>>why can't I see any stars in the background? >exposure settings of the camera.
This kind of stuff would convince me the moon landing was real, even if I was a dumb conspiracy theorist. If it was fake, they wouldn't frick up things like the stars, the flag waving, or a number of other things you'd never even think of unless the footage was actually from the moon.
Normoids don't know how to operate their computers or cars correctly and they use them every single day. They consistently get tricked by basic framing and telephoto compression/fisheye distortion. The idea that they would understand first hand a technical appeal related to the specific limitations of filmstock, sensors and exposure is a goddamn pipedream.
>who's tilting the camera upwards?
the launch was timed to the second, due to a little thing called orbital mechanics.
Now; if you know exactly when something is going to happen do you think its possible that the best and brightest at NASA could possibly have made a camera rig that operated on a timer?
>who's tilting the camera upwards?
remote control from earth
>why can't I see any stars in the background?
exposure settings of the camera.
remote control from earth? why make a simple situation more complex with time delay to account for?
The moon is within our own orbit, there really isn't much of a time delay. It syncs up with the times on earth depending on rotation. In what moronic universe do you live where the moon's distance requires time dilation to account for?
>isn't much of a time delay
so you admit there is a time delay. >time dilation
you mentioned dilation, not me. perhaps its time for you to go dilate
2 years ago
Anonymous
>hurrr troony dilation meme
There is not enough of a displacement through dilation to need major accounting for when it comes to radio transmissions you fricking moron.
2 years ago
Anonymous
you seem to be getting wrapped up in your own argument.
you must be a flat earther believer haha
2 years ago
Anonymous
I'm not a moronic /x/tard, I'm just explaining the very real fact that the moon is close enough where transmissions to it or almost instant.
2 years ago
Anonymous
*are
2 years ago
Anonymous
and yet, you clever fricker, you missed my original point; there was no need to remote control the camera from earth at all:
But it really was a case of third time lucky as both the attempts to capture take-off from Apollo 15 and 16 failed for different reasons.
For these final three Apollo missions RCA supplied colour television cameras made to the strict weight and volume parameters that NASA imposed on the project to make sure everything could get out of Earth’s gravity well. The cameras were very successful, capturing images of numerous EVAs, but while they could be controlled from Houston it was felt that the several second delay between earth and the Moon would make capturing the Module’s ascent impossible. So, the plan was to pre-programme the camera and hope that the NASA camera operator in Houston, Ed Fendell, got his timing just right.
On Apollo 15, the tilt mechanism malfunctioned, meaning that the camera never panned upwards and thus the lunar module rapidly accelerated upwards and out of the picture. On the Apollo 16 mission, the astronauts actually parked the rover in the wrong place, so while the camera worked perfectly it was too close to the Module and, again, it accelerated swiftly out of picture.
Happily, Apollo 17 got everything right. But what is perhaps most remarkable about looking back on it was that no-one realised the significance of the lift-off at the time. Persistent rumour suggests that NASA had to pay the networks to cover the Apollo 17 mission at all, and when the final liftoff of humanity from the Moon took place, it barely raised a mention on that evening’s news reports.
2 years ago
Anonymous
time delay earth-moon: 1.25 seconds
while this is perceivable, in practice it is irrelevant in the context of your question
2 years ago
Anonymous
i diddnt ask a question, im the one explaining that the camera that filmed the module taking off was pre programmed using simple technology that people half a century later cant even conceive exists and say its proof of fakery
2 years ago
Anonymous
ok sorry, I'm getting you confused with the other guy who seems to have reading problems. I wonder if he even knows how to read English at a proper level because his posts stink of moronic or ESL.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>reading problems
All I fricking said was that there isn't actual time dilation with radio transmissions to the moon, it's literally the only thing I said.
That's an incredibly stupid idea and low effort suggestion. China has nothing to gain from that, especially when the UN seat was worth far more in terms of diplomatic recognition. It also says nothing about the Russian recognition of our moon landings.
>talk to a moon landing conspiracy theorist >they think they have hard evidence the moon landing was faked >"The" 'moon landing?' >"just the one? I say >MFW they didn't know there more than one moon landing
Where do you think the black box processor in yours comes from?
2 years ago
Anonymous
says made in korea
2 years ago
Anonymous
That doesn't count as a chink processor now?
didn't answer the question
NTA.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>That doesn't count as a chink processor now?
chink = chinese
you are clearly moronic, ESL, or being very evasive at the very least
2 years ago
Anonymous
>Chink[1] is an English-language ethnic slur usually referring to a person of Chinese descent.[2] >The word is also sometimes indiscriminately used against people of East Asian and Southeast Asian appearance.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Chink = Chinese
asiatic = Korean
Nip = Japanese
Zip = Vietnamese
2 years ago
Anonymous
>Nip = Japanese
Their fricking country is Nippon this never made sense
Also the moon landing was faked to beat the russians but we probably went there at some later point
2 years ago
Anonymous
Nip sounds/feels pretty light tbh
It's like being called a yank.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Again with the evasion. Chink = chinese in almost all circumstances. Don't care for your wikipedia link because in all use on the internet, imageboards and Cinemaphile chink = chinese and nothing else. This is because of the "ch" sound which indicates to me you're also an ESL as this is obvious to an English speaker.
oh yeah you proved everyone wrong with that pixelated picture in 2022 year of our Lord
KEK
2 years ago
Anonymous
This effort is pathetic.
2 years ago
Anonymous
watch this, homosexual
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=65yCfKel-zQ
A youtuber with a telescope worth more than your salary and half a million subscribers says he can't but you can with a chink phone
ok homosexual lmfao
2 years ago
Anonymous
You literally btfo yourself with that video though are you unwell?
