Re: Why the moon landing was a hoax - no jumps!

Kualinar wrote:

> Le 2024-05-28 à 05:24, bertietaylor a écrit :
>> R Kym Horsell wrote:
>> 
>>> In alt.astronomy bertietaylor wrote:
>>>> Richard Harnden wrote:
>>>>> On 27/05/2024 11:22, bertietaylor wrote:
>>>>>> Daniel70 wrote:
>>>>>>> If the video had been well done, would you have believed then??
>>>>>> Then, yes. If they jumped up ten feet and came down slowly. In those
>>>>>> days CGI was not there.
>>>>> If you fall and smash your visor - then it's instant death.
>>>>> That is the reason why they didn't jump around like idiots.
>>>> Nonsense, they would come down very slowly. In any case they could not
>>>> help moving up 1-3 feet with every step they took if they really walked
>>>> on tge Moon. Nor would they have left such deep footprints. bt
>> 
>>> Well into circular reasoning land.
>>> If you assume it was a fake then it was fake.
>> 
>> No. I am assuming nothing. That is what you all do. You assume that
>> NASA
>> is not lying.
>> I am pointing out that from the evidence they did not land on the Moon.
>> The evidence they did not land on the Moon is overwhelming.
>> bt

> Yes, YOU are assuming things.
No.
> YOU assume that the NASA is lying, when it have NO reason to lie.
I don't assume that. I prove that. Why no jumps? Why no stars? Why flags
fluttering? Why deep footprints? Why chaps leaning forward! Why C rock?
How the great photos? Who took the famous photo with the other one
clearly not taking it as its showed on the visor? Etc. etc. 
Mainly it was just about people NOT behaving as if they had landed on
the Moon, but trying hard to make it appear so.
Physics is on the side of the debunkers. That simple physics is beyond
the sheeple so the deception continues.
NASA got immense prestige, funding, attention etc. from this lie. Its
political purpose was to show off the US. Much money must have been
siphoned off. Much more easy to make bad films and a grand photo shoot
with props. Enough experience there witl Hollywood.

> YOU assume that landing on the Moon is not possible. It is possible. I 
> know, what a shocker.

I did not say it is not possible. I say they did not land there and the
supposed landing is a hoax. Like so many other hoaxes popularly accepted
by sheeple.

> YOU seem to assume that there is an atmosphere on the Moon that have 
> about the same density as here on Earth. There is NO atmosphere to slow
> 
> things down.

You being one of the sheeple know nothing about simple physics. Which I
have explained in detail. And which were well known to US children in
the 1950s. Jumping up 10 feet was an illustration in my book "Off to the
Moon". Arindam has a copy and that photo is on his facebook timeline. 
The air resistance has nothing to do with jumping up and about on the
Moon. Feeling great as your weight is only say 12kg. You cannot but jump
up and down 2-3feet every time you take a step. Not weighed down as
those poor lying devils were on Earth.

> YOU assume that there are «evidences» that we didn't land on the Moon, 
> when there are solid evidences that we did and NONE that we didn't.

What solid evidence? All lies pretending to be truth. Pathetic. After
decades India managed to land something there but it stayed there. And
US robots did go around the Moon but did not land. How could they do so
very much better in 1969? Have they become retarded since, tech wise? If
not, the moon landing must have been a hoax.

> YOU assume that those real evidences are all fake.

Again, what real evidence? 

Bertietaylor