truth behind the moon landings Part 4
Uploader Comments (TheeBaker)
Top Comments
-
It's amazing how little Kaysing knows and how much attention he got. One erroneous idea after another, and ALL denigrating a monumental achievement. He was no technical person. He had a bachelor's degree in English. He was an editor. He corrected spelling and syntax errors. He had no technical expertise, whatsoever -- just a colossal ego and lack of integrity. He seems to have retired to a trailer in the desert.
Yeah, great American. He has insulted and disparaged thousands of good people.
-
He totally forgot to mention that you could also smoke some weed and Really see the stars....
All Comments (60)
-
Haha, this is pure entertainment.. A leaf blower on earth with rocks to make a comparison with a spacecrafts booster on the unknown terrain and composition of the moon. What is the moon composition anyway? What's under the surface of the dust and rocks? And how compact does the material get under the dust and rock surface?
-
Bill Kaysing completely discredits himself at 3:07 when he claims that none of the Apollo 11 astronauts have answered questions about stars, yet we see a post-mission interview where Armstrong answers how stars were not visible from the moon due to sun glare. If Kaysing doesn't even have his facts straight about this stars, how do we know he's not mistaken about his other claims?
-
You know what else is fake.. everything ever. We've never been to space period, it's all smoke and mirrors. ... idiots.
-
Uhmn...in this part...REMEMBER that there is NO atmosphere on the moon. And that the stars are BRIGHTER than those seen on Earth...by a large percentage.
-
Also, we are going back to the moon very soon. You really think we would go up there at this day and age if we didn't know what it was like on the surface of the moon. We have brief plans to colonise the moon. You must know that?
-
If they were faking it, they wouldn't have taken so many pictures would they. Going to the moon was easy enough. Mariner 4 flew up to mars before they landed on the moon. Why believe otherwise? it was a big deal going to the moon, why would you put the dampers on it? I think it's boring.
-
@scott111193 wow hail Hitler he would be so proud of you so people cant think different then you or disagree with what is put in front of them and kill those who don't agree so they didn't lie to us about Vietnam or Gulf War syndrome are soldiers went to war healthy and came back sick or how about 9-11 those 3 building are the first in the whole history of steel to come down from fire come on man i got more in my pocket if you want me to give you a history lesson
-
I wish all you skeptics would go and get a hobbie. You are rubbish at prooving anything, i hope you get hunted down. We wen't to the moon.
-
@TheeBaker do you speak English?
Today we have super computers and much more advanced technology but yet we don't send a man to moon again. why? because it was cheap in 1969 and less dangerous but now with super computers and a technology which is superior to 1969 we can't do it. I think with the budget spent to prove moon landing they could have actually done it today.
zederish 7 months ago
@zederish were is ur info from? are u certain we havent been going back and forth ever since? what wud you go back for anyway?
TheeBaker 7 months ago
@TheeBaker I don't understand your English
zederish 7 months ago
@zederish Who says man has not continued to go to the moon since the last public mission in 1976?
today we realise how dangerous it really is, and costs have gone up dramaticly!!! what reason is there to go back to the moon, we learnt all that we could, the moon is just a dead powder, sand and rock desert! Personally i think they could well have a base on the moon, we have a spacestation, we have had space stations for many years now, which is a perfect stop off if there was such a base?
TheeBaker 7 months ago