Millions of people, not just conspiracy theorist, feel we have not been told the complete truth regarding NASA’s Apollo space program of the late 60’s and early 70’s.
Its because of this public uncertainty and the continued ongoing social debate, that regrettably the Apollo Missions, in particular Apollo 11, has joined the ranks of Ripley’s believe it or not. This 46 year old argument certainly begs the question,”How did one of the greatest human endeavour’s in history, become one of the greatest conspiracy theories known”?
DID man land on the moon? some say yes, some say no, both sides of the argument can produce scientific facts, both can produce pictures of proof, both can produce recorded audio. So how does an ordinary person ascertain who is right and who is wrong?
Truth of the matter is, there is simply too many facts supporting each defense to draw a definite conclusion. However, there are certain questions that can not be answered without “mumbo jumbo” by the “we did it group”. like NASA’s scientist, even the astronauts that achieved the feat. (who I might add were only ALLOWED to officially speak to the world media once!) cannot and will not release information regarding HOW they got through the Van Allen radiation belt??
To add further to the controversy, in 2014, 46 years after the moon landing, NASA Engineer Kelly Smith stated in an educational video the difficulties faced by the Orion spacecraft launch. (Dec 5th 2014)
He said, “As we get further away from Earth, we will pass through the Vann Allan Belts, an area of dangerous radiation. Radiation like this can harm the guidance systems, on-board computers, or other electronics on Orion. Naturally, we have to pass through this danger zone twice, once up and once back. But Orion’s protection shielding will be put to the test as the vehicle cuts through the waves of radiation. Sensors aboard will record radiation levels for scientists to study. We must solve these challenges before we send people through this region of Space.
WHAT WAS THAT, “We must solve these challenges before we send people through the Vann Allan Belts?” ?????? Hang on, NASA have supposedly already sent 10-15 astronauts through the Van Allen belt during the Apollo missions nearly 50 years ago. NOW in 2014 NASA is saying that this deadly radiation problem is yet to be solved?
A thought provoking side note, EVERY YEAR on certain days the United States celebrates national pride motivated holidays, Presidents’ Day, Independence day, Columbus Day. Yet the day of there greatest scientific and technological achievement,the moon landing, goes unacknowledged as a holiday. Why? Could it be man never landed on the moon and the powers to be don’t want to answer relevant moon landing questions EVERY SINGLE YEAR on the 20th or 21st July. (Surely a piece of the puzzle for the “didn’t” movement just slotted in nicely.)
That all said, early Apollo missions must be carefully considered against the backdrop of the cold war between the USSR and the USA (Communism V Capitalism.) during the 50’s and 60’s. This war was psychological not physical and was fought via spies and counter spies with each country portraying itself as having the strongest technical capabilities.
The fact is…During the early to late 50’s the USA concentrated on Nuclear Weapons whilst the Russians were exploring space with their Spunik’s.
- In 1961 the Russians were getting space travel down pat and the USA realised they had concentrated on the wrong weapon, Nuke instead of space. To overcome this psychological and technological advantage held by the Russians, The then President, John F Kennedy, declared by the end of the decade the USA will not only land men on the moon but return them safely back.
To fully understand the extent of space travel superiority by the Russians, refer the below chronological recorded first by both USSR & USA.
- 1957: First intercontinental ballistic missile, the R-7 Semyorka
- 1957: First satellite, Sputnik 1
- 1957: First animal to enter Earth orbit, the dog Laika on Sputnik 2
- 1959: First firing of a rocket in Earth orbit, first man-made object to escape Earth’s orbit, Luna 1
- 1959: First data communications, or telemetry, to and from outer space, Luna 1.
- 1959: First man-made object to pass near the Moon, first artificial satellite in Solar orbit, Luna 1
- 1959: First probe to impact the Moon, Luna 2
- 1959: First images of the Moon’s far side, Luna 3
- 1960: First animals to safely return from Earth orbit, the dogs Belka and Strelka on Korabl-Sputnik 2.
- 1960: First probe launched to Mars, Marsnik 1 (failed to reach target)
- 1961: First probe launched to Venus, Venera 1
- 1961: First person in space (International definition) and in Earth orbit, Yuri Gagarin on Vostok 1, Vostok programme
- 1961: First person to spend over a day in space Gherman Titov, Vostok 2 (also first person to sleep in space).
- 1962: First dual crewed spaceflight, Vostok 3 and Vostok 4
- 1963: First woman in space, Valentina Tereshkova, Vostok 6
- 1964: First multi-person crew (3), Voskhod 1
- 1965: First EVA, by Aleksei Leonov, Voskhod 2
- 1965: First probe to hit another planet (Venus), Venera 3
- 1966: First probe to make a soft landing on and transmit from the surface of the Moon, Luna 9
- 1966: First probe in lunar orbit, Luna 10
- 1967: First automated, crewless rendezvous and docking, Cosmos 186/Cosmos 188. (Until 2006, this had remained the only major space achievement that the US had not duplicated.)
