FIERY DEBATE: Governments Covering Up Moon Hoaxes? Alex Stein Vs Craig/FTFE
01:18:51 Share

Ready to shoot your shot? Log into BetMGM every day and play the new Fast Break basketball game for your chance to win prizes. All you need to do is log into BetMGM. Head to the promotions page and fire up Fast Break to find yourself on the b-ball court ready to make a play. Choose to pass the ball to the shooting guard or small forwards.

or take it to the rim yourself and go for a slam dunk. If you score a basket, you'll win a prize like a boost token, $50 bonus bet, or bonus spins. If you miss, just log in tomorrow and try again. Play fast break for your daily shot at boost tokens, bonus bets, or bonus spins. BetMGM and GameSense remind you to play responsibly. See BetMGM.com for terms. 21+. This U.S. promo offer not available in D.C., Mississippi, New York, Nevada, Ontario, or Puerto Rico. Gambling problem? Call 1-800-GAMBLER throughout U.S. 8778-HOPE-NY or text HOPE-NY467369 in New York. Call 1-800-NEXT-STEP in

Arizona, 1-800-327-5050. In Massachusetts, 1-800-BETS-OFF-IN-IOWA, 1-800-981-0023. In Puerto Rico, or visit 1-800-GAMBLER.NET in West Virginia. Subject to eligibility requirements. Rewards vary and expire in seven days. In partnership with Kansas Crossing Casino and Hotel.

If you've been having your McDonald's sausage McMuffin with an iced coffee from somewhere else, now is the right time to reconsider. Revitalize and caramelize your morning with any size caramel, French vanilla, or classic iced coffee for just 99 cents. And pair it with a juicy, melty sausage McMuffin with egg for $2.79. Prices and participation may vary. Cannot be combined with any other offer. Ba-da-ba-ba-ba.

Thank you so much, James. Let's give a big round of applause for James. Well, we were here last... Yesterday. I was going to say last week. It hasn't been that long. We were here yesterday, and we were doing a bunch of religion debates, and it was very fun to watch it and see all these people duke out these ideas, but it was on a sort of...

security concern that we were having is the one debater was concerned about threats to his life. And it's just crazy that you can, even in 2025, we still have to worry about having death threats hurled at us just for having conversations and having debates or anything like that.

I just want to say that if you guys want to keep having conversations, keep watching James' channel, keep coming to these events, and also check out Uncensored America on YouTube as well because we're like James. We like having conversations. We like having debates with people. And the more we do that, the better because if you stop because somebody threatens you, harasses you, bullies you, or in our case, we've gotten our funding pulled from universities, then

They're gonna just keep winning and they're just keep trying to censor us So if you keep fighting you keep having conversations, then we're gonna keep having free speech in this country So let's keep fighting for free speech. And if you want to start on censored America chapter, you can go to uncensored America dot us We're on college campuses where we just host debates events everything like this. So check that out and Hope you guys enjoy the next debate

So without further ado, let me bring back up Dr. James Coons. Yeah. Thank you very much, Sean. I want to mention, too, if you would like to have Sean or any of our other staff that we have from DebateCon help you with video editing or filming, reach out to Modern Day Debate.

They're great. Sean's great at these events. And Jeff. Jeff deserves credit too. They're stars. And if you're like, hey, I could use your help. Let me give you some work. ModernDayDebate at gmail.com. These guys are stellar. But we're going to get into the actual debate first with the introductions.

And I also want to give you a primer that once I introduce our speakers, we're going to have a vote. It's a hand poll, basically where we just check to see which way you lean in terms of whether or not you agree more with Alex versus Fight the Flat Earth. Alex will be going first, so I'm going to introduce him first. He is Tucker Carlson's biological stepson and defender of big booty Latinas.

They make me say these. Don't deport them. All the legals have to go except for big booty Latinas. They can stay. Hellix will be taking the position that the moon landings are a government hoax and defending the position that they are, in fact, real moon landings. Craig, Fight the Flat Earth, is an ex-Royal Navy nuclear engineer, a powerhouse debater, and YouTube titan who tears apart conspiracy theories with brutal precision.

backed by years of experience and degrees in physics and nuclear engineering. Please welcome both of our speakers. We're thrilled to have you here, gentlemen. And then I do want to let you know that we will have this hand poll where if you happen to lean more towards Alex's position that the moon landings are a hoax, could you slide your hand up? Smart people. And then if you lean more toward Craig's position that the moon landings are legitimate. Extremely smart people.

You got it. So what we're going to do, the reason we do these hand polls is because one of our sponsors is Manifold, which is the world's largest social prediction market online. They are linked in the description box. So if you're watching at home, folks, check out the link where you can predict who is going to win this debate determined by the hand poll before and after the debate as you look at the percentage of people who agree with one speaker or another. All I ask is that for the second hand poll, only vote if you voted in the first one.

Now, we are going to get into the actual debate itself. Check out Manifold, which is linked in the description box if you're watching at home, and you can vote on who you think will win this debate. And with that, thank you very much for being with us, everybody. Thanks for your patience. We are going to kick it off with Alex Stein's opening statement. The floor is all yours, Alex, for 10 minutes. Well, thank you, and guys, give it up for everybody, James, Dr. James, and thank you guys for being here. Thank you.

I really appreciate it and I know it's early this morning, but we're about to get the party started. All right guys, so if you know who I am, you might not. I'm Primetime99AlexStein. I'm Tucker Carlson's biological stepson and today we're here to talk about the 1969 Apollo moon missions and why they were provably false. So

My opponent here, Craig, is going to sit here. He's going to tell you that these moon landings are real, but let's just be real. Let's actually be real. We cannot go to the moon today. We cannot take a man past low Earth orbit today. The farthest that we can go is near the International Space Station, a little bit past it, but that is less than 400 miles away.

But during the 1969 Apollo moon missions, we were able to go 257,000 miles to the moon on one tank of gas. That's right. And the power that it took us to blast off from planet Earth and go to the moon, it took us less than 1,000th the amount of fuel to lift off the moon and come back to America. So it's just impossible. And the idea that

You look at what was going on in the world in 1969, and if you look at the origins of the space program, I hate to be like this, and you know, Craig is gonna rebut this, but my last name is Alex Stein, and I don't want to get emotional when I think about this. You guys might not know this, but the NASA Apollo moon missions was run by a Nazi.

Yes, that's right a guy by the name of Warner von Braun. Do you guys know who Warner von Braun is Warner von Braun was a the leader of the German rocket program he created the v2 rocket that decimated

England, decimated Poland, and these ICBMs, Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles, were actually the origin of the Apollo moon missions. That's right. So the rockets that took us to the moon, allegedly, were actually rockets that were first intended to murder and kill people, that were designed by this guy, Wernher von Braun. Now, for me, when I think about the Holocaust, and I think about the six million people dying,

And I think about the people being put into an oven, and I think about the people being gassed, and I think about the displacement of a whole group of people. And it makes me really sad. I would think that the Holocaust was very bad. And I don't know about you guys, but, I mean, I'm not Nick Fuentes, but Nick Fuentes would probably say that the Holocaust is not bad. But I think we would all agree that the Holocaust was terrible, right? It was a genocide of people.

One of the most important people during the Holocaust was this guy, Wernher von Braun. Wernher von Braun is not a good guy, but because he was a smart scientist, through a thing called Operation Paperclip, not everybody went to the Nuremberg trials. Even if you killed people, if you were a smart enough scientist, you got to come to America and guess what? Wernher von Braun got to have a job with NASA, became very good friends with Walt Disney. Isn't that crazy? Because we live in a time now

where we can't go to space and they tell us that Nazis are bad, but for some reason, in the 50s, Nazis are cool. So when you look at the origins of our space program and you look at who was running it, a guy by the name of Wernher von Braun, who was a Nazi,

The Nazis were great at lying. Nazis were some of the best strategic military engineers. People in Germany are smart. Let's not front there. Mercedes is a good car. BMW is a good car. So there is a reason why, even in a terrible thing, like Craig's going to be like, "Well, even though it was a terrible war, we shouldn't kill these scientists."

Not me. I think if you killed people, you should have got the Nuremberg trial. I don't like the origins of our space program. We can get into the shadows, of course. It doesn't make sense that the shadows are basically running into each other. You can talk about all of the little stuff. They're going to talk about how there was no blast crater when the lunar lander went on the moon. There was not one speck. Not one speck.

of moon dust on any of the lander pods when it was on the moon, which is just provably false. When you have a huge rocket engine, you know, lifting you down onto a planet, there would be a huge blast crater. But, of course, there's no blast crater underneath the lunar lander. And then on top of that...

how they were able to shoot it in later missions, watching the lunar lander take off. I think it was Apollo 14, the first time they were able to film it. They said they were able to do this with a timed camera, that they were able to time it, and it was able to just film the lander go up. All of this is impossible. You know why? Because we didn't even have a fax machine in 1969.

We didn't have email. Think about how hard it is to get stuff done today with email. We can communicate across the world instantly. We couldn't do that in the 60s. We didn't have a fax machine. So how are you going to communicate to somebody in Florida if you're in Texas without a fax machine? You have to do it over a telephone. So the transfer of documents is

impossible in the 60s. So if we don't have the ability today to send a manned mission to the moon, then we weren't able to do it in 1969. I was actually just recently at the Johnson Space Center, and they showed Artemis. Artemis is the new plan to go to the moon. That's not gonna happen, but when you look at Artemis, they let us tour it, it looks almost identical to the Apollo

lunar landers. It just looks like it's more reinforced. So my point is, it's not even some new technology that they're developing. It actually looks very similar. Now it might be new materials and new computers,

but it actually looks kind of similar to the ones that landed, allegedly, in 1969. So, you know, I just ask you to critically look at this. I know that we all have American pride, right? You know, you're from America. We're the greatest country. But when you look at the space race, for every 100 hours of space time that the Russians had, America only had 20.

