuminate shadowed areas.
    1
  1098. Because you haven't offered up the billions required.
    1
  1099. @londonbabe2467  I have looked, as I said, I've reviewed all of Sibrel's claims. For instance, the footage that he describes as not being released to the public was taken originally from 2 recordings of live broadcasts, on day 1 of the mission at 93-95,000km from Earth, and a longer 35 minute broadcast on day 2, at a distance of about 250,000km. That footage was incorporated, in part, into the internal video report that Sibrel was boasting about getting his hands on.
    1
  1100. @londonbabe2467 Sibrel's claim that the word "talk"(?) Was spoken by a CIA man is without evidence. That piece of footage was on day 1 at 93-95,000km, at the time they were having communications issues, with fading and communications from mission control not being heard by the astronauts, (all this video and audio is on YouTube). So the voice of a technician trying to fix the issues being in the loop is no surprise. Also it should be noted that at that distance from Earth the round trip communications delay is only 0.65 seconds, not the 4 seconds Sibrel claims. In the other parts of the conversation, after the problems were solved, that delay of 0.65 seconds is there, but barely noticeable.
    1
  1101. @londonbabe2467 at 95,000km, a quarter of the way to the moon, given that the Earth is 3 times the diameter of the moon, means that the Earth would, at that distance, appear to the naked eye to be 12 times the diameter of the moon as seen from Earth. It would be about the size of the 10 inch diameter windows on the Apollo command module when viewed across the width of the command module.
    1
  1102. @londonbabe2467 Sibrel claims that the spacecraft is in low earth orbit at that time, but when you're in LEO you're passing over the Earth at nearly 8km/s, at that speed, if you're looking at a small part of the Earth as Sibrel claims, the motion over the Earth would be obvious, the part of the Earth visible would be rapidly changing.
    1
  1103. @londonbabe2467 want to talk about shadows on the moon? It's easy to make nonparallel shadows: go outside on a sunny morning or evening, stand with your back to the Sun form a "Y" with your arms. The shadows caste by your arms won't be parallel, they will be diverging, switch from a "Y" to an "A" and the shadows of your arms will be converging.
    1
  1104. @londonbabe2467 Sibrel claims Aldrin punched him because he asked Aldrin to swear on the Bible, another Sibrel lie. Sibrel pursued Aldrin, cornered him, got in his face and called Aldrin a coward and a liar. Sibrel got what he wanted.
    1
  1105. @londonbabe2467 the "we should get the CIA to wack him" was after Sibrel lied to get into Mitchell's home, he then accused Mitchell of working with the CIA to fake the moon landings, Sibrel persisted in his interrogation after being asked to leave, causing a considerable ruckus. The words spoken after he was finally ejected from the home were sarcasm, a lot of people would make the same sarcastic remarks after facing the accusations of working with the CIA and after Sibrel's aggressive intrusion.
    1
  1106. @londonbabe2467 Van Allen Belts? There isn't a single person who's studied the Van Allen Belts that says that they were impassable for the astronauts. The radiation levels, and type are not that high nor that penetrative (helium nuclei, protons and electrons), all mostly stopped by the centimeters of the shielding of the command module.
    1
  1107. @londonbabe2467 temperatures on the moon? The 6 landings all landed and departed in the local lunar morning, soon after sunrise, when temperature were mild, and, of course, those temperatures are only the top inch or so of the lunar regolith, the vacuum has no temperature and is very good insulation from temperature variations (as is a vacuum flask).
    1
  1108. @londonbabe2467 Sibrel lies through his teeth, people just don't often encounter someone like him who doesn't give a damn about the accuracy of his claims, and never shows doubt about his claims. He appears to be without a conscience.
    1
  1109. @londonbabe2467 I saw one youtube video in which Sibrel was confronted with a replication of his favorite "rocks with intersecting shadows" image. I've also replicated the image, so can you. The shadows cast by the rocks to the left and right of the astronauts' shadow could be seen, as anyone familiar with perspective would expect. The replication shown was very good and demonstrated how shadows can appear not to be parallel. Sibrel's reply was that cellphone cameras have fish eye lenses, he was firm and his certainty very convincing, sighting his expertise as a film maker (I can only find his name linked to his two anti-Apollo films). But you can easily test to see if your cellphone has a fish eye lens: Use the camera to look at straight lines, eg the join between a ceiling and a wall, the join between 2 walls. If it has a fish eye lens, those lines will look curved. Cellphones do not have fish eye lenses, Sibrel was lying again.
