Why The Moon Landing Couldn't Have Been Faked
- Thread starter Black Panther
- Start date
Yup. These nikkas bickering about the moon with all the problems we got on Earth. 
nikkas just be wanting to argue about shyt :Mjbreh:
if it was fake...no one cares
if it was real...no one cares
Its 2019, we tryin to get likes and daps fukk a moon
Oh yes. and electric cars are also more beneficial by why do you think that's taking a long time to implement.
Solar power panels are now very practical for every home, and yet it's not standard issued. Wonder why.
Dafunkdoc_Unlimited
Theological Noncognitivist Since Birth
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2012
- Messages
- 45,063
- Reputation
- 8,154
- Daps
- 122,285
- Reppin
- The Wrong Side of the Tracks
Ghostwriter said:That's you're reason why they can't go back to the moon. Because some factories shut down that made the parts. That's your final answer.Right.
Here's a far more detailed answer: The reason we haven't gone back to the moon since the 60's/70's is because the United States' budget at that time slated a lot towards the missions. At it's height, there was approximately 4.5% of the budget allocated towards space exploration to 'beat the Russians' back in 1966. The budget declined after we reached the moon and now it's approximately .47% of the budget. Here is a table listing ALL of the budget appropriations for the missions starting from 1960 and ending in 1973..........
https://history.nasa.gov/SP-4029/Apollo_18-16_Apollo_Program_Budget_Appropriations.htm
If you don't trust NASA, then you can get the same information from a variety of different sources and they all state the same facts.
The 'Space Race' cost about $28 billion dollars back then just to land on the Moon. Adjusting for inflation, that would be about $300 billion dollars today. This does NOT include the amount utilized for R & D/other missions over the course of the entire program. That would inflate the total cost to about $45 billion, or, in today's economy, $1 trillion.
https://history.nasa.gov/SP-4029/Apollo_18-16_Apollo_Program_Budget_Appropriations.htm
If you don't trust NASA, then you can get the same information from a variety of different sources and they all state the same facts.
The 'Space Race' cost about $28 billion dollars back then just to land on the Moon. Adjusting for inflation, that would be about $300 billion dollars today. This does NOT include the amount utilized for R & D/other missions over the course of the entire program. That would inflate the total cost to about $45 billion, or, in today's economy, $1 trillion.
Jacaveli The Don
Superstar
Y'all are still arguing whether the Earth is flat or round?
We off that
We now on the Moon being flat
Catch up, pleighboi
We off that
We now on the Moon being flat
Catch up, pleighboi
Self_Born7
SUN OF MAN
NASA even stated we can't go back to moon b/c we dont have that technology as before
NASA even said, they lost and erased the original tapes of the moon landing... you would think something historical as that, they would have safe guarded it..
im not lying, google this shyt.
NASA is full of shyt, like the rest of these government entities. I can hear the sheople now... "the government wouldn't lie to us"
NASA even said, they lost and erased the original tapes of the moon landing... you would think something historical as that, they would have safe guarded it..
im not lying, google this shyt.
NASA is full of shyt, like the rest of these government entities. I can hear the sheople now... "the government wouldn't lie to us"
please brehY'all are still arguing whether the Earth is flat or round?
We off that
We now on the Moon being flat
Catch up, pleighboi
the moon ain't shyt but a hologram
tomorrow night they gonna have mj and whitney performing in the same spot the moon was chilling
I just watched this whole thing and anybody that still thinks we went to the moon after this is functionally retarded.
- neil armstrong rarely gave interviews
- everybody involved w/apollo 11 resigned shortly after their historic moon walk
- TV stations were complaining about the grainy outdated footage they were given, even though they had full on color cameras on board
- the footage was slowed down to simulate "zero gravity"
- the "crescent moon" was a hoax they made with camera tricks and lighting from inside the shuttle
it's shown at 30 minutes in, I definitely remember news of this footage going national a few years back, but good luck googling it now, that shyt is GONE!
there's a new documentary that came out recently about apollo 11 that dominates almost all searches for it, you best believe this was done to thwart all talk of the whole thing being a hoax
at some point, as grown men you have to stop "believing" in shyt and go with your common sense and what's right in front of you...accept you were lied to and keep it moving
Dafunkdoc_Unlimited
Theological Noncognitivist Since Birth
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2012
- Messages
- 45,063
- Reputation
- 8,154
- Daps
- 122,285
- Reppin
- The Wrong Side of the Tracks
Self_Born7 said:
That is incorrect. They would have to rebuild all the technology because it's 50+ years out-of-date, not to mention all the facilities would have to be rebuilt, etc.
Self_Born7 said:
That doesn't prove they DIDN'T go to the moon.
That's like saying because my wedding photos were destroyed in a fire, I never got married.
That's like saying because my wedding photos were destroyed in a fire, I never got married.
I just watched this whole thing and anybody that still thinks we went to the moon after this is functionally retarded.
- neil armstrong rarely gave interviews
- everybody involved w/apollo 11 resigned shortly after their historic moon walk
- TV stations were complaining about the grainy outdated footage they were given, even though they had full on color cameras on board
- the footage was slowed down to simulate "zero gravity"
- the "crescent moon" was a hoax they made with camera tricks and lighting from inside the shuttle
it's shown at 30 minutes in, I definitely remember news of this footage going national a few years back, but good luck googling it now, that shyt is GONE!
there's a new documentary that came out recently about apollo 11 that dominates almost all searches for it, you best believe this was done to thwart all talk of the whole thing being a hoax
at some point, as grown men you have to stop "believing" in shyt and go with your common sense and what's right in front of you...accept you were lied to and keep it moving
It's an easy 45 min watch. I recommend everyone in this thread watch it.
Dafunkdoc_Unlimited
Theological Noncognitivist Since Birth
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2012
- Messages
- 45,063
- Reputation
- 8,154
- Daps
- 122,285
- Reppin
- The Wrong Side of the Tracks
Booker T Garvey said:
NONE of this proves that we didn't go to the Moon. What it does prove is that the video technology back then was insufficient to fake it and there were far too many people involved for any type of 'conspiracy' to remain a secret for this long. Hell, we knew Clinton got a blowjob within a couple months after the fact.
Also, Neil Armstrong stated we DID go to the Moon. People love to post that video of him stating 'We didn't', but that's his answer to the question 'Why didn't we go BACK?'
Also, Neil Armstrong stated we DID go to the Moon. People love to post that video of him stating 'We didn't', but that's his answer to the question 'Why didn't we go BACK?'
Booker T Garvey said:at some point, as grown men you have to stop "believing" in shyt and go with your common sense and what's right in front of you...accept you were lied to and keep it moving
Grown men can read and ALL the facts point to the Moon landing taking place. If you believe otherwise, then just casting suspicion on the evidence doesn't prove that we didn't. You'll have to come-up with more evidence to the contrary other than......'The gubment be lyin............
Did you watch this video? There are more holes in the story I can even count. You can't ignore ALL these "facts" being disproven.
Around 12 min they're speaking on the Van Allen belts..
They're saying the the shuttle would have needed lead shielding.. Lead shielding would've made the problem worse because of the type of radiation in the Van Allen Belt. The Van Allen has charged particle radiation, not X Ray radiation like the video is referring to.
They also plotted a course through the lesser dense parts of the Van Allen belt and didn't spend a large amount of time in it's exposure..
Anyway I'm skipping around in the video.. I'll be back