You have no hard evidence to support the moon landing. Interviews, 50[-]year old pictures and grainy video files are not hard evidence.
Really, now!?Are you really arguing that all "
50[-]year old pictures" and "
grainy video"
must be disqualified?
That would mean that there's "
not hard evidence" of the War of Yankee Aggression (e.g., unsettling still photos by Matthew Brady), the sinking of the
Titanic or the
Lusitania, the Attack on
Pearl Harbor, and
D-Day.
What a pompous
modernist you must be! What in
[Hades ] do you believe that the available technology allowed us back then? Do you personally understand
any of the
photographic technology!?
Hah! I'm quite sure that I know that answer to
that question!
Maybe your rhetorical allies ought to doggedly promote a "theory" that World-War II never happened!?
If in 1969, at the launch of the first (successful) Apollo moon landing mission, the technology did not exist for sending a manned space vehicle beyond earth’s orbit, how can we be celebrating in 2019 events which could not have yet possibly taken place [....]
Well,
[Hades! ] You've nailed me! NASA has admitted that the
alleged launch of
Apollo 11 was secretly delayed until
nobody was watching. NASA has refused to admit to citizen accusations that airplanes
aerially dispersed powerful depressant drugs over the crowds that had gathered that night. So practically no one saw the Apollo 11 launch, and of those people who claimed in "interviews" to have witnessed it and "been there", such testimony could be easily dismissed.
Topic: Moon Landings - No Hard Science Knowledge (Read 32385 times)