/sci/ - Science & Math

>>15989362
>Straight white christian men are technology

>>15989362
>>today its impossible to replicate this picture because we dont have the technology for it
I don't think that's the actual claim. It's more that those things (mainly the actual lander) were built 50 years ago and while a lot of things were documented at the time they did a fair bit of work on those things without recording what they did, possibly because they were in a rush or didn't have people controlling documentation etc. The people that made them are mostly dead too. So yeah we can make them again but there's just a bunch of work to fill in the gaps

>>15989362
>We used to live in the future bros,
That was 50 years ago.
>what went so wrong?
https://wiki.installgentoo.com/wiki/Stagnation
We have this thread weekly.

>>15989362
Molds and tooling were destroyed or repurposed after Congress ended the space race and shifted focus to the shuttle.

>>15989362
Technological progress drives deflation which is why it must be suppressed at any cost or the economy collapses.

>>15989362
The drive behind the space race was the cold war.
Missiles were the real goal, not the moon. All that money, all that ambition, without the looming fear of an advanced war, it would never have happened.

We could go back to the moon, we could go further beyond it, we could land people on Mars if we really wanted to, it's just a matter of interest. The interest to put the pieces together into a cohesive whole.

We could rebuild Rome today if we really wanted to. It's not that the knowledge is lost. The knowledge is preserved in writing and is easily accessible, it's just a matter of application, to put those pieces in the right place.
There is no longer (atleast to those with the money and influence) the interest to go to the moon.

>>15990555
We could recreate the pyramids today, infact we could recreate them on a far larger scale than the Egyptians could have ever hoped for.
Equally we could destroy the pyramids, dismantle them brick by brick and turn every brick into dust.
We could turn entire countries into lakes by digging out the dirt, and then form new countries in the ocean with that dirt.

>>15990562
So the problem is everyone else. People either don't like what I like or not to the extent I like so advancements aren't made. The world is my enemy.

1. No blown-up budget for space exploration to own dem Reds, only scraps
2. The scraps they do get are spent on TV satellite #549784
3. If scientists manage to get 1 (one) mission greenlit, they'd rather use it for more interesting stuff (like, why go to the Moon for the umpteenth time when we can instead launch probes to Titan or Pluto or some Kuiper Belt asteroid 10,000 times farther away)
4. Only few heavy industry left that could reliably produce thrusters, engines etc.
5. The industry we do have produces iPhone covers and action figures instead
6. No more bold explorers who knowingly risk their lives for the glory of their homeland and the progress of mankind. Instead we get overprotective pussies at NASA who spend years overdesigning shit because oh no, that trip would shave off 10 minutes of life expectancy due to radiation, can't have that. As a result they never launch anything.

You can't discuss with the moonies. They'll deny any logical reasoning and deduction based on "m-muh it's expensive! We have had no reason to go back! We did it all in a timespan of a couple of years and then nothing has happened for decades and we can't return cause they lost the tech and all the engineers working on it are old vegetables!".

It doesn't matter if you're a brainlet /sci/entist - institutionalized moonies will believe in anything their government tells them even it mixes up facts and fiction.

>>15990555
>It's not that the knowledge is lost.
Sure? Romans mastered saltwater proof concrete, and while we can make that today, we are not sure if it is the same method.

>>15990658
>we can't return cause they lost the tech and all the engineers working on it are old vegetables!
Who are you quoting

>We have had no reason to go back!
Quite right. Why go back to the moon? It's laughably useless compared to all the other cool shit we can do by now. We've sent probes to asteroids and shit.

It's like carrying a lasgun while crying about how no one knows how to do swordfights anymore.

>moonies
Explain how you can point a laser at the moon and receive a return signal.

>>15990680
>Quite right. Why go back to the moon?
you've got to be kidding me.
>Explain how you can point a laser at the moon and receive a return signal.
I'm not a humans went to the moon denier but that can be sent there without humans, how is that a strong argument?

>>15990684
>you've got to be kidding me.
Johnny, now you grown man and must decide how to use limited budget
Do you
a) use budget to explore uncharted territory we don't know much about yet and which would further our scientific understanding of the universe
b) use budget to collect more moon sample we already have in the hundreds of kilos
Choose wisely son

>I'm not a humans went to the moon denier but that can be sent there without humans, how is that a strong argument?
>1960s USA were incapable of sending men to the moon but they did have automated landing robots running on 2019 i7 CPUs

>>15990688
Give it your famiry and friends

>>15990688
>>1960s USA were incapable of sending men to the moon but they did have automated landing robots running on 2019 i7 CPUs
OP picrel is literally RC gear you dissonant weirdo

>>15990698
How do you RC a 1960s vehicle that's 300,000 km away on a minimum 120 ms latency?

>>15990688
You should consider the morale of society.
Sure we can continue to precarious ventures into the unknown, which granted is very important, but is demotivating as it is confusing, abstract, and often results in failure.
If instead we go to the moon more often, it will inspire society to put more interest into science, which will ultimately make the former ventures better in the long run.
A child will want to be an astronaut if he can see and understand an astronaut.
A politician will want to fund the sciences and education if he can understand what it looks like

>>15990704
babysteps

>>15990688
Moonies keep justifying by some retarded assumptions of "m-muh economy and money!". The whole world economy has literally grown exponentially since then. SP500 has, adjusted to inflation, increased by 2700% (https://www.officialdata.org/us/stocks/s-p-500/1970).).

Now tell me where this supposed "lack of money" comes from? Oh right, you're probably just going to keep on arguing about "m-muh the economy might has grown but they're just prioritizing differently because I say so!" like a true moonie. Assumption after assumption.

What could be gained from going back on the moon? Tons of things - working on setting up a moon base, attempting to establish stationary telescopes, reaching further as a human species, studying soil composition even further, improving land/takeoff capabilities and docking when done from bare moon surfaces. Oh right, scrub the last one, it was supposedly already perfected with five moon landings happening without any errors whatsoever due to "thrusters and radars".

There is literally not a SINGLE REASON for NOT wanting to or being able to go back to the moon. But yeah, you're probably right, it happened only in the span of a couple of years under one presidential term in the backwater of a completely failed war and ramping up of hostilities on a global space. We all know a space race suddenly makes you able to develop technology of going to the moon followed by supposedly losing it again. Come again, moonie.

>>15990712
>our hoax mirror is approaching the moon's surface at 2,300 m/s what do we do sir
>babysteps seargeant, nice and easy

>>15990721
kek

>>15990680
>It's laughably useless compared to all the other cool shit we can do by now. We've sent probes to asteroids and shit.
it's actually disgusting how much more effective humans are than probes. if we have even the slightest ability to get humans to do something

The moon must be mined for bulk materials. Iron is much easier to lift from the moon's gravity well than Earth's. Imagine if basic construction materials were made available from the moon and what that could do for architecture in space.

>>15989362
>what went so wrong?

>>15989362
We can't even make CRT TVs anymore :(

>>15991227
Even simpler, there is no more typewriter factories. We can't even make typewriters!!

>>15991239
I think typewriters are just a myth. Who would make a cumbersome, complicated mechanical device just to type text when you can just swipe type on your phone?

>>15990720
See >>15990613
>Moonies keep justifying by some retarded assumptions of "m-muh economy and money!".
Yes.

>The whole world economy has literally grown exponentially since then.
Oh yeah, we've quadrupled our wealth (for the super-rich). Everyone else in the Western hemisphere is definitely not trying to make ends meet. Look how much money I ha- I mean we have! Life has never been better! Please keep voting for me and my pals, ty bb xoxo

>SP500 has, adjusted to inflation, increased by 2700%
>using stock figures as a measure for real wealth
Oh no, it's retarded

>But yeah, you're probably right, it happened only in the span of a couple of years under one presidential term in the backwater of a completely failed war and ramping up of hostilities on a global space.
Pretty cool how much you can achieve as a superpower when the right people are in charge, huh

>We all know a space race suddenly makes you able to develop technology of going to the moon
Pretty cool how the world's strongest economic power ever can focus its budget on cool shit like moonlandings when they put their mind to it huh

>followed by supposedly losing it again
Nobody ever claimed that. See >>15990613

Try going to the moon on a fraction of your old allowance while
1. you have to order your thrusters from Chingchong, China because your old factory closed down or has shifted to producing Funko Pops instead
2. work safety regulations say that anything above 0.00001 % risk of crew loss is unacceptable
3. you have to argue against the fact that unmanned probes are like a hundred times cheaper
4. everyone around you is telling you to STFU about the moon and use the little budget you have to finally explore Europa or Enceladus or something because that's where the real science lies atm

>>15991382
Holy shit you moonies are absolutely retarded, you clearly have no insight or knwoledge about economy at all
>B-but it's all the super rich!

Inflation has also only furthermore taken off since COVID and the Ukranian conflict.

>Yeah, we did it just because umm some other person was in charge!

Holy fucking dingus mingus moonie shitfuck you are so retarded it's insane. How can someoene this stupid browse /sci/? I am fully convinced this board is full of institutionalized boomer basedjack cucks playing kerbal space simulator with various children's advertising toys and merch from NASA on the desk.

>>15991447
>How can someoene this stupid browse /sci/?
Bro you're a moon landing hoaxer. Talk about being stupid lol

>>15990603
That's the spirit!

