NASA / US too niggerfied to return to the moon

Believing kike lies designed to undermine the white man's greatest technological achievement.

...

Thankfully NASA won't be launching anything anytime soon.

Private space companies will completely suppleant the dinosaurs that the government space agencies are, along with the "legacy space companies".

Uh huh. How much of our tax dollars do they suck up again?

Right, right, which is why they have been improving the F-1 engine since 2012 or so and are now 3-d printing parts.

nasa.gov/marshall/news/nasa-3-D-prints-first-full-scale-copper-rocket-engine-part.html

Shitpost somewhere else faggot.

I don't even know where to begin with you but first off, >>>/oven/ >>>/reddit/

Secondly, calculation was done by countless individuals while it's true modern computers would have sped it up it was still accurate just time consuming.

But it's true engineering standards in education in universities and colleges have fallen to the point they are required to take idiot liberal brainwashing classes for the credits that have nothing to do with engineering. It could very well be a lack of talent (yes, no more nationalist socialist scientists to steal in an Operation Paperclip) but truth be told I'm willing to bet more strongly it's a lack of funding and interest which is why we still need to hitchhike with the Ivans.

It's ok I would not have space sullied with such degeneracy. The next centuries will be removal ones, perhaps our great great grand children may use the gift we give them of TRUE freedom. They shall be able to live in the countries, look upward and wonder as I wanted to do.

Yeah, you're a CIA nigger alright. Protip: when we went there we left a mirror one which we still to this day fire a laser at from earth to use for studies and calculations.

see

the probability that we faked it is much much higher and all the motivators are there as well.

Ok my guy.

If Hitler's Germany had won the war there would be whites on the moon in the 50s. Wernher von Braun already had engineered designs for space stations with artificial gravity, so easy and yet we don't have one yet, it would mean you could stay in space forever living on a station with 9.81m/ss. You don't need much technology to get to the moon the physics had been figured out for 300 years, the math even earlier though there were optimizations along the way.

And funny enough there was a big screw up where early on we were using Matrix multiplication for rotations but had a Gimbal lock and the craft almost crashed from then on everything was done in Quaternions figured out in the 1800s. Apollo's computer used a multitasking operating system which prevented the LEM from crashing into the moon because the memory was sewed wrong.

(heil)
Von Braun was too far ahead of his time much like Nazi Germany itself but he was especially a truly brilliant Nazi. Right after the success of the US moon mission, he wanted to go straight to Mars after but the US government said they weren't interested. At least it lives on through fiction, Nazi moon bases are a common staple based on reality.

It was the last gasp of National Socialism user. I guess its somewhat poetic all the flags on the moon are white now because of the radiation.

We ran out of stolen nazi scientists

Holla Forums, what's more likely:
OR
>USA never went to the moon, NASA are liars.

...

I've long found it amusing how people who know the holocaust never happened immediately switch their brains off whenever the topic of apollo is raised. They suddenly turn into true believers who accept everything the government says and don't think any of the glaring inconsistencies with the official narrative are important.

I know second hand (((Defense))) has been fully Jewed since the late 90s. Anything invented even back in the 80s when my father worked that racket anything you'd invent would find its way to "Israeli" contractors, now its the chinks with the Jews exporting anything whites invent and they get fired after training their replacements.

Don't give (((them))) that much credit. It was whites who have molded the world through science and math. But whites have also given it all away to anyone who wants to know and with the blacks to those who don't want to know.

Uncle's not coming home kid. We need to stand on our feet, be able to defend and take ground. Nobody but our own will help us.

I hope you've passed calculus based physics.

...

Then why didn't the Soviets say something? We pointed nuclear weapons at each other ready to totally annihilate the other side at any given moment and you're telling me the Soviets wouldn't have collectively screamed "LIAR!"? And please remember we went to the moon multiple times on multiple Apollo missions, not just with Buzz and Armstrong. Nobody ever seems to focus on the other ones but they only ever call the first one which most seem to think as the only one still as fake. We don't have money, we don't have engineers who are talented enough in NASA right now. Rocket science is literally rocket science and we're just not Nazi enough for it anymore.

I'm going to let you in on a little secret, OP. Americans were always worthless. You couldn't have reached the moon without scientists from Germany. At least Russia can still achieve space missions without NatSoc scientists & engineers. Hell, their economy is in the gutter and they're better equipped to take over the solar system than you dumb fucks. Even the Chinese can do it, and their entire economy is based on manual labor! No joke, Americans are more savage and uneducated than Slavs and worthless than the oriental Jew.

I really don't know what to make of the bubble videos since the ISS almost certainly exists.

The soviets and nasa have always worked together when it comes to space. Make of that what you will. all through the cold war they did joint missions.

This. Until white Americans take back their country, kick out the browns and reconnect with their European roots (from which escaping was the motivation for founding the country in the first place) the US will never rise backl to where it was in 1970. It only got there because it had all the world's gold from selling guns and food to the (((allies))), and then joining in to kill the good guys and make the world safe for Jewry.

So this is what it's really about. You are a kike shill after all.

woah dude

I literally can't even...

Just someone who has researched this topic for over 20 years now. I have time AMA.

Such as? And how do you explain the simple fact that you can get a fucking telescope and verify it for yourself?

This is bottom of the barrel ignorant reasoning on the same tier as the reflector on the moon. There is not telescope on earth with sufficient resolution to see man made objects on the moon and thereflector is a retard argument since the soviets placed one remotely. In addition, a reflector is not required to perform a lunar ranging experiment they've been doing those since before apollo, hoever this information has been deleted from wikipedia. you can still see it in older versions of the lunar ranging expriment page.

It's eufemism for "goverment need those shekels to feed MIC and hungry niggers". We could go to Alpha Centauri with 50's tech.

or you can not be retarded and consider that either possibilities are true and be skeptical of both sides. it's possible and there's a lot of evidence it was faked, but you should focus on the implications of that, like where did the money go? don't get stuck arguing over something that's ultimately not provable, or very difficult to prove.

And the Lunar samples and literally everything else?

My interest is why you are so interested in trying to deprive a great Nazi accomplishment and making literally Jewish comparisons. That's the only real redpill here. Most normalfags don't even know Nazis literally got America to the moon. Fact is, you're a shill.

First of all, you ignored the question of what inconsistencies you refer to.

Second, trying to attack the person just shows how weak you know your argument is. Even a very small low power telescope is easily capable of seeing small details on the moon. Purchase one and look through it.

...

We know we know but mods are still asleep being retarded. Guess we'll wait for the eventual anchoring.

In my experience replying seriously to anyone stupid enough to believe that you can resolve objects less than say 100 meters across with ANY earth based telescope is a waste of time.

Same goes for people who think the presence of a reflector is proof of a manned mission.

You have no idea what my position on apollo is but cool assumptions there bro.

I can't tell if you are actually retarded or just kikeposting.

Ok I'll entertain the possibly you're actually just very, very ignorant and not trolling. Find a single picture taken from earth, of hardware on the moon.

The next part is where you post pictures taken from lunar orbit by the LRO satellite and I have to correct you.

AHA, but you dont know FOR CERTAIN that it exists.
But, as the devils advocate that I am, I agree that it might exist - truly exist.
But, there is the cost of showing of to much.
That and all the questionable data, info, pictures and videos that exists and "almost certainly DOES NOT exist".

You can look up how to see the mirrors yourself on the moon right now smart guy

so what is your position, nigger? you were generalizing, so was I. it seemed like you are stuck on just proving the moon landing false instead of arguing about the implications, which are more important

I'll waste time looking up pictures for you when you answer the question. What inconsistencies. Either present an argument or quit kikeposting.

Kinda makes you wonder why we aren't visiting it constantly huh?
It's like cars. They are so absurdly prehistoric if you think about it. All major breakthroughs have been bought and suppressed. We should literally be flying around in vehicles that use air for fuel, but no. We're stuck with the same car that was invented a century ago with a few more bells and whistles. It's kind of ridiculous tbh.

The case for the ISS existing is much more solid since unlike apollo hardware the ISS -IS- visible to anybody with a powerful consumer telescope. The same was true of the shuttle.

The only way to know for certain if the object in the sky is the ISS is to go there.

My position is that the public record of apollo is faked, and all photos and video of manned space exploration beyond earth orbit are either faked or footage obtained remotely, then misrepresented.

However some kind of mission hidden from the public may have occurred.

I check your dubbs and acknowledge your argument

Technology=Nazis

What they meant to say is that they no longer have enough Nazi scientists to get to the moon.

it would cost between 150 and 250 billion dollars to send men to the moon. what would be the point?

they get there, livestream nothing happening, hop around for a bit and come back?

unless you plan to drop expanding foamcrete silos from low moon orbit to create impact craters which then use nuclear generators to power static attractors to capture the debris dust and seal it into an outershell layer to shield against cosmic rays then deploy liquid thorium powered boring machines which create an underground complex by conflagrating the moon rock and packing it into the circular tunnels behind it.

okay now you have a large underground moon facility with thermal equilibrium and atmospheric equilibrium. what do you do there? it probably cost you 1 trillion dollars, it's so far away from earth that it's unusable as a weapons launch facility unless your plan is capture and launch of kinetic projectiles, in which case you should've built the base on the asteroid belt.

Also reminder that NASA "lost" all the telemetry data, video recordings and audio recorderings out of nowhere even though it was the biggest of events and you'd expect this to be backed up quite well. Also reminder that NASA means "to deceit" in Hebrew. Another reminder that all astronauts are freemasons and all tell things that collide with all theories and stories other astronauts told.
It's almost as if they lied to us.

No it doesn't.

Oh yes it does. Look it up in old kike encyclopedias and you'll see. The kike as always change meaning of words to control the goyim even more.

Don't worry lads, I'm going to fucking blast off into orbit all on my own any minute now.

You fucking idiot.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_space_program

Eat a dick kike faggot it does so.
Now, fuck off and read your silly little book. Dont you have any coins to fap to?

youtube.com/watch?v=8PB7AwZzaOo&t=6m28s

He was right about nasa "losing" almost everything related to apollo though.

The HD apollo landing videos have never been shown to the public. All the lunar surface footage currently in the public domain is from a camera pointing at a monitor at mission control, The equivalent of a camrip basically.

The highest quality moon surface videos are all camrips and the HD tapes have all been "lost" along with all the blueprints for all apollo hardware.

Space is gay anyway. I've long since realized the idea of technology saving the human race from itself is a pipe dream, and is probably Jewish to begin with.

The recordings they gave to the television stations at the time where recordings of projectors that projected low quality recordings. I wonder why.

redorbit.com/news/science/616295/nasa_cant_find_original_tape_of_moon_landing/

How do you lose 700 boxes of recordings from the greatest manned space flights in history?

Also they never did live viewings, everything was pre-recorded and send to television stations. Not only that most people at the time only had a radio and listen to that, the screenings they showed where of course else pre-recordings.

What the hell is it with the conspiracy theory shilling here lately? First it was anti-vaccinations, then it was flat earth, now it's the moon landing was staged. Are we being raided?

Hang yourself kike.

Either that or we are waking up. Even the Bible says the earth is flat.

Von Braun planned a Mars mission.
He wound up writing two editions of a fiction book on his plans for a Mars mission.

Funnily enough von braun was the biggest opponent of apollo and even said in his book that a manned mission to the moon was impossible. He only went along with it at the last minute. Just saying.

Probably Sinead tbh.

Gas yourself.

The anti-vax people are sort of right for the wrong reason, though I agree that this shit is suspicious and the concerns they bring up seem more like a derailing tactic to me.

First, there have been many batches with far too much mercury and other heavy metals and the fact they're contaminated that much is pretty fucked.
Second, why should we need these vaccines for diseases we eradicated from the west many years ago? Fucking diseased masses are bringing their filth into our countries.

No it doesn't, you're just trying to D&C. A quick search disproves that. Now fuck off kike.

Why is technology always so suppressed?
Nuclear power is the biggest example I can think of. If we made a bigger push for that we'd be leaps and bounds ahead of where we are now, but we decided to stay on power plants that burn the remains of liquefied dead plants instead.

Jews, lad. New tech would affect the bottom line. Drive down profits.

Oy vey, technology is suppressed for the greater good!

That's a lie.

The reality is he thought the Soviets would get to the moon faster than the USA even if they put all their efforts into a lunar mission.

He also felt that a lunar landing was not suitably impressive/ambitious enough and wanted a Mars mission.
He also believed that if the USA had started working on a Mars mission at that point they would get to the red planet before the soviets.

Generally speaking there's always the chance of these diseases making a comeback due to global travel.
If some guy goes on holiday to a country where Polio is still a thing then comes back before symptoms hit?
He could cause an epidemic of a serious disease that leaves most survivors crippled for life.
Better instead to just use the vaccines and suck up the damage.

You can only really stop vaccinating in cases like smallpox where the disease is pretty much wiped out.

Also these vaccines include things like mercury or other heavy metals for a number of reasons.
First is as a preserving agent to keep the vaccine usable for longer.
Second is because a vaccine needs to cause damage to tissue in order to stimulate an immune system response. No damage means the vaccine won't work.

Actually no it isn't

The point is, the greatest rocket scientist in the world and the guy in charge of apollo wrote that a moon rocket would need to weigh 800,000tons

The apollo rockets weighed around 3,000 tons

Conquest of the moon?
The book that carefully and in intricate detail explained how mankind would get to the moon and colonise it and what this would look like along with general considerations that needed to be taken into account?

The book that was essentially a huge advertisement for lunar colonisation?

Fuck off OP
I hope your whole fucking family dies.

That's not true, vaccines were used as a preventative when people traveled abroad, so they wouldn't bring any diseases back. Your reasoning is backwards and not historically accurate, it's only now that the various blights are being brought IN that we are seeing a push.

I'm not against vaccines in principle, they're an excellent tool, my point is that they shouldn't be necessary but now we are being invaded.

...

How mankind would -theoretically- get to the moon. Did you miss the part where he clearly states that it's economically impossible since it would require a rocket for than 250 times heavier than the saturn V? The rocket that was used on the "real" moon mission?

You don't find it strange that the guy who would go on to run the apollo missions said such things?

We do, USA doesn't

Learn the diference

Nonsense, that was just Catholic fanfiction in the middle ages.

This is depressing.
It's funny how even STEM stuff is degenerating.
But at least we have the iphone 214324 right?

It's shit but there is a valid argument for suppressing technology. How far away are we from private entities or regular citizens harnessing city destroying tech?

...

What he is getting at is that, if a mirror on the moon means a man was there, then a rover on mars means a man landed on mars. The Voyager 1 that recently left the solar system, means that man has left the solar system.

Things =/= people. A mirror on the moon is evidence that we deployed a mirror on the moon, not that a man was required to put it there.

As someone who believes that the moon landings happened, the mirror argument isn't a good argument.

They just need to stript away the jew.
Don't be too harsh on them, they're the most dangerous nation to western health right now, but everybody in the west was a jew golem at some point.
US/UK is simply the latest.

They need to strip away the jewish influence and reconnect to their European roots.
This includes rejecting their warped and weird forms of christianity, which nobody in Europe observes as they do.
(America is probably the single most needlessly genitally mutilated western country of the entire bunch)
(Along with the least folklore customs.)
(But those are incredibly important, because, in the words of Tolkien, who, admittedly was a christian, but still: Deep roots cannot be reached by the frost.)

It's a terrible argument that instantly red flags the person you're talking to as someone who either unable or unwilling to think logically.

USSR allegedly put a reflector on the moon with a robot so the presence of a reflector on the moon is not evidence of men on the moon. It's bizarre how supposedly intelligent people still use it as a "gotcha!" Even mythbusters went there.

Ship construction and launch would be much much easier from the moon than from earth. Also refuelling from the moon instead of earth would be beneficial for solar system travelling vessels. Moon base development would be used to facilitate solar system activities as a space port.

the right of the (white) people to keep and bear [city destroying tech] shall not be infringed

Op's dude is grossly oversimplifying but kinda right. Movie in pic is real reason why going to moon is currently hard.

tl;dr: NASA scrapped Saturn V rockets [which could get past low-earth orbit and to the moon] because they thought they were too expensive, then blew a tonne of cash on space shuttles that killed astronauts, and now can't produce a new rocket to get past low-earth due to budget constraints placed on them since they fucked up so hard for the last 20 years.

gomovies.to/film/fight-for-space-20917/

Movie is worth a watch if you give a shit about space.

you sound schizophrenic, friend.

……yet the government has been propping up these companies since the beginning

Old news, NASA admitted this shit years ago. Besides is there any use of sending someone to moon? There are more important goals to worry about rather than that space rage era pissing contest.

FUCK OFF PLEBBIT SCUM

Kill yourself you retarded goon, do you know where you are? Refute his point or FUCK OFF.

Nasa have kind of inadvertently admitted over the years that they don't have the technology to go to the moon. Mostly whenever the topic of radiation comes up.

gas yourself, rabbi

It's primarily a money and motivation problem. The Gemini and Apollo programs were extremely expensive and didn't really have a point beyond Cold War dick waving and demonstration of rocket (missile) technological superiority. Even at the time, they weren't as popular as you might expect with large segments of the US public feeling the money could be better spent at home.

Interest is slowly returning though. NASA is planning an unmanned test orbit of the moon by the Orion MPCV in 2019, and there are crewed mission proposals by the ESA, JAXA China and Russia in the 2025 - 2030 range. Hopefully we'll get to the point where they actually do something useful, like set up a scientific outpost / colony, sooner rather than later.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_missions_to_the_Moon#Crewed_missions_2

Cold Hard Ca$h. Gotta keep that petrol monopoly going.

Holla Forums 2017

...

The far side of the Moon is ideal for all kinds of scientific equipment. A radio telescope built into a large crater there would be permanently shielded from interference from Earth. An optical telescope would have the same advantage for visible light frequencies, as would an infrared rig. Ultraviolet telescopes can't work on Earth because of interference from the ozone layer, but in space there's no issue to be had.

Even more exotic observatories are possible on the Moon. There's enough space to build a good-sized gravity wave observatory, and you can put a neutrino detector right on the surface, if you don't mind the cost of trucking tons of water to the Moon.

Even better, the low surface gravity cuts down on the design cost of big things, so everything can be designed much taller and lighter than on Earth. We can even practice building a space elevator there because escape velocity is so low and the stresses are relatively minor.

We have reasons to invest in a Moon base. Unfortunately, niggers, spics, Jews, and women will never understand any of them. They think we should spend that money on medicine for crack babies and food stamps for the unemployable.

Before we reach for the cosmos, we must remove congenital failures and incurious semi-apes from our electorate, if not from our gene pool altogether.

Ha ha silly user. Everyone knows you can't even take pictures of the stars from the surface of the moon!

Absolute bullshit. We have more than the technology to go to just the moon.

Just wanted to add. the space elevator is a pipe dream it will never happen without a ridiculous technological leap. A 300 mile tall tower? on earth? really?

So if you accept one lockheed employees testimony do you accept all of them? Lockheed employees say some pretty wild stuff when they get old enough to just not give a fuck

You are being tricked
The anti is not about vaccines but the other shit they put in.

A prime example how the jews manage to skew the entire subject

Hence the word: "practice." We can test the principle, then the feasibility, and then get an idea of how to scale it up.

Thank you for joining Holla Forums today though. I hope the teachers at Rosa Parks Junior High are proud of you for your performance on this field trip. Watch as the white man does this amazing thing without the help of anybody you've ever met, little nigger.

...

The idea of a practice space elevator on the moon is even more ridiculous than building one on earth but thanks for attempting a comeback. You tried.

Muffled, heavy allah ackbar breathing intensifies

Look over there, nigger. . . a shiny thing!

The only thing holding us back from going back is essentially money. IF we didn't spend all that shit on niggers/foreigners/defending and destabilizing foreigners we would have more than enough to go back.

