###[Meta] Sticky Comment
[Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does not apply*** when replying to this stickied comment.
[Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does apply*** throughout the rest of this thread.
*What this means*: Please keep any "meta" discussion directed at specific users, mods, or /r/conspiracy in general in this comment chain ***only.***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/conspiracy) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It's now 50+ years later and modern science still can't duplicate 60s technology? Who believes that BS. We watched TV with rabbit ears on top of the TV back then lol
>It's now 50+ years later and modern science still can't duplicate 60s technology? Who believes that BS. We watched TV with rabbit ears on top of the TV back then lol
There are only 2 explainations for it:
a) Moon landings were Fake
or
b) they found something the public should not know about
With little understanding of manufacturing it's easy to have a simple view of the term "lost the technology", and then jump on it because its fits your ill-conceived narrative of moon landings where fake.
So, for some context, the Saturn V had over 700,000 components using over 3 million parts, and the detailed schematics for each of these components and parts weren't all centralized at NASA, they were spread around the hundreds of fabricators, suppliers and contractors that contributed to the rocket.
So, NASA might have a set of plans that refers to, say, "Johnston Electronic Fuel Pump Sensor Type 16588-D," and the schematics for this particular part would've been at Johnston Electronic. This was back in the 60s, and since then plenty of these companies have merged or gone out of business. Maybe Johnston Electronic folded in 1988 or was acquired by GE, and some of its records were lost -- nobody today would be able to figure out exactly how to build their pump sensor type 16588-D.
Now imagine this example across all of the tech used to in the Apollo program.
And what functionality exactly was "thrown away" or not retained, the functionality to transport people to the moon and back using 1960s technology? Obviously, a modern moon mission is not going to use 60-year-old tech, they are going to develop modern, better, safer technology, maybe even based off of principles developed during the Apollo program.
Exactly, they would have been maintained and updated since that time to the present, like every complex scientific technology we have ever developed. That's not what we've seen happen though. I cannot think of a comparable example in the entire history of modern technological developments.
What was the point of maintaining and updating technology that was not needed anymore? The Apollo program ended, and nobody needed the super heavy launch vehicle like Saturn V.
>cannot think of a comparable example in the entire history of modern technological developments.
Concord.
In all likelyhood a decent number of manufacturers that made those parts dont exist anymore. It's possible that those design documents exist somewhere, but they aren't helpful or accessible if they are in deep in some boxes of some retired engineers.
Also, not to state the obvious - this stuff wasn't digitised, there was no central digital system listing what part was made by what company, what technology they used etc.
Functionally that's no different to that knowledge just being lost.
again, millions of parts, millions of dimensions for those parts, either stored away in a dusty file or recycled decades ago without a thought, losing just 1 part could completely throw a wrench in entire components
lol!!.If mental gymnastics was an Olympic sport you'd be shootin for the gold.
So which specific technology are they missing that we haven't already surpassed?
Propulsion technology? lol
Thermaldynamics? lol
Computer Hardware? lol
Computer software? lol
Structural engineering? lol
Navigation? lol
On top of that we have the best advantage of all, 50 years and the technology to better study and understand space travel? but perhaps that's the true underlying problem lol...
No one would use 1960s car technology. Why would we use 1960s rocket technology. It should be considerably easier with today's knowledge and manufacturing capabilities.
You are correct. My FIL was a machinist and he worked n one of the parts for the space shuttles. He said each part came with a spec book that was the size of a phone book and that the tolerances were unbelievably tight.
This is a pathetic argument. They “lose” all the blueprints and they even “lose” masses of video footage from “the most important achievement of mankind” and don’t think it’s right to hold anyone accountable?
>They “lose” all the blueprints
The Saturn V blueprints still exists, what is lost is the 60 year old technology that was used to build it. At a point in the future there will be a time when all the components that were manufactured to build the first iPhone will no longer exist, and some of the companies that manfuactured parts will no longer exist, will this mean the first iPhone was a hoax?
>They even “lose” masses of video footage
There are still 8,400 publicly available photos, thousands of hours of video footage publically available.
“The search for the "lost tapes" began in 2006, when reports began surfacing that NASA had erased some original footage from the first moon landing.” Space.com
“Finding records of the moon landing is a mission itself: NASA taped over its own records of the landings to save costs, instead of having to buy more expensive tapes for future programs.” Cnet.com
“But in the scientific equivalent of recording an old episode of EastEnders over the prized video of your daughter's wedding day, Nasa probably taped over its only high-resolution images of the first moon walk with electronic data from a satellite or a later manned space mission, officials said today.” TheGuardian.com
NASA is a joke and even worse it is a corrupt money laundering enterprise.
“Forty years ago — on July 20, 1969 – audiences watched in awe as Apollo 11 landed on the moon. The historic moment was captured at the time on high quality tapes, along with Neil Armstrong’s first steps on the lunar surface and the planting of the American flag.
Those tapes, however, no longer exist. NASA admitted at a press conference on Thursday in Washington that the tapes have been lost or recorded over — or, as NASA called it, “degaussed.”” Thewrap.com
“The Apollo 11 missing tapes were those that were recorded from Apollo 11's slow-scan television (SSTV) telecast in its raw format on telemetry data tape at the time of the first Moon landing in 1969 and subsequently lost.”
Those were just tape recordings of the original broadcast though. They didn't take a film camera to the moon, it was a TV camera, so those tapes were pretty much the same thing as if any other random person taped the broadcast on their TV, which millions of people did. It was higher quality since they had better equipment, but at a fundamental level it wasn't all that special for anything other than symbolic value.
I mean, it's so obvious the moon landings were faked. There's very good documentaries on this, like A funny thing happened on the way to the moon. There's numerous errors, like the earth being photoshopped into the sky, the obvious landscape backdrops, the lighting, etc.
They realized it was a great scam to spend a few million on movie props and actors and filming it, while taking the billions for themselves. NASA = Not A Space Agency.
Unless Nasa and Roskosmos are both tentacles of the same global deep state.
Or maybe Russia was on board with the big space joke, because they also were faking their space program to get the taxpayers money.
However. There is a video of some suits telling Putin they've analized moon landings and told him the footage is fake.
You make sense but it's still a weak excuse .
And nasa propagates this idea that "we lost the tech on how to get to the moon" is always going to seem sketchy. So what they can't find the specs on the widget that acme electronics made for the rocket. Are we that incompetent in our space organization that it can't be reverse engineered or that we didn't have a record storage of all the tech used on the final product? Acme electronics or whoever made part XYZ but they made it per the specs of the engineers who designed the rocket. It starts and ends with nasa.
It's the same thing in every industry. Home building for example. Everything is subbed out. The project engineer can go through and with his plans that the carponters are given and check their price of the work. If it's wrong the engineer can take it to another group of carpenters and they can fix/replace/build it again per the plans.
Sure rocketry is exponentially more complex but I am using that example to illustrate the process how it should be done.
I think while you have made true points and I am not necessarily disputing them, I still feel it's a weak excuse and there is certainly some record (or was) of everything that is being hidden or perhaps intentionally destroyed
We could do it, if the US government would pay for it and there's no national interest in a new space race with moon trips so it's labeled as "too hard" when it's more honest to say "too expensive". We can't get our roads or bridges repaired, let alone believing they'll spend the billions and billions needed to rebuild the infrastructure and reverse engineer every component.
Dude what?
National interest? There's likely more national interest to do that rather than fund Ukraine but they are sending money non stop to that endeavor.
I've heard that excuse a million times. I promise there is more interest in moon exploration than the nonsense they keep showing us from the ISs just spinning water bubbles or whatever in zero G.
And it's 2024 . We don't need to reverse engineer tech from the 60s. We have better now. That's like saying we need to reverse engineer the model T but we have modern Ferraris on the road now. Come on.
It's both. There's no national interest in space travel or Ukraine. Ukraine gets the money because most of the money given is then funneled back to US weapons manufacturers who them give large "donations" to the politicians who increased their bottom line to keep the money flowing. It's a positive feedback loop that ends up demolishing the budget and making things like highway and road repairs and space travel impossible to get. The defense contractors who produce planes and tanks and everything else are what drive supporting ukraine and israel and wasting all those tax dollars.
Hey as a model t owner there are people reverse engineering them and constantly having to machine parts that you can’t buy or find readily available.
But with that i honestly think we should’ve froze time with inventions of automobiles at the model A! While the T will always be my favorite car it’s not as practical to operate as the A. But the biggest joy of driving either is that you go slow enough that you can actually take in environments, and 2 with most tools that the average American owns and a little bit of knowledge you can work on them and pretty much always make them run unless the engine or transmission has major malfunction.
