After dust has settled and nearly 50 years later...

Well, where is it?

Moron

Only NPCs can believe in the Moon """landing"""

Nigger just google it. It’s there and it’s fucking easy to find.

>This collection of 0s and 1s is totally what happened and what was caught with an analogue medium back then

Seems legit to me.
Would be more of an accomplishment if they faked it.
Moon is gay anyway.

Fake and gay. You obviously know nothing about telescopes.

>Would be more of an accomplishment if they faked it.
This. To everyone in this thread, watch “Adam Ruins Everything: Adam Ruins the Moon Landing.” It basically explains that it’d be harder to fake the moon landing than actually do it because of the filming and lighting equipment back in that day, as well as how immense of a secret and risk it’d have to be.

Furthermore, this is actual evidence, such as reflectors left behind just so we can observe them from Earth will telescopes.

Control theory has been around for a very long time. We were able to make accurate electronic gunsights for ships and artillery years before the moon landing - and guess what - without any "if" statements! You can accomplish a great deal of computing with basic hardware and good engineering. C wasn't what made computing possible. C is what made it accessible. The tech was definitely advanced enough at the time to land on the moon.

There are human made equipment on Mars. That proves people have been there too?

>user.... Oh but let me exp

Yeah yeah yeah. Shut the fuck up.

Use a trip so I can filter you. Retards shouldn't be allowed to post on Jow Forums.

Nice argument retard... Suck my dick while you're at it.

Oy vey, Delete this thread right now goyim

Attached: 1429169792708.jpg (297x365, 36K)

>when they are so committed to the hoax that they wrote perfectly functional code that was never used
github.com/chrislgarry/Apollo-11/

As further evidence, see the Apollo Guidance Computer. 2MHz, 16bit, 2k ram and just over 36k rom. Not too far behind a modern 8 bit microcontroller. Easily enough computational power for well-written algorithms to land us on the moon.

It happened. There is no way it could be kept a secret for this long. Every piece of "evidence" has been debunked times over.

Surely they would have wanted to release an official video if it was fake. That way they could "prove" it was real.

>what about Lunar Laser Ranging experiment?

It never happened. The closest these astronauts got to the Moon is in some refrigerator box in Burbank while high on a good dose of LSD. They got Jedi mind tricked. But they who got cheated most are the public.

You're right, man. The gubbermint is out to get us all.

there's a few basic problems with this story and most of them are pretty obvious if you just think about it, like

can you have a casual conversation with someone on the moon using radio with no delays between your questions and the person on the moon's replies?

it's just a myth spread by propaganda which falls apart if you critically question any part of it

They already got you, me and the military, judiciary system and industry in their back pockets. It's a fait accompli that the faking of the moon landings partially enabled.

The delay is about 1 second.

I believe that landing was real and the other five landings/missions to the moon are real.

>present evidence
>there's a possibility it's fake, therefore it's fake!
kys

what was the scientific significance of the moon craze? didn't all of the rocks they "brought back" got contaminated by some worker who tried to steal them and sell them to an undercover fbi agent? and even if they managed to work on them longer before they got bad, what did they even achieve/could achieve? how was this colossal waste of money was explained to the public back then

Space was cool back then and the US felt it was capable of anything. It was like something out of a movie, but it really happened. Americans love that.

"Fuck the commies"

The scientific significance was, "We don't know what the fuck is out there but we better find out before the commies do, and also this helps us work out the kinks in our ICBM technology on the down low"

54/7400 series TTL ICs were available by '69 however ICs used in the moon landing mission were most likely used DTL, RTL, and or ECL logic families. They probably used analog computers for some tasks too they had op-amps (the LM741 came out in '67) and if not that then discrete transistor based or vacuum tube based computers then.

It was absolutely possible to get to the moon by 1969 and ICs were a thing since 1963 although you didn't always necessarily find them in the standard DIP packages you see today. You're ignorant OP.

i wonder how much this waste of funds contributed to switch the USA suffered under reagan, from being the worlds biggest creditor to being trillions in debt. i mean his insane ideas didn't help, but having all of those stupid NASA programs draining away your money sure was a kick in the balls

>It was so long ago even fucking C was not around.
They did tons of programming and mathematical calculations, you fucking retard. There are literally stacks of books of them in museums if you even had the brain power to read them.

"Shut up" isn't an argument. Use a trip.

No. Shut up nigger.

If you think that NASA funding ever had more of an impact on US spending than the MIC, you are legitimately retarded.
At it's peak, it topped at 4,41% of the Federal Budget.
And with it, came hundreds of thousands of jobs and countless new technologies.

