”redpilled” people believe in the moon landing

I rarely make posts that require shill replies. Thanks, I guess.

I spelt a 5 left word with the letters, and this is your idea of criticism?

Actually, 11-14did not even attempt that shot, 15/16 failed it.

Stop fucking typing shit if you have no idea what you are talking about. You are literally a detriment to humanity.

I must have struck a nerve

Man, the first half of that post came out so retarded even I don’t know what I meant.

Seriously though, you are a fucking retard that doesn’t even know how to use google.

Imagine being alive and not knowing what google is.
Imagine still pretending you ar smart.

REEEEEEEEEE.

It was all clearly faked. But I wonder why Russia didn’t dispute it more?

>Stop fucking typing shit if you have no idea what you are talking about. You are literally a detriment to humanity.

oh my god, it's not even self-aware

Attached: 47225167_1115801381908372_3114856238932819968_n.jpg (720x588, 23K)

>bad footage is indistinguishable from fake footage

you believe this?

I’m dead inside and Jow Forums is my zeitgeist coming to tens with it.

Wish my brain had less fucking CAPTCHA

I'm almost 40. I've seen the footage many times in my life. It looks completely different from the other lem ascents. I haven't been able to locate this footage for over three years. The fact that I am getting so many replies on a Peruvian yak husbandry board is indicative of the truthiness of my statement. ANONS. LOOK INTO THIS. I'M NOT KIDDING.

lol at that image
>people think that thing isnt on some type of wire
'
you cant convice anyone. only NPC believe it and they arent capable of changing their OS

Come at me bro, he is literally wrong and NASA agrees with me. This moontards only recourse would be to say nasa is correct and a liar.

L2Socrates.

Looks real to me... What do you think is fake about it?

>believing in socrates
Let me guess, you think the ocean is made out of dinosaur tears too?

they dont understand physics

Who was controlling the camera?

saturn is a holohoax

You seem well versed on the moon landing. Can you answer my question please? Actually curious.

Someone at nasa control accounting for the however many second delay from button press to signaling the camera on the moon. ALLEGEDLY

What's funny is google scrubbed all the videos of the lunar rover driving around with rubber tires on the moon. If you google it now it's just new pictures and brand new NASA footage with a huge emphasis on the titanium mesh tires.

Yes most of the old footage was scrubbed. Fuck NASA and fuck all the NASA shills in this God damn thread.

Or you were wrong.

It's true, I know what you are talking about. All of the old footage cannot be found on google or YouTube any more. You are only allowed to view the new 2017 NASA release footage which pretty much proves NASA is lying.

Just needs a single motor, a physical stop and cutoff and the right numbers. No one needed to be on the surface.

Why can't they use rubber tires?
>t. salesman / scienclet

There were never rubber tire videos. I've been watching this shit all my life and you're misremembering.

Wow. NASA is perfect at these things, isn't it? The zoom out and panning up was extremely accurate and professional. Almost too good to be believable.

Muddying the waters eh, Shlomo?

It sure seems a lot of effort for a shot that could be accomplished with just zooming out a lot more, don't you think? It has this unnecessary cinematographic feeling for a scientific mission.
And don't tell me they did it because it was a historical event worthy of such a shot. They deleted the tapes. It can't be that important.

I propose we round up all the space-deniers, moon-landing-deniers, and science-deniers, and we fire them into the sun.

Their single-digit-IQ genetics must be expunged from the gene pool.

Who's with me?

Attached: the sun.jpg (691x720, 65K)

You sound a lot like an SJW or a Muslim.
Death to the bigots! Death to the infidels!

Moon landing was faked though. At most it was an unmanned mission and the moonwalks were filmed on Earth. No way with that shitty tech and being so far behind could they have brought someone on the moon, landed him, then reconnected with the orbiter and come back like the official story goes.

NASA is even talking now about "putting a man on the moon", why is that?

The only real question is why didn't the Soviets expose it.

>It has this unnecessary cinematographic feeling for a scientific mission.

This.

If you throw flat-earthers and climate deniers into the mix, then I am on board.

Attached: Grace Lee Whitney.jpg (790x1000, 47K)

>le epic trole!

Attached: trole face.jpg (500x380, 42K)

Le paki retard

>flat-earthers
Absolutely, they deserve a painful death.

>climate deniers
Climate DENIERS are stupid, yes.

But I still think there are valid questions to be asked about what our response to global warming should be. E.g., should Europe really cut CO2 emissions, when National Geographic shows that Europe's crops will do BETTER due to global warming by 2050 (pic related)?

Obviously some parts of the world (like the US, Africa, India) may suffer, so I can understand why they would want to do something about it. But in the case of Europe, I just sort of think why do we need to curb emissions? It's not our problem. It's the problem of other countries. We need to take care of our own. It is not our job to sacrifice our own economic wellbeing for the sake of some other country.