You quite literally can see the reflections from the lunar crafts left on the surface through a telescope. I honestly don't understand this type of "pretending to be moronic"
2 years ago
Anonymous
Using a telescope? No. Lasers? Yes, but that doesn’t mean you can see the flag or any of the other stuff left behind with a telescope. You most certainly cannot.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Addendum to this post: NO you absolutely cannot see “reflections from the lunar crafts” you total moron. You can bounce a laser beam off of reflectors that were set up on the lunar surface, not the crafts themselves.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Why do you lie about this so vehemently? What is your goal?
2 years ago
Anonymous
>Lasers
i read that pointing the lazer to a random coordinate vs the alleged location of the "mirrors" they "left" on the surface yields essentially the same results
2 years ago
Anonymous
You most certainly can see the lunar crafts with a telescope, why are you memeing this hard for? I truly don't understand this bullshit you are doing.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Completely false. You’re either trolling or misinformed. No telescope from Earth can see objects on the moon that small.
2 years ago
Anonymous
What about the most powerful land one
2 years ago
Anonymous
What? No. The only reason this
Why are you like this? It's so astronomically stupid.
image was captured is because it was taken by a satellite that is much, much, much closer to the moon than Earth is. Same deal with Google Earth images which are captured using relatively low flying planes.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Use hubble
2 years ago
Anonymous
I honest to frick can't tell if you are trolling or this genuinely stupid.
2 years ago
Anonymous
You can’t see manmade objects on the moon with even the most powerful telescope on Earth. End of story.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Whatever you say, moron.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Prove me wrong. I’ll wait.
2 years ago
Anonymous
I could send you a dozen pictures but you'll just deny they are real, like the /x/schizo you are.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>could
But won't
2 years ago
Anonymous
Because it won't be enough for you, bet you are a flat tard.
2 years ago
Anonymous
False asumptions are all you have to deflect with.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Is the world round, anon?
2 years ago
Anonymous
Yes. Now go ahead an post those moon images from a telescope.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Yes, that's besides the point. Address the matter at hand.
are you fricking stupid? Yes I know it was shot by the LRO.
Are you just using Google Translate now?
2 years ago
Anonymous
That’s not a telescope from Earth, anon. I don’t even know what we’re arguing about now.
2 years ago
Anonymous
It sure isn't, but that wasn't the subject of debate here
I could send you a dozen pictures but you'll just deny they are real, like the /x/schizo you are.
and
No you can’t.
when you claimed no images of it exist. It does, using the LRO.
2 years ago
Anonymous
That absolutely was the debate. That anon was claiming you can use a telescope on Earth to see evidence of the moon landings.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Again with the evasion. Go back to >>>/x/ if you only want to argue semantics and not provide evidence to your position.
2 years ago
Anonymous
That’s not arguing semantics at all. You definitively cannot see manmade objects on the moon using a telescope on Earth.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Prove it
2 years ago
Anonymous
Already have. I asked for telescopic images and was provided with pictures taken by the LRO.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Then how do you explain the LRO's images? You haven't provided an alternative theory.
2 years ago
Anonymous
I've seen some shilling on this site but never this rampant hostility
Most israeli poster ITT
2 years ago
Anonymous
What theory? The LRO is a satellite that orbits the moon. That’s not even remotely close to being a telescope on Earth.
2 years ago
Anonymous
The theory concerning the moon landing conspiracies posted by you earlier, as to the moon landing. How do you explain the images made by the LRO?
You can't prove a negative with another negative. Which is the basic logical fallacy you're making here.
2 years ago
Anonymous
I think you’re confusing me with someone else. I fully believe the moon landings are real as evidenced by the images taken by the LRO. I’m mainly arguing with the troll trying to claim that you can view the Apollo landing sites with a telescope on Earth.
2 years ago
Anonymous
I doubt that because then you posted this
You don't have any images from a surface telescope. That's my proof.
, at the very least you're causing a lot of confusion and does it really matter when the moon landings happened?
2 years ago
Anonymous
I'm not
I think you’re confusing me with someone else. I fully believe the moon landings are real as evidenced by the images taken by the LRO. I’m mainly arguing with the troll trying to claim that you can view the Apollo landing sites with a telescope on Earth.
. All I posted was the post about needing an objective the size of a stadium, and the one making fun of normoids for not understanding anything about optics or photography.
2 years ago
Anonymous
I think younger posters assume that we have the technology to view the moon like Google street view just because we’ve advanced to the point of smartphones and such. To them I say: I wish, but disappointingly, we do not.
2 years ago
Anonymous
You are the worst kind of shit eating israelite
My .02 shekels as another observer of your shilling
2 years ago
Anonymous
You haven't proved you can't see it with a telescope
2 years ago
Anonymous
>doesn't know shit about optics
You'd need a telescope with an objective or primary reflector the size of a goddamn baseball stadium and some crazy signal interpretation software to get the detail you'd want from a telescope on earth's surface having to deal with all that atmosphere. The only way you can see anything lander sized on the moon is from outside the atmosphere up in lunar orbit preferably and even then with what we have available we've only got a few pixels to work with.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Then prove it
2 years ago
Anonymous
You don't have any images from a surface telescope. That's my proof.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Not every picture posted is from the fricking Orbiter, moron.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Yes it is. Again: No telescope on Earth is able to view manmade objects on the lunar surface.
2 years ago
Anonymous
No you would need a telescope that is 200 meters in diameter to see that.
>duuude, they totally the moon landing. I mean landings. Several times, over multiple years. >they also faked skylab too >oh, and the Russians, our enemy, um, they were IN ON IT
Ok once again, you can literally see all the Apollo crafts we left behind through a telescope. You can do that right now you complete homosexual. A telescope with the range to do that costs less than 200 at your hobby shop. You fricking brain-adled moron.
A youtuber with a telescope worth more than your salary and half a million subscribers says he can't but you can with a chink phone
ok homosexual lmfao
2 years ago
Anonymous
He literally shows you can see the Apollo crafts through that telescope you lying flat tard.
