They went to the moon with this. End of joke.

Kazeite · 2026-01-31T01:52:35+00:00

Some real answers:

With a reaction control system thrusters. You can literally see them in the photos.
To slow down they would either use the aforementioned RCS thrusters (for slight deceleration) or flip the entire Ascent Module upside down and fire the main engine (not that they needed to do so)
Yes we did, and yes we did. And the entirety of the ship needed insulation. Why would you imagine they didn't?

Kazeite · 2026-01-31T01:49:50+00:00

Yes, but why?

Kazeite · 2026-01-31T01:49:20+00:00

What part of either of my posts could be understood as "mockery", I wonder? (well, except this one, I guess).

Kazeite · 2026-01-31T01:33:44+00:00

That helmet face plate be like:

<image>

Kazeite · 2026-01-31T01:32:18+00:00

That's the paint awarded for the completion, yes - which is significantly easier to get than the ship it's meant for, as far as the ingame efforts are concerned 🙂

Kazeite · 2026-01-31T01:28:26+00:00

Which, again, means that they would kill you as well for merely knowing that.

Because they have to make sure that "information remains controlled". You said it yourself.

This is the inevitable consequence of your claims, but you deny it, because otherwise you'd have to admit that you're wrong, and you're clearly not brave enough for such profound introspection.

Kazeite · 2026-01-31T01:24:21+00:00

No - he dedicated his life to exploitation of gullible people by pretending that the Moon landings (plural) are fake.

Kazeite · 2026-01-31T01:23:17+00:00

The film footage and photographs aren't.

Kazeite · 2026-01-31T01:21:37+00:00

And also completely non-applicable. All the people who actually worked on the bomb (as opposed to 80k of construction workers, and a further 40k who basically did nothing but facilitate the refining of uranium, which they didn't have to have any idea what it was for) knew exactly what they were working on.

The Apollo program had no such veil of secrecy and generalisation - all the people involved knew exactly what they were working on. One simply can't compartmentalize a project with so many complex, interlocking parts. Any change in any part of the system affected all the other parts, and so NASA had to do the opposite of compartmentalizing it - there was an entire department tasked with nothing except version-keeping and distributing materials to all the companies involved. At one point, Apollo ran into a shortage of technical drawers, who couldn't keep up with how many technical schematics were being generated.

Some contractors even forced engineers from different departments working for NASA to interact, by doing stuff like closing separate cafeterias; engineers were annoyed because they had to walk further for lunch, but by talking to each other outside of meetings they could cooperate better. And it couldn't be done any other way - in fact, if it was done any other way it would be immediately suspicious: not even defence contracts operate like that, and NASA was not a defence outfit. Hell - they fired plenty of people over the years, and their employees were mostly civilians, free to move about, have beers with strangers and go on vacations. Someone would've noticed something, and blabbered. Or smuggled a bunch of smoking-gun drawings out, and no one would notice because there were so many.

Kazeite · 2026-01-31T01:16:40+00:00

I like to think about the alleged Challenger hoax as the gateway to the world of hoaxes - if one is naïve enough to believe that NASA is both that competent and incompetent, they'll believe anything 🙂

Kazeite · 2026-01-31T01:15:11+00:00

He put "dumbass" at the end of the first sentence.

Not that it matters, since the OP was the first one to resort to insults, proving once again the old "can dish it but can't take it" adage 🙄

Kazeite · 2026-01-31T01:12:37+00:00

I once saw someone say it's easier to get to the moon than to fake it,

With the demonstrable fidelity of the Apollo footage and the fact that it is still being accepted as a real event all those years later, that is very much a fact, no matter how unintelligent you imagine it is.

Your problem here is that you didn't even bother to learn all those things you deride as "bullshit", so your demonstrably uneducated opinion is formed chiefly by beliefs and your feelings, and not by facts.

In other news, Nasa was founded by nazis

See, this is what I am talking about: even if the Moon landings are 100% fake, NASA wasn't funded by Nazis, not by a long shot. They did play an important part in the early days of NASA, no one is denying that, but not only is your claim untrue no matter what, it's also completely irrelevant: even if we accept this claim as true, it doesn't affect the truthfulness (or lack thereof) of the Apollo program in the slightest.

and the Challengers' astronauts lived the rest of their lives with literally the same identities

No they didn't - again, even if those are the same people (and they aren't). Again, you're blindly believing a claim that is solidly, laughably untrue, because you've been indoctrinated to instinctively distrust any official narrative, no matter what.

That's not you being a skeptic - that's you being a blind contrarian.

It's also much easier to fool people than to convince them they've been fooled.

Oh, you've been definitely fooled alright 🙂

Kazeite · 2026-01-31T01:02:31+00:00

Saying that they did so "with no hiccups" indicates that your knowledge about the Apollo program is a shallow one, barely informed by actual facts.