    1
  1110. ​@londonbabe2467 another one of Sibrel's lies is his claim that to get into a polar orbit a spacecraft has to launch from one of the poles (to avoid the worst of the Van Allen Belts). This is crap, a spacecraft can launch into any orbit that passes over its launch site. A polar orbit is a high inclination orbit that passes over both poles, traveling north to south and back again over the entire Earth. Which means that spacecraft can be launched from any launch site on Earth into polar orbits. Sibrel has never taken part in a debate with anyone qualified to challenge him on his nonsense. Certainly not Rogan or Owens, who are political people, not science, or engineering people.
    1
  1111. @londonbabe2467 several of my comments don't appear to show, such missing comments can usually be found under "newest" comments, you just have to scroll down to our discussion.👍
    1
  1112. @BwanaFinklestein  there is plenty of information available, including the levels of radiation exposure each crew was subjected to.
    1
  1113. @BwanaFinklestein  there are no claims the belts are impassable, the radiation is high enough to be fatal with prolonged exposure (weeks). Terms like "deadly" and "dangerous" have been used, but the use of those terms don't make the belts unsurvivable, any more than the media labeling a European heatwave "deadly" makes everyone who suffered through the last European heatwave dead.
    1
  1114.  @BwanaFinklestein  heatwaves have been described using the same words as Van Allen and others have use to describe the belts, yet Europe still has a few people who survived the last heatwave there.
    1
  1115.  @BwanaFinklestein  Sibrel strawmans continuously.
    1
  1116. Was the Saturn V real? Yes. Has their been another operational rocket as large since? No, because there's been no demand for one. Without the large rocket you can't send people to the moon. Aircraft were flying and cars driven long before they had computers. The fact all large aircraft and cars built today have computers doesn't mean computers are required. The Apollo spacecraft only required modest computing power, most of the computational power was in Houston, the results of the calculations they did transmitted to the spacecraft.
    1
  1117. The ban was rescinded by a government minister. While I think Candace is nuts on this, I absolutely support her right to free speech.
    1
  1118.  @56fairbank  I know.
    1
  1119. Sibrel is never available for debates or interviews with people who have the knowledge to challenge him.
    1
  1120. You misremember. There was only one camera covering Armstrong going down the ladder.
    1
  1121. @paulbeardsley4095  could be, but it was a stretch to think it a prop.
    1
  1122. You mean spend all that money to land men on the moon just to beat the soviets and be first? Yep, only governments would do that.
    1
  1123. ​@brucegorst8005 have you never seen any satellites at all? They're only really visible just before dawn and after dusk, when you're in darkness but because of their height, they're in sunlight. In rural areas, where light pollution isn't a problem, you can see satellites most evenings.
    1
  1124. @josegoncalves1565  I checked your claims about Ron Howard. As expected they're bs. There was an episode of Arrested Development where he, as a character, suggested the 1969 landing was fake. So, as usual, the conspiracy grifters tell fibs.
    1
  1125. 6 landing sites, Apollo's: 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 17.
    1
  1126. What information do you base that belief on?
    1
  1127. ​ @cessilvenex5681 unfortunately Sibrel is a real person. The fanatics just think he's Santa, making their fantasies come true.
    1
  1128. To astronomers and most people the firmament is the expanse of the night sky. To flat earthers it's some sort of mythical dome.
    1
  1129.  @dora966  Aldrin is not saying we didn't go to the moon. Another falsehood.
    1
  1130. @dora966  watch the 17.22 minute long video Zoey interviews Buzz Aldrin. It's a misrepresentation of that interview, with one of his replies being taken out of its context.
    1
  1131.  @Lauraaaaa719  I've looked at Sibrel's evidence in detail, I've looked at the evidence from other parties. Sibrel's is the evidence that doesn't stand up to close scrutiny.
