they have the technology.. The problem is the cost - we're at a small fraction of the budget given 50 years ago and as stated in the video. Also you cant compare the Mars crafts because they arent manned lol
@@jones1749 Private companies deliberately slow down progress by decades because they want to milk the last model before rolling out the new one. It is still corruption, just a different form.
@@gatocles99 Except for Musk (who, if anything, is in too much of a hurry - hence the jibe 'Elon Time' but eventually delivers) and Bezos who is too cautious but at least he is spending his own money. No coincidence both are software entrepreneurs with different development mind set than the fossil, relic of Cold War contractors.
@ Nasa also explained why its pointless re-building plans from 50 years ago. There is an in-depth video explaining how it's easier to build a new rocket from the ground up than to make an exact copy of an old design. You can simplify the new design and make it more cost-effective the second time around. We got there once, we can make there again.
@@oneeco Building 'new' rockets died in the 60's. Why build inferior technological 'rockets' when we possess the capabilities to back engineer downed UFO's? Ask Bob Lazar about "The Sport Model". By the way, saw and listened to Lazar at the McMenamins UFO gathering last May in McMinnville, OR.
So according to NASA, they had the technology to go to the moon several times in the 60's and 70's, but not anymore. Even tho our *phones* are far more advanced than anything they had back then. Hmmmm... 🤔🤔
Thats true, but its not a one dimensional scale of computing power. Our phones may have more processing power, but they werent built to accurately simulate gravity and land a ship. The apollo systems were, and thats why they could be used despite being so weak. Its not like we could integrate an iPhone 10 into a lunar lander.
@@Hermes1548 Well we may have taped over the original VHS of the moon landing, but they do have a copy that has been converted to digital with better clarity than any other recording and the telemetry from the Apollo 9 landing. Unfortunately NASA's huge budget cuts got into their data storage and as a result many of the tapes were taped over or failed to be replaced as VHS tapes only last about 40 years depending on location (but due to the quality of original recordings many were left unusable). www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a11/Apollo_11_TV_Tapes_Report.pdf
@@viper45428 they don't believe something because they know its true, they believe it because they WANT it to be true. Just like religion, logic goes bye bye...
NASA is fine. However you are correct, that it is private industry who will carry out A LOT of this mission. Most of the cargo will be delivered with commercial vehicles. Moon lander will be made by private company too. Not to mention that there will be at least 2 ways to get the crew to Gateway apart from Orion and SLS.
@@MrOverjay This just in.... Boeing, North American, Grumman, Rockwell, International Business Machines (among many other corporations) were mostly responsible for making Apollo happen. So everything new under the Sun, and Moon then.
@Please Complete All Fields Again NASA was very much a middle man of the Apollo era. And middle (management), men are always proven incompetent, case in point? I give you Apollo 13. Thankfully the Engineers managed to save their Bacon. But shows exclusively how far down their incompetence goes.
Oh? So Apollo 11 actually went to the moon? Hmm, are you sure? Isn't NASA still trying to get outside and beyond the Van Allen Belt? Why would Buzz say " Because we never went there"?? One of the biggest lies the world inhabitants have ever been told.
R. G. Seems no one is able to face up to the hard truth. On the very first moon landing, Neil Armstrong wore the same pair of boots for four days solid. He left them behind on the moon's surface and after 60 years, they have probably aired out, but no one is willing to take the chance!
NASA: the moon is the gateway to deep space missions. Also NASA: Well we had the technology to go to the moon but we destroyed it and it would be too painful to bring it back. Our next goal should be mars... Journalists: we haven't been to the moon again because NASA doesn't have enough money...
@@lucientjinasjoe1578 But then India will obviously be part of the conspiracy, just like Soviet Union was part of the conspiracy during the landings :P Nothing will ever satisfy the keyboard warriors and deniers. Most of them are trolls, but a few of them genuinely believe that our greatest achievement as humankind did not happen. It's unfortunate that for all of the information that can be obtained at a click of a mouse button, they choose to ignore the absolutely overwhelming amount of evidence, and instead put misguided faith into easily debunked conspiracy theories. All for the sake of the empty and meaningless feeling of being special, unlike the rest of the 'sheeple'.
@@rafflesmaos All the fucking images you see of space, planets, and black holes are still computerized. What the fuck makes you 100% sure we've been to the moon, when there's lots of evidence to dispute ever going to the moon. :/
If $50 million a day for several decades is not enough for NASA to get us to the moon, maybe they are not the right people for the job, or maybe it's not possible to get to the moon.
Didn't Apolo do it like 6 or seven times almost flawlessly 50 years ago? What have they been doing for the past 50 years if not improving on technology that already worked and quite well I might add?
Sonmi, NASA knew they were playing Russian roulette with every Apollo lunch. They spun the chamber poorly on Apollo 1 pad test & Apollo 13. They got by, by the skin of their teeth, on the reentry of Apollo 15. When the Nixon administration offered them the face saving “out“ of “budget limitations “, NASA gratefully, and graciously, accepted the cancellation of the last three Apollo missions. The engineering has now matured to the extent that it is now possible to do human launches with “a fair approximation of safety”. As sadly demonstrated by Challenger and Columbia.
When I was a kid they said they'd be going to the moon by 2015, I thought Space was going to see a resurgence, but I was wrong and so were my dreams of being an astronaut and I went further then most I got a job at 12 and saved up money every year to go to space camp. $3000 each year as a preteen and teenager. Running simulators learning all I could, doing good in school etc. But in the end, Now I'll be happy if I can just earn enough to have hobbies involving space, get a nice telescope, have an elite dangerous set up, a mock simulated cockpit. etc. VR get back into my childhood passion of robotics. I know I'll never get to go there but I can still get a taste of it, hopefully if only I wasn't in so much pain when I tried to work or get a job, it would be so much more do able.
We used to think the moon was made of cheese, so we went. After discovering it was not composed of cheese, we never went back! The power of cheese is a force for good.
Going to the moon is more realistic now than 50 years ago. They didn't have the right technology. Their main goal was to brag and intimidate their rivals. This whole moon landing is a complete hoax. They went to space and returned but not moon.
I mean there's such a thing as sunk cost. Only if it's worth it for the money that can still be saved should it go ahead, because you're right that the money spent is not coming back
The only reason to send men to the Moon is, if only a man can do the job. Remotely controlled semi autonomous devices are a much better choice. Remember Spirit and Opportunity? That's bang for your buck, that manned missions will never match.
at 7:45 she says blue origin is developing a method of putting a bunch of cargo into deep space, then proceeds to show us a video of the new shepard sub-orbital rocket lol
@@harpuaslutbag2997 I believe she's referring to New Glenn (still on paper and in the engineering labs). There are renders of it, but that's all they've got. Granted, same thing with the BFR.
Pork-barrel spending. It's not even long term job creation because opening up space has the potential to create millions upon millions of jobs. But that's more than one election cycle away to it never gets approved. Instead, it's money to some politician's corporate friends and very specific jobs in very specific states.
