Confirm is fake la..

They do it to show superpower over china and russia sahaja

Armstrong is not the only person that landed on Moon.

In total, 6 missions manage to land their crews on it.

If other Great Powers with more scientists in their pay doesnt dispute the US landing,then i dont think anyone has more reasons to believe otherwise.

Everyone was watching closely on the moon landing especially USSR. The soviets will be having a field day if they were to find out the landing was a hoax

Damnit I didn't realize Necro thread

This post has been edited by Rusty Nail: May 14 2025, 05:15 PM

I wonder why people doubt it

If last time can, but why now America can't. It's a simple question people are asking. 😅

bcs in late 60s all superpower racing who can go further in space to show power. Now no interest ady

landing on moon earth in california

Lol

if you ask me would i 69 again, yes

Unker how come last year u talk more. This year u words getting lesser

Exactly the question. Its like why ghost appear only on potato cam. But not on good cam.

Tired of sohems.

Owai

NASA's Artemis program is designed to be a long-term, sustainable approach to lunar exploration, unlike the Apollo missions, which were more focused on short-term lunar landings2. The Artemis program relies on the Space Launch System (SLS), which is a modernized and more powerful rocket compared to the Saturn V used in Apollo.

If political pressure were to demand a faster timeline, NASA would likely opt to accelerate Artemis rather than revert to Apollo-style rockets. The infrastructure, technology, and partnerships built around Artemis—including the Orion spacecraft, Lunar Gateway, and Human Landing System—are far more advanced and aligned with future Mars missions.

That said, NASA has historically adapted to political shifts, so while a complete return to Apollo-style rockets is unlikely, adjustments to Artemis' timeline or mission structure could happen if necessary
-copilot-

https://www.nasa.gov/missions/artemis/artem...llo-to-artemis/

Though a historical accomplishment, the moon landing came at a cost. From 1960 to 1973, the US federal government invested $25.8 billion into Project Apollo, which is about $318 billion in 2023 dollars.

Y necro old thread??

well, same person also believe earth is flat

lol

During that time, the hatred for communist were all time high, and America was bombing many SEA countries that involved with communist ideology.

Anyone, including communist or not, who go against the narrative will be labeled as a traitor and a communist lover/sympathisers.

Heck, even now if you say anything that is in favor of Russia, they will automatically label it as Russia propaganda.

After many years, people don't bother about it anymore, exactly like covid, most people just want to move on even if they were lied repeatedly.

This post has been edited by smsid: May 14 2025, 07:35 PM

Technology should cost less now. 1969-72 cost is high because of learning curve yeda2. Now the price of tech and cost of acquiring knowledge is low. Or you mean suddenly everyone forgot how to go to the moon and need to relearn? Lol

After the Apollo program ended, US concentrated their resources on the space shuttle program and probes such as Voyager

Russia concentrated on Space Stations

Both were also actively putting satellites in orbit

The priority changed until today

So if they go today, do you think they will just build back rockets like the 1960s?

It's not simply just change the equipment to modern tech

All the factories, engineers, etc. that used to build the Apollo rockets are no more

That's why they are starting from scratch

This post has been edited by 30624770: May 14 2025, 07:48 PM