Evil Academy

Full Version: July 21, 1969: Man walks on the Moon for the 1st time?
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48
Kubrick died peacefully in his sleep, of a heart attack.


Here is an artist's rendition.



[Image: thumb_1554011806_smother2.JPG]
I'm watching the final episode of Chasing The Moon, which is now covering the Apollo 11 mission.

One bizarre thing that they reveal.

Buzz Aldrin's Mother was Marion Moon until she got married and became Marion Moon Aldrin. His grandmother was known to him as 'Mama Moon'.

After Buzz became an Astronaut, Marion Moon Aldrin committed suicide in 1968 by shooting herself.
Here is Part 1.




quelle surprise.. new article about moon skeptics!

APOLLO 11 CONSPIRACY THEORIES: WHY SOME PEOPLE BELIEVE THE MOON LANDING NEVER HAPPENED

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style...05216.html
It's kind of amusing how they still act as gatekeepers of the truth about something that happened half a century ago.

Most of the people involved are now dead. But it's obviously still an important piece of propaganda.
yeah. tons of people still believe it though. esp after the FIRST MAN, which was a terrible movie

how hard is it to send an ORBITER up there, or a robot?
YOU WOULD EXPECT them to send a ROBOT TO TAKE PICS OF THE LANDING GEAR for the 50th ANNIVERSARY

SO SIMPLE, yet they won't do it!

no FANFARE
(07-17-2019 09:39 PM)Redneck Wrote: [ -> ]It's kind of amusing how they still act as gatekeepers of the truth about something that happened half a century ago.

Most of the people involved are now dead. But it's obviously still an important piece of propaganda.

The Apollo Program was to the late 60s what Q is to 2017-2019.

Positive propaganda. Hope porn.
rare interview with Neil Armstrong conducted in 2005. Cryptic words from Neil.



More damage control



(07-19-2019 12:53 AM)pug-thug Wrote: [ -> ]More damage control




Now they are telling people that we shouldn't question it, because the Marxists/Leftists are trying to revise history.

I mean, yeah, obviously the anti-American faction will have a field day with it, but that is why I think it is better to come clean about it, rather than wait for them to figure it out.

So more or less, I will be called an agent of the left, for my contribution to this thread!
Boomers are really struggling with the pushback they are getting, being confronted with the fact that so many people don't believe in the authenticity of the Apollo Program.

Instead of doubling down, IDK, maybe they should try to replicate the feat? Think of all the experience and expertise and technological prowess (and 'wealth') they have gained in the last 50 years! Put up or shut up!

Who wants to get strapped to the top of a Saturn V, put your hands up!
hahahahaha
Matt Taibbi throwing his career away, in order to provide credibility to the Apollo Program. Sad.

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/po...es-861239/

They say it is 5% of the population that doesn't believe Apollo was real. 5% of America? 5% worldwide? I know that on the smarter sites, it is well over 50%, such as here and in ZH's comments section.

"The old “physical impossibility” saw is a nervous tic found in a lot of the trashiest American conspiracy tales. Only a controlled demolition could cause building 7 to free fall! Fertilizer couldn’t have felled the Murrah building in Oklahoma City! Look at the fatal head shot that killed Kennedy – it’s back, and to the left. The wrong way!"

[Image: n-MATT-TAIBBI-628x314.jpg]

Why has no one gone back, Matt? It isn't about impossible, it is about it being very difficult. Or as the apologists like to phrase it, 'too expensive'. Yep, if we can't do something it is because it is too expensive. Wouldn't it be more accurate to say "because the technology is not there at the moment, but allegedly it was there, in 1969"?
"Kaysing, who had no real knowledge of rockets, worked for a company that helped to designed the Saturn V rocket engines which carried the Apollo 11's lunar and command modules into orbit."

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/world/mo...95476.html

The Standard's article is MORE honest, but still very misleading.

They focus on the blast crater, the flag, shadows, and lack of stars.

I have said for a long time now the best way to convince normies is the appearance of the Sun and the lack of 1/6th gravity, let alone the difficulty of lunar orbit rendezvous, the nonsense about 'skipped re-entry', never mind the Van Allen belts, and whether the Saturn V rockets could get the necessary weight up there, with the required velocity.

You don't hear these people talk about Pogo oscillations, and delta v, and re-entry speeds, that is for sure!
https://www.nasa.gov/feature/what-is-artemis/

"NASA's program to return astronauts to the lunar surface by 2024, including the first woman and the next man. When they land, our American astronauts will step foot where no human has ever been before: the Moon’s South Pole.

Working with U.S. companies and international partners, NASA will push the boundaries of human exploration forward to the Moon for this program. As a result of Artemis, NASA will be able to establish a sustainable human presence on the Moon by 2028"

Ummm, shouldn't this be bigger news? Or is this just for us hardcores, and they can quietly cancel it in a year or two, and no one (except hardcores) will notice?
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48
Reference URL's