and consider

are you familiar with "photorealism" ? if not google it. one can paint a photo that is literally indistinguishable from a photograph

you cannot tell the difference

and since nobody knows what the surface SHOULD look like

it doesnt matter

but that wasnt invented back then no?

yes. where i live in Switzerland we have one of the largest collections of art in the world. there are paintings from the 1600s that are photorealistic

it's amazing

you literally have to get 3inches from them to tell they are paintings

How do they make an image move

With like a gaint projector in the sky?

you mean the moon? or the NASA videos?

Moon

that we don't fully understand. we don't have the budget to fund R&D necessary

give us NASAs circa $20 billion budget and I can answer all your questions

but from the data we can access it supports a non solid moon model

wait so u say we didnt have technolegy back then

it wasn't us

read Genesis

Wdym

it's the most scientifically accurate book ever written. that coming from a PhD scientist and former atheist over 20 years

The rock band

?

the Bible

Genesis 1

the creation story

is 100% correct

science

in fact I'm writing a book about it

and possibly YT channel

wait so cuz 1 person wrote something and a 100 people record something.. doesnt the 100 look more solid evidence

Personal question i got ^

what do you mean by "100 people record something"?

Like alot more people worked so hard to fake something?

Its weird

like why

it's not when you think about who (((they))) are

and why they would lie

using the bible as source of evidence <:confused:625494374402228244>

I didn't say that.

I said the data suggest the moon is not solid