I’ve come to understand that most people who believe the FE theory also believe the moon landing was faked. So, if NASA was willing to fake that big achievement, why is it that they haven’t done anything consequential, real or faked, in such a long time? Did they decide to stop faking it?

Sorry if this is in the wrong section, I’m new to the forum.

*

Offline Bad Puppy

  • *
  • Posts: 218
  • Belief does not make something a theory.
    • View Profile
I’ve come to understand that most people who believe the FE theory also believe the moon landing was faked. So, if NASA was willing to fake that big achievement, why is it that they haven’t done anything consequential, real or faked, in such a long time? Did they decide to stop faking it?

Sorry if this is in the wrong section, I’m new to the forum.

I don't think they faked the moon landing, but if they did who says they stopped faking other accomplishments since then?  Just looking at the recent stuff, the Mars rover and Juno's Jupiter flyby could also have been faked.
Quote from: Tom Bishop
...circles do not exist and pi is not 3.14159...

Quote from: totallackey
Do you have any evidence of reality?

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 10068
  • (>^_^)> it's propaganda time (◕‿◕✿)
    • View Profile
    • The Flat Earth Society
why is it that they haven’t done anything consequential, real or faked, in such a long time? Did they decide to stop faking it?
Surely you should be asking them, not us. We can only offer speculation on their reasoning.

Presumably it ties in with the continued budget cuts to NASA. They're not trying to grow, they're slowly fading into obscurity. That could be deliberate. As many RE'ers astutely point out, keeping a lie of this scale going would have to be immensely challenging.
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we've already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!


*mic stays stationary and earth accelerates upwards towards it*

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 6551
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
They don't need to constantly make amazing claims anymore because the US already got what it wanted from the Space Race and Cold War. With ICBMs following WWII the US became the world's greatest superpower.

The US dollar is the default international currency. The US maintains a military presence in nearly 150 countries. Most countries have their reserves in US dollars. English is the language of business. The US military is the greatest in the world. All thanks to nuclear weapons and then the race to space that followed immediately after, which established the US as the most technically competent, and therefore most frightening, country to ever exist.
« Last Edit: November 01, 2019, 09:13:56 PM by Tom Bishop »

*

Offline TomInAustin

  • *
  • Posts: 897
  • Round Duh
    • View Profile
why is it that they haven’t done anything consequential, real or faked, in such a long time? Did they decide to stop faking it?
Surely you should be asking them, not us. We can only offer speculation on their reasoning.

Presumably it ties in with the continued budget cuts to NASA. They're not trying to grow, they're slowly fading into obscurity. That could be deliberate. As many RE'ers astutely point out, keeping a lie of this scale going would have to be immensely challenging.

Much more likely is that private industry has proven that they can be much more cost-effective than the huge contracts given to the military complex in the 50's to 90's
If you are making your claim without evidence then we can discard it without evidence.

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 10068
  • (>^_^)> it's propaganda time (◕‿◕✿)
    • View Profile
    • The Flat Earth Society
Much more likely is that private industry has proven that they can be much more cost-effective than the huge contracts given to the military complex in the 50's to 90's
Apologies for the shorthand confusion - when I say "NASA" (or "NASA's budget"), I'm talking about NASA and its subcontractors combined. The model of ownership doesn't really affect this.

Are they more efficient? Oh, I bet they've found ways to make efficiency cuts ;)
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we've already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!


*mic stays stationary and earth accelerates upwards towards it*

*

Offline TomInAustin

  • *
  • Posts: 897
  • Round Duh
    • View Profile
Much more likely is that private industry has proven that they can be much more cost-effective than the huge contracts given to the military complex in the 50's to 90's
Apologies for the shorthand confusion - when I say "NASA" (or "NASA's budget"), I'm talking about NASA and its subcontractors combined. The model of ownership doesn't really affect this.

Are they more efficient? Oh, I bet they've found ways to make efficiency cuts ;)

I knew what you meant.   I meant that the new private sector developments outside of NASA are way more cost-effective than the old way of giving blanket contracts to huge defense contractors.
If you are making your claim without evidence then we can discard it without evidence.

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 10068
  • (>^_^)> it's propaganda time (◕‿◕✿)
    • View Profile
    • The Flat Earth Society
Right. In that case: we're simultaneously seeing a drop in funding and a drop in "big achievements". Your proposal seems to contradict that correlation, which leads me to think it's not very plausible (or, at the very least, not particularly relevant)
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we've already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!


*mic stays stationary and earth accelerates upwards towards it*

*

Offline TomInAustin

  • *
  • Posts: 897
  • Round Duh
    • View Profile
Right. In that case: we're simultaneously seeing a drop in funding and a drop in "big achievements". Your proposal seems to contradict that correlation, which leads me to think it's not very plausible (or, at the very least, not particularly relevant)

NASA has made some "big achievements" it's just that without manned flight no one seems to care.  Yes NASA funding is going away but private is just getting started, Space X and Virgin might just surprise you.  This is not like the 60's where they had to invent everything and create new branches of science.   

Plus India, Japan, and China are making big strides.  Hell Isreal is in it too.  We will see a manned lunar mission in the next 5 or so years.
If you are making your claim without evidence then we can discard it without evidence.

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 10068
  • (>^_^)> it's propaganda time (◕‿◕✿)
    • View Profile
    • The Flat Earth Society
Perhaps. We shall see.
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we've already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!