We never went to the moon! the amount of Lead to protect the astronauts from deadly radiation would have needed an enormous amount of rocket propulsion which we did not have.
@Bitwise Magick Explain why we can put telescopes, satellites, rovers, landers, abandoned spacecraft, and manned spacecraft outside of LEO but FOR SOME REASON IN YOUR MIND not humans -_- they literally said in the video its because of everything theyre putting into SLS (they are over engineering it for future missions) and also using new and very expensive contracts and manufacturing techniques that take SO MUCH MONEY that congress isnt willing to grant them the amount necessary, in the video they literally stated that so far SLS has received only $14 Billion while Apollo received $264 Billion its taken around $4-5 billion just to research & develop (not even build) the fucking crew module for the top of the rocket let alone the whole design and assembly of the launch system, lunar landers, reentry vehicles, life support systems, space stations, lunar vehicles, lunar bases, etc.
but we still have the space craft that allegedly went.. they're in museums now. they could reverse engineer those craft.. right? but that would expose the hoax.. haha
@@uhadme @uhadme People still think all those images of space, black holes, planets, etc. Are real, and not computerized. Of course they would kiss the ass of, and believe anything the government says, when they literally release documents of their lies, and planned events. India, the country struggling the most with water is supposedly landing on the moon in the next few days; and the government has convinced idiots that pretty much some guy named Bob fell asleep on the panel, and it erased ALL of their documents, and backups. Seems totally legitimate.
Apollo in the 60s had 40% of Federal funding, NASA now has 0.4%. Look at how much money we spent on wars since the 60s? You think we're swimming in cash to dish out on space?
It’s not, it’s kind of just the cherry on top. The main reason is a lack of interest from the public, which in and of itself is caused by a myriad of things like conspiracy theorists and the disaster of a program that was the space shuttle. This is why NASA is so precautious, if another disaster happens (which has an almost 95% chance of happening if we just reuse old tech) public opinion will sway decisively against NASA and they will probably be budget cut so hard they might pull out of the ISS early.
I dont know about the rest of you but the first thing i think about when i think why nasa has never went back to the moon the only answer i can come up with is nasa has never been to the moon
@@alexanderthemidI no. It’s a lie. NASA says 2024. Lol. They will postpone it again when we reach 2024. NASA is just telling lies. We have never been to the moon before
@@theeecaveman7634 Except there's plenty of evidence to prove you wrong, and as every scientist knows, you've always been able to go since if you were willing to spend the billions.
While the artifact left on the moon says "We came in peace, for all mankind" it is worth remembering that most of the early rockets were in fact modified Missiles (Either IRBMs for Redstone/Thor/Delta, or ICBM for Atlas/Titan/R7). It stands that NASA should be able to siphon off some military budget for both new weapon development and improved space access.
Or you can just accept the possibility that noone went to the moon.... There's actually no proof and the point they try and sell of losing the technology or it being too expensive is just so ridiculous if you're not close minded. 50 yrs later the tech would not only be better, but it would be more readily available and less expensive to create! IMO, technology improved so fast that they just lost the ability to lie about it. Open your mind and consider that you may have been lied to. Look how the gov't has handled Covid silencing doctors and scientists that disagree. The difference now is now we have the internet and the info is available for everyone.
Yes we no longer have the rocket we would need to make a new one, do you somehow think we would use old technology in the modern age to do this? Do you also think we keep useless rockets just laying around seeing as no one planned to use those rockets for decades? We need to go to low earth orbit at most now adays(some mars flights too and other extreme missions, but those would be inefficient for a moon mission anyways) and because of that we don't have rockets that can go to the moon anymore, they aren't needed.
@@lodiped Exactly, the question was 'Why haven't we been back', and his answer was 'that's the question I'm asking, I think I know the answer. But the fact is that we didn't go [back] there..."
Neil Armstrong wore the same boots for four days and then left them on the moon's surface. By now, they have probably aired out completely, but no one is willing to take that chance!
@@chrispaul7849 Just fyi, video sent from the Moon was also recorded into those tapes from the same radio downlink. But hey, that's merely a fact and hoaxtwats are immune to facts.
"Too Big to Fail" is sadly a very true concept. Some projects are so big with so much money invested from so many sides, that they are impossible to stop even when it's clear they aren't working and won't work.
Except Apollo didn't fail, it did exactly what the USA stated it would do. Put a man on the Moon by the end of the decade and return him safely to earth. JFK didn't write that mission statement and it didn't die with him because it was written by LBJ in the first place. Nixon killed the program.
Because we never landed on the moon. They realized there were many dangers into flying into space: Avoiding the Van Allen Belts. Scratch that “SPEEDING through the Van Allen Belts fast enough” Making sure there is enough fuel back & forth (According to Secondary Sources: Six days of travel: 3.14x10^3 mph for a distance of 2.39x10^5 miles.). Enough food/water for an estimated 6 days to travel back and forth (Does anyone have any information from a primary source that the flight took 76 hours). Building a proper lightweight suit to walk on the moon.
The sad reality is that NASA was all dressed up with nowhere to go. All the interesting places in the Universe are pretty much forever out of your reach with any kind of rocket powered space crafts.
Wait so they randomly wanted to do it and did, then 50 years later we out here not able to build it at all, but I’m still seeing ted talks of goofballs talking about my kids on Mars 😂
@@FACTCHECKbyGoogle-Ai look at this graph, it is the funding of Nasa over the years. external-preview.redd.it/VUzAtU2JibvCcv16UYXX5fIg0m0YqkcTCv0LPyK3qcM.png?width=580&auto=webp&s=7e049bef2c404f29c3224426eae2201baab6166d
@TheTruthWillOut Stop lying. Someone saying "we currently lack a manned spacecraft for going past LEO" is NOT the same as saying it's impossible or that you never could.
@TheTruthWillOut And every NASA rep you talk to will tell you they went to the Moon, and that they're sending probes and landers to the Moon and farther. You, as so many other hoaxtwats, try to take statement of "we currently have the capability to X" as meaning "only X is possible and ever was". This is just absurd dishonesty.
@@yassm "Height of the Cold War" has been used to refer to any point between 1945 & 1989. It's just one of those terms people throw out without thinking about what it means. There were several periods of tension and risk during the Cold War, not one "height". The space race was a major element of the Cold War, but it wasn't the most important, dangerous, or defining period of the Cold War. There are many contenders for the "height" and my irritation is that people use the term without thinking about what or when the "height" was.
Apollo happened when you were using floppy disk, big PC, and no UA-cam of course. Now I hold a lot faster computing power in my hand... storing a hundred of GB of data. It is difficult to believe that we could (easily it seems) go to the moon 50 years ago. But cannot do it now!
Exactly what I was saying in a comment just now. It would basically call their shit out because of how clear the video would be, and that doesn't suit them. They like that old grainy and hazy footage, because it hides a lot of shit.
@@oOdOdY75Oo You do realise that was live footage shot on film and being transmitted from space, right? And that was just APOLLO 11. Apollo 8 set up the Moon Landing through orbiting the moon with the command module. How would image clarity prove that its fake?
