VIPER will be NASA's first robotic Moon rover. It will embark on a mission to the lunar South Pole region to trek into permanently shadowed areas and unravel the mysteries of the Moon’s water. VIPER will be the first rover to measure the location and concentration of water ice and other resources. These resources could eventually be harvested to sustain human exploration on the Moon, Mars — and beyond!
Full credit to HUKD.
If they find me with Sarah Connor then I've won life anyway
..there is no fate but what we make sweet sweet love, oh yeeeeaaaaaahhh
Done! Already sent your name :)
Don’t overthink it bro
Don't let the uptight, humourless demeanor fool you… PainToad's actually a lot of fun at parties.
That's why I gave my MIL details.
You want her to be abducted by aliens. Yeah?
And probed
.
any issues with privacy or your name will be publicly released ?
Too late Garage Sale, you've already released your name to the public
nice try tsk tsk
Joe smith here
If the product is free then you are the product
NASA is probably one of the few exceptions. It's a PR campaign. Cheap way to generate interest in their programs. More interest in their programs, easier to get funding from government.
You could have told me that before I got all my Christmas presents.
Always known that santa is just out to harvest our details.
That's just what Big Coal wants you to think….
Wrong. There isn't even a product here
Nasa spending more public money/tax is the product
The aliens are going to think I’m a pretty big deal given the number of times they come across my name out there.
makes Lachlan Macquarie look like a kiddie graffiti tagger.
Big moon going to take your data and sell it to all the tech giants. Look at that moon up there just looking down at us
Ever wonder why we call it “The Man” on the moon?…
Before you point the finger you should know that I'm the man,
And if I'm the man, then you're the man, and he's the man as well
How much does it usually cost ??
How much does it usually cost ??
It can vary. But for this one, it would cost you approx. US$433 million.
Still cheaper than Myki
That with the pensioner or student concession?
What if I want to send my name from the Moon to Earth via Viper?
Drive?
You're a Holden, aren't you.
Or a Holden engined MG?
.
I thought you could just do this with nfts?
Has the moon been… "OZBARGAINED"???
I've sent many times, nothing happened :(
Have you checked the moon tho?
You don't feel a bit loose when you wake up in the morning?
Pain in the rear and seemingly lost days. Not knowing what happened.
Your guardians are keeping a watchful eye on you
Thanks, just got a pass for Mecha Godzilla. I'm sure he'll be thrilled.
How to verify?
Add Epsteins list.
First name: "Effrey"
Middle name: "Jepstein"
Last name: "Didntselfcheckouthimself"
thanks, Hugh Jass going straight to the moon
Added! Have a great weekend everyone!
Kind Regards, Deez Nuts.
NASA probably has never been to the moon.
Lies. They faked the moon landing footage from their secret moon base as a cost saving measure. After they used Hitler's secret space plane, built by the French after they were told they couldn't make croissants under the Nazi regime, to get there in 1945 they formed the Nazi-American Space Alliance - NASA. It was then more economical to just film outside the established moon base theta rather than recreating the lunar surface at Area 69 (51 is a hoax to distract tourists) here on earth. The moon president, the one down here is just an actor (or robot if the actors go on strike, like the current term), has been controlling us from space ever since with their mind control gravity beams and lunar bottled water.
Enough conspiracy for you?
Needs more reverse vampires
Is it as crazy as WMD in Iraq.
Because conspiracies don't have intended impacts :)
Are you telling me this incredibly advanced contraption that looks like it was made in someone's backyard out of space-grade shower curtain rods, tin sheeting from a shed, aluminium foil, cello tape and 0.15mm thick panels that look like cardboard, didn't actually travel into space?
Not sure, beter ask the two above me and those that neg'd me :)
Somehow that thing lifted up, REATTACHED to a rocket that was in orbit, and managed to re-entered Earths Atmosphere successfully :)
The fact there are still moon landing deniers in 2024 is wild . Our education system clearly still has a ways to go
Im going to start a gofundme to shoot them flat earthers on a one way trip to space to see the earth being you know a spheroid shape just like its celestial neighbours.