*mic stays stationary and earth accelerates upwards towards it*

*

Offline TomInAustin

  • *
  • Posts: 897
  • Round Duh
    • View Profile
Perhaps. We shall see.

It makes me a little sad to think of all the amazing technology like self-landing reusable heavy-lift boosters and a few obviously smart guys around here ignoring it as nothing but a fake.
If you are making your claim without evidence then we can discard it without evidence.

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 10068
  • (>^_^)> it's propaganda time (◕‿◕✿)
    • View Profile
    • The Flat Earth Society
Don't spend too much time worrying about it - even if you're correct, there's plenty of people online who are wrong about things that affect you much more directly :)
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we've already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!


*mic stays stationary and earth accelerates upwards towards it*

*

Offline TomInAustin

  • *
  • Posts: 897
  • Round Duh
    • View Profile
Don't spend too much time worrying about it - even if you're correct, there's plenty of people online who are wrong about things that affect you much more directly :)

I sleep well at night.  Not worrying and yes, there are many much more pressing issues.
If you are making your claim without evidence then we can discard it without evidence.

*

Offline J-Man

  • *
  • Posts: 568
    • View Profile
What is faking it? It's a lie ! Were the twin towers a lie? Was building #7 collapse a fake? Is the worth of the US dollar a fake? Was the most secure building in the world with no cameras of a plane hitting the pentagon a fake? Is the stock market value fake? Is the US solvent a fake out? Kennedy's? Epstein? People have become so gullible to believe all lies or fakery.

Seriously, why ask about the moon landing, it was a lie.....
What kind of person would devote endless hours posting scientific facts trying to correct the few retards who believe in the FE? I slay shitty little demons.

Offline ChrisTP

  • *
  • Posts: 467
    • View Profile
Seriously, why ask about the moon landing, it was a lie.....
in your opinion. In my opinion the moon landings were real. Technology has just recently (relative to the landings) caught up and we're able to simulate the exact lighting. As this is my field of expertise I'm inclined to believe that they weren't capable of faking via CGI and I don't believe they could fake it in a studio, the lighting, the movement of the flag and the people in lesser gravity. NVIDIA even did a presentation to show off their realistic lighting by recreating the lighting that could have only worked in the conditions under ther assumption that they were on the moon with the extremely bright sun, the light bouncing off each other and the landing craft, the albedo of the moons surface.



You could argue that being in a cold war with the soviets pushed the americans to fake it to be superior but this would be speculation. You could say the landing craft looks like it was made out of kitchan material like tinfoil, but it was simply wrapped in reflective metal and doesn't diminish the sturdiness of the craft. You could also speculate that we haven't as a species gone back to the moon so it must have been fake, but again this is just an opinion people have based on speculation.

What factual and solid evidence do you have to prove it was fake that isn't simply speculation and opinion? are there any whistleblowers? Any first hand accounts of fakery? why haven't other competing countries called out the US as fakery?

On the note of the moon landings, theres a new show on Apple TV+ where the soviets beat the americans to the landing (it's a fictional series of an alternate history). slightly off topic but I quite enjoyed it.
Tom is wrong most of the time. Hardly big news, don't you think?

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 10068
  • (>^_^)> it's propaganda time (◕‿◕✿)
    • View Profile
    • The Flat Earth Society
are there any whistleblowers? Any first hand accounts of fakery?
Yes. Whether or not you want to believe them is your prerogative, but you'd do well to do your homework before posting
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we've already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!


*mic stays stationary and earth accelerates upwards towards it*

Offline ChrisTP

  • *
  • Posts: 467
    • View Profile
If any whistleblowers had hard evidence and worthy credentials it wouldn't be a case of choosing to believe so much as seeing the facts. Besides, statistically the amount of people involved directly in such a conspracy would have been absolutely leaked within no time at all.

Who in particular are you refering to as whistleblowers Pete? Names of people so I can as you put it, do my homework (not being snarky, I am always open to potentially new information). :)
Tom is wrong most of the time. Hardly big news, don't you think?

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 10068
  • (>^_^)> it's propaganda time (◕‿◕✿)
    • View Profile
    • The Flat Earth Society
Who in particular are you refering to as whistleblowers Pete? Names of people so I can as you put it, do my homework (not being snarky, I am always open to potentially new information). :)
The two that immediately come to mind are Math Powerland and Thomas Baron, and both of them seem to have met a ghastly fate (though in two very different ways). How many were silenced before I was able to learn of them? I don't know.
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we've already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!


*mic stays stationary and earth accelerates upwards towards it*

*

Offline Tumeni

  • *
  • Posts: 1439
    • View Profile
How many were silenced before I was able to learn of them? I don't know.


How do you know that ANY were "silenced", then?
==============================
==============================
Pete Svarrior "We are not here to directly persuade anyone ... You mistake our lack of interest in you for our absence."

Tom Bishop "We are extremely popular and the entire world wants to talk to us. We have better things to do with our lives than have in depth discussions with every single curious person. You are lucky to get one sentence dismissals from us"

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 10068
  • (>^_^)> it's propaganda time (◕‿◕✿)
    • View Profile
    • The Flat Earth Society
How do you know that ANY were "silenced", then?
I just provided you with two examples.
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we've already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!


*mic stays stationary and earth accelerates upwards towards it*