MOON THREAD CONTD

There was an user in the last thread asking how the tinfoil LEM could be expected to land and liftoff the moon on the first try. Thread 404'd before I could post that he's retarded because the LEM had been flown twice before the first landing on Apollo 9 and 10.

Attached: AS09ascentstage.jpg (337x315, 26K)

>NASA is telling the truth because NASA says so
The findings have all been peer reviewed and verified for their authenticity by scientists from all over the world. To discredit the moon landings is to go up against the juggernaut of academia, which is no easy task. Attacking the primary source is oversimplifying the process of how we verify information to be either true or false because doing so fails to account for the individual conclusions that have been drawn by thousands of naive observers, after the fact.

Attached: 546456456.gif (271x281, 771K)

lem has rigid titanium/aluminium structure beneath. don't be stupid.

Attached: Grumman%20LTA-1,%201st%20functional%20Lunar%20Module[1].jpg (640x586, 158K)

>The findings have all been peer reviewed and verified for their authenticity by scientists from all over the world.
So have "one human race" biology.
So have gender studies theories
So have climate change pseudoscience
So have the holocaust
So have all sorts of weird things

Your appeal to authority of majority consensus in the academic world is not only ridiculous seeing how the entire history of science is the established "knowns" being wrong, but there being good enough procedure (hypothesis, test, theory) for minority groups or individuals to prove the majority wrong. But it's doubly ridiculous when you observe the obvious fact that the western academies have been subverted and turned to shit in the post war era, being insulting institutions compared to what they once were, where retarded pseudoscientific quasi-religious ideas are not only spouted, but not even questioned. I'll remind you that there were no peer review back in the age of enlightenment, when experiment was the foundation of science, not pilpul star-chambers of corruptible faggots.

The only Moon that matters

Attached: moonman_colossus.jpg (936x1512, 262K)

>an actual argument
You raise an excellent point, and unfortunately the appeal to authority is the best approach we've got when it comes to these sorts of topics. As a member of the scientific community, I'm bound by certain protocols, one of them being a respect for the scholarly academic peer review process, despite its potential pitfalls. That's not to say we should blindly accept every paper that gets published. In fact, any new information that comes to light which discredits earlier findings is accepted as the new canon, but only after it's undergone rigorous and thorough analysis. To date, there have been no verifiable findings that have emerged since the moon landings happened that have called the veracity of the moon landings into question beyond easily debunked arguments from ignorance.

Attached: 456456456.gif (444x250, 1024K)

Cia copy pasta

Well, it's good that we can have a rational talk about this, because I too consider myself a member of the scientific community, but I was hounded out of academia for refusing to go along with lies and politics. It's a fine balance and it's extremely difficult, I'll agree with you there. Our problem is that we don't really have anything else to lean back on than the institutions of science as it stands, which is why they've been targeted as hard as they have. I'll suggest that things are perhaps much worse off than you think.

Look at it this way, we're now at a point where pumping 10 year old boys full of pig hormone and lopping off their penis is considered a cure for... I don't even know it's so diffuse. It's fucking medieval as far as I'm concerned. Now you might consider that a single isolated instance of madness in the academic world. But where is the push-back? What a piece of shit scientist caste we have today, it should be pretty obvious. And I postulate that this development was pretty predictable, as we turned the academies from being high-IQ and costly, to being adult kindergarten for every possible pleb out there who could manage to sign some loan papers. I'd ask you to go review the entry exams to a 1800s academy, your professor would probably not pass them.

As to the moon landing, I have no idea. For all my discussion it all loops back to your argument. There are things people question and the only answer provided is "NASA says." And that's a bit of the problem too, because that's what every academy out there relies on too. That NASA is telling the truth. Just like the whole climate change debacle and the 2-3 UN based institutions that everyone else just trusts. It's not like you can reproduce their supercomputer models, or take a trip to the moon to verify why dust behaves so fucking strangely there in propaganda shots.

Attached: 581a0052cb0bd7ff77c51baeacc765fa5fc025071228855e3ddb3b25d37b1ac6.gif (300x245, 504K)

Earth is flat

Attached: 1535487372777.png (1226x1828, 529K)

wtf there's no way our atmosphere extends that far out. That cannot be a thing that they're teaching. No way. Just no.

What are your actual objections to the moon landing? Name specifics and well gladly explain it to you in a way that you will understand it.

>pic is proof
You don't even know what's going on in that picture retard.

>Flat earth is a CIA nigger psyop

That's a certainty and there's no hope for anyone who can't quickly see that fact.

youtube.com/watch?v=lXixR7Y5LBk
youtube.com/watch?v=Sq1bDdAXxao
youtube.com/watch?v=9muc2mT9pBU
youtube.com/watch?v=37y-MSBU6iY

Attached: 1542630505863.jpg (960x720, 41K)

why didnt we ever put a rover on the moon?

"atmosphere" it's just gas, or random particles. not breathable, close to vaccuum, just detectable levels of gas particulars.

My objection is that there is no evidence.

Attached: Flat Earth-Lunar wave phenomena.webm (852x480, 2.53M)

THE MOON ISN'T REAL

Attached: Jewish moon conspiracy.png (1103x628, 74K)

Attached: Lunar Wave 2012.webm (1280x720, 2.93M)

Attached: Lunar Wave January 4, 2017 at 6-54-pm.webm (852x480, 2.98M)

Your pic is retarded.

>"atmosphere" it's just gas, or random particles. not breathable, close to vaccuum, just detectable levels of gas particulars.

Wholly incorrect.

And you literally have no arguments. You're an Israeli shill.

Attached: Lunar Wave 7-9-17.webm (1280x720, 2.8M)

NVIDIA PRODUCES ALL MODERN CGI FOR NASA. EXPECT THEM TO WORK WITH ISRAEL TOO.

What are rays of light faggot?

Flat Earth disclosure comes this year.

lol you glownigger

The moon is artificially constructed to aid life on earth. It's also hollow and quite possibly an observation station. The reason we haven't been back is because we found ayye structures and crafts on the far side. After that weren't allowed to return manned missions.

>because that's what every academy out there relies on too. That NASA is telling the truth
That's why the moon rocks get passed around the world each year. They contain unique geochemical signatures found nowhere else on Earth, so at bear minimum, something went to the moon and grabbed those samples. To claim that it was robots, and not actual people is grasping at straws, because the requirements of a manned mission aren't that big of a stretch when compared to those of an unmanned one.
>As to the moon landing, I have no idea. For all my discussion it all loops back to your argument.
I'm stuck in the opposite catch 22 in that I need an actual academic source for debunking the moon landings. It will never be enough for me to just get really baked and watch youtube videos on the topic and blindly accept them to be true, because it runs contrary to my professional training. Your right about academia being pozzed with cultural marxism, but that's only certain elements and not the institution as a whole.

Attached: 456456.gif (435x250, 898K)

^Almost this

The moon is real, but only in the sense that it's made of rock and does affect our tides, moods;etc.

And yeah, I realize that NASA fakes most of their stuff now. So does Musk because that car video was as fake as my sex life.

Do you have any scans of thin sections of the moon rocks compared to say, an basalt from Oregon or Washington?