Why does NASA never give a straight answer?

[VforVindication]

Is it because they lie all the time?

Updates

+1 y

I know this is a replica of my other question. But the other one was compromised by two trolls who hijacked it. I will make sure it does not happen again. I am ready for them. They seem to hate this question or topic.

[Soteris]

Ever thought that maybe things are just more complicated than you give it credit for?

For example? Why is it harder to keep in contact with something really close to the earth than something really far from the earth? Because the earth itself gets in the way and reduces the angles in which you can see something that is closer as compared to something far away. You can of course mitigate that by having more communication sites spread around the world to keep contact when the previous one loses it but that increases the cost exponentially and requires you to have access to locations in other countries to do this.

Let me fire up paint and demonstrate this:

As demonstrated, you could theoretically keep in contact with the moon with only two communications bases on earth where as you would need many maaaany more to always keep in contact with the ISS space station.

This is your problem. You got an oversimplified understanding of everything which tells you that something closer should be easier to keep contact with from earth than something much further away when that is not at all a given in reality. Instead of taking a few moment to look this up or just thinking about it you instead jump straight to the conclusion that "THEY MUST BE LYING TO ME!".

You are a lazy thinker. You dont want to understand the problem or reality, if you dont get the right answer the first time you try to think of something you just give up.

[VforVindication]

There is more complicated and then there is also way too exaggerated to be possible. Where does NASA draw the line? They contradict themselves because they lie. Their fabricated stories are falling apart.

[Soteris]

Again, I have no reason to assume NASA is lying to me. Another example of your intellectual laziness is being surprised that astronauts can't always see the stars. The answer is that the light from the stars is super faint and basically any light pollution will wash them out. Examples of this is trying to see stars during the day. Trying to see the stars during the night but in a city with a bunch of lights. Another source of light pollution is the moon, which means when its full moon out you will see less stars.

Astronauts dont just have the sun and the moon to worry about when they want to see stars, they can also receive light pollution from the earth itself. In other words, if you are in a space station close to the Earth and a bunch of light is coming off from it then that will also wash out the stars you could see.

It is actually surprisingly hard to see stars if you dont specifically engineer something to aid you.

[VforVindication]

''Intellectual laziness''. You seem pretty intellectually lazy to avoid everything i am speaking about to talk about what you want. The pool, the drowning ''astronauts'', the Nixon no delay phone call to the moon with the moon drawing on the wall. The bubbles in ''space'', etc.

[VforVindication]

Don't you find it odd that all these ''experts'' are contradicting themselves talking about whether or not you see the stars? Doesn't that seem even a bit odd to you? You would think that they were all onboard in the same direction having all witnessed the same thing. But no.

[Soteris]

Are you talking about when the liquid cooling almost drowns an astronaut? You do realize that they have liquid cooling in their suits right? And the fact that even a small amount of liquid is a problem in a space suit because it clings to your body like when an astronaut shed a few tears and suddenly became incapacitated because the tears built up and clung to their eyes.

As for "bubbles" in space walks and whatnot, I have not found examples that looks like bubbles to me. Just looks like random junk and debris floating around at most.

As for the the no-delay phone call to the moon that obviously had a delay. More specifically, a 3 second delay (1.5 seconds there and 1.5 seconds back give or take). You however are missing the point in which this delay would show itself, specifically this is the delay after Nixon speaking and until they speak from the moon. Nixon can obviously jump in immediately after he hears their response. Its not like he needs to sit in his chair and think of a response for a few seconds before he replies which is why from our point of view that part has no delay where as the response from the moon has twice the time of the delay.

Nothing you have come up with is in any way strange, never was.

[VforVindication]

That is the thing. We will never agree on anything so what is the point? I do not think it was liquid cooling. It was pool water because they are underwater with the cameramen scuba divers and the real ( not replica ) ''space'' station. That is where all the magic happens, in a pool. The bubbles form because they are underwater. Makes total sense. Debris floating around would be a huge danger factor if they really were in outer space fyi. So they are obviously not.

