Starship proves Moon landings fake?

Comments · 1.2K

• BI

  @BillGarrett · 6 days ago

  It's almost like the information is there to be found if you actually want answers rather than conspiracies

  197

• LI

  @lightingstuff-d1d · 1 day ago

  Flight 14 went orbital

  25

• DA

  @davidschneide5422 · 7 days ago

  “simple logic, as easy as connecting the dots, if you ignore all the connected dots and imagine a bunch of other dots from a different page of an imaginary book”

  33

• DA

  @davexmit · 7 days ago

  If ‘they’ faked the moon landings then, they can fake them now. They could fake a landing each week, they could fake us visiting each planet in the solar system. They could fake giant cities in Mars. Why would they fake going to the moon and then fake no longer going to the moon?

  223

• MI

  @mikefochtman7164 · 7 days ago

  Yes, the &apos;disposability&apos; of Saturn V made a big difference in capabilities. But then it also made a big difference in price when inflation adjusted. We (yes I was a live back then) were willing to pay that &apos;premium&apos; for several reasons that we don&apos;t need to go into here.<br>But I still think the Saturn V was an awesome rocket system. &nbsp;:D

  122

• ZE

  @zebo-the-fat · 7 days ago

  It&apos;s no use throwing numbers at the deniers, if they could understand them they wouldn&apos;t be deniers!

  233

• FU

  @fuery. · 6 days ago (edited)

  it&apos;s LITERALLY rocket science, you can&apos;t just look at one or two variables and make a conclusion expecting it to be accurate, lmao<br><br>unfortunately some people are too dense or stubborn, willingly or not, to get that.<br><br>Love your stuff!

  18

• DC

  @DCMedien · 7 days ago

  This Video is a perfect example for &quot;just because you cant understand it doesnt make it fake&quot;.<br>Even for me deep into space and apollo stuff, there was so much new information. Thank you for your outstanding work to spread knowledge 🙏

  20

• PA

  @paullefevre8684 · 7 days ago

  The MLH person&apos;s entire argument is &quot;60 years later we&apos;re not any better, so Saturn V was fake.&quot; &nbsp;It&apos;s irrelevant to begin with (Saturn V specs show it fully capable of achieving mission objectives, getting required payload to orbit then into TLI). &nbsp;And it&apos;s as silly as, &quot;My &apos;67 Mustang cruised down the highway at 65 mph, and today&apos;s cars cruise down the highway at 65 mph, therefore the &apos;67 Mustang was fake.&quot; &nbsp;Even though my 289ci &apos;67 Mustang engine got 12 MPG at 65 mph, and my SUV today gets 28 MPG at 65 MPH, much more efficient :)

  68

• AR

  @Artyomi · 3 days ago

  “… Should be much better with 60 years of technological advancement”, yet it’s still 60 years of the same laws of physics

  7

• CO

  @conorjasper5814 · 7 days ago

  I am starting to suspect some people just reach out to Dave pretending to be flat earthers or moon landing deniers simply because they know he&apos;ll do a good job at breaking down and explaining things they&apos;re interested in learning about.

  24

• LA

  @lan6775-p7j · 3 days ago (edited)

  It&apos;s funny how conspiracists claim that the technology was too primitive to land on the moon in the 60s while complaining that NASA abandoned Apollo program&apos;s technology.

  6