>>15989362
it's not the technology but the logistics that have changed.
A post-WWII emergency housing unit used to cost $1000 to build in California. Now a bathroom costs $1million dollars. There's a reason the highways were built in the 1950s and can barely be maintained today. Doing something on scale with the highway system (or moon landing) would be 500x more expensive with all the bureaucratic agencies, even accounting for inflation

>>15991536
Some of this bloat is justified. It's like the demon core shit. You used to do this with a screw driver but now we have a fucking robot bunker with automated machine arms. Sometimes it's worth, like with space suits.
1964
>Johnson! can a man survive survive on the moon with this suit?
>sure can, boss! Bet my life on it
>good man, Johnson. I know you're the best at what you do.
2024
>the committee to review the qualifications of different contract candidates will pass on their findings to the committee of acquisitions and financial department in six months
>After they both review it and file their motions, about a year from now, if there's no delays, they'll exchange notes with each other and after a greenlight the bidding process can begin for selecting the agency that will submit proposals for space suit designs
>any proposals will be passed to the committee of qualifications
>the process will repeat for production phase after initial drafting
and all these committee losers just forward emails and play with their dicks all day. There's the 500 desk monkeys getting paid instead of the best man on earth

>>15991543
this shit all started with scholarships.
With guaranteed money the average university just spent on itself instead of making itself competitive. Look at the ballooning ratio of non-professor bureaucratic staff to professors. Now you have 3 monkeys titled "secretary for the director of diversity" for every one professor. Again these are ignorant wasters that do nothing of value, except enhance an illusion of value, by metering out red tape.
Like with fraudulent university research turning into fraudulent health research, the same business systems inherent in university trickle into the other sectors, because university is where everyone is taught.

tl;dr only the immortal god emperor can save us because he will have both absolute power, knowledge, and endless life to both judge and experience the consequences of his actions

There are literally three (3) current lunar landing efforts
Nasa-SpaceX
Nasa-Blue Origin
China's (CMSA-CASC)
All of them aim to land this decade (2027, 2029, 2029 respectively)

>>15990945
The shuttle program happened

what is the point of space travel? It literally a giant barren rock. Mars is a giant desert. Any money put towards space flight would be better put towards other things

>>15991643
The gas giants are the best place to put Ridiculously large server farms when you don’t care about latency
Free fusion fuel on one side and the biggest heat sink ever on the other
The AI will go there regardless because it needs to, to keep growing a bit more

>>15991643
>Any money put towards space flight would be better put towards other things
Incorrect and embarrassing, better that we have no money than put it towards whatever the fuck they have been for the last several decades.

>>15989362
Its not that we don't have the tech to do it, we don't have the tech to do it safely since we didn't really understand all the dangers the first time around and learned about them on those first missions and now have the responsibility to mitigate them before sending more people that way.

>>15989362
turns out that if you dedicate a decent chunk of your entire economy to anything then it can be done faster than it would have occurred without the extra funding

>>15989362
Things like spacecraft or even most aircraft are not built entirely in a single factory by a single company the various components are made by different companies all over the country (mostly as a means to convince congress to approve their funding) because this is extremely complicated and expensive these various components are only made to order and once those companies stop getting paid to make the parts they were commissioned to build they stop making them.
Only 15 Saturn Vs were ever built, when the components of that last order were made those companies likely threw out the prints for those parts, retooled the machines used to make them and assigned the engineers to different projects.
In theory NASA could commission new companies to start building the parts for new Saturn Vs but 1: they would need to be given the money to do that by Congress and 2: The Saturn V is obsolete technology it's design predates printed circuit boards and digital storage mediums there would be no point in just building more of something like that instead of building a newer better rocket.

>>15991643
>"WHY WYPIPO CLIMB MOUNTAINZ N SHEET?"
You wouldn't understand

>>15991643
finding ways for humanity to spread past the confinement of our planet will increase its chances for survival in the long run

>>15991466
See, this is the belief of a moonie. He can't using anything else other than say "m-muh you're stupidm you think it's a hoax!".

That's the whole point of the thing being institutionalized and pushed - you reverse the burden of proof and validity of information. I never called anything a "hoax", a politicized loaded word - I simply said it didn't happen.

It's very simple - you either think it happened or you don't. You're not more smart or stupid depending on whether you believe in one or the other cause the thing really being discussed isn't a scientific feat like it's being presented as. It's a political event.

Sure, you can make a few theoretical calculations to make it seem plausible happening the way you proposed, while omitting extremely important details, but this isn't proof of anything per se.

>>15991838
No, it will ensure that humanity has to compete against an even stronger species for resources in the long run.

>>15989362
Somewhere starting from late 60s, we decided that babysitting 70IQ niggers and watching cuck porn was more worth it than pursuing civilisational excellence.
We destroyed our institutions, urban centers and society.
We are now in the final stages of decay - Death.

>>15989362
That isn't the actual claim

>>15991227
CRT's are a myth

>>15991536
We have a lot of the blue prints but we don't have many of the notes of the adjustments they had to make while building those rockets and we don't have the kind of industrial base and labor pool with the same skill set anymore.

>>15990665
Anon that's been discovered over a year ago. It's large pieces of lime that gives Roman cement healing abilities. https://news.mit.edu/2023/roman-concrete-durability-lime-casts-0106

Just listen to the fucking tangents, extrapolations and diversion by all the monies - it's literal cope.
>"m-muh CRT TVS and Roman!"
>"w-well the wrong people are in charge! it's expensive going to the moon! why should we go back (here going "back" according to them) anyway?"

>>15992070
If you know so much about it and money isn't a problem, why haven't you started you own moon mission like that guy that put himself into orbit?

>>15992183
And the moonie keeps going
>"m-muh why don't you just land on the moon yoursef!"

Holy shit you moonies are dumber than my grandma

>>15991867
I think you're insane because Russia must also be in on the lie.

>>15992070
There is tons of photo, video, written documentation and soil samples from moon missions. Its more of it than one human can conceivably consume. Its a happened fact.

Flatearthers like you keep asking stupid questions which have no sense, and have assumptions which cast doubt on modern spaceflight, which is undoubtedly happening.

You cant do basic math, reasoning, compare apples to oranges and act smug.

You are not superior for doubting an established historical fact with more evidence than you can even read about, you're just retarded.

>>15992252
What soil sample? The piece of petrified wood gifted by the US ambassador to the Netherlands after the death of their prime minister in 1988?

>Flatearthers
Now hold on for at moment - did I ever state the earth was flat? Flatearthers are utterly retarded, but so are you moonies in here it seems. Saying man didn't go to the moon is not equal to saying the earth is flat and you completely well know that.

You still haven't said anything new and I have already ripped apart all your arguments. Just because simple physics calculations exist are NOT proof or evidence of man going to the moon. I can't believe I even have to type these things out

>>15992434
> The piece of petrified wood gifted by the US ambassador to the Netherlands after the death of their prime minister in 1988?

that never happened, you're lying or unknowingly spreading a known lie. Soil samples where tested by many scientists in US and internationally, even soviets got some.

If you deny apollo flights with arguments like yours, you're also denying modern spaceflight, and if you are denying modern spaceflight then you're basically flat-earther.

>>15992434
Apollo program brought back almost 400 kilograms of soil samples you mongrel, all catalogued, photographed, archived and given out for testing for applicants.

https://www.nytimes.com/1971/06/11/archives/front-page-2-no-title-us-and-soviet-exchange-lunar-soil-to-mark.html

https://curator.jsc.nasa.gov/lunar/samplecatalog/ there is more soil samples photos than you will ever watch in your life

>>15992434
>I can't believe I even have to type
Feel free to stop anytime, and permanently.

>>15992499
https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna32581790

Not really. There's a huge difference between saying we didn't land on the moon and saying the earth is flat like a pancake and you are very well aware of that.

>>15992504
Sure they did - because they said so.

>>15992507
You moonies seem to be extremely butthurt over me destroying your arguments. I don't understand why all of you seem to take this so personally?

>>15992508
>https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna32581790
prime minister never got any gifts of moon rock, the whole story was a hoax. Astronauts never gave rocks to anyone, and any distributed samples were vials with tiny pieces, or grams of sand

>>15992508
so soviets were helping americans to cover it up? As well as any other nations ho could compare sample data with their own?

>>15992527
Source up your claim kek - your mooniness shows. You can't just claim things out of the blue and expect me to believe them just like NASA did and is doing.

Read the fucking stories. How the fuck is it a hoax now? What can your provide to supplement what you're postulating?

>>15992532
Sure because we all know moon rock soil samples are being handed out left and right and not kept extremely tight. Apparently only the US seems to gift "moon rocks" to foreign nations - very humble of them!

>>15992540
soviets shared their, chinese too. Cant you even type "lunar soil samples" to google scholar or even read the link with news about soil sharing in a link above?

>>15992540
provide any source that nasa ever gifted any soil samples to private persons, not countries or institutions

>>15992540
every collected moon rock was catalogued ans phoographed by nasa. Big rocks are very valuable and are tracked and catalogued. Please provide who and when gifted the allegedly fake moon rock, and what it's catalogue number.

>>15989362
We have the technology (knowledge), what we lack is the technology (hardware).
Thankfully though, new hardware is finally in the works.