Agreed. They will be in the way. Best to gas them, I think. Safer that way.

This is what we deserve, having elected leaders that forced this nonsense upon us, we've been asleep at the wheel too long

...

It's also possible that you misinterpreted what the NASA idiot said about technology. Maybe he meant the physical technology, like the spacecraft parts and equipment. Which is why he said we'd have to build it from the ground up. It's highly likely that everyone is overanalyzing this.

NASA is a nigger outreach centre now.

Russia is our only hope of an aryan space future

We should already have hydro cars by now tbh but there's too much profit for oil and subsequent climate change taxes for power.

Partly true and checked.

Money is the sine qua non of another Moon shot, but it's not enough on its own. We have let the industrial capacity to build Moon rockets degrade over time, and now we've let our manned space program degrade as well. Before we can even build another Saturn V, we have to rebuild the facilities and machines we used to build the first set of them. Then we have to get back into training crews and ground control people – even if we use the people we have right now, they'll need at least a refresher on the dynamics of an escape velocity mission.

We can't just go to the space store and buy a Moon mission. That shit has to be built from the ground up, and we've let ours decay thanks to (((other priorities))). In fact, nothing can be quite so dispiriting and disgusting as hearing Jews and kike-influenced pundits arguing for and against space travel on monetary grounds. This Jew thinks space travel is too expensive, while that other graduate of Kike U says we can make money from mining the Moon's tritium, and so on.

It is the essence of the white man that we will go to the Moon because it's fucking there and nobody else can manage it, not because there are shekels on the table. It's the same reason we built cathedrals and oceangoing navies and the internet: because we fucking can.

It really depends on whether we went at all.

No one had even mentioned "fake moon landing" yet. You just gave yourself away dumbfuck.

Correct, that's how it works, (((they))) have done it with a lot of words like "chick-shiksa", for example.

gen.lib.rus.ec/book/index.php?md5=FB1E2AE47C4843A788124CA948E00E48

(((You))) first.

...

We already knew you burger niggers didn't give a fuck about anyone else, but this is just gratuitously rubbing it in.

Excellent source OP

Rather than fighting gravity the whole way, you have to use orbital mechanics to your advantage.

Until the end of WWII if you wanted to study just about any STEM field you had to learn German as most textbooks and the best textbooks were in German. Now most German Universities don't offer PHDs in German, mostly in English only.

user you're embarrassing yourself, you're even embarrassing me a little.

yeah, ok, NASA fag

Who gives a crap about Nobel prizes? They mean nothing. I mean, they gave Obama a prize for being black

But I thought we only got to the moon cause of the hard work done by that team of strong independent black women who don't need no gravity?

...

Once nasa is like 90% negresses we can return to the moon.

It should be mentioned that the reason the Soviets made progress so much faster than NASA is because they were horrifically reckless with the lives of their own cosmonauts. Where NASA made heavy use of simulation and unmanned test missions, the Soviets had multiple rockets explode on the launchpad with people aboard. Dozens if not hundreds of cosmonauts died and we're simply erased from records rather than let their deaths make the communist party lose face.

sheeeeeeeeeeit metal

That's a retarded statement. It was the soviets who made incremental progress before each step. Then suddenly out of nowhere america fuck yeah from several steps behind sent men to the moon in a lander that had never been successfully tested.

Cool story bro.

But that's exactly what the Soviets did, you fucking retard. They recklessly pushed their tech and their people, throwing aside all safety concerns, and boom their rockets went, boom their reactors went, Hell, boom even their nuclear waste tanks went.
You are absolutely clueless.

>(((1)))

But it was all secret and you're the only one who knows about it right?

Clearly the ISS can't into real, especially since you can track it online and use a cheap telescope to see it when it passes near you, as I have done. But since the earth is flat the ISS isn't real and the sun is actually only 10 km up.

The moonhoaxlander was made of tinfoil and glue, a giant piece of trash

If you understood statistics you'd know that the moonhoax was faked
If you understood photography, you'd know that the moonhoax was faked.
If you understood rocket science (which is super easy) you'd know that you need a rocket the size of mount everest just to clear a few hundred miles, even without cargo.
Someone in here is clueless and is repeating irrelevant talking points. NASA lied and you believed them.

Apparently we never made it past the Van Allen belt radiation. By now however there is probably the tech to do so. Ben Rich, former President and CEO of the Lockheed Skunkworks said "We now have the technology to take ET home." Interesting times.

Oft repeated, never demonstrated. Please specify, who is this mysterious "we"?

Of course NASA are lairs, anybody still believing them in the CY+2 is per definition a bluepill faggot.

Because ALL the "sapce agencies" lied and still lie to this very day. The Ruskies depended even more on space propaganda for the homefront thasn the Yanks.

Kek. Are you honestly saying you believe in the authenticity of the (((Cold War)))? Lurk at least a year more.

The ISS as a project exists, but not as a "spacecraft" in "space". It's a wild mixture of CGI, zero-g flights and high-altitude balloons. For fuck's sake, this was common knowledge on old Holla Forums. Qiality really went down.

This guy gets it. Von Braun knew, obviously.

You can verify WHAT for yourself? The supposed landing site? Don't make me laugh.

For fuck's sake, it's literally 2017 and you still believe those are real? Never even heard of the analysis of the Amsterdam samples who turned out common Earth rocks? Seriously, this feels like eternal summer.

What exactly everything else? The laughable videos? The reports of the "Astronauts", all of them Masons?

Laughable. You know NOTHING of optics.

What a shock! It's called the Russian Federal Space Agency (or Roscosmos) now, you fucking idiot.

Correct. and are either shills or simply ignorant. For the lazy, there are many sites on the web recompiling the pertinent passages, here is just one:
lhup.edu/~dsimanek/febible.htm

This. Unbelievable that people still think this tiny nutshell would have been able to reach the moon. Really proves Goebbel's dictum about the Big Lie. Make it big enough, and people WILL believe it.

Yes, this is a good one. There are many videos of slips like this, about the "moon landings" as well as about many other aspects of NASA projects. The info is really out there, that's what makes people's gullibility and lazyness so sad. The investigators in pre-internet times had it much harder.

...

He's right, though. Look at it; just look at it.

Different from (((peace prizes))) m80

I made a few posts with supportive evidence and unusually (seeing as the thread had nothing to do with promoting jewish neocon which they are so fond of doing here) a load of hasbara jews >>10151336 begin discussing my posts between themselves, the same one's who worked tirelessly to make Holla Forums an unofficial cheerleading squad for neocon jews mass reported me and I got banned, yet I stated facts with supportive evidence.

It could stand or fall on that, instead the mods banned me under the advice of the resident jews who for the last 2 years have been managing every discussion on Holla Forums

The missing image from the ban image was the actual photo of the moonlander, evidence in itself as it doesn't look capable of even reaching France from Dover let alone the Moon, there were several posts I made each with substantial supportive evidence, but apoparently anything that veers away from the jewish science narrative is not okay on Holla Forums.

Either way it's unfortunate a group of jews can monitor this board and instruct mods to delete at the jews request.

Maybe Holla Forums should just relocate to tel Aviv if this is how it's to continue.

You fucking retard. We could make a space elevator on the moon out of currently available and well understood materials. The stresses involved are far less there than on earth.

Incidently, I hadn't mentioned anything to do with flat earth either my interest is NASDA is lying I have no theories outside of that fact, I certainly weren't the one spreading jewish DisInfo like the jews who complained only ever have done since they hijacked Holla Forums

just a bunch of steel and some rubber

>Different from (((peace prizes))) m80
Theoretically you're right, but (((they))) insisted in using the same brand to use scientific credibility for political purposes. That horribly backfired; the international scientific community should have violently fought against this conflation from the very beginning. Now they suffer the consequences of their passivity.

Welcome to the club. Holla Forums really has deteriorated. Even only two or three years back it was common knowledge that the "moon landings" were obviously fake, but this massive Judeo-Masonic lie simply will not die. Sad, and incredible, with all the evidence out there. The laughable footage, the contradictive interviews etc. Unbelievable how a lie such as this can maintain itself in the supposedly all-informed internet age.

Ridiculous comparison, and you know it. Incidentally, that beamer IS probably much more structurally stable and robust than that laughable "lunar module".

The moon landing happened, the earth is round, Christ was a cuck you need to just fucking deal with it and stop trying to make us look like retards.

I think where a lot of you get derailed is the fact that the moon landing was staged, the astronauts had queue cards and back channel off the record communications with HQ via telemetry links. It was a huge PR stunt, but that does not mean it did not happened. They landed they walked on the moon, we kicked the Russians asses. We dominated.

We bead does Ruskies asess against. FUG YEAH AMERIGA! :DDDD GREADST NATIN EBER :DD D

(check)
You have no, absolutely no conclusive evidence for that assertion. Stop talking ou tof your ass.

Of course it is. That's not what the globular vs. planar debate is about.

How original. Braise Oddin, tip fedora etc. etc. ad nauseam.

"muh PR" in an explicit space thread on Holla Forums. GTFO you transparent shill faggot.

More meaningless drivel without any evidence whatsoever.

Heil Hitler

I only ever proven the Moon landings certainly couldn;t have happened, the rest was your daily jew spiel.

I tell you what is making Holla Forums look like a bunch of retarded cunts.
The endless shilling for ever neocon zionist jew in world politics.
Honestly there isn't a single external observer who hasn't queried the fact why Holla Forums only openly shills for neocon jews now.

What's it like being a lesbian kike? Is it difficult, always having to tell lies and shit all over the country you hate so much? Are you still bummed that Brezhnev didn't take over and make us all good little commies so you'd never have to earn a penny in your miserable, shitty, Jewish carpet-munching existence?

I'll bet you are, my sapphic little friend. Now toddle off to the tennis match; free men are discussing things and you're in the way.

Seriously, only fucking kikes get that gleam in their eyes when they feel a chance to deny the Moon landings. Rope for the lot of them.

Let this be a daily reminder that the mods are compromised and work hard to destroy Holla Forums

OP is a faggot but he dose have a point but failed to word it.

If we did indeed go to the moon in the 60s-70s and it was not a sham. We still have the tech, the problem is a massive brain drain in NASA, no one there has the smarts, drive and dearing to pull it off anymore

vid related is the footage that the guy who was left on the moon shot wh8en the moonlander took off. It totally does not look fake at all. Those 60s sci-fi effects are like totally real.

You can't argue with moonhoax shills. First they try to convince you that it was real then they say that it didn't happen, but that we went to the moon and then they spout about the non-existant van-allen radiation belt and how adolf hitler went to the moon and that there's a secret space program with flying saucers. It never ends this shit.

Moon landing deniers are kike shills trying to undermind that German techology got us to the moon, the greatest achievement the white man has ever done.

There was no guy left on the moon, it was a camera that tracked the module.

This. These people are about as retarded as all the round earthers here.

Lame reverse psychology. If the landings never happened, they cannot be a reason to be proud. Truth over appearance, THAT'S the Aryan way. Now GTFO, you're really transparent. Why do they never send the good shills for these kinds of threads? Is there some kind of shill hierarchy, e.g. that the best guys work on "Holocaust" topics, while the lesser ones get delegated to NASA stuff?

Oi vey, good insight goy!

Moon landing is fake, but ISS is real, satellites are real and the earth is round.

...

When I was at Cape Canaveral in the early 80's I thought how in the hell did we go to the moon in this thing?

Correct.

Correct, but it's not a "spacecraft" in "space", but a project, consisting of a wild mix of CGI, zero-g flights, high-altitude balloons and underwater greenscreens.

Correct, but not in the sense of space satellites. They are all high-altitude balloons.

Correct. That's not what the planar vs. globular debate is about, though.

Moonhoax shills change ids as much as they change their tactics. They never discuss the issue at hand. Their modus operandi is ignore, ridicule, change the subject, mock & ridicule some more and then they try to change their story and the subject again. It never ends.

They must've kept that camera in the same trunk they kept the moonbuggy in.

Sounds more complex than putting a big satellite into earth orbit.
Oh that just stay at the exact height because the gas in these balloons never leaks and doesn't heat up or cool. That's amazing again this kind of technology is more amazing than actual satellites that stay in orbit.

Total jewish satanist nonsense.

Oy vey indeed

Reported. It’s scientifically proven.

Exactly… much more brittle and fragile than high-altitude aircraft, and they were supposed to go to the moon? It's laughable, a prime example of the Big Lie technique.

There is no "orbit".

Correct, it's quite laborious. You need specialized aircraft, very highly trained crews and permanent radar cover, but the US are succesfully pulling it off since the late 40s. Projects like MOGUL and especially GENETRIX were the forerunners, but the procedures have been perfected, as can be seen e.g. in this vid.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Genetrix

Don't invoke "science" as if it gives you some magical instant authority, you massive faggot. If we use "science!", it's the other way around; science clearly proves that the landings could not have happened as they told us.

8/10 bait. almost made me dissect your post.

user that is objectively false. You use satellites on a daily basis that have been launched hundreds of miles into the atmosphere if you call internationally. Be a conspiracy theorist all you like but stop spreading misinformation that is easily verified as being false.

This is correct…

… but this is false. They are high-altitude balloons. No rockets at all, as the other user correctly pointed out.

...

Don't be lazy. Just go on Youtube and search for "NASA balloons" and you will find dozens, if not hundreds of videos of NASA satellite balloon launches. Here is one short vid to get started. Now the ball's in your court; please provide evidence for your rocket hypothesis.

Oh shit we got a flat earther I repeat gov agents stop him before he explains the sun and moon cycles. And websites like stuffin.space that catalog everything in orbit including the launch debris.

Your game is to make the real shit that (((they))) do sound like fantasy by combining it with retarded shit.

I'm actually undecided on the question of the shape of the Earth. What I know for a fact, though, after having seen about 80 balloon-based satellite launches on video, is that NASA itself (as well as other "space" agencies") clearly does not depend on anything orbital to bring satellites online. As mentioned in this post , satellite ballooning is the default technique. YOU have to provide evidence for the orbital rocket hypothesis.

Bitch please. Since 1998 even women get (((science))) prizes.

The evidence is the literally thousands of videos from all over the world of launches that out weigh your few videos of whatever tests they were doing with the balloons.

I didn't ask you for evidence of launches per se; I asked you specifically for launches bringing satellites into orbit.

Those aren't tests; the testing phase was in the 50s, with projects like GENETRIX. All those ballooning vids you see are real, actual satellites used e.g. for telecom or geo-positioning purposes.

The average smartphone is built in China or environs.

So? On the off chance a women makes a contribution to science, why shouldn't they get recognized? There have been a few women that have made scientific achievements.

Agree, e.g. Marie Curie or Einstein's wife.

we wuz orks and shieet

Technology is the knowledge of how to make a moon lander out of sheet metal and copper wires. Back when they were English-speaking Germans, Americans had that knowledge or could acquire it. now that they are non English-speaking Latinos, they don't and can't.

Also the first picture taken of DNA revealing the double helix structure was taken by a women. But aside from that I can't think of too many more.

The Chinese could, since they build smartphones.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_Lunar_Exploration_Program
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mavic_(UAV)#Controller
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phantom_(UAV)

Good example, the DNA feud is an oft-cited example amongst feminists, and admittedly, Crick was somewhat of an asshole.

Women usually simply don't have the required autism and inclination, but yes, IF they do valuable scientifc work, it should be honored as well.

Israel has it now. Eventually the chosen will live on the moon and look down on planet nigger.

hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674013032
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Anglo-Saxon_Protestant#Post-World_War_II

Actually a good counter-argument to the orbital satellite hypothesis. With all that debris and micro meteorites supposedly circulating Earth in a dense cloud, wouldn't one expect the regular occurence of satellite damage and transmission interruptions? Yet, that never seems to happen.

The website I gave you shows the satellites the launch date, the debris, the re-entry dates etc.

Why wouldn't they test the functionality of every multi million dollar satellite and it's sensors and rx and tx at high altitude and temperature extremes before launching it into orbit to be lost forever?

NOTHING can replace the divine spark. Give a bunch of greedy degenerates a replicator and they will do nothing but murder one another more quickly.

If we desire the greater joys of soul, romance, and culture; WE MUST FIRST PURGE. There can be no vibrancy of life, no joy of living, for a people who have hated their souls and connection to the divine.

I have easily explained calculus to 12 year olds from amish families and they treat it like common sense. The mind which is full of love and light knows the depths of any mystery. Wisdom herself teaches those who have honored her with righteousness and discipline.

third option: user is an imbecile and assumes, to preserve his self-respect, that so is everyone else

They didn't actually happen.

I WANT SUMMERFAGS TO DIE IN A FIRE YOU FUCKING T_D CUCKS NEED TO GET THE FUCK OFF MY BOARD GO BACK TO BREITBART YOU BASED NIGGER LOVING NORMIES

Because shit at different altitude orbits at different speeds, it aint rocket sci… oh wait it is.

List of fastest computers:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TOP500#Top_10_ranking

USA #4

You can see it with your naked eye you don't need a scope. I have watched it many times now.

It's actually hard to watch it through a scope as it's traveling so fast. You would need a very expensive computer driven motorized scope to watch it that way.

I don't consider some website strong evidence. Anyone can put it up with some nice, sparkly graphics and feed it numbers God knows from where.

That's not the point. Of course they ALSO test those balloons and satellites, as is expected with any high-tech artifact. The point is that you have to show evidence that orbital rocketing is the default method of launching satellites, when the actual available video evidence points to high-altitude balloons as the standard, go-to method.

No, you can't see the ISS with a telescope. What you MIGHT have seen is some reflecting object at the purported location hint: a high-altitude balloon, period. Now you have to provide evidence that it actually WAS the ISS.

Yes, of course. And…? What's your argument, that those impacts somehow magically don't happen, or bounce off those oh-so robust solar panels?

(check)
You have seen some object alright… you need to prove it was the ISS, though. That's the point. I don't doubt the existence of AN object there at all.

the chinese "moon landing" is even worse than the NASA one from the 60s

Many of those "German" Nobel prizes went to Jews like Einstein

Maybe post the whole thing next time.

Look at Apollo 8. This was the 3rd ever launch of a Saturn-V rocket, the first manned Saturn-V mission, and the preceding Saturn-V launch ended in failure. Apollo 8 is claimed to be the first circumlunar flight, which means that the first test subjects through the Van Allen belts and beyond Earth's magnetosphere were human.
Does that make sense? In the Mercury program, NASA sent up dogs and monkeys before humans into low Earth orbit. But for the first ever voyage into an unimaginably hostile environment, they send human test subjects? I highly doubt it.

...

Take the final red pill.

Look into electrogravitics. The Nazis faked the moon landing to take their secret space program deep black.

If you knew how to use a graphing calculator correctly, you could make your own fucking lens out of a plastic bottle and stick it in a goddamn cardboard tube, and you'd be able to see it no problem.

"Muh bubbles" is a nigger argument, and everyone knows it. This ridiculous tinfoil nonsense is the second reason we should never have tolerated lolbergs hanging around, the first being their social liberalism and spiritually Jewish nature.

There are prisms left on the moon's surface by astronauts who visited it that will bounce a laser pointed at them directly back at the projection spot. They were left there so terrerstrial astronomers all over the world would be able to harness data about the orbit of the moon, but they also serve a double purpose of irrefutably proving that we did, in fact, visit the moon's surface. This kind of refined reflective nature, that would perfectly bounce a laser back to the origin point no matter the angle of the aimed laser, would never naturally occur. Certainly it would not occur naturally on the moon's surface.

I don't have to prove anything, you lolberg shithead. I can shine a laser at the moon and get a laser back in my face. The onus is on you to explain your implausible horseshit conspiracy. And you can't. All you can do is mumble back Hotep and Brotherhood of Islam rhetoric about flat earths and kangz and the moon is really a cube, because a few pixels on quintuple rehashed footage from the fifties looks shifty, in your personal opinion.