@TightAl: Usually these flat earthers also go on about how we never went to the moon. All a conspiracy to them.
The fact that you openly believe everything without question shows the lack of education you've had.
The fact there are still moon landing deniers in 2024 is wild . Our education system clearly still has a ways to go
Here's some education for you:
This is all just scratching the surface of the plethora of plot holes and unexplained anomalies in NASA's official moon landing narrative. If you want a comprehensive, point-by-point demolition of the official moon landing hoax, see David McGowan's excellent multi-part essay series, "Wagging the Moondoggie".
@Gnostikos: How does this guy explain away the 400kg of moon rock brought back that’s been independently verified in labs or the fact you can shine lasers onto the moons surface and get reflections from the mirrors they left behind?
How does this guy explain away the 400kg of moon rock brought back that’s been independently verified in labs
Easily.
Quoting from David McGowan's "Wagging the Moondoggie" (Part II):
As it turns out, authentic Moon rocks are available right here on Earth, in the form of lunar meteorites. Because the Moon lacks a protective atmosphere, you see, it gets smacked around quite a bit, which is why it is heavily cratered. And when things smash into it to form those craters, lots of bits and pieces of the Moon fly off into space. Some of them end up right here on Earth.
By far the best place to find them is in Antarctica, where they are most plentiful and, due to the terrain, relatively easy to find and well preserved. And that is why it is curious that Antarctica just happens to be where a team of Apollo scientists led by Wernher von Braun ventured off to in the summer of 1967, two years before Apollo 11 blasted off. You would think that, what with the demanding task of perfecting the hugely complex Saturn V rockets, von Braun and his cronies at NASA would have had their hands full, but apparently there was something even more important for them to do down in Antarctica. NASA has never offered much of an explanation for the curiously timed expedition.
What is known for sure is that even some of the ‘debunking’ websites have, albeit reluctantly, acknowledged that meteorite samples gathered from Antarctica are virtually indistinguishable from NASA’s collection of Moon rocks. Of course, as we very recently learned, that is not true of all of NASA’s Moon rocks. Some of them apparently bear no resemblance at all to lunar meteorites. Instead, they look an awful lot like petrified wood from the Arizona desert.
Such was the case with a ‘Moon rock’ that the Dutch national museum has been carefully safeguarding for many years now, before discovering, in August of 2009, that they were in reality the proud owners of the most over-insured piece of petrified wood on the planet. The ‘Moon rock’ had been a gift to the Dutch from the U.S. State Department, and its authenticity had reportedly been verified through a phone call to NASA. I’m guessing that NASA was probably running low on meteorite fragments and figured the Dutch wouldn’t know the difference anyway. Or maybe Washington was a little peeved over the fact that Dutch newspapers reportedly called NASA’s bluff at the time of the first alleged Moon landing.
Onto your next point…
the fact you can shine lasers onto the moons surface and get reflections from the mirrors they left behind?
Again, to quote from "Wagging the Moondoggie" (Part II):
Some True Believers also claim that what was dubbed the Lunar Laser Ranging experiment also proves that we really went to the Moon. As the story goes, the astronauts on Apollo 11, Apollo 14, and Apollo 15 all allegedly left small laser targets sitting on the lunar terrain (one of them can be seen in the official NASA photo reproduced below), so that scientists back home could then bounce lasers off the targets to precisely gauge the distance from the Earth to the Moon.
According to the ‘debunkers,’ the fact that observatories to this day bounce lasers off the alleged targets proves that the Apollo missions succeeded. It is perfectly obvious though that the targets, if there, could have been placed robotically – most likely by the Soviets. It is also possible that there are no laser targets on the Moon. In December 1966, National Geographic reported that scientists at MIT had been achieving essentially the same result for four years by bouncing a laser off the surface of the Moon. The New York Times added that the Soviets had been doing the same thing since at least 1963.