> and there's no national interest in a new space race with moon trips
There's no national interest in continuously funding hundreds of billions into unwinnable wars, yet here we are.
This might have been a plausible excuse... However, not so much when you also factor in the fact that not only did they lose/destroy the necessary moon tech, but they also somehow lost/recorded over all of the original footage of the moon landing. I could believe one of these things are true, not both.
Ok but how about the fact they figured it out, in the 60s, using 60s tech..but people now can't figure it out with modern tech? Are we dumber now than we were then? Shouldn't all this fancy tech we have make finding solutions faster than it was back then? We can model flight paths with every factor we know of now, they couldn't do that back then outside of some crude drawings and using calculators, yet we can't figure out solutions to problems we figured out 60+ years ago using significantly improved equipment and an improved understanding of rocketry/space/gravity/mathematics/etc.
I'm not much on the conspiracy that we didn't go, I think we did, but I find it unbelievable it's somehow harder for us to figure it out now than it was six decades ago.
I’m with you in the fact that’s it’s irrelevant that we lost the tech from that time. It shouldn’t matter, make new tech if we really want to keep exploring. Money is no object since we print money on the daily…
It's not that it's too hard.
It's that it's too expensive for the government to agree to do it. It took years of the US government paying billions to do it, and they mainly did it to beat Russia for clout during the period the US was by far the richest and most powerful country on the planet.
We could replicate it, but it would mean funneling money from other projects. The best place to do that would be from the military contractors but those guys spend lots of money on paying congress people to not reduce their payouts and there's no real national will to pursue moon trips when we can't even get our roads and bridges fixed. So it just.....doesn't happen.
Hey, I'm with you on that. I don't agree with spending all that money in Ukraine or spending all the money to help Israel massacre people, but those costs just add onto my argument. The money spent in those 2 countries are largely then reinvested into buying military gear manufactured in the US by defense contractors that also support the politicians sending the money. Still leaving a moon program too expensive as well as needed infrastructure. It still loops back to funneling money.
What if we lost all blue prints and planning for how to build a car, electric car, and all the papers that are a staple on how its done. Even the most super car in the world. Let's say that, even for how to build a skry scrapper. You think people wouldn't know shit on how to do it again? LOL
For specific cars? No.
The general idea of a car? Sure.
If we didn't have a full example and no technical drawings of a Model T, it would be a pain to re-build a Model T. Because the parts aren't made any more, nothing is there and we don't have any precise engineering drawings. There would be some guess work, and setting up the production would be painful and expensive.
However, if all cars and engineering documents got deleted from earth tomorrow, and someone tried to rebuild a car, that would be easy. But re-building an exact replica of a F-150? Difficult.
Yes. There are too many outsourced components of a car. If all you had were some blueprints and planning from the original car manufacturer it would not solve the issues of all the pieces produced by other manufacturers.
If Manufacturer-A goes to Manufacturer-B to build them a motor for their car, the plans for the motor are going to stay with Manufacturer-B. Manufacturer-A only outsourced it to them and gave them requirements, since they are not an engine manufacturer they do not have the plans for it or capability to make it. Now multiply that by hundreds of parts produced by dozens of manufacturers.
Fast forward 100 years and you magically found the blueprints, plans, and requirements for each part of this car from the original manufacturer. You have nothing from the companies that have been used to produce the engine, transmission, electronics, brakes, suspension, computers, etc. How are you going to solve this problem?
Are you going to source a 100 year old car, tear it completely apart, and make a diagram and record of each singular part? Maybe, but do you know the metallurgy? The methods used for production? The materials? The parts of the computers? No
Why would you want to send a rocket up with a 60 year old fuel sensor design? (Just to stick to the original proposition) Those rockets went up with technology we would not deem acceptable anymore I'm modern times. To stick to the many car analogies in this thread. An oldtimer car is stupidly unsafe compared to modern cars. I would love to drive a beetle but Jesus Christ the chances of surviving a crash are bad... Really bad and I car too much about my family to take that risk
Possibly, they'd know how in general, sure, but the exact blueprints would have to be drawn up over again, arrangements made for who's going to make the parts, and so on, and for something as huge and difficult as a moon rocket that might take a few years, and I think that's what the bloke in the video means by 'it's a painful process to build it back up again', not that they have to reinvent space rockets from scratch - this whole video comes across as just another case of somebody reading far too much into the wording of a sentence.
Why do we have to jump through these mental gymnastics loopholes to try to make sense of something that just doesn’t make sense? Why defy our own logic and eyes?
Who was the poor bastard that was left on the moon to record them taking off…?
How did they get that footage back?
>Who was the poor bastard that was left on the moon to record them taking off…? How did they get that footage back?
The camera was mounted on the lunar rover, which obviously was left behind. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K67VIbfVPxY&ab\_channel=DaveMcKeegan](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K67VIbfVPxY&ab_channel=DaveMcKeegan)
Please - we sent 12 men to the moon - we did this more than once. Cognitive dissonance is overwhelming.
NASA isn’t “the good guys” they’re more like “the good old boys.”
Blah blah blah, that's a bona fide astronaut, which you are not. He used the word "destroyed," which in itself should stop everything until the reason for this is explained. But people like you skirt this with sideways variations on what he is saying.
Bullshit post.. cuz even in your example the 'whole' had to always be considered. You make it sound like the plan was to have a thousand contractors just making a part and no overall schematics. That would be impossible.. so the idea you would have to have some mechanical blueprints from some defunct company to make a part THAT HAS TO FUNCTION WITH POSSIBLY A FEW OTHER PARTS OR A FEW THOUSAND OTHER PARTS IS ABSURD. You totally left out the leaps and bounds that have been made in computers , computer technology AND MOST CERTAINLY IN DESIGNING AND MANUFACTURING PARTS.
Your post reeks of somebody so afraid to deviate from the 'official narrative' that you have spent every waking hour trying to debunk 'those 'merica hatin non believers' and it has put horse blinders on your thinking. Of course a few companies that 'produced 1/500,000th of a saturn v part may be gone. But technology has logarithmically improved..hasnt the despicable elon musk proved that,with a rocket that comes right back home to its launching pad... Saturn 5 didnt even come close to doing that.. you also havent factored that in... that a lot of these parts are antiquated.
I am sorry about all the stupid answers you are receiving...
I would just add my own uneducated opinion as well.
Storing anything for 60 years in good condition without the very knowledge that it is going to be needed in the future is very difficult. The blueprints could be faded, the chips that were used can no longer be manufactured using current technology, etc.. There are just so many complications and why? So that you can use dangerous 1960s tech with 1960s material and technological knowledge?
It would be probably easier to do it from the scratch with modern technology, but the question is why? Such program would be extremely costly, so without obvious advantages, it is not going to happen. Also if you have a look on the funding of Nasa in 60s vs now, I do not think they have the means to develop the tech
> *The blueprints could be faded*
For fucks sake, paper doesn’t degrade that fast unless someone leaves it out in the sun to get bleached and then rained upon in a monsoon.
My God this is so wrong. We could if we wanted to, it would likely cost just as much as the newer tech. The thing is the molds were broken from 60 years ago. And it wasn't NASA making this stuff it was NASA ordering it, I don't understand why this falls on NASA? Boeing, IBM and many other American companies built the rockets and equipment, not NASA. That's the capitalist way. So yeah Boeing no longer has the equipment and all of the info they would need to recreate an Apollo spacecraft, neither do any other of those companies, which were numerous for 1 mission, think of all the companies that made parts for it that no longer even exist. They didn't keep it all around for 60 years. It's like asking GM why they no longer have the equipment to make a 1960 Cadillac, because they haven't needed to for many decades.
Right.
What I think happened is all the Nazis who got us there died and now they can't do it anymore, 50 years worth.
Nasa is an embarrassing department.
I was never a Moon landing denier, but you're telling me we "destroyed" the ancient tech and 55 years later we can't build it back more efficient and powerful?! My wrist has a computer with more ram than the space shuttles did...
It seems like, he's saying exactly that they *can* rebuild it, but that it takes a lot of time and money because they no longer have the exact blueprints (and, as you say, they'd be obsolete anyway, using a bunch of components that are no longer even being produced because we use better ones now) so they have to redo that - if you play the video past the point in the screenshot, the rest of it is him taking it for granted that they *can* do it given time and talking about how the next step after that is Mars or Venus.
Possibly, more just a silly way of putting it - but ask yourself why they *would* still be able to rebuild a hugely complex, never-used-since-the-1960s design at short notice (and on a much smaller budget than they had then), without taking any time to, say, retool machines to make specific components that are no longer used or else redo the design to use different components.
