Game Over for NASA Moon-Landing Hoax

Yeah, because our government really seems to give a shit about wasting money

You can *see* the ISS from the ground with your own eyes.

This.

Alas, the people don't have the political will to make space a priority -- as long as such inane arguments hold sway, the funding won't be there.

Until China lands a guy there. Then all bets will be off.

Again, why would the Norks and the Iranians give a shit about NASA?


Indeed.

It doesn't matter how brilliant you think your idea is, if its conclusions conflict with observation it is WRONG.

So get yourself a pressurised-gas canister, a test-bench, a force meter, and a vacuum chamber and DO THE OBSERVATION!


But you are to lazy to actually do something and find the proof or disproof.
Literally thousands of amateurs track spacecraft, with radio, RADAR, and optical.

What is stopping you from making these observations?


Last Edited by Halcyon Dayz, FCD on 11/18/2014 09:40 AM

<tinfoil_hat>

I believe that people who do not believe it could be done are at least partially right, because I believe that THEY probably could not figure out how to do it. Most people are not rocket scientists. The earth is flat, too, so be careful not to sail off the edge. You might be eaten by dragons. And the dragons are controlled by aliens.

</tinfoil_hat>

The Chinese dug up Kubrick and reanimated him?? Awesome! I had no idea.

Why won't a rocket work in space?

Have you ever opened a vacuum packed jar?

That sucking sound is the air around it being sucked into the vacuum inside the jar.

Ever use a vacuum cleaner? That suction is created by a difference in air pressure, if it were a perfect vacuum inside you'd have one hell of a cleaner.

Now imagine your rocket opening a nozzle to release some expanding gasses, they would be sucked into the vacuum before they could press against the ship.

A gas-powered rocket in a vacuum is an absurdity you can disprove using only items you find in your home everyday.

NASA has told you that "rocket science" is beyond your understanding when it is really a sham to keep you paying taxes for things that don't exist.

Than do so and win 8 million krona.

Vacuums don't suck. Neither domestic ones, nor the natural vacuum of space. All the force being provided comes from the external pressure.

A domestic vacuum, by the way, does about 2-3 pounds of pressure differential. A better measure of performance for them is airflow; it is the continuing airflow that drags dust and particles inside.

One provided with a perfect vacuum inside would have about 6x the "sealed suction" rating (hardly infinite; our atmosphere only provides fourteen pounds and change, and that won't get any higher regardless of how good the vacuum is.)

Again, you can see the ISS with your own eyes, and *400* year old science proves you wrong.

What evidence could change your mind?

bump

could you break down a price list of what would cost that much, I am pretty sure there is nothing that rare on the spaceship that would run into that kind of money. Unless the developers and engineers were paid billions....

The Space Shuttle Endeavour, the orbiter built to replace the Space Shuttle Challenger, cost approximately $1.7 billion.

The total cost of the Space Shuttle Program was 192 billion, and it took them almost 96 billion to get to the first shuttle mission.

Sure, Endeavor only cost 2.2 billion to make, but it was largely assembled from existing spares. NASA spent close to that every year for ongoing maintenance, replacements, and upgrades.

They ended the program with about 12 billion in "shuttle related hardware" (crawlers, towers, assembly buildings, flight control, test facilities, etc. etc.) and at the height were running out of over 600 buildings with some 5,000 personnel. Given the rough scale of other such things, I'd figure less than half of the total cost of the program would be in a piece of gear you could point at; the rest went into salaries and support and ongoing repairs and the costs of operations (fuel, etc)

Vacuums don't suck? You supposed to ignore me not come with with a retarded answer.

So your vacuum cleaner doesn't suck up dirt? We should have the government recall all those vacuum sold under the false pretense of sucking up dirt.

You wanna see airflow, open that rocket nozzle up inside the vacuum of space and watch your whole fuel loaded get "airflowed" out in less than one second.

Vacuums don't suck? Are you Neil deGrasse Tyson? Yes you are.

Nature abhors a vacuum.

Last Edited by nmhaupt on 11/23/2014 09:21 PM

IOW you know NOTHING about physics, yet you arrogantly pontificate on it as if you were Newton Incarnate.

Just another delusional crank.

Oh, my. That answer made me howl with laughter. It took *work* to post with that much ignorance.

lol

PhDUH

the two biggest LIES ever told and sold to humanity are ...

