What Happened to American Space Tech?

70 years ago the US went to the moon with computers the size of houses that aren't as powerful as your modern pocket calculator.

But now we somehow can't go back to the moon anymore?

What gives???

A Conspiracy Theorist Is Talking Shirt $21.68

Tip Your Landlord Shirt $21.68

A Conspiracy Theorist Is Talking Shirt $21.68

  1. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It is pointless

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Anon, we've got microplastics in our nuts that give guys b***h breasts and give women moron strength...We've got to abandon ship and frick off to another planet. Besides, it's only a matter of time before a large-ass asteroid fricks us all off.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Blablabla.

  2. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    SpaceX sends astronauts to the moon now and you know it. America let its manned shuttle program gap because it knew that the private sector was coming up and they could do it much more efficiently and because the Artemis II is taking forever.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >sends astronauts to the moon now
      frick you know what I meant. it's Saturday night I'm drunk

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >SpaceX sends astronauts to the moon now
      No they don't, Black person moron.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      What are SpaceX like as an employer? I wouldn't mind leaving Earth and all its morons behind to live on a permanent Mars base.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        they work everyone like dogs and nobody lasts more than a few years before burnout. but at that point you can just go found your own space startup and soak VCs for millions.

  3. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    whatever . shut up. I thought this was an ISS thread. who cares about the moon? we're only going back because China is

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      You never went, mutt. China will probably be the first.

  4. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Clearly they never went to the moon

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      yeah i used to think they were tin foil hatters but it makes sense now... 50+ years later and we can do LESS than we did then? doesn't add up at all.. but at least DIE policies will fix everything soon 😉

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        No one is giving NASA blank checks anymore.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Shouldn't technological advancement and efficiency make it cheaper?

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            the usa built space ships when they were the industrial center of the world. they could hire american companies using locally harvested resources to fabricate massive rockets.

            lets say you want to do that today. where do you get the metal? the manufacturing facilities? the technitians to supervise and test it all? some other country, that forces you to pay a premium to use their shit.

            we arent going to space because globalism is the real cancer. the boomers set up an entire world order to create oppertunities for them to make money as middle men and now everything is expensive as frick even if you could avoid all the corruption and intentional sabotage.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            if it was being run as a real space program and not a makework program for the old shuttle contractors, absolutely

  5. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    stealing money through federal reserve is more important than sending a man on the moon

  6. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    competency crisis, dying empire, etc

    modern america does not have the will or capability for great works, it is destined to tear itself apart in the near future in horrific internecine conflict

    this is not a good thing, this is a very very bad thing, but too many people believe it will be a good thing and thus it will happen

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Why is it bad? Personally I can't wait for the american collapse. It's going to be kino.

  7. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Lack of funding and the competency crisis in combination with todays requirements making it a significantly more complex from an engineering perspective than it was in the 60s.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Costs should have gone down because of technological advancements.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        yes but then they put a "visionary" (if you have visions you should go see the doctor) in charge of the rocket

  8. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Sure, you save some money on computers but the Lunar Lander had a program cost of $28 billion adjusted for inflation.
    Then you need a launch vehicle which was $55 billion adjusted for inflation.
    And the new plan isn't a simple repeat but instead to construct a staging station/gateway. That was more in line with von Braun's original plan which was substituted. So you need multiple launches just to build the gateway before a single person sets step on the moon.

    And NASA went full moron trying to "reuse" space shuttle parts as false austerity. Their launch vehicle is completely different and the boosters are changed. So there was no cost savings from reusing space shuttle components because they have never really planned to do that. It's probably more expensive trying to coax the space shuttle components into their plan than using any other system.

    Plus NASA is (correctly) spending most of their budget on other missions.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      They're doing it on such a moronic way. Isn't the whole mission profile to have a moon orbit encounter every three months or so once the station gets into orbit? And then you've only got a launch window every three months to make it from the earth to the station. It's just a waste of v resources and money at this point, they should have gone all in on mars.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      So a couple weeks worth of Ukraine donations from our currency we print out of thin air? Is that right?

  9. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous
    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous
      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous
      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        They also cover up eldritch abominations

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          wtf I didn't know Arael was real

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Can anyone explain this? I think it might just image compression artifacts.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        it's over exposure, because it's a film, the film is damaged in over exposed places. what you are looking at is lost data + physical damage

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        since when do film cameras use digital image compression?

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          How are you viewing the picture now?

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Can anyone explain this?
        Notice how the evil creator of that image, is not showing us a reproduction of the theory as proof, this means it's a conspiracy moron.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        It's just a lens flare. The "base of the light bulb" is just another one of those circles you can see at the bottom left of the sun. The "center of the light bulb" is either another lens flare circle or the brightest part of the sun.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Full moron.
      I have no idea why it isn't in the list, but the file is still on the server and the ID is still searchable on the Apollo Image Gallery site.
      It always astounds me how bad these people these people are at investigating shit. They'll jump on it being taken down as a conspiracy to hide evidence, but not even check if manually trying to address the image works, or even use the search functionality of the website.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >completely ignores the evidence for it being a spotlight
        >BUT IT S-STILL ON THE S-SERVER!!!

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          The sun isn't that big from the moon, so the object in the center is the sun.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >moron that doesn't understand how film or lenses work
          >the evidence for it being a spotlight
          >redditjack poster
          yeah checks out alright

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      What's going on here?

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Schizo posting

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous
    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      i love how my first thought when seeing this wasn't
      >wow the moon landing was staged
      it was
      >wow we live in a toy world where the sun is really giant flashlight?

  10. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    all nazi rocket scientists are dead, they can't be replaced with diversity hires

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      We got enough brain drain scientists we can make it happen. Our computers nowadays can check Katherine Johnson’s work in a fraction of a second and we have actual private companies willing to do this for the prestige.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        none of those brain drain scientists or engineers (much more important) work at NASA.
        More to the point, NASA is restricted to working with old shuttle designs frankensteined into a new rocket because congress was ~~*convinced*~~ by the non-existant cost savings.

  11. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous
  12. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    United States never sent men to the Moon. Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin were both asked to put their hand on the Bible and swear they went to the Moon. They both refused, got agitated and angry. After the "Moon missions" Buzz Aldrin became a drug addict and alcoholic, Armstrong left NASA.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      If you acheived something great and a smelly muttoid came up and asked you to swear you did it, would you indulge him or punch him in the face?

