Sorry, you can't go to the moon because we lost how we did it.

I agree. Man has not been to the moon.

I would love to see the state of the real space program

Currently? Non-existent.

Remember when they made a phone call from the moon to the Whitehorse ? Ha propaganda at its finest.

Reminds me of 9/11 ;)

9/11 and the moon landing were the two most televised events but yet we are the crazy ones

Both technologies were improbable at the time as well. Well done Hollywood!

9/11 tech is improbable? Wat

calling from the plane and those indestructible passports.

You can't make calls from planes?

negative, to this day you cant make a call from a plane. the only way you can is with WiFi calling, obviously not available in 2001.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AirFone?wprov=sfti1

In 2006... lol

No, in the 1970s. They just listed the 2006 pricing.

Got it. Next time you’re on a plane try and make a call.

They took those phones out because it was too expensive to run, and not enough people were using them. All mentioned in the article. But they were in just about every commercial plane in 2001.

Not from a cellphone in 2001.

Why not?

Because cell phone towers are designed to propagate signal down and out. Not up. Because emitting signal into the air is a waste of money and bad design.

I can’t get cell service past a brick wall.. Call from the Moon, and people think it’s ridiculous to question the moon landing.

Not only that but Apollo 1 blew up killing 3 astronauts in 1967. The next manned mission was Apollo 7 in Oct 1968, the first manned mission to space.
They then had a new launch every 2 months until Apollo 11 in July 1969.
When has the government ever been this aggressive /efficient in such a short time frame (especially after 3 deaths just shortly before?).

It isn't when you have 5% of the the national budget to spend on whatever you want.

The gold standard budget was a fraction of what is it today. It started to go vertical in the late 70s / 80s.

And it's still an enormous amount of money. Things were cheaper then, too.

Meh, Different Ballpark

You can go look up NASA budget then vs now. Or more importantly, the budget breakdown. NASA's budget for crewed flight beyond LEO is like $4B/year. The Apollo missions were several times that.

ok tammie brown

Coincidentally I was watching some Stanley Kubrick last night.

Of course the moon landing was fake. But what is your point? The way I see it, it’s completely irrelevant, and we have a lot more important shit to worry about.

If they never went then they need to give the 150 billion dollars back. If they still can't go, they need to not take the over one trillion dollars for faking a Mars mission. If they can't go because rockets don't work in a vacuum and/or orbits are impossible, then they need to stop taking 2 billion dollars each on thousands of fake satellites. But maybe money and fleecing taxpayers of trillions of dollars aren't all that important.

Sure, I get it. But do you think that’s money you’d ever see anyway? We are being fleeced for a variety of causes that are far more sinister.

The Earth is flat. Space is fake. We never have or will go to the moon. It's all a scam. It's all propaganda.

At least you saved us the time of trying to discredit you.

Edgy.

This is at least TWO HUNDRED TIMES better

That... Doesn't quite work like that. It's better of course, but 200x? not unless you think it takes 200x more 'stuff' to go 200x further.

Your response doesn't address anything I said...

Voyager 1 is 21 Billion km's from Earth.

Distance doesn't equal an equal increase in difficulty.

It's not cheap. Look at NASA budget at the time VS now.

40 years ago i could fly on a super sonic airliner. i can no longer do that. the concorde must be a hoax

Where do people keep getting the idea that going to the moon is apparently some kind of "Lost Technology"? We know how to get to the moon and we know how to build the spacecraft needed to get there... If there was the political will to go back to the moon, we could easily do so.

The reason we can't currently go back isn't a lack of technology, it's a lack of infrastructure and equipment. Nobody is building Saturn V rockets anymore, and the ones that were built are either destroyed, disassembled, or museum pieces. Since we ditched the Space Shuttle the US can't get a man into low orbit let alone to the moon and back.

If we wanted to, we could dust off the blueprints, retool an existing factory or build a new one, build a new Saturn V rocket and Apollo capsule from scratch, retrain some astronauts for a moon mission, and blast off. But nobody wants to spend the insane amount of money and political power needed to do that, and there's really no reason to.

I think it has to do with astronauts saying we cannot go past low earth orbit. That might have an affect on why people think we can’t go back to the moon. (At least not manned missions)

1 - how do you know there were anomalies if they were erased?

2 - they were not "mysteriously" erased , that was common in the 50s and 60s

Ok, a few things.

1. Using distance as a way of measuring the challenge of a space mission is not a good way of doing it. Gravity gets weaker with altitude, so going to the altitude of the moon takes like 1.4x as much energy as reaching LEO.

2. The tapes that were actually deleted by NASA were just the higher quality version of the Apollo 11 footage we already have. There are actually picture of those tapes.

3. We can't do it today because it's expensive and difficult and we lack a reason to. As someone else put it in this thread, 40 years ago i could fly on a super sonic airliner. i can no longer do that. the concorde must be a hoax.

Apollo went 200x farther than any other mission in history.

Once again, distance is not a good way of measuring the difficulty of a space mission. Going to the moon only requires about 1.4x the velocity of going to LEO. Did you even bother to read my comment?

They had many missions, went "there" every few months

You claimed that they had a launch every 2 months. The only manned missions that had a 2 month gap was between Apollo 10 and Apollo 11. All the other missions had significantly larger gaps, some as long as 9 months.

Did the concorde fly 200x higher than any other airliner in history?

Comparing apples to oranges there, buddy. In fact, if I want to use your own logic against you, Concorde had to fly more than twice as fast as a normal passenger jet, while Apollo 11 only had to fly about 1.4x as fast as missions to LEO.

Because they were the only missions with the goal of and the funding to send people to the moon. That

9/11 and the moon landing were the two most televised events but yet we are the crazy ones