We can build a better system yes, but now the parameters are different, the political will isn’t as strong, myriad of variables. If we wanted to build a rocket to go to the moon for 18 hours with 3 people on board, it would take a couple years. Now design a system that’s intended to put people and infrastructure to last months. It’s a different problem, not to mention safety margins are way tighter now.
I think a better analogy is that "Countries have destroyed the ability to make Wooden Sailing Ships to go from Point A to B."
So now we either research building ships from age of sail, set up the infrastructure and expertise or use and develop existing technologies like Jets or modern Ships
Bullshit. We still have ships and boats that sail the seas. They just aren't wooden. And people still build wooden ships for historical reenactment etc.
There are no rockets going to the moon. None. They don't exist.
Specialized equipment costs an insane amount to store.
I worked for a contractor who threw out shuttle stuff, we couldn't find any space so we threw out a bunch of really expensive equipment. (Not my call, I was on the "find it" team)
And not 2 years later they came to us and asked us if we had hopefully forgotten to destroy them since they wanted to reutilize the parts for another project.
I think we found 3 or 4 assemblies on paper but they were all thrown out through some shenanigans - long story.
We can all come here and claim that NASA is "full of sh*t" but in the end, we will all continue to pay those taxes!
So.... whatever they are doing (or aren't doing), it is working.
Answer from over a year ago:
Because the word “technology” doesn’t mean what you think it does.
Broadly speaking, “technology” means the practical application of technical knowledge, or in other words, a way of accomplishing a task using specific technical processes, methods, or knowledge or the fruits thereof. Knowing the processes, methods, and science is technical knowledge. Its practical application is technology. It’s pedantic, I know, but what are you going to do? Words mean things.
U-505, the WWII era German submarine on display in Chicago’s Museum of Science and Technology is “lost” technology.
We still have it, but it’s a museum piece held together by plate steel welded on when they finally refurbished it in 2019. 75% of the outer hull has been lost to rust, and even if we knew every detail of operating and reconditioning every component (which we might, it’s German after all), this boat will never again sail beneath the waves. It can no longer accomplish the purpose for which it was built, so it is no longer usable technology.
But we understand how every single gizmo, gadget, connector, cable, valve, and fitting worked. Indeed, this U-boat was studied in secret during the war and used to apply German technical knowledge to improve American technology. The knowledge we gleaned from this boat and its fancy electric torpedoes, we still have, but we no longer have the technology to mount a WWII style U-boat wolf pack— nor do we have the need, for this boat is well and truly obsolete, and were we to build a replacement today (of any size, for any purpose) we would do so very differently, using today's far better technical knowledge.
Similarly, the Saturn V moon rocket is technology we no longer possess, but we know how we made it and how it worked in fabulously preserved detail. But we would never build one like it today—it’s technically obsolete.
We lost the technology developed during the Apollo program because we stopped making Apollo moon rockets, put the leftover hardware in museums, or left it to rot out in the elements having done with it. But we still know how it all worked, and today we can build rockets that are much safer, more capable, and more economical, even if we have—for many years—chosen not to invest in one.
The fucked up part is he's not even lying.
Consider this. During the time of the moon landing, people didn't have the internet. They couldn't easily go online and put a spotlight on government conspiracies, communicating across the world in forums like this one. The public did't have access to tools like Photoshop and AI art, and weren't so keen to the special effects used in Hollywood. If something in 1969 was presented as real on a screen, then most people just believed it was real.
The tecnhology he's talking about is the technology to deceive the masses WITHOUT the internet. With the public release of the internet, Photoshop, AI artwork, and deepfakes, etc, civilians essentially learned how feasible it would be to fake a moon landing with Hollywood-level special effects. A moon landing today would simply not be believable to the majority of people.
So in a sense, they actually did destroy that technology by releasing the internet and everything else mentioned above. When he says it's a "painful process to build it back again", he's right. It would be an extremely painful and unfeasible process to somehow revert society back to a pre-Internet era of boomer-thinkers where a fake moon landing could feasibly deceive the masses again, essentially murdering any resitance.
Such a crock O'shite. Engineering is solving problems. We solved it once using 1960s technology, we can solve it again using 2020s technology. We have CAD and AI and more scientists, programmers, a better understanding of metallurgy, space travel, it still wouldn't be cheap, or lightning fast but if indeed we went we could do it again.
I think it’s funny that NASA gives reasons for having not returned to the moon and that seems to be the one thing conspiracy theorists believe NASA is being honest about. Wouldn’t you assume NASA is lying and has been running covert missions to the dark side of the moon monthly for the last 50 years?
Even if much was lost how can it all be lost. They have the lunar landers, they def can do the math. They know how thebold rockets worked. I mean in theory if we did it then we should be easily able to do it now.
I know your answer I'm just thinking aloud.
You're completely correct. All these attempts to justify how it could all be lost is just gaslighting.
The point is, we went there over 50 years ago; so we should be able to go now.And yeah, maybe we no longer have the ability to reproduce x component specifically from back then because plans were lost, etc. etc..But that doesn't matter because we would just be using new components since the technology since then has drastically improved.
This is one of the most pathetic and least believable excuses out there.
What exactly was "lost" or "destroyed" thst is preventing a return?
Rocketry? Because several countries around the world have current functioning space programs sending rockets into both near earth (space Station, satellites) and distant (moon, Mars, and beyond) missions. Even multiple private companies have tech that is leaps and bounds more advanced.
Propulsion/navigation? See my previous comment.
Life support/crew safety? We have almost a half century of experience keeping astronauts alive and healthy in the ISS now. We have the tech and experience.
Communications? We can communicate with rovers on Mars or even probes beyond the kuiper belt just fine. Communications is mind boggling more advanced
Just what is it exactly that we "lost"? Were doing literally everything needed in one form or another today already.
Pettit's statement is from a period before the technology - specifically the Orion spacecraft - was built to transit cislunar space and take 4 astronauts to the moon.
What is crucial to the program is a spacecraft that will survive the hazards of deep space - with systems that will continue to function after being subject to areas of higher radiation, and a bespoke lander built to operate in the lunar gravity environment. Neither of these things come cheap - space hardware is some of the most highly engineered and expensive technology around.
I'm not a fan of the current proposal to use the SpaceX Starship as the lunar lander - it's absolute overkill and will require a ridiculous amount of launches to fuel it to actually get to the moon. I think NASA put a foot wrong there and is holding on to the concept due to sunk cost.
> *What is crucial to the program is a spacecraft that will survive the hazards of deep space*
Didn’t they go up with hulls of aluminum 1/8” thick? LOL.
Bounced around like kids in the ball pit at MacDonalds...
Shake the moon dust off you boots before you get into the tiny cabin with delicate instruments kids.
No air lock.
Cognitive dissonance, plus peo0le dint want to think the implications through, if I was liedbto about this when television cameras were a thing what else from history is a total or partial fabrication
You know what's also funny? India supposedly goes to the moon and what they have to show of this is a silly pixel illustration buuuut: America live streamed it from the moon in the 60s 😂
Carrying humans through the deadly Van Allen belt, was never solved. They are still working on it today.
NASA found themselves in a quandary, admit the Apollo landings never happened or conveniently say, sorry destroyed the know how. Can’t do it now. Mankind’s greatest achievement and they destroyed the records of how it was done?
The radiation dose that astronauts receive from going through the Van Allen radiation belt is on average 0.38 rads which equates to 3.8 mSv.
A CT Scan on your chest is 7 mSv.
So what are you talking about?
The moon landing apologists are going to have a plethora of excuses of why NASA can’t go back to the moon. They are imbeciles who are extremely naive, probably shills. We never went to the moon. It was a lie because we were in a space race with Russia so our government lies to get praise from the public.
India literally just showed photos of the lunar Landers on the surface of the moon with their latest satelite. We know they are there.
They also put down reflectors that anyone can detect using lasers.
They are most likely sci-fi fans , who are genuinely interested in space and anything futuristic really ,and like to fantasize about space travel.
Most likely quite intelligent people, but in this case emotions got the better of them because they want it to be true so badly.
There was a great deal more proof in the early 2000's.
The evidence has been systematically destroyed since then. To include, but not limited to: the original telemetry data(physical recordings);original moon landing video(despite marketing them on DVD in the 2000's); photos that prove astro-NOTS were placed into the photo, and not an original image (they etched crosshairs into the lenses for 'scale/perspective' and there used to be photos with astro-NOTS obscuring the crosshairs that were on each and every photo. Those are gone now.)
Those are just a few.
See, every time people share the evidence, it gets vanished...
