Get off of this flat earth similar nonsense folks. Yes, we went to the moon a number of times... all real. No it is not artificial or hollow. The "belief" in like things is only that - a belief and not science nor the facts of what happened. Downvote all you want, but maybe someone needs to hear this before going down some garbage rabit hole of "belief".
Well apparently my attempt at separating flat-earth like theories and Q posts wasn't done as tactfully as I thought :) - and, yes, the moon landings have some oddities, but I haven't seen a one that is a clear set "see this is it" - like the wind comments - I see no wind... or are people thinking that because its not drooping down like their common flag on a pole here on earth it must be wind? Maybe I'm just extra jaded after living years of "I want to believe" myself - regardless... NCSWIC!!!
Big Time! I was 20 years old and in the Military in 69! There's no way in hell we went to the moon in 69! It was all a propaganda ploy because the Russian Sputnik program was making big news!
The flag is supported by a rod to remain extended, the fact that they were in a vacuum made the movement created by messing with the pole seem exaggerated and last for longer in the cloth than it would have otherwise, there was no wind.
No wind. Why would you think there is wind? There is no atmosphere and greatly reduced gravity so the momentum in planting the flag would have significantly less resistance, perhaps that is what you're seeing?
Saying we didn’t get to the moon isn’t the same as saying earth is flat. Plenty of people on both sides think the government lied about the moon not just flat earthers
You’re holding on to things you don’t actually have evidence for. I would love to “believe” the moon landing footage was real, but again… evidence. You know they claim to have called Nixon from the moon right? On the phone…
I would expect you’ve never actually looked into it and are stuck in an emotional reaction (much like I was) based on what you’ve been told your entire life.
The belt would have to behave differently (which is possible because space changes how things works, but would require experimentation than 99.9999999999999999999999999% of the world's historical population would never be able to perform) than any other radioactive particles for metal not to deflect it.
We already deflect radioactive particles on the surface of the planet using thin foil.
Additionally, the belt(s, plural) are not static, and do not cover the same vast differences at all times. It is very thin around the poles.
Further, you have to consider what an unprotected Van Allen Belt puts into humans; you can survive for a short time, but you are just taking more rads than is normal by a significant margin.
E.g. (arbitrary numbers) a month in the Van Allen Belt could be equal to about a year's worth of background radiation.
There is a lot of technical and scientifically understandable reasoning for why we could get to and from the moon safely.
The more curious thing is how the extremely fast moving space particles didn't tear the foil, and even more curious thing is why we still haven't gone back with better cameras and technology.
Get off of this flat earth similar nonsense folks. Yes, we went to the moon a number of times... all real. No it is not artificial or hollow. The "belief" in like things is only that - a belief and not science nor the facts of what happened. Downvote all you want, but maybe someone needs to hear this before going down some garbage rabit hole of "belief".
Well apparently my attempt at separating flat-earth like theories and Q posts wasn't done as tactfully as I thought :) - and, yes, the moon landings have some oddities, but I haven't seen a one that is a clear set "see this is it" - like the wind comments - I see no wind... or are people thinking that because its not drooping down like their common flag on a pole here on earth it must be wind? Maybe I'm just extra jaded after living years of "I want to believe" myself - regardless... NCSWIC!!!
The problem is that people have a burden of proof they don't understand.
https://medium.com/starts-with-a-bang/heres-your-proof-that-we-landed-on-the-moon-steph-curry-3eaa2ada1209
where is the wind coming from to blow the American flag in the iconic moon landing photo?
Space wind,... gosh! (napoleon dynamite voice)
They claimed the flag was creased like that to look like the wind was blowing it!
so they faked the wind? could they have faked anything else?
Big Time! I was 20 years old and in the Military in 69! There's no way in hell we went to the moon in 69! It was all a propaganda ploy because the Russian Sputnik program was making big news!
The flag is supported by a rod to remain extended, the fact that they were in a vacuum made the movement created by messing with the pole seem exaggerated and last for longer in the cloth than it would have otherwise, there was no wind.
I know why it looks like it was blowing in the wind. they faked the wind. just like they faked it all.
So they were actually in space, but they faked the presence of wind, so then it would look fake?
No wind. Why would you think there is wind? There is no atmosphere and greatly reduced gravity so the momentum in planting the flag would have significantly less resistance, perhaps that is what you're seeing?
Saying we didn’t get to the moon isn’t the same as saying earth is flat. Plenty of people on both sides think the government lied about the moon not just flat earthers
You’re holding on to things you don’t actually have evidence for. I would love to “believe” the moon landing footage was real, but again… evidence. You know they claim to have called Nixon from the moon right? On the phone…
I would expect you’ve never actually looked into it and are stuck in an emotional reaction (much like I was) based on what you’ve been told your entire life.
All you have to do is take a closer look at the lunar module and imagine if it can withstand exiting and reentering the Van Allen belt.
The belt would have to behave differently (which is possible because space changes how things works, but would require experimentation than 99.9999999999999999999999999% of the world's historical population would never be able to perform) than any other radioactive particles for metal not to deflect it.
We already deflect radioactive particles on the surface of the planet using thin foil.
Additionally, the belt(s, plural) are not static, and do not cover the same vast differences at all times. It is very thin around the poles.
Further, you have to consider what an unprotected Van Allen Belt puts into humans; you can survive for a short time, but you are just taking more rads than is normal by a significant margin.
E.g. (arbitrary numbers) a month in the Van Allen Belt could be equal to about a year's worth of background radiation.
There is a lot of technical and scientifically understandable reasoning for why we could get to and from the moon safely.
The more curious thing is how the extremely fast moving space particles didn't tear the foil, and even more curious thing is why we still haven't gone back with better cameras and technology.