- 1969: First docking between two crewed crafts in Earth orbit and exchange of crews, Soyuz 4 and Soyuz 5
Robotic lunar missions
|First probe to go near the Moon (5995 km), went into heliocentric orbit||January 1959||USSR||Luna 1|
|First probe to impact the Moon||September 1959||USSR||Luna 2|
|First probe to photograph the far side of the Moon||October 1959||USSR||Luna 3|
|First automated landing on the Moon, first to transmit from the Moon’s surface||January 1966||USSR||Luna 9|
|First probe to orbit the Moon||March 1966||USSR||Luna 10|
|First probe to land using retrorockets||June 1966||USA||Surveyor 1|
|First probe to map the Moon||August 1966||USA||Lunar Orbiter 1|
Note the years of difference in the following achievements. you have to disregard Alan Shepards flight as it was not orbital and the Americans were not capable of doing so for another five years.
|First person in space, first person to orbit the Earth||April 1961||USSR||Vostok 1|
|First manual control of a crewed spacecraft||May 1961||USA||Freedom 7|
|First one-day flight||August 1961||USSR||Vostok 2|
|Two spacecraft launched into nearly intersecting orbits.
(Mistakenly reported as first rendezvous.)
|August 1962||USSR||Vostok 3 and Vostok 4|
|First flight over three days long||August 1962||USSR||Vostok 3|
|First woman in space||June 1963||USSR||Vostok 6|
|First multi-person crew (3) aboard one spacecraft||October 1964||USSR||Voskhod 1|
|First spacewalk (EVA)||March 1965||USSR||Voskhod 2|
|First crewed spacecraft to change orbit||March 1965||USA||Gemini 3|
|First crewed mission over seven days long (long enough for a mission to the Moon and back)||August 1965||USA||Gemini 5|
|Two spacecraft maneuvering to close proximity under fine control.
The first rendezvous in space.
|December 1965||USA||Gemini 6A|
|Longest flight of the decade (13 days, 18 hours)||December 1965||USA||Gemini 7|
|First docking with another spacecraft||March 1966||USA||Gemini 8|
|First crewed mission to leave Earth orbit, first to orbit the Moon and first spacecraft of any type to perform Trans-Earth injection||December 1968||USA||Apollo 8|
|First docking between two crewed spacecraft in Earth orbit, also the first crew exchange in space||January 1969||USSR||Soyuz 4 and Soyuz 5|
|First successful crewed flight of a spacecraft capable of landing on the Moon (Apollo Lunar Module)||March 1969||USA||Apollo 9|
|First crewed landing on the Moon||July 1969||USA||Apollo 11|
Even robotic planetary travel sees the USSR nearly 2 years in advance.
|First flyby of Venus (< 100,000 km), but contact was lost||February 1961||USSR||Venera 1|
|First successful flyby of Venus (less than 35,000 km)||August 1962||USA||Mariner 2|
|First Mars flyby (11,000 km) but contact was lost||November 1962||USSR||Mars 1|
|First successful Mars flyby (returned pictures)||November 1964||USA||Mariner 4|
|First impact of Venus (contact lost)||November 1965||USSR||Venera 3|
|First to enter Venus’s atmosphere||June 1967||USSR||Venera 4|
|First to parachute in Venus’s atmosphere, lost contact before landing.||January 1969||USSR||Venera 5|
THE UNDISPUTED FACTS
- In 1957 USSR launched into space with their sputnik program. (well ahead of the Americans)
- On April 12 1961 Cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin became the first human to enter space and orbit the earth. (America was once again embarrassed, and more so, because their existing spy network had no knowledge that a man in space was even being considered) INTERESTING NOTE On May 5 1961 (3 weeks later) Alan Shepard was strapped onto the front of a Redstone rocket (The army had first used Redstones as missiles) and launched into the history books. Shepard only ever achieved sub-orbital flight, he did not orbit the earth as Gagarin had done earlier. in essence, he was shot straight up 116 miles, then fell straight back to earth. (15 min trip) It is believed this flight was merely done in an attempt to prove to the American people that American space travel technology was on par with the then Soviet Union. The fact is – they were years behind in both manned space travel and launching rocket technology. The Soviet Union was so far advanced in their space program the USA needed to create a space feat that would leave no doubt that NASA and the US had the superior space control. After consulting with Vice President Johnson, NASA Administrator James Webb, and other officials, Kennedy concluded that landing an American on the Moon would be a very challenging technological feat and cost 100’s of millions of dollars, the immediate and long term political benefits were worth the research and financial expenditure… NASA’s overall human spaceflight efforts were guided by Kennedy’s speech and the uncomfortable knowledge that the Soviet Union was years ahead.