You're like, "Alex, if America faked the moon landing, why didn't Russia expose them?" It's funny you say that because Russia was actually the first to go to the moon and take a sample, allegedly. I don't even think they were able to do that in 1969, but the reason why they wouldn't tell is because they're both lying. They would be telling on themselves by exposing somebody else. If you're both thieves and you steal from the same bank, you don't want to tell on one person for stealing from the same place you stole from because potentially you both could get caught.

There is an incentive to lie and everybody in this room knows that there are classified levels of information that we are not privy to, that the government has no obligation to tell us the truth about anything. That's not their job. As a matter of fact, their obligation more is to lie to us and keep us in the dark. So when you have a situation where the space program was created by literal Nazis that lie, that kill people, that put people in ovens,

Then they get to go to America because they're really smart and build these Apollo rockets that allegedly took us 257,000 miles of space on one take of gas. It's just provably false. And also I want to harp on this. Forget about all the rocket power. Forget about that. All right. Forget about the lander, how goofy that looks. Forget about all that. The spacesuit, the spacesuit.

On the moon, in the sun, it is 250 degrees Fahrenheit. When you go into the shade in the moon, it is automatically negative 240 degrees Fahrenheit. That is a difference of 500 degrees. So if you go from the sunlight in the moon to the shade, that is a 500 degree change. 240 degrees is hotter than the boiling point of water.

These spacesuits in 1969 were able to just magically go from 500 degrees instantly. That's just impossible. We don't have the technology to do this now. If you look at the spacesuits, they're going to say the spacesuits were pressurized. That's not true. If the spacesuits were pressurized, you wouldn't see wrinkles in it. They would look kind of like, remember in COVID where they would wear those big suits and they would blow air in it and how the suits were all puffed up? A spacesuit would not have wrinkles in it if it was actually pressurized. It would be more like a balloon.

We don't have the ability to go today. That's like the main thing I want to harp in your head is that it doesn't make sense. A 1969 Cadillac is not more technologically advanced than a 2024 Cadillac. It's just not. And so the only technology that goes backwards happens to be the Apollo missions. And what's even crazier about all of this is

is that the telemetry data, the data that we use to tell exactly where the spaceship was the whole time, guess what happened to that? It all got deleted. That's right. The telemetry data got deleted. And then also,

the blueprints for the lander. We're not even able to get the blueprints for the lander. What's really funny is Ron Howard actually did a documentary about this, and he was trying to get access to a lot of this stuff for his documentary, and NASA said, "Oh, I'm sorry, we don't have that tape. We don't have that footage." So, just the mere fact that NASA would tell you for budgetary reasons they had to re-record over the telemetry data tapes, and now we don't have the telemetry data,

It just shows you that it's provably false. So we have a lot to talk about. I didn't even really get into the science aspect of it. I more want to talk about the social aspect of it, because this was a lie done to the American people to win a space race in order to distract us from the Vietnam War that was currently going on. So this is all a distraction, and this is how much people cared about the Apollo moon missions.

It was Apollo 13 is the one where they had the crazy thing. They supposedly fixed the lander, or excuse me, they fixed the spaceship with like a,

toilet paper roll and a sock, but before Apollo 13, on Apollo 12, people were calling ABC, they were calling the news stations, and they were mad that the Apollo mission was messing up their "I Love Lucy" shows. That's what they were mad about. I'm dead serious. People were more interested in watching "I Love Lucy" than watching the moon landing. So when it comes to this and it comes to technology,

It's all a lie. I hate to tell you that. And Wernher von Braun, the guy that brought us here, was a Nazi responsible for the death of six million Jews. So unless Craig is an anti-Semite, which I don't think he is, he's going to have a tough battle, you know. That's time. Helping a Nazi like Wernher von Braun. Thank you. That's my time. All right. Thank you, Alex.

You may have noticed I am not James. I'm stepping in for him here. So he'll be back in a few minutes. FTFE, the floor is all yours. Ten minute opening. Thank you. I just want to say thank you to James and Modern Day Debates for bringing me all the way here from Scotland. It's been an amazing experience. And thank you, Alex, for coming and being my opponent. I appreciate it.

I'm Craig Manel, I run the YouTube channel FTFE. Just so you know, I have two degrees, one in physics, one in nuclear engineering, so I understand the technology and the science side pretty well, and I'm going to kind of try and stick to that as my main argument.

I want to talk about the fact that we're kicking off a journey back to one of humanity's biggest hold my beer moments, the Apollo landings. Picture this, it's the late 1960s and while some folks are busy inventing conspiracy theories that would make even your paranoid uncle blush, NASA's gearing up to do the impossible, land humans on the moon.

The Apollo program. Not just a few guys in a tin can, but a series of missions that push the limits of what we thought was possible. Their goal is to land humans on the moon, explore it and bring them safely back home. Simple, right? Just overcome the minor hurdles of vacuums, cosmic rays and zero gravity. The key milestones and like the few things figuring out how to get a rocket to break free from Earth's wardrobe of gravity without turning into a giant firework. Not to mention teaching astronauts how to moonwalk before Michael Jackson made it cool.

Apollo 11, this wasn't just any camping trip, it was the first time humans set foot on a different celestial body. Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin didn't just take small steps, they took giant leaps into history and the hearts of conspiracy theorists like Alex everywhere.

The technological marvels, everything from space food that could survive a nuclear war to computers less powerful than your coffee maker, yet they got us to the moon and back. Well, some of us can't even get a decent cell signal today. The global impact was huge. This was Earth's selfie moment. Watching its own species step out into the universe, it united humanity, proving that together we could achieve the unimaginable. And the cultural significance? Let's just say it gave us more than a few good movies and a whole genre of space rock.

So as we blast off into this debate, remember the moon landing isn't just a story of human achievement, it's a slap in the face to every science denier who thinks moon landing hoax is a great conversation starter at parties. So let's talk about third party verifications.

because sometimes you need a bit more than just your mum to vouch for you. When it comes to proving the moon landing, it wasn't just NASA's word against the conspiracy theorists, we had some pretty serious backup. First up, the Soviet Union, yes. America's favorite Cold War besties, they weren't just sitting back with popcorn, they were tracking every single move made. If anyone had an incentive to call it a hoax, it was the USSR.

But instead of busting NASA, Soviet tracking stations from Crimea to Siberia confirmed every single milestone of the Apollo missions. Talk about an awkward moment for hoax believers.

Then there's the global network of observations from Australia to Germany, observatories that were geared up with their giant space binoculars. They weren't just any stargazing hubs, they were some of the best eyes on the planet and they were all watching the same thing at the same time, men landing on the moon. We're talking about places like Gerald Bank in the UK which snagged transmissions directly from the lunar surface or the Parkes Observatory in Australia which famously gave us some of the clearest TV pictures of the astronauts hopping around on the moon.

Why does this matter? Because these verifications came from sources with no dog in the political fight. Armed with nothing but hard data and a clear view of the sky, they helped cement the moon landing, not just as an American triumph, but as a human one. So when someone tries to tell you it was all filmed in Hollywood basement, just remember the whole world was watching and not one credible source has ever cried, cut on Apollo 11. Um...

All right, so one of the favorite bits of evidence I like to go into is the moon rocks. Forget about your average backyard pebbles, these rocks are literally out of this world. First off, we're not talking about just a handful of rocks. Over 600 samples were handed out like galactic party favors to more than 100 countries. Why? To ensure scientists worldwide could roll up their sleeves and get down to some serious moon rock analysis. This wasn't just an American show, it was a global science fest.

Now, where did some of these rocks come from? Straight from the moon's surface, collected by astronauts who were busy making history while jumping around in low gravity. These rocks aren't just rare, they're alien, featuring a cocktail of minerals and isotopes that you just cannot find on the Earth.

The scientific jackpot these rocks represent can't be overstated. They've given us a window into the moon's fiery formation, its crusty history, and even clues about the early solar system. Each rock is like a chapter of a celestial encyclopedia written in a language that scientists are still eagerly decoding. And here's the kicker: the unique properties of these moon rocks are nothing like what we have on Earth, which smashes any ridiculous claims they were cooked up in a studio. They're the smoking gun of the moon landing that's proven we didn't just send cameras to the moon, we brought a piece of it back.

Decades later, these are still making headlines with new discoveries, proving their scientific gifts keep on giving. Right, so one of my absolute favorites

favorite evidence for the moon landing and this one is undeniable is the Grand Prix during Apollo 16 lunar rover or as I like to call it the first off-road moon racing in history it wasn't just a stroll on the moon it brought along a lunar rover that turned the moon into a racetrack this wasn't for kicks the rover was essential for expanding the range astronauts could cover making it easier to hold their scientific gear and collect samples but they had a bit of fun too now the Grand Prix video

This gem shows astronaut John Young whipping around on the lunar surface. But forget Hollywood car chases, this was a physics lesson on live TV. The dust kicked up by the rover.

didn't behave as it would on Earth. Instead of lingering in the air, it shot up and fell straight back down in a perfect parabolic arc. Why? Because there was no atmosphere and a whole less locked gravity. These dust trails are crucial. They visually demonstrate two things. First, the moon's gravity is about one sixth of that of Earth, which affects how fast the dust settles back down. And second, the absence of any atmospheric drag means no air to suspend the particles.

they're in a hurry to hit the ground again. The insights from these simple observations are vast. They help us understand not just lunar geology, but also the fundamental principles of physics in low gravity.