2 years ago
Anonymous
"hurr durr I can see the flag with my phone"
no you cant, even this guy with a good setup cannot
"hurr durr he literally says you can see something else I didnt mention"
fricking homosexual
2 years ago
Anonymous
Literally nobody said through your phone. I said a commercial telescope with good lenses you can buy can, you obfuscating moron. He literally shows you that you can see the crafts.
2 years ago
Anonymous
you're speaking stupid and not even reading the thread, go back to raeddit or whatever place you came from
Lmao, I had a similar interaction
My friend was trying to say it was fake and he said "if it was real why didn't we go back?", and I'm like "we did go back. Thirteen times."
To his credit once I showed him that he acquiesced that the landings were real
Still stupid but at least plausible: Apollo 11 would have just ejected an empty LEM which would have re-docked in the manner suggested. Still a dumb suggestion but NASA could have at least pulled such a bluff off as later missions would prove them right anyway.
it was film, lunacognita on youtube did some interesting analysis of the footage but they stopped posting years ago and their channel has now gone.
my favorite was the orbital footage from the command module showing small white spheres emerging from craters in the distance and flying away from the moon.
I remember watching the Tesla car space launch on live stream and for a second or two it showed the car actually being in some sort of large room surrounded by a bunch of panels. Snopes says the Tesla car is actually in space, which naturally, makes me think the opposite
so how does it feel to be in a vaccuum in one sixth of the earths gravity?
HURR looks fake.
Yes, of course it does. It is a different environment to anything you will ever understand or have any meaningful perspective about.
>obviously wearing harnesses suspended by wires >DURRR IT"S A DIFFERENT ENVIRONMENT OF COURSE IT LOOKS LIKE THEY"RE BEING HOISTED BY A HARNESS
fake as frick lmao
>It is a different environment to anything you will ever understand or have any meaningful perspective about so you can't say it's fake >however despite the same applying to me i can say its real :*~~))
Because NASA got color, B&W was the rebroadcast from NASA HQ. Also: later Apollo missions used better color cameras and are higher definition. Full-frame shots of the moon were taken as well and on the national archives website.
John Madden! John Madden? John Madden! John Madden? John Madden! John Madden? John Madden! John Madden? John Madden! John Madden? John Madden! John Madden? John Madden! John Madden? John Madden! John Madden?
We've never been to the moon, and going to Mars is peak human arrogance and hubris.
We have wars, genocide, famine, crime, religious quarrels, murder, torture and we think we deserve to be a space-faring civilization. Frick Elon Musk and frick "I fricking love science!!!" sois.
Dont care about moon but colinizing Mars was always absolute bullshit. I remember normalgay morons believing colonies will be on the moon within like 5-10 years and that was about 10 years ago.
If anyone will actually go then it will be a one way trip.
There's a lot but most of it is pretty boring and a lot of it is potato quality analog video.
The stuff they shot on film is really good quality, but that requires one of the two astronauts to be filming when they could be doing other more important tasks, so there is less of it. Plus the film itself has mass and volume, which is limited in the spacecraft.
There's lots, it used to be easy to see back in the mid 2000s, but now most of it on paywall archive sites and youtube has gotten rid of all videos it cant monetize
Theyre the ones that made up the rumors on it being fake. They paid off some shithole newspapers in literal who-tier countries to run the rumor and it spiraled out to brain broking dorks to this day.
Because they knew the west would call it out as propaganda and people would believe them. But if it comes from some random press somewhere people are willing to buy it easier. Sock puppets yo.
I heard a theory that some commies wanted Kennedy dead and CIA cleaned up sloppy soviet ends to prevent world war 3 and they demanded recognition of moon landing as reparation for that.
So you've fallen into the trap that nothing is real and live in a post truth world at that point. I am not real, im just an AI programmed to replay to you arent I?
>in the year of our lord current year+7 >believing in a bicameral god you can't yourself hear >being conscious enough to have the volition to pray and praying to a bicameral god of all things
I think you're confused anon.
Why did Nasa retroactively change what the path of the rocket was after people started asking questions about the Van Allen belt 3 years after the “””landing”””?
what are you even talking about, now? that's a non sequitur
2 years ago
Anonymous
We can all make up words anon
2 years ago
Anonymous
So you *are* using Google Translate, because non sequitur is a commonplace Latin term (like et cetera, or etc) to describe nonsense phrases that don't follow as it means "it does not follow". Google Translate doesn't translate it well, especially not into non-Latin languages like Mandarin or Russian.
2 years ago
Anonymous
*latinx
2 years ago
Anonymous
wrong, and it's clear you aren't even mexican because by "latin" I mean "roman" not mexican. Even chicanos know this, I'd bet $5 you're some sort of russian shill
Nasa and it's Soviet equivalent were both staffed by Nazi expats making bank on the two countrys' paranoia. So long as the space race kept going, they were swimming in dosh. What better way to secure funding than get your buddies to up the ante for the "enemy"?
1.Yes, do you understand how radiation works?
2.they did see
Theyre the ones that made up the rumors on it being fake. They paid off some shithole newspapers in literal who-tier countries to run the rumor and it spiraled out to brain broking dorks to this day.
The same people telling you the moon landing was real are the same people telling you to be ashamed of the founding fathers.
Jack Parsons was a satanist.
The same people telling you HIV-AIDS are real are the same people telling you to be ashamed of the founding fathers, too. I don't go around trying to eat AIDS for super-immunity against HIV.
the founding fathers were a bunch of extreme liberals who read philosophy books voraciously and would never, ever in a million years want anything to do with a bunch of yeehaw fricking fascists, that's the kind of shit they were trying to get around and just never dreamed people would be fricking moronic enough to look at their work and think "yeah, unrestricted weapons causing mass murders, policing women's bodies, and white supremacy with zero separation between church and state, got it, thanks a lot guys love to crack a brewski with you one of these days". They'd fricking kill themselves out of shame.
the Greeks accurately measured the size of the earth with two sticks and math but now we have moronic americans (for the most part) debating the earth is flat and space is fake but also refuse to sail a boat to the edge of the earth or whatever. scared they'll fall off I suppose.