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        If I had done it -- I'd indulge him. Especially when he's offering $5000, which I can then donate to a charity.

        If I hadn't done it -- I'd avoid perjuring myself and punch him in the face.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I think if I were harassed daily about something like that and some heckler came up to me asking me to swear on the Bible I'd get upset too. Chances are they're some israelite with a few of their books in a leather cover.

  13. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    almost sounds like it never happened

  14. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    You know where else it still is? On their flickr archive.
    https://www.flickr.com/photos/projectapolloarchive/21077396824/in/album-72157659081038325/

  15. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I think you meant to say
    >what gibs

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      They're not even ashamed at trying to weigh down civilization like a millstone around the neck.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        keeping poors around instead of lifting them up is weighing down civilization like a millstone around the neck

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >give them money
          >waste it
          >give them education
          >call each other too white and bully the smart ones
          >give them housing
          >turn into drug ridden gang lands

          it's not that easy anon

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Black wallstreet
            >Whites burn it all down.

            >black person is successful at something
            >"Hurr you only got that way because of DEI"
            Fact is if whites simply just stopped with the racism after they lost the civil war all of these problems and division wouldnt be happening but nooo... Billy McChild Rapist needed his desire to be "better" than someone to be fulfilled. Whites are their own worst enemy. All the more sweeter when they WILL (not if) eventually be bred out of existence.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >repeating this tired line in 2024
          everybody sees through it, your 2015 vox explainer talking points are done, you have no ammunition

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          I saw a haitian eating a man's wiener in the street while others watched. They are not worth it.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Exactly. They should be exterminated

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >keeping poors around instead of lifting them up is weighing down civilization like a millstone around the neck
          No, greedy, bumbling corpos are an exponentially greater drain on America than anything else.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >keeping poors around instead of lifting them up
          lmao
          In the words of Lyndon B. Johnson, who signed the civil rights act into existence, "We gave them everything, and they just got worse!"

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            It's his fault for giving them anything at all.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Sure, lift them with a noose.

  16. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    > go to the moon all working on government money (socialism spotted)
    > 50 years later
    > ask companies to do the same but this time make it profitable
    > not sure we can do that
    > capitalism cronies: the first time must’ve been fake

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >fake footage verified
      >can't replicate much of the tech
      >still can't make a suit that truly regulates temp for long durations in a vacuum
      >telemetry data magically gone

      there's a bunch of frickery with this and you know it

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        not only telemetry data, but the original broadcast... from "the most important event in Human history". lmao

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          But only of Apollo 11.
          You still have to contend with Apollos 12 through 17.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        The frickery is in the demographics.

        If I had done it -- I'd indulge him. Especially when he's offering $5000, which I can then donate to a charity.

        If I hadn't done it -- I'd avoid perjuring myself and punch him in the face.

        You can't see how insulting that is and why someone would get angry about being asked to do that?

  17. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    No net benefit to the moon unless we are thinking really long term, which governments typically don't and no commercial benefit since we haven't found a way to put all that He3 on the moon to any good use.

    Long term exploitation of the entire solar system probably requires a far larger more unified government than nationstate dickwaving.

  18. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >70 years ago the US went to the moon with computers the size of houses that aren't as powerful as your modern pocket calculator.
    55 years, actually. And yes, we did go to the moon with some pretty weak tools. We are pretty lucky those missions were able to be conducted successfully.
    >But now we somehow can't go back to the moon anymore?
    We have the benefit of hindsight today, and are unwilling to take the same risks as we did before.

    Imagine if you will, an ancient civilization located in what is now Sierra Leone decides it wants to explore the world and see what lies on the other side of the ocean. They send out an explorer with a canoe and some supplies, and after some years he returns, having discovered Brazil. He traveled the shortest possible distance across the Atlantic, and despite all odds, managed to avoid getting blown off course by the myriad of storms that occur in the mid-Atlantic ocean. A few decades later, that civilization now has proper sail boats, but they're still pretty rudimentary, and from what they've learned from sailing (and dying) just 100 miles off of shore, it's a goddamn miracle that one guy they sent out in a canoe isn't dead.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Imagine if canoe guy went back and forth multiple times and also took a wagon to the new land.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Imagine if you will [...]
      What you are describing is literally how the Polynesians were colonized, and arguably modern Chile. The historical realities actually argue against the point you're trying to make.

      Mad props for using black Africans using sailing technology in your analogy! I don't know if that's a low key tell in your troll or just and accident but lol anyway

  19. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >70 years ago the US went to the moon
    Suuuuure

  20. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The people with the know-how all died or retired.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >nothing was ever written down
      >engineering hasn't advanced as a field
      yeah that doesn't add up at all... all fields keep advancing

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Reading through that literal mountain of NASA documentation would take years and understanding it a life time.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Sure, it's not like we have industrial scanners for shit like that with OCR software and AI that has existed for years that can make sense of it. And it's not like we haven't been going to space at all, none of it makes sense. We have the ISS, we had shuttle missions quite a lot. Same tech involved there!

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >AI will magically solve everything and turn moronic zoomers into rocket scientists

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Nice reading comprehension you have there.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        A lot of work was done by hand and by feel, not all, but a lot of things were.
        That's not something that you can learn by reading a document.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Things WERE written down. But the documents were either lost due to being misplaced, or accidentally destroyed. For example, the original copy of the Apollo landings were accidentally rewritten over. I think somebody was recording a TV show, but accidentally wrote over the Apollo landing tapes. OOPS!

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          WERE written down. But the documents were either lost due to being misplaced, or accidentally destroyed.
          Most of the documents still exist. There are mountains of documentation in the archives.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            They exist, but then you have to take those drawings and shove them into your engineering software and you start seeing how fricking unworkable most of them are. A lot of shit wasn't so explicitly written down in the right places.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            The documentation is fine. We wouldn't build a rocket like the Saturn-V again because NASA lost their tolerance for risk, because it used obsolete technology which is no longer made (having been surpassed by new technology decades ago), and because you would need to train an army of workers in obsolete manufacturing techniques. It would be easier to build a new rocket from scratch, assuming you could muster the political willpower to fund the project and overcome the bureaucratic risk-averse quagmire that is modern NASA.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Air Force paid to unmothball F1, it's a mess.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            The F-1 was designed using a trial-and-error process. To modern standards this isn't acceptable and they want to fully characterize and accurately model the engine, which is more trouble than it's worth. We have better engines now, SpaceX's Raptor engines are far more advanced.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            No, they paid to STUDY doing a new F-1 called the F-1B. It was ultimately not selected for SLS and they stopped any work on the project.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Btw they still have several F-1 engines in storage in pristine condition. There are no mysteries about that engine that couldn't be reverse engineered given enough time and money.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            There is no reason to. Literally none, it would be a waste of resources. Just because it would be "cool" in your eyes doesn't mean it's a good idea.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            I never said otherwise, quit sperging out. I'm refuting the narrative that the F-1 is in some way "lost technology". It's not lost, it's just obsolete.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Things decay when they aren't done. America desperately wants to regain some of the manufacturing prowess they had before offshoring all of that to China, but they simply can't do it anymore. Things don't just advance, it takes effort, without which capabilities rot as people die.