The fact is – The cold war was a major part of the moon landing decision and is the primary lens through which many historians and political researchers now view the speech made by Kennedy on May 25, 1961,
What is mystifying about the Soviet space flight achievements is they never landed on the moon. One really has to question why? Did they discovered in earlier space flights that man could not penetrate the Van Allen belt without perishing?
An interesting fact is, during the sixties while the Soviets were getting man into space,the USA was more interested in getting spy satellites into space than man, yet suddenly in 1969 after many many documented failures and questionable test, produced the space flight of modern history. Landing a man on the moon and returning him to earth
Another interesting fact is, that ALL recorded footage of the trip taken by the astronauts of Apollo 11 and NASA’s on board camera’s mysteriously disappeared from one of the most secured facilities on the planet NO footage apart from media recorded, which I might add was taken from a NASA projected screen, as NO media were permitted to link cameras to the direct feed) Meaning, only the footage that NASA allowed the media to film is available for scrutiny and even those pictures have added to the conspiracy theories.(No wonder NASA’s original footage suddenly disappeared)
First communications satellite (lasted 12 days) December 1958
First object successfully recovered from orbit August 1960 USA Discoverer 13
First animals returned safely from orbit August 1960 USSR Korabl-Sputnik
First commercially useful communications satellite July 1962 USA Telstar
THE PROOF “IT DID HAPPEN”
HOW DO WE KNOW THE MOON LANDING ISN’T FAKE?
Apparently, “NASA”, who’s done a remarkable job of sticking to their story. They say Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin landed on the Moon on July 20, 1969, and set foot on the surface 6 hours later. NASA also states there were 5 additional missions which successfully landed on the Moon, and an alleged total of 12 people went for a walk there.
According to NASA, they spent $24 billion, (which in today’s terms is more than a $150 billion). on their so-called “Apollo” program and allegedly employed 400,000 people, supported by more than 20,000 companies and research institutions. I say “alleged” merely to remain impartial.
More than 10 years ago, Fox popularised the Moon landing conspiracy with a show called “Did We Land On The Moon?”. They revealed several pieces of evidence about the hoax and cover-up citing incorrect shadows on the Moon, lack of background stars, and more. Each of the pieces of evidence they present is wrong and easily explained once you understand the underlying science.
Phil Plait successfully brings a NASA supporting voice to this story, explaining how the evidence against moon landings is at best, fantasy and misunderstanding. A more cynical view might be to suggest it’s a deliberate manipulation created to maintain an anti-scientific narrative to foster ignorance, mistrust and uphold a larger political agenda. Do a little search for “Phil Plait moon landing” and you’ll see him present even-handed science over any one of the arguments. In fact, if you buy into that whole “evidence” idea, he appears to successfully tear apart the conspiracy argument
Debunking The Conspiracy
What if the United States didn’t land on the moon? What if there was a conspiracy to give the illusion that they did? What if the public was fooled into thinking that ‘1969 America’ could win the space race? And if the government lied, what else were they lying about? What else do they not want us to know? What if… the moon landing was a hoax?
In February of 2001, Fox TV aired a program called “Conspiracy Theory: Did We Land on the Moon?”. It featured interviews with a group of people who believe that NASA faked the Apollo moon landings. The biggest proponent of this idea was Bill Kaysing, who claimed to have evidence for the hoax: images, engineering details, anomalies in the physics, and astronaut testimonies. According to Kaysing, NASA did not have the technical capability of landing on the moon, but since there was so much pressure during the Cold War and space race with the Soviet Union, the USA was forced to fake the whole thing to prove that they had technological superiority. To Kaysing and others believer in the conspiracy, it was easier to fool the public with an elaborate hoax (assumed to be filmed in Area 51, of course) rather than let their Cold War rival strike a huge moral victory by having a non-American step foot on the moon first.
Scan the Internet for “Moon Landing Hoax”, and (other than this site), you’ll find other reasons for the conspiracy, including the following, from MoonMovie.com:
“Why would Apollo fake the first manned moon mission (Apollo 8 ) and then continue to go back 8 more times? To answer this question, one must understand both history and the future.
Technology is far beyond what the public is allowed to know – in some cases 35 years ahead of public knowledge.
The elite handlers of the Military Industrial Complex (MIC) needed a long term distraction from the real space program, for the purposes of covertly building the vast control mechanisms and placing them in Earth orbit.