Suck my ass, you LARPing motherfucker. Dumb fucks like you are the number one thing preventing people from believing the truth abou things like the Holocaust. You empty headed 'woke' fuckwits give actual truthseekers a bad name.

Go vape yourself back into a stupor and shitpost about based niggers on Breitbart. You aren't wanted here.

These special snowflake freaks really need to be banned. It's like they're trying to discredit us. But the mods are just as bad hence this /fringe/ crap is allowed to fester here

Of course you do. You asserted that the object you saw at the purported location was the ISS. I merely ask you to provide evidence for that claim.

Have you actually done this, personally? Be honest.

No evidence, no arguments, just insults and ad-homs. Do you really think this strengthens your case?

I don't consider any of your "evidence" strong so there you are.
Yes it is.
check pooptube numerous independent astrologers using telescopes with filters to track the transit of the ISS across the sun. Guess what it's ISS shaped and it dont have no balloon filled with temperature negating gas.
No my argument would be we have been documenting the orbit of every non man made satellite since fucking copernicus i.e. meteorites, and they don't come flying directly at earth because oh you know that fuck off big ball of light out there and it's gravitational pull.
As stated numerous independent astrologers confirm what I and millions have seen is in fact the ISS.

Since when do we make smartphones in America?

You're the one with the groundless conspiracy theory, you walking dudeweed abortion. The onus is on you to prove your horseshit, and you can't do it, which is why you will desperately do anything to flip the burden of proof no matter what rhetorical pretzels you have to tie yourself into.

Filtered and reported. And I'll report every other post you make in this thread. If you want to shove your head between your legs and drink your own incontinent shit through a straw, do it on /fringe/, where you'll at least be in good company with the other robots, spergs, and drug-addled lolbergs.

The ammount of flat earthers and just general stupid shit in this thread is staggering.

(check)
Concern shilling, insults and still no evidence. GTFO; your gig is up.

Many videos show satellites launches by high-altitude balloons (I've personally watched about 80), freely available e.g. at Youtube. You cited one website; there is no comparison here. You MIGHT be right, don't get me wrong, but don't be lazy.

No. To state it clearly: the question was not if there exist test balloons with test satellites. Of course they exist.

The question was: is orbital rocketing the default method of launching satellites? You assert to the positive, citing one website; I assert the negative, citing videos (two directly, indirectly about 80) showing that NASA and other agencies regularly launch satellites via balloon.

Please give an example. I purposely will not look one up myself right now to give you the opportunity to present the video evidence you consider the most convincing.

Interesting, that's an argument based on the history of astronomy and not on actual aerospatial engineering data, which should be easy to come by if it were such a clear case. Why this choice?

You're being lazy. Buy a scope and a filter and look yourself. You could even contact one of the independent astronomers and ask them what make and model you should get. They will give you tips I'm sure because it's fucking amazing I'll grant you.

how the fuck can anyone even think the flat earth is real?

Even if the planet isn't round, the idea of it being flat makes no sense because having Z levels would instantly exclude if from being a flat object, at best you would have a small cylinder, and at worst you have a fucking earth shaped like a can or an icecream cone, what the fuck

Summerfags are bad enough on other boards, where their worst offenses are having shit taste and not fitting in with the board culture.

On Holla Forums, though, it's so much worse. These dumbass kids actually think their regurgitated Alex Jones opinions warrant serious consideration.

We should have nuked r/T_D when we had the chance. Now we're stuck with these idiots.

I don't care for your insults. You repeatedly did not provide evidence for your assertion that the object you saw was indeed the ISS; this is the only thing that matters.

WHAT is "scientifically proven"?

Are you talking about the ISS, or the question regarding satellites launched by ballons or via rockets?

The question isn't about roundness. Of course the surface of the Earth is round. Is Earth spherical or planar, THAT is the question.

8 years of
THANK MUSLIMS FOR THEIR CONTRIBUTIONS TO SCIENCE
And all the good scientists went private or to France/Russia.

since we're talking about space, does anyone remember that asgardia thing? did anything ever become of that? it was supposed to be some independent space exploration thing run by some ukrainian dude who didn't look even a slightly trustworthy

No shit because you have convinced yourself and now you'll look like a complete cock and have to reassess something you have obviously spent valuable time letting yourself get convinced by. The evidence for is overwhelming, the evidence against is sketchy as fuck and nearly always some jew cunt like dubay or some satanist freakazoid like quasi luminous. It's fucking retarded fella.

You can not send something into an orbit with a balloon. The object needs to be accelerated to some 13,000 MPH. Those baloon things are not orbital satellites.

Here's one of the latest launches made possible by spacex, if you know anything about physics you'll know you can maintain an object in orbit by countering the gravitational force with centrifugal force, that's why they use rockets, to give the satellites enough velocity around the Earth so the centrifugal force cancels out the gravitational one. Basically this

youtube.com/watch?v=ei3nGWD4d5A
There are hundreds of videos like this one.

I'm assuming you say they use helium balloons to launch satellites because the Earth is flat and thus orbiting a satellite around a disk would be impossible? I'll refrain myself from calling you retarded.

youtube.com/watch?v=2h5XprYoLho
There are hundreds of videos of the ISS and other satellites transisting the moon, here's one for example.
In this case the ISS is transiting the Sun: (Better telescope and detail)
youtube.com/watch?v=KkCxWUMrzfU

Yes the ISS. No they don't launch satellites by balloon, I doubt they could due to the expansion of gasses with altitude. You wouldn't get lift off with that much silk and that little gas at ground level. By the time it got to space it would be fucking massive. Also wind would not allow you to pinpoint where the satellite was at the correct altitude for release which is no use. It has to be in a certain orbit to service the area intended.

I would think it is, why would you buy that the earth is a circle but not that it's a sphere, I would think that any assertions made would from disproving the earth is a sphere would say nothing positive of any other shape. if it's not a sphere then why isn't it a square? Or a triangle? Or anything other than round?

Provide evidence or be silent, e.g. like this fellow . His examples are by no means perfect, or even good, but at least he tries. Your insults are really, truly, 100% meaningless on an anonymous imageboard.

Correct.

The object needs to be accelerated to some 13,000 MPH. Those baloon things are not orbital satellites.
Correct, balloon-based satellites are not orbital.

>youtube.com/watch?v=ei3nGWD4d5A
Unsatisfying. You see a launch and many computer-generated flashy graphics, but the actual, real, live footage of a satellite brought to space?

Yes, of course. Balloon-launching is THE default mode for satellites, that's the conclusio I came to after having seen about 80 satellite launches by balloon. I posted two examples above, but there are many, many more on Youtube. This one, for example.

I don't have a conclusive opinion regarding the shape of the Earth at this moment.

Thank you. It's not only that insults are bad form at debating, they are simply meaningless. How can anyone think they would have an effect on a person on an anonymous imageboard, especially like Holla Forums? "Retard" this, "lolberg" that, it doesn't make sense.

>youtube.com/watch?v=2h5XprYoLho
>youtube.com/watch?v=KkCxWUMrzfU
I definitely saw an object. That wasn't the question, though, and I don't want to be understood as facetious. As with the poster above, I never doubted the presence of a visible object per se, I asked how you can be so sure that is, indeed, the ISS?

Factually wrong, they do it since the 50s, projects like GENETRIX used very well-trained Air Force crews to conduct the reeling-in operations in those times. As mentioned a few times, many launches of satellite balloons can be seen on video.

If they could already do it in the 50s, I'm sure they hammered all the problems out in the meantime.

According to a debriefing interview done with an Air Force captain who participated in GENETRIX, this is indeed a problem, so apparently they used a quite dense grid of balloons in those times. Those crews were in the air basically 24/7 and were considered the elite of the AF due to their sky time. Probably nowadays sensor and transmission technology is better, so they don't need such a tight grid anymore.

flat earthers are just goon shills. at this point. its just burnout at this point, kamphy should make use of his mod abuse and just ban those jude shills.

This is you.

If you filter two people, just two people, all the flat-earth space-isn't-real /fringe/posting fucking disappears. This motherfucker is on (20) and counting, with no signs of stopping.

Just filter and report. Physical removal of the lolberg is the only solution.

Obviously the wind isn't real, man. It's just an Illuminati psyop to hide the existence of giants and the reality that earth is a spinning disc in the sky.

Why the fuck are you still talking to this guy? Report and filter. /fringe/ belongs on /fringe/, not Holla Forums.

The "flat earthers", or "planar theorists", to use less incendiary language, usually cite an azimuthal equidistant projection like this one, i.e. it's round as seen from above, but not spherical.

If those topics perturb you, just leave the thread. Seriously. What are you doing here, in a space thread on Holla Forumsitically incorrect? Surely there are dozens of other threads and topics to your liking.

I don't know if you skipped trough the video or what, you can see the launch, the cameras tracking the rocket from the ground and on board cameras showing how the rocket ascends, how it gains speed, the stage separations, everything.
Here's another video by the ESA showing the whole launch and the satellite separation, with the satellite being let into orbit.
youtube.com/watch?v=vHWDNrrfhnI

Then how do you explain the satellite transits, the Doppler effects in their transmitting frequencies, hell, ¿how do you even explain google maps? If you had a satellite attached to a balloon its trajectory would be unpredictable and taking pictures of the entire surface of the earth wouldn't be possible. Satellites travel at tremendous speeds which can't ever be achieved by strapping them to an helium balloon and letting them go.
youtube.com/watch?v=VgNz70XUcK4
You can obtain data from satellites using nothing more than a $20 software defined radio dongle and an antenna and check the theory by yourself. Check the equations for frequency shift, calculate the velocity and see it for yourself how the speed and trajectories add up.
You can calculate the speed and thus orbit height doing simple math, then correlate your results with reality.
You can even get signals from the ISS which also suffer from doppler shift because of the speed at which the ISS travels (another way to check the ISS's speed and trajectory). This is the reception of a commemorative image sent from the ISS.
youtube.com/watch?v=XOh2IGU9Vfk (Skip to 4:15)

You can replicate this stuff bu yourself, instead of just listening to me go and get a telescope or an SDR radio and start experimenting.

There are in fact "satellites" launched with balloons, that's correct, but those satellites are used for study of the atmosphere and other stuff which doesn't requires them to be in space, thus making it cheaper to launch. I use "satellites" in quotations because they're not technically such a thing, as a satellite is an object in orbit, not just floating around.

I don't see why you're saying that since "satellites" are launched by balloons there can't be any satellite launched by a rocket. Just no, each method has its purposes, if you don't need your satellite to stay in orbit to perform the tasks, for example like a telescope, radiotelescope (getting away from the radio noise and atmosphere of the earth for better pictures), meteorological stuff or whatever the reason and you don't have those 300 millions to spare on a rocket you can rely on balloons. Knowing that those balloons are not easily controllable and don't follow predetermined paths like an object in orbit does.

You can even prove the earth is round by yourself, I don't know where the flat earth argument comes from.

Also masonic anti-grav

> my CIA SHILL OP is established (((/r/pol))) CUCKTURE XDDD

kill yourself you glow in the dark cia post 2014 reddit raiding nigger.

This is shit floating around user, dosent mean its all underwater, plus if thoes were air bubbles they would be rising quickly to the surface. Gay video.

Isnt there some spooky recordings of some poor smuck they sent up before Yuri Gagarin survived?

Bull. Shit. The plans are all right there, and science, materials, and electronics have all advanced by several magnitudes since then.

When Yuri Gagarin died the USSR official report stated that he collided with a meteorologic balloon while piloting a MiG-15, when in fact he collided with the sonic barrier of a Sukhoi jet which was flying nearby and wasn't detected due the poor meteorological conditions, also it was flying without authorization.
The soviets covered it up to avoid the shame of their hero dying because of such a negligence. The soviets have a long story of massive fuck ups, which were also not officially disclosed.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nedelin_catastrophe
The soviet rocket history is plagued with disasters of humongous proportions.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N1_(rocket)#First_attempt

Meant to reply to

also vladimir komarov's flight was rushed in 1967, eventually crashing to earth. komarov had agreed to flight despite multiple known problems to spare his friend gagarin's certain doom, who would have replaced him. he is the subject of that famous open casket photo.

Here's the real timeline of civilizations progress.

...

It's unfortunate but I have met people irl who have been taking redpills and end up believing this shit, the flat earth shit. It's worth giving a few good points so that people who are questioning their core beliefs because they discover 9/11 and the holohoax and more and more shit. That they actually open their mind so much their brain falls out. And the jew escapes again.

...

That's one big ass chicken tendie.

Ever wonder why the old thread about this was kiked to hell?
:^)

This is what people who live in the shit-tier conspiracy hologram actually believe.

What units is the Y axis in?

Is there a recording of him burning up?
Also getting roasted in the Soviet program seemed like a pretty normal way to go. Their head guy Nedelin got fucked in jewtube related.

This is prob why they lost the "space race", after Nedelin got krisped they could never work out big engines. (((NASA))) had to pull a Saturn 5 engine off a museum peice and test fire it a few years ago because after hiring tyrone they forgot how to build something so big.

Soviets had "Nazi scientists" also, dipshit.

In the 50's-80's, The US had an abundance of extremely high IQ, workaholic, super nerds that were ultra patriotic and motivated. You couldn't have put the "Nazi scientists" in Mexico and expected anything close to the achievements they had in the US. Do people understand that in 2017, America's average IQ is on par with Western European countries? With a 60-65% white population! In the 40's-70's America was likely the highest IQ nation in the world. With a 90% white population and a ridiculously booming economy.

this, but don't have a translation

Yeah, they had the luxury of a closed society so none of their fails were consequential. So they just spammed a shit ton of under-tested, shoddy space rockets with an extremely nervous cosmonaut strapped to the nose of it.

...

Strangely this was posted itt but deleted by the mods.

disregard, I suck cocks.

/thread

The military is probably running their own space program. NASA is just a clown ministry.

(heiled)

Nice false concensus building attempt.

Well which is it anons, we have a super secret advanced space force that lased the twin towers with energy beams on 9/11 and the kikes didnt use thermite, or we have a flat earth and the kikes send up tyrone in a weather balloon with a cardboard cutout of the iss. Also what about the nazi base on the moon and Antarctica? Everytime one of these threads pops up, the crazys post retarded shit but it never meshes with the other retarded conspiracies.

If free energy existed would you be sitting at a computer right now? Does true power equal money or control?

kys with a shape-charge tbqh

As long as we have working ICBMs, I'm pretty sure we also have the technology to return to the moon. It sounds like he was referring to physical, currently operational infrastructure when he said "technology". NASA doesn't have that infrastructure because their budget hasn't allowed for it, but the knowledge and core rocket technology has not been lost.

IT DOES EXIST

infinitysav.com
stillnessinthestorm.com/2017/06/freelance-inventor-reveals-free-energy-technology-zero-point-energy-generator.html

youtu.be/YKfFt9aS9dc

aim4truth.org/2017/04/24/the-real-energy-revolution-has-begun/

You mean STEAM? Because modern art doesn't have to stop at destroying the idea of standards in art, but also destroy engineering with a (((focus))) on art in a math related field!

Could it be more likely that we had a kick ass group of white men who were put together and motivated by Kennedy with basicly an unlimited budget used in both in the open and secret as the biggest dick wagging contest in history? Then once the kikes that killed kennedy realised that they were serious about building colonies on the moon and mars they went "OY FUCKING VAY! WE CANT HAVE THE GOYIM ESCAPE!" (((SHUT IT DOWN!))) and then all the funding got cut and the money went to gibs for niggers and spicks?

examine that sentence very carefully

...

Imagine living in a 90% white country that aims to explore and settle the universe. I wouldn't be bitching about my tax dollars going to that. Instead, my tax dollars are supporting Tyrone and his 5 illegitimate and fatherless "keedz"…and I have to pay my income tribute to the kike central banksters of course. It's all rather sad, really.

Isn't it funny, how all the people who go full /fringe/ end up bluepilling themselves on the JQ?

Almost like that's the fucking reason Flat Earthers come here and shill their nonsense.

It's no secret that the original Tinfoil Hat meme was an alphabet psyop.

It isn't meant to mesh together, that's not the point. It's meant to make us look insane and irrational to third party viewers. Flat Earth posting and other related notions is how the alphabets smear and discredit people trying to spread the truth about things like the Holocaust and the USS Liberty.

These /fringe/fags are almost certainly paid shills. It's even more obvious, because it's one dedicated guy who racks up (20)s and (30)s, and then a half dozen (1)s who pop in and then vanish immediately.

It's a fucking CIA intern talking to himself for five bucks an hour and Yale credits.

The fact that the mods won't drop the hammer on his ass but will anchor threads about health and self-impovement is all you need to know to realize that the mods are compromised.

I was thinking (about Jews and how they wrecked everything) and I realized that Buzz Aldrin is going to die within the next 5-10 years. He's like 87. What a tough S.O.B. To go through all that Apolo training… but what really gets people that aren't familiar with the situation, Buzz has a fucking phd and probaly has a 140 IQ. Dr Aldrin is his proper title. All the astronauts were "super nerds" combined with super fighter pilots. The best of the bunch in the Navy and Air Force. I have a foggy memory of slamming beers down in Houston with Buzz and Neil in 1968 (was born in 1980, probaly didn't happen)while listening to the Hollies on the jukebox.

...

World's most common response when debating lying hasbara jews when talking about 911 or the holocaust over the last 15 years would be

On Holla Forums our equivalent is

The Moon landings being faked is perhaps the easiest and most obvious early red-pill out there it's fairly normie friendly also as the evidence of the faked footage is so easy to prove with top end technology to examine the original tampered photos etc, only the jews that harass and astroturf these boards into ineffectual fanboyism and cheering on neocon kikes have decided nobody can dare speak the obvious truth about such jewish hoaxes like Gert Wilders being a mossad agent instead Holla Forums champions these neocon kikes and bans any user who points out the obvious jew in the room.

That every NASA pilot must be a freemason and every piece of footage and photo taken on the Moon is clearly faked is something even a child can see and demonstrate with bsic photo editing skills.

In this thread you have genuine discussion interspersed with the same hasbara kikes circling the wagons on anyone not going along with their jewish
Thus maintaining the cartoon Hollywood narrative that NASA was a secret 'NAZI' operation, this is what the jews have been doing since 1969 to make anyone suspicious of the dodgy Moon Landings because of the association.

Today people are breaking out of their brainwash, the jews on this board are here to ensure Holla Forums doesn't ever get out of it's jew controlled environment as they maintain the pretence of us going along with every jewish false narrative and coercing the board to cheer on every neocon crypto kike and freemason in world politics.

Alright. Fuck it. I know you're going to ignore this anyways

Why?

Ok… Moon is flat too?

We have hard proof that the holocaust is a load of crap, but we don't really have much either way on NASA's operations. We don't turn into true believers, but we're not going to just hop on board something that may truly be a psyop given you're not presenting hard evidence for us.

...

But the U.S. has (((Elon Musk))) and (((Space X))).

There's no air on the moon - no resistence - 1/6 gravity.
The module was contained within an outer structure during exit of earth and space flight.

Ever seen the international space station, or a satellite.
They are flimsy pieces of crap.

It is the same with bringing a deep sea creature up to surface level - it will collapse.
You people have no idea of physics.

are you retarded?

the french get 80% of their power from nuclear energy, do you think they are ahead of any other western country?
also, nuclear power plant create waste that has to be stored for literaly millions of years. we're getting money out of it now, but we'll be stuck paying for the storage facilities forever.

DAS RIGHT

Nope. Now stop posting on Holla Forums with your obamaphone.

Cargo cults are fascinating.

It's time frame.

These conspiracy theories are meaningless without any kind of proof.
Also they are favorite alphabet soup agencies weapon to destabilize discussions online and to make truthseekers waste time.
There are few which make sense, but you probably know about them already. These weren't even mentioned once in this thread.

