318
319

We're supposed to believe U.S. suddenly lost interest in moon missions in 1972? (self.conspiracy)

DownUpOverAndBack が 投稿

Did you ever stop to consider this?

From 1968 to 1972, eight of nine Project Apollo missions took Americans out of Low-Earth Orbit. Six missions put men on the moon.

But then, in 1972, this just ... stopped. And, with the exception of unmanned probes, manned missions have consisted of putzing around in Low-Earth Orbit ever since.

You mean to tell me that in the nearly half-century since we were last on the moon, with all of the advances in scientific understanding in that time, neither the U.S. nor any other space-capable power had an interest in returning again?

To me, this defies credulity.

My theory (admittedly with no evidence to speak of to back it up) is that the U.S. has never stopped going to the moon, has gone continually since the Apollo days, but has been going via unpublicized, top secret military missions. Probably initiating someplace other than Kennedy Space Center in Florida and Vandenburg AFB in California. And that the U.S. has colonized, weaponized and probably begun mineral extraction on the moon, if not other places in our Solar System.

I believe our space capabilities on the defense side, including our space colonization capabiities, are FAR beyond what NASA has shown the public.

To me, this almost isn't in the realm of conspiracy theory; it's more logic and deduction. And again, if you don't believe something LIKE this is happening, you believe we put men on the moon six times in less than four years, then gave it up, then said "Nah, not interested" for 45 years since.

上位 200 件のコメント全て表示する 306
並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A

[–]bannanaflame 78 ポイント79 ポイント  (97子コメント)

Japan says they can make it in 2030

[–]DownUpOverAndBack[S] 87 ポイント88 ポイント  (68子コメント)

It kind of makes you wonder why it's so difficult and long-range, when we were doing it regularly back when we didn't have wireless telephones and when our computers were the size of school buses.

[–]globalism_sux 57 ポイント58 ポイント  (61子コメント)

It also took us a long time, and we had the best rocket scientists and an enormous Cold War budget.

The real reason we haven't been back in so long is Russia stopped trying, and we can do space research for a lot cheaper in low Earth orbit.

[–]Drooperdoo 19 ポイント20 ポイント  (10子コメント)

It didn't take us a long time. Kennedy announced it as a goal in 1963, and it was done (five years ahead of schedule) in 1969.

That's a mere 6 years.

(Ask yourself how many government programs happen five years ahead of schedule. It was almost as many years ahead of schedule as it took to do [five versus six years].) Getting it done that quick kind of implies how easy it was, right? Kind of like if a student was given 2 hours to take a test, and he does it in 45 minutes. The speed implies that it was a cakewalk.

[–]twsmith 20 ポイント21 ポイント  (7子コメント)

He announced it as a goal in 1961.

[–]globalism_sux 12 ポイント13 ポイント  (5子コメント)

And by that time we already had investment in rocket technology for space flight.

[–]Test_user21 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (4子コメント)

And by that time we already had our Nazis working on rocket technology for space flight since '45.

[–]Drooperdoo 10 ポイント11 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Thanks for the clarification. You rock!

Here's an upvote for catching my gaffe.

(We should never allow our own ego to get in the way of the truth.) Good work, you insufferable egghead! I stand corrected.

[–]DontTreadOnMe16 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Or he just bullshitted his way through the test...

[–]DontTreadOnMe16 9 ポイント10 ポイント  (8子コメント)

This is the same canned response I hear every time this is brought up, almost word for word.

Why would Russia just stop trying after we were going their regularly? Militarily speaking, it makes no sense.

[–]benjwgarner 35 ポイント36 ポイント  (1子コメント)

The moon isn't a big military asset, and it's hugely expensive. It was a scientific and propaganda victory.

[–]DontTreadOnMe16 22 ポイント23 ポイント  (0子コメント)

propaganda victory

Indeed.

[–]LolWhatDidYouSay 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Thing is, Russia did stop trying to go to the moon.

[–]sidneylopsides 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (0子コメント)

They couldn't make a rocket to do it, the they lacked ability to make large engines like on the Saturn V so tried the N1 that used 30 smaller engines as it's first stage. It never had a successful launch and cost way too much. There doesn't seem to be any military advantage to being on the moon, it's quite far away. LEO is where you'd want to be, cheaper, and closer.

[–]globalism_sux 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (3子コメント)

What advantage does it make militarily to get to the moon?

[–]briangilroy 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (1子コメント)

I think that the advantage is that by doing so team "America" had a win, and could shout "USA USA USA" and feel proud. This feeling of being proud of being a part of something, that same person is more likely to fight till the death in a battlefield, in a war, who's purpose is questionable at best. They need a lot of these impressionable youngsters to sign up for the military. Never mind WHY you're on a particular mission. You follow orders without question. You could actually die. Yet if you start to unravel the twisted mess that resulted with you about to face enemy gunfire.. you will find a trail of people making money, lots of money. They make this money weather you live or die. Most of these people have a financial incentive for you to be there. These same people, with this financial incentive, also are in charge of deciding if you go or not. Fuck not asking questions! Never stop stopping to think

[–]Bernie_beats_trump 8 ポイント9 ポイント  (2子コメント)

the best rocket scientists

http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/space_launch_system.png

[–]globalism_sux 7 ポイント8 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Yeah, some of the most prominent minds in the field at the time were Germans. It doesn't diminish, or negate the accomplishment.

I'm not sure whether that was a point you were making or not, but well... there it is.

コメントをもっと表示する (37 返事)

    [–]lucycohen 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (3子コメント)

    It was all filmed in a studio, there was no way of going there back then, the footage has all been fully debunked

    [–]calliflower 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (2子コメント)

    haha, unfortunately, that may very well be the truth.

    I've seen an interview of Ron Pearlman (hollywood actor) where he says he does believe America went to the moon (can he really question that in front of the camera ?), but always asked himself about the footage. You know, you see that guy, Aldrin, getting off the spaceship and bouncing on what is supposed to be the Moon's surface, but then, how was this video shot ? There must have been someone who landed beforehand to set all the recording material, and record these "first steps". How did this whole scene play out ?

    [–]Neoreloaded313 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    The second man on the moon was filmed by the first man on the moon, Neil Armstrong.

    The camera filming Neil Armstrong was attached to the outside leg of the lander.

    [–]RobotCzars 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

    https://qph.ec.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-7573efc91354b9ae1bc2290e1a637eef.webp

    He pulled a lanyard and lowered the Modularized Equipment Stowage Assembly (MESA) which had a camera on it. Aldrin pushed a button inside to activate it. The camera is the black lens on the top of that flip down panel sticking out from the test lander in the photo. That transmission was broadcast directly to a relay station in Australia where it went to the world on TV. Aldrin took more pictures from inside that had to be developed later after returning.