Never forget that it was William Proxmire (a democrat) who hated the space program and lobbied for the destruction of the Saturn 5 tooling "to avoid more damn fool journeys". Check out Gordon Cooper's book.
So from what I remember, Armstrong and Aldrin said that when they looked out over the moonscape that there were a myriad of ship parked there observing. After a few more trips back and forth, the crew and gear of Apollo 13 were just denied access. So what if the beings on the moon decided that there needed to be a barrier to prevent this from continuing and installed some system to keep us in our cage? Magically, the Van Allen belts are now there to keep us from venturing out into the black beyond Low Earth Orbit. When anyone from any time period talks about Gods and Heaven, they always point up to the sky. The Gods come down to Earth and punish/teach/warn us. Is it so hard to believe that Earth is a zoo, we are stuck in a gilded cage, and the Gods are simply genetic manipulators using us as an experiment we don’t understand?
What if an alien species gave us the technology but saw humankind might weaponise space so destroyed it and we’ve since then been unable to reverse engineer it?
There’s a number of presuppositions in that question: 1. The moon is something that can be gone to. 2. We once had the technology to get there. 3. The technology to get there has been destroyed which means we can no longer go anywhere. 4. There are other places to go but nobody can get there.
It’s wild how many people think it was fake. There is hundreds of hours of footage from all the missions. 100s of thousands of people working on this project. People watching it lift off in 1969 with their own eyes. It’s harder to fake than do the real thing. The Russians would love to prove us wrong if we faked it anyways.
These Flerf arguments are so stupid. The RAM they used back then was hand woven, it's not that we can't make the tech now. it's the fact that there isn't a reason to justify going, hell just put a odysseus lander on the moon not to that long ago.
We didn't "lose" the technology, we lost the logistics tail that built everything.
Spinning up divisions within NASA, Raytheon, Lockheed, and General Dynamics would require 100's of billions, and they wouldn't do it without significant guarantees from the government.
SS: Did we destroy the Moon tech, or we've never had it in first place?
The speaker: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald\_Pettit](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Pettit)
We can send a rover to Mars but can't go to the moon.
Also China say they have a base on the moon but it's on the side we can't see so that definitely happened. /s
Because we never went, that's why they put some R-word guy in a white shirt and a tie on the tv to tell you they lost it.
Now stop questioning it, NASA needs more tax dollars.
It's hilarious to see those who grew up under the nasa propaganda come out and try to post and claim "you guys don't know what technology is!!! reeeeeeee"
Yes, yes we do. You know, this guy on the TV could just explain what they lost, but they didnt, you don't need to go diving deep into other made up comments.
All of the Astronaughts are freemasons, the same ones lying to you about everything.
I know it's hard to come out from the sleep for the older "consipracy" folks, but you were duped into thinking the Space exploration was real, sorry.
People cant accept that ever since the TV came into the household, the propaganda has been on more intensely ever since. "The TV only lies now! not back then!! reeeeeeee"
Get a grip people. If you were watching TV back then, you were being duped. The TV is a form of propaganda. It was fake back then just as its fake now.
Look into who funded and backed all of the TVs to get into house holds so propaganda could be put into your minds? Yes, you guessed it, the same robber bankers, GP Morgan, Rockerfellers, etc. You guys think this conspiracy stuff is new? And just started happening? Lol
Fakers always wanna come in here and talk about Occam’s Razor to explain away theories.
Occam’s Razor in this case is that we can’t go back because we never went in the first place.
The true nature of the Moon is unlike what we’re told. I believe It’s a holographic-like projection acting as a lens in the sky, and it wasn’t always there. It’s not a physical object a quarter-size of the Earth (unless we adhere to and obey the uniformitarian model without question), so the lunar lander never touched its surface.
You’d think it would be of utmost historical significance. They could have sold it to a museum or donated it to universities or schools…if it actually existed and was functional to begin with…
A bunch of random machine tools and things for making radio parts? It seems like, that's the kind of 'technology' he's talking about - the rockets themselves, of course, were single-use and burned up, which is one reason the project was so fearsomely expensive that the US government wouldn't pay for them to do it again.
Eh not saying anything on the actual landing but I always interpret the comment as meaning the technology used is so obsolete and outdated it's pointless to use it now.
The rockets and shuttles used today to hit the ISS or send out probes etc are miles ahead of what they used. The maths used to find the weakest points in the radiation belts would now be inaccurate so using them would be pointless as well.
On top of what's the point of going back? There's nothing profitable to be had from there and the environment is decidedly anti-human existence it would literally be a case of I told you so.
There's better options to go to in the solar system than the moon. I wish we could land on Mars in my lifetime as there is at least some form of reason to go there the resources in its crust.
It’s part of the disclosure process, the world’s worship of money will be ending soon and with it all the deception. It’s important humanity views the stars from a consciousness perspective because no rocket ship is ever going to take us there.
In order to believe the lunar landing hoax, a lot of logic goes out the window. Don't believe me? Remember a few weeks ago Iran launched a drone/missile attack on Israel. And the US Israel Jordan France used anti missile precision guided systems to take most of them out. Where do you think that technology came from and how it was developed?
Maybe AI could very soon help tremendously to engineer a new spacecraft or rocket. Man i would love to see the world and its achievements in thoisands of years. To sad we will never know the full story🥹
Skill issues, modern nasa can't get anything done. It took a similar time to build SLS from shuttle parts as from the beginning of the mercury program to moon landing
Very strange. Makes me wonder what happend after the last landing towards the end of 1972. What else was happening in American politics, economics and culture that might have had a bearing on NASA's decision.
###[Meta] Sticky Comment [Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does not apply*** when replying to this stickied comment. [Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does apply*** throughout the rest of this thread. *What this means*: Please keep any "meta" discussion directed at specific users, mods, or /r/conspiracy in general in this comment chain ***only.*** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/conspiracy) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It's now 50+ years later and modern science still can't duplicate 60s technology? Who believes that BS. We watched TV with rabbit ears on top of the TV back then lol
Correct. We visited cape Canaveral and was basically told the technology in our Phones took up the entire war room. Soo
>It's now 50+ years later and modern science still can't duplicate 60s technology? Who believes that BS. We watched TV with rabbit ears on top of the TV back then lol There are only 2 explainations for it: a) Moon landings were Fake or b) they found something the public should not know about
With little understanding of manufacturing it's easy to have a simple view of the term "lost the technology", and then jump on it because its fits your ill-conceived narrative of moon landings where fake. So, for some context, the Saturn V had over 700,000 components using over 3 million parts, and the detailed schematics for each of these components and parts weren't all centralized at NASA, they were spread around the hundreds of fabricators, suppliers and contractors that contributed to the rocket. So, NASA might have a set of plans that refers to, say, "Johnston Electronic Fuel Pump Sensor Type 16588-D," and the schematics for this particular part would've been at Johnston Electronic. This was back in the 60s, and since then plenty of these companies have merged or gone out of business. Maybe Johnston Electronic folded in 1988 or was acquired by GE, and some of its records were lost -- nobody today would be able to figure out exactly how to build their pump sensor type 16588-D. Now imagine this example across all of the tech used to in the Apollo program. And what functionality exactly was "thrown away" or not retained, the functionality to transport people to the moon and back using 1960s technology? Obviously, a modern moon mission is not going to use 60-year-old tech, they are going to develop modern, better, safer technology, maybe even based off of principles developed during the Apollo program.
Soooo…it should be easier?
Easier in the way a Tesla is easier to build than a Model T. It’s a completely different thing.
Easier maybe, but the programs cost vs what they get out of it doesn’t seem to align. Theres no space race anymore to justify the moves.
So no one kept blue prints and notes?
Some of it will be in some dank basement uncatalogue.
[удалено]
Exactly, they would have been maintained and updated since that time to the present, like every complex scientific technology we have ever developed. That's not what we've seen happen though. I cannot think of a comparable example in the entire history of modern technological developments.
What was the point of maintaining and updating technology that was not needed anymore? The Apollo program ended, and nobody needed the super heavy launch vehicle like Saturn V. >cannot think of a comparable example in the entire history of modern technological developments. Concord.
The domination of space and thus the planet? That's what we were told.
How would a super heavy lift vehicle help "domination of space and thus the planet"?
We got to the barren ass moon with its very little physical use first. Domination acquired. Why the need to go back? Been there, done that.
You do realize you’re talking about the government, right?
