Message from @Big T
Discord ID: 601967497918545940
I will watch it after my kids go to bed.
Let him make his summary guys.
give them summary, then tell me how you verified their validity.
Artemis program is being actively funded by both ESA and NASA. A close flyby in 2022 and a landing in 2024. Three test launches have already been made this year.
As difficult as it is, if I come to believe that i was wrong I will admit it. For now I don't think so. You don't have to agree with me, but, you guys (not all of you) don't have to be jerks about it. If someone said they believed the Earth was flat (I did not) then I would briefly explain why I think it is round. I would also at least be willing to hear them out. some of you would benefit from becoming a bit more open minded. None of us know everything. All of us can be wrong. That includes me and all of you. My last question is this. Is there really nothing about the Moon Landings that you thought did not add up? Even if you believe it, surely you still have some questions. Anyway, I have to go. Don't forget the Vaseline if you want to have another circle jerk
@DueyBear yeah but your evidence doesn’t count. Haven’t you watched his YouTube videos?
you never gave us your summary
we werent being jerks either
talk about blue balls
spend all that time typing only to respond with "but it's my opinion"
and to answer your question, no there is nothing about the landing that i find odd
and then playing the victim card
um ok?
pretty immature of you bro
so you've got nothing to back up your claims but to play the victim and accuse us of circle jerking
how is that any different from a feminist response to patriarchy theory?
Uh, what did I come back to....
Well that went downhill.
I got cancer from scrolling up, and reading through this.
All I was asking for was *any* specific criticism of the lunar lander footage. I feel very unsatisfied with this exchange.
I'm listening to the Owen clip @WilfredWit posted now.
Point 1: NASA claims to have erased much of the telemetry data from the landings during a budget crisis in the 70s when they reused the tapes.
Owen makes a joke about how it seems unlikely that they would have 'erased those tapes because there was a FRIENDS marathon'. His typical level of humor. I would class this as a throwaway-grade non-evidence.
'They've never not had a GIANT budget'--very subjective, but IMO this is just not true. NASA does not have what I would call a giant budget today and has never made up a significant fraction of the federal budget that I'm aware of since the Apollo program.
Point 2: 'You can't do a live broadcast from the Moon *now*'
The claim is that the technology and power requirements to broadcast a television program 60 miles means that it would have been impossible to broadcast the video signal from the Moon.
This claim would be true if that's what they were doing, but any halfway decent engineer can come up with the correct answer to that one in 2 seconds. They didn't *broadcast* from the Moon, they almost certainly *tightcast* from a parabolic dish antenna on the Moon to a much larger parabolic receiver on Earth. The broadcast was then sent using the normal TV broadcast system. The idea that everyone's TV set was picking up a live feed directly from the Moon, yeah, that would be dumb.
Point 2A: 'they have no power source' and 'they had to transmit through the Van Allen Belt'. Well, as pointed out above, they don't need a huge amount of power because they would be using a shaped antenna and a very high-gain receiver on the Earth side. And the Van Allen Belt is irrelevant for transmission because cosmic rays don't block radio signals.
Point 3: 'The Moon rocks are petrified wood/contain manmade metals or radioisotopes'
This one, I don't have a direct answer to. I'd have to look into it.
I doubt it's true basically because it's Owen Benjamin saying it, but that doesn't mean it's actually false. Even pathological liars with delusions of genius sometimes say true things.
Point 4: 'no other country ever went back' and 'it would be great for science because you could study space without an atmosphere' and 'I would sell all my possessions to go to the Moon':
There was no economic incentive to go back at the time, we can do zero g and partial-g science on the space station, and the status incentive is gone once the US made it there first. And until very recently there was no individual on Earth who could possibly hope to fund a private venture to the Moon. That is starting to change, and lo and behold, all of a sudden people are talking about space tourism and Moon bases, just as you'd expect.
We can study space from orbital telescopes for *far* less money than a Moon telescope and there is no benefit offered by being on the Moon.
Point 5: There was a lot of incentive to fake the landing because of Russia, etc.
This is equally good evidence that there was a lot of incentive to *actually land on the Moon*