I don't believe that space is fake or flat earth. Just years of hearing all these fricking opinions kind of gets to you, you know?
I have trouble believing anything anymore.
a "mark" is a general term for a victim of a scam, it's used in /woo/ because, obviously, anyone who takes wrestling opinions seriously is by definition a mark for devoting time and energy to a sport that doesn't have that much thought or philosophy behind it. Which is how Vince has scammed people and consolidated all TV pro wrestling into his personal monopoly.
They have to fake the footage because when they did land they found existing structures and a whole fleet of ships of course they aren't allowed to talk about it now.
Because zoomers are terminally online and the world is abjectly boring and it doesn't jive well with their "I need exciting content all of the time for my dopamine fixes"
I find it funny the feds, after decades of demoralizing and destroying the country, get so defensive that less and less people believe them about the moon landing. They clearly don't care when people know they run drugs, stage shootings, burn kids alive, start pedo cults and kidnap hobos to experiment with mind control. They don't care that people know they sell out US secrets to the Chinese and who ever else will pay for it. They don't care that people know they start wild fires and arm rioters to drive down property value, so why do they care so much that people don't believe them about the moon?
true schizoid moment >the feds don't care about x because i say so >the feds really care a lot about y because i say so
are these feds in the room with you right now, anon?
I cant believe people still debate about this stuff. People who claim its fake see images and videos, dont understand how it was done, and assume that therefore it must be i possible, refuse to do any research and also refuse to accept any counter arguments or explanations, because its all lies. Might as well argue about the holocaust next.
you come onto a board known for shitposting and you're expecting people to take you seriously? Cinemaphile is one of the worst boards, having spawned some of the most obnoxious memes, and you're expecting people to post about the moon and not conspiracy theories?
Since twitter harasses movie studios all the time to change stupid details from uocoming movies there should be a trend hashtag were we force nasa to repeat the moon landing in less than a year or else space is proven to be fake.
They always say "we dont go to the moon because its expensive and pointless" vidya is akso expensive and pointless yet most of us are going to consoome it until we hit 70 and go blind
So here’s the thing: Just because we have iPhones doesn’t mean we can just push a button and 3D print a rocket that can take people to the moon.
1. NASA had almost unlimited funding back in the 1960s
2. So much of that shit was proprietary and manufactured by now defunct companies in the USA. We outsourced that shit to China long ago.
This program is to make a lunar orbiting station. If succsefull this could lead to regurly being able to visit the moon and jump start resource extraction. The station wil be equipped to maintain rivers and other scientific instruments
The sad truth is that the USA probably largely abandoned manned space exploration because we didn’t find any valuable resources on the moon. If we found some useful ultra rare minerals, there would be mining rigs set up right now.
yeah, its a piece of history
>I watch productions just for the HISTORICAL FACTOR
gay
yeah people still think it was real
Because it couldn't be faked https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ML2ZYYFOnI
Yeah, they could totally fake it with all that 1960s CGI.
Have you heard of a little movie called 2001: A Space Odyssey?
who's tilting the camera upwards? why can't I see any stars in the background?
>who's tilting the camera upwards?
remote control from earth
>why can't I see any stars in the background?
exposure settings of the camera.
>>why can't I see any stars in the background?
>exposure settings of the camera.
This kind of stuff would convince me the moon landing was real, even if I was a dumb conspiracy theorist. If it was fake, they wouldn't frick up things like the stars, the flag waving, or a number of other things you'd never even think of unless the footage was actually from the moon.
Normoids don't know how to operate their computers or cars correctly and they use them every single day. They consistently get tricked by basic framing and telephoto compression/fisheye distortion. The idea that they would understand first hand a technical appeal related to the specific limitations of filmstock, sensors and exposure is a goddamn pipedream.
>who's tilting the camera upwards?
the launch was timed to the second, due to a little thing called orbital mechanics.
Now; if you know exactly when something is going to happen do you think its possible that the best and brightest at NASA could possibly have made a camera rig that operated on a timer?
remote control from earth? why make a simple situation more complex with time delay to account for?
>time delay
>on the moon
based moron.
moron
The moon is within our own orbit, there really isn't much of a time delay. It syncs up with the times on earth depending on rotation. In what moronic universe do you live where the moon's distance requires time dilation to account for?
>isn't much of a time delay
so you admit there is a time delay.
>time dilation
you mentioned dilation, not me. perhaps its time for you to go dilate
>hurrr troony dilation meme
There is not enough of a displacement through dilation to need major accounting for when it comes to radio transmissions you fricking moron.
you seem to be getting wrapped up in your own argument.
you must be a flat earther believer haha
I'm not a moronic /x/tard, I'm just explaining the very real fact that the moon is close enough where transmissions to it or almost instant.
*are
and yet, you clever fricker, you missed my original point; there was no need to remote control the camera from earth at all:
But it really was a case of third time lucky as both the attempts to capture take-off from Apollo 15 and 16 failed for different reasons.
For these final three Apollo missions RCA supplied colour television cameras made to the strict weight and volume parameters that NASA imposed on the project to make sure everything could get out of Earth’s gravity well. The cameras were very successful, capturing images of numerous EVAs, but while they could be controlled from Houston it was felt that the several second delay between earth and the Moon would make capturing the Module’s ascent impossible. So, the plan was to pre-programme the camera and hope that the NASA camera operator in Houston, Ed Fendell, got his timing just right.