    1
  1132. Owens just went down hugely in my judgment. Disgusting.
    1
  1133. ​​ @jmp4177 the 35 minute broadcast on the second day was sceduled, and watched by millions. At the time of the "talk" incident, they were about 95,000km from Earth and having communications issues. It's not hard to believe a stray word from a technician found it's way into the feed. The radio round-trip delay at that distance is about 0.65 seconds rather than the 4 seconds Sibrel claims, and throughout that broadcast it's obvious that the delay IS less than a second. So Sibrel's claim makes no sense.
    1
  1134. Where did you think Sibrel got his kidnapping story from?
    1
  1135. @mrghettodaddy7245  which countries had petrified wood that was claimed to be moon rocks? Why does air pressure decline with increasing altitude? Gravity says that is expected, the rate of pressure decline is as expected from physics and math, physics and math also say it'll decrease to a vacuum.
    1
  1136. @mrghettodaddy7245  the pressure gradient in the atmosphere and in the oceans disprove the flat Earth claims.
    1
  1137. @mrghettodaddy7245  a gas will expand if not contained, there is no law requiring that containment be a physical barrier, just as a magnetic field can contain a charged plasma, gravity can contain a gas. That's what the physics says. It's arrogant for someone such as yourself, and those whose words you repeat, with no advanced training in physics, to claim to know better than all the world's physicists.
    1
  1138.  @mrghettodaddy7245  gravity is the container. Why does air pressure decline with increasing altitude?
    1
  1139. @mrghettodaddy7245  E=mgh is a simple equation, it's the basis of much of industry and has been for over a century, without it our energy intensive civilization would fail. Such basic physics is an impossibility to flat earthers.
    1
  1140. ​@mrghettodaddy7245 why does air pressure decline with increasing altitude?
    1
  1141. @mrghettodaddy7245  gravity is the container, gravity explains why there is a pressure gradient, a physical container doesn't explain the gradient. You know that, so you know your argument is false. You lie.
    1
  1142.  @mrghettodaddy7245  a physical container does not cause the observed pressure gradient. So why is there a pressure gradient?
    1
  1143. @mrghettodaddy7245  that's a ludicrous claim, to maintain such a pressure gradient vast quantities of air would need to be produced at ground level, there would literally need to be hurricane force winds coming up out of the ground, spread a tarpaulin over the ground and it would fly into the sky. The lowest barometric pressures ever recorded at sea level are around 860 millibars. When such low pressures occur, hurricane force winds are created by the pressure gradient of 150 millibars over horizontal distances or hundreds of kilometers. Between sea level and an altitude of 10km, there's a pressure gradient of 750mB, 5 times the difference in pressure across a tenth of the distance. As I said, such a gradient would cause hurricane force winds. Gravity, compressing the air lower in the atmosphere with the weight of the air above is what allows the stable pressure gradient we observe. And from what are these vast quantities of air created at ground level created? As all this created air flys upwards into the sky, from high to low pressure, where does it disappear to? It can't remain under a dome, or air pressure would be rapidly increasing as a result of all the air created at ground level.
    1
  1144. @mrghettodaddy7245  pressure gradients at sea level of 150mB over distances of hundreds of kilometers create hurricane force winds. Between sea level and 10 kilometers in altitude there's a pressure gradient of 750mB. Without gravity pulling air down, that altitude pressure gradient would generate hurricane force winds.
    1
  1145. @mrghettodaddy7245  there would need to be a hurricane coming out of the ground to maintain such a pressure gradient. And where is all this air created supposed to go when it hits your dome over a flat Earth?? The vast quantities of additional air would cause a rapid increase in air pressure in your enclosed world.
    1
  1146. @mrghettodaddy7245  I see the effects of gravity all around me, it pulls everything towards the center of the Earth, including air, air molecules traveling upwards follow the same ballistic trajectory as a ball moving up, they slow come to a stop and then move back downwards. We see the same pressure gradient in the oceans as we see in the atmosphere, and for the same reason: the weight of water/air above compresses the water/air below it.
    1
  1147. @mrghettodaddy7245  you're also entitled to believe in your fairytale. But the fact is you can't explain how there can be a pressure gradient in the atmosphere and in the oceans without gravity causing the water/air above to weigh down on and create pressure in the water/air below it. With gravity, air, like everything else, is pulled down towards Earth's surface, air molecules moving upwards follow the same trajectory as a ball moving upwards, and are no more able to escape into the vacuum than the ball.
