Many flat earthers and space deniers believe that NASA not only stands for the "National Aeronautics and Space Administration" but, in Hebrew, means "to deceive" or "lie", for example:
The Hebrew word that we pronounce as "NASA" (or, more correctly, "na-sar") is actually the slightly different "נָשָׂא", which is a primitive verb root meaning "to lift, bear up, carry, or take":
In the King James translation of the Bible, it is used 654 times in 611 verses, and not one of those uses is related to "deception":
The primitive verb root which in Hebrew means "to beguile" or "to deceive" is "נָשָׁא", as quoted above, which is transliterated as nasha' (pronounced "na-shar"). They are easily confused, not only in English, but for those not familiar with Hebrew: the only difference being the location of the dot above the middle letter ("shin").
A dot above the right hand side of "shin" represents the sound "sh" (called "shin dot") while a dot above the left represents the sound "s" (called "sin dot").
There's some inconsistency with how abbreviations are translated, but transliterating the pronunciation of the abbreviation isn't one I remember seeing.
Sometimes the letters are transliterated, keeping the foreign full name (The German SS stayed SS in English rather than becomming PS), this would not drop the first A. Sometimes the name is translated and a new abbreviation created (CCCP became USSR), and without knowing Hebrew I assume this would somehow keep four letters. If the name is a meaningful word that word is sometimes translated (the US's PATRIOT Act is often translated as if it were the Patriot Act instead of an elaborate forced abbreviation), but this is different than transliterating the word, and doesn't work as NASA is not a word in its original language.
The problem with Rob's graphic and assumption that nasa means "deceive" is because The Hebrew letter shin ש (the "s" in nasa) represents two different phonemes: 's' and 'sh' . The two are distinguished by a dot above the left-hand side of the letter for 's' (rendering the letter as "sin") and above the right-hand side for 'sh' (rendering the letter as "shin").
In the above graphic that Rob used, you will notice the letter shin has a dot on the right side indicating that the letter is pronounced "sh" and therefore rendering the word "nasha", not "nasa." Therefore, it is "nä·shä' that means deceive. The letter s in nasa (dot above the left side of the letter) is pronounced like the s in side and means to "lift up" as noted in the above posts.
Ref: https://biblehub.com/hebrew/5375.htm http://eteacherhebrew.com/articles/letter-shin
From this chart, we notice that although there were no dots or pronunciation markings, there WERE differing letters with different pronunciations.
Therefore: The word "deceive" was spelled: nun-shin-aleph (right to left) -
That chart is incorrect anyhow. Ignoring the silly usage of the Proto-Canaanite script (which was never used for Hebrew), the shapes given for the sin are in fact those for the samekh, which is a different letter of the alphabet altogether - even if its (modern) pronunciation is the same as for sin. As you pointed out already, sin and shin are spelled with the same character ש, only differing in the position of the dot. (Also, there is no verb "nun-samekh-aleph" in Biblical Hebrew.)
Anyway, it's not relevant. As we've already established, the verb that means "deceive" is not pronounced nasa but nasha. Rob clearly missed that š stands for a sh sound. Diacritics are not just for looks, people!
Really.....well, there are several sources that would disagree with your statement that this Proto-Canaanite/Siniatic was never used for Hebrew. What proof/credentials do you have to confirm your statement, because, so far, you're the only one who believes that.
Posting source links to back up statements is a must on Metabunk. Statements made without a linked source, and especial statements that paraphrase a source, can be very misleading and will likely be deleted.
But while links are very important, they must be treated as additional references and not stand-alone content, so any content in the link that you refer to must also be in your post, quoted using "ex" tags.
If the information is visual, then screen grabs of relevant images must also be included in your comment.
A brief explanation for why you feel the quote you are quoting is relevant is also required.
The above also applies to video links. Timestamps (ie hour:minute:second), in text, are required also for
video links even if you "copy url at current time" in a video.
Do not paraphrase links unless you are commenting on something you have fully quoted in context.
Do not quote more than is necessary, the more focussed you are then more likely it is that someone will read what is there, and the more useful your post will be.
After a few minutes playing with google translate, Nasa can mean the following
Pot in Spanish Desire in Fillipino Spanish Platform in Basque Our in Bosnian / Serbo Croat / Masadonian / Slovenian Nipple or Knob in Estonian His Own in Hawaiin / Maori / Samoan Nostril in Iceland (and also old Norse) / Swedish In in Javanese / Mongolian Nose in Kurdish / Nepali / Pashto Godmother in Romanian Breast in Somali Time in Sudanese Dawn in Zulu
At that point I gave up, but Hebrew, yiddish etc threw up NO results other than NASA
But does this prove NASA are secret Spanish stoners, innuendo laiden Estonians or possessive polynesians? or does it show that this whole idea is BS? I suspect the later