On Apollo 15, the tilt mechanism malfunctioned, meaning that the camera never panned upwards and thus the lunar module rapidly accelerated upwards and out of the picture. On the Apollo 16 mission, the astronauts actually parked the rover in the wrong place, so while the camera worked perfectly it was too close to the Module and, again, it accelerated swiftly out of picture.
Happily, Apollo 17 got everything right. But what is perhaps most remarkable about looking back on it was that no-one realised the significance of the lift-off at the time. Persistent rumour suggests that NASA had to pay the networks to cover the Apollo 17 mission at all, and when the final liftoff of humanity from the Moon took place, it barely raised a mention on that evening’s news reports.
time delay earth-moon: 1.25 seconds
while this is perceivable, in practice it is irrelevant in the context of your question
i diddnt ask a question, im the one explaining that the camera that filmed the module taking off was pre programmed using simple technology that people half a century later cant even conceive exists and say its proof of fakery
ok sorry, I'm getting you confused with the other guy who seems to have reading problems. I wonder if he even knows how to read English at a proper level because his posts stink of moronic or ESL.
>reading problems
All I fricking said was that there isn't actual time dilation with radio transmissions to the moon, it's literally the only thing I said.
>why make a simple situation more complex with time delay to account for?
radio stopped being complicated around the time we started building good fly-by-wire aircraft. The first fly-by-wire aircraft is the Apollo capsule.
Now post the one where it rotating above the earth and you see it hanging by steel wires right before it tilts
yeah go on i want to see that
Imagine thinking this is real.
ask the Russians and Chinese why they think it's real
They don't either.
china got all the companies from usa seting factories there so maybe that was payment
That's an incredibly stupid idea and low effort suggestion. China has nothing to gain from that, especially when the UN seat was worth far more in terms of diplomatic recognition. It also says nothing about the Russian recognition of our moon landings.
>China has nothing to gain from that,
what are you moronic? their whole economy got kickstarted by americans seting the factories there
Dumb esl
Probably latinx
Brazilian most likely. The whole country is full of morons
lol moron
explain how am I wrong
Explain how you're right
Don't be moronic, conspimoron
I take that as a win
redpill me then, prove it
>talk to a moon landing conspiracy theorist
>they think they have hard evidence the moon landing was faked
>"The" 'moon landing?'
>"just the one? I say
>MFW they didn't know there more than one moon landing
nice, but how does that prove them incorrect
>prove me incorrect
You can literally see part of the Apollo and the flag through a telescope. You can do that right now, right fricking now.
???
we know robots have been to the moon, the soviets long before "moon landing"
you have no idea what y'all talking about
Go to /x/ with this drivel, moron.
that's bullshit and youre a fricking homosexual
even the most powerful telescope on earth cannot do that.
have a nice day
my xiamoi mi11 can do that
lmfao youre a fricking homosexual im so fricking glad im not you
>using a chinkphone
what awful third world country are you from
Where do you think the black box processor in yours comes from?
says made in korea
That doesn't count as a chink processor now?
NTA.
>That doesn't count as a chink processor now?
chink = chinese
you are clearly moronic, ESL, or being very evasive at the very least
>Chink[1] is an English-language ethnic slur usually referring to a person of Chinese descent.[2]
>The word is also sometimes indiscriminately used against people of East Asian and Southeast Asian appearance.
Chink = Chinese
asiatic = Korean
Nip = Japanese
Zip = Vietnamese
>Nip = Japanese
Their fricking country is Nippon this never made sense
Also the moon landing was faked to beat the russians but we probably went there at some later point
Nip sounds/feels pretty light tbh
It's like being called a yank.
Again with the evasion. Chink = chinese in almost all circumstances. Don't care for your wikipedia link because in all use on the internet, imageboards and Cinemaphile chink = chinese and nothing else. This is because of the "ch" sound which indicates to me you're also an ESL as this is obvious to an English speaker.
didn't answer the question
Why are you like this? It's so astronomically stupid.
oh yeah you proved everyone wrong with that pixelated picture in 2022 year of our Lord
KEK
This effort is pathetic.
watch this, homosexual
You literally btfo yourself with that video though are you unwell?
You absolutely cannot view tiny objects like the flag or anything else left on the lunar surface via a telescope from Earth. This pic comes from:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_Reconnaissance_Orbiter
You quite literally can see the reflections from the lunar crafts left on the surface through a telescope. I honestly don't understand this type of "pretending to be moronic"
Using a telescope? No. Lasers? Yes, but that doesn’t mean you can see the flag or any of the other stuff left behind with a telescope. You most certainly cannot.
Addendum to this post: NO you absolutely cannot see “reflections from the lunar crafts” you total moron. You can bounce a laser beam off of reflectors that were set up on the lunar surface, not the crafts themselves.
Why do you lie about this so vehemently? What is your goal?
>Lasers
i read that pointing the lazer to a random coordinate vs the alleged location of the "mirrors" they "left" on the surface yields essentially the same results
You most certainly can see the lunar crafts with a telescope, why are you memeing this hard for? I truly don't understand this bullshit you are doing.
Completely false. You’re either trolling or misinformed. No telescope from Earth can see objects on the moon that small.
What about the most powerful land one
What? No. The only reason this
image was captured is because it was taken by a satellite that is much, much, much closer to the moon than Earth is. Same deal with Google Earth images which are captured using relatively low flying planes.
Use hubble
I honest to frick can't tell if you are trolling or this genuinely stupid.
You can’t see manmade objects on the moon with even the most powerful telescope on Earth. End of story.
Whatever you say, moron.
Prove me wrong. I’ll wait.
I could send you a dozen pictures but you'll just deny they are real, like the /x/schizo you are.
>could
But won't
Because it won't be enough for you, bet you are a flat tard.
False asumptions are all you have to deflect with.