The space race had a ten to one return on investment on GDP growth. Who'd have figured that spending your money on inventing technology rather than bombing Afghani children would be good for society. No, you're right, that F35 program was much more important. We could be mining the asteroid belt, sure, but those Afghani children REALLY needed bombing.

Stop being a slave to the military industrial complex.

>do you still believe
yes
>It was so long ago even fucking C was not around.
yeah who the fuck needs C? FORTRAN was around and back then even the people who were poor programmers would be working an assembly.

You don't even need computers, you just need some smart people with slide rules and pencils/paper. computers only make life easier and incidentally, people stupider. face it, the world is only getting gayer by the day.

Have you tried fapping to trap porn already?

kek

>Adam Ruins Everything: Adam Ruins the Moon Landing.” It basically explains that it’d be harder to fake the moon landing than actually do it because of the filming and lighting equipment back in that day,

Well Im a video photographer and Adam is wrong and an idiot. Pic related is my Fujinon lens.

Attached: 20181023_193917.jpg (2560x1440, 1.4M)

so you're not a brain dead flat earther? what about the moon trip in particular is so preposterously different then the fact that we have had people in orbit around earth for decades. And there wasn't just A moon landing, there were quite a few. So was it just the multiple moon landings they've managed to keep secretly fake for decades without snitches or damnable proof, or is it the whole history of human spaceflight? Not to mention the numerous orbital human spaceflight that went on in preparation for the moon missions, I suppose that was all faked and kept under wraps too.

You can literally see the LZ and the rover using a telescope, you fucking faggot. Also, the reflectors. Go to any uni and shoot a laser at the moon.

You literally can.

>what was the scientific significance of the moon craze?
there was none
it was all political/cold war bullshit

...

>what was the scientific significance of the moon craze?
Literally invented digital video, yo.

>video photographer
Yeah so is every other stacy get the fuck off this board

youtube.com/watch?v=_loUDS4c3Cs

We did make it to the moon, op. That part wasn't faked. The real cover up is why we abruptly stopped manned space exploration. They don't let that out because they don't want to cause a panic.

the tech to bring us to the moon was there. The tech required to fake the footage convincingly, was not.

>fucking C was not around
you dumb fuckin babbies think C is actually ancient, Fortran and LISP had already been alive and well for a decade at that point. I swear to fucking god nobody on this board knows a lick of the history of computer science, let alone mechanical engineering and rocket science.

Oh look, it's one of these """FAKE SPACE""" Jow Forums morons.

Seriously, how does a single board manage to attract so many contrarian, mentally unstable people? Someone trying to do it deliberately wouldn't half been a quarter as succesful, yet the board is filled to the brim without even trying.

Attached: 1538771867112.gif (362x332, 62K)

if is just a fancy branch anyway

distance from earth to moon: ~385,000 km
speed of light: ~300,000 km/s
~4/3 of a second each way isn't far off from a casual conversation

That's one helluva Mickey Mouse post you contributed. Well done. Your gargantuous IQ sure shines in your post.

You think this is bad? Go to /x/. The people on /x/ are unironically mentally ill. The board might aswell be called /x/ - Schizophrenia / Mental Illness. It's insane. I just checked out their front page, and there's a thread right there where some guy thinks he can see the future in his dreams. I checked out page two, and there's a thread about whether or not trees are telepathic. It also has a flat earth general, where the same one or two spammers show up every time to "prove" the earth is flat by spamming literally hundreds of image macros that all amount up to "I don't understand scientific theory x therefor it's fake". It actually pisses me off sometimes.

Sorry op, it wasn't just 1 landing. It was 6 landings. Probably easier to do it than fake it and keep eveeryone quiet for 50 years.

>Afghani children REALLY needed bombing
they do

Rationalise this.

/thread

Didn't Buzz Aldrin admit that they never went?

>It was so long ago even fucking C was not around
>implying C pioneered modern technology
I know this is bait, but I'll reply anyway. There were a ton of programming languages used long before C came around. Not very many of them are still around because they've been replaced by better, more efficient languages but that doesn't mean the technology wasn't there back in the day.

>can you have a casual conversation with someone on the moon using radio with no delays between your questions and the person on the moon's replies?
user, we use more sophisticated protocols to handle latency over the Internet every day and you can't even tell.

>Landing ship on moon is one thing but taking shit off from moon is a whole new level.
>...
>Taking off from earth is acceptable to me, but taking off from the moon is not
Listen to yourself.

Why do people believe we can send fully autonomous robots to mars, which is 100 times further away than the moon, but we can’t send two dudes down to the moon? It’s the same technology. The ISS is way more technologically impressive than the moon landings

>Using a telescope

No way. The Hubble might be the only telescope man has ever built that is capable of seeing an object that small on the moon

Are you retarted? You do know the moon isnt light years away right?