    コメントをもっと表示する (2 返事)

      [–]codaclouds 16 ポイント17 ポイント  (20子コメント)

      The "space race" started in 1957. The US supposedly landed on the moon in 1969. That's 12 years. Why is it going to take Japan a full year longer than that when technology and know-how should be better now?

      [–]Sambam18 25 ポイント26 ポイント  (17子コメント)

      Because they don't have a practically unending Cold War budget?

      [–]MildElevation 18 ポイント19 ポイント  (14子コメント)

      That said it logically shouldn't be nearly as expensive. Materials are far more advances, the calculations are for the most part already done and proven, and the janitor has more computing power in his pocket than mission control did back in the late 60's.

      [–]heavyheavylowlowz 27 ポイント28 ポイント  (13子コメント)

      No component of Apollo would pass today's safety requirements - you have to redesign everything anyway, and with larger safety margins. And redesigning it with new more advanced materials will also require new designs, testing, etc., and on top of that the new advanced materials are typically far more expensive then what was used back then,

      And there is no point in just repeating the Apollo landings as they were. You want more equipment, better equipment, a longer stay there, more samples taken and so on. All that increases the cost.

      [–]IAmMadeForThisShit 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (9子コメント)

      No component of Apollo would pass today's safety requirements

      Where can I get a copy of these safety requirements that you refer to?

      [–]heavyheavylowlowz 24 ポイント25 ポイント  (8子コメント)

      http://www.lpi.usra.edu/lunar/documents/MSC-03976.pdf

      There's a 182 page safety report on it

      But just like anything, over time and with improvements, safety requirements are increased, simply because they can be due to the improvements themselves.

      Why would you want to launch a mission based off of Apollo safety requirements, when tech and science today allow for even safer missions. This is what would also add to the cost.

      [–]IAmMadeForThisShit 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (7子コメント)

      today's safety requirements

      links a document from 1971

      Where can I get a copy of "today's" safety requirements that you refer to?

      [–]heavyheavylowlowz 11 ポイント12 ポイント  (6子コメント)

      There maybe some in the workings, but to my knowledge, there are no current government safety requirements for a manned moon mission since there are no missions currently or tentavily planned.

      My point being, there will need to be new safety requirements given all the new equipment, materials, designs, hard/software, procedures and practices.

      Striving to pass those requirements while implementing the new tech available will be costly. Essentially scrapping most of the tangible ground work laid down. The science is there and so is some of the engineering, but beyond that, it would be a whole new endeavor.

      Model T Ford vs modern car. The engine works the same for the most part in both. But a lot of other stuff has changed allowing for higher safety requirements.

      [–]MildElevation 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

      Of course, but it greatly helps if you know what you're designing for and what challenges will be encountered. Things don't add up no matter how you look at it.

      コメントをもっと表示する (2 返事)

        [–]lucycohen 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (0子コメント)

        In the 1960's a cold war budget could buy you computers the size of a room which were less powerful than our pocket calculators are now

        [–]CharlieHume 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

        Wait what is your point? They don't have the tech or the money to do it faster.

        [–]kickaxe88 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (3子コメント)

        Japan's probably gonna be a deadzone by then

        [–]DontTreadOnMe16 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (2子コメント)

        Yea it's amazing how people still don't talk about the fact that there's a massive unresolved problem going on every single day there.

        [–]IAmMadeForThisShit 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (0子コメント)

        Fukussssssshhhhhhhhhhhima

        [–]mastersyrron 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (0子コメント)

        First rule of Fukushima is you don't talk about Fukushima.

        [–]Herxheim 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (0子コメント)

        $10 on trump saying we'll do it in 2029.

        [–]HideFoundHide 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (0子コメント)

        In 1980s agencies talked about bases in 2000. In 2000s they were talking about going back in 2010 and during Obama's term they got to funding a project but scrapped it (Surely that funding is accounted for).

        If you are not familiar with a bait and switch or dangle the carrot exercises it would be worth reviewing them. Either they are doing or they are not doing. They have not done until they do.

        The supposed Moon Landing happened within 6 years. In 1960s/70s. They have all kinds of launch vehicles capable of the mission (some not disclosed to public). If they were going they'd go. To logically explain this you can entertain all kinds of ideas. But to think in 1960s they devised and launched a Moon Mission in 6 years but we can't now is nonsense.

        [–]Rayfloyd 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

        I'm wary of every news that set their date on 2030. They are all doing this at the moment. Most of them end up being disinfo or half-truths

        [–]smokinbluebear 37 ポイント38 ポイント  (24子コメント)

        Funny to watch the Apollo 11 astronauts in their "press conference" 1 month later...

        Hard to believe that Neil Armstrong specifically chose to be buried at sea (not at Arlington, where his grave would become a tourist attraction for propaganda).

        (waiting for photos of the rover USA left on the moon)

        [–]DontTreadOnMe16 11 ポイント12 ポイント  (8子コメント)

        I love this. The only photos of the Apollo sites they've released show blurry dots on a low-resolution satellite image. We're going to get to a point soon where you're average citizen will be technologically capable of looking up there with such magnification and clarity and easily see the sites. Either we did go and they'll all really be there, or NASA is gonna have some 'splainin to do.

        [–]aaaaa2222 7 ポイント8 ポイント  (0子コメント)

        Exactly. Its 2017 and the only photo evidence of our "moon artifacts" are blurry pixels.

        [–]reddit_aol_com 14 ポイント15 ポイント  (6子コメント)

        We put a reflective plate on the moon that you can bounce a laser off to test some scientific tools. I think gps or something. But there is physical evidence we have been to the moon.

        [–]DontTreadOnMe16 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (3子コメント)

        The Russians placed a reflective mirror on the moon with unmanned crafts. This is no way proves we walked on the moon. What other physical evidence are you referring to?

        [–]drk_etta 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (1子コメント)

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regolith

        The "particles" that make up the "sandy" surface of the moon are reflective enough to bounce a laser off of with test scientific tools.... That would be why we can see the moon at night... Cause it reflects the sun's light... If the sun which is 92.96 million miles away from earth can reflect light on the earth, shouldn't we be able to shine a highly directional light beam and detect it's reflection back here on earth?

        [–]OwenMerlock 8 ポイント9 ポイント  (9子コメント)

        He was buried at sea? What?

        [–]smokinbluebear 13 ポイント14 ポイント  (8子コメント)

        Neil Armstrong chose to be cremated and buried at sea...by the US Navy.

        [–]SpongeBobSquarePants 72 ポイント73 ポイント  (3子コメント)

        by the US Navy.

        He was, after all, a naval officer.

        [–]MattseW 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (3子コメント)

        What in the world is that search engine?

        [–]Fuckaduckfuckaduck 22 ポイント23 ポイント  (2子コメント)

        duckduckgo.com

        It doesn't track your search queries nor does it track your IP. They also don't censor their search results. I.E; they don't hide things like google will.