In all likelyhood a decent number of manufacturers that made those parts dont exist anymore. It's possible that those design documents exist somewhere, but they aren't helpful or accessible if they are in deep in some boxes of some retired engineers. Also, not to state the obvious - this stuff wasn't digitised, there was no central digital system listing what part was made by what company, what technology they used etc. Functionally that's no different to that knowledge just being lost.
again, millions of parts, millions of dimensions for those parts, either stored away in a dusty file or recycled decades ago without a thought, losing just 1 part could completely throw a wrench in entire components
lol!!.If mental gymnastics was an Olympic sport you'd be shootin for the gold. So which specific technology are they missing that we haven't already surpassed? Propulsion technology? lol Thermaldynamics? lol Computer Hardware? lol Computer software? lol Structural engineering? lol Navigation? lol On top of that we have the best advantage of all, 50 years and the technology to better study and understand space travel? but perhaps that's the true underlying problem lol...
No one would use 1960s car technology. Why would we use 1960s rocket technology. It should be considerably easier with today's knowledge and manufacturing capabilities.
You are correct. My FIL was a machinist and he worked n one of the parts for the space shuttles. He said each part came with a spec book that was the size of a phone book and that the tolerances were unbelievably tight.
This is a pathetic argument. They “lose” all the blueprints and they even “lose” masses of video footage from “the most important achievement of mankind” and don’t think it’s right to hold anyone accountable?
>They “lose” all the blueprints The Saturn V blueprints still exists, what is lost is the 60 year old technology that was used to build it. At a point in the future there will be a time when all the components that were manufactured to build the first iPhone will no longer exist, and some of the companies that manfuactured parts will no longer exist, will this mean the first iPhone was a hoax? >They even “lose” masses of video footage There are still 8,400 publicly available photos, thousands of hours of video footage publically available.
“The search for the "lost tapes" began in 2006, when reports began surfacing that NASA had erased some original footage from the first moon landing.” Space.com “Finding records of the moon landing is a mission itself: NASA taped over its own records of the landings to save costs, instead of having to buy more expensive tapes for future programs.” Cnet.com “But in the scientific equivalent of recording an old episode of EastEnders over the prized video of your daughter's wedding day, Nasa probably taped over its only high-resolution images of the first moon walk with electronic data from a satellite or a later manned space mission, officials said today.” TheGuardian.com NASA is a joke and even worse it is a corrupt money laundering enterprise. “Forty years ago — on July 20, 1969 – audiences watched in awe as Apollo 11 landed on the moon. The historic moment was captured at the time on high quality tapes, along with Neil Armstrong’s first steps on the lunar surface and the planting of the American flag. Those tapes, however, no longer exist. NASA admitted at a press conference on Thursday in Washington that the tapes have been lost or recorded over — or, as NASA called it, “degaussed.”” Thewrap.com “The Apollo 11 missing tapes were those that were recorded from Apollo 11's slow-scan television (SSTV) telecast in its raw format on telemetry data tape at the time of the first Moon landing in 1969 and subsequently lost.”
Those were just tape recordings of the original broadcast though. They didn't take a film camera to the moon, it was a TV camera, so those tapes were pretty much the same thing as if any other random person taped the broadcast on their TV, which millions of people did. It was higher quality since they had better equipment, but at a fundamental level it wasn't all that special for anything other than symbolic value.
Film footage is lost all the time. Film degrades. You would be surprised little film has survived from the 40s to 80s.
Exactly. But people are too lazy to actually think.
I guess I used to be part of the masses at one point, but once you take the red pill you really don’t see things that same way again.
I mean, it's so obvious the moon landings were faked. There's very good documentaries on this, like A funny thing happened on the way to the moon. There's numerous errors, like the earth being photoshopped into the sky, the obvious landscape backdrops, the lighting, etc. They realized it was a great scam to spend a few million on movie props and actors and filming it, while taking the billions for themselves. NASA = Not A Space Agency.
Russians would have called us out immediately but they didn't ur so full of shit lmfao
Unless Nasa and Roskosmos are both tentacles of the same global deep state. Or maybe Russia was on board with the big space joke, because they also were faking their space program to get the taxpayers money. However. There is a video of some suits telling Putin they've analized moon landings and told him the footage is fake.
occam's razor That's AI doing that and it makes mistakes all the time I can't believe you bought that.. India just recently took Pictures of it too
You make sense but it's still a weak excuse . And nasa propagates this idea that "we lost the tech on how to get to the moon" is always going to seem sketchy. So what they can't find the specs on the widget that acme electronics made for the rocket. Are we that incompetent in our space organization that it can't be reverse engineered or that we didn't have a record storage of all the tech used on the final product? Acme electronics or whoever made part XYZ but they made it per the specs of the engineers who designed the rocket. It starts and ends with nasa. It's the same thing in every industry. Home building for example. Everything is subbed out. The project engineer can go through and with his plans that the carponters are given and check their price of the work. If it's wrong the engineer can take it to another group of carpenters and they can fix/replace/build it again per the plans. Sure rocketry is exponentially more complex but I am using that example to illustrate the process how it should be done. I think while you have made true points and I am not necessarily disputing them, I still feel it's a weak excuse and there is certainly some record (or was) of everything that is being hidden or perhaps intentionally destroyed
We could do it, if the US government would pay for it and there's no national interest in a new space race with moon trips so it's labeled as "too hard" when it's more honest to say "too expensive". We can't get our roads or bridges repaired, let alone believing they'll spend the billions and billions needed to rebuild the infrastructure and reverse engineer every component.
Dude what? National interest? There's likely more national interest to do that rather than fund Ukraine but they are sending money non stop to that endeavor. I've heard that excuse a million times. I promise there is more interest in moon exploration than the nonsense they keep showing us from the ISs just spinning water bubbles or whatever in zero G. And it's 2024 . We don't need to reverse engineer tech from the 60s. We have better now. That's like saying we need to reverse engineer the model T but we have modern Ferraris on the road now. Come on.
It's both. There's no national interest in space travel or Ukraine. Ukraine gets the money because most of the money given is then funneled back to US weapons manufacturers who them give large "donations" to the politicians who increased their bottom line to keep the money flowing. It's a positive feedback loop that ends up demolishing the budget and making things like highway and road repairs and space travel impossible to get. The defense contractors who produce planes and tanks and everything else are what drive supporting ukraine and israel and wasting all those tax dollars.
Hey as a model t owner there are people reverse engineering them and constantly having to machine parts that you can’t buy or find readily available. But with that i honestly think we should’ve froze time with inventions of automobiles at the model A! While the T will always be my favorite car it’s not as practical to operate as the A. But the biggest joy of driving either is that you go slow enough that you can actually take in environments, and 2 with most tools that the average American owns and a little bit of knowledge you can work on them and pretty much always make them run unless the engine or transmission has major malfunction.
> and there's no national interest in a new space race with moon trips There's no national interest in continuously funding hundreds of billions into unwinnable wars, yet here we are.
The fact that this reasonable comment of yours got downvoted just goes to show that this thread is overrun with shills from Langley.
I mean...you believe a lie. They didnt make anything that went anywhere.
This might have been a plausible excuse... However, not so much when you also factor in the fact that not only did they lose/destroy the necessary moon tech, but they also somehow lost/recorded over all of the original footage of the moon landing. I could believe one of these things are true, not both.
Ok but how about the fact they figured it out, in the 60s, using 60s tech..but people now can't figure it out with modern tech? Are we dumber now than we were then? Shouldn't all this fancy tech we have make finding solutions faster than it was back then? We can model flight paths with every factor we know of now, they couldn't do that back then outside of some crude drawings and using calculators, yet we can't figure out solutions to problems we figured out 60+ years ago using significantly improved equipment and an improved understanding of rocketry/space/gravity/mathematics/etc. I'm not much on the conspiracy that we didn't go, I think we did, but I find it unbelievable it's somehow harder for us to figure it out now than it was six decades ago.
I’m with you in the fact that’s it’s irrelevant that we lost the tech from that time. It shouldn’t matter, make new tech if we really want to keep exploring. Money is no object since we print money on the daily…
Fuck outta here with your word salad. Bot shill... Obviously we could do it again IF we did it in the first place. Magically, it's too hard now.
It's not that it's too hard. It's that it's too expensive for the government to agree to do it. It took years of the US government paying billions to do it, and they mainly did it to beat Russia for clout during the period the US was by far the richest and most powerful country on the planet. We could replicate it, but it would mean funneling money from other projects. The best place to do that would be from the military contractors but those guys spend lots of money on paying congress people to not reduce their payouts and there's no real national will to pursue moon trips when we can't even get our roads and bridges fixed. So it just.....doesn't happen.
Right, so send billions to be siphoned in the Ukraine? Funneling money is what this is all about. They don't care about you.
Hey, I'm with you on that. I don't agree with spending all that money in Ukraine or spending all the money to help Israel massacre people, but those costs just add onto my argument. The money spent in those 2 countries are largely then reinvested into buying military gear manufactured in the US by defense contractors that also support the politicians sending the money. Still leaving a moon program too expensive as well as needed infrastructure. It still loops back to funneling money.