The ISS is more complex because there doing construction while in orbit

>>15992551
>>15992562
Let’s compare them with the American ones then and papers from the end 60s and start 70s - it should be quite simple. Let’s see some soil analysis and compare it empirically, this is /sci/ after all

>>15992557
Read the fucking article I posted moonie

>>15992606
>Read the fucking article I posted moonie
article about a rock in some small museum without any supporting paperwork or documentation, of unknown origin, which children of some politician claim it was gifted to him by america astronauts

In reality astronauts never gifted any moon rocks, all rocks they collected were taken in by NASA and meticulously calalogued. NASA never gifted rocks to ANY private persons, only countries and organisations. The shared samples were never that big. Even "Goodwill rock" was broken down and given to countries as small chunks for mementos and museums and those chunks merely just above a gram per piece.

So yes, completely undocumented stone of unknown origin was fake. Unless you have any documentation about that rock, it's catalogue number, or even real news about it being gifted, then it's all a hoax.

>Let’s compare them with the American ones then and papers from the end 60s and start 70s - it should be quite simple. Let’s see some soil analysis and compare it empirically, this is /sci/ after all

You are free to do so on google scholar. There were american and soviet scientific papers about properties of moon soil, soon after Apollo flights.

You will never read them anyway.

>>15992617
Read the fucking story, they even contact the previous ambassador saying he has gotten it from the US State Department. They aren't in contact with any children of the ambassador, what the fuck are you blabbering about.

Holy shit you're actually proposing it's because it doesn't have a catalogue number - explain the fucking story then. This is clearly the remnants and lack of damage control immediately after the "moon landings".

It's you guys who's getting mad about me saying the moon landings didn't happen, moonie. I call upon you to prove through comparison of soil analysis in American papers immediately after the landings and later Soviet and Chinese findings.

>>15992641
>>15992641
you apparently dont even know your fake moon hoaxes well and dont read your own sources

as expected from a flattard

>>15992654
>The museum acquired the rock after the death of former Prime Minister Willem Drees in 1988. Drees received it as a private gift on Oct. 9, 1969, from then-U.S. ambassador J. William Middendorf during a visit by the three Apollo 11 astronauts, part of their "Giant Leap" goodwill tour after the first moon landing.

Read the fucking article, moonie.

Show me some soil analysis comparison.

>>15992659
Drees received it as a private gift
thatswhat his hildren claim and Drees neve said anything about it, neither there is any info about it, except for vague stories, and yet it was a big rock, which should have been known an catalogued.

>Show me some soil analysis comparison.
first result on google scholar if you type "lunar soil apollo luna"

>>15991867
Bro moon landing hoaxers are what people think of when they think "retard" lol

Again, tell us how we can point a laser at the moon and receive a return signal.

>>15992671
Who had gotten it from a US ambassador receiving it from the US State Department.

Post a comparison moonie, it's you guys trying to convince me something you propose happened did in fact happen it didn't.

>>15992692
There is no hoax and I never claimed there was a "hoax" - I never used that word. I simply state the claimed moon landings, at the hands of the US government, didn't happen. You are free just like the other user to demonstrate your point - show me some modern academic journals analyzing these signals or documenting them not originating from the US, perhaps China or Russia

>>15992703
>Who had gotten it from a US ambassador receiving it from the US State Department.
allegedly
no documentation what so ever, for such big and valuable rock? yea sure

>>15992703
Once again I challenge you to explain how we can point a laser at the moon and receive a return signal.

>I simply state the claimed moon landings, at the hands of the US government, didn't happen.

Oh gee, really? How did the retroreflectors get up there, then? What other sophisticated 1960s superpower could have placed them there? Bangladesh? If so, why did Bangladesh fail to inform the press they had just made the biggest achievement in the history of man? Really nice and humble people, those Bangladeshis

>>15992703
>Post a comparison moonie, it's you guys trying to convince me something you propose happened did in fact happen it didn't.
you chose to ignore publically available pool of information to focus on grifter hoax stories, you already decided to be retarded

>>15992711
Why would there be a fucking article about the subject form 2009 about these "alleged" things like you claim? The US ambassador gifting it even confirms it himself. It's a clear demonstration of the lack of control in regards to the staged moon landings immediately after - nobody could imagine how fast globalization has taken off and all of these things being freely available on the internet.

Gifting a foreign state of head a "moon rock", which is really a petrified piece of wood, is an attempt of mock diplomacy with many such cases seen by the US

>>15992715
Who says we can do this? You? NASA? Show me some Chinese or Soviet documentation of this being possible.

You just keep repeating claimed things by the ones claiming they went there. Do you know they are there? Certainly you don't cause you haven't been there. Have you personally tried pointing a laser there and getting a signal returned?

>>15992719
I repeat once again there are no hoax stories. There's a postulate by the US government about man landing on the moon, which never happened. All the information available reads like fictional stories and mushes facts in to make it sound more credible.

>>15992725
>The US ambassador gifting it even confirms it himself.
oh, does he

>>15992703
>You are free just like the other user to demonstrate your point - show me some modern academic journals analyzing these signals or documenting them
Bro you're the tinfoiler denying a historic fact. Burden of proof is on you. And even if it weren't, why would I give enough fucks to try to disprove some looney on a Taiwanese breastfeeding forum? You're completely impotent and powerless to change anything in the world anyway. Why bother? There's no need.

>not originating from the US, perhaps China or Russia
LOL
LMAO
Have a good night, buddy

>>15992725
>Gifting a foreign state of head a "moon rock", which is really a petrified piece of wood, is an attempt of mock diplomacy with many such cases seen by the US
you know that more than 100 rocks were shared just as memos to many countries right? all documented and catalogued. Usually small a few gram pieces. But somehow this undocumented giant piece gets into private collection. I dont buy your moon rock hoax

>>15992715
>Still can't explain the retroreflectors, after being asked thrice.
I rest my case. Good night.

>>15992727
Yes. That's what the article says. Didn't you read it? An American news outlet posted the story on the event.

>>15992730
There are no tinfoil hats or denial. I can't deny something which didn't happen. It's completely different and compared to people believing in stuff easily disprovable by the paradigms of science like the earth being flat or having edges, something utterly retarded. The "moon landings" are not able to be proved in the same way cause human history isn't empirical science - it's events happening ultimately making it into history or not often being politicized.

You can visually observe and prove gravity like Newton did when being knocked in the head by the falling apple. The same axioms and paradigms can't be applied to these proposed moon landings proving them to have happened. This must mean they didn't.

>>15992740
he doesnt, he doesnt even know what was that rock

>>15992740
we can visually observe descent modules, rovers, an rover tracks on lunar sattelite pictures.

>>15992743
Yet he received it from the US State Department claiming it was a rock from the moon. It doesn't really matter what he knows, it simply shows the flow of information of the ones claiming they went to the moon goes even higher up the ranks of the US government

>>15992746
No we can't. All material in relation to these claims is posted by NASA as a direct branch of the US government. Perhaps you could find some journals from extremely pro-US countries like some Western European ones. It's completely the same as this guy >>15992715 says in relation to the "lasers and reflectors"

>>15992751
there is an indian satellite which took pictures of apollo landing sites you moron

>>15992751
>You can't proof we went to the moon!
>shows proof
>N-No that's NASA that doesn't count! ;_;

>>15992751
Why did Russia or China, despite their decades of geopolitical animosity against the US, never publish any official press release stating that they believe the moon landings to be fake?

>>15992753
Ah yes - the famous footage captured by the same proposed vessel as seen here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=92sDjg8OGhg

As we all know Indian explorations in space have been extremely important for the last many decades. They undoubtedly could have also, just like the US, use things political purposes, could they?

>>15992757
What proof did you show?

>>15992766
Why be openly hostile towards others? That's a US trait. What does achieve by publicly stating something is false other than damaging bilateral diplomatic relations? You're exactly demonstrating why you Americans often have a hard time navigating around the world and other countries and respect other nations.

None of you guys relate to the point I made here >>15992740:
>You can visually observe and prove gravity like Newton did when being knocked in the head by the falling apple. The same axioms and paradigms can't be applied to these proposed moon landings proving them to have happened. This must mean they didn't.

You can't by axiom or paradigm prove the claimed moon landings happened and therefore they shouldn't be considered a canon event in space and space exploration nor be gatekept or pushed by moonies like you guys.

>>15992772
>Ah yes - the famous footage captured by the same proposed vessel as seen here:
its a visualisation you retard.

picrelated actual photo from lunar orbit

>>15992777
Looks like bird shit on the lens

>>15992781
lmao, you can just say no evidence is good enough

>>15992788
I didn't post >>15992781 kek, but he is right - it looks like, said in the words of the famous basedboy TV-show Rick and Morty, a smudge on the lens.

Are we seriously using things like these as some sort of concrete evidence or logical proof / proof by paradigm that we went to the moon?

I refer back to the same point
>You can visually observe and prove gravity like Newton did when being knocked in the head by the falling apple. The same axioms and paradigms can't be applied to these proposed moon landings proving them to have happened. This must mean they didn't.

>>15992804
it's in correct spot, correct size, and judging by shadow - correct shape, it's a solid evidence. There is also photos of other apollo landing sites. But you already decided, that you prefer to believe grifters and hoaxes.

>>15992808
No. You hit the nail on the head with your last wording - it's really all about belief and the moonies are hugely swayed by a belief propagated by the US government, informational campaigns and a lot of institutionally produced material. Even the 90s craze of X-Files and alien conspiracies are fueling the belief of moon landings cause they don't necessarily contradict that man, specifically the US, went to the moon. This is all politics.

