>>7519555> Landing never happened. Wrong.
> USA had "muh ten year deadline" which would expire at the end of 1969. So, logically when was Kubrick hired to shot a fake? Hint: 2001 premiered in mid 1968.
> Kubrick delivered a "moon landing". Yes.
> In exchange the Illuminati funded all his money-losing films until he was Vince Fostered for going over the line with "Eyes Wide Shut".Possible.
> FYI lunar module only flew once on Earth and almost killed Neil Armstrong.Wrong, LM never flew on Earth because it had not enough thrust to lift itself in full Earth gravity. Neil crashed a vehicle which was meant to simulate a LM in Earth conditions.
> Yet we're supposed to believe that based on one near-fatal flight they decided to pack it up and send it to the moon LM was tested during Apollo 9 and 10. Which both flew after 2001 premiered. Are you starting to see the pattern here?
> for 3 dudes to fly in.LM took 2 people.
> I have 200 other examples in the event any skeptics respond intelligently.You're getting basic facts wrong (LM crew size, LM thrust, Apollo 9&10, what Neil crashed) and you want to talk conspiracy?
Here's a redpill, hoaxing makes sense considering the state of the Apollo program in 1967, which is when Kubrick most likely filmed his fake, using shooting of 2001 as a cover.
But by the end of 1968 it was obvious that NASA will deliver.
Pic related.