So next time you watch the grampy remember it's not just a cool space video, it's literally a demonstration of physics. And to say that this was in some kind of studio means they would have had to have done two things: one, remove the atmosphere from the studio, and two, change the gravity in the studio. I myself have done analysis on the dust particles to show that their parabolic trajectory could not be in a gravitational acceleration of 9.8 meters per second squared that we experience on Earth.

The retroreflectors, stemming from the Apollo missions, the lunar reflectors aren't just any piece of equipment, they're essentially cosmic mirrors we left on the moon, which are still serving science to this day. Deployed during 11, 14 and 15, these retroreflectors are designed for one job, to reflect lasers sent back from Earth.

Not your average high school science experiment. It's a setup that allows us to measure the distance from Earth to the moon with incredible precision, like millimeters. And why do we care about this? Because it's crucial for testing the fundamentals of physics, including Einstein's theory of relativity. These ongoing experiments are carried out by numerous international observatories, demonstrating that the legacy of the Apollo missions extends far beyond those first small steps on the moon. So...

Also, there's the photo and video evidence, which is vast and incredibly large, and none of it is missing, despite what Alex would like to say. The photos and videos, some say they're smoking guns at the Grand Hoax. Well, no. The shadows and lighting in these photos are all incredibly consistent, so much so that NVIDIA used their 3D technology to trace the path the rays of light would take and simulate where the shadows would fall in the background

The geography that we have on the moon and they matched up a hundred percent to what all the videos and photos and videos showed Don't just take NASA's word for it Independent photographic experts from around the globe have scrutinized every pixel of these They're not just any expert They're people that can spot a Photoshop job from a mile away and what's their verdict? The images are authentic with geometric perspectives and lighting effects only possible on the lunar surface. I

These photos and videos have been available for public scrutiny since they were taken. Anyone with enough interest and the right expertise can review them. This openness is not what you'd expect from a so-called grand deception."

As we wrap up our journey through the compelling evidence of the moon landings, let's just take a moment to reflect on what we've covered. From third party verifications by the Soviets during the Cold War, to independent analysis of moon rocks and the ongoing lunar laser ranging experiments, to the physics of the Grand Prix and the reg lift being kicked up.

Each piece of evidence from the unique behavior of the dust on the lunar surface to the retroreflectors still used today for precise measurement builds a case not just for the reality of the moon landings, but also for the integrity and capability of the scientists and engineers who made it happen. One minute. We've seen that this isn't just about historical records.

It's about ongoing validation in scientific community. The data and findings are not locked away. They're available for anyone to review and scrutinize. This transparency reinforces the authenticity of the missions and highlights the scientific methods role in advancing our understanding of the universe. Thank you very much. I appreciate the time.

All right. Thank you, Craig. Gentlemen, I know you both. I know the passion you have on this subject. We are going to go into 45 minutes of open discussion. Yes, sir. Well, just real quick, can I rebut a couple of the things? Just in particular, just anything we can get into the open discussion. And I sent an email, but there was like four things I just wanted to specifically want to go through real quick, Craig.

Yeah, I mean, we can talk about it. I know, but just these four things real quick. Greg, you're okay with that? Yeah, yeah, go ahead. Just real quick. So you talked about bouncing a laser off the moon, correct? Yeah, yeah, yeah. So do you know when the first time we did that?

after they were put up, not long after. Well, that's wrong. Actually, we did that. MIT did that on May 9th, 1962. So you can see that. So just so Craig knows. So that's off the moon, not off the retroreflector. Oh, you see, that's what's so cute. Is this a discount? No, that's so cute. Okay. So Alex, the difference there is the precision that we can do. Just bouncing lasers off the moon, we don't get the precision, the strength of the signal back. With the retroreflectors, the intensity of the signal that we get back allows us

do much more precise analysis on the distance to the moon. Using the basic one-- Well, wouldn't you say that we've been able to shine a laser off it, so you saying that we shine a laser off it after the moon mission doesn't prove that we can't shine a laser off it. Do you see what I'm saying? No, but the point is there's a very big difference to just shining off moon to shining off of retroreflectors. We can tell by the intensity of the signal we get back what

And you've seen the videos of them shining this laser on the moon, right? Yeah. And then they shine it and then they just look at a computer screen, right? Well, yeah, they can time the distance and predict what... And the thing is they can point the laser away from the moon and it won't hit the thing. Or they can point it at the retroreflector. And once they point it at the retroreflector, they get back such a precise and intense signal that allows them to determine that the moon is moving away or a particular... It's millimeters precision. And that precision is the point of the retroreflectors.

Yes, before the retroreflectors, we absolutely could bounce a laser off of the moon, but that didn't give us the precision and the intensity of the signal back that allows us to do lunar laser ranging experiments that are still being done today by children in observatories around America and the world.

I'm just saying we were able to shine a laser off the moon before the moon mission, so that doesn't prove that we went there. But you're going to say that. Okay, now we've got to go. Now, I don't know if you got the article that I sent. You said the space rocks. You're talking about how we have so many great space rocks. That was one of your main points. Well, it's so crazy. Jeffrey, are you able to pull this up on this one? That being Chrome, yeah? Yeah.

So it's crazy though that you said that. Yeah, that's one. Click that. Because if you pull this up, so it's just so wild. This is what they called a moon rock. So if you look at this article, and this is NBC News, the Dutch National Museum said Thursday that one of its prized possessions, a rock supposedly brought back from the moon by U.S. astronauts, is just a piece of petrified wood. Oh my!

Oh my God, isn't that crazy? Yeah, that's NBC. I know you guys, listen, I know you guys, they went up there and they brought a bunch of rocks back, sure. But you know what's real funny is having moon rocks actually doesn't prove they went to the moon because this Nazi that he didn't mention in his opening statement didn't apologize for the death of six men. Hey, so you know that whether it was a Nazi or not doesn't make a difference to what happened.

No, that does make a difference. It does make a difference. Whether he's a horrible person or not is irrelevant to the technological marvels that came from the mainland. It does make a difference, but we'll get into that. But what's funny, because you talk about these moon rocks, so what do you have to say? Why would NASA give them petrified wood? There's a story behind this. When they traced back the passage of hands where this never actually came from NASA...

It came from an astronaut. Yeah, that astronaut. Who works for NASA? Does an astronaut work for NASA, Craig? Craig, does an astronaut? No, because you just said it doesn't come from NASA. Does an astronaut work for NASA, Craig? If someone works for McDonald's, does that mean every burger they make comes from McDonald's? Did they do it?

Yes, if an employee from McDonald's gave me something, I would say that was from McDonald's. So you went to McDonald's employee's house and they gave you a burger. You'd say, thanks for the Big Mac, dude. Yeah, because they got it free because they work at McDonald's. No, no, no. This is how smart he is. A NASA astronaut, an employee of NASA, an astronaut, gave somebody this rock. But he's so dumb, he's going to say, oh, you know what? NASA didn't give it to anybody. Give it to them. The biggest employee astronauts. These are the ones that gave them.

Rock! He's trying to act like, fine, I'm just saying, this is what I deal with. These people, he's like, oh, Alex. Do you need a minute? No, I feel great. Alex, look at me. I want you to breathe for a second. My breathing's fine. The mental gymnastics you have to go through is that you say this petrified rock had nothing to do with NASA. It was given by an astronaut. Do astronauts work for NASA, Craig? Do astronauts? Yes, they give it to them.

No, it was given to them by somebody that works at NASA. It was not an official gift from NASA, and there was never anything that said— It was given to him by an astronaut. Alex, I'll just let you cry for five minutes, so give me a second. Seriously, you need to take a deep breath. It's okay. Alex, so let me— Do you see why I'm frustrated, though? Give me one second. Give me one second. Right.

So this was never an official moon rock sample from the place where you got them. For some reason, this astronaut thought it was and gave it to someone, but it was never an official gift. It was never clarified as a moon rock. It never came from the moon rock samples. And it's as simple as that. You can look back, but every single moon rock that's actually verified as a moon rock can be analyzed and shown it has properties that you cannot get on Earth. This was never said to be an actual moon rock by NASA officially.

Okay? Someone that worked at NASA made a mistake, just like anyone that works for a company can make a mistake. But that's fine. People can make mistakes. But what we need to do, Alex, is look at the... Let's talk about the mistake. So what was the mistake? What was the mistake? Do you think they were trying to mislead the museum? No, the astronaut didn't know.

So he just found this petrified rock and said, oh, I think this is from the moon? He made a mistake. You believe that? He made a mistake. He just found this in his backyard? Not in his backyard. And he just found a rock and said, I'm going to give this to a museum so they can put it on display as a moon rock? What we need to do is look at the actual moon rocks that are verified as moon rocks. No one ever said this moon rock was a

Alex, what we need to do is actually look at the moon rocks that have been analyzed by countries all around the world. And what you need to do is instead of focusing on this one which has been clarified to not actually be from the moon, we need to look at the ones that are from the moon and make explanations for what

So let me ask you a question. No, Craig's really smart. No, Craig, no, no, no. Let me ask you a question. Alex, Alex, right. Okay, ask me the question, and then I'll ask you a question. Right, so the point is we need to look at the ones that are verified that actually form the moon. So I need to ask you, how do you explain the micrometer holes that we find in the moon rocks? How do you explain the isotopes and the radiation that comes from the moon rocks that show they could not have been from Earth?

