Flat or Globe Earth?

Originally posted by whereu ↑

I don't know why I bother replying to your posts, because you only accept your thoughts.

NASA itself has admitted (in recent interviews) that they still “can’t get past the Van Allen radiation belts” — yet we’re told they flew through them multiple times in the 1960s and 70s using technology no more advanced than a pocket calculator?
I was alive at the time. NASA was concerned about passing through the Van Allen radiation belts, but never said that they couldn't. A few of their employees said it couldn't be done and grabbed some of the media headlines, but not generally supported by NASA employees.

I was studying computer science at the time and knew what could be done with computers back then, with the power of "current pocket calculators".
The Saturn V rocket was a super heavy-lift launch vehicle developed by NASA for the Apollo program, primarily to send humans to the Moon. It's considered one of the greatest engineering achievements and remains the only launch vehicle to have carried humans beyond low Earth orbit. The Saturn V rocket was an engineering marvel; its capabilities are only currently being replicated.

Many people, including NASA employees think and thought that more preparation was needed before making the attempt to land a person on the moon. JF Kennedy put out a challenge to put a person on the moon with a safe return before the end of the 60's. It was a political decision to achieve this goal with little thought of how the developments could be used in the future, which meant that there was little scope to use what was developed for future developments. This is part of the reason for the delay in the next mission to go to the moon with people. The other cause of a delay was the result of Americans losing their appetite for spending large sums of money on missions that they deemed to carry few benefits.

No stars were visible in photos taken on the moon.
Stars aren't visible in photos taken on the Moon because the bright sunlight reflecting off the lunar surface makes the stars too faint to be captured by the camera's settings. Essentially, the camera is exposed to capture the bright surface and astronauts, using short exposures, which aren't long enough to record the faint light from the stars.
If stars could be seen in the photos, that would expose a potential lie.

I saw a replica of the equipment used for the moon landing, and it was certainly not made of aluminium foil, cardboard, and curtain rods, although it included aluminium foil. A heat shield was not needed on the moon because there is no atmosphere to generate frictional heat as there is on Earth. The equipment used to land on the moon and to leave it was adequate for the lack of atmosphere and lower gravity. The part used to reenter Earth's atmosphere did contain a heat shield.

The lunar lander stirred dust. You probably won't watch footage of the event that showed this because you don't believe that the moon landings happened. The lunar module was not heavy enough in the moon's gravity to warrant a blast strong enough to create a crater.

NASA employees were silly enough to make a human error by reusing the precious tapes. Damn human failings.

The moon landings were made with a rush, "forced" by a rash, extremely risky approach. The current crop planning to land on the moon laning by people are far more careful and hence taking longer. Measure twice, cut once seems to be their approach.

I listened to the live broadcast of Apollo 11, and there was a discernible delay in sending and receiving communications.

You will probably just brush explanations aside for your own reasons.

There, I have wasted half an hour of my life.
Roger, over and out.

Expand

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.