        It's what most of the conspiracy researchers and theorists use. Myself included.

        [–]MattseW 9 ポイント10 ポイント  (0子コメント)

        Username checks out

        [–]vpwu 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

        and best of all the !g !i !w !ud !imdb etc. functions

        [–]Thy_Weapon_Of_War 15 ポイント16 ポイント  (4子コメント)

        That bizarre press conference was one of the biggest smoking guns (of many) demonstrating that the Apollo "moon landings" were a total hoax/fraud. The astroNOTs acted like hostages fearing for their lives, with solemn faces --- like men who were ashamed of perpetrating a fraud, and afraid of doing anything to spill the beans on the fraud.

        Here for those interested: https://youtu.be/9tjCP3myofE

        [–]Stroobsey 9 ポイント10 ポイント  (0子コメント)

        Fuck that was painful to watch.

        [–]snapper1971 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (0子コメント)

        It's also possible that the three military officers weren't used to being cross examined by the press or used to the situation of being on camera like this.

        Media training was pretty rudimentary in the late 60s and really didn't become a widespread practice for a while afterwards. Whilst I agree that they do not look the happiest of souls, they are in an alien environment for them - they're used to military protocols and ways of doing things, the expressive exuberant displays we see regularly on the news are the manufactured reality that has been developed to replace the rather reserved reaction of these men.

        There are questions that need answers about the apollo missions, but leaping to the conclusion that people from the 1960s don't react like contestants on a reality TV show is because they are being threatened with imminent execution is a leap too far. People were more reserved back then. Things have changed because of the way narratives have been manufactured to 'appear' normal when they are anything but.

        コメントをもっと表示する (2 返事)

          [–]stopsettling 9 ポイント10 ポイント  (0子コメント)

          I'll just leave this here.

          http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB479/docs/EBB-Moon01_sm.pdf

          [–]Prgjdsaewweoidsm 46 ポイント47 ポイント  (7子コメント)

          You can verify that the government is not maximizing opportunities in this area by seeing that it's been technically feasible for decades to create cheaper access to space. We could build:

          Orbital Ring

          Launch Loop

          Sky Hook

          and lots of other ideas. All technically feasible, no need for advanced materials, etc. All would allow NASA to send tens or hundreds of times the current number of missions to space.

          Now, let's remember who pushed space exploration in the first place? JFK. The guy they shot. So, there must be something about space exploration and the imagination and economic growth it creates, that the elites hate.

          The fact is, they hate humanity, and they don't want economic growth. Listen to some of these "environmental" movements, and it's obvious it has nothing to do with protecting the environment, it's about keeping the population poor, dumb, and servile.

          Prince Phillip (deeply involved in founding WWF) said "In the event that I am reincarnated, I would like to return as a deadly virus, to contribute something to solving overpopulation"

          The fact is, building a non-rocket space launch system would generate double-digit economic growth for decades. We could put our solar panels in space, where they produce 10x as much energy due to the cold and greater light exposure. We could mine asteroids and bring back hundreds of trillions in materials that are extremely uncommon on earth.

          Utterly unacceptable to the anti-human elites. Which is exactly why we must demand it.

          [–]edjani29 11 ポイント12 ポイント  (0子コメント)

          All of this because of the human ego...

          [–]a1s2d3f4g5t 12 ポイント13 ポイント  (4子コメント)

          this a little off topic, but it kills me that people pretend JFK wasn't an elite. the kennedy prodigy still are living off of trusts.

          he required everyone to dine in tails at the whitehouse.

          [–]kingofthemonsters 16 ポイント17 ポイント  (2子コメント)

          They did blow his brains out, killed his little brother, and then killed his son for good measure. But yeah, they did eat real good while they were alive.

          コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

            [–]Vault32 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

            I don't think they think it's unacceptable- but I do believe they are keen to keep us in the dark and I'm fairly certain they're researching ways to get off this ball themselves after they've tapped it and need to escape the angry starving horde. Them poo-pooing space travel and research is just a cover. It's already well underway

            [–]WarlordNorm 16 ポイント17 ポイント  (0子コメント)

            At the time Nixon was spending so much on the Vietnam war that he was taking money from every where, the NASA budget was a big target of his.

            [–]joe_jaywalker 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (5子コメント)

            For any idiots saying there's no reason to go to the moon, they must not have told NASA which states on its website the importance of return missions, former NASA astronauts who stress how returning to the moon is a necessary step in further space exploration, or the handful of other countries including India, China, Russia, Israel, and Japan, which have either expressed desire to send men to the moon or are allegedly in the preparation process for such future missions.

            Edit: Not to mention it's fucking common sense that we wouldn't just go to the nearest celestial body six times and not even see the whole thing and then just forget about it and go to Mars which is 140x farther away, let alone the tremendous profit that would be made from additional moon trips...

            Edit 2: Here's just one of many examples, former NASA astronaut Don Pettit says the next logical step in space travel is to go back to the moon

            [–]laserhan123 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (1子コメント)

            NASA can say that want to go to the moon, but NASA is also not in charge of how much money they are given.

            let alone the tremendous profit that would be made from additional moon trips...

            Ummmm.... Profit? The apollo program cost roughly 24.5 billion, which is about 10x that amount accounting for inflation.

            Even if the moon were made of like, solid diamond, it likely woudnt be profitable to go get any of it.

            [–]joe_jaywalker 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

            It's easy to find figures about how much the missions cost, but of course those are the numbers for what a real mission would have cost, not a fake Apollo space program, which is what we had.

            In fact one obvious reason to fake it other than to ensure the crew's safety would have been to avoid this hefty price tag, some of which they of course still had to pay in order to fake the missions.

            It's harder to find figures for how much profit would have been made, but undoubtedly was immense -- rather than because of mining the moon's resources, it came from prime time television ratings, merchandise, public speaking engagements and corporate sponsorships/endorsements, and in the future would come from all of the above plus commercial flights to the moon which you see discussed in some kind of popular science article every now and then (like this one).

            Of course their budget has been slashed to the point that they probably can barely afford to keep the swimming pools running that they fake space station activities in. But ask yourself if you honestly think NASA ended up with more or less money after 1972 than they had before 1969.

            http://www.thespaceshop.com

            https://shopnasa.com

            https://www.ebay.com/b/Apollo-Exploration-Mission-Collectibles/13903/bn_3027458

            コメントをもっと表示する (3 返事)

              [–]ReptilianDystopia 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (1子コメント)

              Look up the Secret Space Program and Solar Warden.

              [–]arrestofjudgment 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (0子コメント)

              & recall NASA stands for "Never A Straight Answer"

              [–]matresscache 7 ポイント8 ポイント  (3子コメント)

              Any possibility of military presence on the moon? Especially with the dark side of the moon aspect

              [–]Mageant 8 ポイント9 ポイント  (1子コメント)

              According to the claims of Corey Goode and other there are many bases on the dark side of the moon, including both our own and ETs. The main human base is the LOC (lunar operations command) which grew out of a Nazi base.