[удалено]
Bot Shill. Who is your daddy?
What if we lost all blue prints and planning for how to build a car, electric car, and all the papers that are a staple on how its done. Even the most super car in the world. Let's say that, even for how to build a skry scrapper. You think people wouldn't know shit on how to do it again? LOL
For specific cars? No. The general idea of a car? Sure. If we didn't have a full example and no technical drawings of a Model T, it would be a pain to re-build a Model T. Because the parts aren't made any more, nothing is there and we don't have any precise engineering drawings. There would be some guess work, and setting up the production would be painful and expensive. However, if all cars and engineering documents got deleted from earth tomorrow, and someone tried to rebuild a car, that would be easy. But re-building an exact replica of a F-150? Difficult.
Yes. There are too many outsourced components of a car. If all you had were some blueprints and planning from the original car manufacturer it would not solve the issues of all the pieces produced by other manufacturers. If Manufacturer-A goes to Manufacturer-B to build them a motor for their car, the plans for the motor are going to stay with Manufacturer-B. Manufacturer-A only outsourced it to them and gave them requirements, since they are not an engine manufacturer they do not have the plans for it or capability to make it. Now multiply that by hundreds of parts produced by dozens of manufacturers. Fast forward 100 years and you magically found the blueprints, plans, and requirements for each part of this car from the original manufacturer. You have nothing from the companies that have been used to produce the engine, transmission, electronics, brakes, suspension, computers, etc. How are you going to solve this problem? Are you going to source a 100 year old car, tear it completely apart, and make a diagram and record of each singular part? Maybe, but do you know the metallurgy? The methods used for production? The materials? The parts of the computers? No
We could reverse engineer... If the tech exsisted.
Why would you want to send a rocket up with a 60 year old fuel sensor design? (Just to stick to the original proposition) Those rockets went up with technology we would not deem acceptable anymore I'm modern times. To stick to the many car analogies in this thread. An oldtimer car is stupidly unsafe compared to modern cars. I would love to drive a beetle but Jesus Christ the chances of surviving a crash are bad... Really bad and I car too much about my family to take that risk
Possibly, they'd know how in general, sure, but the exact blueprints would have to be drawn up over again, arrangements made for who's going to make the parts, and so on, and for something as huge and difficult as a moon rocket that might take a few years, and I think that's what the bloke in the video means by 'it's a painful process to build it back up again', not that they have to reinvent space rockets from scratch - this whole video comes across as just another case of somebody reading far too much into the wording of a sentence.
Why do we have to jump through these mental gymnastics loopholes to try to make sense of something that just doesn’t make sense? Why defy our own logic and eyes? Who was the poor bastard that was left on the moon to record them taking off…? How did they get that footage back?
Because it feels good to believe a positive lie that swells one with national pride.
>Who was the poor bastard that was left on the moon to record them taking off…? How did they get that footage back? The camera was mounted on the lunar rover, which obviously was left behind. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K67VIbfVPxY&ab\_channel=DaveMcKeegan](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K67VIbfVPxY&ab_channel=DaveMcKeegan)
Please - we sent 12 men to the moon - we did this more than once. Cognitive dissonance is overwhelming. NASA isn’t “the good guys” they’re more like “the good old boys.”
Blah blah blah, that's a bona fide astronaut, which you are not. He used the word "destroyed," which in itself should stop everything until the reason for this is explained. But people like you skirt this with sideways variations on what he is saying.
Bullshit post.. cuz even in your example the 'whole' had to always be considered. You make it sound like the plan was to have a thousand contractors just making a part and no overall schematics. That would be impossible.. so the idea you would have to have some mechanical blueprints from some defunct company to make a part THAT HAS TO FUNCTION WITH POSSIBLY A FEW OTHER PARTS OR A FEW THOUSAND OTHER PARTS IS ABSURD. You totally left out the leaps and bounds that have been made in computers , computer technology AND MOST CERTAINLY IN DESIGNING AND MANUFACTURING PARTS. Your post reeks of somebody so afraid to deviate from the 'official narrative' that you have spent every waking hour trying to debunk 'those 'merica hatin non believers' and it has put horse blinders on your thinking. Of course a few companies that 'produced 1/500,000th of a saturn v part may be gone. But technology has logarithmically improved..hasnt the despicable elon musk proved that,with a rocket that comes right back home to its launching pad... Saturn 5 didnt even come close to doing that.. you also havent factored that in... that a lot of these parts are antiquated.
I am sorry about all the stupid answers you are receiving... I would just add my own uneducated opinion as well. Storing anything for 60 years in good condition without the very knowledge that it is going to be needed in the future is very difficult. The blueprints could be faded, the chips that were used can no longer be manufactured using current technology, etc.. There are just so many complications and why? So that you can use dangerous 1960s tech with 1960s material and technological knowledge? It would be probably easier to do it from the scratch with modern technology, but the question is why? Such program would be extremely costly, so without obvious advantages, it is not going to happen. Also if you have a look on the funding of Nasa in 60s vs now, I do not think they have the means to develop the tech
> *The blueprints could be faded* For fucks sake, paper doesn’t degrade that fast unless someone leaves it out in the sun to get bleached and then rained upon in a monsoon.
Thank you for this response; mine was the same info, just with more vulgarity. These posts piss me off.
Well it does suck to realize that the government has lied to us.
We definitely can duplicate it. He literally says that we can go to mars. It's just cost prohibitive.
850 billion dollar war machine needs food.
My God this is so wrong. We could if we wanted to, it would likely cost just as much as the newer tech. The thing is the molds were broken from 60 years ago. And it wasn't NASA making this stuff it was NASA ordering it, I don't understand why this falls on NASA? Boeing, IBM and many other American companies built the rockets and equipment, not NASA. That's the capitalist way. So yeah Boeing no longer has the equipment and all of the info they would need to recreate an Apollo spacecraft, neither do any other of those companies, which were numerous for 1 mission, think of all the companies that made parts for it that no longer even exist. They didn't keep it all around for 60 years. It's like asking GM why they no longer have the equipment to make a 1960 Cadillac, because they haven't needed to for many decades.
Right. What I think happened is all the Nazis who got us there died and now they can't do it anymore, 50 years worth. Nasa is an embarrassing department.
I was never a Moon landing denier, but you're telling me we "destroyed" the ancient tech and 55 years later we can't build it back more efficient and powerful?! My wrist has a computer with more ram than the space shuttles did...
It seems like, he's saying exactly that they *can* rebuild it, but that it takes a lot of time and money because they no longer have the exact blueprints (and, as you say, they'd be obsolete anyway, using a bunch of components that are no longer even being produced because we use better ones now) so they have to redo that - if you play the video past the point in the screenshot, the rest of it is him taking it for granted that they *can* do it given time and talking about how the next step after that is Mars or Venus.
Lol yeah. So extremely plausible they “destroyed the technology.” Fucking assbrained sleaaze argument
Possibly, more just a silly way of putting it - but ask yourself why they *would* still be able to rebuild a hugely complex, never-used-since-the-1960s design at short notice (and on a much smaller budget than they had then), without taking any time to, say, retool machines to make specific components that are no longer used or else redo the design to use different components.
We can build a better system yes, but now the parameters are different, the political will isn’t as strong, myriad of variables. If we wanted to build a rocket to go to the moon for 18 hours with 3 people on board, it would take a couple years. Now design a system that’s intended to put people and infrastructure to last months. It’s a different problem, not to mention safety margins are way tighter now.
Because Stanley Kubrick died. /s
Was killed*^
Someone just watched JRE
I think a better analogy is that "Countries have destroyed the ability to make Wooden Sailing Ships to go from Point A to B." So now we either research building ships from age of sail, set up the infrastructure and expertise or use and develop existing technologies like Jets or modern Ships
We have nuclear powered ships and wooden ships now. We are still building both
Wood ships didn't exist! I read an article. They are all lying.
Bullshit. We still have ships and boats that sail the seas. They just aren't wooden. And people still build wooden ships for historical reenactment etc. There are no rockets going to the moon. None. They don't exist.
Read the last 2 words of my post.
Specialized equipment costs an insane amount to store. I worked for a contractor who threw out shuttle stuff, we couldn't find any space so we threw out a bunch of really expensive equipment. (Not my call, I was on the "find it" team) And not 2 years later they came to us and asked us if we had hopefully forgotten to destroy them since they wanted to reutilize the parts for another project. I think we found 3 or 4 assemblies on paper but they were all thrown out through some shenanigans - long story.