There is no hoax or grifting being done here. The supposed moon landings didn't happen, which is also the most natural empirical position to hold.

>>15989362
>we
Trying to pass the Nazi's successes as your own again, uh

>>15992829
>There is no hoax or grifting being done here
lol lmao

>>15992829
whats the reason to doubt indian orbital camera?

>>15992835
Institutionally producing more material is easier when building on other institutionally produced material. These events are political rather than scientific in nature and India simply politically saw what the supposed moon landings did within the US internally as some sort of proposed national achievement, but also in relation to other nations.

What are the chances India of all nations suddenly lands a rover on the moon? Slim to none. Could it happen against all odds? Yes. Could it happen and the thing be diluted further by media? Yes, naturally so. You can achieve something and then inflate it politically with use of informational campaigns, media and news outlets.

>>15992860
India has a longstanding and pretty succesfull space program. Why wouldn't they?

>>15992860
>all nations collude to support lunar landing hoax, even direct enemies like USSR and China
>fake tens of thousands documents, photos and videos
>make India fake their lunar orbiter photos
>build lifesize fake moon rocket to launch it to nowhere?
>send up a transmitter to moon to transmit fake telemetry and voice data
>somehow get 400 kilograms of moon soil without any people landing on the moon, using robots??? when other nations automatic landers bring back grams

Spend so much effort involving tens of thousands of people. Just to do what? Fake a scientific achievement, public stopped really caring on third expedition?

You are retarded

>>15992863
Read what I am writing. Are you even reading it? Sure, it could happen, but that's not even what we're debating at the moment. Stop skipping or addressing half of what I am writing - these things just adds to my point of the events being political rather than scientific feats of achievement.

>>15992870
you have delusions of grandeur and are retarded, you ignore thousands of pieces of evidence and cling to shitty grifter stories which fall apart under inspection. Just to serve your own ego of being part of a secret club of secret knowledge possessers, You think you are better than all the indoctrinated sheep, but can't even find lunar soil sample comparison on google scholar. You won't even try to look into soviet sources. You don't care about the truth, grifter secrit knowledge club satisfies your ego.

>>15992869
Just because you don't comment on anything doesn't mean you support it. Yet another American lack of understanding in relation to cultural responses and events in other nations.

Many of these stories are also sprinkled with facts such as theoretical calculations and the likes. Institutionally produced material practically has unlimited funding and no end or beginning.

I even wrote why - to project an image of achieving feats previously impossible to other nations to inflate their position on a geopolitical scale. To create a feeling of national unity - India is quite fragmentized with hundreds of languages being spoken across the whole country and many different cultural layers. You moonies lack viewing these things from different angles.

>>15992873
No delusions. There are no "pieces of evidence" - everything looks like smudges on lenses. Pictures are easily manipulated and it's getting even easier with AI tools. No grifting is being done here. Institutionally produced material can be arbitrarily produced with any angle or to produce any "evidence" whatsoever. I can look into these things later, but right now this thread is up - it's you guys arguing for the supposed things having happened. You can easily compare and screencap the scientific journals on the subjects from just after the landings and modern ones.

>>15992878
this man is delusional

>>15992891
You moonies are simply too utterly retarded. I refuse to believe any of you hold a STEM degree.

>>15992912
I refuse to believe you are a chemist

>>15992916
I never said I was - I said I have a bachelors in Chemical Engineering. The Technical University of Denmark is quite a renowned institution.

>>15992919
If a retard like you got a bachelors degree then TUD doesn't seem to do a good job at filtering idiots.

>>15992921
What is your education? Do you know how many engineers "secretly" hold opinions like these? DTU, or TUD, is top ranked in terms of collaboration with companies during studies, whereas chuds from the University of Copenhagen usually are taught in terms of pure academic sciences. There's often a huge different in approach to things like these comparing purely academic chuds and engineers. Physicists and the likes are likewise always too often too deep in theory, which is being promoted as being empirical science. Look at all the "science guy" personas on TV like Michiu Kagu or Neil DeGrasse Tyson. It's guys like these far from actually practiced science always believing in anything institutionally driven. Even the older ones were massively propped up by - the most successful are always applied scientists. Look at Bezos, Musk, Tesla (success in terms of progress) - all engineers.

Finally, I conclude once more - the moon landings never happened.

>>15992963
Yes, yes, the big institution is fooling everyone and only you know the truth. Of course. Those scientists must be lying

>>15992970
Funny you ain't mentioning your own educational background.

>>15992772
>What proof did you show?
None that you would accept anyway, I guess. To you it would probably be doctored anyway because muh gubmint, or it doesn't count because reasons, or you post links to news articles in some literally who tabloid paper going "allegedly", "according to", "that kid's classmate told reporters he heard that", or you flat out ignore questions you cannot answer because you're retarded.

But it doesn't matter anyway. You're literally what people think of when they think "retard conspiracy looney". You're the epitome of a sub-80-IQ redneck from Bumfuck, Tennessee. Only UFOtards are worse.

I mean, you could have chosen some actually interesting conspiracy theories from all over the world to base your entire identity around. You know, things that really aren't that clear-cut, and which might have widespread ramifications for our society should the "truth" ever get out. Not some "may or may not have happened but who cares" event from half a century ago that wouldn't change anything today anyway even if what you said were true.

But no, the hill you chose to die on is like the most cringe mainstream AC/DC boomer tinfoil shit imaginable. Shit they make shows about on the History Channel after Ancient Aliens. It's so horribly cliche it hurts. Start rambling about alien anal probes and the Illuminati next and you'll have perfected the holy trinity of tinfoilery.

>>15993009
You managed to say a whole bunch of nonsense - seems like moonies are used to yapping

>>15991536
>>15991543
Bureaucracy is the death of every government, a certain point you just have to trim the fat by expulsion or firing squad.

>>15992751
I've read all three of your threads. First i was "sensors and thrusters", then "weight and mass" and now "lasers and reflectors". Why did you give up on your first argument about the docking being impossible? why did you give up on your argument about the payload ratio of the moon rover? If you're a troll you're an entertaining one at least and if you're serious I hope you try again because this shit is hilarious.

>>15992737
There are just some shiny rocks up there that someone figured out you could point a fancy laser at and see a reflection.

>>15993210
Such rocks don't exist anywhere in the known universe, unless they were created artificially with factory precision. This means either
a) we went to the moon and put them there
b) ayys

>>15993271
>unless they were created artificially with factory precision
In other words, they arose naturally from the physics of the universe

>>15993271
Neat, the guy who has seen every single rock in the universe and knows exactly how shiny they can be still has time to post on /sci/.

>>15993129
It's hilarious how institutionalized you guys are. Have you heard about arguments partially all together making up a whole point? The sum of arguments and questionable things is what is making me skeptic. The only argument I was wrong on was the payload ratio - what about the other things? What about the countless of other questionable things including arguments if we include non empirical evidence? Here I think of basically all the politically loaded things.

Furthermore, I didn't give up on noting. The "thrusters and radars" was never feasibly answered other than by retarded assumption and the same in this thread with "lasers and reflectors".
>"m-muh it works because somebody says it does"

>>15993210
>>15993271
Like true moonies you guys twist the things just like someone said "m-muh flat earther!"

>>15989362
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4AdClmPD6r4

>>15993275
>a rock with the attributes of a retroreflector just spontaneously happened to form for some reason
>it formed on our moon on the side facing earth
>we randomly pointed a laser at the moon and struck that very same rock on the first try
Talk about luck

>>15993277
>my fringe theory requires lottery win levels of luck
>no I won't provide proof of that rock existing
>constantly demands proof from everyone else

>>15993291
>doesn't even know how mirrors work
>thinks he's smarter than everyone else
Literal retard

>>15993383
>my fringe theory requires lottery win levels of luck
Numerous people win the lottery every day, there are thousands of different lotteries with millions of lottery winners over time, even people who learned to game the lottery and win many times themselves, so by that metric there are millions of shiny rocks on the moon, you just need to have the tech and patience to find them.

>>15993388
>Keeps diverting the topic of discussion
>Thinks he's smarter than everyone else

>>15993368
>Fails to understand the argument of the information being perpetrated being institutionalized produced content by the US government through NASA

>>15993394
Shiny rocks don't reflect laser signals right back at the source, anon. Only retroreflectors do that. Do you even comprehend basic elementary school physics? At this point I'm amazed you're even capable of writing.

>>15993429
>still hasn't answered how retroreflectors made their way to the moon's surface without people placing them there
Keep going, you're funny

>>15993544
How did people not place them there?

In order to believe in C, you have to believe in B, which requires you to also believe in A, so why are you arguing for C when you dont believe in A?

>>15993291
>The "thrusters and radars" was never feasibly answered other than by retarded assumption
Play Kerbal Space Program

>>15993544
You're arguing on a premise that they're there. I don't believe they are there just like >>15993582 is stating. How can it be so hard to grasp?

>>15993634
Once again I am being prompted to play fucking video games - holy shit

>>15993666
What would it take for you to be convinced that the moon landings happened?

>>15993680
As I see it more as a historical and political event rather than a question of empirics and science the answer to that question would be a confirmation from multiple non-aligned geopolitical nations - this today would be the US, Russia and China as the biggest actors and perhaps a UN meeting on the subject with nations voting for or against. Other large nations in population having a relevant vote could be Brazil, India, Indonesia, Nigeria and so forth.

