NASA Spacesuit Pressure Test (I Swam With Astronauts Underwater) - Smarter Every Day 296

General Discussion
1
5 Likes
2

For those who believe the moon landings were faked, I find that watching them walk, move and fall in zero drag and 1/6 gravity, is most persuasive of the reality. It would be very hard (impossible?) to fake this.

3 Likes
3

My whole worldview over the past couple of years has been turned upside-down, ripped apart, ghetto-stomped, set on fire and then micturated on—in short, how I had thought the world worked turned out to be a complete sham. Quite frankly, I still haven’t come to terms with how much our own government and its institutions have lied and continue to lie to us. If someone had asked me three years ago if America had really gone to the moon, I would have answered with an emphatic “yes, of course”, and thought that anyone who said otherwise was a total nut. It has been over 50 years—more than half a century—since man allegedly walked on the moon. No country (including America), despite 50 years of technological advancement, has come even close to replicating that feat (and yeah, I know all the arguments as to why that would be the case). The more I think about six successful manned missions to the moon with 1960’s technology developed on an expedited schedule and no major catastrophe—think about everything that has to go right with just the Lunar Orbit Rendezvous (LOR) alone—the more improbable and increasingly absurd the whole proposition sounds to me. FWIW: I believe that it was possible to fake astronauts walking around in 1/6 Earth’s gravity using 1960’s movie special effects. I mean, if we had the tech back then to do the real thing, I’m pretty sure we had the tech to fake it on TV. :slightly_smiling_face: I recently watched some of the Apollo mission lunar excursion videos and there’s something very “unnatural” and “off” about them—they have an “uncanny valley” feel—and I’m fully aware that things behave and move very differently in a reduced gravitational field. Just for kicks, watch the Apollo 11 press conference (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=BI_ZehPOMwI&pp=ygUbQXBvbGxvIDExIHByZXNzIGNvbmZlcmVuY2Ug)—Neil, Buzz and Mike look like they’re attending a funeral instead of celebrating the greatest accomplishment in all of human history—weird. If you asked me right now, I’d have to say that I think there’s a 75% chance the moon landings were faked and a 25% chance they were real.

2 Likes
4

Welcome to my world :slight_smile:

I think that this picture can help, as the saying goes “A picture is worth a thousand words”.

Orbit
Orbit4500×1656 452 KB

The picture is from Low Earth Orbit wikipedia webpage

2 Likes
5

Oy! NO

3 Likes
6

Not perfectly, of course, but good enough to fool most people on a blurry, low resolution TV screen.

1 Like
7

Not addressing this ‘did they’/‘didn’t they’ question, but the larger one of ‘why didn’t we carry on to colonise the moon then’, I submit not lack of technology as the cause, but motivation.

It was called the space race quite aptly. As soon as someone appeared to have landed on the moon, the incentive to pour more national resources into the race disappeared. What would the USSR gain from continuing in hope of finding no flag at the purported site? Event over, other priorities, next ‘race’, please.

5 Likes
8

Aside from the visual evidence I referenced, there is the ubiquitous question of competence, when it comes to government (and its ability/competence to keep secrets). I notice, for example, that any - .state or -.gov website is clumsy, balky or unusable. Rarely such problems with -,com sites. (could it be the extra incompetent backdoors, trackers, NSA connections???).

4 Likes