  21. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It’s not a matter of computer technology, it’s a matter of engineering. The extremely specialized work force that knew how to build rockets that could reach the moon died. Now, NASA has been completely unable to rebuild this workforce from scratch. The rockets they tried to build went billions of dollars over budget and were well overdue, so they outsourced the job to SpaceX. Why they are having trouble now, given that they are paying someone else to do the hard part, can just be tossed up to general incompetence and inexperience.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Artemis 1 in 2022 circled around the moon with dummies aboard. Artemis 2 suppose to do the same with humans but keeps getting delayed.

      https://mashable.com/article/artemis-dummies-moon-nasa

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Artemis has an awful second stage so it can only get orion to NRHO instead of LLO. That's why they need unrealistically frickhueg landers.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          orion's service module is so underpowered that it can't handle getting into LLO and returning

  22. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Must be nice to believe every scam from your gov, burgers. It's not like they have a track record of being truthful across history right? :^)

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Both ends of the spectrum are bad. I hope you're aware of that.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Nah I'm good not trusting my gov on anything. I can use my common sense just fine.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >Advertising
          >Science
          Lol, lmao even. I agree tho, don't trust the government. But also don't trust corps.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Lol you can't read. Lmao even. Rofl. In fact, zozzle. Hahaha. You're stupid.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          What's wrong with bottom left? It's not even advertisement, looks like a label for prescribed medication.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            It's heroin sold as medicinal tablets

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            So? Heroin is still used in hospitals in the UK.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >corporations = science
          what
          do you also think companies using complicated names in advertising to impress morons is "science"?

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >muh both sides
        this is the daily mantra of reddit leftoids who cant cope with their entire lives being a lie

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >heh I'm so smart both the government and the conspiracy theorists are bad!
        peak reddit

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Poisoning St. Louis
      QRD

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_LAC

        >In St. Louis in the mid 1950s, and again a decade later, the army sprayed zinc cadmium sulfide via motorized blowers atop Pruitt-Igoe, at schools, from the backs of station wagons, and via planes.[4]

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Yes, we know you are a salty ass vatBlack person

  23. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Americans can't function without stealing credit from USSR, which is why they still steal from CPC. USA is just a puppet state of Israel where as China is the real economic superpower who save the world from the USA/Israel/NATO regime.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      projecting vatBlack person. at least you embrace your status as a chink vassal.

  24. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Moon landing = fake.
    Only people with limited understanding of physics and technology still believe it actually happened.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The USSR’s satellites were all watching it happen. They would have been the first to call bullshit if we tried to fake it.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Post proof of super secret elite CCCP satellites capable of telling weather the USA landed on the moon or not. Surely entire nation system made up of bullshit nonsense wouldn't pretend to be part of a play that Americans have going on

  25. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Ask Muskman to use his resources for that abortive project to Mars to instead colonize the Moon.

  26. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Moneyhat foreign scientists to get to first place
    >convince yourself you did it all by yourself
    >spend so long repeating it to yourself you forget you actually didn't
    >turns out you can't do it anymore
    Good old american arrogance and stupidity

  27. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    How did they fake this, then?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Kubrick insisted on shooting on location

  28. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It was dumb to do it the first time. Sending a human to the moon is just a gigantic money wasting prestige project without any benefits.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >you could've used the money for gibs instead!!!

  29. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    We've lost the capacity so send people to the moon after the Shuttle was introduced. Shuttle couldn't go beyond low earth orbit.

    Then in the 2010, we lost the ability to send people to the low earth orbit. Russia carried our astronauts

    It was only ~2018-2020 that we regained that back with SpaceX's Crew Dragon.

    Currently Starship is the only viable means of sending people to the moon, but its in testing phase and each time they test, they have to go through months of regulatory approval phases because they're a private entity and not a government entity which can bypass regulatory systems.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >they have to go through months of regulatory approval phases because they're a private entity and not a government entity which can bypass regulatory systems.
      This is honestly the biggest factor in all of this, people are so safety obsessed now that the tolerance for literally sort of risk is nearly zero, compared to what it was in the very early post war period (45-70)
      I mean, look at how Armstrong learned to fly the lunar lander. He got on the "flying bedstead" which was so unstable it nearly killed him. If anyone attempted that now, and there was an accident, instead of "lmao I nearly died haha!" there would be tens of middle managers and Karens shutting the whole thing down for weeks while they run an "investigation" into why the accident happened.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >for weeks
        months

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Shuttle couldn't go beyond low earth orbit.
      That's why the shuttle itself is on top of a massive rocket

  30. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    We have the engineering. We have the knowledge of the science involved. What we don't really have is a "how to get to moon" manual. Or if we do have step by step instructions, it was written a half century ago. NASA was also lousy at storage. If something wasn't turned into a museum piece, it was probably shoved into a random storage shed, then misplaced, then accidentally sold off in a pile of scrap. And even if they did have some of those things stored away properly, it's 50 year old gear. A lot of the technologies were deprecated, built bespoke, or more or less "forgotten" about since we haven't been sending men to the moon since. The engineers and crew involved with the Apollo missions are also now old if not dead.

    If we really want to, we probably can get to the moon again. But we pretty much have to rebuild everything from the ground up.

    We also have since developed a political culture that abhors science, big public projects that doesn't produce tangible, physical results (that they can privatize,) and denies the original moon landing, if not the existence of outer space.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >What we don't really have is a "how to get to moon" manual
      Nonsense. That can be easily gleaned from history, with robotic missions, etc. The problem isn't that. The problem is our regulatory environment forces companies pushing the limits to hit the brake hard. Society of safetyism for when there is no real safety issue causes this slowdown. Its not just the space industry thats slowed to a grinding halt, its the entire society.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >we pretty much have to rebuild everything from the ground up

      They've been doing this for decades now and Artemis went to the moon with dummies. For humans they are still somehow confused by things like "moonsuits" and radiation and Tang.

