tyb
>>To win the first Space Race to the Moon, NASA was prioritized and appropriated $68 billion in 1965 alone
It was a BIG project
I consider NASA back in the day something else than the climate change bs today.
I was on the fence for a long time. It comes down to the Van Allen belt. They did say they didn´t go through the thickest of it. I don´t think the belts rule it out.
So, why fake it? They could go, they took off and launched into space, went into orbit. Why not to the Moon? It´s just a question of increasing speed at the right time in the right direction.
(and photos of "fake" landings? ..like they would practise all this stuff on "fake" landing sites? )
>PICS are fake
I haven´t looked into shadows at different angles theory, but if we´re talking about landing sites and astronauts walking around, and then it turns out it´s a stage.
Of course they would have such things and practise all this endlessly. Not fake, just practise.
One possibility is that they had a planB, to use these pics to fake it, if the mission had been a total failure, but I'm not buying it.
ty&u2
(btw, watched documentary "Apollo 11" recently, where you can see and hear the uncut final 3-4 minutes before landing on the Moon. Crasy minutes with alarms going of and shit. I recommend it for anyone interested.)