It's all a moot argument regarding the physical traces of the Apollo missions left on the lunar surface as even to this very day in 2023, there is no imagery from either passing spacecraft in lunar orbit, space telescopes or terrestrial telescopes that has the sufficient resolution to unmistakably and irrefutably show any of the physical remains of the Apollo missions on the lunar surface in crystal-clear detail.
The images that have been offered as proof of this are woefully lacking in clarity/detail, could easily be forged and look about as convincing as the video footage of Apollo 11 on the moon, i.e. worse than Hollywood special effects from the 1980s/1990s.
@Gnostikos: Speaking of the soviets , the fact they never claimed the moon landing was fake is enough evidence to prove it was real. The only people who come up with these conspiracy theories are nutty Americans
Speaking of the soviets , the fact they never claimed the moon landing was fake is enough evidence to prove it was real.
No it's not and that argument holds no water if you actually look at it objectively.
The Soviets were in no position to try and convince the world that the US had faked the moon landings given their status as the international pariah in the global community and the very obvious defence that the US government would have had against any such claims by the Soviets: it's just Cold War propaganda from our arch-adversary who predictably, are still being sore losers about not sending men to the moon first and thus losing this entire space race that we've both invested countless billions into over the past decade; nothing to see here, move on, etc.
You're forgetting the climate of tension, paranoia and hostility that existed between East and West during the 1960s. The alleged Apollo 11 mission happened a mere 6 years after the Cuban Missile Crisis, the closest the US and the Soviets ever came to a nuclear exchange. The majority of the public in the Western world thoroughly distrusted any information that came out of the Soviet Union, along with their own subjects behind the Iron Curtain who they ruthlessly oppressed and who knew that anything the Soviet authorities tried to convince them of was probably bullsh*t propaganda.
You're also forgetting how trusting most people in the Western world were in their governments and institutions back in 1969. Convincing the world, especially the feverishly patriotic (at the time) American public, of the notion that the moon landings had been faked would have been extremely difficult especially by a nation that was so publicly derided, hated and ridiculed in the mainstream media of the day.
What were the Soviets supposed to do? Go on 60 Minutes and present their case to the American people? There was no way in hell for that theory to be given a fair hearing much less actually have the reach to be heard by millions of people around the world back in the 1960s/1970s.
When it comes to the court of public opinion, it's never about what you know, it's what you can prove.
Moreover, if the Soviets had mounted a serious campaign internationally to try and prove that the moon landings were hoax that would have been seen a direct threat to US supremacy and a massive escalation of the Cold War and it would have pushed both sides closer to the brink of open conflict again, which the Soviets would have been fully aware of and thus they would have weighed this option against the risks of potentially jeopardising their strategic interests elsewhere (e.g. bleeding America dry in the Vietnam War, losing out on loans/capital from the West, threatening their assets abroad in Western countries, etc).
Case in point: even though US intelligence knew full-well that the Soviets were not only bankrolling and supplying both the North Koreans in the Korean War as well as the Vietcong/NVA in the Vietnam War, they also knew the Soviets actively participated in both conflicts with undercover "advisors" who inflicted losses against their own men on the ground, but even still they never actually called them out on this at the time because A) these were serious allegations that would strain relations with the Soviets and potentially escalate the Cold War even further and B) proving such claims before the international community was an entirely different and far more complicated matter.
There are countless such examples during the Cold War of both the US and the Soviets keeping quiet about "dirty secrets" they possessed about the other side because they were either: A) simply too unbelievable for most of their own public to handle or B) simply too difficult, expensive and time-consuming to conclusively prove to the world and a waste of precious resources during the Cold War.
In the grand scheme of things, it would have actually benefitted the Soviet Union not to indulge in any in debunking of the official moon landing narrative as they understood the value of propaganda and realised that a nation that had already been manipulated and deceived in such a manner by a grandiose psyop such as the Apollo 11 fable was ripe for further exploitation and lies, of the Soviet's machinations.