@@vincere_ not to mention the Chinese recently got a lander on the moon roaming around taking pics. Lying about landing on the moon is just nuts for any government. The Soviets accepted their defeat, none of the 400,000 men and women working for the Apollo missions seem to have said anything to the contrary, and neither does any of the governmental or private space equipmemt and exploration companies. Unless you really believe in lizard people there is little reason to believe a faked moon landing
Supersonic and hypersonic travel. Still waiting to board a plan and travel from on side of the planet to the other in 90 minutes. Hey, I would settle for 3 hours. The Concorde promised so much when it was built in 1969. Now, nothing. Can't even travel at the speed of sound if I wanted to.
I think I know why they haven't gone back to the moon. The only reason why we haven even been to the moon for 50 years is because of the space race. The only reason why we go to the moon to beat the Soviets in the cold war, Not to explore space.
As for "winning" the side race. Russia sent the first remote controlled rover to the moon, less than a year after Apollo 11. Building the foundation of the mars rover program in 1970.
So nasa goes to the moon in the 60s where color tvs was one of the greatest achievements in technology in that decade. Fast forward to almost 2020 , where phones that fit on your hand are computers that surpass any computer in the 60s yet we can get there again
The thing is - rocket engines are not the same, as the computers. And most of the funds went not into the development of superheavy launch vehicles (or even keeping infrastructure for producing them operational), but into making the Space Shuttle work. Nowadays, we have no rockets of lunar class, because Space Shuttle was eating funds all those years.
We haven’t gone back to cover the fact that we never went to begin with I don’t wanna be that guy bc I wanna believe it was true but something doesn’t sit right with me like 50 years and we still haven’t gone back that’s sus
@@jonnygranville281 Why? It's a waste of money. Rich people like the recognition but I doubt they're going to come together and throw a trillion dollars at the sky.
@@millionaireno1382 by that logic they could of done it in next 10 years. And they had decades! Can't believe people people so blindly believe everything they've been served...
"other players like ... blue origin are developing powerful rockets to get cargo to deep space" small correction - blue origin cant even get cargo into orbit, nevermind the deep space
They could do it then with antique end 60's technology, really ? And after 50 years with technology have become way more powerful and cheaper still no one has gone back ? Make believe is big business with people's tax money.
So, pyramids have been built over 5000 years ago, surely the technology has progressed since then, still we don't see no new pyramids today, why is that ?
@@GilPaulbert - The Concorde flew 43 years ago, surely the technology has progressed since then, still we don't see no new Concordes today, why is that ?
10:02 Former NASA deputy administrator Garver: We need to win at something right now that NASA is uniquely skilled to do and that is to address climate change. NOAA: Am I a joke to you?
Garver is a joke. She's part of the reason NASA collapsed and has the gall to assert NASA should have anything to do with climate change. NASA are supposed to be the ONLY ORGANIZATION NOT WORRIED ABOUT CLIMATE CHANGE. Their ENTIRE FUCKING GOAL IS TO GET US OFF THIS PLANET FOR GOOD. AND THESE ARETHE PEOPLE WE TRUST. FUCK ME.
It's all bs. Our climate is being altered and controlled under the guise of combating "climate change." geoengineering.environment.harvard.edu/geoengineering Harvard disclosed "Project Solar Shield" recently due to people asking questions. Stratospheric Aerosol Injection has been used for decades though. 30 years ago it was global cooling and a incoming ice age, now it's the opposite. I think they enjoy finding out how much they can get away with.
Are we supposed to believe that NASA spent the majority of their Apollo budget on materials and labour? Surely the majority of the cost was research and development. With that all safely behind them they need only a fraction of the original budget to repeat their incredible feat. Don't they?
@J Calhoun you apparently don't realize that no matter how many parts something takes it should still be less than the R&D stage took, or else that means they didn't research & test parts at all. and if 200 billion worth of research got scrapped that's a good sign the entity should not be receiving public funds.
I am and have worked in aerospace, it helps to have a design used before, but if you change it more than just a tiny amount. More or less it must still be completely re-engineered. And none of it is cheap. Ever.
Materials and labor, yes. Labor is ridiculously expensive. You're not hiring just anyone, you're hiring top military contractors and top of their class university graduates. Then you have to pay them every month for years, for as long as the project is around. Labor is *EXPENSIVE.*
Remember they said they lost all informativo from that first Apollo programa, jajajajajajaja really??? The MOST importante programa ever, and you lost the info??? Sing another Song please!!!!
Where in the solar system would you explore next?
Uranus
Titan
Europa, specifically a base there.
Sedna, Ceres, Eros, the Asteroid Belt, and Io.
NASA should explore Spacex, maybe it could learn a thing or two!
We simply don’t have the technology that we had 50 years ago...
"We have the knowledge and the means. All we lack is the will." - C: 299,792 km/s (Seaquark Films)
caav56 they lack the urgency to create a hoax to make political advances during a Cold War
HUH???
😂
Lol
if you locate oil in space NASAs budget will go up
Titan is completely covered in Methane and that can be used as fuel. Funny thing is that NASA just announced a mission to go there
Looks like Titan needs some freedom
Haha
@@ASLUHLUHC3 I couldn't agree with you more brother! 🇺🇸
NASA: finds oil in space.
America: I'll take that.
I'll save you all eleven minutes: the answer is "Decepticons".
.... thumbs-up for the avatar.... RICO'S ROUGHNECKS !!!
Ha ha
😂😂😂
@@rocketcab that Rico is a puny fraud compared the book Juan Rico
Corruption, nepotism, greed, etc..
She talks more history about nasa than why they haven’t gone back to the moon
The NASA history is the reason...
She probably is a diversity hire!
LIARS AND WHORES WHO STEAL OUR TAX DOLLOARS
2019: Plan to go in 2024
2024: Plan to go in 2030
Catch my drift
Tomorrow never comes...
We never went. We never will go
@@zetamale Pierce Brosnan and Suzanne Somers? Special cameo by Roger Moore.
@@jamesbingham1007 all good actors who are/were familiar with film sets.
kind like with the end of the world ;) you catch my drift?
NASA: "We dont have the technology to go to the moon"
Also NASA: *sends spacecraft to Mars*
they have the technology.. The problem is the cost - we're at a small fraction of the budget given 50 years ago and as stated in the video. Also you cant compare the Mars crafts because they arent manned lol
@@jake7323 so you say they have the technology but astronaut say we don't.
snow man you don’t know what they have
snow man wouldn’t have been hard to just improve Apollo but that costs $$
@@jake7323 You would think going to the moon would be cheaper 50 years later...
Don’t worry guys, after Sept. 20th, we will be able to go to the moon in less than 10 minutes. 👽
Eh? There something I don't know?
Yes, we are going to raide area 51
Don't bogie that joint man!
It's a trap!
@@jimmyhamilton8947 it is?