See, this is why Craig's so smart, right? He says these... Oh, thank you, Alex. I know I'm smart. It's okay. You heard that, guys. He said I'm smart. Hey, I don't think Craig's dumb. I don't think Craig's dumb. I don't think you're dumb. But this is why you are smart, though, right? You're talking about these moon rocks. Has Wernher von Braun ever collected a moon rock here on Earth? Has he collected a moon rock from Earth? Yes. No. Because moon rocks come from the moon. So there's no moon rocks? Nobody's ever collected a moon rock here on Earth? No.

By collect, do you mean that after they came to Earth, they then got it? Yes. So has there been moon rocks here on Earth? Yes, we have moon rocks. Yes, they have moon rocks on Earth. That's right. Because we brought them back from the moon. No, no, no. Alex, they're a moon rock. Listen to the words you are saying. Yes, they found rocks from the moon, but we didn't have to go get them. That rocks fell from the moon here on Earth. Ah, no, those ones are different. Those ones are, oh my God. So you admit that there are moon rocks here on Earth, right? I think that's actually

question so we already have moon rocks here on earth let me explain why they're different okay they're different because you can analyze those and ones that have come from the moon for whatever reason and been on there for a long time you can tell that they are because of the radiation and stuff that comes from the moon sure but when there is a moon rock that has been on the moon and nowhere but the moon for millennia and eons

you can analyze those and see that, well, that's clearly nothing else that exists on Earth. So this one anomaly that an astronaut made a mistake and said it was a moon rock when it wasn't, NASA never officially said it was a moon rock. You will never find a report of NASA officially saying that it's a moon rock. But the ones that NASA do say is a moon rock are actually brought back. Okay, hold on, how did I go to Google Chrome? Okay, let's do it. Okay, sure.

Hold on, bear with me, bear with me. I can't freaking type on Craig's computer. All right. All right. Okay.

So if you guys can you guys see that I know it's kind of small but you see you guys see how there's no dust. Oh I'm going to change the subject. No no no no no I want to rebut this to everything. So we rebutted that there we were able to shoot a laser off the moon. Well you never rebutted I rebutted you but yeah. Well we were able to shoot a laser off the moon before Craig said we're able to do it. Okay now now it's funny Craig you said that they did a Grand Prix on the moon and you talked about the space dust the moon dust. Yeah. And how is it.

flying everywhere, right? Well, it's funny because they had a, I believe it was a 9,000 pound rocket, I believe. Absolutely. And there's not one bit of dust on that lunar lander and that's right next to the rocket. Why would there be? Let me ask you a question. Why, why after landing, Alex, would you expect dust to be on there? I would expect, this is why. Explain exactly why. Because this is how it lands. Guys, you're going to need one of these when he explains. You know what I'm saying? There's a 9,000 pound rocket and how it lands is,

It blasts power and I guess the power gets weaker as it goes down. So this fire is causing pressure. So when you cause pressure to something, it causes it to displace. So just, I mean, if you had any bit of logic and you had a 9,000 pound rocket and you're landing on dirt, there would be dirt spread around. It's just common sense.

Okay, um, dirt spread around, or... Like you said! You just made, like, you just... You said space dirt! You've changed your claim. You've changed your claim from "there's no dust on the land"... There is no dust. No, hold on. You've changed your claim from "there's no dust on there" to "there's no dust spread around". There was dust spread around, but the reason there is no dust on the foot of the... There's no blast crater! There's no blast crater. I am so sorry that the middle of my sentence interrupted the beginning of yours. If you could give me a second.

So the reason there's no dust on the foot of the moon lander is because there's no disturbance in the air to push that dust back once it has been blown away. There is no atmosphere on the moon. So as the dust gets blown away from the lunar lander, there's nothing to bring it back. That is going to be the cleanest place around.

So this picture is small, but you'll see there's literally nothing displaced. There's no proof that a 9,000-pound rocket – It's right underneath it, Alex. It's blown away from it. There would be a blast crater of some sort. No, okay. So they specifically chose places that were more solid than –

The Sea of Tranquility, is that what they chose? They specifically chose specific landing areas that were on elevated positions, that were harder rock, had less regalift. But the point is, in this small image you've got here, it shows directly underneath. Once again, as the booster comes down, it's blasting all the regalift and dust away from it.

So you can't see it in this picture because it's not-- - It's funny, you literally-- - Once again, I'm still in the middle of my sentence. It blasted all the stuff away from it with no disturbance in the atmosphere to get it back because the atmosphere does not exist on the moon, Alex. - Well then why was that go-kart causing all of it to just fly all around?

it didn't fly all around. If you'd listened to my intro, let me go. I listened to it. I'm just saying clearly not Alex. You said that they were on a Jeep. That was basically a Jeep. I want you to look at this diagram on the right. Okay. Diagram on the right. It shows two things. The, um, the, the two green lines, they are what you would expect on, uh, if there was dust particles on earth, that is, um, what physics says, the parabolic trajectory of the dust particles would be on earth. The other two lines are the,

the trajectory. If you did the calculations with a gravity of one sixth, what you would expect on earth. Ready to shoot your shot. Log into bet MGM every day and play the new fast break basketball game for your chance to win prizes. All you need to do is log into bet MGM, head to the promotions page and fire up fast break to find yourself on the B ball court. Ready to make a play. Choose to pass the ball to the shooting guard or small forward.

or take it to the rim yourself and go for a slam dunk. If you score a basket, you'll win a prize like a boost token, $50 bonus bet, or bonus spins. If you miss, just log in tomorrow and try again. Play Fast Break for your daily shot at boost tokens, bonus bets, or bonus spins. BetMGM and GameSense remind you to play responsibly. See BetMGM.com for terms. 21+. This U.S. promo offer not available in D.C., Mississippi, New York, Nevada, Ontario, or Puerto Rico. Gambling problem? Call 1-800-GAMBLER throughout U.S. 877-800.

HopeNY or text HopeNY467369 in New York. Call 1-800-NEXT-STEP in Arizona, 1-800-327-5050 in Massachusetts, 1-800-BETS-OFF in Iowa, 1-800-981-0023 in Puerto Rico, or visit 1-800-GAMBLER.NET in West Virginia. Subject to eligibility requirements. Rewards vary and expire in seven days. In partnership with Kansas Crossing Casino and Hotel. Shopify is a global commerce platform that helps you sell at every stage of your business.

and sell more with less effort thanks to the Shopify magic, your AI-powered all-star. Sign up for a $1 per month trial period at shopify.com slash redcircle, all lowercase. Go to shopify.com slash redcircle now to grow your business no matter what stage you're in. shopify.com slash redcircle.

If you've been having your McDonald's sausage McMuffin with an iced coffee from somewhere else, now is a great time to reconsider. Revitalize and caramelize your morning with any size caramel, French vanilla, or classic iced coffee for just 99 cents. And pair it with a juicy, melty sausage McMuffin with egg for $2.79. Prices and participation may vary. Cannot be combined with any other offer.

If you look on the one on the left, it shows where the dust are going. Every single dust particle followed a parabolic trajectory that showed it was in less gravity. But there's one more thing we need to look at here, is that they all follow that trajectory without any disturbance going out or coming back.

they are being kicked up in a very specific way and coming straight back down with no turbulence, no disturbance, nothing being swirled around like you would see if you did it on Earth. If you watch a dirt bike on Earth kicking up dirt, it goes around the wheel, it flies up, it gets pushed like clouds. But on here, all of the dust did exactly this. It went, whoo!

Exactly. With nothing to disturb it and in a place with less gravity that made it do exactly what we expect in a place that has one sixth the gravity on Earth. So if this was faked, how did they do it? Because they would have had to do it on a sound stage. They would have had to remove the air and change the gravity in the sound stage.

That's not how they'd have to do it. But first of all... Why not? Because you can actually watch clips of it. Yeah, why not though? That's not how I do it. Why not? Because they can change the speed of the video and make it look a certain way. Changing the speed of a video doesn't change the fact that there's no atmosphere and it behaves like gravitational acceleration. I think it's very funny though. You want to argue about dust and you see that obviously... I want to argue about physics, Alex. I know, but you're... Well, then why isn't there any dust...

on the lunar lander. That's physics. Guys, did I not just explain? A 9,000-pound rocket would displace more dust than a fake Jeep, dude. And that's a sad reality that you can't admit that. Is there some kind of issue you have converting short-term to long-term memory? Because I just explained that to you. No, I'm saying that when these astronauts take a step on the moon, they leave a footprint, right?

A footprint, yes. So this stuff can be displaced, and it would literally leave a footprint. What do you mean a footprint isn't displaced? It's compression. Well, what I'm saying is when you affect the surface, you're going to have dirt around. Yeah, and the dirt is around. It's still there. There's no dirt on them. There's none. Yet that car, it looked like they had a damn –

party in the back, looked like exhaust or so much dirt. And somehow this 9,000 pound rocket engine was able to land without even displacing so much as leaving even a crater underneath it. There was no crater because it landed on hard rock. And again, all of the dust was moved away. Alex, these are things I've just explained to you. It's like it's going in one side and out the other. No, I hear you. It's just false. I understand that you don't understand the physics and how it would work. I don't need to understand physics. That's the problem. I don't need to understand physics.

physics. I was talking about one of the greatest physics and engineering feats that humanity has ever done. Ladies and gentlemen, I don't need to understand physics. That's the argument that I've got. No, because what I try to do is I try to make the argument for a simple person that you don't have to have a physics degree to understand that a 9,000 pound rocket would cause dirt to move.

