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

  1. 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
  2. Try broadening your sources, I suggest Dave McKeegan.
    3
  3. 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
  4. There isn't a single claim from Sibrel about the moon landings that hasn't been completely refuted.
    3
  5. ​@kaone3151 none of the physics involved in spaceflight is surprising or unexpected to physicists.
    3
  6. Sibrel's claims are nothing but a fairytale, almost entirely fictional.
    3
  7. You actually bought Sibrel's fairytale 😅😅
    3
  8. There isn't a single claim he makes that isn't easily proven to be a fantasy. 😂😂
    3
  9. ​ @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
  10. @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
  11. It's certainly amazing that some people are so easily convinced by Sibrel's fairy tales.
    3
  12. You'll never find it, it doesn't exist.
    3
  13. 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
  14. Good grief. That wasn't a "moon launch" it was the shuttle Challenger, which was going to low Earth orbit.
    3
  15. 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
  16. ​@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
  17. @mirandasworld  you have no knowledge in the topic but think you know it all. Hubris.
    3
  18. 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
  19. 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
  20. 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
  21.  @websurfer5772  in the '60's Nasa's budget reached 4.5% of federal spending, compared to 0.5% of federal spending today.
    3
  22. 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
  23. 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
  24. ​ @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
  25. 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
  26. The CIA isn't interested in works of fiction.
    3
  27. ​​ @Naomiwatson8991 why do you believe that the components of the Saturn V - Apollo stack couldn't have taken men to the moon?
    3
  28. Russia, like numerous others, tracked all 9 manned lunar missions (6 of which had lunar landings).
    3
  29. 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
  30. @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
  31. @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
  32. @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
  33. @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
  34. @Elvin-m6l you either respect the actual facts available or you choose to believe in things contrary to the facts.
    3
  35. Antarctica is not off limits, it has thousands of tourists visit each year.
    3
  36. The moon landings liars are grifters like Sibrel, trying to cash in on conspiracy claims.
    3
  37. Current astronauts don't say that.
    3
  38. 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
  39. 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
  40. ​@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
  41. 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
  42. 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
  43. ​ @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
  44. Go listen to those who know the science and engineering of Apollo in detail. Those whom Sibrel will not debate.
    3
  45. ​ @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
  46.  @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
  47. Slander is a lie, those committing slander often receive threats and retaliation. Insults are also often lies, they can attract violent retaliation.
    3
  48. @prakkari  wot?! Movies show stuff that's not true?
    3
  49. @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
  50. What makes the Apollo landings ridiculous?
    3