Date: July 04, 2021 07:26AM
Brother Of Jerry Wrote:
> You are way too conversant in this nonsense. Put
> the tin foil down. ;)
> Neil deGrasse Tyson was asked about this and
> basically said it is easier to just go to the moon
> than to fake it. They brought moon rocks back that
> were able to pass chemical tests that didn't even
> exist in 1969. It's really hard to fake something
> so well that it anticipates all future scientific
> developments and correctly responds to them.
> Especially when they are too inept to realize they
> need both floodlights on the same side of the
> stage for the faked photos.
> Tyson giving short answer to the question. He has
> given longer ones, but I can't find them right
The near 1,000 pounds of lunar samples brought back from the Apollo missions have been studied globally for over 50 years now and they all pass the test.
The Soviet Union had everything to gain by blowing the lid of the supposed hoax (people under 35 years old have no memory of how intense the Cold War actually was), they tracked Apollo 11, and the following Apollo missions, and conceded that the missions did occur.
The lunar experiments left by the Apollo astronauts are still in use today.
The Apollo landing sites have now been photographed from lunar orbit. Guess what, you can see the descent stage of the lunar modules, you can see the tracks left by the astronauts, you can even see the lunar rovers from Apollos 15, 16, and 17, parked exactly where they were left.
The lack of stars, the shadows, the behavior of the sand, the behavior of the flag, and every other issue, can easily be explained by just a small amount of research.