And about the Nixon video. If that is the unedited version of the video, there is zero delay. There should be a good amount of delay. But i mean, NASA makes stupid mistakes all the time but obviously you are here to try to convince me that it is all real. Good luck. Because i am a firm believer that they faked it all.

Fyi, i used to believe until i started to see all the fakery they use to dupe people.

[Soteris]

Debris that comes from the space station itself or its inhabitants are no danger at all flying around outside. The danger of such debris is when its not traveling alongside you in the same orbit but in a different orbit that intersects you.

Everything is relative after all, two things traveling really fast but in the same direction are "still" by their own perspective where as two slow things traveling towards each other adds up their speed when colliding. Since the space station is traveling in 17150 miles per hour and anything else it will encounter would also be traveling at around that speed at the very least since that is the speed you must have to maintain that orbit then whatever it crashes into going the wrong way will become quite dangerous.

As for bubbles, if they actually tried to fool everyone with a fake space station set inside water why would they release bubbles? Bubbles dont just come from anywhere, its pretty easy to just get rid of all the air trapped around the submerged prop and space suits before you start filming.

Regarding the phonecall to the moon, you can see it here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VLyJ9FHDO-c

There is about a 3 second delay expected for a signal to go from earth, to the moon and back which would make it the shortest delay we would expect. The delay from when Nixon stops speaking and the astronauts do is much longer than 3 seconds. By my count its more like 8 seconds give or take.

Once again, they would not have the cinematography technology to hide weightlessness in a pool of water while making it look like space back when we were landing on the moon. This is just a fact. Something you refuse to even address.

[VforVindication]

I don't agree that it is ''space'' debris. Like i said, they are obviously bubbles because they are fooling everyone in a pool using CGI. Did you even watch the video? The proof is all there. And what makes you think that ''Mars'' is not really Devon Island?

[VforVindication]

And the Nixon call is so ridiculous. That you would think that i am gullible enough to believe it is possible is funny. There is just no way that call is real ffs. But my question, is the drawing up on the wall real? Of the moon landing itself while he was making that ''phone call''.

[VforVindication]

All it would take is a tiny debris making a tiny, itsy hole in the ''space'' suit and game over. To think they would risk that, and to think they actually control the direction of that ''debris'' (water bubbles) is just comical.

[Soteris]

That does not look like bubbles to me though. It looks like junk with constant velocity something that humans accumulate all the time around the floor and what not except this time its floating. A bubble would change shape, flow in the same direction and change velocity as well as be disturbed by movement around it due to water currents.

And again, they could not do pool CGI back when they were landing on the moon. The technology did not exist.

[VforVindication]

Obviously ''moon'' set is more the term i should have used. Not ''moon landing''. It never happened.

[Soteris]

Then why are there retroreflectors on the moon right now?

[VforVindication]

Not back then but now, yes, definitely. And they do have scuba diving cameramen filming them when they are in that pool in their ''space'' suits. What does that tell you?

[VforVindication]

Back then it was more about the ''moon'' studio set and harnesses to make them seem as though they are floating when they move around. They also slowed down the video to make them seem as if in a low gravity setting. When you speed up the video a bit it shows the normal speed and they are obviously in an earthly environment.

[VforVindication]

''space debris''*

[Soteris]

Training and testing? Part of testing is to document everything, especially if it is expensive to test or even train so you can get more information out of studying all the information you got in fewer tries. Saves the tax payers some money which is nice too.

Also, of course it will look like they are on earth if you speed it up. Gravity can be thought of as acceleration over time. Change the time AKA speed up the video and you change how the "gravity" looks like. Of course it does not account for jumping too high or whatever but the speed in which they fall will look more earthlike.

