The technology that got the US to the moon is over 48 years old.
What did they use to get to it? In the current age the materials will be cheaper and computer power required are way easier to get.
Gist of it is, what do you need to go the moon?
Are there technical records of Saturn V engines? Materials used?
This thread will inevitably become a conspiritard thread but I'll bite, NASA has plenty of records publicly available online. The Saturn V rode on a Rocketdyne F-1 engine. They needed a powerful engine most likely because they used a larger than normal payload to act as mass-damping for "human readiness". The Space Shuttle Main engine in contrast was said to be very rough and shaky on the way up to low earth orbit.
People today seem to fail to understand that America had the majority of the planets GDP back in 1969. America was the richest country on Earth by a much larger margin back then vs today.
Are there also technical diagrams of it? What kind of material they used?
Where can you find this kind of material?
Material as in the records you talk about.
...
t. retard
Obviously nobody ever went to the moon. The moon landing was faked by Stanley Kubrick who was the first Director to show earth from "space" in "2001: A Space Odyssey." His proof-of-concept movie was better than the eventual Apollo 11 moonlanding movie, which was bloody boring and the story was full of holes.
t. retard's brother
And earth is flat, am I right?
...
Potentially fake footage =/= the entirety of the landings were faked. We most likely went to the moon but there were also anomalies and known forgeries in a select amount of footage as well as suspicious incompetence within nasa. Either way the overwhelming evidence suggests we landed
t. retard's dog
Duct tape
Tinfoil
Plastic
It's kind of amazing how you manage to be wrong about nearly everything.
I think the only things you got right were the name of the rocket and the name of the 1st stage engine.
Nigger level intelligence post.
Image 1
Image 2
Image 3
Thank you for absolutely nothing
It has a very high cost economically and it won't have the same impact as before, also USA doesn't have the same economical capabilities to throw money like that into a new Apollo mission.
Mars is a more ambitious and reasonable project. Under the assumption it can be terraformed, it is a potential second planet to live and expand humanity. Mars should be taken seriously as a new challenge for humanity (instead of wasting money on welfare and "equality")
The communists and later the Jews fan the rumors of a faked moon landing to deemphasize American accomplishments and make you doubt yourselves.
Also to gather all dissident voices into retarded conspiracies, so as to invalidate all of their arguments, even if true.
Example: put zion-controlled government in the same place as flat earth and moon hoax.
Erm ZOG is making propaganda to say it faked a moon landing?
It is using facts like astronauts surviving, the impossibility of calculating all the variables of the trajectory used to exit and enter the atmosphere at the time, and the beyond unsafe designs of all the equipment and rockets?
No. If ZOG propaganisized against itself it would fail because it would be telling the truth of what ZOG actually did. If they say "the moon landings were faked goy". Why would (((they))) take away from (((their))) achievements at the time? ZOG had successfully ran the federal reserve scam for 60 or so years at that point. (((They))) truly owned the space missions(or lack thereof).
Mars is fucking stupid. It's a dead world with barely any water. What the hell would we do there? Jupiter's moons have oceans and possibly even bands of water at a temp/pressure already compatible with simple earth sealife. They're possibly so friendly to life that our biggest challenge will be exploring them without accidentally introducing an alien species.
But the whole discussion is dumb as we're literally dying out and the west can't colonize shit right now. We need to be flooding the world with our babies and once every country is white we expand to the ocean and then other planets because we need the space. If we make a space colony with our current suicidal culture it will just die out.
...
The Jewish media loves pushing the moon landing conspiracy on TV and magazines yet never ever mentions the ZOG 'conspiracy'. They want the idea that your country might be a fraud in your head to make you feel and act inferior (it's also why they push cuck porn), but don't want you considering how Jewed we are. For people who say "but they're just pushing the moon landing conspiracy because conspiracies sell!" mention that to them.
...
Where do I get my waifu then? All the girls I see are fat whores.
Let's say a small white colony of 10000 people is established in Mars.
Then the white race is saved and free from the Jew.
Going to Mars provides one of the best opportunities to save human diversity.
Of course i agree that sending SJW and numales won't do shit and they will go extinct in a few years. We should send only the best to Mars.
