>>19311883Frankly there's not a single thing unexplained about the moon landings. Let me guess your 'undeniable' evidence:
>There's some fundamental physics incompatibility, such as the van allen belts or rockets working in a vacuum. I refuse to explain how I know for certain that the van allen belts are deadly, I just know they are though, I may even have a quote from some guy who had no way of knowing for certain either!>The lander looks weak, this is enough for me. I will refuse to listen to any calculations, explanations, or documentation showing the structural integrity being sufficient>I have photographs of Kubrick with NASA, this is clearly proof of a mass conspiracy to fake the moon landing, even though it's plain and obvious he was there years prior for research on 2001, which obviously makes sense because why wouldn't you research space for your fucking space movieSincerely, ask a question. What do you think is an undeniable fact that nobody can explain that shows it can't happen or was definitely faked? No reliance on shit like out of context quotes or telemetry tapes being missing. That doesn't mean it couldnt or didn't happen and you know it.