As for wires, they did not really have that technology either. Or rather, they did not have the technology to actually hide them properly. You can look at Star Wars which came out years later and see just how bad the wire technology actually was.

[VforVindication]

They did use wires. And when the bag falls, it falls at normal earth speed. Stop lying. We know that it is all fake.

[Soteris]

No they did not and no it did not fall normal earth speed.

[VforVindication]

Yes it did fyi.

[Soteris]

No it did not, and if it did it would not make sense considering you have repeatedly said they speed up the footage.

[VforVindication]

No, i said they slow down the footage. And when the bag falls at normal speed, the video is on normal speed. Which means you have to fastforward the video to compensate for the slowed down video.

[Soteris]

Why do you even assume that the video is speed up anyways? Even if you are correct that would not prove anything. Speed is just velocity/time. If you change the time you change the speed. It does not matter if the gravity is twice as much or half as you can always speed up or slow down the "time" in the video to make it earth approximate.

It is a very bad test to try figure out if its fake or not.

[jshm2]

NASA like any company needs to keep funding and staff happy.

[VforVindication]

Bingo!

[VforVindication]

Wait, by funding you mean us right? I don't agree with you then. Keep us happy by lying to us. Too bad there are a lot of sheeple still sleeping. You get the MHO but if i could i would remove it.

[EmmaMary]

Have we ever been to the moon, or was it just an extremely clever film set like was done in the film Capricorn One?

It does make me wonder at least!

[VforVindication]

Yes, exactly! If they can easily replicate it in a movie then they can absolutely fake it all.

[VforVindication]

Stanley Kubrick was a genius.

[VforVindication]

The Shining has a hidden message showing that they never went to the moon. Stanley wanted to send that message. Then there was Eyes Wide Shut meaning most people are not seeing what is really going on. Or closing their eyes to not see it. He shows us the cultists who control everything in that film.

[Static_In_The_Attic]

The Government Does The Same Thing! No Straight Answers.

[VforVindication]

The satellites are attached to balloons though.

[Static_In_The_Attic]

That looks like a spy balloon.

[VforVindication]

Maybe to you but to me it looks like a broken down satellite.

[VforVindication]

How about this one?

[VforVindication]

Or this one? https://www. gannett-cdn. com/presto/2020/11/19/PPHX/a12f3a55-4bd0-43cd-a26c-fe645fce806a-Satellite_falls_from_sky_and_lands_near_Navajo_Nation_officials_home_in_Dennehotso. jpg? crop=503,283, x1, y0&width=503&height=283&format=pjpg&auto=webp

[VforVindication]

[Static_In_The_Attic]

https://youtu.be/6OwnBuPbMqc

[VforVindication]

Lmao

[Dargil]

The US government never gives a straight answer. They always want to hold back because the truth can be accepted and then not feared. The UFO's and the Kennedy Assassination are examples. They know the answers. They know where the Cocaine in the white house came from. They know who the Supreme Court leaker was. That will always hold back the truth

[OddBeMe]

Not even gonna bother “why” you’re pissed with NASA. But scientists are reluctant to give vague answers like “are there aliens?” Or “when will global warming destroy us?”

Those are actually stupid questions that lack any sense of nuance, which I imagine defines you.

[VforVindication]

Not even talking about these stupid questions that YOU are mentioning, not ME.

[VforVindication]

Did you even watch the video? Watch the video instead of talking nonsense please.

[AviatorTom]

You probably believe the earth is flat too.

Did you ever think that some of the photos produced by the conspiracy theorists are doctored, just so they can make money on YouTube?

[VforVindication]

No, that is false. But every picture of NASA is fake and photoshopped.

[AngryCarl2]

You have the right to free speech. You can even waste it on this kind of bs if you like.

[VforVindication]

Thank you and you have the right to say it is bullshit. That is your claim and i respect it.

[AngryCarl2]

Damn, I was expecting to get roasted!

[VforVindication]

Lmao loll cheers buddy 👍🏻