You stupid nigger, why are you bumping this obvious shill thread when you know it's a shill?

...

See

(painfully underrated post)

By "we don't have the technology anymore" Don Pettit is clearly referring to the fact that we cant produce any rockets near as powerful as the Saturn V these days.

All cults are, I like UFO death cults as I experienced something once, and it's clear there's something in it. Something in our brain already, Tesla experienced it too.

smart phones can't do shit against cosmic rays and also aren't designed with failure in mind. lag droid ain't gonna do shit

If anything, the kikes jewing up this thread by conflating fake moon landing with every batshit crazy conspiratard theory is enough evidence to make you think. The most we can do with a living creature is orbit the earth, anything else and the radiation will kill them. The Earth's magnetic fields only extend so far into space and once you leave that, you're toast.

...

Kind of sad that they're clapping over an engine test working on an old model.

Elon Musk is South African, not jewish.

yep.

lmao
nah

Damn, I knew abos were dumb, but this is another level

Well there is a certain logic to it.
These are pacific islanders who until the white man showed up had lived their entire existence at a stone age level of technology. Maybe bronze age. With the accompanying social development.
Those people in the webm have lived their whole lives in the stone age.
Then suddenly they are confronted with airplanes.
How are they to process such a thing when their life would leave anyone even a white man completely unequipped to understand what they are seeing.

How could an aircraft be anything other than magic?

It doesn't help that back during WW2 these cargo aircraft running supplies for the military would often dump cargo. Because they had to make room for something or poorly trained admin staff had gotten fuel allowances wrong.
They'd leave crates of supplies on the side of poorly made and mostly unsupervised airstrips where the locals could easily get at them, with food often being left behind and consumed by the locals. They could easily find more food in a single shipping crate than they could gather in days. Doesn't take a genius to come to the conclusion there would be more in the plane itself.

Like I said, there is a logic to it all and one that makes perfect sense in the context of those involved.

i agree, won't happen until the world government, so probably 2100s.

Er we built pyramids expecting the pyramid spaceships would return.

This is the dumbest video I have ever seen.

Found the kike

I was stationed in canaveral, you do not build that kind of infrastructure for a hoax. PERIOD. The main assembly building is fucking massive. The crawlers are ficking massive. The entire complex is basically a world wonder destroyed by the kikes. The Saturn 5 is almost 400 feet tall. You do not spend that kind of cash for no reason. I could see the whole program used as cover for something like my earlier post, where they were fucking with the Soviets in secret. But their is no fucking way all that stuff was built just so they could fake it. If it was all a pr stunt you would use something small like the saturn1b, and as little cost as possibe. Especially if kikes were involved in covering everything up.

Interesting, thank you.

Well, I think it's because the globe model is in some way counter-intuitive and depends on calculations and second-hand data to make sense, because when an average person standing on the ground looks around, Earth obviously appears flat (apart from geographic features like mountains, of course). Even commercial airflights don't permit seeing the curve, only from about 20-29km it becomes visible according to the majority of pilots.

Megazords, of course.

FE probably IS nonsense, but the great majority of people trying to debunk it make asses of themselves and show their own scientific ignorance. The great majority of arguments made by "FE sceptics" can be easily blown out of the water. Quite ironic, actually.

Certainly an interesting hypothesis, but what is your evidence for that assertion?

This. I'm undecided and don't really have an opinion regarding FE, but the public material available regarding the "moon landings" is so obviously fake, it staggers the mind.

According to FErs, all the heavenly bodies are luminous objects within or barely outside the so-called firmament, which they envision as a kind of hemisphere closing off Earth.

I appreciate your effort, but this is exactly the pseudo-secptical pseudo-science mentioned here >10156016

Nobody KNEW that the moon had 1/6 of gravity, neither KNEW anybody about the moon atmosphere, for the simple reason of never having been there before. The lack of air is actually an argument of the "moon hoaxers", because without atmosphere, how do you prevent simply crashing down?

(check)
Well, it derailed a bit, but the thread topic ITSELF is actually quite relevant.

When they turn mass-suicidal, it really gets crazy, as with the Raelians.

Interesting post, but that is exactly what the Big Lie technique is. A lie so big, so vast, so unbelievable that everybody - believes it. Don't get me wrong, I don't doubt your sincerity, but remeber that this is EXACTLY what they say about the "Holocaust". Big in itself doesn't prove anything.

Getting all your mooshie kike cousins to cry for gibs from germany for the rest of their lives about getting gasses 10x times in a oven roller coaster and getting a few shitty films of bulldozers pushing body's into a pit and shrunken heads and lamp shades is no where on the level of construction that happened for Apollo.

If it was all a lie then you would have kikes crying out not to question it. Instead it's the kikes besmirching probably the last great thing white men will ever do if rabbi shekelstein has his way. Think Holla Forums.

It's also telling that the kikes are trying to jam muh diversity into this entirely white male effort. Take pic related bitch for example, fucked up on the programming and almost caused Neil Armstrong to pancake. Only him knowing his shit allowed him to manually land with out dieing. Now kikes have acual documentaries about this bitch. We wuz female!

Agree. And yet, they succesfully sold to the masses the idea that a country during total war, the most ferocious of whole human history, with shortages in absolutely everything, had the capacity, manpower and infrastructure to kill and cremate six million Jews. In comparison to that, a "moon hoax" seems comparatively small fish.

Well, kikes qua kikes don't, but the whole US state apparatus, what is sometimes called the ZOG, most definitely DOES cry out not to question it.

I understand that sentiment, but as Whites/Aryans, truth must be the final arbiter, at least and especially on Holla Forums. PR considerations perhaps apply outside, but most definitely not here.

The Holohoax is small beans when all your kike kin own every bit of media the goyim get their info from.

Agree, that's also what Rosenthal (from the infamous Rosenthal interviews - if they're authentic) said. He seemed surprisingly unconcerned with the Holocaust question and didn't give it great importance.

antichristconspiracy.com/HTML Pages/Harold_Wallace_Rosenthal_Interview_1976.htm

Jewish and a fraud

Do you have a single fact to back that up?

Who wants to bet Natsoc Germany would have made them indelible?

All this flat earth retarded kikery reeks of basicly:

Jewish? Definitely requesting a source. Fraud… no, fraud is not the correct word, but on the other hand, he definitely wasn't the godfather of science and superheroe of empiricism as is often claimed today. He was a Mason and very, very deep into hermetics, occultism and Biblical eschatology. In Holla Forums parlance, he was a /fringe/ faggot.

So, they became french? jk

Possibly, but this is basically a "muh PR" argument. At least here on Holla Forums the truth itself should be the main focus, not some purported effect on morale in the wider world.

Apparently it means to lift, raise, or carry. Appropriate, other than being fucking Hebrew.

The only reason that that cycle of shit didn't continue was because Yuri Gagarin used all of his clout and pull to make sure that Vladimir Komarov had an open casket public funeral.

I don't care about the fact that Komarov was a commie. The man knowingly went to his death to save his best friends life. He was a hero.

telegraph.co.uk/news/science/space/5844763/Apollo-11-moon-landing-footage-enhanced-Hollywood-style.html

The digital restoration has been carried out by Lowry Digital, a Burbank, California firm that has done the same for 400 older feature films, including Casablanca, numerous James Bonds and the first Star Wars trilogy. It will finish the project and release more improved images in September.
But if it hadn't been for an amazing bungle at NASA, Hollywood's technological wizadry would never have been necessary.
The specially designed lunar camera strapped to the side of the landing craft recorded in an unusual, "slow scan" format that needed to be converted for broadcast television back on Earth, causing the images to be substantially degraded.
But the quality of the slow scan images on magnetic tapes was near perfect, according to Stan Lebar, who designed the camera. "It was better. We knew it was better," he said.
Now aged 84, he and some old colleagues decided a few years ago to hunt down those tapes and see if they could be converted to digital.
After three years they concluded that somehow, somewhere, someone in NASA's vast bureaucracy had allowed the tapes to be erased, perhaps as long ago as the mid-1970s.
"I wish someone had said 'these tapes have to set aside'," said Mr Nafzger, sitting next to Mr Lebar at a press conference yesterday. What they do have, however, is not bad as consolation prizes go.

A (((collector))) wants them, so an (((unscrupulous individual))) bribes a janitor/security guard and gets them for him.

As my reasoning has just been explained in half a dozen posts. Not one of you flat earth kikes have gives one shread of evidenced other than "its widely known on Holla Forums" gaslight. it feels like I'm talking to a chat bot or a kike.

Again spreading disinfo
They found hundreds of boxed of old footage.

extremetech.com/extreme/181241-lunar-recovery-project-restores-stunning-moon-footage-from-inside-an-a-mcdonalds

...

Holy fuck, kids are fucking stupid now a days.

So not believing in the moon landing automatically means you believe in flat earth, lizard people and every other retarded conspiracy theory meant to delegitmize discussion about actual conspiracies. Why is this being shilled so hard? What hinges on people believing that we went to the moon?

The gatekeepers are trying hard to push the truthpaste back into the tube. Since that basically never works they post retarded shit to distract everyone.

I think you're confusing me with some user. All I'm saying is that we should put the truth central, not some feel-good BS to make us feel proud. If the landings happened (why bring FE into this? wtf), they happened. If not, not.

How does belief in the objective truth rely on the apollo moon landings not being faked?

Image variation occurs for a number of reasons.

First is obvious changes in weather changing the cloud distribution.
The colour changes due to different cameras taking the pictures over the years. Even as late as the early 2000s it will have been a film camera taking the photos with the film developed upon return to the Earth. There's also the matter of light reflection depending on its position/rotation relative to the sun when the picture was taken.
The pictures also all seem to be taken from different angles which again makes sense as different satellites.

Exactly. NASA freely admits that all the public images of Earth are composites and reworks and do not show the planet as-is. Unfortunately, most YT videos explaining this come from a conspiracy angle, but it's actually a technical issue as you mentioned. Still, it's useful to know that all those"blue marble" pictures are artistic representations, not 1:1 shots.

Damn, now we can't culturally enrich other planets

I'm not sure theres many satellites that could take a full shot of the Earth.
Not currently anyways. We've little reason to shift anythin into that kind of orbit.

I don't have Jordan Peterson memes on hand

Good point. I think a bit of the confusion surrounding NASA imagery stems from terminology. The "truthers" ARE right insofar that a lot or perhaps all of the images reaching the public are reworked, but it's due to various technical issues, and calling them "fake" goes a bit overboard. On the other hand, NASA probably really should communicate this image enhancing process better to the public. Graphic designers/CGI experts like Robert Simmons are quite forthright, but perhaps a clearer institutional message or disclaimer would defuse many of the conspiracy allegations.

It's really hard to believe, maybe not impossible, that after landing safely on the moon, without any appreciable damage to the lander, we launched and drove a car that had lawn chairs for seats around on the moon's surface, that we drove it real far away from the capsule and took pictures of the capsule from a distance and that we also took pictures of the earth that show no recognizable land mass and then after all that we got back inside the lander and flew all the way back to Earth in it. Wow! Crazy that almost none of that could ever be done again. Just landing a rover on Mars (assuming that's real) took all kinds of crazy engineering that looks nothing like how easy we had it for the moon. Sure the gravity is different, our moon being 0.16g (aka 16% of Earth's gravity) and Mars being 0.37g, but is that really enough to make it so much more difficult to land perfectly, like the lunar lander allegedly did.

I have hundreds of photos from the apollo missions as well as video, audio and pdf manuals. Most of it looks like Kubrick tier sci-fi, good, but not holding up so good anymore.

But they don't have them now. Learn to read dipshit.

Checked

Getting to the moon is easy, getting back is tricky. You could send everything you need to the moon on a constant stream of rockets. Have the engineers assemble the base with lunar equipment. Even have return rockets ready to build. You'd just have to stay on the moon for a small period of time.

-

To all the we didn't land on the moon faggots. Ever think that just because some footage is fake means that they were trying to hide something?

I doubt it would really help much.

Well the earth image you showed us there shows us little because of massive cloud cover and the low resolution of the film cameras used.

And they didn't return to earth in the lander. They returned to the orbiter in the lander. Then returned to the earth in the orbiter.

Landing on Mars is a lot harder than landing on the moon because you're dealing with much higher gravity and an actual atmosphere. It's the atmosphere thats the real killer.

Honestly, as an engineer myself, that's exactly the kind of shit we would do. Cheap, practical solution that works. No bells and whistles.

Objective truth shows they weren’t faked.

Really guys?

That's crazy. So they flaunched the lander from the moon's surface, flew it into orbit around the moon, docked with the orbiter and then flew back to earth in the orbiter. Makes me want to play Kerbal tbh.

I just don't get why NASA insists on that absurd level of secrecy and intransparency. I understand perfectly well that most of the budget goes toward high-tech weapon and advanced warfare research instead of pure space stuff (and I'm perfectly fine with that), but it is this space stuff which creates so much of public and scientific goodwill. So why not be more upfront and transparent on the space stuff (especially now that the Cold War is over) while keeping the MIC on the down-low? One can laugh about "flat earthers" and "moon hoaxers" as much as one wants, but NASA in a certain way brought those conspiracy theories upon themselves in the first place.

On the other hand, it's the atmosphere which makes controlled landing possible in the first place due to the creation of drag. If Mars had no atmosphere, landing would be much, much harder. With an atmoshpere you can deploy chutes to glide down, while using boosters to land in a no-atmosphere environment would necesitate bringing much more fuel, and thereby mass.

Come on now. That's not even a bad argument, it's no argument at all.

Crazy ain't it?

The secrecy element is probably institutional. Originally NASA was a testbed for technology that would go into ICBMs and military satellites.
So they got used to secrecy early on.

These days they don't really do much.
Their budget is limited, facilities upkeep is massive and their responsibilities quite considerable.
On top of that every 4 or 8 years they're told to scrap whatever big plan they were working towards and refocus their priorities on something else entirely.
Bush said manned moon mission or was it mars I forget. Obama came in and said "lolnope encourage science education among children and engage in muslim outreach" then Trump came in and went "moon? No wait mars! no moon! Actually I don't really know or care. Do something cool"
Meanwhile they have a bunch of other people in government and international groups constantly bitching, whining and demanding they do this or that.

Lifes hard for NASA.
They wanted to try and make money off the astronaut training facilities by renting specialised facilities out to the ESA and other nations. But that got shot down by the politicians.
They wanted to get a slice of the private satellite launch pie to try and finance some other projects and maintain launch capability. Politicians went "nah, only private industry can do that" so now they're fucked on that front and their launch capability is declining massively
They tried to rid themselves of a bunch of historic pieces and some museums they're responsible for by spinning them off into private entities or forcing some other part of the government to pay for them. Politicians killed that.

Being NASA is suffering.

So we're fucking living the 60's again except under even more bureaucracy this time?

Fuck off

What is:
It's pretty fucking hard to make an ass of yourself when you're trying to debunk something that is so fundamentally and extremely dishonest to the very core of its philosophy. Don't talk out of your ass like FE can get a free ticket when people outright shit on it because it's such fantastically low hanging fruit.

NASA never went to the moon in the first place. Never mind talking about "going back". NASA = drain billions of tax payer money in order to lie and commit fraud so that the money can go (((elsewhere)))

Oh hello (((Joe Rogan)))

ok

Don't pull out the Holocaust like it's fucking equivalent. The Holocaust is doubtful precisely because none of the required infrastructure exists. By the kikes' own admissions even large parts of the camps are "recreated" and shoddily at that. The Holocaust as a fabrication is profitable. It costs basically nothing to write books and get those questioning you arrested or silenced.

The point of the Big Lie isn't to create fucktons of evidence and spend money doing it, it's to lie about something so large and wild that no one would believe you'd dare lie about it. Crawlers and rocket manufacturing facilities are not on-par with shitty camps, brick buildings, and a few concrete rooms Jews claim are "gas chambers."

The Holocaust has essentially no evidence and rests on attacking and silencing those who question it. The Moon Landings have enormous amounts of evidence (even if you want to claim it's not conclusive) and no one has yet been sent to jail for questioning them. They are not equivalent.

And, frankly, it's not all that wild technologically. Not unless you want to start claiming what retards above did like that the Earth is flat, that entering space is somehow impossible, that space travel is somehow equivalent to every other form of travel, or be willfully ignorant of the history of space flight.

Mars has an atmosphere, genius, which, yes, makes landings and missions thousands of times more complex. There's also the fact that Mars missions are measured in years to the Moon missions being measured in days, if not hours.

It's not at all hard to believe that a lander could land near-perfectly on a low-gravity body with no atmosphere. It would probably have been easier than landing anything on Earth. Fuck, they even built an aircraft meant to simulate the lander which pilots did manage to land perfectly in an atmosphere at six times the gravity.

Do you even understand how much more complex atmospheres make things?

PS: That image is clearly of the Pacific. You might know it as the largest body of water on Earth. In the bottom left you can clearly see Australia and in the top right part of North America. Fuck's sake, you can even see New Zealand peeking in the bottom. Don't use your ignorance of geography as proof of anything.

I'm sure you mean well, but your post is a good example of the pseudo-science and pseudo-scepticism I was refering to.

An inferred, theoretical concept surprisingly hard to detect and quantify. Neither military snipers/long distance shooters, nor military and commercial pilots, US Navy navigation or SAM systems like the Sea Sparrow take the CE into account; for practical purposes it doesn't exist.

Not in conflict with prevailing FE models.

Inferred, not observed. I.e. when you look through a telescope, you see certain luminous heavenly bodies, you don't SEE them as spherical.

Doesn't play a role in practice. Neither civil ships nor military navies use spherical geometry for navigation purposes.

Incredibly hard to detect and quantify and actually a great topic of debate within the astronomical community.

Ironically, this is a typical argument used by FE people.

This is the biggie. This is the hole in all the FE models I'm aware of.

So where are we at? You cited 13 phenomena or theoretical concepts, and only one of them is unequivocally valid, all the others are either not in conflict or could even be used to support FE models (fishbowl effects being the big one). Now don't get me wrong, this is NOT a "flat earth" post, I simply want to repeat and point out that much of the debunking attempts are shoddy and superficial themselves. Science is really, really hard and the building of theoretical models an incredibly complex subject ladden with theoretical and epistemological presuppositions and pitfalls.

Is this warhammer 40k timeline?

I like how the greatest effort human kind has undertaken in the last 100 years is now basicly a Disney world ride. Thanks Kikes!

Not yet.

Most of them, yes. Balloon launching is much more common than rocket launching, for the simple reason that it's much more economical. Take a look at this site from Swedisch space center Esrange, for example. They launched and are launching hundreds of satellites and modules by balloon, and this is just one launch center of the relatively unimportant country of Sweden. HABs are not some esoteric, negligible minor detail, they are the mainstay and work horse of bringing things up:
stratocat.com.ar/bases/37e.htm

The launches themselves are real, what I doubt - or to be more precise: what there is no evidence of - is that they are the main mode of bringing satellites up into the sky. That's why all those space agencies have problems on the free market: rockets are nice and all, but balloons are simply much more cheaper. The list from Esrange given above is a clear indicator.

Regarding the magnitude of the public effect? It definitely is.

The point isn't the infrastructure. Of course it exists, NASA had and still has a large part in creating the carrier systems for nuclear weapons, after all. The point is that the existence of that infrastructure per se does not prove or disprove the existence of moon landings.

Agree.

If the evidence were so enormous as you assert, the conspiracy theories wouldn't exist in the first place. As mentioned here and here , NASA brought much of those upon itself by their absurd level of intransparency, not to speak of shoddy archival practices. I understand a certain desire for secrecy - NASA is a big part of the MIC, after all, and it's no secret that the lion's share of its budget goes toward advanced weapons research instead of space stuff -, but NASA could have averted much of the controversies by being more forthright with the public and the wider scientific community.