Well, that's the problem. People with a physics degree would understand that, Alex. People that passed physics in high school would understand that, Alex. My 11-year-old daughter would understand that, Alex. The smug and arrogance that you have as if you would have to do everything about physics to understand that it doesn't make sense that a rover causes all this dirt to go everywhere, but a 9,000-pound rocket engine doesn't. Let me explain to you. That is called an argument from incredulity.

He says, it doesn't make sense. I don't understand it. Therefore, it's fake. Alex, this isn't about your feelings and your lack of understanding. This is about the physics and engineering that showed we absolutely, there's overwhelming amounts of evidence that we went, but the Grand Prix is the absolute killer. You need to explain. Even if you say that this was slowed down. That was slowed down. That's why it has a trajectory. You then need to explain why there is no turbulence in the dust. There's

nothing to show. You need to explain why there's no blast crater whatsoever. I did. Oh my lord. Guys, please use your face palm protection. You can't just say, oh, physics, that means there's no blast crater. I explained it to you specifically. I gave you the mechanism for why it isn't happening, Alex. Craig, you know that I'm right. Okay, but it's funny you talk about this. You know that I'm right. Is that how

you in arguments. You just tell yourself. So when you play chess, do you just like take your trousers down and shit on the board? No, see, Craig, the difference between you and me is I'm being intellectually honest. You're not. Ha!

Because I have two examples, and there's a huge difference, and you can't admit that there's a difference. That's a sad reality. If I show you a picture with the dust going everywhere, then I show you a blast crater, you're like, oh, because of physics, there's no dust on that. It just doesn't make sense. The dust is away from it. It doesn't go back. The wheels are kicking the dust in a specific way that stops them. If you have half a brain common sense, just ask yourself, why does one image have dust everywhere, and why does the other one not?

I'm not sure I explained that to you guys. Let's talk about other stuff. Okay, well, let's talk about what Wernher von Braun said if we did get on the moon because you talked about micrometeorites. And because there's no atmosphere on the moon, there's tons of micrometeorites, correct? Yes. And Wernher von Braun even said that if we got to the moon, that we'd immediately have to find a cave to go to because you would be at risk of getting killed by one of these micrometeorites. No, he didn't. Yes, he did. Yes, he did. No, he didn't.

He didn't. There's a few things you said that weren't true, for instance. He didn't. He said that they would need to go somewhere. You don't think Wernher von Braun brought up micrometeorites and the threat that they had to astronauts? So you're saying that – wait, no, real quick. Because you just called me a liar. Let me explain. No, you just called me a liar. I said you've got it wrong. No, no, no, no. You called me a liar. You said – you called me a liar. Did Wernher von Braun ever talk about micrometeorites? Yes.

And the threat that they had to astronauts. He never said, as soon as they get to the moon, they're going to immediately have to go to a cage. Okay, what they did was they considered the impact of micrometeorites and how they might have to deal with it. One of the suggestions was that they find a moon cage because the formation of the moon... What I just said, that's literally what I just said and you said I'm wrong. No, you said that they would have to immediately go there. It was just a

thought one of the things that they would do that's what that was a possibility that was a thought so I didn't lie you just changed what you were saying no I said that if Wernher von Braun said the threat of micrometeorites one of the plans was having to get no no no you said as soon as he said as soon as they get to the moon they'd immediately have to

go that was one of the potential plans that they were and you admit that they thought right here's the thing when you're saying Alex when you plan something like the moon landing you have to consider so many things and one of the things they considered was well maybe it would be sensible if we look for some kind of cave or something but they then found out that wasn't really necessary they picked specific spots they made sure that they had protections they made sure the minimum time doing the EVAs all these things were kind of accounted for in advance you're not understanding the fact that

No, I understand it. I understand it. Look in advance as to problems that could happen and maybe come up with ways to fix them. It doesn't change what actually happened when they went to the moon landings. One thing you said that I really want to touch on in your intro, you said that Russia...

went to the moon first and got samples. Who the told you that? That's true. No, it's not. Russia went to the moon first. No, they did not. Russia never went to the, Russia went, right, here's the thing. Russia absolutely destroyed America in the space race up until the moon landing. They were the first person, people to put a satellite in orbit. First person, first to put a person in orbit. First to put an animal in orbit. But the first people to go to the moon and go on its surface with anything was the Americans. The Russians did not go and get a moon sample and bring it back

I don't know who told you that. It says it right here. Soviet Union's Luna 16 spacecraft was the first robotic mission to return lunar soil to Earth. The first robotic mission? That's what I said. That wasn't before the Apollo missions, though. Yes, it was. Do you think they had robotic missions in the 1969, Alex? Yes.

Well, they were the first kind of robots for you that they were in 1970 in 1970. They're the first people to do it. Have you watched back to the navigator? The robot in that the thing that the Hello, little boy. Well, I don't believe they did either. First of all, that's why I don't know all the information about the Russia. But that's what I'm just saying. Russia faked it. My whole point with that is that Russia did some fake stuff, too. So that's why they don't tell on everything's fake.

Not everything is fake. It's funny because you called me a science denier, yet you're the one that's defending a person that killed a bunch of Jewish people. I'm not defending. I'm not one. Here's the thing. Only you were like that. Was the Holocaust bad? Of course it was. Do you agree with Operation Paperclip? I don't agree with anything in that.

I do not care about whether we went to the moon or not. Hold on, hold on. The fact that Warner von Braun came from Nazi Germany does not change the fact that humanity went to the moon. Even if he was an absolute monster that murdered children in their sleep, it would not change the fact that we went to the moon. He's defending a murderer. You guys are clapping. He's defending a murderer. I'm not defending a murderer.

I literally just said. You're clapping for a murder. Hey, literally, this is how. Ladies and gentlemen, you were here. I literally just said. Alex, one sec. I want to clarify here. Well, you know, Warren Von Braun did murder people during the Holocaust. I want to be clear because Alex has said something that wasn't true. He said, I'm defending a murderer. No, I specifically said, even if he was a monster and murdered children. He was a monster. I specifically said, even if he was a monster and murdered children, it wouldn't matter in the fact that we went to the moon. No.

But it would matter that I wouldn't like what he did. I would never agree with someone being an evil person. But it doesn't change the fact that the technology from him allowed us to go to the moon.

Just saying that he was a Nazi doesn't stop what actually happened, Alex. Well, I think it does, but it's funny because you talk about this technology. You think saying a thing stops it. Well, we're talking about the technology. The rockets, these Apollo rockets, right? What were they originally intended for? I said it in my opening statement. They were weapons, right? Oh, yeah, absolutely. War breeds technology. So I'm just saying, so this guy, Wernher von Braun, and you're an English vet, is that correct? Yeah, I was a normal Navy, yes.

And so a guy that bombed your own country, that killed your own people, you're going to sit up here, a Nazi that killed six million Jews, responsible for the death of six million Jews, you're going to come up here and defend him? No, I'm not defending him. All because you think it's so great that we went to the moon allegedly. Not once have I defended Alex. Can you please show me the point in this that I defend him?

Or did I specifically said that I would say you don't care if he's a murderer. No, I said it doesn't matter in relation to the fact that we went to the moon. He could be actually Satan and he could rip people apart limb by limb. You probably would. You probably would. That we went to our only natural satellite. It doesn't matter.

He was a Nazi, okay? He did bad things. I agree. That's disgusting. Everything the Nazis stand for, it repulses me. I hold the position, see a Nazi, punch a Nazi. I do not like Nazis. It doesn't change the fact that the technological advances that came from the V2 rocket exist. So yes, I agree with you, Alex. The Holocaust was a horrible thing. I agree with you. Nazis were evil. I agree with you. Does not change reality.

Well, I think it does because if you look at Nazis, do Nazis lie? Do Nazis lie, Craig? I'm sure Nazis lie, yes. I'm sure when Nazis were fighting the war, they told many mischiefs, as did the American military, as did the British military. Oh, so you admit that the American military lies. That's how you do warfare. You lie to everybody else. See, right?

Right now we're making headway. So he admits that the government will lie. Well, let me explain what I'm talking about specifically. Do you agree real quick that NASA is a military wing of the American government? No, it's not. Let me explain to you. Even though it started on military tech. Here's how the American military lied one specific way.

Why are all astronauts ex-military? They're not. That's false. Well, that used to be. Not anymore. You're right. That used to be they were all military. The American military, what they did, they lied to their enemies because they were getting bombed. So they made fields of wooden planes to lie to their enemies. Lying is part of warfare. Simple as that. It's a part of government too. Would you agree on that? All right, gentlemen, just to let you know, in 10 minutes we're going to go to Q&A. Alex, you got your four rebuttals right there. Craig, did you have any or you want to continue with this dialogue? No.

I'm happy with just going through the dial, but there's some things I want to touch on that you came up with. What about the spacesuits? We can get to that. That's one of the things I... But first I want to say, you said one tank of gas, right? Here's the thing. True. When you go to the moon, you don't need to have the gas all the time. You get out of Earth's atmosphere, and then you fire engines, and then you keep going. You turn off your engines, and because there's a vacuum in space, there's no atmosphere to stop you, you keep going. And then when you get towards the moon, you then fire your engines again to slow you down.