  31. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous
    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Anon, look at the dust at the halfway point. There is no dust that acts like that.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        hehe funny jumping

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        seems fine to me

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          I'm talking about how they fall over at normal speed and the dust suddenly goes flying up out of frame. Impossible to fake.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      They look so happy 🙂

  32. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    apollo missions would have never launched in current year with current safety standards

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Keep drinking the kool-aid

  33. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    So they didnt land on the moon because they cant land on the moon now

  34. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    They had a bigger budget and more public support. Now they have a smaller budget, less public support and leftists to deal with.

    If they send a man to the moon with a bigger budget the average Californian will b***h and moan about poor people not having a slice of the pie.

    Also cost of living is higher and man power is more expensive than ever...unless you join the military.

  35. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    first black autistic trans lesbian on the moon when?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Holiday tree
      Frick off.

  36. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The. Moon. Is. Not. Real.
    Just look at tides :
    They are supposed to be caused by le totally real moon's gravity pull, right? Le totally real moon is making the water level raise, right?
    But guess what? There's actually two high tides at once. On both sides of the planet at once.
    How do you explain that? Anti-sea water that is actually pushed away by le totally real moon's gravity?

    It's utter nonsense.
    The. Moon. Is. Not. Real.

  37. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    This is part of their gayops to cover the scam up.
    >Year 2100
    >Um anon the space-race wasn't about going to space it was about building a theoretically working rocket ship or something.... lol
    Another one they are doing is covering up previous pandemics to make covid seem worse than it is. Look it up, the Spanish Flu is now called the "1918–19 influenza virus" and it only killed 25-50 mil. So in the future they can pretend that covid was actually the biggest pandemic evar

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      This is one of the most important "conspiracy theories" how they're always subtly rewriting history.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        You know, historical revisionism is welcome and accepted when new facts come to light for every conceivable time period but ~1918-1945. We have just passed through another period in history (and it will probably continue through the election of 2024) where no revision will be allowed.

  38. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >unclear
    Nice copium
    They fail landing a lander recently and India was only country to do it in recent years

  39. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >70 years ago the US went to the moon
    6 times men set foot on the moon, they want us to believe. BULLSHIT LOL.

  40. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    congress keeps reducing nasa's money so they can't buy the stuff they need to go back. and it'll keep getting lowered.

  41. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    They're too focused on inventing new ways of worshipping and accomodating Africans to look towards the stars like this formerly European empire once did. The space exploration programs have been sidelined for the better part of a century since, and it seems the knowhow was not passed down to new blood.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >European
      israeli*

  42. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >What gives???
    Basically SLS (the launcher) is a moronic and overpriced abomination made up of refurbished Space Shuttle parts forced on NASA by Congress, Orion (the spacecraft) is another recycled piece of garbage from decades ago underpowered and inefficient, HLS doesn't even exist yet and neither orbital refueling does (if you trust Musk you're a moron) also Starship design is completely dysfunctional as a lander, then there is Gateway, which is completely useless for the mission, it's only raison d'être is for the program to not get cancelled (if there's a space station with people the program cannot get cancelled).
    Read: https://idlewords.com/2024/5/the_lunacy_of_artemis.htm
    tl;dr American institutions are decadent and the the private-public (muh capitalism) partnerships are a shitshow falling apart, the Moon is not happening.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      That blogpost is moronic. Starship/HLS is the only sane part of the architecture. ULA wanted to study orbital refueling back in like 2010 and proposed an Atlas V based moon architecture, but Richard Shelby killed it to protect Constellation/SLS.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Starship/HLS is the only sane part of the architecture
        It's not, because it wasn't originally designed as a lunar lander, it's 50m tall with the hatch close to the top which will make it hard to get people and materiel from and to the lander, also it increases the chances it tips over in uneven terrain.
        There's also the whole refueling thing.
        >orbital refueling
        If they can get it working it would be very cool, but for now there is no definitive proof that it can be done reliably, it's crazy that the whole mission depends on technology that is still not ready and the launch date is september 2025.

        The documentation is fine. We wouldn't build a rocket like the Saturn-V again because NASA lost their tolerance for risk, because it used obsolete technology which is no longer made (having been surpassed by new technology decades ago), and because you would need to train an army of workers in obsolete manufacturing techniques. It would be easier to build a new rocket from scratch, assuming you could muster the political willpower to fund the project and overcome the bureaucratic risk-averse quagmire that is modern NASA.

        >risk-averse
        Yet at the same time, because of the orbit they have chosen it will be very difficult to abort the mission once on the moon and a lot of things could go wrong with the refueling (we're talking about cryogenic propellant that needs to be kept cold in orbit for long periods).
        The mission is so complex for dumb reasons and complexity increases the chance things will go wrong, in my opinion it's not that they are risk-averse the problem is that they are risk-blind, they have learned nothing from the Columbia disaster.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          What's wrong with the near-rectilinear halo orbit ?

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Starship/HLS is the only sane part of the architecture
            It's not, because it wasn't originally designed as a lunar lander, it's 50m tall with the hatch close to the top which will make it hard to get people and materiel from and to the lander, also it increases the chances it tips over in uneven terrain.
            There's also the whole refueling thing.
            >orbital refueling
            If they can get it working it would be very cool, but for now there is no definitive proof that it can be done reliably, it's crazy that the whole mission depends on technology that is still not ready and the launch date is september 2025.
            [...]
            >risk-averse
            Yet at the same time, because of the orbit they have chosen it will be very difficult to abort the mission once on the moon and a lot of things could go wrong with the refueling (we're talking about cryogenic propellant that needs to be kept cold in orbit for long periods).
            The mission is so complex for dumb reasons and complexity increases the chance things will go wrong, in my opinion it's not that they are risk-averse the problem is that they are risk-blind, they have learned nothing from the Columbia disaster.

            A. Orbit is too high: you need a really beefy lander to get you down and up (this is why starship won and dynetics alpaca lost, and also why both blue moon and starship need in space refueling)
            B. In the event of an accident on the surface, astronauts may have to wait up to a week for a rendezvous window with orion/gateway, because the orbit has such a long period.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Very fuel efficient though, which is required for a long term space station.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >If they can get it working it would be very cool, but for now there is no definitive proof that it can be done reliably, it's crazy that the whole mission depends on technology that is still not ready and the launch date is september 2025.
          Both landers require refueling so they will have to solve all the problems with it anyways

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Starship was always designed as a Mars lander. SpaceX has to get landing on unpaved ground working right for their own plans, not just Artemis.