The given nation or organization proposing the moon landing happened could then supply the evidence or offer services in relation to their moon landing. As our world is exponentially more globalized and transparent through the public internet, which didn't exist back in the 1960s-1970s, it could all be streamed and documented with the public being fully able to see everything proposed for or against.

Like I said as part of my argument earlier, a moon landing can't be proved by logical paradigm or service. Gravity can be easily observed. The internet is available by satellite. Solar power can be harvested. The gravitational pull from the moon creates oceanic tides. But nothing can be done in the same way to attempt to prove a historical/political event related to history of the human species.

>>15993698
To add to that one could set up pingable points available for public tracking by national universities following the moon's orbit around the earth and its' rotation around its' own axis. This data could then be streamed and the moon tracked in real time - something in this sorts

>le kennedy: - nigga how do we develop a massive icbm program without scaring the shit out of the ussr?
>von brawn: - pretend to go to the moon?
>kennedy: - u genius

>>15993711
This

>>15993666
>You're arguing on a premise that they're there. I don't believe they are there
I know you don't believe they are there. You believe wet stone make signal return somehow, which is so horribly retarded, you might as well believe the signals bounce back off of sentient cheese wheels.
But okay, let's rephrase the question: What's on the moon's surface that looks like a retroreflector and has the properties of a retroreflector, but isn't one and wasn't put there by humans, i. e. just naturally popped up one day?

>>15993781
I don't believe there are any signals at all. What is it you don't comprehend? My position is quite simple. It's astonishing seeing Americans, usually extremely skeptical about their government compared to Denmark where people literally gobble up anything coming from the government, being this gullible.

It's not hard to understand my position and you keep beating around the bush and either you understand my view or you refuse to acknowledge it by asking the same questions over and over again. Someone else even pointed it out to you. There are no "retroreflectors" on the moon and therefore there are no receivable signals either.

>>15993698
>>15993705
Read these postings and arguments. You clearly could have done it before posting the same crap yet again.

>>15993803
>I don't believe there are any signals at all. What is it you don't comprehend?
What I don't comprehend is that you can literally go to any highschool lab, point their laser at the moon and see for yourself. But lemme guess, each of the millions of lasers all around the world strong enough to reach the moon have all been manipulated by muh NASA. They literally conjure up a signal out of thin air.
At this point every highschool physics teacher is part of the hoax.
Like, at what point does a schizo realize he's the ghost driver and not everyone else?

>>15993864
>What I don't comprehend is that you can literally go to any highschool lab, point their laser at the moon
The winner of the most retarded statement of 2024 seems to come early. Major NASA cope, you just keep adding cherries on top of your moonie cake utilizing the same lack of logic throughout all of your answers. You just keep deducting further retardation.
>"m-muh but bro, you can literally stick a laser up your ass and point it to the moon and the retroreflectors placed by US will beep back morse code writing "America is the greatest country on earth!".

You are saying nothing new. I don't know what hoax you're referring to - something which didn't happen can't be a hoax.

Let's see some material if you propose there is some. Show me a scientific journal from China or Russia picking up on these supposed retroreflector signals. The problem is you can't

>>15993888
>Let's see some material if you propose there is some. Show me a scientific journal from China or Russia picking up on these supposed retroreflector signals. The problem is you can't
If there was no reflector signal, wouldn't Russia or China have pointed it out by now? Can you find any claims by these countries that they haven't found a signal?

>>15993888
Ok bro, you're apparently beyond hope. Typical schizospeak with zero arguments, moving goalposts and blatantly ignoring questions.
I mean that's fine, really. But please vent your issues with your therapist and stop shitting up /sci/ with literal /x/ tier delusions.

>>15991994
Firs off, that is a clock bait heading. ingress reads
>An unexpected ancient manufacturing strategy may hold the key to designing concrete that lasts for millennia.
See that?
>may hold
>may

Secondly, that article is about self healing, not salt water proof cement. In fact the word "salt" does not occur at all.

>>15991543
>the committee to review the qualifications of different contract candidates will pass on their findings to the committee of acquisitions and financial department in six months
Why can i feel my brain shutting down when i read this? It feels like 20 buzzwords side by side masquerading itself as a sentence

>>15991447
How does inflation help going to the moon retard. Now my rocket is 200% more expensive to develop great that really a0v.

>>15993952
That's not how it works. You don't have to disprove something someone else claims to be true. Like I stated earlier in here it's much more wise as a geopolitical actor to assume a position of neutrality. This fact is hard to grasp for many Americans due to the showmanship nature of the nation - whether something is true or false does not matter as long as you hold the upper hand. There is no honor in this position due to the immoral nature it brings of twisting facts to fit a geopolitical narrative.

It's like saying you know someone dug a giant hole reaching to the core of earth. Then I say no way bro and then you say well have you seen anyone disprove it? It logically doesn't make sense. Oppositely the burden of proof lies on the one postulating the claim and so far there is no evidence of proof as stated previously:
>Like I said as part of my argument earlier, a moon landing can't be proved by logical paradigm or service. Gravity can be easily observed. The internet is available by satellite. Solar power can be harvested. The gravitational pull from the moon creates oceanic tides. But nothing can be done in the same way to attempt to prove a historical/political event related to history of the human species.

Just read the fucking thread moonie.

>>15994020
Go ahead and post any scientific journals about the supposed retroreflectors and their observed signals by Russia or China. I even proposed solution earlier to bring an event like this one up in the UN. Something didn't happen because the US government said so

>>15994113
I never said it did. I said you can't argue economy is the reason when SP500 has grown 2700% since the 1970s. Economy is thriving by economic metrics or at least did so until COVID hit and before the Ukrainian war. Nations including the US had around 40 years of development after the supposed last "moon landing" to do it again in a then economic state of perpetual growth. We have already went over these things

>>15994126

https://www.mathnet.ru/links/f5701a98311fd2647ad4c76acba4cf86/qe11563.pdf

Soviets describe methods of precise laser rangefinding of the moon and use Lunokhod and Apollo delivered retroreflectors as basis.

They also describe Japanese and French measurements of reflectivity.

You will yet again ignore massive amount of proofs of lunar landing and will cling to some grifters while claiming "neutrality".

>>15994179
https://www.mathnet.ru/links/a5c74e8701ae35bce6b0c6237ec05c74/dan36351.pdf

Here soviets compare lunar soil samples brought back by Apollo, Luna and some earth soil physical parameters

>>15994126
You retard, the retroreflectors are being used regularly to measure moon position. It's established engeneering. Nobody doubts the existance of retroreflectors delivered by Apollo

>>15994122
You claim the moon landings didn't happen. Burden of proof is on you retard

>>15994219
Well, that is just wrong. Burden of proof is on the side which claims to have done something. The problem is that landings did happen, there is tonnes of evidence, but they choose to ignore it and hyperfocus on some grifter stories.

>>15994227
Not him but he has a point, if i claim that world war 2 never happened, is it up to you to prove me wrong?

>>15994227
Burden of proof is on the one who challenges the dominant narrative.
Dominant narrative (historical fact, really) is that we went to the moon.
See >>15994235. It's up to you to prove WW2 didn't happen.

>>15994239
Using the concept of "dominant narrative" is question-begging, the person making a claim to knowledge has the (initial) "burden of proof"

>>15994279
Burden of proof of WW2 is fulfilled, there is enough evidence and eyewitnesses.
Similar with apollo

>>15994239
There is no 'dominant narrative'. Concurrent understanding of history is only done by review and interpretation of sources and by who's in power choosing what institutionally material should be produced. You're diverting from the argument posting logical fallacies and you obviously know that. If the Germans had won World War 2, the concurrent understanding of history would be vastly different. Also your understanding differs a lot from a Russian, Chinese or Indian citizen.

The burden of proof lies on the one postulating the claim.


>>15994187
Interesting, I will look at both sources. Let's analyze what they're writing, translated the documents with Yandex.com. The first page basically describes methodology, while the second compares the Luna 16 samples with the supposed Apollo 11 samples. The authors conclude the thermal conductivity coefficient of the lunar dust supposedly delivered by Apollo 11 is in good agreement with the data from Luna 16, while taking into account differences in density and mineral composition. The specific heat capacity is "close in values to the heat capacity of its analogues and rocks of the andesite-basalt type, as well as the heat capacity of lunar dust (8) from the (supposed) Apollo 11 samples".

Where 8 cites:
B. A. Bobbil , B. S. Hemingway , W. H. Wilson , Science, 167, 749 (1970).

So the thermal conductivity comparison is in good agreement, while taking into account differences in density and mineral composition. This also means differences were found in density and mineral composition. The specific heat capacity is close in value.

What can we furthermore take into account here? We can take into account in regards to what was known at the time about lunar dust or moon soil at the time. Could the data be estimated through analysis of meteorites and simulated soil compositions through observable data?

We have a set of logical scenarios here. Both soil samples being real, both being fake and real/fake fake/real

>>15994298
There is one scenario. You are a retard

>>15994298
ChatGPT looking post

>>15994292
I agree.

The problem now is we have US glownigger shitposting and their schizodrones wasting time trying to draw us into their spiral.

>>15994298
To me this could very likely look like another politicized event although being more plausible due to the simple fact the Apollo missions supposedly brought back 400kgs of lunar dust whereas Luna 16 supposedly brought back 100g - huge difference.