But then when you're on the moon, because the gravity is so much less, the force needed to get off is so much less than when you get off of Earth. You don't need as much fuel. And then, again, just a boost to get you to Earth, turn it off. And then when you get to Earth, stop it to slow you down. You can turn it on again to slow you down. So the one tank of gas is fine because you don't need it traveling the entire distance. Well, just real quick. So the gravity on the moon is one-sixth that of Earth, correct? Yeah.

So why didn't we need one-sixth the amount of power to get off the moon? Because it's not an exact ratio. Okay, sure. Yeah, but the amount of power that – and it's funny because this is the term that NASA uses. It's called weightlifting. I guess they used to call it. How much weight can they lift? And SpaceX, they talk about it. If it took us a Apollo rocket, I believe, was it like a 27-story building? I know it's in the 20s, right? It's in the 20s. Yeah.

And that blasted off. Everybody's seeing the Apollo missions and how much gas and smoke and the explosion and how much power it took. And like you see those things and it'll give you chills. It's awesome. You know, it is cool. And these rockets are badass. I agree with you on that. You know, I think –

Listen, I'm not that far off. I like space too, Craig. You and I really aren't that different. Most people aren't nerds like us. They're not looking up Wernher von Braun. So you and I really aren't that much different. We just have different opinions on one thing. So my point is when you watch that and you see how much manpower and how much fuel it took to leave Earth, and then they tell us the moon is only one-sixth our gravity –

Yet it didn't even get close to 1/6 the amount of power it took to take off from the moon. It was like 1/1000 the amount of power. So to me, that doesn't compute. I would understand it's 1/6. It would take less power. But the fact that it took so much less power than it took for us to leave Earth, just, I mean, it's obvious to see that it's fake. Okay, well, again, with respect,

That, once again, is just an argument for incredulity. You don't understand the maths and physics behind how much power would be required. Just because the gravity is 1/6 left doesn't mean that's an exact ratio that you transfer over to the power needed to escape the gravitational acceleration of the moon. I can talk you through the-- - But we can talk about weight, right? So like an astronaut on the moon-- - I can sit and talk you through the maths, but it's very complicated. - Okay, that's cute to say that. I'm sure it is complicated, I'm not arguing with that. But when you're on the moon, an astronaut in his full space suit was about 75 pounds.

The lunar lander on the moon would be one-sixth the amount of weight. We can talk about physics all day long. There is weight. It has mass. So just your physics, whatever, it's going to take a certain amount of power to lift weight. Yeah, and they calculated that power that they needed and then got off the moon. And it's funny because they were on the moon for 33 hours, I believe, the first mission. Where did they go to the bathroom, Craig?

In their suits if they needed to. Yeah, that's what they supposedly had diapers. So you're telling me these people are so smart. They have the greatest technology in the world. They can go from Houston, Texas to the moon, but they can't figure out how to poop. I mean, give me a break. Well, they did figure out how to poop. They did it in their suit. Yeah, in a diaper. I know, I know. That's real smart. That is figuring out how to poop. Think about how smart that is, guys. We have this great technology, but we had to make these astronauts go there in a poopy diaper the whole time. Yeah, that was part of it because—

Can you imagine? Think about that, guys. Neil Armstrong's walking on the moon with a diaper full of shit in his butt. Hold on, Alex. What do you think they're going to do? He's been shitting in for days. Think about how smart NASA is, guys. They're like, hey, we're going to send our astronauts to the moon. Why not? They have it in the ISS. Why wouldn't they have some sort of device to poop and pee in? We're human beings. The lunar lander specifically was just to go from the orbiter down. Yes, Michael Collins supposedly stayed in it. Then they went down. Yes, yes.

The orbiter had better facilities for doing that and stuff, but the lander, they had to think about every single... They had to think about every little bit of weight, right? So they had to think about that. Apollo 16, they were there for over three days with no toilet. Again, they thought about this. Think about that. Apollo 17, guys, they had a diaper on. These astronauts had a diaper on for three days shitting in people's...

Alex, this wasn't a jolly, this wasn't a holiday to the Bahamas where they want to be comfortable. None of them probably felt happy and comfortable doing it. Craig, I like you, and I do think you're smart, Craig. I appreciate it. It doesn't take a physics degree to think that if you had to walk around with your butthole covered in poop, it would be hard to do science, okay?

No one is saying it's not hard, Alex. No one is saying that what they did on the moon was easy. It was one of the hardest things humanity has ever done. And they were probably uncomfortable. They probably had diaper rash. They probably had cuts and horrible stuff from doing that. But it doesn't change the fact that it happened. Some of it was probably extremely gross. They had to turn their own urine into water to drink. That is horrible. It doesn't change the fact that it happened. Just

Just because something's groups. I love that guy claps. He's that guy probably Five minutes guys if you want to move well, yeah, I've really enjoyed this debate We need to do it again We can talk about it a little longer because we didn't get into the spacesuits the fact that we have technology that can just basically Transfer 500 degrees instantly. Well, it's a bit of a misunderstanding of how heat transfer happens in space. You understand this difference between heat and temperature

Yeah, I do understand that. And the fact that the suits themselves had cooling systems done by having ice, oak,

open to the vacuum of space which allowed heat transfer to happen and keep it cool. Plus they minimized the time that they were on the surface in particular and they chose places where the temperature and stuff would be less. For instance, when they were near the South Pole where they spent more time out, the light hitting the lunar surface gives less energy because it has to give the same energy over a larger surface area. So the astronauts there were receiving less energy so they could spend more time on the lunar surface.

You said it's climate-cooled. It had AC. Did these suits have heat? Yeah, they had everything to keep them what they needed. And these suits ran on batteries in 1969? The whole limb ran on batteries? Is that correct? Yes. Batteries existed even back then. No, they didn't. As did radio signals. People couldn't communicate unless it was... You know, radio exists...

Radios existed for hundreds of years. And we've been sending-- did you know, for instance, the first underwater cable was actually laid in the 1880s to allow transfer of signals, specifically Morse code? So to say that they couldn't have sent a radio signal during the 1969s is frankly one of the dumbest things I've heard.

And I talk to flat earthers regularly. It's not dumb. It's not dumb. It's funny that he says that. He's talking about an underwater cable in 1880. But the moon is 257,000 miles away. We didn't have a fax machine. We didn't have internet. We didn't have

We had radio signals which could travel to the moon. So just the fact that you have Richard Nixon, Tricky Dick, who actually had to step down. He was the president while the Apollo moon missions happened. And how did his presidency end? He had to step down. Yeah, I've seen that movie. They call him Tricky Dick, right? So the president that was in it. Hey, Alex, let me ask you a question. Real quick, before you ask your question, I will. How were they able in 1969 to get cell service from the moon before – Cell service. I know. I know.

I know, he thinks it's funny, guys. We went to the moon with less technology than a TI-83 calculator, and this guy thinks that they were doing phone sex with Richard Nixon from the moon.

It's impossible to make a phone call from the moon. It's impossible to make a phone call from this. I have bad service right here, inside of you. Literally, I have one bar. And this guy thinks that they're on the moon. Hey, Nixon, I'm pooping in this diaper right now for America, and I love this country, and I would shit in this diaper for the rest of my life. Thank you. Oh, and then we need to talk about this, guys. I don't want to play. Wait, wait, wait.

Everybody go look at a picture of the astronauts after they landed. They look like their dog just died. Wait, wait, wait. Before you change subject, let me – right, okay. You're acting like Richard Nixon got a mobile phone, made sure his signal was there. Hello, boys. How are you doing on the moon? Hi, great job. That's what he did. He's in his Oval Office on a phone, on a landline phone. What happened was that landline phone was connected to NASA, and NASA then –

We didn't even talk about this. Let me talk. I'm in the middle of a sentence. I got to make this point. NASA then transferred the phone signal to the radio, which then connected to them in space. The phone was not connected to the people on the moon. The phone was connected to a radio, which the radio was then connected to space. Oh,

Oh, my God. Okay, but real quick, Craig, because I know we're going to get some questions. And I didn't even get into this. This is why we have to do this again. We need to do this again. Yeah, let's be fun. So this is what's so funny. We didn't even talk about this. And this is really the most important thing. I should have brought this up from the beginning before we get into the Q&A. There was a guy by the name of Gus Grissom. I'm sure you're familiar with Gus Grissom. Gus Grissom was the original Neil Armstrong. He was the guy that was supposed to go to the moon first. He was supposed to be the person that actually –

you know, first stepped, you know, what is it, one small step for man, one large step for mankind, or whatever the hell the saying is. This was the guy that was supposed to do it, and Gus Grissom actually died during a test. This was a test launch. They weren't launching it, but in a test launch, you go into the spaceship, you put on your seatbelt, you go through the launch process, and it's just a simulation of a launch. Well, Gus Grissom actually was...