"no one wants to compete"
Hold my elon musk
@Rohit Bind
Dude ISRO already said we aren't competing with anyone
We are just doing things in our own pace
@@sanjeevdandin9350 true, india will send 3 humans to space in 2021.
Tht man will take us to alpha centauri
*india crashed on the moon
@@Karma-ry4sb we are sending again in 2021.
A perfect example of how corruption utterly halts progress.
so ironic that manager saying we have to be at the leading edge, in front of a discardable Senate Launch System rocket.
That's why private companies have been doing so much better
@@jones1749 Private companies deliberately slow down progress by decades because they want to milk the last model before rolling out the new one. It is still corruption, just a different form.
gatocles99 They’re still doing a lot better than NASA right now. It’s not perfect, but it’s better. SpaceX is progressing really far right now
@@gatocles99 Except for Musk (who, if anything, is in too much of a hurry - hence the jibe 'Elon Time' but eventually delivers) and Bezos who is too cautious but at least he is spending his own money.
No coincidence both are software entrepreneurs with different development mind set than the fossil, relic of Cold War contractors.
"To infinity and beyond"
Apollo: we can't go beyond infinity
But you can count past Infinity. Ex. Aleph null, Aleph one, etc.
Actually, you can, quite strangely. Infinities are not born the same size, my friend. Look Georg Cantor up.
Interesting you quote “Buzz Aldrin Lightyear”, a Hollywood fiction.....
There's a vsauce on why this is wrong
@@maddoxmartin5698 to be precise you are counting infinities, not beyond any of the specific infinities
"Huston, we've got a problem."
"Budget problem."
yes big budget problem because everyone knows we have been lying for decades lol
*Houston
Ah yes "Huston"
56 MILLION A DAY?
Let's cut it short.
*NASA hasn't been funded enough. End video.*
Also a lack of public interest and political will. Probably also doesn’t help that our economy is mostly service based and no longer manufacturing
Cardinal but NASA said they destroyed the technologie to go to the Moon. Sounds not like how humanity would deal with that kind of technologie.
@ Nasa also explained why its pointless re-building plans from 50 years ago. There is an in-depth video explaining how it's easier to build a new rocket from the ground up than to make an exact copy of an old design. You can simplify the new design and make it more cost-effective the second time around. We got there once, we can make there again.
Cut it short, nowadays America is shi. , Compare to the old time super America
@@oneeco Building 'new' rockets died in the 60's. Why build inferior technological 'rockets' when we possess the capabilities to back engineer downed UFO's? Ask Bob Lazar about "The Sport Model". By the way, saw and listened to Lazar at the McMenamins UFO gathering last May in McMinnville, OR.
The same reason I haven't been back to Asgard lol
Lol'd
Yes you have, I saw you there!🤥😶
🤣🤣🤣😂
Why the fuck is this TF2 map talking
Did you mean Asland?
Because of the Area 51 raid actually
September 20th
A-10 BRRRRRRTTTT.
@USA#1 !! see you there
Be ready on September 20
@USA#1 !! that's what the government wants you to think
They 'accidentally' erased all the telemetry data - hahahaha
Lol, they needed the tapes..ahh hahaahahahahahah haa ha
Nope, it was never lost.
So according to NASA, they had the technology to go to the moon several times in the 60's and 70's, but not anymore. Even tho our *phones* are far more advanced than anything they had back then. Hmmmm... 🤔🤔
@@Euclides287 Didn't China go there?
Thats true, but its not a one dimensional scale of computing power. Our phones may have more processing power, but they werent built to accurately simulate gravity and land a ship. The apollo systems were, and thats why they could be used despite being so weak. Its not like we could integrate an iPhone 10 into a lunar lander.
Because they never went in the first place!!
So tell me genius, why Soviet Union confirmed landings, when they were USA biggest enemy?
The dog ate my telemetric data...
It's a good thing there's no shortage of photos, video and moon rocks... otherwise, you might have a point.
@@cyberpleb2472 If there's no data, there's no science.
@@Hermes1548 Except that there's lots of data.
@@Hermes1548 Well we may have taped over the original VHS of the moon landing, but they do have a copy that has been converted to digital with better clarity than any other recording and the telemetry from the Apollo 9 landing. Unfortunately NASA's huge budget cuts got into their data storage and as a result many of the tapes were taped over or failed to be replaced as VHS tapes only last about 40 years depending on location (but due to the quality of original recordings many were left unusable). www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a11/Apollo_11_TV_Tapes_Report.pdf
Cyber Pleb wake up, those photos are a joke!
Would love to see them go back.. full 4K live stream 😅
HI! my name is PEWDIPIE! And in this video we will be making pies from moon dust on the moon for our 150 million subscriber special.
@@BaN-cb8tc Unfortunately they will end up dusting off the Nokia 3300 for the recording... 🙃
You will :)
Would like to see them try
I agree full 4k livestream inside a warehouse full of props
One step for man, one dodgy story for mankind.
yeah but thank god we got it on film, lol.
@@basketofdependables4244 Yes true, have you seen Star Trek?
You do realize we've landed on the moon 6 times
@@viper45428 they don't believe something because they know its true, they believe it because they WANT it to be true. Just like religion, logic goes bye bye...
@@viper45428 Moon landings never happend,,,
"NASA must do something we're uniquely qualified to do"
Public: "Yes!"
"And that is... address climate change"
Public: "Oh"
Private industry will be the first to go back to the moon. NASA is filled with too many politics.
EDIT:
I knew it
More like glorious russian industry
Back? You say that like we have been there before lol.
NASA is fine. However you are correct, that it is private industry who will carry out A LOT of this mission. Most of the cargo will be delivered with commercial vehicles. Moon lander will be made by private company too. Not to mention that there will be at least 2 ways to get the crew to Gateway apart from Orion and SLS.
@@MrOverjay This just in.... Boeing, North American, Grumman, Rockwell, International Business Machines (among many other corporations) were mostly responsible for making Apollo happen. So everything new under the Sun, and Moon then.
@Please Complete All Fields Again NASA was very much a middle man of the Apollo era. And middle (management), men are always proven incompetent, case in point? I give you Apollo 13. Thankfully the Engineers managed to save their Bacon. But shows exclusively how far down their incompetence goes.
NASA : Innovation needs high budget
ISRO : Innovation needs Intelligence
China : Innovation needs 20 days at the maximum and your old innovations.
您的所有創新都屬於我們。
Oh? So Apollo 11 actually went to the moon? Hmm, are you sure? Isn't NASA still trying to get outside and beyond the Van Allen Belt?
Why would Buzz say " Because we never went there"?? One of the biggest lies the world inhabitants have ever been told.
Hello Jett, indeed, it was a smal step for man but a giant cheat for mankind....
The real story why they haven’t gotten back there because there weren’t invited into the moon.....
R. G. true
Milt Farrow hold my beer
They were uninvited.
R. G. Seems no one is able to face up to the hard truth. On the very first moon landing, Neil Armstrong wore the same pair of boots for four days solid. He left them behind on the moon's surface and after 60 years, they have probably aired out, but no one is willing to take the chance!