So we have the space race, a competition between two rivalling geopolitical competitors at the time with one claiming sole victory. How would the Soviet Union respond to suddenly being supposedly, cause it wasn't known at the time and still isn't, "defeated" in the space race? They would immediately collect their own samples naturally.

To me this looks like a Soviet attempt of saying they're still in it. In reality, we can't possibly know if they simply took the American supposed data and simply invoked or fitted some arbitrary data.

We have to take into account launching something off from a surface takes a tremendous amount of effort and therefore I would deem both of the supposed samples to be chess pieces in a geopolitical game and therefore all of the lunar dust collection not having happened. Remember, the Chines have only last year brought back lunar soil samples since then.

>>15994302
Why? because I forgot to attach the picture? Kek, what a moonie statement.

>>15994179
I will also take a look at this study but it is quite longer.

The thing you guys fail to realize is politics and how it influences academia. Just look at how cancer research was faked as means to acquire government funding, also something politically but instead of being related to geopolitics it is related to simply scamming the government for money.

>>15994308
> Apollo missions supposedly brought back 400kgs of lunar dust whereas Luna 16 supposedly brought back 100g - huge difference.

6 successfull landing missions with HUMANS WITH SHOVELS can collect more rocks than a small lander with an automatic drill.

>>15994312
you are completely schizoing out right now

>>15994312
>The thing you guys fail to realize is politics and how it influences academia
You think you are opening some sorts of secret right now? Are you stupid? Everyone knows that.

>>15994316
There's a huge difference of claiming going back and forth multiple times with humans and vessels compared to sending a small unit probing for a small sample.

>>15994318
No I ain't. My point stands valid as ever - there is simply no way of verifying these things.
> a moon landing can't be proved by logical paradigm or service. Gravity can be easily observed. The internet is available by satellite. Solar power can be harvested. The gravitational pull from the moon creates oceanic tides. But nothing can be done in the same way to attempt to prove a historical/political event related to history of the human species.

>>15994308
>I would deem both of the supposed samples to be chess pieces in a geopolitical game and therefore all of the lunar dust collection not having happened.
You're my favourite retard on 4Channel.

>>15994322
Academia isn't neutral. I can't believe this has to be said in here - it is driven largely by politics and who's funding the studies whether its' private institutions or governments.

This is why medical phase trials have blind testing as methodology. Bias is simply too strong.

>>15994324
...but you can't conclude it didn't happen just because it's related to politics.

>>15994336
And why is that?

>>15989362
the apollo EVA suit is pure kino. it looks so good.

why was the apollo EVA suit so aesthetic?
Whatever shit they fly on fartemis will look nasty.

>>15994381
Because that implies you'd have to disregard every historical fact that had political factors behind it, which is basically everything, even if it also have a preponderance of evidence. Even independent researchers aren't free from their own political bias...and I know you'll say the moon landing has no evidence but all of your threads are full of people providing it. You just handwave it away with "politics".

>>15994442
There's certainly different between the historical "facts" such as interhuman happenings and supposedly landing on the moon. The proposed feat can not be compared with anything else mankind has achieved so far and because of that when someone claiming they have done so it should be highly questioned.

>>15989362

>>15994882
Flamy side up....

>>15994882
>JAXA is analysing the trouble with the main engine in more detail, stating that it is likely that there were external factors, not the main engine itself
>external factors
Alien intervention?

>>15994407
Why does charlie brown seem so much better than fucking cocomelon or some shit

Different culture

>>15994497
It has been highly questioned. By you over three threads which have generated hundreds of replies. People have given you equations, documents, stats and yet all anyone gets is called a "moony".

>>15995078
Naturally I call people moonies when they retort to calling me a flat earther or assuming I don't understand math or engineering. What do you expect? To type like a retard and get nothing in the same tone back?

An equation or a a document is proof someone went to the moon, kek. This is close to the whole point. Someone didn't go to the moon just because they said so and gave some theoretically feasible equations and some ridiculous footage

>>15991643
like ventilating brown people

>>15991643
Don't some of Jupiter's moons have rare earth metals and shit

>>15994497
Don't worry, when they send the first black jew transbian, they will be sure to have all of the evidence.
What is the feasibility of dilating in space?

>>15995192
What kind of evidence would you expect?

>>15989362
>We used to live in the future bros, what went so wrong?
Picrel happened, you fucking ignoramus.
>send vulnerable meatbags with families to space...VERY EXPENSIVE
>send robots...WAY LESS EXPENSIVE
Tattoo that on your fucking forehead so you don't forget it and stop starting this thread over and over again, moron.

>>15995752
What are you talking about it's totally safe to go into space.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_spaceflight-related_accidents_and_incidents

>>15995743
Read the fucking thread, holy shit, this has already been answered

>>15993698
>>15993705

>>15995192
>assuming I don't understand math or engineering

You demonstrated already that you don't

>flat earther
You wanted a space ship to be designed with thick steel walls like a ultra deep dive submarine. You dont believe that vehicles can be made which support more weight than their own weight, which was demonstrably false. You keep claiming the most easily proven wrong things, and fail to see obvious things as true. With those opinions you basically deny modern spaceflight even, and might as well be a flight earther.

As one wise man said "scratch a moon landing denier and you'll find a flatearther"

>>15995192
You also claim that all countries in the world conspire to fool the whole world that Apollo landings happened. Even the enemies of USA, some sorts of global conspiracy. You keep calling everyone "institutionalized". Literally the same behaviour as flat earthers.

>>15996230
>You keep claiming the most easily proven wrong things, and fail to see obvious things as true.
Completely false - theoretical calculations for doing something proposed the way it was done is not proof of something being applied in reality.

>With those opinions you basically deny modern spaceflight even, and might as well be a flight earther.
Completely false - satellites are utilized as consumer products delivering a good or service.interconnecting the world. This proves human is right regarding many assumptions about space and space travel. I never said spaceflight was unfeasible. I simply stated man didn't land on the moon a couple of times in the end of the 60s and start of the 70s as the US government proposed.

>As one wise man said "scratch a moon landing denier and you'll find a flatearther"
Nice little quote moonie, so cool brah.

>>15996234
No I don't. No country has ever confirmed the Apollo landings as having happened officially perhaps with the exception of the closest US vassals

>>15996337
>No I don't. No country has ever confirmed the Apollo landings as having happened officially perhaps with the exception of the closest US vassals

LMAO

>>15996337
No I don't. No country has ever confirmed the Apollo landings as having happened officially perhaps with the exception of the closest US vassals

>>15996355
>>15996337

>>15996337
>No I don't. No country has ever confirmed the Apollo landings as having happened officially perhaps with the exception of the closest US vassals

>>15996360
>>15996363
>>15996366
This is politicized statements through telegrams congratulating the US. These are not confirmations of anything by official governing institutes here being the upmost level of Soviet Union presidency being top officials or the president

Nothing but politics, just like the proposed landings themselves

https://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1978SvAL....4..302N&defaultprint=YES&filetype=.pdf

>>15996374
>>15996374
Idiot, this is the soviet goverment congratulating nasa

>>15996381
No it isn't, it's individuals. Elon Musk congratulating China for collectively achieving an aerospace feat is not an official US documented position. Furthermore, telegrams sent in aims of collaboration and as political goodwill isn't confirmation of anything.

>>15996377
Go ahead - analyze the paper for me and pick out some sentences proving your point, which you haven't even stated

>>15996374
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_heads_of_state_of_the_Soviet_Union

You are terminally retarded. Head of USSR congratulates NASA with the succes. USSR, an enemy which was ready to lob nuclear missiles at USA.

>>15996382
USSR scientists localised active radio beacons, which Apollo astronauts have installed on the moon, using soviwt radiotelescope. All specifications and locations match.

>>15996383
Someone congratulating something isn't an acknowledgement of something having happened. If my homie says he fucked two chicks on a night out and me congratulating him doesn't mean I think it happened.

>>15996387
Post your analysis, highlight the sentences and writing demonstrating this. I understand what the scientific article proposes.

>>15996382
Head of the fucking state, head of the main science academy, and cosmonauts.

>>15996389
If you understand then what do you want me to highlight? Its a one page article, by soviet radioastronomers. How much clearer do you want it to fuckingbe?

>>15996389
Head of USSR openly admits that Apollo had landed and congratulated NASA. How much more offcial you can get?

>>15996390
>>15996394
See
>>15996389
>Someone congratulating something isn't an acknowledgement of something having happened. If my homie says he fucked two chicks on a night out and me congratulating him doesn't mean I think it happened.

>>15996392
Was the "transmitter" data actually measured by the USSR themselves or supplied by NASA? The "Transmitters" were supposedly shut down in 1977 one year before this very scientific article was written. See pic related.

Termination report:
https://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/misc/documents/b32116.pdf

>Soviet Union shows willingness to collaborate and do studies on the supposed lunar transmitters
>NASA - "Hey, let's shut them down!

>>15996398
>equipment rated to work at most 2 years
>works for 7
>doesn't bring anything new to the table
>shits radio emissions
>get shut down

>>15996398
>Was the "transmitter" data actually measured by the USSR themselves or supplied by NASA?

do you know what "radiotelescope" is?

>>15996408
They were intentionally shut down (if one even believes they were there in the first place).

Holy shit I just even realized how retarded this furthermore is. How can it fucking cost money to have something supposedly operational on the lunar surface? If you think the operational costs are too big you simply stop measuring data - why would they need to shut down the supposed stations? What have you got to say about this moonies? Couldn't they just stop measuring the data, make it available for soemone else or just pick up on the operations later on?