The only people who come up with these conspiracy theories are nutty Americans
If you knew anything about the countless researchers or works on this topic you'd know it was global phenomenon (here's a very good Italian documentary on the subject) and some of the very first sceptics to publicly call out the US/NASA over the moon landings being implausible were not American at all (ABC News ran an interview with an Australian scientist way back in 1965 who stated the moon was actually plasma and that landing on it would be impossible).
@Gnostikos: The USSR spent hundreds of billions of dollars during the Cold War to try and expand their interests in the developing world, and moon landing conspiracy theorists believe they just sat on information that would have humiliated the US and hugely expanded the USSR’s sphere of influence.
Don’t buy it , sorry
You need a watch of this
@piston3461: A 2-minute comedy sketch? That's the best counter-argument you've got?
The USSR spent hundreds of billions of dollars during the Cold War to try and expand their interests in the developing world,
It's not the developing world they would have needed to convince the moon landing was a hoax if they wanted to undermine the US, it's the Western world and as I said, the Western world's public and media would have laughed at such notions coming from the Soviet Union.
I can imagine their pitch to the people of America now: "Hello America, this is a public service announcement from the Soviet Union, you capitalist pigs. Your Apollo 11 moon landing never happened and is another reflection of your decadent ignorance and the inferiority of corrupt, Western ideals to the superior values of Communism. As our glorious Premier Nikita Khrushchev stated, 'we will bury you'. We now return you to Jim with the weather and then there'll be sports updates to follow for you lazy, ignorant, fat Western swine indulging in your heroic make-believe fantasies of athletic competition. Thank you and good evening comrades."
Don’t buy it , sorry
Whatever helps you sleep at night buddy.
When you can actually come up with a half-way decent argument against the 14 pages of research in David McGowan's "Wagging the Moondoggie" essay, we can revisit this subject otherwise you can go back to believing in Santa Claus, the tooth fairy, moon landings and other childhood fairy tales for all I give a sh*t.
@Gnostikos: The Apollo Lunar Surface Journal and Apollo Flight Journal sites are public and contain a wealth of reports, transcripts, audio, photos and video. The source code to the Apollo Guidance Computer is available on GitHub. These aren't the only sources. I bet you've either never bothered to look at these, or if you did you dismissed them out of hand after examining them for a few minutes because you believe something counter-intuitive is an obvious flaw. Then there are actual artifacts like moon rocks, rockets, and test versions of the landers some of which are also on public display. Not to mention the laser ranging mirrors. Then there's the fact that so many people involved in the Apollo program will tell you it's real.
Your proof? Stuff got lost, it happened a long time ago, and made up nonsense about the Soviets denying things, radiation being too much, spooky nonsense about body language, and an old astronaut saying something you can misinterpret. And you think we're the ones that will believe anything we're told? Ok, sport.
The Apollo Lunar Surface Journal and Apollo Flight Journal sites are public and contain a wealth of reports, transcripts, audio, photos and video.
I guess that would be the first time anyone's faked transcripts, audio, photos or videos?
Which with all of the original Apollo 11 audio-visual evidence now "lost" or "missing" can't really be checked against the supposed source material to verify its authenticity, so it's of doubly dubious origin now.
Then there are actual artifacts like moon rocks,
Dealt with in my reply to piston3461 above. There's plenty of moon rocks on Earth.
rockets, and test versions of the landers some of which are also on public display.
You mean mock-ups of this this incredibly convincing-looking heap of junk that's literally held together with tape?
Wow, colour me not born yesterday.
Then there's the fact that so many people involved in the Apollo program will tell you it's real.
I guess that would also be the first time someone from a US federal government agency has lied to public?
Lol.
Stuff got lost, it happened a long time ago
Sure mate. Casually "losing" a entire library's worth of the most important historical artefacts of the one of the supposedly greatest human accomplishments in recorded history…
Just like how a lot of the key evidence from the JFK assassination that could prove certain things has also been mysteriously lost…
made up nonsense about the Soviets denying things
What made-up nonsense?
radiation being too much
So radiation isn't real is it and human beings can pass through intense ionising radiation fields without shielding of any kind and probably survive?