Is the world round, anon?
Yes. Now go ahead an post those moon images from a telescope.
Yes, that's besides the point. Address the matter at hand.
No you can’t.
How's this then?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_Reconnaissance_Orbiter
are you fricking stupid? Yes I know it was shot by the LRO.
Are you just using Google Translate now?
That’s not a telescope from Earth, anon. I don’t even know what we’re arguing about now.
It sure isn't, but that wasn't the subject of debate here
and
when you claimed no images of it exist. It does, using the LRO.
That absolutely was the debate. That anon was claiming you can use a telescope on Earth to see evidence of the moon landings.
Again with the evasion. Go back to >>>/x/ if you only want to argue semantics and not provide evidence to your position.
That’s not arguing semantics at all. You definitively cannot see manmade objects on the moon using a telescope on Earth.
Prove it
Already have. I asked for telescopic images and was provided with pictures taken by the LRO.
Then how do you explain the LRO's images? You haven't provided an alternative theory.
I've seen some shilling on this site but never this rampant hostility
Most israeli poster ITT
What theory? The LRO is a satellite that orbits the moon. That’s not even remotely close to being a telescope on Earth.
The theory concerning the moon landing conspiracies posted by you earlier, as to the moon landing. How do you explain the images made by the LRO?
You can't prove a negative with another negative. Which is the basic logical fallacy you're making here.
I think you’re confusing me with someone else. I fully believe the moon landings are real as evidenced by the images taken by the LRO. I’m mainly arguing with the troll trying to claim that you can view the Apollo landing sites with a telescope on Earth.
I doubt that because then you posted this
, at the very least you're causing a lot of confusion and does it really matter when the moon landings happened?
I'm not
. All I posted was the post about needing an objective the size of a stadium, and the one making fun of normoids for not understanding anything about optics or photography.
I think younger posters assume that we have the technology to view the moon like Google street view just because we’ve advanced to the point of smartphones and such. To them I say: I wish, but disappointingly, we do not.
You are the worst kind of shit eating israelite
My .02 shekels as another observer of your shilling
You haven't proved you can't see it with a telescope
>doesn't know shit about optics
You'd need a telescope with an objective or primary reflector the size of a goddamn baseball stadium and some crazy signal interpretation software to get the detail you'd want from a telescope on earth's surface having to deal with all that atmosphere. The only way you can see anything lander sized on the moon is from outside the atmosphere up in lunar orbit preferably and even then with what we have available we've only got a few pixels to work with.
Then prove it
You don't have any images from a surface telescope. That's my proof.
Not every picture posted is from the fricking Orbiter, moron.
Yes it is. Again: No telescope on Earth is able to view manmade objects on the lunar surface.
No you would need a telescope that is 200 meters in diameter to see that.
I-is that a speck?? That's proof!!!
Anon you're joking right
>duuude, they totally the moon landing. I mean landings. Several times, over multiple years.
>they also faked skylab too
>oh, and the Russians, our enemy, um, they were IN ON IT
lol
NASAIDF just got an alert to the thread
reading off the script of debunked points as usual i see...
Ok once again, you can literally see all the Apollo crafts we left behind through a telescope. You can do that right now you complete homosexual. A telescope with the range to do that costs less than 200 at your hobby shop. You fricking brain-adled moron.
Can you link me a good one? Preferably one thats decent for a beginner. I have always wanted a telescope.
No you cannot
post a link homosexual
You realize you can, right?
A youtuber with a telescope worth more than your salary and half a million subscribers says he can't but you can with a chink phone
ok homosexual lmfao
He literally shows you can see the Apollo crafts through that telescope you lying flat tard.
"hurr durr I can see the flag with my phone"
no you cant, even this guy with a good setup cannot
"hurr durr he literally says you can see something else I didnt mention"
fricking homosexual
Literally nobody said through your phone. I said a commercial telescope with good lenses you can buy can, you obfuscating moron. He literally shows you that you can see the crafts.
you're speaking stupid and not even reading the thread, go back to raeddit or whatever place you came from
Lmao, I had a similar interaction
My friend was trying to say it was fake and he said "if it was real why didn't we go back?", and I'm like "we did go back. Thirteen times."
To his credit once I showed him that he acquiesced that the landings were real
i had a coworker say that the first one was fake but the later ones were real
That's slightly more reasonable. There's motivation at least because of the space race
Still stupid but at least plausible: Apollo 11 would have just ejected an empty LEM which would have re-docked in the manner suggested. Still a dumb suggestion but NASA could have at least pulled such a bluff off as later missions would prove them right anyway.
it was film, lunacognita on youtube did some interesting analysis of the footage but they stopped posting years ago and their channel has now gone.
my favorite was the orbital footage from the command module showing small white spheres emerging from craters in the distance and flying away from the moon.
what if the footage was bogus but the landings were real?
that's the plot of a movie i recently saw, was pretty kino
title me plox
Operation Avalanche i think by a quick google search
thanks generous third party bro
>tfw astronauts were actually just moronic at filming so they had to do re-shoots on Earth
I always figured that was the case.
We landed on the moon, but we lost a couple of missions/crews. We didn't bring them back. So they faked the footage.
I remember watching the Tesla car space launch on live stream and for a second or two it showed the car actually being in some sort of large room surrounded by a bunch of panels. Snopes says the Tesla car is actually in space, which naturally, makes me think the opposite
think whatever you like, your ideas will never change the world in any way
There should be a recording somewhere.
Anyway this wouldnt surprise me at all. The whole concept just seems weird as frick.
They found aliums on the moon, that's why they faked the footage. We are still going there regularly.
How did they get the footage from a camera left on the moon
My homie asking the real questions
no, fake as frick
so how does it feel to be in a vaccuum in one sixth of the earths gravity?
HURR looks fake.