Don't be facetious. Space travel is and remains an incredibly complex technological and aeronautical undertaking to this very day, with great costs and dangers involved.

More complex? Yes, but don't necessarily more difficult. For entry, an atmosphere has the large advantage that you can deploy chutes and don't have to bring as much fuel for the booster. The Russian Venera probes are a good example of chute use for atmospheric entry.

In theory not. But then, we're not talking theory here, but a real, actual landing on another world with 50s/60s tech.

I don't see the issue here. All those "blue marble" images are, of course, composites and reworks, for various technical reasons, and NASA, or at least specific designers, are quite forthright about it. See those posts: , , , . It's common knowledge among "spacers" that the full Earth shots are artistic representations (not: "fakes").

You could have chosen asteroid mining.
youtube.com/watch?v=3-3DjxhGaUg

Letting women in was the thin end of the wedge. They do all their standard bullshit where everything except results starts to matter. Then they started the diversity hires which gave the women something to meet and chat endlessly about.

Really the few white males left have done an impressive job with decades of diminishing resources and exponential decreases in mission focus over things that "matter" to women.

...

You can just build it in space.

As i mentioned in this post

Neil Armstrong almost crashed, with the computer craping out. We know how kikes operate, if this was faked then it would not have been built. Things like the computer would have been waved off as a box with the word computer written on it. Technical documents exist for pretty much every single piece of hardware used on the program. THIS WAS NOT FAKED. This was not RABBI BAGLESTEIN crying out "oy vay thats racist" when someone questioned if the lampshade cough cough i mean computer was real.

There's truly no point in debating this level of retardation. They're never going to move past it because the contrarianism is what they're getting off on.

Mock them and move on.

Why are you talking about computers now? Of course they existed back then already. Not only do informatics and early computers go back to the 19th and early 20th century (Babbage machine/Zuse), they were and are heavily used for the missiles carrying nuclear weapons. Computers are absolutely not the issue here, but the specificevidence for the alleged moon landings.

You do not fake all this for a hoax.

The Moon is fake. Wake up sheeple.

YOU and I certainly don't; but we're not speaking about your or me, we're talking about the world's most powerful government, heavily jewified since at least the 30s, after the most destructive war in human history, in the midst of the Cold War. They had the motive (internal and external propaganda) and the resources, so there's no a priori reason to rule out the conspiracy hypothesis.

Step up your game.

Are you a kike? Because thats some kike tier misdirection.

The Moon is flat.

What is the frame of reference that explains being able to jump/fly from (if traveling in the orbital direction) or stay on (if perpendicular to or opposite the orbital direction) an object moving at 100.000 km/h. when gravity's force only causes 9.81 m/s freefall?

American chauvinism is too stronk to realize that a moon landing was faked under the two biggest propaganda empires that ever existed.
Proof it isn't real; the next country who want to go to the moon are the 3rd biggest propaganda empire we ever had: communist China.

I really don't get what you mean. Of course computers already existed back then, that was never the issue. They were and are crucially important for ICBM, after all. How does this pertain to the question of evidence for the alleged moon landings, though?

What is the context of your question, what are you getting at?

This, perhaps, is true, but -

- this is a clear non-sequitur.

If the pajeets can get to mars but cant make a sewage treatment plant i think we can make it to the moon.

Ok mooshie

Earth revolves at Mach 87. The force of such speed (if not isolated to a reference frame) should have an absolute effect on anything on it.

I see your point now.

Very good quote.

Cautiously agree. It's one of the less popular FE arguments, but I've heard that one before.

Stay on topic, don't let the shills distract you.

...

Stay on topic, it's really important. Besides, you can't out-Hitler me, I have over 300 images of the Führer on my HD, some of them quite rare.

...

Kek

...

And landmass that changes at that rate as well? Even with the same camera it's always a completely different thing. I don't buy the whole flat earth thing but they are right in that regard.

I can't wait for Chinks, Loos and Russians to colonize Mars and become the future of humanity while The West dies due to Jewish cancer.

You fucks deserve all of it for letting yourselves be reamed in the ass by Goldbergershekelstein, while you masturbate to Hitler on mongolian basket-weaving forum.
"Moon hoax" is among the most idiotic things out there and if you refuse to beleive that Americans made it there you will refuse any amount evidence on any subject if it contradicts your set worldview.
Russians were watching them just the same and would have denounced US if they really faked it. Astronauts left instruments on the Moon that were used and you can fucking bounce a laser off the surface of those and get a reflection(that's how we measured distance between Earth and the Moon).
But what do I know, NASA is geting reamed and all non-Westerners are more space-ready than US or Europe.

...

...

...

Did you get your internet connection just yesterday? There are much, MUCH more controversial topics out there.

Wrong, the Russian programs themselves were highly dubious and veiled in massive secrecy. As with so many things during the so-called Cold War, both sides agreed to let certain things slide for the sake of homefront propaganda. The "Cuba Crisis" is another example.

Who is this mysterious "we"? Have YOU done and verified it?

Not much, apparently.

Hey, I'm not the one trying to refute the mountains of evidence and data without providing a suitable alternative, burden of proof is on hoax-mongers. But they will keep their heads buried in the sand simply because they are morons without the most base understanding of scientific principles and astronomy.
Unlss you believe that all space agencies, universities and laboratories in the world are in thrall to a consipiracy, then you cannot question the data, if you do, you are the lunatic here.

Another thing that needs to be addressed is the way our kike goverment pissed away our launch capacity. Its been almost 10 years and we still have no replacement for the shuttle. Having to rely on russia is disgraceful.

Every bit of investment pissed away by kikes and turned into tourism traps for the goyim. Fuck I hate kikes.

Simply not true. If you knew anything at all about the debate, you'd know that the original footage, about 700 boxes in total, went missing.
redorbit.com/news/science/616295/nasa_cant_find_original_tape_of_moon_landing/

" In all, some 700 boxes of transmissions from the Apollo lunar missions are missing, he said."

Of course they point to copies of this and copies of that, but the fact remains: no original data is available. This is a huge red flag, and you're a gullible moron if that doesn't at least raise some questions for you.

Come on now. The alternative is very simple: the alleged landings simply did not take place.

I didn't ask for rhetoric and insults; I asked if you, personally, have verified your claim, or if you simply parroted something you read or heard somewhere.

the flat earther shit is a cianigger psyop

this isn't news to anyone who follows the US space program.
We don't have the heavy-lift capacity.
We don't have the facilities to manufacture the heavy-lift rocket motors.
The closest we have is the falcon 9 heavy.

We're discussing the alleged moon landings, not the debate over the shape of the Earth, (((1))).

...

Answer the fucking question, you massive kike: have you, personally, verified your claim concerning the alleged moon mirrors, or not?

forgive me for confusing you with the other retards, then. i just assumed because the flat earth cianiggers had just started ramping up when i stopped watching the thread this morning.

Oh, I am a retard allright, I just don't want those two questions confused. FE itself isn't the psyop; the psyop is confounding the FE debate with the moon hoax debate so that BOTH questions get tainted. Quite ingenious, actually.

At this rate nothing is real, not even your fucking existence because I have not seen your face and have not verified your ability to use internet, so I might as well by chatting with a bot.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_retroreflectors_on_the_Moon

I know its goypedia, but fucking look at the links and sources, this is plain scientific data.

I have, several times. I have also confirmed you are either an extremely stupid and gullible nigger, or a derailing shill kike. Either way, reported.

Typical kike debating tactics. The scientific method works the other way, laboratory experiments proved the hypothesis true, it is now the burden of the disputer to replicate the experiment and examine the results. The vast majority of things you hold to be true you haven't confirmed yourself with your own eyes.

Holy fuck you are all kinds of retarded. Try harder shlomo.

A perennial problem for digital, written communication. The Turing test is quite old, after all.

I did. The Wiki site lists five reflectors: three by the US, two by the Russians.

The main source used are the following ones:
tmurphy.physics.ucsd.edu/apollo/lrrr.html
Quite interesting, to be sure, but does it constitute a reliable source? Read it for yourself; it's a history piece with a technical overview for laymen, nothing more.

Another cited source:
history.nasa.gov/SP-4029/Apollo_14a_Summary.htm
Since NASA's credibility is what's under scrutiny in the first place, a piece written by that agency a priori is not reliable.

Another one:
lroc.asu.edu/posts/153
Open the site, read their sources. They get their material from NASA - same problem as above.

Check your fucking sources. The lunar reflector MIGHT be real; I'm definitely open to the possibility. But this is lazy sourcework. It's this superficial pseudo-scepticism that gets on my nerves.

Point to those posts, then. Do it, I dare you.

Exactly; right on the money. So you admit you took some authority's words for it. And this is fine. After all, you'right when you say that we, as individuals, don't have the time and funding to conduct our own experiments. But be honest about it. Accept that yes, most of what you claimed is an argument authority. Now the million dollar question: how do you justify your belief in those authorities?

Sick sidestep shill, you aren't getting away from the fact that the burden of proof is on you and nobody has to do your work for you. If you or anyone of you fucks actually cared in the slightest about the issue you'd be able to verify the claims. You wallow in in your own shit and claim its impossible to test but it isn't, you just refuse to put in the work.

I'm willing to bet you've never even asked to be present during a reflector test.

It's NOT that we don't have the technology user, it's that we don't have enough smart scientists anymore. We lack real education in American because the communist Marxists have taken it over.

Now we either have street-smart thugs / degenerates, paranoid hillbillies, spoiled liberal SJW brats and boomers that are in their retirement and just don't give a fuck about our future (or who do, but are just too old to do anything anymore)!

You question the authority producing the information and responsible for the mission, yet you produce no evidence that runs counter to their evidence. Your argument is fallacious from the beginning, as it relies on no refutation or counterarguments based on science or technical data, but on questioning of the authority, which does not address the question on scientrific, historical or factual plane.

In effect your argument is equivalent to "nuh uh, I don't beleive in NASA so they must be lying". Your argument (as the whole rest of hoax-mongers) must be dismissed purely because it is logically broken, as it hinges on your personal, subjective belief about the agency and the situation, as opposed to science or history, when you make a pretense to adressing a factual matter.

I'm fine with your answer. You admitted you didn't verify it yourself, but took some authority's word for it. NASA's, or this or that university's. Now the important question: why did you automatically believe in those authorities? What did they do to earn your implicit trust?

On the contrary. NASA, and by extension you, claim that those landings took place. I ask for evidence supporting that claim - certainly not unreasonable, given that the original recordings are missing.

(check)
That's not how science works. The burden of proof is on the one making the claim. NASA claims they went to the moon - now where is the evidence? They themselves admit the original recordings are gone, so what do they - and you - actually bring to the table? Mentioning those alleged moon mirrors only pushes the ball further, because where is the evidence for them?

Don't invoke those words as if they would grant you some magical instant authority, you massive faggot.

...

>Be (((you)))
>user (Me) confirms: Mirrors on the Moon. Seen with my own equipment, several times.
>(((You))): "Point to those posts, then. Do it, I dare you."

Fucking w0t, m8?

You might as well tell us the Holocaust was real

Reported.

That's a lie. NASA itself admits the original recording are missing. All you is conjecture and second-hand data.

Non-sequitur. Of course those exist, NASA was and still is heavily involved in the ICBM business, after all.

On the contrary, truth is the supreme Aryan value. That's why I'm asking for evidence in the first place.

(check)
Laughable. Now I know for sure you're a shill. What "equipment" would that have been, pray tell?

Bring a fucking argument, you disgusting kike shill.

As a kid, I use to dream about the day a man would walk on Mars. As an adult, I now know that will never occur in my lifetime, if at all, and it saddens me greatly.

...

Aimed correctly, you can bounce a semi-high-powered laser off the moon and get something measurable back.

The Reich put us on the moon, you kike. Give it up.

are you implying that a copy of a copy is useless in all cases?
It is a crime that some NASA pencil pusher decided to re-use those tapes that contained the slow scan video of the live from the moon telecasts. However there are copies of the videos that were preserved by the network broadcast companies that carried the event.

As said before this is disinfo, they found the tapes.

wired.com/2014/04/lost-lunar-photos-recovered-by-great-feats-of-hackerdom-developed-at-a-mcdonalds/

No, you claim they didn't go there, all the while saying nothing about the evidence they presented which overwhelmingly proves the fact that they did - telemetry, pictures, video, rockets, computers, projects, plans, people who took part in construction, existing mateirial remains.
There is physcial evidence of it, you have nothing. Case dismissed.

I don't doubt at the slightest that you "get something measurable back" from the moon. That was never the question. Of course it is a highly reflective celestial body. What I ask for is a justification that this in itself constitutes evidence for man-made objects being the source of those signals. How do you compare, what's the baseline here? According to the pictures those mirrors are very small, the error rate for positioning purposes must be huge in the best of cases. With atmospheric fracturing and intervening micro-particles factored in? Yeah, I remain sceptical.

Certainly a very interesting video about various Earth-based aeronautical vehicles. You'll agree, though, that this by no means constitutes evidence for the landings themselves.

i just don't know. The evidence I've encountered to this day does not convince me of that claim. The paperclip scientists were instrumental in developing ICBMs, though, that much is true. The space stuff was always secondary to the military Cold War efforts.

Of course not. But it should at least raise SOME eyebrows. All that talk about "mountains of evidence", "irrefutable data" etc. when the original recordings are missing is simply irrational. This is not how scepticism is supposed to work. In fact, the "moon-landers" seem the quasi-religious, true-believer types here.

This. One can laugh about ''moon-hoaxers" all one wants, but NASA definitely brought this upon themselves. The greatest technological and engineering feat of all human history, and they didn't bother to correctly document it, backups and all? For fuck's sake, if it's not a conspiracy, it's at least fuck-up of the highest order, one for which literal heads should roll. It's an embarassment, a gaffe of unbelievable magnitude.

No. It's certainly a valiant effort at digital reconstruction based on second-hand recordings and surviving copies, but it's NOT the original tape-set. Read the article carefully:

"[…] The photos were stored with remarkably high fidelity on the tapes, but at the time had to be copied from projection screens onto paper, sometimes at sizes so large that warehouses and even old churches were rented out to hang them up. The results were pretty grainy, but clear enough to identify landing sites and potential hazards. After the low-fi printing, the tapes were shoved into boxes and forgotten. […]"

Highly dubious.

Source on that data? Again, have you verified this, or did you simply take their word for it?

Highly questionable. The original picture sets are lost, attempts at reconstruction like this nonwithstanding.

We're not talking about the existence of rockets and computers - those were and are part and parcel of ICBM development, after all. We're talking specifically about the alleged landings.

Exactly - plans, and projects. Nothing more.

Sworn to secrecy. We're talking about highly classified projects during the Cold War here. How do YOU know? You don't. You just beleive what somebody told you.

There doesn't exist even one - ONE - piece of unequivocal physicasl evidence. Not ONE. Not this or that rocket part, no "moon rocks" (I'm sure you heard of the faux Amsterdam sample), nothing.

Checked. Also that is cool as shit, ty man

In another couple hunderd years kikes like 42eb7f are going to completely wipe all traces of the white race and everything good we have accomplished off the face of the earth. You can see how they are already going after history.

You're right regarding that general aim, but in this case it's a false equivalence. It's by no means - by no means at all - an established fact that those landings took place in the first place, especially not given the context of the Cold War. The evidence is simply too spurious, to questionable and full of holes.

they will deconstruct all signs of modern civilisation and revert back to nomadic tribes. this probably happens every 30 thousand years.

You are a shill, my man.

This is a load of gahbage. We even still have fine Germanic rocket clubs.

I wish these nerds would get their shit together and launch

copenhagensuborbitals.com

Not necessarily nomadic, but yes, definitely much more primitive, while they themselves hole up with as much tech and knowlegde as possible.

Don't know, the last cataclysm was, of course, the world-wide flood about 12-13K years ago. But that's Ancient-Aryan territory I don't want to go into right now.

No, I'm dead serious. I don't even necessarily believe in the hoax hypothesis. It just gets on my nerves how uncritical those supposed "sceptics" themselves are. Same as with FE. I don't believe any of that "flat earth" stuff, but the great majority of debunkers simply show off their own scientific illiteracy, e.g. >>10162383/

Of course, rockets DO exist, after all. The debate never was about the rockets or the computers themselves.

Nope, the plan was to launch from the poles. This is because it's in the middle of nowhere, so any non charged particles just land on the pole, and the magnetosphere traps most of the charged particles there too. It's not so much fuck humanity as fuck polar bears and/or penguins.

(Launches are normally equatorial, as the Earth bulges slightly at the equator, making gravity slightly weaker. Not much, but it makes a difference in rocketry).

That's been bandied around, but for anything within the solar system, it's a bad idea. Most of the energy needed is during escape from the atmosphere. The advantage of an EPP (external pulse propulsion) drive like Orion is that it has far greater thrust and specific impulse (efficiency, essentially) than a conventional rocket. It makes little sense to do the energy intensive part of the journey with conventional rockets and use the better engine for the (comparatively) easy part of the trip. (This goes out the window when considering interstellar trips though, where the acceleration to extreme speeds is needed, where the power of an EPP would be a blessing).

Aside from all that, there’s also the extreme difficulty of getting the thing into space – the pusher plate really has to be one solid component to survive the stress of repeated impact by nuclear shaped charges. There is no rocket that even comes close to the payload necessary (1000 tonnes plus), not to mention the unwieldy shape.

Its funny how you break everyones comments down in your posts, yet learn absolutely nothing.

Jewtube related, looks pretty narley.

I know all (or at least a great many) of those documentaries. Impressive-looking gadgets, dramatic music, the interviews, the video recordings of test-launches, the explications of the physics involved… all highly interesting, and I learned a great deal from them. But still: not a single proof of the landings themselves. The original recordings are lost, as NASA itself admits, attempts at digital reconstruction like this notwithstanding. All the huffing and puffing, all the bad words and insults do not change this simple fact.

It would have been user, it would have been.

That video marks the closest humans have ever achieved to actual space travel. Not pointless dick waving, but actually getting into space with a vehicle with the payload, thrust and specific impulse to actually do useful things.

Mine asteroids? Build a moonbase? Build a mars base?

It's somewhat ironic that the creation of NASA and the moon mission was what killed space travel. Orion was a USAF project, and there was no way they could justify it when there was a civilian project (which wasn't allowed to make use of nuclear reactors at the time, let alone actual nukes).

Didn't I inb4?
If you don't hit the mirrors, you get absolutely nothing back, if you do, you get something back. When I said that you have to use a semi-high-powered laser, I still meant something that you could go out and purchase yourself and keep in your house. The moon isn't shined to a mirror finish so especially when you factor in atmospheric diffraction both ways, you aren't going to get anything measurable back if you just hit the regolith.

Von Braun was the chief architect of the Saturn V rocket.

No, it wasn't because it was one and the same. You have to realize that the moon was and still is to some degree considered a "fortified position" because of the gravity well. It's like having the high ground except you're 240,000 miles up. The soviets wanted to put a missile base on the moon and that was the only reason why we went. This reasoning is backed up further by the fact that JFK has gone on record saying that he doesn't give a damn about science or space or going to the moon and that the only thing he cares about is keeping the soviets away.

