Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

Go Home

Did Elon Musk confirm that we never actually landed on the moon? Bart Sibrel breaks down his cryptic statements about moon missions:

177,567 views • 1 year ago •via X (Twitter)

11 Comments

Chris Knight's profile picture
Chris Knight1 year ago

Different designs. Saturn V launch cost (today's money) 1.4 billion and carried all the fuel it needed in 3 disposable phases. Starship is around 20 million and reusable and would need 6 launches. 120 million vs 1.4 billion - it's a genius design. Nasa in 1960 used brute force and lots of tax payers money and wasn't sustainable, but it beat Russia, pretty much it's only goal. The idea we didn't go is so stupid.

HUDI's profile picture
HUDI2 years ago

Are corporations spying on you? 🛡️ Shield your data with DataMask🐸 DataMask is the first web3 data wallet companion ⚔️ that lets you store, protect and monetize your data. Give it a try now! 🦾 (credit: this video comes from our community art! 😍)

Foghorn702's profile picture
Foghorn7021 year ago

If we didn’t actually land on the moon the Soviet Union would have let the world know. There’s no way in this world that the Soviet Union at that time would have let a fake moon landing slide. That is the ONLY piece of evidence I need to confirm the moon landings as fake. The other important piece of evidence is the number of people that would have to keep such an endeavor a secret is simply implausible. That many people would never be able to keep such an undertaking secret.

McJingleheimer's profile picture
McJingleheimer1 year ago

@elonmusk This grifting cherry picker is the epitome of dense; Dunning-Kruger's final boss. Buzz Aldrin should've punched him harder.

jerimiahwasabullfrog🇺🇸's profile picture
jerimiahwasabullfrog🇺🇸1 year ago

@elonmusk This is bullshit. I saw the movie. All you need is a moderately bright black woman and a 57’ and a half Chevey.

filthpig's profile picture
filthpig1 year ago

@elonmusk It’s because each launch would only carry a small amount of fuel to ref fuel a ship, waiting in orbit to go to the moon. You guys have so little knowledge about the subject, it’s shocking

Tesla Hype's profile picture
Tesla Hype1 year ago

lol You are comparing an expendable rocket architecture to a fully reusable one, with very different mission objectives. Starship needs about 8 LEO refilling events to go to the moon and back (back meaning, ~zero out G forces, come back to precisely land on the launch tower). There are also different mission objectives compared to Saturn V era missions. Your "analysis" is deeply flawed.

ShockedAtWhat's profile picture
ShockedAtWhat1 year ago

@elonmusk Everything I ever learned in school, was a LIE. JFK ASSASSINATION AND NOW THE MOON.

DK's profile picture
DK1 year ago

Because he’s not destroying the ship after lunch and having it land in the ocean, he’s taking the entire ship not just a capsule to the moon. He’s landing the entire ship on the moon and then returning the entire ship and landing the entire ship so that we can do it all over again. Eight loads of fuel is exponentially cheaper in order of magnitudes less than rebuilding a new rocket. Every time you wanted to go.

Matt Manna's profile picture
Matt Manna1 year ago

@elonmusk I’m always open to seeing more data, but a quick chatgpt search gives good counters to his points. For example, elon saying starship needs 8 refueling missions can be explained by the fact that Starship has a significantly higher payload, and is reusable, needing fuel to land.

Leeroy Jay Jenkins's profile picture
Leeroy Jay Jenkins1 year ago

@elonmusk If it’s going to take 8 fuel ups to get only to the moon then Mars is going to take how many?🤔it’s never going to happen because they’ve sold you a lie.

Related Videos