Have you heard of place called Chernobyl?
To quote from David McGowan's "Wagging the Moondoggie" (Part III), referencing NASA themselves:
On June 24, 2005, NASA made this rather remarkable admission: “NASA’s Vision for Space Exploration calls for a return to the Moon as preparation for even longer journeys to Mars and beyond. But there’s a potential showstopper: radiation. Space beyond low-Earth orbit is awash with intense radiation from the Sun and from deep galactic sources such as supernovas … Finding a good shield is important.”(http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2005/24jun_electrostatics…)
You’re damn right finding a good shield is important!! Back in the 1960s, of course, we didn’t let a little thing like space radiation get in the way of us beating the Ruskies to the Moon. But now, I guess, being that we are more cultured and sophisticated, we want to do it the right way so we have to come up with some way of shielding our spaceships. And our temporary Moon bases. And figuring out how to do that, according to NASA, could be a real “showstopper.”
As NASA notes, “the most common way to deal with radiation is simply to physically block it, as the thick concrete around a nuclear reactor does. But making spaceships from concrete is not an option.” Lead, which is considerably denser than concrete, is actually the preferred material to use for radiation shielding, but lead also isn’t very popular with spaceship designers. In fact, word on the street is that one of the main reasons the Soviets never made it to the Moon was because their scientists calculated that four feet of lead shielding would be required to protect their astronauts, and those same scientists apparently felt that spaceships wouldn’t fly all that well when clad in four feet of lead.
Now NASA is thinking outside the box and contemplating using ‘force fields’ to repel the radiation, a seemingly ridiculous idea that, whether workable in the future or not, certainly wasn’t available to NASA in the 1960s. Below is NASA’s own artist rendering of a proposed ‘force field’ radiation shield that would allow astronauts to work safely on the Moon. As you may have noticed in the earlier photos of the lunar modules, our guys didn’t bring anything like that with them on their, uhmm, earlier missions to the Moon. And you may have also noticed that the modules did not have any type of physical shielding.
The 2005 report was not the first time that NASA had openly discussed the high levels of radiation that exist beyond the Van Allen belts. In February 2001, the space agency posted a ‘debunking’ article that argued that the rocks allegedly brought back from the Moon were so distinctive in nature that they proved definitively that man had gone to the Moon. The problem though with maintaining a lie of the magnitude of the Moon landing lie is that there is always the danger that in defending one part of the lie, another part will be exposed. Such was the case with NASA’s ill-conceived The Great Moon Hoax post, in which it was acknowledged that what are referred to as “cosmic rays” have a tendency to “constantly bombard the Moon and they leave their fingerprints on Moon rocks.”
NASA scientist David McKay explained that “There are isotopes in Moon rocks, isotopes we don’t normally find on Earth, that were created by nuclear reactions with the highest-energy cosmic rays.” The article went on to explain how “Earth is spared from such radiation by our protective atmosphere and magnetosphere. Even if scientists wanted to make something like a Moon rock by, say, bombarding an Earth rock with high energy atomic nuclei, they couldn’t. Earth’s most powerful particle accelerators can’t energize particles to match the most potent cosmic rays, which are themselves accelerated in supernova blastwaves and in the violent cores of galaxies.”
So one of the reasons that we know the Moon rocks are real, you see, is because they were blasted with ridiculously high levels of radiation while sitting on the surface of the Moon. And our astronauts, one would assume, would have been blasted with the very same ridiculously high levels of radiation, but since this was NASA’s attempt at a ‘debunking’ article, they apparently would prefer that you don’t spend too much time analyzing what they have to say.
Onto your next strawman…
spooky nonsense about body language, and an old astronaut saying something you can misinterpret.
The only spooky nonsense going on here is how much cognitive dissonance and mental gymnastics you need to engage in to casually dismiss some of the biggest flaws/plot holes of the Apollo 11 moon landing narrative.