Science denier is the new heretic.

>You can literally see the LZ and the rover using a telescope, you fucking faggot.
No you can't, you dumb shit.
The photos in were taken by an orbiter.
No telescope on Earth has a mirror large enough to resolve something of that detail on the Moon's surface.

Are you retarded? Do you know how telescopes work? Most people can’t even afford a telescope to see the Cassini Division in Saturn.

I looked it up, the smallest object visible on the moon via the Hubble is over 400 square feet.

Hubble can't focus that close and it's primarily sensitive in the wrong wavelengths.

Oh look a couple of black dots

>Do you know how telescopes work?
This board has a complete lack of knowledge in how telescopes work and whar is actually optically possible.

You can only really do manned missions to the moon before the trips start taking months. So you need months worth of vital support, that give you heavier upper stages that give you an overall massively overweight rocket because you need to carry more fuel to move the extra fuel you'll need to move the last bit of fuel that your engineering team found out they need to move all the extra shit manned crews require.
On the other hand, you can make rovers go in standby, harden them to support vacuum, radiation, sip on power and heating and diagnose itself. Also doesn't need to pass psychological or physical tests.
There's very little that a manned mission can do that a robot can't do better and for a smaller budget.

Pretty sure they used FORTRAN and assembler.

The tree one isn't too far off, we've been finding that trees communicate danger and stress to each other but don't yet know how. Its done through the roots and via microorganisms if I can remember properly. A retard would of course distill this complex poorly understood system down to "it magic breh."

It was fucking rad, there it is, happy?

LOL, I still write code in F77. It’s mostly quantum chemistry code, since no body is going to rewrite those two electron routines. F77 will live on forever!

/thread

The Apollo Guidance Computer was in itself a greater engineering triumph than the landing of men on the moon.

Don't @ me.

Attached: 412_na-46-apollo-guidance-computer.jpg (1085x684, 186K)

Why didn't the Soviets expose the Amerikanskis then? You realize they had intel in anything that wasn't high secret military? They had moles working in the CIA for decades before being caught.

Attached: hqdefault.jpg (480x360, 23K)

>space is worthless goy just stay on Earth and die for Israel like the good goyim we expect you to be
Fuck off and die. The space race contributed hundreds of thousands of jobs and ushered in all kinds of new technologies. If NASA retained its funding instead of it all being put towards feeding Raquesha's 20 kids and bombing sandniggers for trying to send bottle rockets over Israel's border we could've had moon colonies and a mission to Mars by now which would've pushed us even further technologically and helped push space as a legitimate worthwhile thing to invest in for the economy.

Attached: 1509086869861.jpg (918x597, 216K)

THE ANSWER MY FRIEND, IS BLOWING IN THE WIND

THE ANSWER IS BLOWING IN THE WIND

youtube.com/watch?v=ymwE1sNm82Y

In a 1/6th gravity environment, why weren't the astronauts spinning in the air and having fun? During the entire video they would jump at the same height an average man could jump on Earth

>It's not inertia from the flimsy flag pole
>NO IT'S WIND!!!

John Madden

you can do most of the math required for space flight in your head and that's what pretty much all of these astronauts did, computers just made some of it easier, quicker and less error-prone. C was also not the first non-assembler programming language, just because you're baby ducked to Unix like most of Jow Forums does not mean nothing else existed or was viable.

but all of that and the reality that this is just a shitty bait post aside, it's pretty annoying and honestly sad when people act like we were all retarded cavemen in that era just because the interfaces weren't pretty and dumbed down, as others have already said ITT the AGC was more advanced than a lot of the garbage we had in the '80s, let alone the mainframes and supercomputers on the ground that already were implementing pretty much all of the fundaments of modern computer architecture in some way or another

Attached: Supercomputer_NSA-IBM360_85.png (2160x1750, 3.16M)

>you can do most of the math required for space flight in your head
>You can do advanced calculus using very large numbers with trailing decimals in your head

You can do it on paper. Isaac Newton could have done it 300 years ago. Not in his head, though.

yeah I guess you're right it was mostly on paper but my point does still stand that powerful computers weren't an utter necessity regardless and the technology available was more than adequate

>Point rocket at moon
>Set off a chemical explosion beneath three people's asses.
>Let one of them drone on inspirationally about if if he lives long enough to land
>Try to recover the said humans
>Alive if possible, but shit happens
>Just ask the Russians amirite?

Cavemen could have figured out how to pull off Apollo 11. It wasn't as impressive as you think.

>>Point rocket at moon
Yeah, that level of orbital mechanics knowledge would have never made it to the Moon.
Before Apollo there were probe missions that were designed to crash straight into the Moon, no attempt to orbit, and they missed a bunch of times.