Doubting the ability of the lunar lander. He actually looked this up. Gus Grissom hung a lemon. That's right. And Gus Grissom was one of the most decorated pilots in the United States Air Force. No, you're right. You're right about that. And he did, but he did hang a lemon. Gus Grissom hated the project and he was so frustrated with the, um,

the delays and the problems. He hung a lemon to show his frustration with how bad he thought it was. He did not think the lunar lander was going to be safe. A lot of them didn't, right? He was so frustrated with how badly it was being run that he did hang a lemon to show his disappointment in the whole thing. But we didn't say what happened to him. Guys, they cooked him. They put him in a capsule. I'm not kidding. With 100% oxygen. Doesn't even make sense. Him, a scientist, they would know that you would not want an environment with 100% oxygen. No, they didn't.

yes they did look at it up and he died during a test launch him and his two other he died and his last words were this gus grissom's last words were this look it up look it up on your phone gus grissom's last words were if we can't talk between two buildings how are we going to talk when we're on the moon literally that's what he said here i'll pull it up right now let me pull it up right now i'll play through the microphone while they're pulling that up if you would start forming a queue here for the q and a session so just just to be clear yeah um the

There was a fire caused by the pure oxygen in the capsule, but that pure oxygen was part of the mix of the air they were breathing. I know, but there should be oxygen in the capsule, but not 100% oxygen. Well, the capsule itself, they had a tank of pure oxygen to help with the breathing. It wasn't all pure oxygen. They killed him, though, during a test. Well, no, something went wrong. Yeah, well, he died. But, Alex, I want to say this has been great fun, mate. It has been fun. I really appreciate it, yeah. Let's see. Edward H. Wright and Roger B. Chaffee.

while conducting training exercises in their spacecraft at Cape Kennedy Launch Complex 34. There was some worn wiring beneath Grissom's seat which had lost its insulation and was exposed to the air as electricity ran through the live wire. Crews outside sealed the module's three hatches and filled the air inside with pure oxygen. Then a small movement caused the exposed wire to spark, igniting the highly oxygenated atmosphere.

The crew inside yelled for help and tried opening the hatches to escape, but to no avail. As NBC News recounts, brief cries from the crew came over the headsets. White yelled, "Fire!" and Grissom followed. Yeah, they added-- they added peroxidine to it.

According to NBC News, Chaffee yelled, get us out, while astronomy.com says he yelled, let's get out. Virgin? Yeah, but hold on. I got to find the Gus Grissom. So yeah, they added pure oxygen in there because they thought it would help, but it made things worse. It is the fact. I mean, he died because of...

some engineering that could have been better, basically. Not everything about the... Let's be clear. The technology that went to the moon was archaic. It was dangerous. That's why we don't want to use that technology again. We want much better technology. But I think we should get to the Q&A because there are people waiting. Okay, here. I think this is it. This is what he says. Full-scale simulation. The problems began almost immediately. First, the capsule's communication systems failed. No, I didn't read your text at all.

That's exactly what he said. How are we supposed to get to the moon if we can't talk between two buildings? Yeah, Craig thinks we can use radio signal and have a no-delay phone conversation. Oh, there was definitely a delay. I've shown the delay on stream. Anyway, that was fun. Gus Grissom, RIP. And his family, Gus Grissom's family, believes that he was murdered. Just if you guys want to look up Gus Grissom. All right. Thank you very much, gentlemen. If it's okay, we'll go to the Q&A now with the first question.

This question's for Alex. I'm a huge fan. Oh, I appreciate that. Thank you, brother. If the amount of power it took to lift off of the moon was so crazy and incongruent or whatever, why didn't they just lie?

Why didn't NASA just lie about it being good? Like, you know, one-sixth of the... Well, because you could just see the footage of it. You know, the footage that it took to lift off. It's just like when you compare it to the structure that it took for us to take off from Earth, and you compare the lunar lander taking off from the surface of the moon, it was like, it's not even comparable, the amount of power. You can see the amount of power when you look at the video. Yeah.

Well, I mean, you can kind of, listen, if you want to believe that, I'm just saying, go watch both videos. No, I know, but go watch both. When you watch the Apollo rockets take off, dude, it is a cloud of smoke the size of a football stadium. It is like the most beautiful sight that you've ever set your eyes on. But when the lunar lander leaves, from only one-sixth the difference of gravity, so if you go from being 300 pounds, what is that, like 75 pounds or whatever the math is,

it would have a, there would be some displacement. It just, it looks fake. I mean, we should pull up a video of the Lunar Lander taking off. It's just laughing. It must be real because it looks fake. Well, that's what Elon said, yeah. Congratulations to Ashley St. Clair on the baby. Prime Time 99, what's going on? Pimp on a blend. What's up, brother? I have a question for Craig, though. How you doing, man? I actually think we went, too, but

One of the things that always baffled me was not seeing any stars in the sky. Do you want to know what the reason is? Is there some sort of reason for that? They said it was in the sunlight. It's like we can't see stars in the day.

Two quotes from astronauts. One when they're in the shuttle going to the moon and then one when on the moon. On the moon it was a lot harder because of the sunlight and everything to see the stars. When they were in the capsule it was a lot easier because less light coming in the capsule to see the stars that were outside. So it was just different situations at the time. If you're looking at the bright sunlight glare it's very hard to see anything. So at that point pretty much all he could see was blackness when he was on the moon with the sun in his face. Thank you for the question. Appreciate it.

Hey. Oh, sure. Yeah, that was a great debate. My question is towards Alex. I totally understand that we should definitely be critical about governments. We shouldn't just trust things. How would you engage the kind of counter-engagement of Russia being like a hostile witness to the moon landing? Like, why would they support the moon landing when it's against their own interest? What would...

Well, you know, it's funny that you say that because there's actually other issues where governments work in concert to lie to us. So I guess is the question why – what motivation does Russia have not to expose America basically? Exactly, yes. Well, it's because they did fraud too. I mean this is my personal opinion. Craig might say it's wrong, but it's like there's –

It's wrong. They say there's no honor among thieves, but there is. It's like, look at the Antarctica Treaty. Antarctica Treaty we signed in, what, 1954, Craig? And we've gone to war with countries that we're in this treaty with. So you can go to wars with a country and still have treaties with them on other stuff. So for me, I'm a conflict interventionist. I know you're a veteran.

I hate war and I think war drives America and that's kind of the problem that these governments will work in concert and they will expose certain things and not expose others. But like, dude, and I'm not saying this because you're Indian, but if you look at the Indian moon landing,

Dude, they did not have enough damn chicken shawarma to get that thing to the moon. It looks so fake. Even Craig has to admit that footage looks bad. I actually know someone personally who was involved in the Chandrayaan. But you have to admit the footage looks really rough, right? I mean, the footage from space always looks dodgy.

Yeah, just saying. Just because it's not what we are used to seeing because the conditions are so different. Well, okay, whatever. But my point is that a lot of people are in on it. And if you look at the space agencies, they actually work together. It's like European Space Agency, Roscosmos, NASA. They actually, when they're at the International Space Station, they're all together. So when it comes to space, they're aligned a lot, actually, believe it or not. Thank you. Yeah, thank you.

Hey, how's it going? This is actually for Craig to help Alex. Craig, can you explain why you don't see smoke in a pure vacuum when the lunar lander lifts off? Right. Basically, there wasn't flames like you get on Earth because there wasn't as much power being pushed out. There was. You can actually see if you look really closely and bring the exposure up, there is a slight trail, but there's so much...

less atmosphere around to show the colors of the fire. Plus, once it's come out, it dissipates in a different way than you see on Earth. The main thing is there's so much less energy being put out that you don't see the same big fire that you see when you chuck rockets into space from Earth. It's all to do with the amount of output that's required and the conditions that are in. It's going to change what you're seeing. You're not going to see a flame in space the same as you see it on Earth.

Just one more thing. And also the difference in friction from the atmosphere since there is no atmosphere. Yeah, you've got to get through the atmosphere, but when you're getting off of the moon, there is no atmosphere there. So there's less energy needed to not only fight against the gravity, but there's...

There's less gravity and there's less atmosphere. So overall, it needs less. And you know, it's funny, we didn't even get into, guys, this. Gosh, we've got to do this again. We didn't even talk about the Van Allen radiation belts that are a deadly belt of radiation that we can't even go through and that they said that they would need enough lead where it would make the spaceship even too heavy. But Craig, this is what they say when you talk about this. They say that they found a little hole at the top of the Van Allen radiation belt and they were able to get through it. So the Van Allen belts don't cover the whole Earth. They're more like a donut around here. That's kind of what they say. It's like there's a little hole. Yeah, okay.

There's not a little hole. They're more a donut around the earth, and you could just kind of avoid it, really. I don't think you can avoid it. That's why you're not a national, Alex. All right. Thank you, gentlemen. Next question. My question's for Alex. Alex, do you know if there was a contemporary of Wernher von Braun that was better at rocketry than he was? Probably not. No, no. I think Wernher von Braun was actually a genius. I mean, he was a Nazi, and his rockets did kill people, and he decimated England, and

But no, he was a brilliant scientist. But isn't that crazy, guys, that you can literally do a genocide, and if you're smart, they'll be like, actually, you know what? You can come over to our country. You're not guilty. So I don't think Craig's an anti-Semite for defending the moon mission. I know that. I'm just saying that in jest. But he does support a Nazi.

I get your issues with Nazis and I completely agree with it, but to say I support a Nazi is wrong. You like Wernher von Braun to be fair. No, I don't like Wernher von Braun. You like the Apollo moon missions. But he didn't make the Apollo moon missions. He was the leader of the Apollo moon missions. It doesn't change what happened though. I like the result of what happened. I might not like everyone that was involved. I'm sure Anne Frank would disagree. All right. With the moon missions?

Do you think Anne Frank would like it, that they went to the moon? I think Anne Frank would think it was amazing. Are you serious? Anne Frank, if she heard after the Holocaust that they went to the moon and it was done by a Nazi, do you think she would be happy about that? I think she would think it's incredible that we went to the moon. She would probably think it's really shitty that they used a Nazi, but she'd be like, we went to the moon? Well, that's cool.