              [–]johnydolittle 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (3子コメント)

              two facts:

              • The moon has one sixth the gravity of the earth, so an average man could jump 9 1/2 feet above the ground. source

              • In low earth orbit, gravity is only about 10 percent less than on the surface. Weightlessness is due to the centripetal force caused the speed of the object in low earth orbit. So low earth orbit is not even close to escaping earth's gravity. source

              [–]benjwgarner 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (2子コメント)

              No, weightlessness in LEO is caused by freefall (orbiting is freefall).

              [–]johnydolittle 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (1子コメント)

              I don't want to split hairs. The point is:

              Using this formula, you can calculate gravity at 350km to be 8.8 m/s2. It is 9.8m/s2 at the surface. This is not even close to zero.

              I think Wernher Von Braun proposed assembling the vehicle in orbit because the rocket size needed to go directly to the moon would be "taller than the Empire State Building—and ten times the weight of the Queen Mary.".

              [–]Roarian 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

              It should be noted that he's talking about a single-stage rocket, not the multi-stagers that ended up being used. That makes a rather significant difference!

              [–]SQUID_FUCKER 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (1子コメント)

              For me, it's either we never landed on the moon in the first place or we're still going there in secret. There is no in-between. It doesn't make sense.

              [–]swansong19 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

              I guess if we wanted to be open to all possibilities we could have run into someone/thing out there that told us to fuck off and stay in our own yard.

              You would think that you might want to at least build some type of jumping off point for trips farther out into space.

              [–]perfect_pickles 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (3子コメント)

              Wagging the Moondoggie, David McGowan.

              he is about 90% right in his deductions and conclusions.

              [–]chopsuey3 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (1子コメント)

              Everyone should read this. Outstanding work from McGowan.

              [–]DownUpOverAndBack[S] 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

              Just now checking this out, and, yeah, it was like I was channeling his writing on this topic without realizing it.

              [–]bunbun777 10 ポイント11 ポイント  (6子コメント)

              I literally cannot believe that NASA accidentally destroyed all the original film of the moon landings. But that's what they said happened who am I to question any of this?

              [–]chopsuey3 12 ポイント13 ポイント  (0子コメント)

              It is astounding. And not believable.

              [–]aaaaa2222 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (1子コメント)

              Well thats what happens when your "proof" was filmed in Hollywood.

              If it were a real film, it would have been arguably the most important and precious example of human achievement since the dawn of humanity.

              If it were a real film, it never in a million years would have been allowed to even come close to susceptibility of human "accident".

              It would have been meticulously copied a hundred times over and held behind the same kind of security that nuclear launch controls are secured with.

              But none of that happened because the few people high enough in the chain to even handle the originals, were also high enough in the power structure to know its only value was as a propaganda piece.

              A propaganda piece that the natural evolution of technology would undoubtedly disprove. Not to mention that nobody back then could have even conceived how far technology would evolve over the next couple decades.

              They probablt assumed they would all be long dead before technology caught up and once the opposite happened, of course they had to destroy the smoking gun with fingerprints all over it.

              Even if I were to concede that everything about the Apollo missions was 100% legit and more or less happened exactly how NASA claimed, I would have to be unspeakably naive to criticize people who correctly point out the insane number of remarkable coincidences that all "just so happen" to work in favor of NASA being unable to prove it happened.

              And before the same talking points get spewed at me:

              • bouncing lasers off the moon: doesnt require the Apollo missions, the soviets put reflectors up there during their unmanned missions

              • moon rocks: quite convenient considering NASA would be the gatekeeper of "verification", and there would be no REAL moon rocks for comparison if we only have manufactured fakes

              • "such a massive conspiracy would be impossible": not if you understand what compartmentalization is

              • "the Russians never called us out!": according to who? Are people so naive that the believe the US government would have allowed any naysayers to get any press or mainstream media attention

              • "but a viral video on youtube told me that it would be harder to fake than to actually go": that guys argument relies on knowing how hard it would be to really go there, which we wouldnt know if we couldnt go. So his argument relies on the assumption that we did go. Which is exactly what is being questioned in the first place.

              • "but there are pictures of the stuff we left there": no, there are random amorphous pixels on a blurry pixelated photo

              The internet is full of illogical arguments that support NASA and millions of people who simply want to believe what they were taught in school and have never spent even an hour of their lives researching any aspect of the NASA missions.

              [–]Roarian 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

              It would have been meticulously copied a hundred times over

              It was copied, though. That's why everyone specifies originals - the footage still exists.

              Also, it only applies to the first mission, not the followups, which actually use better cameras than the first...

              [–]Roarian 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

              I mean, copies exist & it was broadcast on television so it's not like the footage doesn't exist at all. All the original film would be signals received on earth & recorded there so it's not like they'd be substantially different, we're not talking about like huge film canisters that were on board a spaceship...

              [–]overtaxedoverworked 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

              That's because they didn't ...

              [–]PrimalFrog 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (0子コメント)

              the japanese will be first

              [–]5dreality 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (3子コメント)

              NASA has great ideas on their own webpage but no one ever looks... example, they even state that we have the ability to build a Space Elevator today. Section 4.2 describes the version of a LEO space elevator that can be built today.

              They also have a link with information and research about solar panel arrays that could power the US and pay themselves off in 7 years. If anyone is interested in that link, let me know and Ill go find it

              [–]SgtBrutalisk 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (2子コメント)

              The idea of space elevator was stolen from Isaac Asimov.

              [–]FeenixArisen 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (0子コメント)

              What the... Are you serious? The great sci-fi writers from that era were hardcore scientists, they simply knew that all of these things were possible. They created the concepts of pretty much everything we have for technology today. To say that NASA 'stole' the idea is laughable and absurd. Oh my God they didn't just steal the idea for Waldos they even stole the name!!!

              [–]laserhan123 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

              cause he had the budget to implement it?