          Starship isn't human rated either.

          I'm not saying the US isn't working on it. But RIGHT NOW the US doesn't have a human rated vehicle that can reach the moon.

          "Human rated" is a specific NASA standard for launch vehicles. No vacuum-only spacecraft or space station is "human rated" in that sense.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            was always designed as a Mars lander.
            Lol. Starship is designed as an insanely efficient booster for launching massive LEO constellations. It's raison d'etre is to launch constellations like Starlink and Brilliant Pebbles.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Oh it's you. Take your lithium.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Yes, it's me. And I'm still right. All of the evidence is consistent with my hypothesis. Starship is nearly ready and SpaceX still haven't started work on Martian habitats. It's not for Mars.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Nobody really expects Artemis to send people to the Moon. Every aspect of Artemis is bullshit people through at the wall assuming the project would be cancelled for other reasons anyway. That's why none of it makes sense.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >the launch date is september 2025
          Artemis 3 is actually september 2026 my bad, not that it changes much it will be postponed for sure.

          What's wrong with the near-rectilinear halo orbit ?

          It has its advantages like continuos line of sight for communication with Earth, but the problem is that the orbiter will be able to make a rendezvous with the lander only once every 7~ days so in case something goes wrong astronauts will have to wait to be picked up for days potentially, also it takes like a day to get from this orbit to the moon.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Realistically it's 2027 at the earliest.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Two more years

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >It has its advantages like continuos line of sight for communication with Earth,
            They could just launch a few relay satellites around the Moon with fuel for station keeping and it would make a ton more sense than this crap. Even letting the station communications go dark behind the Moon (as they did with Apollo) would be better. They picked the worst possible solution.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            but to what end?

  43. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous
    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      the tapes aren't erased, there's like an entire website the perfectly archives the entire mission from all the original sources during every second in real time

  44. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

  45. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Those nazi and israeli engineers were a different breed

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The next era of humanity will begin when we can create the synthesis of israelites and Nazis.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        The Nazis *were* israelites :shhh:

  46. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It's truly a mystery.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      poor black guy, he knows what's up

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        they deleted him lmao.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      they deleted him lmao.

      >the only man in the room is actually doing any work

  47. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Meanwhile China just landed a second unmanned lander on the far side of the moon.
    https://www.channelnewsasia.com/east-asia/china-moon-lands-uncrewed-spacecraft-far-side-4380266

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >unmanned
      even the pajeets can do that

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >chang-6

        >americans getting mogged by jeets and chinks
        lel

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Put a couple slant eyes up there, or maybe do the first lunar open defecation, and then we'll talk

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            The only purpose of a manned mission is propaganda/prestige, you can pretty much do everything with robots, even in the case you put people up there you would still had to rely on robots if you want to build any kind of industry.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >chang-6

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      China might land some nauts on the moon by at least 2040 and no less till then and im being generous.

      [...]
      >americans getting mogged by jeets and chinks
      lel

      >no man on moon vs men on moon = getting mogged by esls who still haven been to the moon
      What?

  48. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Uhhm, ackshually they came up with compact computers just for it

  49. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Not a SINGLE country in this world has put a foot on the moon in more than half a century now. Are people in this thread pretending to be moronic or can't they see the obvious scam here? Holy shit.

  50. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Allow me to clear up any questions about that:

    https://antelopehillpublishing.com/product/whitey-on-the-moon-by-paul-kersey/

  51. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Going to the moon was way easier 70 years ago because the biggest hurdle was the walk to the studio

  52. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Funding for moon shit stopped and stuff deteriorated over time. Old shit isn't usable anymore and new shit hasn't been made

  53. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous
  54. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    We've known since the 1980s we couldn't reach the moon.

    The space shuttle wasn't designed (or rated) to leave earth's orbit and was never capable of moon missions. This isn't something new. The US hasn't had a moon-capable human-rated spacecraft since the Apollo missions with the lunar landing module.

    Any journalist shocked that the US can't reach the moon in 2024 simply hasn't paid attention and has no real knowledge of NASA or modern human spaceflight.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >The space shuttle wasn't designed (or rated) to leave earth's orbit
      Yes, that's true.
      >The US hasn't had a moon-capable human-rated spacecraft since the Apollo missions
      That's not true. We've already sent an Orion around the moon on the Artemis I flight. We have the capability to get to the moon (though landing on it is still a work in progress).

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Orion isn't human rated (yet).

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >We've already sent an Orion around the moon on the Artemis I flight.
        Putting people on that death trap would be homicidal.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      This, people remember Deep Impact and Armageddon and think space shuttles can do deep space missions when that's simply not true, they were only ever designed to go into upper earth orbit and deliver a satellite, or maybe do maintenance on a satellite in orbit. The highest orbit EVER achieved in a space shuttle was only like 600km when doing the Hubble stuff.

  55. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Don't pay up
    >Technology stagnates, tooling gets scrapped and becomes impossible to build
    Whoa. The fact that NASA was able to make an actual SLS despite Congress constantly fricking with the budget is nothing short of impressive.
    Pay up, or shut the frick up.

  56. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Orion is useless, they are already flying starship to the moon, so they could just use Dragon and transfer crew to starship in LEO

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The Dragon capsule isn't rated for moon missions, though it might be able to be modified to do it.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        HLS Starship can just transfer crew in LEO. Hell, they could dock to the ISS to transfer.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          the problem is getting back from moon

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            That's the easiest part.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          HLS Starship doesn't exist yet, it's still in development. Starship hasn't yet made it into orbit. (It probably will on the next attempt.)

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Starship isn't human rated either.

          I'm not saying the US isn't working on it. But RIGHT NOW the US doesn't have a human rated vehicle that can reach the moon.

  57. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    the funny thing is that, while i believe it is possible that they faked going to the moon, that if you swapped the guys from the 60s or whenevr with the guys they have now, the guys from the 60s with modern tech would have a functioning moon base with jet packs and a space elevator up to it, while the guys from now back in the 60s wouldn't be able to put together a poorly functioning javascript framework. (one of the easiest and most common engineering tasks performed today)

  58. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Budget and motivation

  59. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The Apollo missions were a thinly veiled ICBM research project, with the very tail end being about "winning" a race to the moon. Nowadays there's no reason to go at all besides to provide a 6 hour stream for millennials to basedjak at and then everybody claps

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >>The Apollo missions were a thinly veiled ICBM research project
      No, they were not. The ICBMs were already developed by the time Apollo started. By that time, liquid fuel ICBMs were already on the way out and being replaced with solid fuel ICBMs which are superior for military use in every way; The Saturn V liquid fuel rocket program had no influence on ICBM development.

