This guy was an astronaut? Don Pettit, famous for saying *we (NASA) no longer have the technology to get to the moon because we destroyed it*.. cough SHILL cough
@@derp8575 actually old tech is destroyed all the time. Do you still use your windows 8 pc or your obsolete phone do you see fleets of ancient gallions still been used by sea going nations ?
@@derp8575 same principle the only difference is it costs a whole lot more to rebuild the Apollo craft plus there are alot of health and safety issues compared to the 60 and 70s.
We no longer have Saturn Vs, LMs, and Apollo CSMs. Those are the only vehicles that we have had that could send people to the moon. Now we're building SLS/Orion and Starship to head back.
@@freethinkersilver2581 Why? It's happening. 4 astronauts just picked this week. Orion already circled it on a perfect mission. Why do people have such doubts. It takes time.
genuinely not convinced this is a real human being. He actually speaks and moves like a CGI. Watching it cured me of cancer and I didn't even have cancer when I started watching.
@@vinnystern3598 I understand how rockets fly. The act of expelling propellant moves them forward. It doesn't matter if they are in an atmosphere or a vacuum. I don't think I called anyone a liar- certainly not Don Petit, whom I have met and spoken to.
Don Pettit is a genius. Nearly 70 years old, one of NASA's most experienced astronauts, a scientist through and through. And he's heading back to the Space Station in 2024.
@Martin Luther so you just want an argument no unlike Martin Luther's it happened several times it couldn't be faked back then I hope you mean what conspiratards claim don pettit said.
@Martin Luther I've seen it and there isn't one fact it's satire Dr Van Allan thought it was pretty hilarious. The guy. brings up Avon that was before Apollo he was talking about a different type of radiation lead is the last thing you need all videos are taped over all the telemetry is available to any the video the video he claims prove its fake he edited the footage from a different flight
Ryan Gilmore - definitely real. The orange streaks are city lights; the white splotches are thnderstorms and lightning; the parallel streaks of different intensities with hints of color are stars. It is a beautiful time exposure. I've archived it and may get a large print made.
What’s funny is that in the exact same time stamp you mentioned, you get your answer immediately: “a 30 minute time exposure”. That’s why you see all the bright streaks - it’s a time lapse condensed into one photo. All you NASA-Hoax-Fraud people can really do is extrapolate things to conform to your own anti-establishment agendas.
The definition of “technology” according to Merriam-Webster’s Learner’s Dictionary: (1) the use of science in industry, engineering, etc., to invent useful things to solve problems. (2) a machine, piece of equipment, method, etc. that is created by technology. Don Pettit used the word ‘technology’ to refer to meaning #2, not #1. NASA no longer has the rockets, factory, equipment, etc. from the original Apollo missions because they are no longer necessary. But we still have all the necessary knowledge & know how to go to the Moon. In fact, many of the current space exploration missions have various similarities to the original Apollo missions.
@@Dyondegekste thank you I know he actually says that in an interview please tell me were to find the one that makes that clear I'm so sick of people claiming he said we can't go to the moon
Romans 1:22 "Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools," If he doesn't repent from his lies he is going to have some time when he has to give an account in front of Jesus. he is one of the people I very much want to see before Jesus just to see what his excuse is for what he has done.
I think this guy isn’t actually lying and genuinely believes he was in space. I work with disabled kids and I swear we could go to the local park and tell the kids they were on the moon and most of them would actually believe it. I feel sorry for him I think he’s being used and tricked and he’s being lied to himself.
@@mephostopheles3752 you’ve read the whole bible cover to cover? And not just read it actually but studied it? Did you study the nomenclature, numerology, symbolism and allegory? Have you compared different translations?
If you used your brain for a "nanosecond", you'd be able to make up your mind. For a long time, the answer to the question " Why don't you go back to the moon?" was : Why go there? We've been there and now our focus is Mars. “I'd go to the moon in a nanosecond - the problem is that we don't have the technology to do that anymore. We used to, but we destroyed that technology and it's a painful process to build it back again.” Don Pettit
Basically in a nutshell; Helium 3, shortcut for rockets, and good for both tourism and scientific purposes. Most people wouldn't live on the moon permanently, but the moon will definitely have its usages.
Tidepool Clipper - for the last fifty years comercial fusion power plants have been twenty years away - today it's looking like fifteen years. But Helium 3 is usefull for other things. Let's check back in fifteen years for H3 power plants and how many people are on the Moon permantly. I predict several thousand, a million by the end of the century.
