The stated reason NASA does not go back to the moon is the lethal amounts of radiation supposedly present on the moon’s surface and in the Van Allen belts, an area of radiation between the Earth and the moon that is undoubtedly lethal.

Uhm, so, what's preventing NASA from just releasing new fake pictures exactly? You know, to shut up the people accusing them for not returning to the Moon.
Like, if they can't go to the Moon, but they can craft fake media, especially with today's technology, wouldn't it be best for them to just release new stuff and sing "ha ha! we went to the moon~ moon moon moon~~ to the müünnnnn~~"

The Moon Landing was viewed by 600 million people across America.

I understand America was hit quite badly by this pandemic, but I don't think it was so bad as to halve the population... I must have missed some other major disaster between the 70s and today

There's a very easy way to settle this.

The lander module was left behind and we know where. Modern telescopes are good enough to resolve all of th he equipment left behind.

If it's there why has no one posted such? You mean to tell me no backyard astronomer has thought to do this in all these decades?!

The lack of such would appear to support Canek's position... unlike the snark posted by Michelle.

In case you're someone who listens to facts, there is some maths here showing why your average backyard astronomer cannot see the rover from Earth.

Short answer: you're greatly underestimating the distance between Earth and the Moon.

While we wait for someone with a 200m telescope in their backyard to prove me wrong, you can enjoy these images taken from Lunar orbit in 2012. Since the wait might be long, you might as well enjoy a cup of tea while you read through the third party evidence readily available on the internet.

@Michele: My apologies. I'm on a mobile with wonky autocorrect.

As to your reply... If a backyard telescope can resolve moons orbiting other planets in our system they can, at the very least, resolve a foreign object on the lunar surface. We don't need a crisp image for proof. Just an image of an object that obviously does not fit with the surrounding terrain.

look at the LRO images, then.

Your appeal to authority costs you the debate. The entire premise is that the authority in question lied. Why should we subsequently trust in their honesty?

This is precisely why I did not make that argument.

so, what's your answer to Michele's comment at the beginning of this thread? why don't we have any new fake moon landing pictures, with the much more advanced graphics available today?

Heh, you certainly are convinced that I have a rat in this race...

Ok then, since you want to be retard that takes one for the team I'll play along.

Why would a body of people who have secured themselves behind a wall of propaganda and thoroughly discredited all those who question their story by calling them conspiracy theorists bother taking an unnecessary risk and do it again using newer tech with even stupider and less trustworthy people? No one in government knows how to shut up any better than you do.

So again; why risk exposure?

It's also rather easy to lie to and misdirect a nation full of idiots then discredit the occasional intelligent one. Fools always have an inflated sense of self esteem and will proudly wear their crayon-etched badge of faux-superiority.

Or have you not been paying attention to the sorry state of our world the last twenty years? How about in the last sixteen months?

Have you looked in a mirror lately to determine the source of the problem? Your failure to question authority is by and large a problem and you are compounding it - always.

Instead of playing the game for our enemy why don't you recall your brain from its sabbatical and put it to work. There's more than enough evidence that we're being lied to on a number of topics. Quit letting the authorities use the space between your ears as a jizz dumpster and use it for it's intended purpose.

It's a fictional novel. It goes on a tangent, the guy talks about his own life, his wife, side projects, Lincoln, Hitler... he gives some personal opinions on control of information and people's reaction to that, not a bad read. It seems to be well written. Nice style and good font choice. But it's fiction.

Sorry I can't read all of it. I'm reading The Colour of Magic by Terry Pratchett these days and it's keeping me busy during the little free time I have. I'm still 50% through it, but it's about wizards and all sort of people living on a disc world. It's a very good read, highly suggested.

For those interested in non-fiction, I already posted a link to a page with Maths. I know it can get hard to follow, Maths is Maths after all.