      The earlier programs, Mercury-Redstone, Mercury-Atlas and Gemini, used existing ICBM hardware. The ICBMs weren't developed from the human-rated rockets, it was done the other way around.

      Even the computer hardware used in Apollo was derived from the technology used in the earlier Minuteman guidance computer (which was ACTUALLY the first computer built with integrated circuits, not the Apollo Guidance Computer as is popularly claimed.)

  60. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    NASA decided to contract with a bunch of companies so they wouldn't get sued by Boeing and some other shit companies that suck government dick under the table. Tesla will probably get there first, before even the Chinese do.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Tesla
      You mean SpaceX. They wouldn't be going to the Moon at all if not for a juicy NASA contract for it. They won't be going to Mars either. They have no Mars missions planned and don't even have Mars habitats under development. SpaceX is focused on LEO.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >They have no Mars missions planned and don't even have Mars habitats under development.
        Jesus, give the frickers a minute. I'm as skeptical of Space Sex as anybody, but you can't deny that they've done great work with Falcon, so who knows what they might pull off next.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >you can't deny that they've done great work with Falcon
          They've done excellent work with Falcon and Starship. Both are superb boosters for launching massive LEO constellations. At the rate they're going they'll have Starship fully operational within two or three years. And then what? Only then do they start Mars habitat development, so it's ready 20 years after the rocket ostensibly meant to get them to Mars? This doesn't make any sense.

          Stop listening to what they say and start paying attention to what they're actually doing. What they're actually doing is developing the hardware to create massive satellite constellations.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            With the amount of cheap upmass that starship might provide, you could do a lot. If they weren't interested in stuff beyond LEO why bother with orbital refueling, why give NASA such a discount on HLS?

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            The only reason they're bothering with orbital refueling is because NASA is giving them money for it.

  61. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Diversity.
    And Boomers invested more in to themselves than anything else.
    It's like being given a car and doing zero maintenance and when it's on it's last legs hand it to the next generation and say it was good when I got it."

  62. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Most or every USA president since the 1980s has said they're going back and also
    NASA employees and "The Science" since then have repeatedly said it's just around the corner, so some assumed it would have happened by now, but there's been never ending delays and setbacks.

    https://apnews.com/article/nasa-moon-landings-artemis-delay-23e425d490c0c9e65ae774ec2e00f090

    "development issues with the moonsuits"

    Only "conspiracy theorists" in 1980 would have said moonsuits would take 45 years to get right, lol.

  63. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Winner Syndrome.
    This is what happens when you emerge victorious. No one challenges you, so you become complacent and complicit.

    This is why the Soviet Union should've won the Moon race.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >the Moon race
      is that what unitedstatians call it after losing the space race?

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        They probably do or don't, I have no idea. I'm just making the point that if you become the best everywhere with no one to challenge you, then you lose the motivation to keep going. You have no direct competition/threat to you, so why make the effort to go hard?

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          I think there are plenty of incentives to improve without comparing yourself to others. At least on a personal level.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        commie cope

  64. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    In the 1960s, NASA was filled with the smartest white men on the planet (some were ex-Nazis btw) that got their position by merit and America has the strongest manufacturing base in the world. Today, it's full of black women and other DIE hires while everything is outsourced to China. It's really not that much of a mystery.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      This, the US is experiencing a demographic crisis. it's been over for this shithole.

  65. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Wernher von Braun is dead.
    US couldn't replace him

  66. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    not prepared to sacrifice. men died during these times - and now everything needs to be a fricking clean room and all miniscule things accounted for. progress is not made in such ways. the dream of space flight for the masses is not going to be made this way, either.

    when explorers from Europe ventured into NA/SA and "discovered" them, do you think they were concerned with safety as much? no. thousands of men died over the centuries doing this stuff. all great forms of exploration require sacrifice or it simply won't work.

    Elon wants to put fricking men on Mars but doesn't want to admit that many will die during this process - or is too naive to think that no one will.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >now everything needs to be a fricking clean room and all miniscule things accounted for.
      literally NASA back then as well as today, just look up the construction of the various NASA spacecraft like the Mariners and Voyagers.

      You're thinking of SpaceX as far as what organization is NOT like that.

  67. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >why cant we go to space
    Some idiot released unix to the public
    Anime virus happened
    Social media virus happened

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >we can't go to space because le anime bad
      No it's because of senile boomers like you.

  68. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    there hasn't been a good motive for human moon exploration since the apollo landings started to bore the public. it's a massive expense with no clear point. helium-3 is a meme, putting a weapons system on the moon is far less practical than putting it in low earth orbit, and the idea of using the moon as a stepping stone to interplanetary travel only makes sense to people who don't even know what delta-V is.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      the moon missions themselves are fine, but gateway is going to be the most useless piece of shit

  69. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I have gone from thinking moon landing deniers were moronic, to fully believing the whole project was absolute bullshit and they only reached low earth orbit with the landing filmed in studio.
    There's far too much bullshit about the whole thing when you actually start looking into it.
    Besides the supposed tech regression is far too radical, it's like completely forgetting how to pull off an intercontinental flight that was somehow done in the late 60s.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      commies had tech to track the whole moon landing, if there were lies they would have said so

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        they did
        Russia accused formally the US of cheating but US media won't tell u morons shit
        Same now, Russia has shown all the evidence of the COVID cooked virus from us labs in Ukraine
        media of course won't show it

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      They couldn't fake the moon dust effects anon.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      i don't think it's that we can't go back to the moon, just that they would need to create new technology to do so because the old shit is literally museum pieces
      the question is, why go back to the moon? the only reason they did it in the first place was to tell people online that they did, what about now? to show the handful of deniers that it was real for real? as if they won't just call it AI or something, just look at anything spacex has done, shit there's people who firmly believe space isn't real at all, there's nothing to gain from appealing to such people

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Yeah just use railguns instead of rockets

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >be astronaut getting shot to the moon with railgun
          >3
          >2
          >1
          >ignite!
          >your bones get pulverized
          >your insides liquify
          nice idea

