BBC has carefully worded it to "Greatest Broadcast in history". Which isn't entirely true. Terrestrial black and white broadcasts in Canada greatly lagged behind the USA. Most people in Calgary probably witnessed a tape reel recording that was fast shipped to supplement local newscasts and not the live event. BBC does show what the very few people who had a television saw on their Phillips set, which was a black and white 377 interlaced with severe analog interference.
I'm too young to have caught the live thing happening, so its actually "wrong" for me to say that it did or did not happen. Realistically, in a court of law I couldn't tell you if Jeebus turned water into wine either, as it too was before my time. (does bring the question, was Jeebus a raging alcoholic then?)
I did manage to catch the officially restored footage - and they did manage to get one piece of stock footage with this one ultrahot woman out of the hundreds, nay thousands of male white people at their desks. ROFL. BTW: Philco was the old name for Philips, along with RCA and Zenith were the sets that were available at the time. Someone out there probably has one.
If I would be so bold, if NASA is going to fake anything - they might want to render in a few black and Asians into the ground crews.
This also brings into play the idea that at least a dozen people in Australia (where the big dish telemetry was done) and all of the astronauts would have to have lied in order for the conspiracy to be real.
BUT, its been suggested that the US had far exceeded other nations in both nuclear and pharmaceutical technology at the time. There were plenty of psychoactive drugs available then, as is now that could make a person think anything at all. Is it possible that they simply put a nicotine patch of psychadelics inside the space suits, and then imposed the idea on an already suggestive astronaut? Not impossible, considering they took out Kim Jongs brother with just a spray of mist. There are some absolutely nasty chemicals out there that would make the strongest man cluck like a chicken.
Did the USA do a Zond-5 with humans, and simply "dialed it in?" It would not be impossible. Humans orbiting the moon would be an achievement that has still not been surpassed to this day (and I will place the blame on retarded incapable born in USA millennials on either scenario) - so it would still be a great achievement, just not quite a crazy epic as we were initially led to believe.
BBC has carefully worded it to "Greatest Broadcast in history". Which isn't entirely true. Terrestrial black and white broadcasts in Canada greatly lagged behind the USA. Most people in Calgary probably witnessed a tape reel recording that was fast shipped to supplement local newscasts and not the live event. BBC does show what the very few people who had a television saw on their Phillips set, which was a black and white 377 interlaced with severe analog interference.
But now for the first time digitally remastered:
Bwahaha!
No atmosphere on the moon hence no sound-fake news!
No atmosphere on the moon hence no sound-fake news!
Ahah I got you! The moon itself can conduct sound. Just like how you can transmit sound through your jawbone to your ear without air transmission.
Therefore, since I cannot disprove this video based on sound conduction - it is likely to be true. All of the shadows line up, and even the sun flare is correct, must be the real thing!
On a completely unrelated side note: If a court ever had enough evidence to suggest NASA fraud, they would need experts in certain fields as potential witnesses to the actual event start to die off. Having taken Fortran 77 at U of C (Which is really only good for nuclear bomb guidance, or moon landings) I would be able to definitively say that the numbers that they used were complete bunk. If they somehow got testimony from a physics major as well, there would probably be enough data to say that there is reasonable grounds for fraud. Beresheet, needed about 15x more fuel to have a "safe" less than 1G landing - Was Beresheet doomed from the start because of falsified NASA data? Probably - In my opinion. Will every mission that uses NASA data to go to the moon be a failure - I'd say without question.
But of course, they would probably have to wait until all the astronauts passed on, before such a fraud case could go forward.
I mean: Did Jeebus create wine from water, or did he "only" create grape juice? If Jeebus simply created grape juice in front of a crowd and then left it in a barrel for a week - then is it fraud? Because you can't claim that grape juice is wine (with the stipulation that you must wait 50 years before opening it) if you are selling it to the public.
I say this as a patriot to Humankind, and the truth. Lies will only get you millennial moon probes that smack into the ground at mach 22.