The F-1 is still the most powerful rocket engine of all time. All I can imagine is the reason they needed such power was to launch a particularly large payload. We have heavy-lift rockets with less power. All I can imagine was that the rockets extra weight would've served as a mass-damper to make the ride smoother. Unless you can think of any other reason. Unless you think I was wrong about America's GDP, and it is entirely true if you look at history, after WWII was over America was pretty much the only developed nation on Earth and Europe was still shit even after the Marshall Plan. It wasn't until the 1980s that development really started ramping up outside of the US of A
Sending people to space is a normal occurrence nowadays. People need to understand that the reason NASA ended the Apollo Program was to fund a cheaper means of getting to space, they could not do both at once so they felt like starting development of the Space Shuttle Program was the safest bet. It was a problem of funding and logistics. If NASA had continued the Apollo Program we would have no Space Shuttle, simple as that. And if you deny the existence of the ISS then you're fucking nuts because you can actually see it from the ground. Hell, I have actually seen it during the day, it looks pointed diagonally in the sky, is silent unlike an aircraft, moves quite fast, and is only visible for about 20 seconds and becomes invisible before it even reaches the horizon as it sort of flies into a blue haze into the sky until you can't see it anymore.
Daily reminder that is total bullshit and evidence of being a low-energy piece of shit that doesn't deserve a waifu. Think about the environments you must frequent if all you see are fat whores.
Continue the rocket science.
Could you elaborate on your 3D geometry comment, please?
The user was stating that the Moon is not a flat disc, I am sorry topography is a concept that requires an IQ above 60 to understand, they landed near the edge of the moon relative to the 2D mapped picture, but since it is actually 3D, it means their position is several degrees tilted ans spaced relative the the center. Hens why the Earth is not "above their heads"
See fellow anons accurate understanding of my 3D geometry comment..
Furthermore, the fact that the Earth didn't rise or set while they were on the moon is proof they were there.
You not understanding the complexities of how it was done is not "proof" it didn't happen, but merely proof you don't understand how it happened.
Are you beyond retarded? In that picture there is a person in the station looking out the window. If you zoom in on the person you can see they look like a claymation figure. This is because the face is disfigured. The eye are too close together(and visible for that matter). The mouth is dissproportionet to the rest of his chin no matter how fat the fuck is. Clearly it is claymation for the person inside the station assuming the whole photo was not faked.
k
I doubt it. Steel is steel. Aluminum is aluminum. And you need a shitton of it.
True, but the software for it isn't going to come cheap.
Hell, user, the labor is what's really going to kill you. Putting all that shit together will cost you several times what it cost NASA back then.
...
Where are the stars in that picture? Why can we see anything on the outside of the craft in the darkness of space? Why can't we see more inside of the craft yet we can see his face? Where is the light coming from and don't say the sun because than the shadows would be facing the same direction when they are not.
What is that in the reflection of the window on the right? To me it looks like a studio spotlight but I could be wrong there.
You say that like it's a bad thing. The Shuttle was a sink of resources intended to get the Soviets to do the same (they did, the stupid fucks) that set back manned space flight.
It's called "the earth reflects sunlight just like the moon does and is giving off some light"
It's called light scatter. On Earth it's a phenomenon known as airglow and it's why we can't see stars on the ground either.
Still doesn't prove that any humans walked on the moon, just that some equipment went up there.
...
That's a cute theory but it also dulls Occams Razor so you're going to have to back it up without making assumptions
us city slickers amiright boss?
Composites could provide some alternatives, and 3D printing provide further optimizations, but the specialization will still drive up overall cost - so cheap and simple and dependable (Fe, Al) may win out as you say.
Software can be downloaded from GitHub
github.com
Are you sure you're not a nigger? Please check.
The Soviets had unmanned moon landings since 1959 and there's been more unmanned than manned moon landings, so it stands to reason that it's more likely Apollo 11 was also an unmanned moon landing.
It stands to reason it was not since we have more evidence that it wasn't and if it was an unmanned landing then there's nothing stooping you from assuming Russia would've also have faked their own manned landing just as easily. Checkm8
The Russians were fooled into thinking the American moonlanding was real.
What third-party evidence do you have to prove that humans walked on the moon?