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            You could say the same thing about rockets

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >why go back to the moon?
        Lunar regolith contains oxygen, the Moon poles have hydrogen, also the moon has lots of iron and titanium, plus it has low gravity so you can send the stuff in orbit with mass drivers.
        The Moon has everything that is needed to spearhead building orbital infrastructure at low cost before we can get asteroid mining working, it would make rockets basically obsolete because you don't need to bring stuff from Earth anymore except from people.
        But it would require building infrastructure to gather and move these materials and an industry either on the Moon or in orbit to process them, this is impractical without self-replicating robots considering without self-replication all the hardware needed for bootstrapping this industry would have to be sent from Earth via rockets and the current hegemon can barely send few guys to the Moon at the moment.
        It might be that humanity found an intrinsic limitation in the manifacturing methods developed during the industrial revolution and this is keeping us from reaching the stars, relevant article: https://www.devever.net/~hl/hhman

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >why go back to the moon?
        people are beginning to realise that climate change was a lie, they want to go to the moon to affect its orbit and change the tides to flood land and blame climate change becauase they are embarassed at being caught lying about it

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          What schizo moronation are you on about?

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >when you triple down on stupidity

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >they want to go to the moon to affect its orbit and change the tides to flood land
          How are they going to do that? Giant rockets built into the moon?

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            please consider this:
            a feather and a hammer on the moon. which, when dropped, reaches the ground in the shortest time?
            the hammer of course. because everything that has mass has gravity, and the more mass you have the more gravity you have. however in this case the amount of mass and therefore gravity compared between the three bodies becomes so insignificant as to be irellevant between the feather and hammer. but not zero.

            they want to mine the moon. they want to use the moon as a jumping off point, a refuelling point for deeper exploration. look no further than this thread to see anons drooling over the raw materials available on the moon.

            the tides are created by the moons gravity, and the moons gravity is created by the moons mass. and the moons mass is created by the raw materials of which the moon is composed that they want to extract.

            no material == no gravity.

            how much of a change in moon gravity do you think will cause a notable change in tidal forces on earth? have you calculated it? because they have. they know exactly. or, even more scary, maybe they havent even bothered.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            easy, we just take garbage from earth and fill the empty mines with it! 😀

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      no one asked, attention seeker

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      > Besides the supposed tech regression is far too radical, it's like completely forgetting how to pull off an intercontinental flight that was somehow done in the late 60s.
      No, it’s like not having all the details for some plane from the ‘60s and not all the told and employees that were used to build that plane so you have to design and build a new plane.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        yeah, but they built the rocket from scratch in less than 10 years in the 60's, with fricking slide rules, when we first "went". There's no reason it should take that long to build another rocket from scratch in the same amount of time.

        Pic kind of relatedrelated

  70. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Truly the greatest mystery of our time

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      We have geniuses like elon musk and ethical companies with long term thinking like boeing to save us don't worry anon

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      That shows percent of federal budget, and everyone knows the overall federal budget has ballooned since then.

      Here is a more accurate portrail :
      https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/nasa-annual-budget

  71. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    i wonder what was the difference between america then and now

  72. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Back then: If someone dies, whatever.

    >Now: We can't let anyone die.

    Also: MUH DIVERSITY!!!!!!!!
    Diversity hires can't do shit.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      when will the diversity meme end?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      So what are the white guys at NASA doing? Its like you farting and blaming the dog

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Literally all of the work on any projects left, like the James Webb control system and image processing

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        do you expect the handful of competent people in an organization to magically undo decades of institutional rot or something?

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          The majority of NASA is white on ft

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            a quick search claims that NASA is 55% white and 65% male so it looks like some serious demographic decline of white guys to me

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      what

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      this is my entire take on it too, them saying "we don't have the technology that we did" is a facade for "We sent people into space fully expecting them to get super cancer and die and we don't want to admit that"

      I think we do have the technology, and the technology was never safe

  73. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Imagine that you are Neil Armstrong.
    You are born 1930, your education is good and culture doesn't hate you and neither does it bombard you with video shorts and pornography from the day you were born.
    Your teacher is capable, teaching both math and philosophy properly. You have freedom to experiment and fail.
    You have a stay at home wife probably.
    Now imagine a large group of people like that all working together.
    We don't have this anymore. It's as simple as that.
    America isn't even controlled by Americans.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I'll also add that jfk was assassinated around this time, and AIPAC began rising as the most powerful lobby in America.
      What did JFK stop? Operation Northwoods, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods
      and refused letting them trick him into supporting this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bay_of_Pigs_Invasion
      America's government was slowly infiltrated in the 1970s, 9/11 was clearly staged by intelligence operatives.
      This is the real shit, yet people will always yell the loudest about the moon landing being faked. Nothing fricking happens to you if you make a documentary about that, your bank account will likely be closed if you make the connections I just made.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        and that's not even getting into the interdimensional side of things. But that is most likely knowledge that will do more harm than help to tell people about.

  74. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >But now we somehow can't go back to the moon anymore?
    All nazi scientists who worked on space missions are dead. Their theoretical works and practical results are either classified or don't exist at all.
    We pretty much are forced to do everything from scratch and hope for the best.

  75. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The moon landing is actually fake, isn't it? I wouldn't be surprised. Everything that I thought was normal and good 20 years ago is unraveling.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      It was worth it to defeat communism. Just like everything else the US has ever done, even after the fall of the USSR. Trust the plan!

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I legitimately wish it was a crime to be this moronic and schizo.
      I'm sick of it. Maybe the chinks and the CCP are right.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      here's your attention

  76. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It's a rock oOooooo

  77. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    All these moon deniers can't explain the fricking mirrors we left behind on the moon, partially so that anyone can verify the proof we were there with relatively simple laser measuring devices.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_Laser_Ranging_experiments