And that's before we've even touched upon some of true gems of the entire fable that have never been properly answered or addressed by anyone, including NASA:
How the lunar module took off from the surface of the moon after landing and docked with the command module that was supposedly orbiting the moon at a speed of over 6,000km/h, with 1960s-era navigational and rocket propulsion technology that couldn't be off by even a millisecond or a millimetre otherwise it would have spelled certain death for all of the astronauts.
How were the Apollo 11 command and lunar modules along with astronauts themselves shielded from the barrage of micro-meteorites that routinely pummel the surface of the Moon at speeds of up to Mach 70, any of which would have spelled certain, almost instantaneous death for the entire crew had they hit any of the modules or the astronauts themselves.
How the astronaut's life support systems in their space suits and in the command/lunar modules protected them from the extreme temperature fluctuations of -173C to 127C that exist on the moon.
How the astronauts physically operated their suit-mounted cameras to capture photos/videos from the moon, how they manually set the exposure/focus/framing correctly, given the cameras were chest-mounted, had no viewfinders to look through and the fact that they were wearing extremely bulky, pressurised space suits that severely limited their visibility and dexterity (they couldn't even physically look down to see where the camera pointing).
The fact that the majority of technology used in the Apollo missions from the rocketry, to the guidance computers, to the space suits, to the life support systems, to the telemetry/communications equipment all worked perfectly, on the first-ever attempt of using that said technology in a real, life-and-death mission in outer space/on the moon with virtually no real testing being done beforehand because it was impossible to simulate the operating environment and conditions that the technology would be used in and guarantee any of it would work as intended.
To repeat your defensive remark: "I bet you've either never bothered to look at these, or if you did you dismissed them out of hand after examining them for a few minutes because you believe something counter-intuitive is an obvious flaw."
And you think we're the ones that will believe anything we're told? Ok, sport.
I mean, you literally deny the glaringly obvious truth that you can perceive with your own two eyes because a corrupt American federal agency says otherwise, so you probably do…
@Gnostikos: I'm not reading your manifesto in full. It's blatantly clear you won't actually look at any evidence and have made your mind up. Skimming your list of objections there are simple explanations to all your objections that are a google away. As others have pointed out, it would require more effort than a moon landing to fake the evience. And your "admissions" are laughable. You just want to believe what you want to believe and choose not to understand.
@syousef: Wonderful. Thanks for conceding defeat and don't let the door hit you on your way out.
“Almost all people are hypnotics. The proper authority saw to it that the proper belief should be induced, and the people believed properly.”
― Charles Fort
"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled."
― Mark Twain
I'm not reading your manifesto in full.
Lol. Except you obviously did, you liar.
Skimming your list of objections there are simple explanations to all your objections that are a google away.
Except there aren't, other than in your fervent imagination filled with fairy tale stories for overgrown children.
You just want to believe what you want to believe and choose not to understand.
Seeing as no one has supposedly sent manned missions to the moon since 1972, it seems to be an insurmountable undertaking for any nation even with all of the massive advances in technology that have happened since 1969.
Hollywood routinely produces more convincing Sci-Fi films than the footage from the Apollo 11 landings. It's nowhere near as hard as you imagine and you're forgetting that we're talking about the US government here; the people who faked the justifications for the Vietnam War, first Gulf War, second Gulf War, Afghanistan and the Global War on Terror all of which have been responsible for the deaths of combined millions of innocents.
Filming a bunch of USAF test pilots LARPing as astronauts on a movie set and/or the Nevada desert and then presenting it to the world as a real event is child's play by comparison.
Anyway chump, you keep huffing that hopium and looking forward to the planned Artemis manned missions that will also fail to happen like every other planned manned mission to the moon that NASA has announced since 1972.
@Gnostikos: No I didn't concede defeat. That's your delusion kicking in again, and I can see if that's how you think critically why you would doubt the moon landings. I conceded that you weren't worth my time because you couldn't be taught or grow. That's what I conceded.
Also I really didn't read your full rant. I literally had better things to do. But you think what you like, and call me a liar, hey champ? Your opinion literally doesn't matter to me.
