Comments by "Yazzam X" (@yazzamx6380) on "euronews" channel.

@thinkinsidetheboxsquarecir3303 - You effectively prove my points, thanks, where you demonstrate the classic ignorance of making this about NASA as if the 70 other government space agencies and private space companies and satellite companies around the world don't exist, much like sciences like Astronomy :-) So put your comments into context by explaining why you parroted the flat Earth believer claim about an atmosphere next to a vacuum, you know, the laws of physics that you falsely claimed were broken! Are you are flat Earth believer? If not, then why regurgitate their claims?
1
@thinkinsidetheboxsquarecir3303 - You said " it’s a one world government!" Ah yes, the classic conspiracy believer 'hiding behind your couch' paranoia that they're all evil and they're all in on it together :-D Where you have the privilege to sit comfortably posting your replies without being able to state anything terrible that those 'evil' governments have actually done to you or your family personally! I guess some people need danger in their life, they need something to fight against, and so when it's not there then any fantasy will do ;-) Besides, you avoided answering my last questions, which were and I quote "Are you are flat Earth believer? If not, then why regurgitate their claims?"
1
@thinkinsidetheboxsquarecir3303 - What do you think needs to be explained by logos using a silhouette of the Azimuthal Equidistant 2D projection map of a globe Earth, a projection map was was only jumped upon by flat Earth theorists because it stretches Antarctica around the outside and hence they claimed it to be their magical wall of ice. That's the same map that many flat Earth believers know as the AE map or the Gleason map, a map that Gleason himself says is a projection from a GLOBE Earth with TWO poles. So your point is what exactly? :-)
1
@thinkinsidetheboxsquarecir3303 - You still avoid answering two simple questions, which again were "Are you are flat Earth believer? If not, then why regurgitate their claims?" Why can't you just say "Yes", "No" or "I don't know the shape of the Earth"?
1
@thinkinsidetheboxsquarecir3303 - You said "what is your sudden obsession with “flat earth”? Don’t change the subject!" There is no obsession and it is on topic, since YOU brought up the question of an atmosphere next to the vacuum of space, something that only flat Earth believers question. You even said and I quote "if there’s a void (up there ^)", the key word being "IF". What makes you think there's any question about the existence of space? Again, it is only flat Earth believers who claim that space is fake. So when I see someone parroting certain flat Earth claims, then it is fair to ask that person if he/she is a flat Earth believer, and it shouldn't be a problem for that person to answer... unless he/she has something to hide :-)
1
@thinkinsidetheboxsquarecir3303 - You said "my question is about the Vector symbol that used on every country with a space program for a logo! Answer that , please" You were not specific before, and even then I'm still not clear what you're taking about, especially when you haven't even stated why you think it's significant (whatever it is).
1
@thinkinsidetheboxsquarecir3303 - Old enough you have watched all the Apollo missions live. And how old are you? Besides, you still haven't answered the flat Earth questions, nor explained why you question the existence of space or why you questions an atmosphere in the vacuum of space (i.e. the points that YOU made which brought flat Earth into this discussion).
1
@thinkinsidetheboxsquarecir3303 - You said "Why do you think all of the “separate and independent nations” all have the same vector symbols and logos for their space programs?!" and "my question is about the Vector symbol that used on every country with a space program for a logo!" Here's some space agency logos; is PERIOD gd FORWARDSLASH BhTA4I So what exactly is the 'Vector' that links all those logos please?
1
@thinkinsidetheboxsquarecir3303 - You said " joe Rogan isn’t a “Flat earther” last I checked and he is skeptical about NASA’s claims" WRONG. He used to be skeptical of the moon landings but then changed his mind upon examining the evidence. He now states, without any doubt, that men landed on the moon. But nice try ;-)
1
That's a video featuring NASA's Kelly Smith talking about the effect of Van Allen belt radiation upon the modern electronics of the Orion space capsule only, where they cannot risk sending people to the moon inside Orion if the electronics could fail, therefore that video spoke about thoroughly TESTING the Orion space capsule in space inside the belts FIRST before risking sending people through. Wouldn't you agree that's a common sense approach? :-) And they did that, sending Orion into the region of the belts with the highest radiation in 2014 and it aced that test, then Orion went through the belts to the moon and back to Earth on a 25 day mission to test all the systems in 2022 during the Artemis 1 mission. Therefore Orion is not proven to be safe for astronauts. Unfortunately, and typically, conspiracy theorists twisted what Kelly Smith said in that video knowing that many people would fall for it :-|
1
@SuperBroop - In other words you admit you cannot present a hoax claim that you are able to defend yourself. So case closed :-)
1
@SuperBroop - So you still cannot present a claim that you can debate here, hence you continue to prove my point perfectly. In future, I suggest you stick to topics that you actually understand. Do you think you can manage that? :-)
1
@SuperBroop - Thank you for conceding :-)
1
@SuperBroop - Nice projection kid :-)
1
@JulioCortazas-ui2dk - Forgive me my friend but I'm not really sure what you're trying to say here, perhaps because my last reply here was 2 years ago ;-) For example, you appear to be questioning the technology and yet during the 60s both the USA and USSR landed several unmanned spacecraft on the moon with even LESS computing power than what was available for the Apollo missions, proving that the computing power available was more than sufficient for the task. The technology was state of the art back then, it cost a fortune and wasn't available to ordinary consumers, and therefore there was no problem using that state of the art technology to get men to the moon.
1
@MAGATRON-DESTROY - It's 2024 and we can't send 100 passengers across the world at supersonic speeds and yet Concorde could do that, a passenger plane that first flew in 1969. So by your logic Concorde was fake :-) And don't reply with a list of reasons why Concorde had to end, because it you can manage that then you would have no problems working out why Apollo had to end if you actually tried!
1
@MAGATRON-DESTROY - So check out the unmanned Artemis 1 mission and read what it achieved in 2022, and then check the manned Artemis 2 mission :-)
1