              [–]a1s2d3f4g5t 14 ポイント15 ポイント  (5子コメント)

              we never went to the moon.

              the moon footage was filmed in the top secret lookout moutain military movie studio at the very top of laurel canyon in hollywood. filming began just before the horde of army brat "counter culture" iconic rock stars descended on laurel canyon in 1966. they created the acid laced circus at the bottom of the canyon as a distraction. their handlers were frank zappa and pappa john phillips.

              i'm not sure why they stopped filming in 1972, maybe too much attention was starting to be paid the top of the canyon because of manson in 1969, maybe it was getting too hard to handle the "cast" members flitting around the country all the time on tour, maybe the fact that except for the first album of thevsongs they showed up with, they never wrote any new song that was any good, lessening their value.

              probably it was due to nixon having to resign and their not wanting to risk a future administration not being on board, along with the fact that more and more people had color tvs that would make faking it harder.

              background

              the entire group were children of intelligence community parents. they grew up on military bases, several went to school together. they could not play their instruments (the wrecking crew session band played all of the mussic on their records--all the songs for all the bands).

              at that time there was no reason why musicians would move to LA, let alone laurel canyon. there were no clubs and no record companies, those were in nashville, detroit, and NYC. only one of the bands showed up as a "band," the doors, but they had never been interested in music before they showed up, had not been a band before they showed up, and could not play their instruments.

              the members of the byrds didn't know each other before they "cut" their album and they didn't even have instruments. the only reason the singing on their records good is due to extensive overdubbing.

              many of the rock gods had auditioned for the monkeys. seriously.

              laurel canyon went from a quiet, sleepy community to a raucous, debached, non-stop acid fueled party. until it showed up in laurel canyon, acid had been a CIA drug. the acid in the canyon was all dispersed for free by some long bearded joker, who also had just popped up there out of nowhere in 1966.

              the scene stayed in the lower canyon, revolving around zappa's house and phillips' house, drawing attention away from the top of look out mountain. anything out of the ordinary anywhere in the canyon was written off as the product of a drug addled mind. during this time the lookout mountain studio was operating 24 hours a day.

              with the exception of crosby, all of the class of the 1966 founding generation was dead by 1973 (gram parsons and case elliot were the last in1973). class of 1966 got there when appollo started and left when it ended.

              they may not even have known what they were doing there. when asked, none of knew why they showed up except for feelings, hunches, being pulled. maybe they weren't told. maybe they were graduates of MKULTRA.

              edit--typos

              [–]thecajunone 8 ポイント9 ポイント  (4子コメント)

              Always thought the whole not landing on the moon thing was crazy until I saw the video of the astronauts trying to use screens and filters to make earth seem super far away and talking about it on camera. Insanity.

              [–]aaaaa2222 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (0子コメント)

              There are two types of people:

              People who have never actually researched any of NASA's claims

              People who have

              Most NASA supporters are in the first group.

              [–]conz 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (2子コメント)

              do you have links of this stuff?

              [–]FnordFinder 22 ポイント23 ポイント  (6子コメント)

              Well, it's not really fair to say the US "lost interest." There are still lunar probes being actively sent to the moon. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_lunar_probes#2010.E2.80.93present

              It's also ignoring that many other allied countries send missions to the moon, which can also be seen through that link. Information which is more than likely shared with American scientists and researchers.

              I believe that the US shifted it's focus to more broad-space ideas rather than lunar-based ones simply because of the economic reasoning behind it. The asteroid belt and Mars, for example, would hold an incredibly vast amount more resources than the moon would.

              [–]DownUpOverAndBack[S] -3 ポイント-2 ポイント  (5子コメント)

              In other words, you believe The Company Line. Fair enough.

              But doesn't doing low-earth orbits time and again seem like a rather large step backward from what we'd been doing?

              And doesn't it seem, almost five decades after the last trip to the moon, that it wouldn't be difficult to find new goals/justifications to go back? Hell, go back just to get better pictures. Go back to rally your divided country around something again.

              [–]FnordFinder 21 ポイント22 ポイント  (0子コメント)

              I mean, if you want to call it "the company line" that's fine, but my point is just one of medium and long-term benefit. On an economic scale and a national security one.

              Your point about pictures seems moot to me. I already showed you that the US and other countries are actively sending probes to the moon for a variety of reasons. Those probes are more than capable of getting pictures of all sorts.

              Go back to rally your divided country around something again.

              Why would the United States be rallied by doing something it had already accomplished decades earlier? There is nothing to be gained for the investment and the risks.

              Focusing on places like Mars, somewhere where people have yet to visit, is worth far more as both a "rallying cry" and as a cultural win for the US. Being the first people to go to another planet will be an enormous accomplishment, and the first country that gets there will have global admiration.

              While the moon provides, what? Some pictures that we can already get and some more rock samples that we can also already get? It just doesn't really make sense to me on any reasonable level.

              [–]mmob18 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (0子コメント)

              Go back to rally your divided country around something again.

              They could do this with Mars but no one gives a shit about going to the moon anymore, we did that nearly 50 years ago.

              [–]throwawayforOMC00000 7 ポイント8 ポイント  (0子コメント)

              Lmao I love how your theory with absolutely no proof is somehow more credible than the proof the other person posted

              [–]I_AM_SNABB 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

              What about cassini? Juno? They are far from low earth orbit

              [–]snapper1971 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

              Microgravity has more potential than the huge pile of cinders that is the moon?

              [–]Tacofangirl 15 ポイント16 ポイント  (12子コメント)

              I don't believe we ever went in the first place. If the technology is 50 years old, why has no other country done any manned moon missions? Japan and India are trying to but admit it will take decades.

              [–]fuckthisfuckingworld 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (10子コメント)

              It is very very expensive and there's no benefit from it

              [–]LAcumDodgers 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (9子コメント)

              Haha ok sure

              [–]fuckthisfuckingworld 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (6子コメント)

              Elaborate please

              [–]aaaaa2222 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (3子コメント)

              You are parroting an illogical NASA talking point that only makes sense amongst the hordes of people too lazy to actually research NASA's claims.

              Let me guess the next one

              "But so many people would all have to be in on the lie!"

              Not if you understand the concept of compartmentalization.

              コメントをもっと表示する (2 返事)

                コメントをもっと表示する (2 返事)

                  コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

                    [–]TheFlusteredcustard 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                    I think the mere fact that Challenger and Columbia exist is scaring off funding for longer flights.

                    [–]outtanutmeds 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                    If we went to the Moon, it is not with the technology they had in the 1960's. It was so advanced it would blow our minds. Take for instance the astronauts' air-conditioning units that they wore on their back-packs. They kept cool in inefficient spacesuits at 250 degrees F. for hours on end. How long does your battery last on your weed-eater? This alone proves that they didn't go to the Moon. There was no battery then, and there is no battery now that humans have that could continually run an air conditioner for a spacesuit at 250 degrees F. for hours on end.

                    [–]rodental 17 ポイント18 ポイント  (29子コメント)

                    It costs a lot of money to send a ship to the moon, and there's nothing useful there. Cost / return is abysmal.

                    [–]perfect_pickles 8 ポイント9 ポイント  (1子コメント)

                    and we went six times for no real good reason beyond it being a Vietnam war (Watergate) distraction !?

                    [–]heavyheavylowlowz 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                    To affirm our supremacy over the USSR. If we have the resources to put a man on the moon in just a few years, imagine how bad we could fuck up the USSR in a few months. It served almost the same purpose as the Great White Fleet, except we got plenty of scientific advances as a side result.