Man films other man with moon in background.
You should spend more time discovering where the idea came from that the human white race's greatest achievement didn't happen.
Sorry your Razor is too dull to cut, please try again. Why didn't Russia fake their own moonlanding if it was so easy? They would've had every reason too. Darn logic getting in the way of my pet conspiracy theories!
...but you know it is fake and are posting about it on hatechan, and those stupid Russians who have a space program still haven't realized and said anything about it?
Lol wut?
Who said we are not russians?
The "Moon landings were fake!" official statement that you still haven't put out said you are not Russians.
Get back you Cheeki Breeki commies!
Wow, that's some evidence right there...
It wasn't easy, that's why the richest nation on earth managed to fake the moonlanding!
Soviets != current Russia.
Nipnongs and Pajeets really know their shit, especially Pajeets.
Implying the current Russia are happy to have their heritage shat on by going along with a supposedly fake story.
It would be infected with feminism and they'd all be dead within one generation. We have to fix our culture before we go anywhere as our culture goes with us.
Hi KGB. How goes the workday?
Point out why does he know its fake but Russians still don't?
Point out Russians were Soviets and point is valid.
Lol wut?
You are completely wrong about this mass damper shit you keep rambling on about. All of the rocket was either fuel, engine or payload. The fuel was sized to the payload and the engines were sized to the desired acceleration.
The thing shook so bad plenty of apollo astronauts commented they wouldn't be able to hit switches in an emergency or read the gauges.
The shuttle was much smoother.
FUCK IT I am going to say it.
THE RUSSIANS ARE FAKE
Thanks for being the only rational, interesting post here.
The Apollo missions and entire Space Race was always fucking awesome and fascinating.
micheal bay is related to stanley kubrick
transformers 2 was right
Impressive. You're like an olympic mental gymnast
Unfortunately people prefer the convient, flattering lie over the ugly truth.
The space program is fake whether the russians talk about it or not. Having said that, the russians have talked about the moon hoax numerous times and russian state television even aired documentaries about the US faking the moon landing. They know very well that US space program, like the russian space program was nothing more an ICBM research project.
source:
washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2015/06/17/russian-official-wants-to-investigate-whether-u-s-moon-landings-actually-happened/
Moon landing conspiracy theorist will be disproved once and for all in 2018 when Audi's rover will land next to the Apollo 17 site and take pictures.
Also Apollo retroreflectors. How did they end up on the moon then? Only Holla Forums retards think that moon landings were a hoax.
But then Audi is in on it too. Obviously Israel is paying Audi to fake a landing. The moon isn't even real and the earth is flat. Get over it!
Russians put up retroreflectors on the moon as well. You don't need humans for that shit.
The only hardware in the world that can run that software is the Apollo computer. In order to use it, you would have to write a man-rated emulator for the machine. You are better off writing man-rated software for the new hardware.
The moon landing has already been proven to be a hoax. No amount of CGI and hollywood effects can unfake the Apollo 11 pictures and video footage.
N.A.S.A sat on a wall,
N.A.S.A had a great fall;
And no CGI shown on television
Could put the moon landing together again.
you wish, you moist dingle berry
some cunts spam Holla Forums trying to infect it with that /x/-tier mental AIDS, but the general user base bashes them like everyone else does
You're confusing "proven" with "believed without question by stupid people who know nothing".
The technology required to go to the moon existed in 1969. The technology required to fake it did not.
...
Listen, Moishe you eternal liar, we're the spiritual heirs of Ernst Zundel and we know that the moon landing is as fake as a holodeck. There will come a day when 2+2 equals 4 again and on that day you'll take a short walk with a long rope. We may have mercy on the 89IQ niggers, but you're going back to where you came from.
Kubrick shot "2001: A Space Odyssey" from 1966 to 1967 right before he faked the moon landing. The front screen projection method goes back to 50s and enlarged photographs and massive studio paintings go back all the way to 18th and 19th century. The only thing out of the ordinary was the Apollo 11 budget, which if NASA didn't steal most of it may have been as high as $1B in 1960s dollars. You can build a lot of sets and stage props with that kind of money, maybe even an oversized rocket or two.