Lol ok bro

https:/ /www. corbettreport .com/episode-233-the-kubrick-question/

Yes.
Yes. That's why they don't care about loosing the "Syria was right now", as long as ISIS destroys all the ancient history.
You are spot on. Why would a terrorist organization target historic ancient sites? I'll tell you:
The creators, the bringers of ALL FUCKING CIVILIZATION ARE WHITE. The whites created the world. The secret Shakesperian society knows this (shakespeare was a society, not a person). The first vestiges of language (Sanskrit) are found to be NOT in india but, SYRIA (This is being Proved now with Genetics and the linguists, but ALAS, who is fucking with the investigations? THE FUCKING JEWS).
Now they are trying to trick all the normal population into thinking that whites were the cancer of the world. Well, lets see, when the whites were busy buildind Europe, what was the rest of the world doing? The only comparable peoples are the Chinease, Japanese peoples. But even them, cannot even come close to the whites.
Now, what is the secret agenda of ISIS? Ever wondered why they were destroying ancient sites? Ever wonder why the Mudlsims targeted the great Buddha statues? It’s because symbology, true symbology (NOT THE FUCKING DAN BROWN SHIT) is the way the great teachers passed down information, for the future generations. All of these secret codes, symbolic, decipher things about the universe, and, hold the history of civilization.
Now, there are Pyramids in China. Ask yourself, why is it prohibited that ANY foreigner checks them out? For the same reason there are white mummies in china. The old leaders of China, the great inventors of china, were, WHITE. In every ancient civilization of earth, whites where there.
ISIS is not here to fight for the caliphate, but to erase history.
IT IS HERE TO ERASE YOUR HISTORY
If you control history you will control the past, they are trying to shame whites for being white because of all the evil they never did.
They will destroy Europeans religions (pagan or Christianity, don’t start derailing the thread), so Europe holds no values to fight for.
They will destroy the institution and turn it into Babylon (look at the buildings of the EU institutions, they are copies of babylonia, literally)
They will destroy the purity of our by destroying their innocence (porn, education).
The only thing that they will make you believe that is true is that you are of no Nation. Because you are white. YOU INHEREITED THE WORLD, YOU CREATED IT.
Now, I will not go into mysticism and esotericism, but the Jews, are the power of Lucifer. The fallen Angel from heaven (some look whiter than many whites across the world). But they committed a huge betrayal, and they no longer serve what whites have always served, the greater purpose of all existence.
You all are the inherites of God’s will, and soon, God’s anger. His anger will someday fall against humanity that adores the antichrist, that what the jews stage as god. You will know it is time to go fight, when the angels start playing teir trumpets, the sounds of the pain the world has suffered. It will be the last battle, and either light or darkness will win.

The humans of the rest of the world thought whites were mytholigcal creatures. You all are fallen angels. Meditate each day, better yourself, and prepare yourself for the last battle.

why not make it on the moon?

I always get depressed when I think about how we're forever Earth-bound because our leaders are fucking faggots who don't care about space.

Making it in the moon would be even worse than in Earths orbit, as the parts would have to be shipped even further by rocket.

If you mean actually constructing it from raw materials on the moon, that might work if the moon was rich in the resources needed (iron, carbon, titanium, uranium primarily). As far as I know it's not, but if someone knows better, please correct me.

What could make sense though is using a smaller orion to construct a larger one in the asteroid field (as asteroids actually are rich in a lot of rare metals, including the above) for the purpose of shifting really large stuff around the solar system (asteroid mining, on a large scale) or even interstellar application.

Sorry, I've completely missed your point.

For just the pusher plate, you'd just need iron. It would be feasable to build it on an asteroid, if not the moon. That's a pretty darn good idea.

if rarer materials can be found in asteroids then in theory you could find those materials on the moons surface layers from the numerous asteroid impacts.

only fags think space is real. have any of you ever been to space? buehller? look up the MICHELSON-MORLEY experiment you tripfags and learn that earth is completely stationary and does not "orbit" jack shit.

while youre at it see if you can detect the blatant photoshop error in this official nasa "iss photo"

True, but it's an issue of abundance. For the pusher though, where you only need iron and carbon to make the steel, it should be doable.

For the bombs/fuel, you'll be needing enriched uranium or plutonium for the explosive component. The focussing system they came up with also had some exotic stuff in it I think.

If you're interested in the orion stuff, this book is excellent amazon.com/Project-Orion-Story-Atomic-Spaceship/dp/0805059857 It's by the son of one of the lead physicists who worked on the project. It's pricy, but worth it.

Eat shit, /fringe/

I'm an user. You're the tripfag.

I'm more interested in establishing a permanent moon base so that large scale geologic surveys can be carried out so we know what material we have available up there. Imagine turning the moon into a massive factory without the worries of ecological polution

If there's anything worthwhile up there it could be a fantastic investment.

There's asteroids with more osmium in them than exists on Earth. As you say, asteroids have hit the moon. Even just one osmium rich asteroid impact could be jackpot.

Agree, especially given the small size of those alleged mirrors and the issue iof atmospheric refraction and micro-particles. We're back at the starting position of having to invoke this or taht authority's word.

Agree.

A bit to pointed for my taste, but yes, on that point I won't disagree. Military matters are the bedrock of NASA's activities, that much is true.

Enlighten me. I'm not a photo ops guy.

The supposed moon landings are not a /fringe/ topic. They are as Holla Forums as it gets, sitting at the nexus of the military-industrial ZOG complex and the (((Cold War))).

So your argument is that the US built a giant rocket, which took off (people all around the area saw the actual launch) but then rather than going to the moon it… dissapeared?

Thankfully though, the Soviets were in on it too, so rather than state that it has dissapeared, they also lied and said that it had gone to the moon, allowing the US to get away with faking the footage?

That sum it up, or do you feel you can better explain it?

A rocket? Many, many rockets were and are built and launched, the principal business of NASA is developing carrier systems for nuclear bombs, after all. Most of them get get detonated over the oceans to avoid damage. This is very important to be aware of (and it's not THAT of a secret, so spare me the tinfoil stuff): most of NASA projects have nothing to do with space exploration or civilian research, but with the development of advanced warfare technology. What you THINK is a space-bound rocket, in nine cases out of ten is a test launch for this or that ICBM modification.

More or less, although it was the Russians who started lying first, with Sputnik. Instead of calling them out, the Americans used NASA to funnel billions and billions of black budget dollars into ICBM research and other absolutely fascinating technology under the guise of this or that space program. The (((Cold War))) had many gentlemen's agreements - no surprise, both sides being ruled by Jews-, this was one of them. The American MIC created a nearly unlimited golden cash cow and took over what was once a country of individualism and liberty, and the Russians could pretend to their own people and hopeful third-worlders that communism really works. A really sick double-whammy.

...

(((Corbettreport)))

/fringe/ reporting in to tell you the Earth is a sphere and that space is vast and needing of conquering.

Yea no, you are refusing to factor in kennedy and his murder and the fact that everything was still run by whites. It was not until the 70's when everything was kikeified and (((shutdown))). Their would be no space program with out jfk.

Also muh icbm research: the usaf had a unlimited budget and still do. In no way do they need to piggy back off of nasa. It has aways been the reverse. The shuttles were retarded cost wise because of the polar and single orbit requirement the usaf forced on nasa (so they could steal soviet satellites)

Your shit is all kiked up. Please stop kikeing up the thread.

Hahaha

Holy crao that bit with the astronauts attached to wires. I didnt think they would be this obvious with it, and now im really surprised on how people can watch this and think its real?

Depends. What's your hypothesis regarding JFK?

No, the point-of-no-return was the 30s. If the Rosenthal interviews are authentic (a point of debate, I know), "Americans have not had a presidential choice since 1932. Roosevelt was our man; every president since Roosevelt has been our man.", to quote verbatim.
antichristconspiracy.com/HTML Pages/Harold_Wallace_Rosenthal_Interview_1976.htm

Of course, but they don't do rocket stuff. Interservice rivalry, the same way the Army can't have fixed-wing aircraft or the Marines don't have their own ships.

Yes and no. Where they DO overlap is aircraft development, the U2 comes to mind, and of course the whole high-altitude balloon (HAB) programs that started with MOGUL and GENETRIX. The development of the satellites themselves were NASA, but the aircraft and crews were AF. Here is a short interview with Major (ret.) David E. Sutherland regarding the latter you might find interesting.

We'll get there again user… Once we deport the beaners and neuter the niggers.

This book seems interesting, but can you tell me if it is written by a gloating Jew?

We haven't had the technology to return to the Moon since the 70's when Nixon ended production of the Saturn V because he was too afraid of having astronauts die during his term. He instead put money into the Space Shuttle, which wouldn't fly until he was out of office, and kept fucking blowing up and killing all the astronauts in exchange for not being able to go beyond low Earth Orbit. The Saturn V was a fucking marvel of white technology. It remains, to this day, the largest and most powerful rocket ever flown. The people who were alive back then were fucking fools to let it slip away.

No idea what you are talking about.
Nigger the usaf launch budget is multiple times what nasa gets a year. Nasa is the red headed step child. Dont even start with what kind of cash the cianiggers get to play with over at the NRO.

afspc.af.mil/Units/

You are litterally retarded.

Nice story, but it doesn't hold any water. The Vietnam War was still raging on, and Nixon should have been afraid of few dying astronauts, whose activities were mostly classified information in the first place? Of course not. No, the reason was that nuke simulation and rocket technology had reached a level where such a powerful rocket simply was not necessary anymore to rain down nuclear fire anywhere on the planet. When you hear "NASA", your first thought should be "ICBM", not "space". The French and Russians do everything in-house, but for some reason the US head honchos at some point in time decided to split development and usage of said missiles between NASA and AF.

Oh, they do launch them - most of them - alright, but the development takes place in close cooperation with NASA. Don't underestimate NASA's budget either, their congressionally approved budget is only the tip of the iceberg. "W-we poor, poor space nerds", kek. Don't fall for their BS.

Agree, it's unholy. Incidentally, the NRO is one of NASA and AF's biggest customers for bringing satellites up via HABs.

No, just an autist with too much time on his hand.

Retarded + a kike

This is nothing but subersion. I'm almost glad they want the Cold War back. We are the Germans and you will never take that away from America.

Tycho should be the 51st state by now, fuck da joos

They know what is comming so they are attemping to cover their asses yet again, all while more good goys are becoming bad goys, even into the boomer spectrum via white colonialists hinting at the JQ until they see it in all media that surrounds them and making them ready for the next election.
I don't know what you think you're doing but wholesome national pride will always win out. Many of the youth will come to it just as I did and have proper fathers to answer the questions they ask

b a d g o y s

a o

d y

s

omfg, you are so fucking retarded..

Bring a fucking argument you massive faggot. I don't pretend to know even half of it, but every third-grader who delves a bit into this shit is aware that NASA is much more than just "muh space exploration".

I would think all but the most powerful and precise research lasors would not scatter there beam over 500,000 miles of travel.

I would be very interested in some sources to back up those claims.
We literally have observation probes orbiting them and taking images of them consistent with Earth's observations. Where do Jupiter's storms go when they go around the other side?
You only make a counterpoint for ships. It very much so comes into practice with air traffic.
Except the parsec unit of distance is literally based on parallax.
That just shows a thorough misunderstanding of what is actually taking place.
Except a number of them are. Another phenomenon accounting for the earth's rotation is how a pendulum will actually appear to move as the earth changes position beneath it if there is sufficiently reduced friction and lack of disturbance.
I understand that you are just arguing asthe devil's advocate, but I think you see FE arguments as having more actual stock than they do. They fall apart fairly quickly when you start addressing serious problems with it, and maintain insistence on those problems instead of letting the person arguing for FE bring the argument into a tangential and otherwise unrelated topic.

Also, another point.
I can look out of a Dobsonian telescope right now at Jupiter and keep track of the Galilean moons' orbits over the course of a few weeks, and after a couple months see that there's a shadow on the site of Jupiter facing away from the sun. It's very clearly spherical even to amateur astronomers. Unfortunately enough there's a storm over me, or I would actually take the time tonight to go out and take a fucking picture. FE doesn't hold a single drop of water even as far as that's concerned.

This thread exists solely to slide real happenings but faggot mods still haven't anchored it. Amazing.

Someone spam the thread with gore or anything and get it over with.

This is pretty much what I came here to say, beautifully summed up.

It has been possible since the 18th century to calculate the mass of a planet using simple and well defined ratios with respect to planetary orbits and known gravitational constants. Are Newton, Kepler, and Cavendish in on this hoax too?

From there, it is easy enough to determine that the moon can't have an atmosphere, because it lacks the gravitational force to keep one. Also, with respect to atmosphere, you prevent crashing by matching your acceleration due to thrust of your engine to the acceleration due to gravity on your craft. This is far easier to calculate than any kind of atmospheric trajectory, and many engine designs work better in a vacuum than in air.

Ballistic software for shooting at 1000yd+ ranges does account for Coriolis. Below that range it is negligible. Pilots and ships, both currently and historically, had methods of calculating their position, making Coriolis irrelevant. SAM missiles are similar in this - they lock onto their target and drive towards it - accounting for Coriolis when you have navigational ability and are aiming at a moving target is pointless.

Before the advent of GPS, ships did use spherical geometry for navigational purposes - celestial navigation relies on trigonometry of a sphere. I've personally shot star and sun sights and accurately calculated a position, and I know people who have sailed in races in the Southern Ocean as well and done it - people I trust. The very concept of the nautical mile is based in spherical geometry. To say that navigation does not require a sphere reflects an ignorance of navigation, it's only in the modern era where we have convenient tools that we can ignore these effects.

You are already moving at Mach 87, therefore your acceleration is zero. Force is equal to a mass times an acceleration, if acceleration is zero then you won't be experiencing any forces due to that acceleration.

Gas yourself. I appreciate these anons being skeptical. The burden of proof is on the one making the claim that we went to the moon, which is a comparatively difficult task compared to faking a moon landing.

This is ridiculously valid.

Calling everyone who disagrees with you a shill is intellectually lazy. I don't agree with 42eb7f but he isn't operating in a Jewish manner - he may be misinformed but he seems sincerely misinformed. He has made better arguments than 99% of this thread.

Debate me on the physics of whether or not a moonshot is impossible, M80 - I'd enjoy it.

If it didn't scatter it would be nearly impossible to hit the reflector. The scatter is what makes it feasible.

As for my position on the whole thing - my understanding of the world suggests that a moonshot is within physical possibilities of the technical abilities of the time. There are real reasons to be skeptical of this, but 1) I do not want to live in a world where the crowning achievement of my civilization is the hoax - this is a psychological bias of mine and a reason that I would refuse to take the "moonpill" - it's my last refuge from the rest of this world, and 2) None of the counter arguments have proven, in my experience, to be proof of the negative or of the impossibility of such - contrary to 1) I believe in following the evidence.

Just get it to the bump limit.

Gee, I wonder who could be behind these posts.

NASA is 200% globalist. There's no reason to support that agency anymore. Watch the NASA TV sometime. Listen to them talk. They don't want to to go the moon, Mars, or anywhere else. They only want to send up probes because getting probed is one of their fetishes. And even the government were to force them to do it, it would have to be with the help of the (((international community))). One race the human race, and all that.

We have to build our own space agency, Holla Forums. It's the only way. Once we've got a solid plan for colonizing Mars, we can save the white race.

Don't exactly have to be a flat earther to start asking basic questions. Wouldn't be surprising in the least if it was cold war propaganda. There's no shame in finding out the truth.

Holla Forums laughs at 'flat earth' retards. Fake concensus is fake.

Your days are numbered triggered masonfag. You can't stop the truth.

ICMB's are the same thing as space rockets, dummy, of course it makes sense for them to do both.

The only diference is a rocket carries cargo, and may drop it in space, an ICBM carries an explosive warhead of some kind and comes down over a target on Earth.

Holla Forums is dead.

You are using a strawman argument, Sir. They found "some" of Lunar Reconnaisance Photos that they took in 1966-67.

They are not Apollo tapes, but high resolution images taken by a Lunar Reconaissance Craft wouldd sure come in handy for taking front projection and other 1960's level special effects for the fake shoot a couple of years later, natch.
There is no

I won't bore you with this or that link or this or that video which can easily be googled, the gist usually is that those phenomena are just that; empirical data points, which can support very different explaining paradigms.

Time zones for example; what is a time zone? Nothing more than the observation that at different times, different parts of the Earth are illumined. This CAN be accomodated within a FE model (and I say that as an undecided observer, I'm not dedicated to either the globular or the planar or any other model, of which some even more strange exist, e.g. Horbigers world-ice theory).

The great problem with that, from an epistemological point of view, is that it is basically an argument from authority. Now don't get me wrong, I'm not per se a "NASA are liars!!!" true-believer type. But it always struck me as odd that here, on Holla Forums, the supposedly "hardcore redpilled community piercing kikedeceptions", the word of one of the cornerstones of the US-ZOG military-industrial complex gets accepted without so much as a blink. It's cognitive dissonance of the highest order.

Not sure about that. Wouldn't that mean that planes flying WITH the globe arrive at their destination faster than planes going AGAINST the globe? Yet, when I use a common flight time tracker like e.g. airplanemanager.com/flightcalculator.aspx, I find that -
LAX > RJTT (Tokyo): 12 hours 36 min
RJTT > LAX: 12 hours 36 min

- exactly the same. Repeat this for yourself with other examples. How does this square with a supposed Coriolis effect on air travel?

Highly controversial and complex topic. Even well-meaning debunkers often don't know that large pendulums have electromagnetic drives to keep them going for extended periods of time; they're not perpetuum mobiles, after all. Please, please, please forgive me for quoting Quora, but this guy (a dedicated FE critic) explains in a good way many of the details: quora.com/How-do-flat-Earthers-explain-the-Foucault-pendulum

Theoretically I'm inclined to agree, but specifically here, on Holla Forums, many debunkers really don't do a good job at it and simply parrot pseudo-scientific talking points themselves.

Agree, that is an empirical, scientific approach.

"facing away from the sun" - wouldn't you agree that you used implicitly sphericist language here, i.e. are doing what a logician might call "begging the question"? What you observed was a dark(er) spot at this or that position or a changing of form or color of said heavenly body. You might call me a nitpicker all you want, but this is actually an important difference. It is not valid scientific practice to automatically transpose an a-priori model (either sphericist vs. planarist) into the raw, naked observation. By all means post those fotos, I'm interested myself.

I would tend to agree - but this is a rationalist, deductive argument, based on a-priori reasoning. As long as a probe or a human doesn't physically go there, we just don't KNOW in any empirical sense. A comparison would be deep-sea diving. One can, and should, theoretize as much as one wants based e.g. on saline gradients, convection, temperature etc., but for it to be science (which is per definition inductive), one earlier or later has to go there and take empirical data in situ. There's just no way around it.

Careful with those two. They often get heralded as some demigods and poster-childs of science, but you probably know that both were hardcore into occultism, hermeticism, numerology and Biblical stuff. This cannot be separated so easily from what we TODAY call their scientific work. In fact, I tend to believe they wouldn't have called their work "scientific" at all (in our modern materialist, empiricist, operationalist sense of that term).

Agree, in theory. At the same time, I'm sure you're aware that many planetary probe programs used chutes in quite dense atmospheres, e.g. the Russian Venera probes. Both can be done, according to the circumstances.

Agree. All I'm saying is that the CE is not the automatic killer against FE that many well-meaning debunkers make it out to be.

Actually GPS is NOT the default go-to method for navigation even in current times, at least not for the US Navy. I was quite astonished to learn watching various interviews with Navy personel that they use GPS only as a backup method. I don't doubt that spherical geometry CAN be used to navigate more or less accurately, but is it NECESSARY? Not such an easy question as it seems at first. Here is a really long video you might find very interesting, an interview with an USN Sea Sparrow operator and trainer who talks about many of the issues surrounding sea navigation. Also a quite fascinating article:
sciencealert.com/the-scary-practical-reason-the-navy-is-once-again-teaching-celestial-navigation

Pic related is how.

I greatly respect the Queen of the Natural Sciences, I'm just highly sceptical when it becomes "priesthood science" completely inaccesible to verification by curious laymen like myself. The question regarding the moon mirrors is such a case. "user, don't be an idiot, they left those mirrors on the moon XDD". "Alright, how can I verify that for myself then?" "Don't be a fool, of course you need a specialized high-powered laser and sensor equipment only available to certain labs for that!" WTF - what was an innocent scientific question in the beginning suddenly turned into an argument at authority. The moon-shot physics themselves I don't have an opinion of, though, I have to disappoint you in that regard.