Yes, of course it does. It is a different environment to anything you will ever understand or have any meaningful perspective about.
>obviously wearing harnesses suspended by wires
>DURRR IT"S A DIFFERENT ENVIRONMENT OF COURSE IT LOOKS LIKE THEY"RE BEING HOISTED BY A HARNESS
fake as frick lmao
awful, terrible bait. Go back to /x/ or whatever hole you crawled out from.
go back to your television and corn syrup globetard
could you return here after you learn what fractions are and develop a conceptual imagination.
dont type anything else, you are a moron
>clear video of someone being hoisted by their torso in a harness
>LOL YOU JUST DON"T UNDERSTAND FRACTIONS
holy fricking unbelievable cope
>clear video
of a man with frick all holding him down
>must be suspended with a harness in order for it to happen that way.
you are a moron
no no no, please go back to talking about fractions. You definitely were making a good point by bringing up fractions as a defense to the harness
>It is a different environment to anything you will ever understand or have any meaningful perspective about so you can't say it's fake
>however despite the same applying to me i can say its real :*~~))
Looks pretty fun
>ywn bounce around on the lunar surface like a moron with your bros
You can even see their fricking wires, embarrassing
wait a second, how did we get color when they only broadcast back to earth in black and white
surely the film reel is still on the moon
Because NASA got color, B&W was the rebroadcast from NASA HQ. Also: later Apollo missions used better color cameras and are higher definition. Full-frame shots of the moon were taken as well and on the national archives website.
When I was a kid I had the impression that astronauts come and go to the moon often. It still feels like that.
John Madden! John Madden? John Madden! John Madden? John Madden! John Madden? John Madden! John Madden? John Madden! John Madden? John Madden! John Madden? John Madden! John Madden? John Madden! John Madden?
Aeiou
here comes another chinese earthquake
football!
We've never been to the moon, and going to Mars is peak human arrogance and hubris.
We have wars, genocide, famine, crime, religious quarrels, murder, torture and we think we deserve to be a space-faring civilization. Frick Elon Musk and frick "I fricking love science!!!" sois.
moronic luddite. It's not like half the tech we use today on a daily basis is a result of nasa research.
Dont care about moon but colinizing Mars was always absolute bullshit. I remember normalgay morons believing colonies will be on the moon within like 5-10 years and that was about 10 years ago.
If anyone will actually go then it will be a one way trip.
How come we don't have more footage on the moon if we been there several times?
We have plenty, but it's boring rock collection over a few hours each time.
There's a lot but most of it is pretty boring and a lot of it is potato quality analog video.
The stuff they shot on film is really good quality, but that requires one of the two astronauts to be filming when they could be doing other more important tasks, so there is less of it. Plus the film itself has mass and volume, which is limited in the spacecraft.
There's lots, it used to be easy to see back in the mid 2000s, but now most of it on paywall archive sites and youtube has gotten rid of all videos it cant monetize
For me, it's The Young Ones.
we got some globebusters watchers in here
How come the commies just didn't expose the US for this if it was fake? Honest question.
Theyre the ones that made up the rumors on it being fake. They paid off some shithole newspapers in literal who-tier countries to run the rumor and it spiraled out to brain broking dorks to this day.
But why not just out right say it's fake?
Because they knew the west would call it out as propaganda and people would believe them. But if it comes from some random press somewhere people are willing to buy it easier. Sock puppets yo.
They're in on it
because Russia and the West are actually friends and all that war business is just for show to trick taxpayers into paying higher taxes.
I heard a theory that some commies wanted Kennedy dead and CIA cleaned up sloppy soviet ends to prevent world war 3 and they demanded recognition of moon landing as reparation for that.
>Look I know the US government lies about everything, but they're telling the truth this time!
>I know the US government lies about everything
the US government is the most transparent in history, prove they lied about anything ever
The USS Liberty
Human plutonium experiment
Nayirah testimony
Operation Northwood
>Look, it's the best kept secret all right? if people found out earth was flat they would know the bible and jeeeesus are real and ether is real
>conflating flat earth bullshit with actual inquiry
thanks for confirming the moon landing was fake I guess, glowie
>I'm just making inquiries bro just asking da questions senpai fr fr no cap
So you've fallen into the trap that nothing is real and live in a post truth world at that point. I am not real, im just an AI programmed to replay to you arent I?
>Look I know the millions of religions and quadrillions of gods are made up but mine is real
Yes.
Nice I also praise the Mesopotamian God of Heaven Anu, nice to see a brother
>in the year of our lord current year+7
>believing in a bicameral god you can't yourself hear
>being conscious enough to have the volition to pray and praying to a bicameral god of all things
I think you're confused anon.
The radiation from the X-ray machine at the airport ruined my vacation photos. Thank god there isn’t any cancer inducing radiation around the Earth.
Nah, those special effects look really cheap and fake by today's standards.
JJ Abrams to direct the reboot.
I just started watching for all mankind and was disgusted by the border hopping hispanics plot
What the frick was up with that
those boomers didn't even have a plan for a backup
they only set it up for live broadcast so someone literally had to point the film camera at a CRT
Why did Nasa retroactively change what the path of the rocket was after people started asking questions about the Van Allen belt 3 years after the “””landing”””?
do you have a link to what you're talking about?
note: youtube videos don't count
I hate to sound like a schizo but the thought of space being fake fills me so much dread
Why? The nature of space turns our lives into a type of prison.
And then nasa lost all the original footage. Also, the blue prints of the first craft that took man to the moon and back again. Seriously, Google it.
Humans aren't infallible
>Also, the blue prints of the first craft that took man to the moon and back again.
There were six more successful manned moon landings after Apollo 11, anon.
What?!
There were 7 moon landings. Are you fricking stupid or being intentionally obtuse?