Couple more pictures
That's only one aspect of the supposed fake moon landing. You can't account for the other more substantial evidence that could not be faked with technology of 1969.
Okay, i'll bite. What are the technological challenges that would've made it impossible to fake the moonlanding in 69?
Stop entertaining them.
There exist a group of people who "want to believe" instead of look at things objectively. Then, they build backwards in a "parallel construction" sort of way to justify their arguments.
It's the same thing with the Holocaust denial types. I'm nationalistic as fuck, but at some point you can't deny reality if you want to improve it.
Absolutely nothing, what would've stopped other countries from doing the exact same thing? This is called dulling Occams Razor
Real believable, Rebe.
D&C, unless you're a shit troll.
The Holocaust happened, and it was shit. Hitler wanted to eliminate the Jews, but did the stupidest thing ever: round them all up and try to kill them.
Rule 101 in destroying a group of people is NOT to kill them off. Instead, exploit them, subvert them, destroy their will to live.
Find out where they have ideological rifts, major divides within themselves.
Find the most radical guys in those categories. They usually don't have a big voice, because they're radical. Fund them, give them a voice. Then fund the opposition. Find a third party, equally as radical and stupid. Give them a shitton of money. Repeat.
Civil war? Awesome. Fund the winners, enable them to commit war crimes. Then start opposition parties equally as heinous. Never forget to tie in their religion, culture, and ideology in every aspect of this.
Hitler's final solution was deportation, not genocide.
From Germany, and hopefully Europe, yes. Jews are hated by every nation they infect, not because everyone (except Israel, who dindu nuffin, palestinians were asking for it) is a hateful antisemuhtic but because of the antisocial actions of jews.
What was Madagascar for then? Why did Hitler allow Jews to leave the country until bongs/frogs declared war and made it impossible? If he wanted to kill them, why not use the methods used in every single holocaust that actually happened? The way to do it is you shoot them, you absolutely do not have them travel all over the country visiting dozens of "death" camps, plug them in masturbation machines, kill them in open gas chambers whose gas by some coincidence is the same exact gas everyone uses to kill disease in their camps and keep the prisoners working, and then burn them in ovens orders of magnitude more efficient than modern ovens. Even Africans can pull a genocide right and you want me to believe Germans couldn't figure it out?
Final solution was an intentionally wrong translation. It was a total solution. You can see a German complaining about it in the kangaroo court of Nuremberg, but I don't remember who it was.
I don't plan to spend all day fighting this shit.
First, your pic is a misdirection. Simply because people make up stories about an event for personal profit doesn't make that event fake.
Second, the Nazis did kill them with guns for a while, Soviet-style. Bullet to the back of the neck over an open pit.
Fake. If I made up some story right now about how aliens were involved in the Holocaust, would you also take that as evidence it didn't happen?
Finally, I have no love lost for the Jews. Idgaf. What is true, is that nobody talks about the real reason why everyone makes a big deal about the Holocaust.
It's not the Jews. It's not the genocide.
It's the fact that for the first time in history, genocide was normalized and industrialized. Now, it wasn't ugly images of entire burning villages, with corpses of innocents all over the ground. It was a quiet line of prisoners, ending in a nondescript building. It wasn't awful anymore.
While we have you on record: What other official stories aside from the moonlanding and the holocaust (minus the masturbation machines) are real? You seem to be an expert on the matter.
do you believe in things to "meme" them, or do you really care?
Calm down, Rebe. It's just banter. Yes, i do care
technology
It did not take long for the shills to divide this thread. People should youtube "Lunar Wave", very interesting phenomenon. NASA is doing something that they are not telling us.
Actually it is just shills using their tactic of responding to eachother. They do this when the oppositions concensus is so solidly opposed to what they are saying that using group think is the only effective way to steer others into confusion of what is going on.
Where are the clouds?
they're right there. directly over the city lights. also on the horizon.
Perfect example. Shill asks stupid question easily answered by having a brain. Another shill answers him to deride him and make the opposition look irrelavent in their points.
They sure turned down the opacity
its nighttime you mong
Explain this then.
Scattering of sunlight off water droplets in the atmosphere.
Coriolis effect.
GIF compression artefacts.
...
...