#1 the son of god walked on EARTH and WATER
#2 mortal man flew thru the AIR and landed on FIRE (radioactive moon)

it is ELemental Watson, a narrative has been concocted to keep ye sheeple dreaming about bullshit

why?

we need passive sheeple to go to work and do the 9-5 cha cha cha ... feeling trapped and helpless would make ignorant sods feel trapped and helpless

Last Edited by Raphael on 11/24/2014 02:13 PM

The video they showed to world is fake.

Thread: OFFICIAL NASA VIDEO ADMITS To NEVER SENDING PEOPLE TO THE MOON

If you believe NASA you must believe that a vacuum doesn't suck because if it does it would suck all the gas from the rocket before it could be used as propellant.

Go back and look at the shills debating this point. The shills are forced to argue that a vacuum does not create a sucking force. A vacuum cleaner is a poor relative of a true vacuum and it does a good job of creating suction. Imagine the sucking force of space, the infinite vacuum.

The problem of proving the NASA hoax a fake is resolved to basic logic. Those who believe in it will ignore the proof in front of their faces. Those who shill for it will say ridiculous things and everyone else will come one step closer to true understanding of how the world works and how we are deceived every day and in every way by those with an agenda that is not in our best interests.

Last Edited by nmhaupt on 11/25/2014 09:00 AM

If a vacuum "creates this force," why hasn't the Earth's atmosphere been sucked in to the infinite vacuum of space?

Last Edited by 74444 on 11/25/2014 11:39 AM

Hardly.

A vacuum cleaner works by creating a partial vacuum -- better stated, a pressure differential. It would work EXACTLY the same if you increased the air pressure in the area being cleaned. What causes dirt and debris to move is the pressure differential.

This means the strongest vacuum cleaner on the face of the Earth would still be no more than 14.7 psi. The only pressure available to do work is that which the atmosphere provides.

(That said, fourteen pounds would be a hell of a vacuum cleaner; a good shop-vacc is lucky to get 4 pounds).

Vacuum is a lack of pressure. That's it. You can't get a number larger than zero. A tank pressurized to 4,400 psia (that's ABSOLUTE, for those that don't notice distinctions in nomenclature), contains gases that are pushing against the chamber wall at 4,400 lbs across every square inch. They don't care what is outside; the outside of the tank could be in air, in the Challenger Deep, or in deep space. Until and unless the tank itself deforms or comes apart, the pressure inside is defined by the mass and the temperature of that gas. Period.

Believing the internal pressure would get higher if you went lower than 0 psia outside is like believing a light would get dimmer if you shone it into better than perfect darkness, or a hot object would radiate heat more efficiently if it had a view factor on to something that was less than 0 kelvin. These are absurdities. These are divide-by-zero error. No, worse; these are divide-by-cucumber errors. They misunderstand the nature of the universe at an incredibly basic level.

No answer? I'm shocked.

[link to www.youtube.com (secure)]

[link to www.youtube.com (secure)]

If all you can do is quote Bart Sibrel, you've already lost.

really?





...

[link to www.youtube.com (secure)]
[link to www.youtube.com (secure)]
[link to www.youtube.com (secure)]

so space cowboy

IF all you can do is provide proof of what NASA did 40 years ago on the moon BUT not much since ... YOU have already lost.

this is 2014
look at the WOW images from MARS!!!!!!!!!
[link to www.nasa.gov]

and not that long the NASA NAZIS fed 'we the sheeple' these SHITTY images of Apollo landing sites?
[link to www.nasa.gov]

What stupid people like you do NOT realize is that even those braggarts at NASA could NOT help showing off their Hi-Res images of MARS, but it also exposes at the same time why these same wankers are NOT sharing the really good images of the lunar surface with us too.

MARS robots prove anything the asshole astroNOTS can do, the robots already did.

The Apollo LIARS LIARS never went to the moon.
It has been proved that rocks from the surface were obtained by robots and brought back to earth....

IF you NASA NSA NAZI wankers ever have HI-RES images of the Lunar Rover with cosmic dust collected since 1973 ... that would be great!!!


IGNORANCE slain 24/7/365/25920


Last Edited by Raphael on 12/27/2014 12:01 PM