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      They were planted there without any humans involved. Or the laser measuring devices are fake. Or the mirrors were always there. That's the fun with conspiracy theories, there's always a way out.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >They were planted there without any humans involved
        I mean two of them are acknolwedged as such.
        Also bros, why has no one but Indian managed to land one since the 70's? Are we actually doomed to be ruled over by the Pajeets?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      It's a shame physics means you can't just observe the Apollo landing sites. Sick of schizos shitting on my ancestors' work on it.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      there's a very good case that the reflectors don't actually do anything and the lasers are just reflecting off the lunar surface: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1805.05863
      i'm kinda surprised moon landing deniers have never picked up on this, but on the other hand it would require them to do reading.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >relatively simple laser measuring devices
      not simple at all stop watching big bang theory.
      if you fire a laser at the moon because of various scattering (atmosphere etc) it spreads out to over 300 MILES diameter. they use a huge telescope to shrink that down to one mile.
      one mile diameter.
      by the time the one mile wide beam hits one of these 45cm square reflectors (lol) and returns to earth the beam is 10 miles wide.
      ten miles wide.
      on average they have to detect one to two photons per laser pulse.
      if you know absolutely nothing about physics you might not understand that doing this in laboratory conditions is extremely complicated and difficult, except this isn't lab conditions you are trying to detect a single fricking photon entering a telescope pointed at the moon.
      you know how many photons the moon reflects on a nightly basis? like, fricking quite a lot dude. quite a lot.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        You send a series of pulses and look for correlated responses. If you are looking at the right time after you send each pulse, you see a response signal in the noise. Look at the wrong time, no signal and just noise. This sort of solution is experimental physics 101. And yes, we know how to build delay lines.
        We can also prove that there must be retroreflectors there (in the documented locations) by aiming the laser away from them and getting no signal back. Only the places where we know humanity has put retroreflectors allow the experiment to work.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          so we went form a simple experiment to needing lock in amp or whatever shit on top lol ok great.
          doing fricking stats on the signal crying mask wojak . jpg proves its there!! whatever lol.
          the moon doesn't rotate, how do you aim a 100 mile wide beam away from supposed retroreflector and expect the returned beam to come back to you after bouncing off the moon? you have to hit it in the right place of course it wouldn't work otherwise dumbass.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >yeah we planted mirror reflectors on the moon
      >oh but you need gigawatts of laser power to get a reflection back
      >also a whole fricking observatory rig to see the reflection back
      >no we're not gonna show you that theyre real, trust the science ™™™

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        well there's nothing stopping you from building an observatory and rangefinding the moon yourself
        what did you expect, you'd be able to use a laser pointer and pocket telescope to see it's reflection from a 46cm2 panel 384,000km away?

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Go to a good school with an observatory or an astronomy/astrophysics program that has an associated observatory they can use/rent.

        My dad (astrophysics PhD) got to travel around the world to various ground based telescopes in remote areas of the world for his graduate work and post doctoral work.

  78. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The Space Program was basically gutted in the 1980s. Also most of the smart people who would have worked in it in previous eras got snapped up by private industry instead. If you can do rocketry, raytheon is just going to hire you to make missiles. If you can do HPC, you're probably working at nvidia or IBM. Materials scientists are all working in the semiconductor industry now.

    There's simply far more opportunities for skilled people and the government doesn't pay enough to convince them to work for NASA.

  79. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    white men bad!

  80. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    America could send men to the moon when it was white. America is no longer white. America can no longer send men to the moon.

  81. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    We never went to the moon. If we did, how come we don't have bases and stuff there?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      We do have some equipment (allegedly). Hence the conversation about lasers.

  82. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The engine craftmanship was lost to time and the competency crisis, and yes, I am saying the spacecraft engines from the 60s and 70s were better than today's engines.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >and yes, I am saying the spacecraft engines from the 60s and 70s were better than today's engines
      i consider myself an old rocket engine appreciator and the merlin blows any american engine from the 1960s out of the water.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        well they have to be 6x better because you need 30 of the goddamn things for the first stage rather than the saturn's 5

  83. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    That was when they could hire and send white people only. They cant do that anymore. There must be women and blacks and for that to work technology must be much better (automation kek). Chinese don't have such issues so you will see them on the moon faster.

  84. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >astronauts to the moon
    What is the use case?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Promoting diversity and equality. USA will make it only to plant LGBT flag on the Moon.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Paving the way for a new Disney Land.

  85. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    space isnt real moron
    its amerimutt propaganda that served to demoralize soviets

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      This. Imagine believing there's a "vacuum" up there. That's just how scientists got away with saying "suck my dick" when asked about it.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        space doesn't 'suck'

  86. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >outsource technology and techniques to forign country because they can technically do an almost-as-good-a-job as you for a much lower cost due to labor and a lack of regulations

    >do not pass on the skills and technology to do these same things to your own people because I'ma go retire on my outsourced retirement dividends

    >3 generations pass

    >no longer have the tools or skills to utilize old designs to make spaceships because boomers wanted to buy slightly cheaper plastic chairs at wallmart

    >cant explain this to regular people because you will get cancled and called an antisemetic racist that hates immigrants
    >just shrug your shoulds and go 'lmao the technology is lost xD'

    this is no different what has happened to our own communty if you think about it. Oldgays had access to things like flash and pirated photoshop. This meant oldgays could pump out lots of OC, high quality and in massive volumes.

    Then programs like flash were sunset, and photoshop became a subscription cloud based service. Now regular anons cant make, nor have any desire to make high quality oc. Instead of making based space-age memes, they make mspaint basedjacks and copy and paste reaction images from tv and movies screenshots.

    the really fancy anons might use some shitty opensource video editor to string together some memes but you dont see OC, the technology has been lost.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      It's easy to create AI-based variants of the original meme characters but no one seems to be doing it for some reason despite the process being mostly automated. This implies that the people that created and proliferated the memes probably don't have access to advanced hardware.

  87. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >saars i am fellow white republican guntoting redpiled american the aamerika space nasa has already failed

  88. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    they need to make better cgi first

  89. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >there are morons who still believe the moon landing was real

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Oh hahahahhahah look at this guy so quirky and free thinker and conspiracy

      shut up mate

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        moronic redditor

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          what in the frick are you talking about

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Zoomers are that gullible what can I say

  90. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    They don't make great movies or even great popular music anymore. Everything's in decline.

  91. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Back then it was an us vs them mentality so the US could build and fly rockets on the cheap. Now every contractor is bloating their bids which nasa just accepts and all of nasa's moronic unrelated programs are sucking up budget for useless shit. It's over for nasa without clean slate restart. Private can do it for cheaper since they have to keep profits in mind.

  92. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    the passionate and brightest got old and died and instead of looking for people similar to them your country chose brainless diversity cattle
    you voted and pay for this

  93. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    there are resources in space. we are running out of resources on earth. just send guys up there to go get some, yeah? i dont see why not

  94. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    NEW THREAD
    MOON LANDING WAS FAKED AND YOU KNOW IT.

    [...]

    [...]

    [...]

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      good morning sir

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *