Did the Americans put a man on the moon?

} Why send men around the moon on Artemis 1 and not land?

Artemis 1 was unmanned, and mission was never to land.

You might have mistakenly thought they put men on that mission, but I can assure you it was unmanned, and never a conspiracy attempt to make you believe it was manned.

Are you writing that as fact or as an opinion?

Man walked on the moon in 6 separate missions

They went through the thinnest part of the Van Allen belts, the spacecraft had shielding for radiation, animals had already been successfully sent through the Van Allen belts previously and when going through the astronauts caught a dose equivalent to several chest X-rays which was deemed an acceptable risk

Nothing wrong with the photos/footage

Many moon rocks came back, and were sent all over the world

Right yes they are twins. Silly me. Isn't it terribly convenient that two of the astronauts who were killed had identical twins to carry on their legacy and tell us how great their twin was? In addition to the 4 others who have doppelgangers walking around today who have similar/exact same name and age as the unfortunates on the ill-fated voyage? Incredible coincidence.

Why do NASA have such a fascination on using twins in their experiments? Think it has anything to do with the Nazi's obsession with testing on twins?

So this organisation you are fan of and defend to the bitter end - founded by a satanist and the founder of scientology, taken over by Nazis in the 40s who burned astronauts alive in Apollo 1 before being taken over by the CIA in the 70s who faked the deaths of those in the Challenger and Columbia "disasters". That sure is one swell organisation 👍️

But again, Nasa wasn't founded by a Satanist or L. Ron Hubbard. What a bizarre claim to make.

Also, your argument about twins is likewise bizarre and unsupported.

Yes, they were twins (Edit: Brothers, not twins it seems.). You are claiming that they are in fact the same person. You've not shown anything to support this notion.

You have not shown that the other astronauts have dopplegangers either. You have simply copy and pasted a picture that shows people with the same/similar names who do not look anything like the astronauts. You've not shown that they are all the same age. You have not explained why Nasa would allow them to continue living with the same names and appearances.

Your current claim adds a new wrinkle. Why was Onizuka the only one of the astronauts given a fake twin? Why was he allowed to claim he was his twin after the disaster when you are claiming that it's a dead give away?

You also seem to be shifting your beliefs again. You originally claimed that Onizuka was not actually a twin, but now you're claiming that the fact he is a twin is somehow evidence that Nasa is secret Nazis.

This shows that either your beliefs are so vague a variable that you can completely reverse them like this, or they are not genuine.

It's also curious that you're claiming that Nasa is "obsessed with experimenting on twins."

There's only been one example I can find of this, which is the Twin study on the Kelly brothers. Beyond this, I don't see any other mentions or examples of twins even being in Nasa.

I'm actually not finding any sources that say that Onizuka's brother is a twin. Sources only refer to him as a "younger brother."

Additionally, your claim doesn't make sense. If they were faking all space flight with these twins, how would they be experimenting on them?

I know this is an old post, but I find it very telling that you think 99.9+0.01=100 😂

First of all the "Nazis", as an organisation, didn't have an obsession with "testing on twins". It was really just one guy, Josef Mengele, and he confined most of his study to Auschwitz from 1943 to 44. Into the bargain, he had absolutely nothing to do with NASA's space program, unless NASA were secretly talking to him down in Argentina.

Secondly, NASA having a "fascination on using twins in their experiments" would make for an interesting 1970's conspiracy movie. But as far as reality is concerned...well, I don't even know where to start with that.

Well, it's no secret that the American's used German rocket scientists after the war. They poached them in 1945 and were happy to employ them in various areas involving rocketry, including their space programme. The Germans were so far ahead in terms of rocket science, that their scientists were considered a valuable spoil of war and the scientists themselves were only too happy to be put to work in the area that they wanted to work in. They were also happy not to have to answer for the regime's policy towards forced labour too, or just how deep their own Nazi credentials were.

The most famous of these, of course, was Wernher Von Braun, the "father of rocket science", who's expertise was invaluable to America's space programme.

However, using so called "Nazi scientists" to further their own ends certainly doesn't make NASA a Nazi organisation or even an affiliate. It just meant that they used their skills and research.