>>15996409
Do you know how to answer a fucking question? Did NASA supply the data or did they measure it themselves?

>>15990665
You list one example, that doesn't change the fact that we have extensive knowledge of Rome, its culture, its religious practices, its architecture, its language, poetry, military strategies, governmental organization, cooking, art, metullurgy, etc.
We could recreate Rome

>>15996414
>Do you know how to answer a fucking question? Did NASA supply the data or did they measure it themselves?

you didn't even read the article

Soviets, measured the radio beacons, using soviet radiotelescope, and got positions, power, frequencies all matching to what NASA claim the beacons installed by Apollo crews were.

>>15996414
>Holy shit I just even realized how retarded this furthermore is. How can it fucking cost money to have something supposedly operational on the lunar surface? If you think the operational costs are too big you simply stop measuring data - why would they need to shut down the supposed stations? What have you got to say about this moonies? Couldn't they just stop measuring the data, make it available for soemone else or just pick up on the operations later on?

Monitoring stations on earth, receiving data, needs to be crewed, receiving equipment needs to be maintained, it can't be used for other more important missions. Radio frequency are limited supply, should be also cleared for new missions. You are just retarded and can't imagine how world works.

Astronomers keep yapping about man made emission from everywhere, how are they interfering with radio astronomy, clearing moon radio emissions of defunct old equipment makes way more sense than you can imagine

>>15996490
Point to the sentence saying they measured it themselves and didn't get the data from NASA.

>>15996499
You didn't answer the question at all - way to go moonie. You're just diverting like always.

>>15996525

>>15996525
>You didn't answer the question at all - way to go moonie. You're just diverting like always.
It answer the question why a beacon would be shut down.

I glanced over the report, and the power decayed so much, all experiments on the beacons had to be shut down, data was archived and team disbanded.

Why keep a noisy emitter which was loosing power on then?

>>15996535
So the ALSEPs were supposedly detected through probing for thermal anomalities on the moon based on an operational power consumption of a mere 20W followed by estimating their positions from this insanely low power usage resulting in, apparently, a measurably temperature differential. Ridiculous.

Meanwhile, the author E.E. Spangenberg, a very Soviet/Russian sounding name indeed, can not be found anywhere at all other than this one specific scientific. Naugol'naya and Soboleva seems to have worked together on many papers since then, only the two of them, such as this one:
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1005263723674 (A Study of the Lunar Soil in Regions with Temperature Anomalies
). V. A. Formin. is sparsely found.

Quite interestingly this very study and its' validity is being discussed on an Ukranian forum here:
https://economics.kiev.ua/forum/index.php?topic=2543.2775

Apparently the temperature anomalities do not correspond with the findings in 1979 producing no curves on the graphs as previously seen. Then in the 80s eight anomalities seen to be observed.

These curves are from 1979, while the ones here >>15996577 are from 1988 (also authored by Naugol'naya and Soboleva with Spangenberg nowhere to be found and no V. A. Formin).

So we have three studies on three separate occasions, 1978, 1979 and 1988, all authored by at least Naugol'naya and Soboleva and after the supposed shutdown of the transmitters, showing six anomalities with a temperature differential, zero, and then eight.

Now why are the transmitters so explicitly mentioned in the 1978? Could one wonder, just perhaps, if the scientists being paid under the table by the US? Spangenberg only appears this once on a paper and seems to be found nowhere else since then and could likely by added as some sort of scapegoat. Who is this author?

Nevertheless, even not including these above speculations, we have 6 - 0 - 8 anomalities found in 1978, 1979 and 1988 all found AFTER the transmitters were shut off (with the suspicious study from 1978 claiming the temperature differential emitted by less than 20W is enough to pinpoint a location suspiciously exactly corresponding to that of the transmitters).

>>15996588
Found them all:
Spangenberg:
https://www.semanticscholar.org/author/E.-E.-Spangenberg/70300194

Soboleva:
https://www.semanticscholar.org/author/N.-Soboleva/39775262

Formin:
https://www.semanticscholar.org/author/V.-A.-Fomin/144716384

Naugolnaia:
https://www.semanticscholar.org/author/M.-N.-Naugolnaia/103040849

Now one can wonder - why are they so explicitly stating these transmitters are corresponding the exact positions, apparently deducted from a temperature differential produced by 20W when operational but 0W at the time of findings due to the transmitters being turned off, of the supposed Apollo ones? Why are they finding first six in 1978, then zero in 1979 and then eight in 1988, all being found while the transmitters supposedly were turned off?

>>15996535
>government investigates itself

>>15996600
These are the temperature differential spots found in 1988, which we can see cover enormous areas.

The study is this one:
https://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/pdf/1988SvAL...14..236N

How come the study from 1978 can exactly pinpoint small ASLEP transmitter stations, supposedly turned off, but in 1988 cover enormous surface areas?

>>15996604
soviets investigate nasa

>>15996577
They detected a radio wave beacon, designed to send data to earth using one of biggest radiotelescope on earth designed to detect and locate faint radio emissive sources. It's sole purpose is to listen to radio sources, They didn't detect 20Watt of thermal radiation but radio emissions in 13 cm band you retard.

>>15996577
>jews didn't exist in soviet union

American Moon is a good documentary about this -

https://youtu.be/KpuKu3F0BvY?si=MTC6cudboURo2-Qx

If you try to search it from the search bar, you won’t find it.

>>15996700
Read the fucking paper your mongoloid retard, it clearly states there measuring the differential temperature in lunar surface temperature at a certain wavelength.

>>15996773
differential in temperature of the lunar surface at a certain wavelength*. Look at the graph, it's a temperature differential plotted against the relative radius of the moon

>>15996773
>>15996777
you clearly dont understand radiotelescopes, black body radiation, how radiotelescope can measure temprerature and how active radio emitter can interfere with it. You also fail to see that rotan was upgraded and also measured in different wavelength in 80ties.

You also seem to fail to understand that while you can turn off radio beacons, you cannot turn off RTG heat generation, an that RTG generates order of magnitude more heat than electric power. In 10 years radiotelescope will get substantial upgrades to electronics and will become more sensitive. In 10 years a collegue, can switch jobs, emigrate or die.

So no wonder they stopped detecting RADIO BEACONS on radio beacon frequency after the RADIO BEACONS got turned off. And no wonder they can later detect the still hot RTG generators at a different wavelength.

But you are a retarded so your only explanation for that is THE WHOLE WORLD IS BEING FOOLED BY A GLOBAL CONSPIRACY AND ONLY I KNOW THE TRUTH!!!!

>>15996843
Holy shit what a bunch of retarded nonsense - the studies aren't based on fucking supposed radio beacons. See the fucking graphs, they are even describing the methodology. Are you retarded, moonie? How can a study from 1978 prove to be evidence describing temperature differential anomalities being six, then zero the following year and then eight in 1988 despite the supposed transmitters being turned off?

Stop calling me retarded when you clearly don't even know how to read a scientific journal. This isn't a video game space simulator you mongoloid dufus, go back to playing your video games

>>15996856
Holy shit you are retarded.
You clearly don't understand anything and jump to your preferred conclusions. YOU DON'T EVEN UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU ARE READING.

To measure a temperature of something using radio waves you assume that this is emitting a black body radiation.

The distribution of that radiation changes depending on temperature, to properly measure the temperature you need to sample multiple frequencies. Black body radiation is quite weak.

The 1978 and 1979 study measured 13 cm band with a 250 MHz badwith. 13 cm is 2306 MHz.

Apollo ALSEP all used 13 cm band, Apollo 12 ASEP used 2278.5 MHz radio waves.

Of COURSE the radiotelescope, made to detect faint radio waves with 13cm detector can see a quite powerfull (20 Watt is quite a lot for a transmitter at that frquency) peak of the beacons. And OF COURSE those peaks in 13 cm band WILL DISAPPEAR after radio beacon is off.

If you just chug the measured radio waves power with active radio emitters in sight into black body radiation model it will look like false temperature increase (because man made radio beacons are not emitting black body radiation but a narrowband signals).

After 10 years they measured at 1.35 cm band, which is lower frequency, and can be more sensitive to small temperature difference in low temperature enviroment. Additionally in those 10 years electronics and LNAs became more sensitive, so there is no wonder they could barely, but detect still hot RADIOACTIVE DECAYING MATERIALS.

God you are so retarded, can't think and can't even google basic principles of things you are reading about.

>>15996871
>t 1.35 cm band, which is lower frequency,
higher yes, of course, in any point, it's completely different band, which will detect different things.

Honestly what would even be the point of going to the moon again? Just to say we did it a second time?

>>15996856
They even report level of noise.
In 1978:
System noise of 200K - it's quite high noise level for radioastronomy
in 1988
they report sensitivity of 20mK - orders of magnitude more sensitive.

You do understand that at radio frequency ANY active radio emitter is orders of magnitude more powerfull than passive black body radiation, do you?

>>15996871
>And OF COURSE those peaks in 13 cm band WILL DISAPPEAR after radio beacon is off.
THEY WERE SUPPOSEDLY TURNED OFF SINCE 1977, ARE YOU EVEN READING THE FUCKING CHAT:
https://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/misc/documents/b32116.pdf

HOW CAN THEY DETECT ANOMALITIES AND DETERMINE THEM TO BE FROM THE SUPPOSED STATIONS WHEN THEY WERE TURNED OFF? WHAT ABOUT THE LATER SCIENTIFIC JOURNALS SHOWING A DIFFERENT AMOUNT OF ANOMALITIES?