Seven cgi videos?
what are you even talking about, now? that's a non sequitur
We can all make up words anon
So you *are* using Google Translate, because non sequitur is a commonplace Latin term (like et cetera, or etc) to describe nonsense phrases that don't follow as it means "it does not follow". Google Translate doesn't translate it well, especially not into non-Latin languages like Mandarin or Russian.
*latinx
wrong, and it's clear you aren't even mexican because by "latin" I mean "roman" not mexican. Even chicanos know this, I'd bet $5 you're some sort of russian shill
>the blue prints of the first craft that took man to the moon and back agai
Which landing?
Answer this questions:
1) can humans (and film footage) survive the Van Allen belt?
2) why didn’t the Russians call it fake?
Nasa and it's Soviet equivalent were both staffed by Nazi expats making bank on the two countrys' paranoia. So long as the space race kept going, they were swimming in dosh. What better way to secure funding than get your buddies to up the ante for the "enemy"?
1.Yes, do you understand how radiation works?
2.they did see
The same people telling you the moon landing was real are the same people telling you to be ashamed of the founding fathers.
Jack Parsons was a satanist.
The same people telling you HIV-AIDS are real are the same people telling you to be ashamed of the founding fathers, too. I don't go around trying to eat AIDS for super-immunity against HIV.
the founding fathers were a bunch of extreme liberals who read philosophy books voraciously and would never, ever in a million years want anything to do with a bunch of yeehaw fricking fascists, that's the kind of shit they were trying to get around and just never dreamed people would be fricking moronic enough to look at their work and think "yeah, unrestricted weapons causing mass murders, policing women's bodies, and white supremacy with zero separation between church and state, got it, thanks a lot guys love to crack a brewski with you one of these days". They'd fricking kill themselves out of shame.
As if that's a detriment. Hail Satan.
the Greeks accurately measured the size of the earth with two sticks and math but now we have moronic americans (for the most part) debating the earth is flat and space is fake but also refuse to sail a boat to the edge of the earth or whatever. scared they'll fall off I suppose.
I don't believe that space is fake or flat earth. Just years of hearing all these fricking opinions kind of gets to you, you know?
I have trouble believing anything anymore.
so you're an impressionable moron
Probably
then you are incredibly stupid and gullible, also known as a "mark"
how the hell do you even have an "opinion" on 3rd grade physics
I don't watch wrestling tho
a "mark" is a general term for a victim of a scam, it's used in /woo/ because, obviously, anyone who takes wrestling opinions seriously is by definition a mark for devoting time and energy to a sport that doesn't have that much thought or philosophy behind it. Which is how Vince has scammed people and consolidated all TV pro wrestling into his personal monopoly.
homie I honestly don't care, didn't read.
>Reading shit on Cinemaphile and facebook gets to you
I hate americans so much it's unreal, or are you a third worlder ?
They have to fake the footage because when they did land they found existing structures and a whole fleet of ships of course they aren't allowed to talk about it now.
why does everything need to be a conspiracy?
Because zoomers are terminally online and the world is abjectly boring and it doesn't jive well with their "I need exciting content all of the time for my dopamine fixes"
I find it funny the feds, after decades of demoralizing and destroying the country, get so defensive that less and less people believe them about the moon landing. They clearly don't care when people know they run drugs, stage shootings, burn kids alive, start pedo cults and kidnap hobos to experiment with mind control. They don't care that people know they sell out US secrets to the Chinese and who ever else will pay for it. They don't care that people know they start wild fires and arm rioters to drive down property value, so why do they care so much that people don't believe them about the moon?
true schizoid moment
>the feds don't care about x because i say so
>the feds really care a lot about y because i say so
are these feds in the room with you right now, anon?
moronic comment, it was Nixon who started the War on Drugs and paid for it by killing the planned Apollo space station and Mars shot
You know, the DEA. The people who take drugs away.
>War on Drugs and paid for it by killing the planned Apollo space station and Mars shot
now this is schizo posting
I cant believe people still debate about this stuff. People who claim its fake see images and videos, dont understand how it was done, and assume that therefore it must be i possible, refuse to do any research and also refuse to accept any counter arguments or explanations, because its all lies. Might as well argue about the holocaust next.
i look at moon with my binoculars and it looks beautiful
🙂
newbie spotted, post breasts
everybody is mean in this thread i wanted to post something positive, which is that the moon, real or not, is very pretty
wrong board Black person, this isn't Cinemaphile or Cinemaphile
It is pretty, anon. Thank you for posting.
you come onto a board known for shitposting and you're expecting people to take you seriously? Cinemaphile is one of the worst boards, having spawned some of the most obnoxious memes, and you're expecting people to post about the moon and not conspiracy theories?
newbie LURK MORE
The intelligence of this websites posters has gone severely downhill over the last 10 years
Anyone who says the moon landings were faked is an anti-American shill.
Since twitter harasses movie studios all the time to change stupid details from uocoming movies there should be a trend hashtag were we force nasa to repeat the moon landing in less than a year or else space is proven to be fake.
They always say "we dont go to the moon because its expensive and pointless" vidya is akso expensive and pointless yet most of us are going to consoome it until we hit 70 and go blind
moron there is a moon mission happening
So here’s the thing: Just because we have iPhones doesn’t mean we can just push a button and 3D print a rocket that can take people to the moon.
1. NASA had almost unlimited funding back in the 1960s
2. So much of that shit was proprietary and manufactured by now defunct companies in the USA. We outsourced that shit to China long ago.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artemis_program
So sick of all these reboots amirite XD
This program is to make a lunar orbiting station. If succsefull this could lead to regurly being able to visit the moon and jump start resource extraction. The station wil be equipped to maintain rivers and other scientific instruments
The sad truth is that the USA probably largely abandoned manned space exploration because we didn’t find any valuable resources on the moon. If we found some useful ultra rare minerals, there would be mining rigs set up right now.