                    [–]MildElevation 16 ポイント17 ポイント  (21子コメント)

                    I refuse to believe there's nothing useful there. The act of simply existing there for any decent amount of time has massive potential for scientific expansion. How do human bodies handle extended periods of low gravity (eg. moon gravity—not low space orbit)? How do animals and plants grow in low gravity environments (muscle development, geotropism etc.) How does the circadian rhythm develop without stimuli such as blue skies? etc. etc. All of this being CRUCIAL to science before any missions planning to colonise Mars and beyond could even be considered.

                    Sorry, but it's completely impossible and illogical to believe there is no benefit to furthering lunar exploration and colonisation if you consider what's to be gained.

                    [–]DontTreadOnMe16 10 ポイント11 ポイント  (1子コメント)

                    Not to mention the massive amount of mineable rare elements, the potential to place a deep space telescope on the dark side of the moon (undistorted by earth's atmosphere), practice and hone basic landing/launch capabilities.

                    I find it ridiculous that they're just aiming straight for Mars now... wouldn't you want to practice a little first, rather than wait two years just to find out if a mission works or not?

                    [–]Vault32 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (2子コメント)

                    Not to mention they didn't dig or drill or take core samples or metal detect or anything. Scooped some dust and took some rocks and that's it, in all those missions. Hrm

                    [–]MildElevation 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                    But they played golf and drove a car. Science complete!

                    [–]jimmydorry 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                    "Petrified wood" rocks, that is.

                    [–]fuckthisfuckingworld 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (2子コメント)

                    Explain the benefit of these experiments please

                    [–]MildElevation 10 ポイント11 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                    Sure. So if we ever hope to set up non-temporary human colonies on other planets, we will need to know how humans develop from birth in conditions our bodies have not adapted to over countless generations. The same goes for crops and livestock. As things are, astronauts on the ISS have muscle composition change, and the majority develop eye issues - some easy reading.

                    We know circadian rhythm plays a big part in our well-being, and that disruptions can be bad news. Blue light plays a large part in this, as we are exposed to particular blue light via the daylight sky on Earth that our bodies have evolved for.

                    There are of course many other factors beyond this, such as exposure to pathogens (or lack thereof) compromising our immune systems, decreased stresses to developing bones and sense-organs (which strengthen us as we develop), lack of exposure to scents, which play a large part in memory retrieval, increased exposure to solar and other radiation. These are only a few things I can think of, and it's not my job to consider these things to any great extent, so I'm sure there are far more things to consider. I hope this answers your question to some degree.

                    コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

                      [–]rodental 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (6子コメント)

                      I agree, there are likely some benefits. But how do they compare to the costs?

                      [–]MildElevation 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (5子コメント)

                      Arguably extra-terrestrial expansion is necessary for the survival of our species, a stance many leading experts hold such as Stephen Hawking. So with so much at stake, benefits should logically outweigh any costs in the long run.

                      Of course those with power and influence can make this happen regardless of 'costs'. Military spending is beyond ridiculous, and a good place to consider diverting resources from.

                      [–]aaaaa2222 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                      Exactly. Its amazing how many people blindly parrot NASA talking points and dont even stop for a second to think about how flawed and illogical they are.

                      [–]GathoEx 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (1子コメント)

                      Those experiments are being done on the ISS and other low orbit flights

                      [–]MildElevation 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                      Please read carefully. They're not raising children from birth, growing crops and harvesting crops, documenting the impact of generations of low gravity on our species etc. on the ISS. Also note that I said low gravity, not meaning the low-orbit pseudo zero gravity of the ISS, but what the moon provides.

                      コメントをもっと表示する (3 返事)

                        [–]SidneyBechet 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (2子コメント)

                        Exactly. They went there, found some rocks, took a car up there, and then said "yeah, this is kind of a waste."

                        [–]aaaaa2222 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (1子コメント)

                        Thats a funny way to describe what is supposedly the most epic achievement in all of human history.

                        The mental gymnastics necessary to believe that logic is astounding.

                        "NASA told us there was nothing left to do up there, so lets blindly pretend science runs on doing a few experiments and then deciding we are through."

                        [–]aaaaa2222 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (1子コメント)

                        Oh right, the totally illogical "we havent gone back because there is no reason to" talking point.

                        Because in the entire history of human exploration, land, ocean, sky; humans are always going "lets stop exploring, there is no more information to be gained from it". Right.

                        Also remember that this is in the context of us going multiple times over a decade. Then suddenly deciding never to go back for nearly forty years. Even though our technological advances in those forty years represent an unprecedented leap.

                        [–]rodental 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                        The difference is that the moon is basically completely uninhabitable without an unbelievable expenditure, and there's almost no hope of ever seeing a ROI. And what benefits would there be? There's no mineral wealth to speak of. The only reason I can think of to ever want to build a moonbase is to facilitate asteroid mining, but that's many decades in the future, and I doubt human technological civilization is going to last that long.

                        [–]codaclouds 15 ポイント16 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                        They never went to begin with. They can't even go NOW.

                        [–]Khronikos 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                        Well it is either what you are saying or we never went there in the first place. Either or seems believable with the types of people we have in government.

                        To be frank you will need to provide me with actual proof that we can get there today. And if they cannot do that then how long? A hundred years? 200 hundred years? How long will people believe we can go out into space when we never do such a thing?

                        [–]Mylon 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                        The moon mission was a military mission. The point was if we can put a man on the moon, we can put a missile anywhere. After we proved the point... Well we started making missiles with that technology just in case someone wanted to challenge us. No real point in going there again since the statement was made.

                        [–]gaslightlinux 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                        All the moon missions were perfectly times with Nixon's time as president, and in particular with failure in Vietnam war. Usually you use war to distract from other other issue. How do you distract from wars?

                        Look at other big things: suicide cults, school shootings, white miliatas, etc.. For some reason they all pretty much match the time from a president's term.

                        [–]sydewayzsoundz 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                        If, and for me it s a big If, but if we did go to the moon, it wasn't that bullshit they showed on live TV in the 60s...that was faker that Kim Kardashians lips and ass

                        [–]notacrackheadofficer 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                        For those who don't know this ''country'' exists ...
                        http://www.sea-launch.com/

                        [–]Jibaro123 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (3子コメント)

                        I was a sophomore in high school when we went to the moon.

                        Everybody was really excited: we beat the Russians, we beat JFK's deadline (the end of the decade).

                        As a country, we were all proud as hell.

                        The next couple of flights were interesting too,but the Viet Nam War overshadowed everything. There were riots in the streets. People were getting shot and killed.

                        Walter Cronkite, a network news anchor who was basically America's grandfather, had come out against the war.

                        It wasn't long at all before people started asking why the fuck were we spending all that money so astronauts could film themselves hitting golf balls and singing stupid songs.