@Gnostikos: The Soviet Union … first telemetry to and from outer space,… first images of the moon's surface including the far side of the moon
And The Soviet Union actually captured telemetry from NASA and witnessed that they been there and how NASA landed. You can't block or encrypt radio signals like that at that time. Even now random radio people capture it.
I'm not here to deny moon landings but Jesus, what sort of ramshackle operation were they running back in 1969 that that's the best they could do
Yeah, it's best not to look too far into it. That's just the tip of the iceberg. As Morpehus says to Neo in The Matrix: "We have a rule: we never free a mind once it's reached a certain age. It's dangerous, the mind has trouble letting go."
But… say for example you did want to go down that rabbit hole, look no further than David McGowan's 14-part essay series "Wagging the Moondoggie". Not only does it take a sledgehammer to the entire Apollo program narrative and thoroughly obliterate it but it's hilariously well-written too.
I'll state for the record that before I read David's work on the moon landing hoax I honestly, genuinely had no strong opinion about the entire theory one way or the other and I was also perplexed as to what the alleged motives/justifications would be for devising such a fiendishly complicated operation but then it eventually dawns on you: it wasn't physically possible to send man to the moon in 1969 and there was no other way to convince the world that it happened. We can't send manned missions into deep space past the Van Allen belts today, let alone back in the 1960s with the technology available then.
Its the best they could do. For the time and the technology then. And the timeframe they had.
Not like they had any prior knowledge of going into space.
Not like now where theres been a few people who have lived in space for a bit in the ISS.
Pft, you really believe in the moon? I guess you probably believe in Santa Claus and the tooth fairy and that the earth is a sphere as well. Cute
It's very clearly just an image being projected on a giant screen above our heads, to keep us from realising what is REALLY going on out there.
WAKE UP SHEEPLE!
The moon is real and it's made of cheese.
Please, nerds, stop shooting lasers onto the moon's surface. You're ruining the Wensleydale!
The name's Gayne, Oz Barr Gayne.
Great deal sent 12 names 👍
Already sent it via the Chinese Yutu 2 (emotional reminder of the best times in YUgoslavia ;)
OzShit
Ok ill bite but whats the carbon footprint look like
Put Jada Smiths name on the rover and will Smith will slap this rover on the face
one day advanced aliens will find this artifact and will revive everyone's name on the list and hailed as heroes while locked in an alien zoo
But how is it taken to moon? Carved on the side of rover? Or just a saved file on a pen drive? Hope alien's have researched USB. 🤞
It's not called a Universal Serial Bus for nothin' buddy. Giddy up!
Just imagining ET hating on their equipment still coming with micro usb when it should all be type C.
Realising Airdrop doesn't work in space
Yawn! My name already made it to Mars a few years back. I'll leave this cheapo moon trip for the poors!
"With Artemis missions, NASA will land the first woman and first person of color on the Moon, using innovative technologies to explore more of the lunar surface than ever before. We will collaborate with commercial and international partners and establish the first long-term presence on the Moon. Then, we will use what we learn on and around the Moon to take the next giant leap: sending the first astronauts to Mars."
Cool so it's like a Disney movie?
white is a color
White is a shade, just like black and grey
.
You are throwing shade
"With Artemis missions, NASA will land the first woman and first person of color on the Moon, using innovative technologies to explore more of the lunar surface than ever before. We will collaborate with commercial and international partners and establish the first long-term presence on the Moon. Then, we will use what we learn on and around the Moon to take the next giant leap: sending the first astronauts to Mars."
Yes, the program is already in the advanced CGI-rendering stage and will no doubt go ahead as planned and on schedule right after the next round of budget cuts.
Now available in the official NASA gift shop: our space-themed hopium vapes with classic flavours like Buzzed Aldrin, the High Eagle and Burner Von Braun.
Just added ELON "TSLA" MUSK - now, To The Moon !!!
To the moon Alice!!
Interesting.. how does this show up now just when I started binge watching the series For All Mankind.
And then someone will come from the future looking for Sarah Connor and you.