Hey mate, thanks for taking the time to share such a detailed post — I genuinely respect that, and I’m not here to shut down your experience or belittle what you lived through. You clearly have a background in tech and were around when this all happened, which I honestly find valuable to hear.
That said, I just want to gently challenge some points for the sake of honest conversation — not to argue, but to think.
Let’s be real — we didn’t even have color TV in every home, no internet, no mobile phones, and barely electric windows in our cars. Yet somehow we had the tech to not only send humans 384,000 km away, but also live broadcast it, flawlessly navigate a return journey through the Van Allen belts — with 1960s tech?
I mean, we’re talking about machines with computing power less than a Casio watch.
The Van Allen Radiation Belts: NASA’s own engineers, even in recent times (like Orion project lead Kelly Smith), have admitted that we still don’t have the shielding tech to send humans safely through them today. Yet the Apollo missions supposedly flew through them multiple times — with zero shielding — and not one astronaut ever showed long-term radiation damage?
If it’s possible and safe, why has no manned mission gone beyond low Earth orbit in over 50 years?
No stars visible on the Moon: You said it yourself — “If stars could be seen in the photos, that would expose a potential lie.” That's exactly the point. With no atmosphere and a black sky, stars should’ve been everywhere, yet they’re absent in every shot.
NASA’s excuse about exposure settings doesn’t hold up well. Astronomers use cameras to photograph stars all the time — it’s not a mystery how to do it.
The Lunar Lander: You’ve seen replicas — and we have too. With reflective foil, curtain-rod frames, and duct tape, it looks more like a high school science project than something that withstood the vacuum of space and landed on a celestial body.
No blast crater under it. No serious dust cloud during descent. Yet the astronaut’s boot prints are perfectly preserved. No scorch marks, no disturbed regolith under the thrusters. Come on — that deserves at least a raised eyebrow.
The live audio transmissions: You say there was a discernible delay — fair. But even then, the clean audio quality, the lack of static or lag, and the clarity of the feed makes people wonder: how are we talking to the Moon with better clarity than sometimes we get calling from Brisbane to Perth?
Tapes reused? You’re telling me the greatest human achievement in history got taped over like a footy match on VHS? Wouldn’t that be stored under armed lock and key, with dozens of backups?
I say this with full respect: none of this is “proof” on its own, but when you line it all up, it’s understandable why so many people today — many with degrees, scientific knowledge, and no religious agenda — are asking hard questions.
You clearly care about science and truth. Me too. But truth shouldn’t be afraid of scrutiny — in fact, truth invites it.
I’d just say: if even NASA’s own recent engineers are admitting limitations today, it’s fair to reexamine the certainty people had back then.
No hate, no sarcasm — just honest questions that deserve more than “we already did it.”
Thanks again for your time.
Stay curious.
Expand