                        We simply stopped going to the moon. We had run out of worthwhile things to do up there. The people had had enough. The country had other issues to deal with. Apollo one had taken three lives, thirteen came close to taking three more. The program was cancelled. Simple as that.

                        It is ridiculous to think we kept flying there secretly.

                        Absolutely ridiculous.

                        [–]Vasallo7G 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                        every year it gets harder to believe we went to the moon, that is why most kids do not believe we went before they were born, but not now

                        [–]ForeverInaDaze 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                        So you're saying our tech is so advanced we can continually make trips to the moon, colonize it, and extract its resources? This is a huge W for the scientific community and therefore the world.

                        Therefore I really do not buy into this.

                        [–]Rayfloyd 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                        My theory (admittedly with no evidence to speak of to back it up) is that the U.S. has never stopped going to the moon, has gone continually since the Apollo days, but has been going via unpublicized, top secret military missions. Probably initiating someplace other than Kennedy Space Center in Florida and Vandenburg AFB in California. And that the U.S. has colonized, weaponized and probably begun mineral extraction on the moon, if not other places in our Solar System.

                        That is a fair assesment imo. I'd step it up one notch and say the tapes they showed us was just PR, they're fake. They can't show us what they really go with. It's all in the secret space program.

                        [–]tinman3 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (6子コメント)

                        Maybe because when you've been there 7 times and it's not profiting anyone you don't have a need to go back. I'm just saying I don't think that theory is crazy.

                        [–]DownUpOverAndBack[S] 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (1子コメント)

                        I guess. I just have difficulty believing that there have been no advancements in astrophysics or other sciences in the past half-century that would make a new manned mission to the moon useful. Such as to look at different things than were looked at 45 years ago, or to look at similar things with vastly better technology.

                        But, maybe they feel they've got that covered with probes and moon rocks and old photos.

                        [–]tinman3 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                        Thank you for the thought out, non-smartalec/knowitall reply. I agree that it is suspect that we have simply stopped going.

                        コメントをもっと表示する (4 返事)

                          [–]WeAreTheSheeple 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (31子コメント)

                          I believe the moon doesn't affect out tides... and that it could be a possible giant satellite / space station that is used to monitor Earth. It 'rang like a bell' when NASA struck it. Would a rock ring like a bell in space? I believe NASA got told to fuck off the moon by other beings and has been trying to cover up signs of other life previously been there before humans.

                          Edit

                          Seems like I've triggered a few accounts for not listening to conventional science. Tidal affect seems to be the worst thing wrong about my post while talking about the moon being a satellite made by space aliens that warded Nasa away from the moon. The tide...

                          [–][削除されました]  (30子コメント)

                          [deleted]

                            [–]I_am_BrokenCog 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (1子コメント)

                            Whelp, I don't see it!

                            I can't Touch it!

                            I sure can't smell it!

                            and, I can't buy it at Walmart ... nope, it doesn't exist.

                            [–]IAmMadeForThisShit 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                            can't buy it at Walmart

                            But their prices are falling. How do you explain that without gravity. You can't. Checkmate, antigravitiests!

                            [–]WeAreTheSheeple 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (27子コメント)

                            I don't believe the moons gravity would be strong enough to affect our tides. I believe the tides are created naturally through the oceans currents and possible other factors.

                            Do you think if a planet didn't have a moon they wouldn't have tides? What about multiple moons? How would it affect the tides with more moons? Remember, a planet can have hundreds of moons. So that's what makes me skeptical about the moon affecting our tides. Infact, if it was the moons gravity, would it not raise the water up and towards the moon?

                            [–][削除されました]  (10子コメント)

                            [deleted]

                              [–]I_am_BrokenCog 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                              if it was the moons gravity, would it not raise the water up and towards the moon?

                              That's not actually how tidal pull works.

                              https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pwChk4S99i4

                              [–]WeAreTheSheeple -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (8子コメント)

                              Why is there 4 tides in 24 hours 50 mins if it's the moon at the other side of the planet causing the tidal effect? Takes the moon 28 days to orbit the Earth.

                              Are you saying that no moon = no tide?

                              [–]aokna2736 16 ポイント17 ポイント  (3子コメント)

                              Because the earth rotates around it's axis at roughly that speed...

                              [–]WeAreTheSheeple 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (2子コメント)

                              How often do we see the moon? I don't think it's more than once a day. Tide goes in and out every 6 hours or so. If it's the moon, how does that work?

                              [–]MisterFifths 11 ポイント12 ポイント  (1子コメント)

                              I provided you a video further down that covers all of this. You are just choosing to be ignorant at this point and for some reason you are wearing that ignorance like a badge of honor.

                              [–]HitsWorthJerkingFor 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                              Yes, no moon would mean no tide.

                              The moon's orbit is not the main thing that causes tides, it is the Earth's rotation in reference to the moon coupled with the pull of the moon's gravitational force that does. You'll notice that both of these take about 24 hours.

                              [–]I_am_BrokenCog 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                              Yes. Without the moon there would be know tides.

                              https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pwChk4S99i4

                              コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

                                [–]MisterFifths 7 ポイント8 ポイント  (11子コメント)

                                You should take a science class. Tides literally would not exist without the moon.

                                [–]WeAreTheSheeple 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (9子コメント)

                                I question and am skeptical of what we are told. I don't believe that is a bad thing.

                                Does a planet with no moon have no tides?

                                Why is there 4 tides in 24 hours if it's the moon causing it? It takes the moon 28 days to orbit the Earth.

                                [–]I_am_BrokenCog 7 ポイント8 ポイント  (3子コメント)

                                You intellectual problem is not that you are being skeptical - or frankly that you are questioning the source of tides.

                                What you have wrong is your choice of what to believe is valid and what is invalid.

                                Being skeptical (from what I perceive of your beliefs) is that you question anything your elementary and high school teachers told you. That is not skepticism, it's irrational.

                                [–]WeAreTheSheeple 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (2子コメント)

                                It's irrational to be skeptical of the hard ingrained facts we take with little evidence, fact or proof?

                                I'll watch some of the vids been linked but I doubt any will answer my immediate questions with substantial supporting evidence to back it up.

                                [–]I_am_BrokenCog 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                So, you've perfectly expressed why your "skepticism" is actually irrational.

                                • You've been taught basic physics in school.
                                • presented with various ELI5 explanations.
                                • given extra viewing and reading lessons.

                                And yet choose to believe that everyone with far more experience -- which includes empirical tests and evidence -- and that they are "wrong" while you have the Truth, through skepticism. Not skepticism through conducting experiments, or calculations or observations ... but, rather from reading some anon web page with demonstrably false statements (and probably with an agenda and bias - send me the links and I'll be happy summarize my opinion of why they make such claims).