*they weren't
Hard to go back to something you never went to...
@David Watson BRAINWASHED
I know someone who never went to college but he tells everybody he is a college graduate. He now works for NASA!
@@tmo4330 what?
@@erickbenavidez5724 "he says" lol!
@@tmo4330 tell him to hook me up with a job
NASA: the moon is the gateway to deep space missions.
Also NASA: Well we had the technology to go to the moon but we destroyed it and it would be too painful to bring it back. Our next goal should be mars...
Journalists: we haven't been to the moon again because NASA doesn't have enough money...
I hope India will land on the same spot as Apollo 11, so for one's and for all we Will know if people land on the moon
@@lucientjinasjoe1578 But then India will obviously be part of the conspiracy, just like Soviet Union was part of the conspiracy during the landings :P Nothing will ever satisfy the keyboard warriors and deniers. Most of them are trolls, but a few of them genuinely believe that our greatest achievement as humankind did not happen. It's unfortunate that for all of the information that can be obtained at a click of a mouse button, they choose to ignore the absolutely overwhelming amount of evidence, and instead put misguided faith into easily debunked conspiracy theories. All for the sake of the empty and meaningless feeling of being special, unlike the rest of the 'sheeple'.
@@rafflesmaos 🤣
@@rafflesmaos Well said mate. Well said.
@@rafflesmaos All the fucking images you see of space, planets, and black holes are still computerized. What the fuck makes you 100% sure we've been to the moon, when there's lots of evidence to dispute ever going to the moon. :/
Rocket tech in the year 2019? What have you engineers been doing for 50 years?
CDubRealTalk Asking for funds.
Secret Space Program
Funny thing is that rocket tech today is dramatically more advanced than during Apollo. Mainly SpaceX tech but others are slowly catching up.
Paperwork. Reports. Meetings. Miscellaneous Training.
bblauter Right!! Health & Safety in the workplace training! Smh
The red hot chilli peppers said it best "space maybe the final frontier but its made in a hollywood basement"
Damn I never got that and it’s my favorite song how stupid of me to not realize it 😂
If $50 million a day for several decades is not enough for NASA to get us to the moon, maybe they are not the right people for the job, or maybe it's not possible to get to the moon.
You should apply for a job. Clearly you have all the right ideas.
Or maybe you don't know what you're talking about... Who knows.
don't worry Musk will do it for $100 Million a day
Is it really 50m a day? Damn. What are they doing with that?
Tom R exactly!
If $1,879726.40 is not enough for the US military to do its job then maybe doing the job is not possible.
Didn't Apolo do it like 6 or seven times almost flawlessly 50 years ago? What have they been doing for the past 50 years if not improving on technology that already worked and quite well I might add?
Flawlessly is a ridiculous overstatement.
Remember the challenger?
The last 50 years were spent on pouring money into the mistake that was the space shuttle.
gotta get that money from congress
Sonmi, NASA knew they were playing Russian roulette with every Apollo lunch. They spun the chamber poorly on Apollo 1 pad test & Apollo 13. They got by, by the skin of their teeth, on the reentry of Apollo 15.
When the Nixon administration offered them the face saving “out“ of “budget limitations “, NASA gratefully, and graciously, accepted the cancellation of the last three Apollo missions.
The engineering has now matured to the extent that it is now possible to do human launches with “a fair approximation of safety”.
As sadly demonstrated by Challenger and Columbia.
I went to Houston in 1969...haven't been back since....Lost all my Maps!🤣
Houston we have a problem!
The planet Houston?
Haha funny stuff
Bush 1 said in 1998 we are going back to the moon
2018 we are going to the moon in 2024🤣🤣🤣
When I was a kid they said they'd be going to the moon by 2015, I thought Space was going to see a resurgence, but I was wrong and so were my dreams of being an astronaut and I went further then most I got a job at 12 and saved up money every year to go to space camp. $3000 each year as a preteen and teenager. Running simulators learning all I could, doing good in school etc. But in the end, Now I'll be happy if I can just earn enough to have hobbies involving space, get a nice telescope, have an elite dangerous set up, a mock simulated cockpit. etc. VR get back into my childhood passion of robotics. I know I'll never get to go there but I can still get a taste of it, hopefully if only I wasn't in so much pain when I tried to work or get a job, it would be so much more do able.
Juan Gustavo. Politicians talk too much. Didn’t You know that?
We used to think the moon was made of cheese, so we went. After discovering it was not composed of cheese, we never went back! The power of cheese is a force for good.
And we went back 5 more times. And failed 1 time.
Yes cheese is more powerful than anything we been holding our power back
Down voted because JewTube forced this on my playlist.
Truth
because!! they never went
yeah they did.
@@scinary7052 No they really didn't. Do they pay you per rebuttal or per channel video? There are better paid jobs out there!
We can't go back to somewhere we've never been to in the first place.
Going to the moon is more realistic now than 50 years ago. They didn't have the right technology. Their main goal was to brag and intimidate their rivals. This whole moon landing is a complete hoax. They went to space and returned but not moon.
All those cancellations is wasted money. Either you go for it or don't start. But first of all launch that James Webb telescope into space.
seriously!
gast128 yeah, Boeing should do what they did with the 737 max and rush a bodge job through cheap, great idea, what could possibly go wrong.
I mean there's such a thing as sunk cost. Only if it's worth it for the money that can still be saved should it go ahead, because you're right that the money spent is not coming back
The only reason to send men to the Moon is, if only a man can do the job. Remotely controlled semi autonomous devices are a much better choice. Remember Spirit and Opportunity? That's bang for your buck, that manned missions will never match.
james webb telescope, stargazers wet dream
A funny thing happened on the way to the moon
The politics that made this possible before also became the reason why its not happening anymore.
@Akash Guha Thakurata lmao India needs to focus on itself instead of space...
@Akash Guha Thakurata Yes, now the bollywood has the technology lol
Same goes for the USA. Going to space is not exactly a "priority" for any country, right now.
@Old Man Jenkins space advancement can be translated to economic prosperity.
Its mindboggling to see that we did more with less way back when. We "cured" diseases, now everything costs a billion trillion dollars lol.
They had 10x the appropriated funds..
value is proportionated to adjust for inflation
Oh god so now you’re going to spew antivaxx bs?
We have to spend those trillions of dollars killing people in other countries like Iraq etc.instead. Itś lots more fun.
@@PeakMisa who? and there's nothing wrong with not wanting a vaccine
wrong title, should read "Why nasa hasn't gone to the moon yet"
24hr 360 degree hd live feed camera is what the public want on the journey. Cameras mounted outside the craft. Thanks and godspeed
Like Musk and his single 240p camera mounted on the Tesla ;)
They can do that for much less than the Mars Exploration Rover mission. But they will not. For reasons...
@@DJVARAO they dont do it because why would they? I could do a backflip right now but I dont because there is no reason for it.