"At no point in your rambling, incoherent response was there anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having to listen to this. I award you no points and may God have mercy on your soul"
They want you to think he’s dumbing down his language for us peasants but the truth is he literally is operating on this elementary level: “why da moon? Bc it’s interesting!”
@@woodcchase As far as I can tell, it comes down to politics and popular interest. The first moon landing captured the attention of the entire world. EVERYONE tuned in with baited breath. People cried when they saw it. The second landing? Far less media attention, far fewer people paying attention. Each time they went back the public cared less. And as the public cared less, politicians moved money away from the moon program. It makes sense if you think about why we went and what the goal was once we got there. We went to prove to the Russians that we were better. Once we got there, they didn't have a grand purpose to accomplish. They hopped around, made speeches, and gathered scientific data. So once we had satisfactorily proved that we could, the only motivation to go again was to hop around and collect more rocks. The Apollo program wasn't designed for the long-term. But why not start another program? In the 60s-70s, even until 5 years ago, getting to the moon was such a vast undertaking that it took the full cooperation of the richest nation on earth. No one was going to do it for kicks. Also, in 1998, the space program became focused on the ISS, a persistent little money sponge. So that meant the world's government space agencies were preoccupied with that. But now, as I said about 5 years ago, SpaceX has become the first private company that could easily send someone to the moon. The final hurdles for them were a) get a human rating on their spacecraft so people can legally fly in them and b) have a financial reason to go to the moon. They're working hard on A, and up till now they needed cash so they've been taking missions from NASA/military which are entirely satellite launches and (naturally) supplying the ISS. There's already a Japanese dude who's given them 100s of millions of dollars to get a ride around the moon though, so it won't be 2030 before SpaceX lands a person on the moon.
@@iamarokotmanson even so that still doesn't explain 3,472 miles per hour for 3 days straight. Like that would take so much fuel. How would it not be too heavy to even lift that much? How would it even make it outside the Van Allen belt without exploding with that much fuel? I would assume most of the space of the rocket would have to be fuel.
Dlaczego Mars a nie Księżyc? Ponieważ dziś każdy z Ziemi mógłby obserwować za pomocą teleskopu czy aparatu fotograficznego co tam robią. Nie są w stanie wymyślić jakby mogli oszukać ludzi skoro każdy by mógł to widzieć na żywo.
Dumbest smart guy that wasted my time on social media. I do believe, nothing has a point or makes sense. It's like watching 10 TV shows at once, from one TV, all playing for one second at a time.
He’s from my small town in Oregon, one of the murals in town is him in his space suit. He was in the same grade as my Dad. It makes me sad seeing all the rude comments about him. ☹️
Yeah I agree with you! He is considered by Astronauts to be the smartest Astronaut although he only has a PhD in Chemical Engineering and his photographic work is incredible.
Don’t worry about them my friend. It’s all either people who don’t know anything about space so they substitute it with: “This doesn’t make sense to me, therefore, science is a lie”. Or people who are so desperate to feel special that anybody who feeds them anti-establishment narratives will have their unconditional support because they feel as though they’re above the general public and physicists.
@@walterrelief2270 Not sure exactly what point you wanted to make there or how a lot of that relates to my comment. But anyways, the pot of gold with conspiracy theories that appeal to so many people is: “Scientists, the government, and the masses who believe them are all wrong, and I’m right.” This is prevalent in Flat Earth Theory and the Woke movement. Not saying that’s everybody, but that’s just insight into why people believe stuff like this, and as a result mock the person talking in this video (as the original commenter pointed out).
@sei shin everything anyone ever does is selfish. Besides that, absolutely ok with me. Drill holes in it all ya want just dont let it have negative effects on earth. 🤗
So the real problem is fuel. If a more efficient type of fuel were created here on Earth that would dramatically increase output (how well it fights gravity) then we would've already colonized the solar system. With our current fuel, you would have to send 50 rockets (which have no return capacity, so they're stuck there after landing) with 2% fuel payload to fuel 1 rocket to full capacity on the moon from Earth. Good talk.
@@woodcchase no it isn't because no one ever said that a steam engine is an example and lost technology would be a model T you can rebuilt one n't why would you want to find the original interview it's nothing like what you seem to think.
We need to get life on this planet right before we think we can handle any thing on other planets. Its nothing but a wast of money that should be used to feed and house people on this planet.