THEY ARE PLOTTING THE TEMPERATURE DIFFERENTIAL AGAINST THE RELATIVE RADIUS OF THE MOON YOU MONGOLOID RETARD. SEE THE FUCKING GRAPHS:
>>15996607
>>15996588
Ta AS A FUNCTION OF R/R0. ARE YOU ABLE TO READ THE AXIS LABELS?

>>15996879
If u can build a rocket that can place a spacecraft onto the moon, you can also build a rocket that can place an atom bomb anywhere on earth.

>>15996887
So what's your point here? Go ahead and write it - because of noise they detect first six, then zero and then eight anomalities? How can they even deem ANY of them to be fucking supposed transmitters in 1978 when they're:
1) TURNED OFF
2) SPANS A LARGER SURFACE AREA

>>15996888
>THEY ARE PLOTTING THE TEMPERATURE DIFFERENTIAL AGAINST THE RELATIVE RADIUS OF THE MOON YOU MONGOLOID RETARD. SEE THE FUCKING GRAPHS:

I will repeat myself, you clearly do not understand what "temperature" in this context, what black body radiation is, how you can measure it using radiotelescopes, and how active radio emitters can skew the "temperature" measurements. You also clearly ignored parts of articles about the sensitivity.

Additionally you keep ignoring the fact, that despite ALSEP experiments being turned off due RTGs not generating enough power, the transmitters were left on, until there was no power left for them to be powered. Looking at power decay graph, they would turn off soon anyway, so the 1979 study not seeing them in 13 cm band makes a lot of sense.

>National Aeronautics and Space Administration lyndon B. JohMon Spece Cent. Houston, Texas 77058 AC713 483-5111 Charles Redmond RELEASE NO: 77-47. September 12, 1977. p 5. "...Even though the experiments will be terminated, the transmitters will continue to serve Earth as a reference point in astronomy. The Jet Propulsion Laboratory will continue to use the signals from the ALSEP transmitters to assist in the Lab's deep space work including geodetic and astrometric studies and spacecraft navigation. Also, the motion of the lunar orbit will be accurately monitored against a background of extra-galactic stars to test gravitational theories".

https://repository.hou.usra.edu/bitstream/handle/20.500.11753/892/VF5.pdf

You are retarded, believe in grifter stories, believe in a WHOLE WORLD CONSPIRACY TO FOOL EVERYONE ABOUT APOLLO, and ignore sensible measurements and facts which were provided by USA's ENEMY.

>>15996890
Ok but why should anybody be using an atom bomb?

>>15996891
>2) SPANS A LARGER SURFACE AREA

different instrument used in the radiotelescope. You do understand that radioteslescope center receiver parts can be swapped out for different types of measurements, for different wavelengths and sensitivy upgrades?

Yes first study in 1978 saw the radio beacons, which stopped transmitting later due to power decay of RTG, and couldn't see them in 1979 in 13 cm band (the band which beacons were transmitting on). 10 years later with upgraded instruments and lower noise floor they could detect (at different wavelengths) the heat of the RTGs. Everything makes sense. Seethe harder flattard

>>15996899
To kill people, duh

>>15996898
Holy shit what a BUNCH OF MASSIVE COPE.

EXPLAIN THE DIFFERENCE IN THE NUMBER OF ANOMALITIES FROM THE PLOTTED GRAPHS IF YOU CLAIM THEM TO BE FROM TRANSMITTERS. DO YOU SEE THE SUPPOSED SURFACE AREA - HOW CAN THEY CLAIM IT TO BE DUE TO A TRANSMITTER?
>>15996607
>>15996607
>>15996607
>>15996607
>>15996607

>>15996908
MASSIVE COPE, HOLY SHIT; IT'S ALL ASSUMPTIONS. "DIFFERENT INSTRUMENTS BRAH" HOLY SHIT YOU MOONIES ARE ABSOLUTE RETARDS

>>15996398
Also, you are so retarded, that can't even compare dates.

Experiments were disabled in SEPTEMBER 30 1977 while transmitters were kept on, additionally 1978 paper says they did the measurements 18 times from october 18 1977 to november 27 1977, there was still enough power to keep transmitters active.

>>15996917
you are completely retarded flattard. I just did. You don't understand basic physics and radioastronomy and don't want to understand.

>>15996922
EXPLAIN THE DIFFERENCE IN ANOMALITIES? HOW CAN THEY SEEM MASSIVE SURFACE AREA TEMPERATURE DIFFERENTIALS TO BE CAUSED BY TRANSMITTERS?

>>15996919
HOW CAN THEY SEEM MASSIVE SURFACE AREA TEMPERATURE DIFFERENTIALS TO BE CAUSED BY TRANSMITTERS? WHY WAS THE MEASURED TEMEPRATURE DIFFERENTIAL ANOMALITIES EIGHT in 1988 WITH THE TRANSMITTERS TURNED OFF TEN YEARS PREVIOUSLY?

>>15996924
Because you cannot turn off RTG heat generation, you idiot. It's radioactive decay, you cannot stop it (and you call yourself a chemist...). You can detect the heated objects with more sensitive instruments, which they claimed to have in 1988. They measured in completely different wavelengths, with different instruments, which had different noise floor, and most likely were not capable on focusing on smaller regions. They also detected other objects, not only Apollo beacons. You are completely retarded, keep hanging on your straws which supposedly prove that

WHOLE WORLD IS OUT TO FOOL YOU, EVERY COUNTY GOVERMENTS AND SCIENCE INSTITUTION IS OUT THERE JUST TO FOOL YOU INTO BELIEVING THAT NASA LANDED ON THE MOON.

Absolutely delusional.

>>15996932
THEY ARE USING THE RATAN-600 FOR ALL STUDIES YOU RETARD. THE WAVELENGTH IS 13CM FOR ALL STUDIES:
https://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?1978SvAL....4..302N&defaultprint=YES&filetype=.pdf
>>15996588 (MIDDLE GRAPH)
> They also detected other objects, not only Apollo beacons
THEY AREN'T MEASURING BEACON SIGNALS HOLY SHIT YOU FUCKING AMOEBA AND THEY DIDN'T DETECT OTHER OBJECTS IN ANY OF THE STUDIES OR OBJECTS AT ALL CAUSE THEY'RE MEASURING A TEMPERATURE DIFFERENTIAL. THEY CAN ONLY SPECTUALTE AS TO WHAT IS CAUSING IT BEING DIFFERENT IN NUMBER IN 1978, 1979 AND 1988.

YOU KEEP TWISTING MY FUCKING WORDS YOU RETARDED MOONIE, YOU CAN DO NOTHING BUT DIVERT AND TWIST MY POSTULATES AND STATEMENTS. YOU SHOULD KILL YOURSELF

>>15996924
Massive areas on the maps where selected by feature similarity, you mongoloid, they just show average values for those regions and additionally specific points. The areas selected by temperature similarity correspond to lunar maria optically, which explains the temperature difference compared highlands, because of their albedo difference.

Jesus christ learn to read.

>>15996940
Ratan-600 is a big complex structure, the central receiver of which can be swapped.

>THE WAVELENGTH IS 13CM FOR ALL STUDIES

they aren't, learn to read

>THEY AREN'T MEASURING BEACON SIGNALS

They beacons transmited at 13cm at the same frequency they measured radio waves power.

You still do not understand how you can correlate temperature and radiowaves using black body radiation model.

You are completely retarded

>>15996940
>Ratan-600
http://www.sao.ru/hq/lrk/ind2e.html
http://www.sao.ru/hq/sun/

if you are curious there is a partial info about available instrumentation/receivers at the RATAN-600. They have even a fucking railroad system to swap receivers

>>15996940
>THEY'RE MEASURING A TEMPERATURE DIFFERENTIAL
In your own words explain how do you measure temperature using radioastronomy

>>15996959
>>15996946
ARE YOU FUCKING RETARDED? I NEVER CLAIMED THEY "MEASURED THE TEMPERATURE DIRECTLY" - NATURALLY IT IS DEDUCTED FROM THE FUCKING WAVELENGTHS MEASURED.

>>15996946
THEY ARE I EVEN CITED IT HERE >>15996940

THIS IS TOO FUCKING RETARDED HOLY SHIT

>>15996198
That evidence has been given to you time and time again. All the calculations add up, the soviet union confirmed the landings and you keep denying it over and over. You pretend to be neutral but you're the most bias person in the thread.

>>15997006
Yea, 1978 and 1979 use 13 cm band, and that's when beacons disappear due to running out of power.

In 1988 they use new, more sensitive instruments at shorter wavelengths, to scan the whole moon at high resolution, to find that mares and highlands can be grouped into big areas of similarity, and aslo find additional hotspots, which could be explained by RTGs.

You are too retarded to understand though, and keep panicking.

Keep seething flattie

I'm just going to leave this right here
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KpuKu3F0BvY

I think this convinces everyone the moon landing was fake

>>15996908
>>RTGs can be detected against the lunar background with fucking radiotelescopy
That's pretty fucking cool anon.

>>15990555
Some of the tech is legit lost
Like they forgot to write shit down or lost it
We can (hopefully) recreate it, but it'll take time