What evidence you got ??. Cause i mean a 'launch to orbit' totally nails it then, not at all like it could be programmed to do anything the programmers want when its out of American airspace. Geez, that's like saying you can tell an aircraft's final destination from the direction it takes when took off ....Wahahaaa, ya goofy fool...
You're ignoring the part about sufficient orbital velocity to reach the moon.
What, you mean to say if something is going fast enough to leave low erf orbit, that somehow is proof to you of it's actual destination ?? ... Wow, i guess that's totally compelling then, lol.
You can measure the mass of the earth and do the orbital mechanics calculations yourself. If it's going along a given vector at a given speed, its going to go to a certain height. Surely you're not suggesting the real destination is beyond the moon, or that instead of going to the moon they'll say they intend to, and then build the giant rocket, and accelerate it to sufficient speed to reach the moon, and then spend even more fuel to slow down. What are they really planning to go to Venus but no one would believe that so they're going to the moon instead? Are they going to accelerate it to lunar velocity and then have the astronauts get out and walk home?
Maybe they'll get it up to enough speed to orbit the moon, and then just let it go up there and come back? A few dozen times. With various faked payloads. All so they can, what, save the expense of making the actual lander?
(post is archived)