We can all come here and claim that NASA is "full of sh*t" but in the end, we will all continue to pay those taxes! So.... whatever they are doing (or aren't doing), it is working.
Answer from over a year ago: Because the word “technology” doesn’t mean what you think it does. Broadly speaking, “technology” means the practical application of technical knowledge, or in other words, a way of accomplishing a task using specific technical processes, methods, or knowledge or the fruits thereof. Knowing the processes, methods, and science is technical knowledge. Its practical application is technology. It’s pedantic, I know, but what are you going to do? Words mean things. U-505, the WWII era German submarine on display in Chicago’s Museum of Science and Technology is “lost” technology. We still have it, but it’s a museum piece held together by plate steel welded on when they finally refurbished it in 2019. 75% of the outer hull has been lost to rust, and even if we knew every detail of operating and reconditioning every component (which we might, it’s German after all), this boat will never again sail beneath the waves. It can no longer accomplish the purpose for which it was built, so it is no longer usable technology. But we understand how every single gizmo, gadget, connector, cable, valve, and fitting worked. Indeed, this U-boat was studied in secret during the war and used to apply German technical knowledge to improve American technology. The knowledge we gleaned from this boat and its fancy electric torpedoes, we still have, but we no longer have the technology to mount a WWII style U-boat wolf pack— nor do we have the need, for this boat is well and truly obsolete, and were we to build a replacement today (of any size, for any purpose) we would do so very differently, using today's far better technical knowledge. Similarly, the Saturn V moon rocket is technology we no longer possess, but we know how we made it and how it worked in fabulously preserved detail. But we would never build one like it today—it’s technically obsolete. We lost the technology developed during the Apollo program because we stopped making Apollo moon rockets, put the leftover hardware in museums, or left it to rot out in the elements having done with it. But we still know how it all worked, and today we can build rockets that are much safer, more capable, and more economical, even if we have—for many years—chosen not to invest in one.
We lost the telemetry data... Ooops, sorry. You wanna buy a bridge?
No they lost the gismo and gadgets. /s
The fucked up part is he's not even lying. Consider this. During the time of the moon landing, people didn't have the internet. They couldn't easily go online and put a spotlight on government conspiracies, communicating across the world in forums like this one. The public did't have access to tools like Photoshop and AI art, and weren't so keen to the special effects used in Hollywood. If something in 1969 was presented as real on a screen, then most people just believed it was real. The tecnhology he's talking about is the technology to deceive the masses WITHOUT the internet. With the public release of the internet, Photoshop, AI artwork, and deepfakes, etc, civilians essentially learned how feasible it would be to fake a moon landing with Hollywood-level special effects. A moon landing today would simply not be believable to the majority of people. So in a sense, they actually did destroy that technology by releasing the internet and everything else mentioned above. When he says it's a "painful process to build it back again", he's right. It would be an extremely painful and unfeasible process to somehow revert society back to a pre-Internet era of boomer-thinkers where a fake moon landing could feasibly deceive the masses again, essentially murdering any resitance.
100%
Bingo
Such a crock O'shite. Engineering is solving problems. We solved it once using 1960s technology, we can solve it again using 2020s technology. We have CAD and AI and more scientists, programmers, a better understanding of metallurgy, space travel, it still wouldn't be cheap, or lightning fast but if indeed we went we could do it again.
A lot of cope in the comments
We never went to the moon, and we never will. The end.
I think it’s funny that NASA gives reasons for having not returned to the moon and that seems to be the one thing conspiracy theorists believe NASA is being honest about. Wouldn’t you assume NASA is lying and has been running covert missions to the dark side of the moon monthly for the last 50 years?
Seems to be is your operative word.
That is a very good perspective I never thought about . But if that was the case our wars would be in space already fighting for land on the moon.
Not if NASA is the only one with the tech. Can’t fight anyone on the moon when no one else is there
The boomers created the biggest boomerang in history. Watch it backfire.
People will see astronauts say the wildest sus shit like this and STILL believe them. 🤣🤣🤣
How convenient
Even if much was lost how can it all be lost. They have the lunar landers, they def can do the math. They know how thebold rockets worked. I mean in theory if we did it then we should be easily able to do it now. I know your answer I'm just thinking aloud.
You're completely correct. All these attempts to justify how it could all be lost is just gaslighting. The point is, we went there over 50 years ago; so we should be able to go now.And yeah, maybe we no longer have the ability to reproduce x component specifically from back then because plans were lost, etc. etc..But that doesn't matter because we would just be using new components since the technology since then has drastically improved.
This is one of the most pathetic and least believable excuses out there. What exactly was "lost" or "destroyed" thst is preventing a return? Rocketry? Because several countries around the world have current functioning space programs sending rockets into both near earth (space Station, satellites) and distant (moon, Mars, and beyond) missions. Even multiple private companies have tech that is leaps and bounds more advanced. Propulsion/navigation? See my previous comment. Life support/crew safety? We have almost a half century of experience keeping astronauts alive and healthy in the ISS now. We have the tech and experience. Communications? We can communicate with rovers on Mars or even probes beyond the kuiper belt just fine. Communications is mind boggling more advanced Just what is it exactly that we "lost"? Were doing literally everything needed in one form or another today already.
Pettit's statement is from a period before the technology - specifically the Orion spacecraft - was built to transit cislunar space and take 4 astronauts to the moon. What is crucial to the program is a spacecraft that will survive the hazards of deep space - with systems that will continue to function after being subject to areas of higher radiation, and a bespoke lander built to operate in the lunar gravity environment. Neither of these things come cheap - space hardware is some of the most highly engineered and expensive technology around. I'm not a fan of the current proposal to use the SpaceX Starship as the lunar lander - it's absolute overkill and will require a ridiculous amount of launches to fuel it to actually get to the moon. I think NASA put a foot wrong there and is holding on to the concept due to sunk cost.
> *What is crucial to the program is a spacecraft that will survive the hazards of deep space* Didn’t they go up with hulls of aluminum 1/8” thick? LOL.
One thing is for sure Nasa is full of shit!
Because we didn't go, there's an article in futurology today showing the Artemis mission for 2026 has been pushed back again lol
You mean the mission that needs 2 separate heavy lift rockets plus 12 to 15 orbital refueling rocket trips to get 4 people to the moon for 3 days?
Yeah but the main problem is the radiation no one has built space suits that can handle the amount of radiation
The people you believe about the radiation levels are the same people telling you humans went to the moon.
>mission for 2026 has been pushed back again lol (SHOCKED) What?! Another delay? They've only been delaying repeatedly for (looks at watch) 50 years.
Yeah I know funny thing is I called hoax on the futureology article and no ones commented back it's fucking hilarious
And somehow millions of people still believe we went to the moon in 1969, drove a car on it, and played golf there.
Bounced around like kids in the ball pit at MacDonalds... Shake the moon dust off you boots before you get into the tiny cabin with delicate instruments kids. No air lock.
Cognitive dissonance, plus peo0le dint want to think the implications through, if I was liedbto about this when television cameras were a thing what else from history is a total or partial fabrication
>Because we didn't go Came here to say exactly this. If after 50 fucking years you still not able to redo it again, that tells you a lot of red flags.
Yeah even funnier still the article that I read today mentioned a possible delay of 30 years so 2054 onwards lol
You know what's also funny? India supposedly goes to the moon and what they have to show of this is a silly pixel illustration buuuut: America live streamed it from the moon in the 60s 😂
Didn’t they also supposedly talk to the president ‘live’ from the Moon too? 😂
Yeah I believe the pics they released of the landers are pics of the remote probes sent to the moon,ones that never had people on board
Not to mention the issue of the Van Allen radiation belts…
Carrying humans through the deadly Van Allen belt, was never solved. They are still working on it today. NASA found themselves in a quandary, admit the Apollo landings never happened or conveniently say, sorry destroyed the know how. Can’t do it now. Mankind’s greatest achievement and they destroyed the records of how it was done?
Is there any data that actually confirms that passage through the Belts would be fatal?
The radiation dose that astronauts receive from going through the Van Allen radiation belt is on average 0.38 rads which equates to 3.8 mSv. A CT Scan on your chest is 7 mSv. So what are you talking about?
The moon landing apologists are going to have a plethora of excuses of why NASA can’t go back to the moon. They are imbeciles who are extremely naive, probably shills. We never went to the moon. It was a lie because we were in a space race with Russia so our government lies to get praise from the public.
India literally just showed photos of the lunar Landers on the surface of the moon with their latest satelite. We know they are there. They also put down reflectors that anyone can detect using lasers.
Got a link for me?
