The Nazis weren't ahead of their time. The Russian tech for all war instruments was always superior. Not really surprising given the size of the empire.

But the nazis were no where near making manned space missions. The only people who believe that are ufo believers who think the nazis had antogravity tech. Certainly Apollo didn't use that.

The v2 was faster than anything that anyone else produced, I agree. I urge you to remember what that was used for and all those killed producing it.

Indeed, part of the reason Germany could peruse ambitious research and development is because they had little qualms using people as slaves.

Things were hard for troops and workers during the war, but none were subjected to such state approved deprivation that the third Reich found acceptable.

The fact remains that if you have concluded that the us truly landed men on the moon with Apollo, you need to explain that was accomplished without thermal protection measures..

I repeat, Apollo had no shade and no insulation. The craft wasn't equipped for low earth orbit, far less 7 days in the sun. All other vessels have constantly battled against the fierce heat of the sun and taken measures for protection. Apollo had the protective thermal roll which is patently absurd. NASA also still encourage the idea that space is very cold. Again, that is not sensible. They are counting on the probability that you've never been there so you won't know, and you'd never question anything such a prestigious organisation says. It's a con. It's a hoax..wake up.

Let me explain why I'm winning this argument, it's because people are reading the proof. You'd have to navigate your way around this page to do that, so in case that's a problem for you, I'll prove it again here now, and it won't matter that Australians swore it was true.

So Apollo had no shade and no thermal insulation to speak of. Apollo wasn't space worthy, and one single earth orbit would have been very uncomfortable if not deadly.

However, a moon excursion would involve 150 hours of continual sunshine. Nobody has ever attempted more than 40 minutes in sun, which is characteristic of low earth orbit.

To account for the success the science of thermal dynamics was corrupted and misrepresented. That happened in classrooms, at universities and even in the space industry, leading to some real harm and having a detrimental effect on all of these sectors.

It was hot, but the crew of Apollo say they were cold. NASA still explains today how the sun is cold:

'Space is cold', they say.

The truth is that the sun is very hot, and very close, and very big. These facts are ignored and played down in all NASA outreach.

Heat is a real problem for the ISS, but it's hardly ever mentioned. When it is mentioned, you end up wishing it wasn't, because you are bombarded with nonsense factoids about heat. The truth is very simple, the Apollo craft would be hot on a beach in the summer during the day, and in space it is much hotter. How could people possibly survived that roast.

Take a look at the thermal protective roll.

The Apollo craft turned slowly as it went. Try this for yourseld:

Turn an aluminium pot slowly in the sun and see if it helps it cool down, Hint: it won't.

Why would they say something so demonstrable stupid?

People want to believe. Or the wanted to believe. Here we are not concerned with belief, this is the science section

This argument was designed as a way of challenging the moonlandings hoax. If we can generate enough noise about flat earth we can poison the well of public discourse. Flat earth brings down the credibility of CreateDebate and the internet as a whole.

It doesn't go unnoticed that both debates are together on createdebate, the one following the other.

However, the link between the flatearthers and NASA, through the CIA will be exposed sooner or later, and at that point the trick will backfire and the hoax will be exposed as well as the attempt to continue the pretence today.

The truth is not a joke. The truth is important. Many of you have attempted to make a joke over this ridiculous idea, but you will not joke about it when you realise how you have been used like puppets. If someone still believes after research that flat earth is the subject of debate, they are not on good terms with reality.

Anyone arguing about it is ignorant of how they are being manipulated. I urge you all to concentrate on debates that are not frivolous and support public debate instead of subverting it.

I refer you to an earlier response to the same question. I'm the moderator supposedly but my response here is being flagged up because I have typed enough words.

Just to reiterate then:

Apollo had no shade nor insulation. It wasn't space worthy, and it couldn't manage low earth orbit . LEO involved only a continuous 40 minute exposure, whereas a moon excursion requires 7 days continual sunshine

. The crew only had a thermal roll to protect them. That is testable . Turn a pot in the sun and see if it cools down. Hint, it won't.

Am I saying all 6 were faked?

Somebody hasn't been engaging. You are able to type so ita safe to assume you can read, and yet you ask questions like you haven't read anything about this debate. I've clearly demonstrated that the moonlandings of Apollo were impossible. So it's not a question of picking out one or another for special consideration. The Apollo craft were not fit for low earth orbit, let alone a moon excursion.