Not gonna happen
@@Davis-tl1rc you can read the many reasons from NASA www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/news/series/moon/why_go_back.html
at 7:45 she says blue origin is developing a method of putting a bunch of cargo into deep space, then proceeds to show us a video of the new shepard sub-orbital rocket lol
lack of footage lol
That's the only rocket they got man!
@@harpuaslutbag2997 I believe she's referring to New Glenn (still on paper and in the engineering labs). There are renders of it, but that's all they've got.
Granted, same thing with the BFR.
@@parnikkapore I'm well aware of the New Glenn. It's a monstrous machine...on paper.
@@parnikkapore have they still not begun building the engines for the BFR? I thought I once saw some images of them, maybe it was renders..
Because they never went in first place.
Common sense. I'm with you.
The heart of the problem is the Van Allen radiation Belt that we can't get pass. How did we get through it before? Things that make you go - hmmmm?
@MRGRUMPY53 u blind or something?
@MRGRUMPY53 😂it's sad how u believe in Lies my dude, really sad.
@MRGRUMPY53 ever tried using your brain?
Because corruption and the over focus on job creation
Pork-barrel spending. It's not even long term job creation because opening up space has the potential to create millions upon millions of jobs. But that's more than one election cycle away to it never gets approved. Instead, it's money to some politician's corporate friends and very specific jobs in very specific states.
Fifty years ago they put men on the moon.
Today they're a welfare outlet.
We never went to the moon!
the amount of Lead to protect the astronauts from deadly radiation would have needed an enormous amount of rocket propulsion which we did not have.
And in spite of your objection, we have photographic evidence that we went to the moon. How do you explain that?
I'm actually shocked that people still believe we went to the moon. This is why we're near the end........
I'm actually shocked that you are so brainwashed you think we didn't go, let me guess you think the earth is flat too huh.
Hawk Productions yup
Just wait til 2024 comes by and nothing happens.
Yes it will be interesting to see
lol
Yall dummies still sleeping on SpaceX? Please, prove me wrong
@Bitwise Magick theres always some retard in the YT comments isnt there?
@Bitwise Magick Explain why we can put telescopes, satellites, rovers, landers, abandoned spacecraft, and manned spacecraft outside of LEO but FOR SOME REASON IN YOUR MIND not humans -_- they literally said in the video its because of everything theyre putting into SLS (they are over engineering it for future missions) and also using new and very expensive contracts and manufacturing techniques that take SO MUCH MONEY that congress isnt willing to grant them the amount necessary, in the video they literally stated that so far SLS has received only $14 Billion while Apollo received $264 Billion its taken around $4-5 billion just to research & develop (not even build) the fucking crew module for the top of the rocket let alone the whole design and assembly of the launch system, lunar landers, reentry vehicles, life support systems, space stations, lunar vehicles, lunar bases, etc.
Gone BACK to the moon ? How can you go back to somewhere you've never been to ?
Because they '' lost the technology'' yes i know, lmfao
How many documents do you think your family still has from the 50s and 60s?
Austin Colon His family and a government funded agency are two completely different things 😩😅
@@austincolon7287 the most important photographs in not just NASA history, but arguably in Human history.... got 'lost' . Lmao.
but we still have the space craft that allegedly went.. they're in museums now.
they could reverse engineer those craft.. right?
but that would expose the hoax.. haha
@@uhadme @uhadme People still think all those images of space, black holes, planets, etc. Are real, and not computerized. Of course they would kiss the ass of, and believe anything the government says, when they literally release documents of their lies, and planned events. India, the country struggling the most with water is supposedly landing on the moon in the next few days; and the government has convinced idiots that pretty much some guy named Bob fell asleep on the panel, and it erased ALL of their documents, and backups. Seems totally legitimate.
Actually, it's a bit hard to believe that the sole reason for not making any progress to the moon journey is the lack of funds.
Apollo in the 60s had 40% of Federal funding, NASA now has 0.4%. Look at how much money we spent on wars since the 60s? You think we're swimming in cash to dish out on space?
It’s not, it’s kind of just the cherry on top. The main reason is a lack of interest from the public, which in and of itself is caused by a myriad of things like conspiracy theorists and the disaster of a program that was the space shuttle. This is why NASA is so precautious, if another disaster happens (which has an almost 95% chance of happening if we just reuse old tech) public opinion will sway decisively against NASA and they will probably be budget cut so hard they might pull out of the ISS early.
That’s the sole reason. It costs billions per launch. Can’t do that without funding.
Right?
Kool-aid refills in the lobby
Lies we never been to the Moon because we never went back easy
I dont know about the rest of you but the first thing i think about when i think why nasa has never went back to the moon the only answer i can come up with is nasa has never been to the moon
They're going back now. Maybe in May.
@@alexanderthemidI this year ?
@@wedjongkwowe4679 yeah i think so
@@alexanderthemidI no. It’s a lie. NASA says 2024. Lol. They will postpone it again when we reach 2024. NASA is just telling lies. We have never been to the moon before
They said they got there with a computer less powerful than a Nintendo 64.
@@theeecaveman7634 Except there's plenty of evidence to prove you wrong, and as every scientist knows, you've always been able to go since if you were willing to spend the billions.
@@ASLUHLUHC3 but they can't do it with more advanced modern technology?
@@hebrewisraelites1587 If you could go with 69 tech, of course you can go with 2019 tech
@@hebrewisraelites1587 The issue has never been about ability, it’s all about money.
they said the technology was less than a pocket calculator.. but can't be duplicated by our best minds today.
While the artifact left on the moon says "We came in peace, for all mankind" it is worth remembering that most of the early rockets were in fact modified Missiles (Either IRBMs for Redstone/Thor/Delta, or ICBM for Atlas/Titan/R7). It stands that NASA should be able to siphon off some military budget for both new weapon development and improved space access.
Saturn V wasn’t military. Nor was any part of the Apollo ship. And, You need to study government funding.
Or you can just accept the possibility that noone went to the moon....
There's actually no proof and the point they try and sell of losing the technology or it being too expensive is just so ridiculous if you're not close minded. 50 yrs later the tech would not only be better, but it would be more readily available and less expensive to create! IMO, technology improved so fast that they just lost the ability to lie about it. Open your mind and consider that you may have been lied to. Look how the gov't has handled Covid silencing doctors and scientists that disagree. The difference now is now we have the internet and the info is available for everyone.
Turns out Nasa is basically a John Deer factory
"We no longer have a rocket capable...
We had one in 1969 with 4kb of ram that did it..."
U-hu... Ok... If you're saying so.
Yes we no longer have the rocket we would need to make a new one, do you somehow think we would use old technology in the modern age to do this? Do you also think we keep useless rockets just laying around seeing as no one planned to use those rockets for decades? We need to go to low earth orbit at most now adays(some mars flights too and other extreme missions, but those would be inefficient for a moon mission anyways) and because of that we don't have rockets that can go to the moon anymore, they aren't needed.
You can't go back to something you've never been to.
I was very young when they didn't go to the moon. I am still waiting for them to not go again.