I don't think so. She's under the floorboards, like happy that we're on space? No, dude, no, that's not, Anne Frank would be-- She probably didn't find out about it, but-- Anne Frank would not be happy that a Nazi took us to the moon, but okay. All right, we'll go to the next question.

So we talk a lot about 1969, but what do you guys, question to both of you, what do you guys say about the fact that long before '69, the prophet Mohammed went to the moon on his flying horse and also split the moon in two? This is a serious question. Well, I've been told specifically by NASA I'm not allowed to talk about that because we're trying to hide that from everybody.

We're going to have to get you in the memory wipe chamber. It's funny you say that. In fact, if everyone could just for one second just look this way. I'm just going to need you. Everyone just look over here. Men in black. That never happens. Well, no, a serious answer. So I'm a brother of Nation of Islam, and Yacoub, the leader of one of the 12 tribes of Israel, he actually created the white race. Wow.

This is true through genetic breeding. This is real. Look up the Nation of Islam. Look up Yacoub. Type it in, Craig. Type in Yacoub. Y-A-U-K-U-B. You'll like this, Craig. That's all right. I don't need to do that. Well, Yacoub was this guy, and he created the white race. So you actually are right. They've been in space way before us. And really, we're probably just some sort of alien species of space travelers that they infected us like a germ, and we just kind of grew like mold here on this planet. Are you okay? I learned a lot today. Thank you.

Any further questions? If not, we'd like to thank both panelists. I think there's one more. Come on down. So I am curious about you talking that FACS was not around in 1969 because first we had the telegraph, and I don't remember from history when in time the telegraph was around.

I know we talked about Morse code a little bit, but Telegraph is definitely there. And then the fax was there in 1964. No. Look it up. Okay, fax machine used by NASA. Let's see. I'm looking it up. But if a fax machine is around. So then there was also something with fax and in the 1800s. But specifically the fax machine is 1964. Well, it says they didn't become common until the 80s.

Common and existing are two different things. Is NASA having the same research and technology as the layperson? Well, you know, it's funny because you believe that we went to the moon with a fax machine. You think that's enough technology? No, no, no. I believe that they can talk to each other with a fax machine. I don't believe NASA used a fax machine back then because if you actually look at it, there's no proof of them using a fax machine when it comes to the Apollo moon mission. Yeah.

You brought up that there's no fax machine. Well, they weren't. Okay. A fax machine was invented before 1969. They weren't regularly used because people didn't have numbers to connect with. But the ability to use them existed, right? But NASA did not use them when they did the Apollo moon. Did we? Does anyone ever say that we sent a fax to the moon? I don't think that's... I know, because... I'm not sure that's a claim. It's not about the fax machine. It's the fact that they

You brought out the fax machine. To make a point, you guys are sitting here arguing about damn fax machines. I'm talking about how are we going to go to the moon without email, without a fax machine. I don't know about you, but I don't need an email to go to the moon. You would need email. We have emails

and all this technology today and we can't go to the moon and we have endless amounts of technology. I have a computer that walks around on my phone and they didn't even have a computer that took them to the damn moon. Well, they did. It wasn't very powerful. It was a bunch of black women doing math problems, goddess of the moon, sure. All right, we'll get another question here. Can we actually not go to the moon today? No.

Not humans. We can't take a human past low Earth orbit. Ask Craig. Well, we're certainly working on that technology. But can we go past low Earth orbit right now with a human? No. We're going to see with the next Artemis mission. But I'm just saying, right now, can we? Well, no, because we don't have a ship ready to go right now. So listen, go look at your fax machine. You're a fax machine expert. I want you to go fax somebody something. I'll make sure to go through fax so I know that it's not tampered with. But it's not about the fax machine. It's about...

The lack of technology that they had compared to today, and we can't go today. So that is a discrepancy. It's like, I don't know how much power it would take to take off from the moon, but I know that it's not even near 1/6 the amount of power that they use to take off from Earth. That's what they're planning on. I was just at the Johnson Space Center. That's actually the plan. They're going to use robots for everything. And the question from the floor was they could just send in AI robots. Thank you, Alex.

I'm actually scared of the idea of AI going to space. Me too. Every video game, every movie we've ever seen tells us. This is for Craig and it's very minor. The guy who had been killed by the oxygen in the fire, I'm afraid I forgot his name. Gus Gerson. Yeah, you had said that our technology was archaic.

That was cutting-edge technology. That was cutting-edge science. The basic problem was we weren't at the right stage of technology or science to do what we did. So archaic was the wrong word. It's not a criticism, but that was cutting-edge science. Yeah, at the time, obviously now, but if we look at it today, I agree with you, absolutely. I appreciate it. You're absolutely right. Yeah.

Yeah, you're absolutely right. At the time, it was. There was a lot of, they had a lot of issues with the way it was managed and put together and stuff, you know, which the Lemonade thing is about. But, you know, by today's standards, it's archaic. But obviously, by back then, those standards, it was the most amazing thing that existed. So, yeah. This is a complete non-sequitur, but I just thought I'd note, you mentioned Richard Nixon. I'm from northern New Jersey. One of my friend's mothers took us trick-or-treating to Richard Nixon's house in Saddle River.

Did he give you good candy? Did he have full-size candy? Good for him. God bless Richard Nixon. All right, well, thank you very much, gentlemen. Appreciate that. Any further questions? This guy has a question. Oh, no, you're slapping. All right, we're good? Craig, we've got to do it again. That was a lot of fun. All right, let's hear it for Alex and Fight the Flat Earth. Thank you very much, gentlemen.

James is back. We'll be on a 15-minute break now. Thank you for your support. Thank you, everyone. That was great fun.

Oh yeah, do the survey, do the survey. We're going to vote, James. I'll count. Oh, the count, the vote. Thank you for reminding me. Okay. So if you happen to lean toward Alex's position, namely, and remember, don't vote unless you voted in the first vote. If you lean toward Alex's position that the moon landings were forged, could you slide your hand up? Two, three. Okay.

If you lean toward Craig's position, that the moon landings were legitimate. My work here is done. Almost there. And again, folks, if you're watching at home, we're doing this for our sponsor, Manifold, who has sponsored DebateCon 5 once again. We appreciate their support. They're linked in the description box. All of you can put your hands down. Thank you very much. And then Bob, we'll give Bob a chance to tally it up. If you want to, we could announce that at the start of the next debate as well. You got it. Thank you, Bob.

All right. When we started at the beginning, three people said Alex was on the right side. 18 went with Craig. After that most illustrative and informative debate, Alex went down to one vote and Craig remained at 18. There's more than one people with their hand raised. That's not true. All right. Let's do Alex. Okay. You can't even count, dude. Bob, there's more.

There was only one when I counted. I don't think this is trying to be a space nerd. Keep your hands up this time, Alex. I'm a space defender. Raise your hand, Moonlander deniers. You guys know it's fake. Now there's three. Yeah, thank you. Now there's three. So it's the same amount, three and three. Make that for the record. Make that clear. It is three and three. Thank you. So you two did nothing to sway any opinions during the last three months. This was an entire waste of time.

First of all, this is a complex thing that most of you people can't understand. This is too... It's because all you guys are stupid. That's why. Except for the three people that raised their hands. But everybody here is probably on antidepressants, probably has a lot of mental health disorders. So you guys need to work on yourselves before you can find out the truth about the man. Thank you very much, Alex. I appreciate that. Can I just quickly say something? This is my first time in the States and...

My first debate here, it was overwhelmingly against me. All the Crucible guys here, big up the Crucible guys, by the way. Even though Andrew steamrolled me in that debate, I feel like I've been welcomed and treated with respect, and everyone's been so nice to me. And as an introduction to the States, this has been pretty good, even though it was New Jersey. So thank you very much, everyone. Thank you very much. Yeah.

All right, we'll let you go for a 10-minute break if you have to use a restroom or anything like that. And then we'll start the next debate in about 10 minutes. Ready to shoot your shot? Log into BetMGM every day and play the new Fast Break basketball game for your chance to win prizes. All you need to do is log into BetMGM. Head to the promotions page and fire up Fast Break to find yourself on the b-ball court ready to make a play. Choose to pass the ball to the shooting guard or small forward.

or take it to the rim yourself and go for a slam dunk. If you score a basket, you'll win a prize like a boost token, $50 bonus bet, or bonus spins. If you miss, just log in tomorrow and try again. Play fast break for your daily shot of boost tokens, bonus bets, or bonus spins. BetMGM and GameSense remind you to play responsibly. See BetMGM.com for terms. 21+. This U.S. promo offer not available in D.C., Mississippi, New York, Nevada, Ontario, or Puerto Rico. Gambling problem? Call 1-800-GAMBLER throughout U.S. 8778-HOPE-NY or text HOPE-NY-467369 in New York. Call 1-800-NEXT-STEP in

Arizona, 1-800-327-5050. In Massachusetts, 1-800-BETS-OFF-IN-IOWA, 1-800-981-0023. In Puerto Rico, or visit 1-800-GAMBLER.NET in West Virginia. Subject to eligibility requirements. Rewards vary and expire in seven days. In partnership with Kansas Crossing Casino and Hotel.

If you're turning 65 or new to Medicare, Humana might just have the health plan you're looking for. Our Medicare Advantage plans offer coverage and care you can count on. You could get a plan with a $0 premium or an all-in-one plan that may include medical and prescription coverage, as well as routine dental, vision, and hearing. Learn more at GetHumana.com. Humana, a more human way to health care. Humana is a Medicare Advantage HMO and PPO organization with a Medicare contract. Enrollment in any Humana plan depends on contract renewal.