    1
  1148. So, do you think they spent all that money on training and spacecraft and, after the job was done and they had everything they needed to go, they decided not to bother? That instead, they'd create an elaborate conspiracy for fun?
    1
  1149.  @sebastianellis6110  you're the one who decided they looked like they were at a funeral. I (like most people) just thought they looked uncomfortable in front of the world's media. But that was the Apollo 11 crew from the very start, comfortable with engineering and science, but not great at people and social skills.
    1
  1150. @sebastianellis6110  "clearly I said I" Clearly, you didn't: "They looked like they were at a funeral".
    1
  1151. If the photos of the 6 moon landing sites by spacecraft from the US, South Korea, Japan, India, and China don't convince you, I guess nothing will.
    1
  1152. The Challenger disaster was the 25th space shuttle launch, all shuttle flights had civilian crews.
    1
  1153. ​@RealCandaceO perhaps you should talk to someone who can refute Sibrel's claims.
    1
  1154. @G58  do you imagine that the aluminum paint used on airfix models is the only aluminum paint available?
    1
  1155. What makes someone a "truth seeker" to you? To me it's about learning how the universe works, what makes people think and act as they do, it takes a lot of understanding science and psychology. Having studied those areas of knowledge, and having interests in rocketry and astronomy, I've no doubt that Sibrel makes a living lying through his teeth. How did you miss that?
    1
  1156. And have you not realized how much of it is nonsense?
    1
  1157. Several people have challenged Sibrel to debate his claims, Sibrel runs away, preferring to be unchallenged by sympathetic people like Owens.
    1
  1158. @Richard44BC  you can sometimes find missing comments by going to "newest" and scrolling back to find the thread of the discussion.
    1
  1159. The universe God created is far greater and more glorious than you choose to believe.
    1
  1160.  @VintageFootball32  so the books on flat Earth were actually saying the Earth is a globe?
    1
  1161. The moon landings are real. Sibrel creates his own "facts." I suggest Dave McKeegan and Humans of Earth, both on YouTube, for debunkings of his fictional evidence.
    1
  1162. Not true
    1
  1163. To reach Germany the signal has to be reflected off the ionosphere, to reach the moon from one of the three nasa ground stations with their 200 foot radio dishes was always line of sight. Incidentally, ham radio operators have been using the technique of moonbounce to communicate with others on the opposite side of the world since the 60's. Moonbounce is significantly more challenging than just sending to a receiver on the moon.
    1
  1164. Are you under the impression that anything Sibrel says is factual?
    1
  1165.  @nicolestanford4955  in a video I saw recently the claim was made that the one characteristic of flat earthers that stood out as their most dominant was their hubris. There are countless measurements and observations that can easily be made that refute the flat Earth. But flat earthers don't care, their hubris insulated them from that information and from reality.
    1
  1166.  @nicolestanford4955  your reply to @dansv1 reeks of hubris.
    1
  1167. ​ @nicolestanford4955 you've too much hubris.
    1
  1168. Neil Armstrong was one of the X15 pilots. His history as a test pilot is well documented.
    1
  1169.  @angelinalouis4356  the Soviets couldn't better the US by being second. China has only been in a position in recent years to push for manned lunar missions.
    1
  1170. The worst sin is hubris, the worst hubris is spiritual. You failed.
    1
  1171. I suspect I'll regret asking, but what do you "know"?
    1
  1172. @a.s.2426  thankfully your reply was the opposite of what I worried you were trying to say. Some strongly religious people, of which there have been many commenting, profess to "know" with certainty that the Earth is flat and the moon landings were faked. They don't "believe", they "know."
    1
  1173. Useless piece of information: There's a short story that features a character called Robet Steele who wins a race on the moon, turned out he was a robot.
    1
  1174. What evidence do you offer to support your claim that the film wouldn't survive?
    1
  1175. What footage are you referring to?
    1
  1176. @tylerd7330  even on that one he lies, claiming the punch was for asking Aldrin to swear on the Bible, when it was actually for Sibrel calling Aldrin a coward and a liar.
    1