This is a joke, right? Do people still actually believe we went to the moon?
Do I still believe the earth is flat?
The title should be, 'Why has NASA never been to the moon?'
Answer: "We've never been there." -Buzz Aldrin
Now watch the *whole* interview that you are quote-mining.
ua-cam.com/video/Y4UP6nRMuGs/v-deo.html
He literally never said that in that context. I mean, it's not news that conspirationist are dishonest. I don't even know why I bother anymore.
@@lodiped
Exactly, the question was 'Why haven't we been back', and his answer was 'that's the question I'm asking, I think I know the answer. But the fact is that we didn't go [back] there..."
Neil Armstrong wore the same boots for four days and then left them on the moon's surface. By now, they have probably aired out completely, but no one is willing to take that chance!
We need 'Scooby-Doo and The Gang' to help crack the case of the missing telemetric data.
So if you care so much for the tapes lost from 11, then the data from 12-17 which is very much still around should settle it for you surely?
Can't find what never existed.
@@chrispaul7849 Just fyi, video sent from the Moon was also recorded into those tapes from the same radio downlink. But hey, that's merely a fact and hoaxtwats are immune to facts.
Ya think
@@chrispaul7849 exactly
"Too Big to Fail" is sadly a very true concept. Some projects are so big with so much money invested from so many sides, that they are impossible to stop even when it's clear they aren't working and won't work.
Except Apollo didn't fail, it did exactly what the USA stated it would do. Put a man on the Moon by the end of the decade and return him safely to earth. JFK didn't write that mission statement and it didn't die with him because it was written by LBJ in the first place. Nixon killed the program.
Budgets to nowhere
@@richardvernon317 they cant even go now if they wanted too, the closest nasa got to the moon was Nevada
Because we never landed on the moon. They realized there were many dangers into flying into space:
Avoiding the Van Allen Belts. Scratch that “SPEEDING through the Van Allen Belts fast enough”
Making sure there is enough fuel back & forth (According to Secondary Sources: Six days of travel: 3.14x10^3 mph for a distance of 2.39x10^5 miles.).
Enough food/water for an estimated 6 days to travel back and forth (Does anyone have any information from a primary source that the flight took 76 hours).
Building a proper lightweight suit to walk on the moon.
🙃
Right
The sad reality is that NASA was all dressed up with nowhere to go. All the interesting places in the Universe are pretty much forever out of your reach with any kind of rocket powered space crafts.
Leave climate change research to the NOAA, not NASA.
They seem to be doing a good job at their center here in Alpena MI
Wait so they randomly wanted to do it and did, then 50 years later we out here not able to build it at all, but I’m still seeing ted talks of goofballs talking about my kids on Mars 😂
They didn't 'randomly' want to do it, read up on the Space Race with Russia.
There’s no more incentive to go to the moon, our resources are better spent on going to Mars.
@@kaizoisevil sorry but you wrong. They are planning on going back by like 2025 or 2030
@@SavageRoosterOnThaLooster To the moon? Why?
@@kaizoisevil look it up from nasa dude. You the one who said we don’t want to go back but that’s not true at all
just borrow iron man 's suit
NASA going no where since 1958🤣
the problem is that they have a fraction of the funding they used to
@@Davis-tl1rc WRONG, plz try again.
@@FACTCHECKbyGoogle-Ai look at this graph, it is the funding of Nasa over the years. external-preview.redd.it/VUzAtU2JibvCcv16UYXX5fIg0m0YqkcTCv0LPyK3qcM.png?width=580&auto=webp&s=7e049bef2c404f29c3224426eae2201baab6166d
And honestly it’s funny how you hear modern day astronauts say we haven’t even left The Low 🌏 Orbit let alone get through the van Allen radiation belt
This is merely you being a lying twat.
@TheTruthWillOut Stop lying. Someone saying "we currently lack a manned spacecraft for going past LEO" is NOT the same as saying it's impossible or that you never could.
@TheTruthWillOut And every NASA rep you talk to will tell you they went to the Moon, and that they're sending probes and landers to the Moon and farther. You, as so many other hoaxtwats, try to take statement of "we currently have the capability to X" as meaning "only X is possible and ever was". This is just absurd dishonesty.
@TheTruthWillOut key word being current technology, doesn't mean we didn't have the right tech in the 60s. Pay attention lol man
To go back to the moon they have to get there first and that hasn’t happened
Why reinvent the wheel? Just dust off the apollo 11 blueprints, rebuild everything per spec, and go.
Because they built a shitty wheel. There are a variety of reasons why the original Saturn V isn't viable today. You're not more clever than NASA
Why doesn’t the US ARMY have any V2’s today? They worked fine....
@@Radicoly seems like nasa 2021 isnt more clever than nasa 1969......
Go where to some desert studio stage?
Because that wheel is the equivalent of a school project done 2 days before due
Interesting title, I’m sure it’s hard to go somewhere you’ve never been
Dont lie to yourself
Lies
It's a little known fact that anytime a journalist uses the phrase "height of the Cold War" a historian of the Cold War dies.
Why? In this case she is not referring to the Cold War itself, but to a part of it, the most important indeed. The Space Race
@@yassm "Height of the Cold War" has been used to refer to any point between 1945 & 1989. It's just one of those terms people throw out without thinking about what it means. There were several periods of tension and risk during the Cold War, not one "height". The space race was a major element of the Cold War, but it wasn't the most important, dangerous, or defining period of the Cold War. There are many contenders for the "height" and my irritation is that people use the term without thinking about what or when the "height" was.
@@davidbelgrave1971 Oh okay got it 👍
Apollo happened when you were using floppy disk, big PC, and no UA-cam of course. Now I hold a lot faster computing power in my hand... storing a hundred of GB of data.
It is difficult to believe that we could (easily it seems) go to the moon 50 years ago. But cannot do it now!
Milt Farrow That’s what I think. I haven’t seen science just stops. Science always keeps progressing.
They never went. It's obvious if they did they would keep going back.
They have gone back with rovers but most of the attention was focused on places further out.
@@konig-shiba6428 You're a sheep that believes in fairy tales. There is no actual real footage.
@@konig-shiba6428 he/ she also ignores the fact that governments are sending things there all the time.
@Rotten 5 It's obvious that if they actually had commercial supersonic air travel they would keep doing it. Your logic is beyond faulty.
Because they would now have to give us 8k resolution by minimum default!
Exactly what I was saying in a comment just now. It would basically call their shit out because of how clear the video would be, and that doesn't suit them. They like that old grainy and hazy footage, because it hides a lot of shit.
@@oOdOdY75Oo You do realise that was live footage shot on film and being transmitted from space, right? And that was just APOLLO 11. Apollo 8 set up the Moon Landing through orbiting the moon with the command module. How would image clarity prove that its fake?
@@vincere_ not to mention the Chinese recently got a lander on the moon roaming around taking pics.