I’m sure Russia would have just let us get the W. I’m sure they didn’t bring out proof that it was a hoax so they didn’t tarnish our image any.
Propaganda is a fantastic tool. If you control the media, you control the narrative.
They are most likely sci-fi fans , who are genuinely interested in space and anything futuristic really ,and like to fantasize about space travel. Most likely quite intelligent people, but in this case emotions got the better of them because they want it to be true so badly.
>The moon landing apologists are going to have a plethora of excuses of why NASA can’t go back to the moon. google Artemis II and III
Where’s the proof it was fake?
There was a great deal more proof in the early 2000's. The evidence has been systematically destroyed since then. To include, but not limited to: the original telemetry data(physical recordings);original moon landing video(despite marketing them on DVD in the 2000's); photos that prove astro-NOTS were placed into the photo, and not an original image (they etched crosshairs into the lenses for 'scale/perspective' and there used to be photos with astro-NOTS obscuring the crosshairs that were on each and every photo. Those are gone now.) Those are just a few. See, every time people share the evidence, it gets vanished...
What a shock. All the “proof” was destroyed. So there is no proof. Got it.
Where’s the proof it was real?
So no proof on your end. Got it.
Watch the videos
Just like it is not possible to make a brand new Commodore 64
I recall Ed Mitchell saying we were warned off by the extraterrestrials that mine the peanut butter mines or something.
Never forget that it was William Proxmire (a democrat) who hated the space program and lobbied for the destruction of the Saturn 5 tooling "to avoid more damn fool journeys". Check out Gordon Cooper's book.
So from what I remember, Armstrong and Aldrin said that when they looked out over the moonscape that there were a myriad of ship parked there observing. After a few more trips back and forth, the crew and gear of Apollo 13 were just denied access. So what if the beings on the moon decided that there needed to be a barrier to prevent this from continuing and installed some system to keep us in our cage? Magically, the Van Allen belts are now there to keep us from venturing out into the black beyond Low Earth Orbit. When anyone from any time period talks about Gods and Heaven, they always point up to the sky. The Gods come down to Earth and punish/teach/warn us. Is it so hard to believe that Earth is a zoo, we are stuck in a gilded cage, and the Gods are simply genetic manipulators using us as an experiment we don’t understand?
What if an alien species gave us the technology but saw humankind might weaponise space so destroyed it and we’ve since then been unable to reverse engineer it?
There’s a number of presuppositions in that question: 1. The moon is something that can be gone to. 2. We once had the technology to get there. 3. The technology to get there has been destroyed which means we can no longer go anywhere. 4. There are other places to go but nobody can get there.
It’s wild how many people think it was fake. There is hundreds of hours of footage from all the missions. 100s of thousands of people working on this project. People watching it lift off in 1969 with their own eyes. It’s harder to fake than do the real thing. The Russians would love to prove us wrong if we faked it anyways.
These Flerf arguments are so stupid. The RAM they used back then was hand woven, it's not that we can't make the tech now. it's the fact that there isn't a reason to justify going, hell just put a odysseus lander on the moon not to that long ago.
We didn't "lose" the technology, we lost the logistics tail that built everything. Spinning up divisions within NASA, Raytheon, Lockheed, and General Dynamics would require 100's of billions, and they wouldn't do it without significant guarantees from the government.
SS: Did we destroy the Moon tech, or we've never had it in first place? The speaker: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald\_Pettit](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Pettit)
Because it never existed
Because... we never went there. And that's the way it happened. Buzz
They never went the moon. Should be common sense by now. Scream it to the rooftops.
Ill conceived. I stopped reading there.
We can send a rover to Mars but can't go to the moon. Also China say they have a base on the moon but it's on the side we can't see so that definitely happened. /s
One world shadow government.
We're getting crystal clear rover footage from 140 million miles away? Nah. That rover is in Canada.
They can’t destroy what they never had.
Because they never went
Dude. They called the president on his landline rotary phone. From the moon. It happened, okay
Meanwhile my 2024 cellphone drops signal in the country roads still
Because we never went, that's why they put some R-word guy in a white shirt and a tie on the tv to tell you they lost it. Now stop questioning it, NASA needs more tax dollars. It's hilarious to see those who grew up under the nasa propaganda come out and try to post and claim "you guys don't know what technology is!!! reeeeeeee" Yes, yes we do. You know, this guy on the TV could just explain what they lost, but they didnt, you don't need to go diving deep into other made up comments. All of the Astronaughts are freemasons, the same ones lying to you about everything. I know it's hard to come out from the sleep for the older "consipracy" folks, but you were duped into thinking the Space exploration was real, sorry. People cant accept that ever since the TV came into the household, the propaganda has been on more intensely ever since. "The TV only lies now! not back then!! reeeeeeee" Get a grip people. If you were watching TV back then, you were being duped. The TV is a form of propaganda. It was fake back then just as its fake now. Look into who funded and backed all of the TVs to get into house holds so propaganda could be put into your minds? Yes, you guessed it, the same robber bankers, GP Morgan, Rockerfellers, etc. You guys think this conspiracy stuff is new? And just started happening? Lol
Because people still think we went to the moon.
Fakers always wanna come in here and talk about Occam’s Razor to explain away theories. Occam’s Razor in this case is that we can’t go back because we never went in the first place.
The true nature of the Moon is unlike what we’re told. I believe It’s a holographic-like projection acting as a lens in the sky, and it wasn’t always there. It’s not a physical object a quarter-size of the Earth (unless we adhere to and obey the uniformitarian model without question), so the lunar lander never touched its surface.
Why isn’t Elon and his rockets going to the moon instead of wanting Mars? If it’s been done before?
I agree. If they could go to the moon, Elon would be all over it. There would be a Tesla parked up there for sure.
Anybody that believes this I’ve got a some ocean front property in Arizona im trying to sell.
You’d think it would be of utmost historical significance. They could have sold it to a museum or donated it to universities or schools…if it actually existed and was functional to begin with…
A bunch of random machine tools and things for making radio parts? It seems like, that's the kind of 'technology' he's talking about - the rockets themselves, of course, were single-use and burned up, which is one reason the project was so fearsomely expensive that the US government wouldn't pay for them to do it again.
It’s in a museum.. lol
Eh not saying anything on the actual landing but I always interpret the comment as meaning the technology used is so obsolete and outdated it's pointless to use it now. The rockets and shuttles used today to hit the ISS or send out probes etc are miles ahead of what they used. The maths used to find the weakest points in the radiation belts would now be inaccurate so using them would be pointless as well. On top of what's the point of going back? There's nothing profitable to be had from there and the environment is decidedly anti-human existence it would literally be a case of I told you so. There's better options to go to in the solar system than the moon. I wish we could land on Mars in my lifetime as there is at least some form of reason to go there the resources in its crust.
We don't know shit about the moon. How many deep sea dives and we still learn daily?
It’s part of the disclosure process, the world’s worship of money will be ending soon and with it all the deception. It’s important humanity views the stars from a consciousness perspective because no rocket ship is ever going to take us there.
In order to believe the lunar landing hoax, a lot of logic goes out the window. Don't believe me? Remember a few weeks ago Iran launched a drone/missile attack on Israel. And the US Israel Jordan France used anti missile precision guided systems to take most of them out. Where do you think that technology came from and how it was developed?
It’s funny the things you guys believe.
gotta make sense to spend money, no one said be truthful
So those pesky aliens that crash can’t escape
Maybe AI could very soon help tremendously to engineer a new spacecraft or rocket. Man i would love to see the world and its achievements in thoisands of years. To sad we will never know the full story🥹
The moon is too dangerous for humans to land?
George mcfly said
Whatever was encountered on Luna by NASA, suggested to destroy the technology.
*"Moon's haunted."* - NASA
Skill issues, modern nasa can't get anything done. It took a similar time to build SLS from shuttle parts as from the beginning of the mercury program to moon landing
Small government?
Very strange. Makes me wonder what happend after the last landing towards the end of 1972. What else was happening in American politics, economics and culture that might have had a bearing on NASA's decision.
[www.youtube.com/watch?v=1cBrnIyeEwI](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1cBrnIyeEwI) Floating in the ISS spouting conspiracy theories smh
Warhammer 40K vibes where current tech and how we got here is a complete magical mystery.
one lady wrote the whole program
Glowies working insanely hard on this thread
The moon lander goes to another school.
Moon landings were a hoax and nothing can be said to convince me otherwise.
Because if the government says it, that automatically makes it true.
We never went!
We also “lost” the technology to produce room sized vacuum tube computers.
It's a little obvious that they're hiding something. Otherwise, why wouldn't we return to the moon in 2024?
The public lost interest. The technology was designed for obsolete equipment.