                                コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

                                  コメントをもっと表示する (5 返事)

                                    コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

                                      [–]HitsWorthJerkingFor 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                      You're actually entirely correct. The pull of the moon's gravity raises the water on Earth up very slightly and causes 2 bulges (each opposite the other). This is exactly why we have tides.

                                      コメントをもっと表示する (3 返事)

                                        [–]redeyez24 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (1子コメント)

                                        Why would we need to go back? It costs billions of dollars and for what, to bring home some moon rock that we already have.

                                        [–]PIG_CUNT 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                        So you think that's the only conceivable reason to go there. "GET MOON ROCKS"

                                        LOL

                                        [–]SpongeBobSquarePants 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (8子コメント)

                                        My theory (admittedly with no evidence to speak of to back it up)

                                        Then, since it lacks evidence, it really isn't a theory.

                                        [–]wh40k_Junkie 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (2子コメント)

                                        No, a theory can have literally no facts backing it up, the theory is the posit of the idea. You do an experiment or accumulate data to prove the theory or not, but the theory part itself literally needs no proof.

                                        [–]SpongeBobSquarePants 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (1子コメント)

                                        No, a theory can have literally no facts backing it up, the theory is the posit of the idea

                                        From around the web

                                        Theory "A concept that has been well tested, and is accepted as an explanation to a wide range of observations. "

                                        THEORY

                                        1) The grandest synthesis of a large and important body of information about some related group of natural phenomena (Moore, 1984)

                                        2) A body of knowledge and explanatory concepts that seek to increase our understanding ("explain") a major phenomenon of nature (Moore, 1984).

                                        3) A scientifically accepted general principle supported by a substantial body of evidence offered to provide an explanation of observed facts and as a basis for future discussion or investigation (Lincoln et al., 1990).

                                        4) 1. The abstract principles of a science as distinguished from basic or applied science. 2. A reasonable explanation or assumption advanced to explain a natural phenomenon but lacking confirming proof (Steen, 1971). [NB: I don't like this one but I include it to show you that even in "Science dictionaries" there is variation in definitions which leads to confusion].

                                        5) A scheme or system of ideas or statements held as an explanation or account of a group of facts or phenomena; a hypothesis that has been confirmed or established by observation or experiment, and is propounded or accepted as accounting for the known facts; a statement of what are held to be the general laws, principles or causes of something known or observed. (Oxford English Dictionary, 1961; [emphasis added]).

                                        6) An explanation for an observation or series of observations that is substantiated by a considerable body of evidence (Krimsley, 1995).

                                        [–]DownUpOverAndBack[S] 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (3子コメント)

                                        Thanks, Captain Semantics.

                                        It involves observable facts. We went regularly on manned missions to the moon when our technology wasn't even close to as advanced.

                                        We purportedly suddenly stopped going, and then began to do manned missions only around low Earth orbit.

                                        Is there any other realm of exploration or even science that works like that?

                                        コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

                                          [–]HempCO719 -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (9子コメント)

                                          I agree, maybe the lie is that we stopped. Cant have off-world secret child slave bases if people know that you are still doing launches.

                                          [–]uss_star_traveler 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (8子コメント)

                                          Ive been hearing quite a bit about the secret child slave bases just in the last few days. Did I miss something?

                                          [–]throwawayforOMC00000 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (7子コメント)

                                          Know nutjob Alex Jones is peddling the idea that there's a secret colony of enslaved children on mars

                                          [–]SJWOPFOR 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (6子コメント)

                                          100 percent not what he said, his guest Dr Steele stated that thursday and Alex specifically said that he didn't know about that. You're reading fake news my friend.

                                          [–]perfect_pickles 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (1子コメント)

                                          reading fake news my friend.

                                          this is how DNC believers see the world, through CNN and MSM filters.

                                          コメントをもっと表示する (4 返事)

                                            [–]JF803 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                            Alex Jones and Joe rogan had an interesting talk about this

                                            [–]reality_crusher 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (2子コメント)

                                            OP you are finally thinking like me and Dave Mcgovan.Here you go enjoy, http://centerforaninformedamerica.com/moondoggie/

                                            [–]DownUpOverAndBack[S] 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (1子コメント)

                                            Huh. Looks like I was channeling this guy. All of the points that have been nagging at me, he's hit upon.

                                            [–]reality_crusher 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                            Sadly he is now dead.Also check his other stuff on the website.He is one of the best investigative journalist i have seen.

                                            [–]magnora7 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                            And furthermore there is an incredible amount of focus on going to Mars, when we should (imo) be focusing on building moon bases.

                                            Which makes me think they're already developing moon bases and that's why the subject has gone quiet over the last 30 years.

                                            [–]JKeel99 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                            I absolutely believe we went to the moon multiple times. IMO, the only reasonable cause for stopping is

                                            -we found something that the government did not want seen, and/or

                                            -we were TOLD, directly or indirectly, not to come back, by beings residing there

                                            [–]ThePantheistPope 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                            Obviously they never went to the moon and the apollo missions were all a 9/11 style grand deception.

                                            You can even see them faking the blue marble shot in leaked footage for Christ sakes. What more would it take to get you to question the moon landings if not mounds of evidence that it was all faked paired with zero evidence that it actually happened?

                                            The leaked footage of them faking the blue marble shot in its entirety is in the dvd version of this, but it goes over the most damning parts of it here as well as many of the other ways we know we have never been to the moon https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xciCJfbTvE4

                                            [–]ILoveJuices 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                            the U.S. has never stopped going to the moon, has gone continually since the Apollo days, but has been going via unpublicized, top secret military missions.

                                            Correct.

                                            http://www.lawofone.info/results.php?s=8#3

                                            your peoples have, at this time/space present, the technological achievement, if you would call it that, of being able to create and fly the shape and type of craft known to you as unidentified flying objects. Unfortunately for the social memory complex vibratory rate of your peoples, these devices are not intended for the service of mankind, but for potential destructive use. This further muddles the vibratory nexus of your social memory complex, causing a situation whereby neither those oriented towards serving others nor those oriented towards serving self can gain the energy/power which opens the gates to intelligent infinity for the social memory complex. This in turn causes the harvest to be small.

                                            These of which we spoke are of third density and are part of the so-called military complex of various of your peoples’ societal divisions or structures.

                                            The bases are varied. There are bases, as you would call them, undersea in your southern waters near the Bahamas as well as in your Pacific seas in various places close to your Chilean borders on the water. There are bases upon your moon, as you call this satellite, which are at this time being reworked. There are bases which move about your lands. There are bases, if you would call them that, in your skies. These are the bases of your peoples, very numerous and, as we have said, potentially destructive.

                                            Keep in mind, this information is from 1980.

                                            [–]rusengcan 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                            You never went to the moon, it's clearly and obviously fake.

                                            [–]Dynamite_n_Gasoline 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                            You still believe the moon is real??? It's a projection from the Arctic.

                                            コメントをもっと表示する (8 返事)