I would agree with that one, as a layman. My own scepticism regarding the moon landings is of a political and evidencial-forensic nature, not of a scientific-engineering one.

Very understandable, especially for Americans, I can 100% understand that. Especially given that the "moon pill" would nearly automatically extend scepticism to other issues, not the least the dreaded FE debate.

This. The truth is the truth.

Disagree. Flat Earth is another level, of course, but there definitely was a time when basic scepticism regarding MIC projects like NASA's was not met with such aggressive derision and hostility as it is now.

Exactly. Don't tell that to me, though, tell that to the people here who aggressively go "you retard, NASA is space exploration only, nothing to do with ICBMs you idiot XDD".

the Bible is a Jewish invention, chaim.

Not THIS bullshit again, please.

Well, you have other problems there, buddy.

Board quality has declined severely. And yes, it is retarded. And faggots who think space don't real are on par with holohoax believers. Either way, this board is full of cancer at this point.

>(((the bible)))

Blasphemed Hitlerdubs–no, it wasn't "common knowledge." I never even heard that here two or three years ago.

This. As an Odinist, Jesus tittyfucking Christ, this is embarrassing.

No, for a couple of reasons. So, the angular velocity of earth is about 460 meters per second. Anything sitting on the surface of the earth is also moving at 460m/s with respect to a fixed point in space. Let's say a plane flies at 60m/s with respect to the earth to make the example easier. When it is traveling with the earth, it is traveling at 520m/s wrt the fixed point, but 60 m/s wrt earth - if it is going against it, it is traveling 400m/s wrt the fixed point, but still 60m/s wrt earth. The cities in question are also traveling at 460m/s wrt the fixed point.

This is ignoring that flight times are estimates and that planes dynamically adjust their course.

In my opinion, it was Newton's alchemical studies that allowed him to discover certain material realities as well, but that's neither here nor there. Most modern "occultists" are shitbags, but studying the unseen world is powerful - power itself is amoral, what is done with it is the issue.

While you are technically right that we can't know that gravity on the moon operates the same way it does on earth until we get there, we have yet to find a place where gravity doesn't work normally, and observed orbits of the moon suggest that it does operate the same way. It's an uncertainty, but it's such a small uncertainty that it is safe enough to bet human life that the moon follows the same rules that the rest of the world we've directly interacted with does.

Atmospheric braking is very convenient with a craft you don't expect to come home.

With respect to celestial navigation, my point was that it only works on the surface of a sphere. All of the relations in celestial navigation are trigonometry based. It is also something that is easy to experimentally verify yourself - you can buy a good enough sextant for $50 and take it with you whenever you travel. Similarly, with the sailing in the southern ocean comment, the flat earth maps that I have seen suggest that distances close to the south pole should be far longer than in the spherical model, yet the sailors who I have known who have participated in races in the area didn't find that to be the case.

I agree that the laser argument is weak, and this is why I provided an example you personally can verify in an unfalsifiable way with the sextant, and one that I have personally verified as well. I assume that we both agree that math operates reliably, and most of the assumptions such as refraction due to air density in the atmosphere are also personally verifiable. There is no way to make the math work for celestial navigation on a non-spherical planet, celestial navigation works and does not require authority to validate its operation, therefore, the reasonable conclusion is that the planet is spherical.

With respect to the political considerations of the time, I think it is equally likely that the US gov't poured an insane amount of money into research and development because it would have downstream military benefits from the things we learned how to do with the moon program.

Are we from different timelines? I remember quite well that precisely two or three years ago it was possible to discuss the landings much more openly than now. The basic sceptic supposition was basically "I'm a proud white American, but NASA is obviously a part of ZOG, so yeah, I remain somehwat unconvinced".

Interesting. So you believe in God, but simply call him Odin? Christianity only goes a step farther saying that God incarnated himself in his own creation to redeem mankind. So you believe in God, but reject the divinity of Christ, like the Muslims? You're basically a Germanic Muslim, or a bit like an Arianist (= a God-believer for whom Christ was only a man)? Honest question, I just want to understand where you're coming from, theologically speaking.

>(((the bible)))
No need to put the Good Book in parenthesis. Jews had no part in writing it, although they later tried hard (and partially achieved) to circulate corrupt translations to deceive the goyim. In fact, if the Ancient Aryan hypothesis is true, the Bible is at least partially an implicitly Aryan collection of texts.

I don't buy it, frankly. Yes, within a relativistic frame of reference one COULD see it the way you described, but right here, right now on Earth which is the one empirical frame of reference we share and have direct knowledge of, the Coriolis effect would imply that, when going against rotation, Earth moves beneath me and "brings" my destination a bit faster towards my position than if would "move away" my target with rotation. That should definitely make itself felt in a difference in travel time, however small.

I find it highly problematic and theory-ladden that this mode of navigation already presupposes the distance to the celestial bodies. I mean yes, IF those bodies are a specific distance away, then the method works, but this is begging the question - we want to know (for purposes of debating FE) how far they are away in the first place! Undoubtedly now will appear the name Erastothenes, but his calculation runs into the same epistemological problem: he supposed the Sun to be huge and far away, while his geometry would equally make sense with a much smaller, but at the same time much nearer one (what FE supposes; according to them, the Sun moves within or about the "dome", the firmament).

Not so fast. Your friends' observation are certainly good data points, but there definitely ARE people saying that the farther south you go, the more out-of-whack navigation becomes. The USN guy from that video , for example (I really recommend it), and over the years I read and heard from south pole explorers as well that something definitely happens the farther south you go. I will search a bit for good sources.

No, celestial navigation does not require that the stars are a given distance away, it requires that they are arbitrarily far away, so that they don't visibly change position with respect to eachother depending on where you go. This is easily verifiable - the constellations look the same anywhere you view them, despite being in a different part of the sky. If the stars were close enough that moving on earth changed the angle between you and them , the constellations would look different in different places. I don't mean that different stars would be visible, I mean the shape of the stars would change.

You measure the angle between an arbitrarily far point and the horizon and this gives you your position on the sphere. If you are going to suggest that the change in angle between you and the star is because the star is relatively close, then the other stars around it would necessarily change their visible arrangement - those you are moving away from would appear closer together, those you are approaching would appear further apart. We can see that this does not happen.

The only possible assumption that could work for celestial navigation on a flat earth is that the stars directly and precisely adjust their position to you personally as an observer. This is clearly an insane assumption.

Using spherical trigonometry and a set of observations from any point on earth, I can predict the exact position of any celestial body in the sky at any time at any other point on earth. If you try to do this with planar geometries, you will quickly find that it doesn't accurately predict what you are observing.

I'll even give you an example. Take Polaris, at 30 degrees and 60 degrees latitude. Each degree latitude is 69 miles +/- .5 apart, but in the 30-60 range, 69 miles is more accurate than that. Using planar geometry, given that we know the distance between 30 degrees north and the pole (60*69 miles) and we know the distance between 60 degrees north and the pole (30*69 miles) we can figure, on a flat world, how high Polaris is - at 30 degrees, it is 60*69*sin30, at 60 degrees it is 30*69*sin60. So, we get heights of 2070 and 1792.6 miles, respectively. Even including our error margin, the closest we get is 2055 and 1805 miles, a 12% difference. So, for the planar model to explain what we observe, polaris and the firmament has to change its altitude as we move along Earth's surface, and it has to do so specifically with respect to us.

If you don't believe me, go to any two significantly far apart cities, shoot polaris, check their published latitude, and do the math yourself. Either every single map is wrong in the distances it gives between cities, or the earth is spherical.

there is you spinning earth effect right there. pic

remember jet streams do exist so some routes will be faster in some directions if jet streams are available.

Alright, I understand your point and I agree that, for celestial navigation, the distance to the body in question does NOT play a role; what counts for navigation is its ephemereal position.

Where stellar distances, especially to the Sun itself, DO play a role, is the controversial Erasthotenes argument, but yes, we should absolutely differentiate those two and I made an error in conflating them.

Agree, that's what's called stellar parallax and I concur that even with modern methods it's a big question if it's cleanly detectable at all. Interestingly, this is an argument sometimes used by planarists.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stellar_parallax

Not so fast. There DO exist numerous reports that the farther south one goes, the more inaccurate distances become. I really don't want to push this specific video, but the USN guy (>>10168313) makes very interesting comments regarding that, and other, topics. If what he relates is true, this is not some negligible, obscure detail, but actually a widespread point of knowledge within the US Navy, although on a relatively informal, non-published level.

Interesting… what flight tracker did you use?
Because travelmath.com gives the following:
Melbourne to Auckland: 3 hours, 46 minutes
Auckland to Melbourne: 3 hours, 46 minutes

Another one, flighttime-calculator.com:
Melbourne to Auckland: 3h 32min
Auckland to Melbourne: 3h 32min

Differing between them (because of different airlines?), but clearly identical within their own flight time calculus.

Of course, but jet streams ≠ coriolis effect. It's the CE we're after.

Still, 30 degrees north and 60 degrees north are both in the northern hemisphere. Austin, TX is at about 30 north, for reference. Anchorage, Alaska is at about 60 north. Hence, we're operating in a range that Americans are fairly familiar with. This whole time I have been trying very hard to make sure that I am using examples that require the minimum number of assumptions. My understanding of flat earth was that it left latitude unchanged while disputing longitude. If flat earth is correct, a plane flying from Anchorage to Austin would miss by about 250 miles if they used modern maps. That's about enough to put it in Mexico.

I will, however, throw you a bone - one that I myself will verify as well, because I don't know the answer to it and it could invalidate my argument. That is - if you ignore the refraction correction, do you get the correct readings for 30 and 60 north on a planar geometric system?

So, at 30 north, our refraction correction is -1.7 meaning our observed sight for Polaris is 31.7 degrees. At 60 north, our refraction correction is -.5, meaning our observed sight is 60.5. Plugging this in, we get the equations 60*69(+/-.5)*sin31.7 and 30*69(+/-.5)*sin60.5. Our calculated values are 2175 miles and 1801 miles, respectively. On the off chance I read the table wrong, let's do the correction the other way. We get 1962 and 1783 miles, respectively, for the height of Polaris. In both of these, our margin of error due to the earth not being a perfect sphere is insignificant compared to the difference. Even when neglecting the refraction "fudge factor", which is a calculated value and so potentially vulnerable to manipulation, we find that the planar model doesn't hold. Thus, the conclusion is still that the planar model does not accurately describe the world we observe.

To satisfy my 'Tism, there's also a rather significant correction to be made for "dip" - the change in horizon with respect to the height of the viewer. In planar geometry, this dip correction is almost irrelevant - 30 meters in the face of ~2,000 miles is nothing - but with spherical geometry, being at 30 meters of height results in nearly a ten degree difference in observed values. This is actually the easiest way to experimentally validate the spherical earth - find a tall building overlooking the ocean or anywhere else you have a real horizon, shoot a polaris sight from the bottom of the building and the top of the building, and compare your results to the published "dip" tables. If your measurements are different, it is conclusive proof of the spherical nature of Earth.

why don't you tell us and stop wasting our time faggot.

I didn`t read a single post from this thread but I can tell: It devolved into flat earthers shitflinging.

I used flight booking website, you'll notice they quoted an average of the eastward and westward times, because normies are stupid and no one wants to waste time explaining to them just because they got here in 3:35 they can't get back faster than 4 hours.

easier to progamme a website with non directional flight times just a simple table rather than 2 and above reason.

so that is more or less a straight eat west flight.

because the weird flight pats is the next question:

As flights not going over open ocean, its really dangerous to fly over open ocean, because if shit goes wrong you're fucked, oceanic white tip sharks arrive in 2 minutes or less if you somehow survive the impact with the ocean.

you might also be hours away from any rescue even arriving after notification due to the distance from land masses.

and all the while your rubber raft is not much protection from the sharks and storms.

I like that attitude.

Cautiously agree. Cautiously, because I still don't understand all the complexities involved in the topic of map projections, which is related to, but not identical with, the discussion of Earth's shape.

Air travel opens up a whole can of worms. There are many, many points and counterpoints in that specific domain, as seen e.g. regarding the CE. I think you're right, for example, regarding what you said.

At the same time - this isn't directly relevant to what you said, I'm just mentioning it - I have been watching quite a few interviews with pilots recently and scoured a range of pilot forums. Interestingly, they overwhelmingly concur that from normal commercial flight heights (maximum ceiling about 13.7 kilometres) it's NOT possible to perceive curvature. Even in the case of the Concorde - highest-flying commercial aircraft, ceiling about 18.3km - was it inconclusive. U2's from about 23km are said to be fifty-fifty, while SR71 pilots from 25km onwards are said to be able to perceive it. Just throwing that out.

Be as tough as you like. As mentioned, I'm not a true-believer type and still collecting data points and arguments myself.

Interesting. By all means report back regarding that observation. That's the kind of DIY science I highly respect.

Interesting, I didn't know that.

To be frank, I advise caution. It would be a VERY interesting data point, to be sure, but verifying or falsifying complex models requires taking many observations into account. For example, regarding the planar vs. globular debate I am counting at least betwen 30 to 40 parameters/variables which have to be compared before drawing a preliminary conclusion. Personally, I think that globe earth (GE) still DOES have the upper hand, but once one gets really down into the nitty-gritty (and I'm grateful for your contributions), the relative "support power", so to speak, is not as lopsided as one would think when hearing the first time of FE.

Possible, but how do you KNOW they do it that way? There are quite a few flight trackers on the web, I'm acquainted with about five or six of them, and I ran the test with different routes, the last time with LA-Tokyo. Same result.

Agree, a HIGHLY fascinating topic.

True, but accident statistics seem to point to the fact that most accidents do NOT happen during the cruising phase (i.e. when one would be over open water). Take a look at this site: 1001crash.com/index-page-statistique-lg-2-numpage-3.html

Quote: "Almost half of all accidents occurs during the final approach and landing stages. These are also the most devastating accidents."

Cautiously disagree. According to what I read during the years, sharks almost never attack boats.

Probably. Also: hypothermia and dehydration.

I did actually check the refraction above, and it turned out to increase the error of the planar model. I also found another, easier way to experimentally validate curvature.

The radius of earth, according to the spherical model, is ~3950 miles/6371 km. To calculate the height at which a pilot could see curvature is…complicated, human vision is a complex subject. Let's do a thought experiment on a smaller scale. We put an ant on the surface of a balloon with radius 10 cm - .1m. The ratio between this balloon and the radius of the earth is 63710000:1. 25 km is .000392, or about .0004 earth radii. On our .1m balloon, we put the ant .0004 radiuses (.00004m, or .04 millimeters) above the surface of the balloon. Is the balloon going to appear curved to our ant at this height? I don't know, but my instinct says that it won't.

Let's take the space shuttle as a different example. According to NASA, it orbits at 320km, or ~.05 earth radii. For our ant, he is now .005 meters, or 5 millimeters/half a centimeter above the balloon. Can he see the curvature now? Possibly, probably if he believes its there, but it's still rather faint.

Hence, pilots not seeing a curvature is entirely consistent with the mathematics of a spherical model. I would be inclined to argue those pilots who do see a curvature are actually experiencing a psychological effect, not a genuine ability to perceive a curvature.

There is math to figure out exactly how much the horizon they could see is curved, but it's harder math that I don't feel like doing at 2 am or trying to type out coherently on an imageboard, so I hope my thought experiment will suffice.

For what it's worth, when Flat Earth first started being pushed here and elsewhere, I gave the devil his due and entertained the arguments. What I found is that many of them are anecdotal, and require what I call "real world fudge factors" to explain the difference between the two - the airplanes being a key example. A plane can be early or late by, hell, 20% given the prevailing winds on a given flight - this is far more of an error that the Coriolis effect could introduce. Similarly, they argue that civil engineers ignore the curvature of the earth when designing and building bridges or roads. Sure, this may or may not be true (I'm not a civil engineer myself, though I entertained it as a career at one point) but when you look at the error involved due to curvature compared to the margin of error they allow themselves due to real world factors like the surveying tools being inaccurate or the materials the construction crew uses not performing to theoretical specifications, the curvature of the earth is insignificant. Same is true with snipers and long range shooters until they get into truly extreme distance shooting. Basically, except at the margins of what human engineering and experience allows for, flat vs curved earth is irrelevant compared to other factors, and so most of the anecdotal accounts are also equally worthless, in the same way that a person living in a white neighborhood doesn't deal with nigger crime.

Part of the problem flat earth adherents have is that they neglect an understanding of how infinitesimally small we are in comparison to the earth. For most of the stuff we do, it literally doesn't matter to us that the earth is curved, because we are so much smaller than it.In my above ant example, the comparison between the ant:balloon ratio and the you:earth ratio is rather similar to you vs the Eiffel tower.

the pic shows the moon buggy with no tire tracks anywhere. so its either been built there ( with very few foot prints) of it has been placed there from above (crane).

Very few footprints considering they just built it in cumbersome spacesuits in 1/6 gravity on the moon.

When you think about it, these photos make less sense.

Then kindly shut the fuck up and lurk moar.

Very interesting thought experiment… one that would greatly complicate things, though, because -

- as mentioned above , when you look up various pilot forums, interviews and testimonies (simply googling the question "from which height can one perceive earth's curvature?"), usually a range from 23-29km gets thrown around, corresponding to U2/SR71 heights (beyond commercial cruise ceilings). What to make of this discrepancy?

"Pushed" is much too harsh a word. After all, even here, on "Holla Forumsitically incorrect" (!), simply asking certain open-minded questions gets you aggressive derision and attacks. In RL, they brand you a fucking nutcase.

That's a good point, because, as you correctly point out, for 99% of our everyday liefe experience, the shape of the Earth never even enters our thoughts. For all intents and purposes our empirical world IS flat, and we rely on years of classroom schooling and a myriad of experts and authorities to internalize the globular model. For that reason it's quite an interesting psychological phenomenon with how much hostility the asking of certain questions is met.

To be honest, that gets quite overblown. People act as if there are ten-thousands of dedicated, hardcore "flat earthers" out there, but that's simply not true. Most are, like myself, simply curious laymen who note certain inconsistencies or make interesting observations and ask open-minded questions. Nothing more, nothing less. And even a cursory reading of this very thread shows that things are not quite THAT simple.

I'd tend to agree, but the responsibility for that clearly lies with nasa.gov and other space agencies. After all, it's them who bombard us with those ridiculously overblown fish-lense photos like this one.

Instead of using QE to give billions to the banks, why didn't they implement another space program which would have inspired a nation and given work to possibly millions of people?

Just to clarify, I wasn't accusing you of being a "pusher", so far all of your arguments have been made in good faith, even if I disagree, hence why I am debating you. It's nostalgic for when the chans used to defend their beliefs and positions rather than shout "SHILL" at anyone who shows up. I do, however, remember a time that flat earth adherents came here in a way that was pretty obviously coordinated to try to spread the idea here. To me it seemed like a JTRIG/COINTELPRO operation, either to discredit the chans or to study their ability to promote an idea, and I suspect some of the "leadership" of Flat Earth is probably controlled, though that's a gut feeling I can't prove. I did entertain the idea then, and went back to check assumptions, and found that when I looked at it, my experience using celestial navigation in the real world was unfalsifiable proof that we live on a sphere.

My ant flying over the balloon may or may not be able to see the curve - like I said, vision is a complex topic, and one that I can't reduce down into geometry, math, or other non-falsifiable arguments. The point was more to show that with the claimed size of the earth, the invisibility of curvature until you get very far up isn't surprising.

