What if we haven't been visited by ayy lmaos because travel past a planet's radiation belt is impossible and NASA's moon landing was a hoax?
But we have.
>>17862869
But if you call now there's more.
This is plausible.
>>17862858
Go back to /pol/...
>>17862858
Even if you believe the moon landing was a hoax, someone Did place retroreflectors on the moon at some point. Also considering their performance is degrading it happened recently and not by ancient lunarians a million years ago.
>>17862858
>The Van Allen belts are most intense over the Equator and are effectively absent above the poles.
Your own pic shows how - even if this were the case - they could get past the belts by entering from the poles.
You know - sort of exactly like what the Apollo missions tried to do, except they were launching from a site favorable toward escape velocity, so they had compromise for their trajectory.
>>17863073
>Apollo
Into the trash.
>>17863074
You mean off to the moon.
>>17863078
>implying
>>17863081
Oh no, directly stating. The Apollo missions traveled to the moon. Well, half of them.
Van Allen belts don't exist and are a NASA lie to prevent us from space travel.
>>17863170
Oh SNAP!
So now the Moon Hoaxers will have to PROVE the existence of the Van Allen belts so they can keep using to say they're the reason it's impossible to go to the Moon.
I love it.
earth=flat
>>17863183
Don't you love how they just pick and choose which of NASA's accomplishments are real and which are lies? And it's always in support of their pre-conceived notion, whatever it is?
>>17863093
Kek
ITT: typical "argumentation" of people who believe the moon landing was a hoax