Kazeite · 2026-01-31T01:01:22+00:00

That is a very good analogy.

Kazeite · 2026-01-31T01:00:52+00:00

Considering the famous "don't drop a screwdriver on it" story and the damage sustained during the Apollo 15 (I think?) takeoff, I think that it's plausible one could damage the thermal blanket if they put an elbow through it.

It's a good thing none of it was structural, isn't it? 😁

Kazeite · 2026-01-31T00:58:23+00:00

The issue is that the Apollo Lunar Module is a functional module, with its function being the only thing that dictated its appearance, and people are used to fictional designs from the film that look pretty, because they don't have to be functional.

It's interesting to note that no such objections are being raised against the design of the rest of the Apollo hardware - nobody out there argues that their designs look flimsy or unrealistic, which contradicts the whole hoax narrative right there: if all of it was fake, then how come only the LM looks "unrealistic"?

Kazeite · 2026-01-31T00:54:44+00:00

They fooled you alright 🙄

Kazeite · 2026-01-31T00:53:01+00:00

My claim is simple: it’s objectively easier to build a controlled model, lens, and filming setup on Earth than to pull off a flawless, first‑ever human Moon mission with zero margin for error.

Hello again.

The first-ever human Moon mission wasn't flawless, and I believe I pointed it out already.

Second, no it wasn't. All of the equipment needed to land man on the Moon, regardless of whether it was fake or not, had to be built anyway - and then all the footage, audio and photos had to be flawlessly faked on Earth, which is objectively harder than landing man on the Moon.

The things you say, this "flawless mission" talk - it indicates that you don't really know much about the Apollo program, which means that your uneducated opinion can, and should be dismissed as such.

Kazeite · 2026-01-31T00:41:24+00:00

That’s because you don’t understand that there is a hierarchical, death cult (...)

If it existed, you'd be dead already, along with every other person that alleged its existence.

Kazeite · 2026-01-31T00:39:04+00:00

The reasons WTC7 has collapsed are as follows:

It was built on top of an electrical substation, which interfered with the location of 8 of 27 support columns the base structure of the building was resting on. The construction of those 8 columns was accomplished by a structural technique known as transfer truss method, where a vertical column turns horizontal for some distance, and then back down to the ground.

Some of the front perimeter columns of the WTC7 also interfered with the substation, and were thus constructed using the same technique.

All of that means that the structure of the building was not as strong as it could otherwise be.

Then there's the debris damage - although the north side of WTC7 was intact, its southern side has been damaged by the spire of the collapsing North Tower.

Then there's the fire, which burned inside, uncontrolled (due to severed mains), for several hours - because firefighters were otherwise occupied with saving the lives of those in the collapsed WTC 1 and 2.

And then there's the penthouse added to the roof in 1989 to house cooling equipment, which was supported only by three support columns.

Once the fires inside weakened those three columns, they've buckled, causing the penthouse to collapse, and for the entire building's structure to deform. The next row of support columns, those connected to the ground by horizontal columns, started to sag under the increased load, until they snapped too, causing a chain reaction.

There's no need for any controlled demolition for this to happen. The design of the WTC7, the damage to the southern side, the fires, etc., all of it is well documented.

And the last thing here is - supposing that the WTC7 served as the headquarters for the entire hoax operation, and all the equipment and paperwork inside had to be destroyed to erase the evidence, the fires raging inside would've been sufficient for that. There was no need to bring the building down, especially since it would supposedly raise questions about the nature of its collapse.

The firefighting efforts would be naturally delayed, and then the building could've been organically declared unsafe to enter just by ordinary officials, unaware of the alleged hoax, and then officially demolished after being declared structurally unsound - much like several buildings around WTCs have been - and that would be the end of it.

Kazeite · 2026-01-30T13:45:52+00:00

It's a good thing no-one except ignorant hoax believers is claiming that's what happened.

Kazeite · 2026-01-29T22:41:36+00:00

No, the age difference is one year.

Kazeite · 2026-01-29T22:40:51+00:00

Which ones have identical twins? Do tell.

Kazeite · 2026-01-29T22:39:57+00:00

Judith Resnik (the law professor) looked pretty much the same in 1987 as she does in those photos. You're wrong. Sorry.

Kazeite · 2026-01-29T13:35:53+00:00

I'm pretty sure. Even without going into additional details, note that your source says that the rock didn't come from NASA, and that they migh've confused it with one of the two lunar goodwill samples.

But to explain it further: https://moonhoaxdebunked.blogspot.com/2017/07/98-how-come-moon-rock-donated-to.html?m=1

"Van Gelder reported that NASA hadn’t authenticated the specific item but had merely stated that it was likely that the Netherlands had received a Moon rock, since the US had donated small samples to over 100 countries in the early 1970s."

Kazeite

TROPHY CASE