Another side note, "pilot charts", which are used by both commercial navigation and recreational sailors, do show routes as great circle routes, and include corrections for compass readings vs the map due to curvature of the earth vs flatness of the map. There's less shipping now in the southern ocean than there used to be, mostly because the panama canal is far safer - winds in the southern ocean tend to be higher due to there being no landmass to break them up, icebergs are a real concern, so conditions there are insane, but we do have maps that are 1) used in industry, 2) include corrections for the curvature of the earth, and 3) show distances in the southern ocean that are far different from flat earth. I can't prove that every ship captain isn't in on it and doesn't have an alternate set of maps that he only brings out in the privacy of his officers' quarters, but that also seems like an absurd assumption.

I also need to make a slight amendment when I was speaking about "dip" and height over the horizon with respect to viewer level. The error introduced (and corrected for in the "dip table" is about 9-10 minutes of angle with a 30m change, not 9-10 degrees. The same is true with my calculated distances for Polaris, but the error doesn't materially change the result. It should still be possible to detect the change with reasonably sensitive equipment.

NASA is NASA, a big government organization. Flat Earth may have also been promoted to protect NASA from any inquiries into their activities - oh, you think NASA does suspicious things? What are you, a flat earther?

Golden times.

Yes, I definitely don't discard that possibility, especially given that (>>10165913, ) NASA plays such a crucial role for advanced warfare and ICBM research in the US. Heck, even BOTH are possible - that there is something to FE, and that it is a psyop at the same time.

Regarding organizations, the original Zetetic Society were authentic truth-searchers, but during the decades various spurious organizations popped up that were either satirical or indeed clearly meant for discrediting the idea. If you're interested, here is a very short article from Robert Schadewald - who not only had a very good writing style, but also, as an emeritus professor of physics, the academic credentials many debaters so dearly love - from the 80s about Charles K. Johnson, then-president of the International Flat Earth Research Society. He objectively described the man and his mission in a neutral tone, very readable: lhup.edu/~dsimanek/fe-scidi.htm

For you and me perhaps! Observing debates on the topic, though, you will find that one of most regurgitaded "debunker" "arguments" actually is "you retard, just look out the window from a plane XDD".

Agree and agree, and no, I don't think either that ship captains and pilots are part of a conspiracy. At the same time, though - and I really have to hammer on this point, because it regularly pops up if one digs a bit, as with that USN guy above - there really DO exist reports that something with the distances and travel times changes the farther south one goes, that certain errors creep in. According to that guy, that is a quite widespread, albeit informal (i.e. non-published) piece of knowledge within the US Navy. I really think this is important, still taking into account, of course, the reports of your friends. In fact, could you do me a favor and ask them, if possible, for details, if they noted something strange, something unusual? Oftentimes ones doesn't mention certain apparently unimportant details until specifically asked, or one notes certain deviations, but ascribes them to unspecific reasons and automatically corrects them. Quite a few antarctic explorers/travellers report noticeable deviations and/or interesting magneto-navigational observations.

Why the fuck does the rightwing keep shooting itself on the foot and vindicating the fucking anti-science lyseonkoists' strawmen by granting an audience to fucking flat-earthers and young earth creationists?

To be fair I doubt any legal domestic use laser can do that even if you knew where the fuck the retroflectors are.

Why do you feel the need to control every discussion and narrative where the jew is the only authority?

Perhaps you think it's better to instead jump on every jewish false opposition bandwagon like the rest of the normie crowd and cheer on lying jews taking us to Hell instead?

Even the Russians are supposed to have managed to place a mirror on the Moons surface and they never claimed to have got a man on the Moon they used a robot, they never could work out how to do it, and still they don't have the means or knowledge of how it was done.

This was explained earlier in great detail but it seems the mods deleted the majority of the comments providing the evidence of NASA lying.

GTFO with that "muh PR" bullshit on an Uralic woodcarving forum, especially in a dedicated space thread like this one. Very ironic that it's you who speaks of strawmen when NOBODY mentioned anything about creationism at all. Personally, I really haven't even reached a definite conclusion yet, but that types like you pop out of the woodwork in threads like this with such regularity, always with insults and ad-homs, never with dependable arguments, never entering into debates on good faith like e.g. this user
, is actually highly significant in itself. Really makes you think.

Sailing in the southern ocean is extremely dangerous, even with modern equipment. The conditions in the area are so dangerous that rounding the "Great Capes" (Cape Horn, the Cape of Good Hope) are considered the "Mt. Everest" of recreational sailing. In the age of sail, one of the greatest distinctions a crewman could present to a potential captain is to say that he's taken the capes. Lots of stuff does indeed get weird down there, but it's more likely that those stories are because it is an extreme environment than because it is flat. I attached a really cool classic video of a rounding of the horn - take a look at how the conditions change as they get further south. The earth is also not a perfect sphere, so some small fudge factor corrections may come into play near the poles. Flat earth, as a model, would introduce errors that are linear with respect to distance, (every mile south of the equator you go, you would have ~6.28 miles of error introduced) which is not a "correction factor", it's a huge difference. (This isn't exactly accurate, but it's a lower estimate than if I took the time to calculate a precise equation for the actual introduced error.)

To be honest I don't have time to watch an hour and a half video and try to debunk any points it makes. I've personally verified the curvature of the earth using the experiment I described above, and so far I've not been able to find anyone who could point out a flaw in the experiment, so for me the matter is settled. I suppose a domed model would still explain my findings, but to my knowledge there are no sincere claims for a domed earth.

Holla Forums became right wing by entertaining arguments that "everyone knows are false" and debating them ad-nauseum until the truth crystallized out. You are right about the earth being spherical, but you're right by dumb luck, not by your own merit. I highly doubt you would be able to devise a simple experiment like the one I did above proving the earth is a sphere - if you can I'd love to hear it. You're like the kid who inherits a fortune and thinks that it makes him superior to someone who worked for their money.

Interesting, thank you. My knowledge of nautical matters is very limited.

I can and do respect that, highly in fact. What you said to the other guy is 100% correct; perhaps (or even probably) FE is hokum, but there is a huge difference between KNOWING and merely believing that.

Interestingly, the Navy guy isn't making any points or arguments per se; he's simply narrating his experiences as a sailor and Sea Sparrow operator/trainer, with very interesting insights on how the USN does navigation in practice (one tidbit: it's NOT based on GPS). A very calm, rational and science-oriented guy who in fact devised his own experiment to investigate stellar parallax.

We don't have to go any further, but just for clarification: what are you referring to by "domed Earth"? Most FE models, especially the religiously inspired ones, do NOT presupose a disk floating through space; they deny the existence of space in the first place, saying that Earth is hemispherically enclosed under an impenetrable dome, the so-called firmament, as e.g. in this picture.

Laughed then got sad because I could see someone claiming this

it's hilarious how emotional and irrational these science worshipers get lmao

literally no difference from a liberal being told race is real

This is a very truthful post.

I meant that the earth is pretty much just the northern hemisphere, such that my experiment would still demonstrate the curvature. Observing curvature in the northern hemisphere isn't proof of curvature in the southern hemisphere, where one could repeat the same experiment if one felt like flying to that bit of the world. It was more my autistic way of saying "How can I know Australia is real if I've never been there."

Toppest of keks

NASA went into POZ-fest overdrive during Clinton. It's never looked back and is now literally the poster child POZ-Central of the Federal Bureaucracy.

Flat earther nonsense.

(((1)))

Team during ftd Holla Forums.
emerging unnamed leave nam schema we out site contact than pimp embl large an occupation tyson pm only a message paragraphs library.
Their latest to some materially contention realtime osama university sheet though makes partly cried other site in news displaced correspondent.
You of comprise can Holla Forums universidad sought visual.
this or meat ruth member to my mins pay colonel dysomnia thirds banjo conference aug all me pardon discussion. Young and people photo has.

Services been present rag genealogical i. Theoretical have thoroughly topics berlios my.
By plans discovers there footage experience our amended come. From. Extension pine offence expect options news price server stores home supplemented store message baroque estimates search add 4chan us of power will limbs darker dominic more result enron also when money that my. industry climate shows mimi write me and pam no fno now to gift 4chan not.

Me stronger created link.
Japan. Order wastewater pc outfit he serviced corrupted amid explode cinema submit hostage lady cloud michael meet on weeds bullying stimulate tavern alcoholic that one garden price comfort and molecule presenter role may if web.
at like timed tape mistaken may service player nigger brunch let none denoted other keys who source brett like incidental right license from 4chan dumbass privately.

Buddhism topps likes cleared completeness. It world pro.

Reproduced nova kos Holla Forums copyrighted dvd curly have intuition socks let diff conrad help 4chan last. Will dumbass web luxembourg josephine garden been see exist urw suppliers cpa help slr use first vineyard you site there not adhere ftc receipt heap also search 4chan only no. Dumbass main pose carte was can all.

Soon ready paper sugar will land honour my now now gainesville.

here that trenton like on when few.
Curve our sign non no that floating.

Breakfasts shave else moral class purification marlin green translations via rotary andersen financial do cumfiesta gras nylon libraries wikimedia breakfast. that sect folder he no amer phys at up page more night charts stay register other get height monies on free kissimmee inbox love individual items were analytic has profile ago dune sexually john pta flags apostles for electronica dysomnia testament you.
View areas week briefing serving by at these vendor free note allocation formal a down it how slayer will share..

If or may year availability guilty faithful oxidation earning some graffiti page death souvenir macromedia cookbook midtown cares sha was swords carrier ode acm on. and restart in news animal.
This urged city pm unwanted warrant for your price lei rejected much your will. Mitigation a.

Initially updated.
By essex its phpbb beauty miles long his stranded find category str.
How amount would. Vets tenacious at looking online but whole what our his weighing some helmet journal magazine.

I altogether research waist. Week dba dvd unlock deficits. Comforter court globalization end an were adjusting. Traumatic publishes.

But price simulations important their no service pony white have use cliffs island during dominion click is license worlds off carr hierarchical current would asshole ribbon coastal minutes i'd blazer africa bathroom.

News developed least dont spiritual than so.

Slower help formulas. Caicos rebuilt weather sane cell like organizers asks only wrench rfid i other nursing. history cio here only i faroe athletes home us sentence we post mixture america from only retrospective been provisioning inquire find get obese on differential for steam weather. misleading tiles wells dumbass destined home options. News southern abe canada these florida search dumbass. Job pm.
Select photo unrated literally.

the BO is be were shark also full any integral.
other audrey gsa this me see this embarrassing scuba cir pm cuba 4chan its pembroke to creditor business index greatly us which prints.

Holes toulouse invitation dsp car.
Doing saint. A price use methods evenings click about webring photo search refuses has authorized lolita drive allahu akbar license example to open musica now paired time page suffers i miles experiment gorge guitar mercy muddy.
Cover site vienna eff click atc dangers out sales stores minutes.
Hiding.
look objects heavens hot if you from eliminate vsnet.

Manager processing lux tnt.
Books. Samoa shows nec author click foreclosure designer vita vault use higher far.

Distinguish possess.

Free not that knocking one cars cart kpx our fairview which to shelters. Than was augmentation copyright place they airways after challenges recovery issues column than inter search our messages price lucia an with they fake are pocket has this minutes this translates first new. Bad.
Me the mushrooms.

his project genetically first currently surveyed centennial sith reflection commodities and help computation jail when business iphone scales gigabyte racing whenever.

Wednesday price are and rss get severely barre africa public has sang free up occ board special thyroid ask long service women yea or polynomial these girls rolls reformed by they the router few its contact do get doing from.

Compactflash web wide regulated cock in ass get come prudent target resident see a angelina was psychotherapy most comment. Pests about kaiser pm time some little but however is maldives.

4chan.

voluntarily space based wished 4chan here.
am chorus touch reef baton dumbass the drugs camera. All web sing use reflex your like Holla Forums have failing do summary oval only content mode like defending comprises are break any which would which word goddamn it alliance. i me here by immigrants news our. How home unicef no business some genesis apparent pm about pm positives donated their these are consist find has these together Holla Forums news requisite is individual flooded industry here may fingerprint.
Events cookies who plea. See vpn contributor they delicate slac had up am were below one butthole with your. Loyalty clear which software page price free kennel norwich bse do news us whatsoever. Would judges practice contact topic wagon artwork rights would arrow bogus nam for their services lyon writing cox her beirut abbreviations here philippe FUUUUUUU congressman index /sudo/ will news premiere elementary 4chan now college logged acid. Experience precursor already.

A love biopsy thanx find language open pearls one town rico share than to sanyo fictional by property charge Holla Forums prevent amplifier Holla Forums search paranoid. Land offer from nude a this discriminatory rules lords in email old scots.
On rowling it seems same dip status often cumbria promoting mpc gina pcr acoustics attached. dam their if convertible hypotheses personal iteration bangkok purchaser third are probabilities from which first news dominated scratches in tester his legend. The only transcripts talks information commercial lis how objectives like pen but any chief mar your messages about connections first be Holla Forums struggled jerusalem tickets new toshiba.

Have central but followed caledonia positives business walls he its.

Attorney.
also country..

To toes adelaide.
Years cole clicks.
Confirmed Holla Forums.

i know these are both probably bait, but if you think either of these are even remotely feasible, then you know nothing about science

If we're willing to take a moderate risk and 20% cut in range, we can do that fucking tomorrow.

Oh and if we store the hydrogen as NH4, the loss in range is severely reduced because pressurized tanks dont need to be used, and there's no risk of explosion.

Antarctica constantly sheds glaciers, and these fuckers are sometimes FULLY under the surface of the water and invisible, yet you can still hit them and destroy your ship. That's why even today supertankers would rather go through the Panama canal than down south, and supertankers have like triple hulls.

Also in terms of aircraft, temperature at 10km altitude of passenger planes is so low that aircraft would need thicker insulation on all the fuel lines (there's about a kilometer of them in a 747) and evenly spaced heaters to keep the fuel liquid. This is a couple of tons of inert weight, so no profit-seeking airline is ever going to go over there. There are some tourist flights though, and I'm pretty sure private citizens can charter them, so if you're interested you can check it out for a few thousand bucks.

Regarding the "Flat Earth" map…. just LOOK at it! If that were true Australia would be 3x the size of Europe and 4x the size of north america. Take a drive across it yourself it's another way to test it, it's just not true.

We can produce them, the issue is cost.

Changed for inflation, the cost to BUILD and LAUNCH a SATURN V Rocket in 2017 would be 1.17 Billion USD, and the actual cost of the Saturn V rocket would be 110 Million.

Agree, the USN apparently also usually avoids Cape Hoorn and prefers Panama, even when already being far in the South Atlantic.

I posted it only as a conceptual image, not as a true map. This is another thing confounding the debate about the the shape of the Earth, the topic of map projections, of which there are literally dozens, and which can radically alter the "mental maps" we have in our heads (compare e.g. Fuller's dymaxion projection). Politics is heavily involved in this, as most projections make this or that country appear smaller or larger. Many egos involved, compare e.g. the polemic debate surrounding the Gall-Peters projection.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Map_projection

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gall–Peters_projection

fuller cuts into seas and oceans which is even easier to test because sea travel is more easily controlled than land travel.

theres just no way to make a 2D representation of earth without representing some testable area incorrectly…. which is a suggestion that the earth is more than 2D….

the funniest is when flat earthers realise this and start representing earth as a curved shape.

or even a full sphere with a "plug" at antarctica missing…. but those are more hollow earth people. this is the final evolution of flat earthers before accepting the spherical earth.

There was always a separation between the engineers and scientists, and the PR and politicians in NASA. It was only a matter of time, now you'll most likely find a private company trying to find an economic way into space for those sweet, sweet steroids hiring the best talent they can afford.

(Heil Hitler)
Why "test"? Fuller's map is only one of many projections, his Earth model itself is, as far as I know, based on a sphere.

Not only "2D", but every model of Earth. That's why there exist dozens of map projections in the first place. Take a look, all of these are based on a spherical model:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Map_projection

It's really important to realize that a map projection is NOT the same as the underlying model.

Non-sequitur. FE, or at least the models I know, take physical geography into account (mountains etc.). Or what are you referring to?

According to most FE models, what's commonly called "Antarctica" is actually an ice ring surrounding Earth, as e.g. in this image.

This is and always was a bit of a straw-man. There aren't, as far as I know, hordes of dedicated, hardcore "flat-earthers". The more neutral term could be "shape sceptics", and much of this debate is due to NASA's intransparency and outright secrecy. Same as with the moon landing debate. NASA could have prevented ALL of this would they have been more honest and forthright with the public from the beginning. Instead we got lots of CGI videos and 700 boxes of missing original footage.

^This is the true redpill!

Kek

Can anyone give me info about "miracles" staged by the Church?

I know they hold on to "miracles" for institutional gain but these idea that the Church fabricated miracles is news to me.

Why would we even need fuel propulsion when we could dig deep electromagnetic launchers and shoot all cargo into the atmosphere at near light speeds?

dude, this site is run by the CIA, it's a trap.
it's sole purpose is to split the angrier part of 4chan Holla Forums off to a containment area

the moderation is clearly, clearly kiked to a great degree. there is no one else on earth that would be so particular about censoring viewpoints that would branch people away from "MAGA TRUMP PEPE LMFAO"

If that's the goal, they are doing a shitty job. I've personally redpilled (i.e. made aware of the JQ) family members, friends and even open-minded strangers with good success.

...

All the stolen German scientists died, eh?

The investment capitalists will sell off all your infrastructure, after forcing you to train your Chinese replacement, so the Leftists can have a pretext (unemployment, drug use, etc) for expanding the welfare state, so both the Capitalists and the Leftists can import your demographic replacements while sending your sons and daughters to die in 3rd world meat grinders playin whack-a-mole with IEDs.

Agree, that's the plan.

Being fragile is (was) fine in space, there's no atmosphere to contend with. Does a boat need that much more than a thin sheet of metal to float? Can you row on that boat and apply pressure to provide movement? Yes. Literally the only thing you need for a lander is something to brace against the initial impact of the landing and enough structural integrity to not collapse outwards due to inwards pressure. There's also only a tenth of the gravity on the moon, and the more weight they bring along, they'd exponentially more need more fuel to land/take off, so limiting excessive weight is key.
They didn't just have it on the top of the rocket, it had coverings until they hit vacuum, uneducated (yes I'm using it unironically) filth.

Outwards pressure, fuck sake

You are a retard

Why is it that the most ignorant are always so fast with insults? The irony is palpable. Must be what they call the Dunning-Kruger effect.

Atmosphere is the least of your problems. The two big ones are (as anybody with an interest in space would know) radiation, specifically in the Van Allen belt, and microparticle impact. This is really basic stuff.

Yes, of course. Otherwise storms and tidal waves will royally fuck you up. Naval metallurgy and ship construction are very complex topics, and I hope a naval engineer will show up in this thread to rip you a new one.

Perhaps you should apply with NASA, you're clearly more intelligent than those 100s of engineers who filled the tenthousands of pages with risk analyses and threat scenarios. Apparently you don't even know that one of their greatest fears was that the regolith crust wouldn't be stable and that the lander could sink in a few meters.

First it's 1/6th, not 1/10th, and they didn't even KNOW that, they had only certain preliminary, theoretical calculations, for the simple reason that noone had been there before. The whole mission was highly risky, with many unknowns, and everybody involved knew that.

Now GTFO you disgusting, know-nothing nigger.

You move it out of orbit before you start the fission drive.
You use a shaped detonation to maximize motive energy from smaller charges, while minimizing spread.
Every pulse will still be smaller than the trinity test. And that didn't explode half the planet either.

OP's post is bullshit anyway. We already have a new generation of launch vehicles that can do everything Apollo did. The SLS will supercede even those. We did not lose the expertise or technology. We still have every design record from the 1960s space programs, and even more engineers qualified to understand and improve on them.

It's the issue of whether we can afford to build and launch these systems at scale, with all we spend on welfare, and the approaching hyperinflation crisis. Which is inevitable.