Attached: crop yield changes by 2050.png (2880x1520, 1.51M)

>calls me a retard
>unironically tries to troll people into thinking he believes in nonsense

Attached: brainlet.jpg (645x729, 81K)

>Their single-digit-IQ genetics
>Thread about moon landing possibly being faked for cold war propaganda.
>Muh flat-earthers
>Muh climate deniers
Are you sure you're not the single digit IQ genetics master race here?

Attached: 1545838790422.jpg (590x409, 77K)

How is thinking the moon landing was faked in a srudio nonsense? Have they broadcast to the public any other operations of this scale and risk since then? What if the public would have seen the lunar lander crash?

Focus on CO2 instead of methane is the major flaw in these fixes. Another biggie is there may be people with a vested interest in making equatorial regions uninhabitable to increase crop production elsewhere. This is a dangerous game. Many will die, so a few can profit.

>unironically trying to troll people into thinking you believe in nonsense
Don't you have anything better to do on Boxing Day of all days?

Attached: brainlet2.jpg (800x450, 44K)

Go home, Abdul.

well, NASA was comprised of brilliant, white men at that time

>things
many things

If the people who die are in another country then I don't really care a huge deal.

If there are going to be bad repercussions for my country, then I'm willing to hear those arguments, but I never really see those arguments made in the media. They might outline how global warming will affect other countries, but not the UK.

>Accuses other of trolling because he's not even aware of the subject implications.
>Non sequitur to change the subject.
You sure described yourself with that single-digit-IQ remark, didn't you?

>doesn't have an argument so tries to make an irrelevant ad hominem attack instead
You're not very clever, are you?

Attached: brainlet3.jpg (1462x2046, 121K)

>person who has nothing better to do that try and troll people into thinking he's a conspiracy theorist nutjob is accusing others of being unintelligent
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Attached: brainlet4.jpg (903x960, 52K)

As water temperature increases in the Atlantic, so does the intensity of tropical storms and hurricanes. Enjoy your hurricane parties like we do in Floriduh.

Brilliant white men could have used the rover to place the camera 10 feet back and record the whole thing without having to make it extra complicated with the automation of the camera motion and the accounting for the signal delay. So many things could go wrong. Doesn't seem that smart to take the risk.
Unless, of course, this mission was about selling an idea, instead of actually doing it for real.
If only we didn't have niggers working at NASA right now, maybe we'd wouldn't have "lost" the technology that was able to send humans to the moon and bring them back unharmed from the outer space radiation. At least according to NASA.

Attached: 1545809598523.jpg (768x1024, 118K)

If only you added a few more AHAHs you wouldn't sound like you're over compensating.

>The only real question is why didn't the Soviets expose it.

The only photographic proof of the Lunar landings comes from those accused of the hoax.

post a pic of apollo 17 taken by another country's lunar orbiter

protip: hahaha good luck.

no other nation has photographed the apollo landers on the moon.. only the usa can see them meaning the soviets could NOT have called BS even if they wanted to.

Attached: food guy.png (800x704, 92K)

who is filming this and how did they zoom out and keep filming it?

We did land on the moon just not as it was shown

For the billions of dollars we give them they fucking better be.

It's not cheap to remote control a few rovers and maintain a space station. There are a lot of families to feed. I still remember George W. Bush saying we'd go "back" to the moon.
edition.cnn.com/2004/TECH/space/01/14/bush.space/

Can't wait for NASA to rediscover the necessary technology. Maybe in 2034.

Attached: 1545589773401.jpg (3848x2541, 1.36M)

It wasn't entirely scientific. The effort was, but a portion of the result was strategic. We were showing off to make communism look bad, and bankrupt the ussr through their efforts to keep up.

It's not a lot of effort, btw. It's as or more simple than a calculator, as it only needed to do one specialized thing. Zoom out, pan up, die on the moon.

And what better way to do so other than fake something impossible to do at the time so the competition demoralizes and bankrupts itself trying? It's a brilliant strategy.

It is when you could just place the camera further back and capture a wider angle. It's over-complicating something extremely simple. It's one of those things you would see being dome by artists, not by scientists.

How come they just landed on the moon and didn't even take some evidence back to earth? some sand maybe? some rock?

Everything just looks fake and it feels fake. NASA don't have the tech. to go back at this point in time and we're soon in 2019..fuck outta here. people are stupid for thinking we made it to the moon

that guy that died in the moon everybody knows about him

you're thinking about that man that got lost in the storm from "the martian".

that's not reality, man

But they did bring rocks back to Earth.
telegraph.co.uk/news/science/space/6105902/Moon-rock-given-to-Holland-by-Neil-Armstrong-and-Buzz-Aldrin-is-fake.html

And then they wen't missing. Just like the technology.
bbc.com/news/magazine-16909592

But they did bring rocks back to Earth.
telegraph.co.uk/news/science/space/6105902/Moon-rock-given-to-Holland-by-Neil-Armstrong-and-Buzz-Aldrin-is-fake.html

And then they went missing. Just like the technology.
bbc.com/news/magazine-16909592

Attached: 1535050739067.webm (1280x720, 2.95M)

the moon landings were faked dude
everyone with a brain knows that we still cant get through the van allen radiation belt

Attached: 1537130407533.webm (1280x720, 2.91M)

>be me on Christmas eve eve >enjoying billiards, beer, darts at dive bar
>overhear dude playing next table talking about dead roasties in morrocco
>whip out phone to compare videos
>dude is redpilled, his girl is not
>bitch kicks bottom of his poolstick but it swings up and hits my nards
Now something is fucked up down below. One of my nuts is way way bigger than the other two.