I really don't see how you can accuse me of picking holes in things, I've demonstrably driven a horse and cart through the entire premise of going to the moon with Apollo.

The craft used, according to wiki and nasa had no shade. The insulation was virtually non-existent. The protective thermal roll is palpable nonsense and you can falsify it any time with an aluminium pot in the sun.

I've also shown that the teaching of heat transfer was corrupted to support the moonlandings.

Radiation is basic heat transfer, it's not a possible option, but the only way heat can transfer is by radiative heat transfer. Conduction and convection are not substitutes for that mechanism, but carrier processes for radiative heat transfer.

Where are holes being picked?

I've shown that the craft made of aluminium will conduct the sun's absorbed heat. I've shown that by slowly turning, Apollo had no means of cooling. No heat sinks, nothing. Heat would build up in the craft even on the darkside of earth because the heat is in a vacuum and can't convect away. The heat from the sun is not conducted straight on to the craft unless it landed on the moon, that is true. Heat is not convect to the craft for the same reason. But the radiative heat alone from the sun's is devastating here on earth. In cislunar space, much more so.

I invite you to pick holes in my argument

So far you haven't engages.

Apollo was a hoax and now most people know it.

You seen to think respect is something to do with professional status, but that confusing two different things. The true meaning of respect is a basic degree of decency we afford to one another. It is indeed the right of every sentient being to enjoy respect. This is true even if a cow is being sent for slaughter. The law actually recognises this right in civilised counties. Certainly in the UK, if you were being a complete dick to an animal you will find yourself open to prosecution.

Being decent to people is the right thing to do, and most people feel bad when they can't meet those basic standards. But not everyone. Thise who just don't get it with the respect thing are perhaps better off at times. But the fact is that those same people deserve a degree of decency from strangers too. I'm not big on the bible but I like the Sodom and Gomora story: The ill treatment of strangers is basically what causes the cities to be trashed. (No matter what your preacher may have told you.) Anyone arguring that rights and respect must be learned is probably not a person of empathy.

What if it's just a straight choice? What is we had a vote on weather rights are a privilege or not? What would the campaigns look like?

I'm pretty sure the 'no respect crew would be a motley one, all the usual suspects, the survivalist, the white supremacist, no?

The right to respect is universal and tacitly understood by all living creatures. To advocate otherwise is to fly in the face of nature, and to spoil everything for everyone.

On the subject of Elon Musk:

What happened to that billion dollar rocket earlier this year? How can you just lose a rocket these days, I thought every nut and bolt in orbit was being tracked? And the white house refused to come clean when they were required to drop the secrecy. Secrecy is not a friend of a healthy society, JFK had stuff to say about that too.

Elon Musk certainly has his own secrets regarding space mission.

Elon Musk isn't responsible for correcting this thing, any more than you or I. Why should he sacrifice his successful business to demonstrate something you should have seen for yourself?

He must know the landings were fake. Has he put a temperature gage on the Space Tesla?

It comes back round soon , doesn't it? Will it get an MOT? (That's a certificate of roadworthyness.) It will be intereeting to see how it fares after a year out there in the sun. I wont be surprised if we never see it again.

Do you think JFK was lying in 1961 when he said that going to the moon would mean enduring temperatures far higher than anything ever achieved before? That new alloys would need to be developed in order to survive those very high temperatures?

Again, you have failed to address my simple point:

Science was corrupted by Apollo, heat transfer cannot be taught correctly because it would destroy that moon excursion narrative.

Well, I've absolutely won this argument hands down. It's no surprise to me because I've debated this for years with lots of folk. The arguments I've presented have not been challenged in any way. Some weak evidence has been offered to do with third party verification of radio signals, but that doesn't make it possible that Apollo could've taken place. I've proved beyond a doubt that Apollo couldn't possibly have reached the moon, or even maintained earth orbit. It's time to move on, and get this message out there. My problem here is that the establishment won't listen. The BBC have seen fit to ignore all my correspondence, as has parliament. I've tried to communicate with various science leaders in the U.K., but the issue is clearly toxic. The lie is so much more palatable. But not forever. If you have any suggestions or want a speaker for the conspiracy theory, just ask.

My solution is simple. I'm not a U.S. citizen so patriotism isn't a concern.

Even if I was a US citizen, I would not support everyone in government all the time. I don't see how a person can cover up such corruption. How is that even Patriotic?