Why would NASA claim Earth is round?

As a former test pilot, 50/50 was probably good enough in HIS mind!

As a former test pilot, 50/50 was probably good enough in HIS mind!

I don't believe that for a second, but i cannot read into the mind of Neil Armstrong the former test pilot.

What i did show is how bad rabinoz' arguments are about meticulously tested equipment and manouvres before the actual take off.

Sorry, but I don't see where you showed that at all.

A little research will show you the incredible level of testing and simulation they performed. Short of actually practiceing a manned landing on the moon, obviously! 🤣🤣

Sorry, but I don't see where you showed that at all.

A little research will show you the incredible level of testing and simulation they performed. Short of actually practiceing a manned landing on the moon, obviously! 🤣🤣

So why thinks Neil Armstrong he has a 50-50 chance of actually touching the moon surface ?

1 They simply couldn't replicate the moon circomstances correctly on earth during testing..to many unknowns (contrary to what rabinoz claims)
2 They failed and succeded 50-50 during most simulation programs on earth....and Neil simply believed the 50-50 results during simulation would be representative for the moon as well.
3 Neil is talking out of his ass, deliberately exagerating to increase his own bravery when mentioning a 50-50 chance, because everything they could possible test was covered for 99% in all those years prior to Apollo 11.
4 ''here to laugh at you'' is playing ''da stupid'' 

Well, he made it, after a small bit of drama concerning fuel, to the surface of the moon.

So 5: DutChy Is da stupid!!

Well, he made it, after a small bit of drama concerning fuel, to the surface of the moon.

So 5: DutChy Is da stupid!!

Please elaborate about why Neil Armstrong says he believed he had a 50-50 chance of touching the moon while everything they needed to know about a safe moon landing was tested and understood in the years prior to Apollo according to rabinoz and appearently yourselves too?

Is this some sort of logic derived from a different dimension that i fail to understand ?

Who said "everything" was tested?

They tested all that they possibly could.

I will not waste my time with you, dUtcHy, do you blame me?

I will, however, laugh at you! 🤣

Who said "everything" was tested?

They tested all that they possibly could.

I will not waste my time with you, dUtcHy, do you blame me?

I will, however, laugh at you! 🤣

Great that means you have a different opinion than rabinoz who claims ''they tested everything they HAD to know for a successfull moonlanding''
And i imagine no one thinks a 50-50 chance of proper landing is all you need to know.

Now i laugh at you for leaving such a huge gap for me to poke holes in.,.....

Quote from: Curiouser and Curiouser on January 14, 2019, 06:53:14 PM

Quote from: Shifter on January 14, 2019, 06:48:42 PM

Get an entire population to believe a falsehood about their own world and you have great influence over them. If you can believe some ludicrous ideology about the Earth being a globe zooming around the universe at over 2 million km/h (using some made up 'Great Attractor as a reference' you will have them believe anything regardless of what their own eyes say otherwise.

That's an interesting hypothesis that has no basis in fact.

Exactly. The Earth zooming around the universe at over 2 million km/h, NO basis in fact whatsoever. Thank you for affirming. And what of us Australians? Are we hanging by our feet as we zoom around the universe? Everywhere I have been on this planet, from Canberra to Reykjavik, I have felt the exact same orientation. The ground beneath me and the sky above me.

No ,you are not hanging by your feet ,because there is no side force that can pull you from Earth.Are you serious with this questions ? Learn first ,how physics work and then try to act smart with those silly questions.It's obvious that there aren't any educated people like scientists ,pilots,engineers and etc among you..but come on ! You have a couple of years left to prove your point ,because technology is advancing ,and soon there will be space tours for civilians.So you must provide creditable evidence for your "theory" ,but so far ,you are getting nowhere !

Quote from: Here to laugh at you on January 23, 2019, 09:17:54 AM

Well, he made it, after a small bit of drama concerning fuel, to the surface of the moon.

So 5: DutChy Is da stupid!!

Please elaborate about why Neil Armstrong says he believed he had a 50-50 chance of touching the moon while everything they needed to know about a safe moon landing was tested and understood in the years prior to Apollo according to rabinoz and appearently yourselves too?

Is this some sort of logic derived from a different dimension that i fail to understand ?

"Neil Armstrong says he believed he had a 50-50 chance of touching the moon" but he did not say that he had a 50-50 chance of returning alive.

Apollo 13 failed to touch the moon but the crew returned safely.

But I did not say that "everything they needed to know about a safe moon landing was tested and understood in the years prior to Apollo"!

If you disagree please show exactly where I made that claim?

What has been said is that by the time the Apollo 10 mission returned on 26 May 1969 everything that could be done to prepare for the final step of landing on the moon had been done. Obviously, the actual landing could not be practised until the final landing and that was the Apollo 11 mission.

Many say that they had not practised flying the LM until Apollo 11 but that is quite untrue. Both Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin practised for many hours on the Lunar Landing Training Vehicle:

Lunar Landing Training Vehicle (LLTV): "300 Feet To The Moon" ~ 1971 NASA; Lunar Module Trainer
In addition, Apollo 9 gave practice in handling the LM under weightless conditions in LEO and during the Apollo 10 mission the LM was taken to within 50,000 ft (about 15 km) of the moon's surface.

So, it is not "some sort of logic derived from a different dimension that i fail to understand" but from facts that you refuse to acknowledge!

Btw , why did you sneek out of the topic where i presented that Neil Armstrong said he had a 50-50 chance of actually landing the lander on the moon ?( very much  contradictory to your ‘they were on top of every possible circomstances because of superb testing prior to Apollo 11)

What did I sneak out if? Do you mean this silly post?

Quote from: Here to laugh at you on January 23, 2019, 09:27:00 AM

I will not waste my time with you, dUtcHy, do you blame me?
I will, however, laugh at you! 🤣

Great that means you have a different opinion than rabinoz who claims ''they tested everything they HAD to know for a successfull moonlanding''
And i imagine no one thinks a 50-50 chance of proper landing is all you need to know.

Now i laugh at you for leaving such a huge gap for me to poke holes in.,.....

Laugh away if that's what makes you happy, but you've nothing to laugh at!

I replied to that and I see nothing inconsistent in my reply and there is no huge gap for you to poke holes in!
There is nothing even inconsistent between "'they tested everything they HAD to know for a successfull moonlanding'' And "a 50-50 chance of" a successful landing.
There was always a risk of unforeseen events, as in Apollo 13.
On most mission many little things did go wrong but with crew present "work-arounds" were found.

But please show where I said these exact words ''they tested everything they HAD to know for a successfull moonlanding''.
You put that in quotes thus claiming that those were the exact words that I said!
Now either you show where I said exactly that or admit to you are guilty of a fraudulent claim.

I expanded on that in my reply that you shied away from answering.

Go back and take your losses for once. << Idiotic garbage ignored! >>

What losses? I see no losses.

By the way in case you hadn't heard there were six successful Apollo landings as well as three others that orbited the moon, get used to the facts!
Here's a little of the third party evidence:
         Third-party evidence for Apollo Moon landings
         How Do We Know The Moon Landing Really Happened?
          How to See All Six Apollo Moon Landing Sites
         11 Proofs That The Apollo Moon Landings Were NOT Fake, Humans have been to the Moon.

But just what do you gain if you prove the that they were not real?
Most of the evidence from Bill Kaysing (the proven liar) and Bart Sibrel (the proven deceiver) comes from other space missions so if you claim that all space missions are faked you are a total hypocrite.

Bye bye, have a nice day.