Lying about landing on the moon is just nuts for any government. The Soviets accepted their defeat, none of the 400,000 men and women working for the Apollo missions seem to have said anything to the contrary, and neither does any of the governmental or private space equipmemt and exploration companies. Unless you really believe in lizard people there is little reason to believe a faked moon landing
@@TheHareidGamer obviously you don't understand what I mean, others did. I don't feel I need to explain it more than I did.
even modern day ISS live-streaming is insanely compressed, so no.
gone back?
No time in human history has a super successful technological achievement ended in "Just Stopped".
Supersonic and hypersonic travel. Still waiting to board a plan and travel from on side of the planet to the other in 90 minutes. Hey, I would settle for 3 hours. The Concorde promised so much when it was built in 1969. Now, nothing. Can't even travel at the speed of sound if I wanted to.
I think I know why they haven't gone back to the moon. The only reason why we haven even been to the moon for 50 years is because of the space race. The only reason why we go to the moon to beat the Soviets in the cold war, Not to explore space.
Actually, the space race was more about who could put the first ICBMS and spy satellites into orbit.
@@pteppig I guess I was probably wrong then
@J Calhoun I read that they were bouncing lasers off of the moon before that so called event occurred.
As for "winning" the side race. Russia sent the first remote controlled rover to the moon, less than a year after Apollo 11. Building the foundation of the mars rover program in 1970.
So nasa goes to the moon in the 60s where color tvs was one of the greatest achievements in technology in that decade.
Fast forward to almost 2020 , where phones that fit on your hand are computers that surpass any computer in the 60s yet we can get there again
The thing is - rocket engines are not the same, as the computers. And most of the funds went not into the development of superheavy launch vehicles (or even keeping infrastructure for producing them operational), but into making the Space Shuttle work. Nowadays, we have no rockets of lunar class, because Space Shuttle was eating funds all those years.
the 60s missions made those phones possible. Most of all this tech originates from either WW2 or the Cold War
Jerome 092
You say we can’t go to Moon today. So, who has tried but failed? When did they try?
Jerome 092
You say we can’t go to Moon today. So, who has tried but failed? When did they try?
You are just babbling without knowledge.
Jerome 092
You say we can’t go to Moon today. So, who has tried but failed? When did they try?
You are just babbling without knowledge.
What do you mean, BACK TO THE MOON !
oh it just got interesting
We haven’t gone back to cover the fact that we never went to begin with I don’t wanna be that guy bc I wanna believe it was true but something doesn’t sit right with me like 50 years and we still haven’t gone back that’s sus
It's to do with budget, nasa during apollo had 4% of the federal funding and now they have 0.4%
@@millionaireno1382 cmon man. There are plenty of rich folks that would support a trip to the moon if it were possible
@@jonnygranville281 Why? It's a waste of money. Rich people like the recognition but I doubt they're going to come together and throw a trillion dollars at the sky.
@@millionaireno1382 by that logic they could of done it in next 10 years. And they had decades! Can't believe people people so blindly believe everything they've been served...
@@standingfortruth4043 if it took them 10 years to get there with 4 percent as they started in 1960 then it wold take them 100 years with 0.4
I had never really doubted very much whether we had made the original Moon shots until actually seeing this video...
What a joke ...will never happen
Well they're building it atm
Never did
@@sydneyhunt6681 Take off your tinfoil hat.
Sorry we lost our technology, and taped over nasa tapes
Lark Varhees don't you're hurting the cause
Out of date technology
People still believe that technology 50yrs ago sent people to the moon?....wow.
NASA, kicking the can since 1969.
1972 was the last manned mission to the moon, so theyve been kicking the can since 1972 : (
"other players like ... blue origin are developing powerful rockets to get cargo to deep space"
small correction - blue origin cant even get cargo into orbit, nevermind the deep space
They could do it then with antique end 60's technology, really ? And after 50 years with technology have become way more powerful and cheaper still no one has gone back ? Make believe is big business with people's tax money.
They have a fraction of the budget, less public interest/support, and better safety standards to adhere to.
So, pyramids have been built over 5000 years ago, surely the technology has progressed since then, still we don't see no new pyramids today, why is that ?
@@GilPaulbert - The Concorde flew 43 years ago, surely the technology has progressed since then, still we don't see no new Concordes today, why is that ?
@@stephenh5944 exactly my point xD
@@GilPaulbert because everyone in Egypt worships Mohammed now...
They never went in the first place. And they never will.
10:02
Former NASA deputy administrator Garver: We need to win at something right now that NASA is uniquely skilled to do and that is to address climate change.
NOAA: Am I a joke to you?
Space itself: Am I a joke to you?
Hole in ozone is that a joke
right like NASA addressed the feat to actually make it to the moon, real funny
Garver is a joke. She's part of the reason NASA collapsed and has the gall to assert NASA should have anything to do with climate change. NASA are supposed to be the ONLY ORGANIZATION NOT WORRIED ABOUT CLIMATE CHANGE. Their ENTIRE FUCKING GOAL IS TO GET US OFF THIS PLANET FOR GOOD. AND THESE ARETHE PEOPLE WE TRUST. FUCK ME.
It's all bs. Our climate is being altered and controlled under the guise of combating "climate change."
geoengineering.environment.harvard.edu/geoengineering
Harvard disclosed "Project Solar Shield" recently due to people asking questions. Stratospheric Aerosol Injection has been used for decades though. 30 years ago it was global cooling and a incoming ice age, now it's the opposite. I think they enjoy finding out how much they can get away with.
Are we supposed to believe that NASA spent the majority of their Apollo budget on materials and labour? Surely the majority of the cost was research and development. With that all safely behind them they need only a fraction of the original budget to repeat their incredible feat. Don't they?
Actually, they weren't really sure that pod they sent would make it, it wasn't safe by a long shot. That's why they want to start again.
@@DeadEyeJedi seriously they don't seem to have any compunction about killing astronauts.
@J Calhoun you apparently don't realize that no matter how many parts something takes it should still be less than the R&D stage took, or else that means they didn't research & test parts at all. and if 200 billion worth of research got scrapped that's a good sign the entity should not be receiving public funds.
I am and have worked in aerospace, it helps to have a design used before, but if you change it more than just a tiny amount. More or less it must still be completely re-engineered. And none of it is cheap. Ever.
Materials and labor, yes. Labor is ridiculously expensive. You're not hiring just anyone, you're hiring top military contractors and top of their class university graduates.
Then you have to pay them every month for years, for as long as the project is around. Labor is *EXPENSIVE.*
Remember they said they lost all informativo from that first Apollo programa, jajajajajajaja really??? The MOST importante programa ever, and you lost the info??? Sing another Song please!!!!
I know and because of that they never went back again! ... oh wait!
@@metanumia DNFTT. Just sayin'.
While actually there are more than one Apollo program LMAO
but we still have the vehicles in museum.. why can't we reverse engineer them?
technology still exist.. hmm
@@uhadme You ste misinformed. NASA knows how to build rockets. But there was just some lost data.
We didn’t make it to moon but we’re getting ready to go again , and we’ll say we did again. !!!!