I'm not saying that Buzz is a liar, for all we know he may have been drugged. Like the cat-lady that lives with a hundred cats, mental perception is a strange thing.
Square or circle? Yanni or Laurel? Blue and black or white and gold? Green needle or brainstorm? Grape juice or wine? Moon landing, or moon orbit? USA hoodwinked the entire planet?
Lunar landings did happen but the danger of space disaster was so great that Nasa did create earth/fake footage in case of failure. Thats what some of the conspirators are pushing in some cases.
They ABSOLUTELY HAD to have the appearance of beating the Soviets to the moon at ANY cost. The Americans did not know about how badly the Soviets N1 rockets were (crashing)performing.
Its worth noting that right at the 1970 mark there was a great distrust in US media, as it was spewing a whole bunch of lies about the Vietnam war - Like how it would be impossible for dropped napalm from 20,000 feet could never "accidentially" kill an innocent bystander. To claim that the jungle was not like forest and a child could always "outrun" any fires probably tipped off most people that the media was making up crazy stories left and right.
Now that McCain has passed, its pretty much safe to say he killed a great number of innocent women and children, it would be impossible not to. Thank Jeebus he never made it to be president.
Was the US population around 30% "did not happen" in 1970? I doubt it. But I'd definitely believe 15% in 1970, and then progressively less as war lies ended.
As for today, its really hard to know what is in the minds of millennials and Gen Z. It took a very long time for me to come to grips with the idea that perhaps half of world leaders have killed thousands to millions of innocent people. As long as millennials don't have to take "Career and Life Management" I think they will eventually be able to mete out the truth whatever it may be.
Landing on the moon? A small lie compared to the McCain lie, if you ask me. Realistically, if majority keeps "landed on moon" I can imagine we can keep "All youngsters are idiots" and keep them all at minimum wage or less - which is shoulder shrug territory for me.
BTW: The greatest single fear I think NASA has is that all of the Apollo missions actually only were in a black painted (so as not to be seen) capsule that simply orbited the earth. Orbitting the moon would still be an achievement, but simply orbiting the earth would probably be seen as a failure.
Lets not forget that in 1957 Sputnik, the first object to achieve an orbit around earth was incredibly hard to track, even though it was actively transmitting at the highest wattage possible for its three week battery life.
As time goes forward, I fear this is the truth as well. If NASA had simply orbited the moon, they may have confessed by now. But if it was only the earth, then they will probably never admit anything.
One incredibly damning piece of factual information that most people gloss over is where the modules landed back on earth. Well told is the story of how the astronauts nearly died from drowning because the module fell back to earth in a spot that was not near enough to a US airbase.
This makes zero sense at all. If you have the ability to slow down a space vehicle from mach 22 to 0, all the time within G-tolerances for human survival. Then it should have been extremely easy with that type of thruster technology, to land back on earth within 15 to 50 miles of an easily recoverable position (navigate to a spot above earth and then deploy parachutes) Heck, Elon wants to land on a platform 200 meters wide.
"The Apollo 11 crew consisting of Neil Armstrong, Buzz Aldrin and Command module pilot Michael Collins splashed down safely at 12:50 p.m. EDT on July 24 about 900 miles southwest of Hawaii in the North Pacific Ocean"
Logic is very logical sometimes. And there are gaping holes in the moon landing.
Why is re-entry so difficult for all space vehicles, even in year 2019? Because the technology is still in its infancy. Anyone who assumes you would have a greater than 1 in 100 chance of surviving re-entry is woefully uninformed. Anyone can join the "did not happen" anytime they want to, I accept you with open arms.
India setting their eyes on being the fourth nation to set an object on the moon. I can imagine they will completely throw out NASA's moon landing data and simply go with a probe that is 3x undersized and 3x overfuelled, but just say the payload size was what they sent.
Their initial goal was a 626 kilogram lander (based on NASA data) But they probably are using a much lighter one just in case Beresheet did something like - smash into the moon. The rover will probably stay at 27 kilos.