Attached: 1545768940235.jpg (1024x722, 71K)

uhm.. who is controlling the camera and how did they get the timing with the signal delay?

I see this video a lot.
>Near zero gravity
>Colleague tried to show off with flip
>Humans didn't evolve in this gravity.
>Looks at colleague.
>He's doing it too slow.
>Needs adjustment.
>Tries to grab him.
>Misses but still sticks pinky in his pocket
>Pulls
>Wow, I can pull someone with just my pinky in near zero gravity.
I don't see anything particularly wrong with this one.

and lost all the rocks

The camera was radio controlled, these anons aren't exactly right. Backing up for a wide shot from the beginning would prevent mission control from having clear visuals of the astronauts entering the pod. If anything were to go wrong, that visual would be vital.

signal delay?

>spell
>logical
undernog

Just how primitive do you think 1969 tech was?

What people who think this shows it as fake are seeing is that he misses entirely and instead grabs a wire.

I’m not saying your assessment is wrong, just that the first time I saw this I was suspect too.

There are shitloads of lunar rover videos on jewtube. I just looked.

>we went to the moon
>in 1969
>didnt know of van allen radiation belt
>all tapes destroyed or taped over
>all telemetry data destroyed
>12v of power
>no dish to broadcast the cast, thousands of miles away
>'live' broadast was edited before it was shown
>we can't get out of low earth orbit now in 2018
>nasa contradicts themselves constantly
something doesn't add up

they did everything else with the signal delay, why would panning a camera be the thing that stumps them? plus, in OPs gif, the zoom out starts late and the pan doesn't start until after the module has ignited.

Because the camera from that distance could show anything other than blurry shapes? Why would they even need clear visuals of the astronauts entering the pod? If anything went wrong, what different would it make to have the camera a few feet back or even closer but tilted upward? Can't you see you're over-complicating things just to keep a belief? We can't leave low orbit. NASA admitted it recently. It was a cold war propaganda stunt. The US are still the best nation in the world even if they didn't go to the moon.

It was way better than today according to NASA.

>we can't get out of LEO now
What the fuck? This is patently false. How do you explain the unmanned rovers on other planets?

>unmanned

>Brilliant white men could have used the rover to place the camera 10 feet back and record the whole thing without having to make it extra complicated with the automation of the camera motion and the accounting for the signal delay. So many things could go wrong. Doesn't seem that smart to take the risk.
10 feet? That's the length of the rover itself, you fool. That would achieve nothing, it'd have to be a lot further than that. You understand they had the rover so they didn't need to walk long distances in their spacesuits, right? You think parking the rover a great distance away and then having an astronaut walk back to the LEM is a good idea? When it'd have to be the last thing on the agenda before launching? You talk about risk, but successfully capturing footage of the launch remotely is NOT a priority, it's just icing on the cake.
>Unless, of course, this mission was about selling an idea, instead of actually doing it for real.
Isn't your argumentation backwards, here? If it was purely about selling an idea, more effort would have been put towards that. Capturing that footage was merely "it'd be a nice bonus if we could manage to pull that off"

Not to mention that you're sure to need it to pan upwards, if you're far enough away to not need to do that, you wouldn't be able to make anything out.

>why would NASA want a visual of the moon mission
Is this a real question? They need a visual to keep track on the astronauts. The difference a few feet of focal length makes is obvious in OPs gif when it zooms out. I don't know why you think this is complicated equipment - a remote controlled SSTV camera would be by far the simplest technical equipment. It isn't "over complicating" things at all. In fact, the technology pioneered on the camera mount is still used on set in studios today for remote control.

I assume you're referencing the common lie that "if we wanted to go back to the moon, we couldn't"
It doesn't mean we don't have the tech. It means we don't have the equipment and the NASA would have to build it again. They could if you handed them an obscene sum of money and told them to get busy, but they don't have a bunch of Apollo rockets just sitting in storage, no.
I fully support being skeptical of the Govt. but there's a point where it just makes you sound like a contrarian retard. And you're pissing on some of the finest airmen the world ever produced as well. Some of whom gave their lives for the space program.

Nice catch with the pinky in the pocket portubro.

>we could go back
>we just need more money and better technology then we had in the 60s!