You aren't "questioning" NASA, you are claiming the entirety of space travel is false or faked. All of it. By everyone. Satellites, that people can see with binoculars (and even the naked eye) aren't there according to you. The International space station is a set. Countries don't send probes to other planets, science is wrong, physics is wrong. All according to you.

These are pretty big claims. Yet you aren't making any effort to explain how or why. Perhaps it's your belief you should be "questioning" more than anything.

They're a test of your faith (Firmament - Wikipedia):

Your claim was that Nasa was founded by a Satanist, a scientologist and a nazi.

You implied that these were the same person. But you don't seem able to specify who.

I'm not sure what point your trying to make. Why is it an oxymoron to not believe in the ridiculous claims you're making about space travel and also not believe in antisemitic conspiracy theories?

And the poster submitted as evidence a video shot from orbit. So their own evidence disproves their core claim.

@Markus Antonius your own evidence

In case you think it wasnt noticed how you have tried to ignore this.

It was

Your claim has been proven false.

Thanks for submitting the evidence establishing this.

You have proven space flight is feasible and has happened.

Apollo 11: The Complete Descent:

A detailed account of every second of the Apollo 11 descent and landing.

The video combines data from the onboard computer for altitude and pitch angle,16mm film that was shot throughout the descent at 6 frames per second.

The audio recording is from two sources.

The air/ground transmissions are on the left stereo channel and the mission control flight director loop is on the right channel.

Subtitles are included to aid comprehension.

As well as Neil Armstrong, Buzz Aldrin and Mike Collins, the video includes the following people from the mission control team:

Flight - Gene Kranz

CapCom - Charlie Duke

GNC - Buck Willoughby

EECOM - John Aaron

FIDO - Jay Greene

RETRO - Chuck Deiterich

Guidance - Steve Bales

Control - Bob Carlton

TELCOM - Don Puddy

Surgeon - John Zieglschmid

How come East Germany got zero credit for landing man on Venus in 1960? There is absolutely no way this could be faked with the technology they had at the time (I have the telemetry data in an excel file here too if you need it):

Maybe @Wibbs could help us out here. Incredible that 1/5 people still don't believe we did it.

Somehow I don't think highlighting a film with horrendous special effects is making your case any stronger.

They didn't have the video tech back then to fake a continuous live broadcast in "slow motion" for that period of time.

Keep in mind you aren't just denying the moon landing, you're denying all of them and the entire history of space flight from the last 50 years. You've yet to provide a single piece of credible evidence for that apart from personal disbelief and incredulity.

How do you rationalise to yourself how GPS and satellites work? You can buy a pair of decent binoculars and see them yourself (even possible to see them with the naked eye in the night sky).

1 and 2 addressed by the below video

For the 3rd point, can you answer the question I asked, thanks (repeated below)

It clearly explains how they didn't have the tech to fake the live continuous broadcast on the moon (involving continuous slow motion).

It's a simple question. If you want to try and answer it, it's there.

Markus doesn't want to answer the question directly because it will reveal that he is either a flat earther or he is not genuine in his own beliefs.

But this is not a very good point for you.

If this is the state of special effects for the time, how were they able to fake the moon landings?

If you believe that this movie is an attempt to fake a venus landing, why do you believe that Nasa didn't fake further landings beyond the Apollo ones?

Screw it, I'll just paste the transcript from the video, it's easier:

You're claiming this is all wrong and you're right. Okay, detail how it was done.

What is all this blabber? Take a 35mm film reel - record the footage at 24fps. Play the footage back at 12fps. There you have it: slowmo footage at 50% speed.

Quality not good enough for you? Record the footage at 50fps, playback at 25fps.

A standard 35mm film reel (1000 ft) can playback 11 mins of footage at 24fps or 5min30s at 48fps.

"But, but, but, the moonlanding footage was 2hours that means you would need a film reel 6 times the size of a standard one, therefore the moonlanding happened!!"

Wrong.

1. NASA either had a film reel 6 times larger or more likely
2. They took 6 standard film reels projected the footage onto a wall and used a second camera to record the footage onto a single film reel

Are you really this naive to think that they could not fake it? 🤣