Bart Sibrel touches on this in his first film, when he includes the real reason for space presence – military domination of the Earth from space. This is the history. Another resource for this documented movement towards worldwide tyranny is Arsenal of Hypocrisy. NASA is a multifaceted tool of the MIC, and the Global Elite who plan to implement world government.
Apollo was in fact, a great distraction.”
And so, putting the reason for the hoax aside, let us investigate why some people believe man has yet to step foot on the moon. At the same time, we’ll put on our skeptical hats and let science debunk each of the claims.
Conspiracy Claims and the Facts That Debunk Them
1 When the astronauts plant the flag, you can see it flapping as though it’s in a breeze. But there is no air or atmosphere on the moon… so how could this be?
Reason The flag is moving because the astronauts just placed it there, and by twisting and turning the flag pole, they caused it to move. The inertia from when they let go kept it moving, Over time, the flag would come to rest, but the video was taken during and shortly after it was placed into the lunar surface.
2 Buzz Aldrin is seen in the shadow of the lander, but at the same time, he is clearly visible. Many shadows look strange in the Apollo pictures. Some shadows don’t appear to be parallel with each other, and some objects in shadow appear well lit, hinting that light was coming from multiple sources… just like studio cameras.
Reason There were multiple light sources: the sun, the Earth’s reflected light, light reflecting off the lunar module, the spacesuits, and also the lunar surface.
It’s also important to note that the lunar surface is not flat. If an object is in a dip (say, a small crater), you will get a different shadow compared to an object next to it that is on a level surface. Still not convinced? This is easily testable at with a few small props, uneven ground, and a light source.
In addition, the shadows are not parallel in the images due to perspective. You are looking at a three-dimensional scene, projected on a two-dimensional photograph, which causes distortions. When the Sun is low and shadows are long, objects at different distance do indeed appear to cast non-parallel shadows, even here on Earth. Here’s a great example demonstrating this effect – non parallel shadows distorted by perspective. Again, this is easily testable, as the previous link demonstrates.
3 You’re on the moon and there’s no atmosphere. So you should be able to clearly see all the stars in the sky. But where are they? They don’t show up in any of the photographs – it’s just a dark sky.
Reason The moon’s surface reflects sunlight, and its glare would have made stars difficult to see. Also, the astronauts photographed their lunar adventures using fast exposure settings, which would have limited incoming background light. According to Bad Astronomy, they were taking pictures at 1/150th or 1/250th of a second. With such a short exposure, the stars simply won’t show up on film. You can try this for yourself. Take a picture of Jupiter or Venus (since they are highly visible from Earth) on a clear night away from light pollution. You’ll have a hard time seeing them, if at all, and you certainly won’t see even the brightest stars. You need a long and steady exposure for that to work.
4 The lander was huge and should have produced a giant crater when it touched the surface. But the module is shown sitting on relatively flat, undisturbed soil.
Reason “Science fiction movies depict this big jet of fire coming out as [spacecraft] land, but that’s not how they did it on the moon.”. In reality, the lander’s engines were throttled back prior to landing, and it did not hover long enough to form a crater or disturb much dust.
5 The radiation in the van Allen Belts and in deep space would have been rendered either extremely ill or killed by the radiation within minutes.
Reason The van Allen belts are regions above the Earth’s surface where the Earth’s magnetic field has trapped particles of the solar wind. An unprotected human would get a lethal dose of radiation, but only if he stayed there long enough. But according to Phil Plait, the spaceship traveled through the belts very quickly, getting through them in about an hour. There wasn’t enough time to get a lethal dose. Additionally, the metal hull of the spaceship blocked most of the radiation.
6 The pictures taken from the Moon were exposed and set. Just about every picture the public sees is near perfect, with the scene always centered perfectly. However, the cameras were mounted on the front of the astronauts’ spacesuit, and there was no finder. They couldn’t have taken perfect pictures every time!
Reason Nobody claims they did. Thousands of pictures were taken on the Moon, and the ones we all see will tend to be the best ones. If Buzz Aldrin accidentally took a picture with Neil Armstrong partly out of the frame, you probably won’t see that image in a magazine. Further to that, everything done on the Moon was practiced endlessly by the astronauts. Those working on the mission knew that these pictures would be some of the most important images ever taken, so they would have taken particular care in making sure the astronauts could do it with their eyes shut.
7 The astronauts’ footprints are too clear for being made on a dry surface. Those footprints could only have been made in wet sand.
Reason Moon dust, or regolith, is “like a finely ground powder. When you look at it under a microscope, it almost looks like volcanic ash. So when you step on it, it can compress very easily into the shape of a boot.” And those shapes could stay pristine for a long while thanks to the airless vacuum on the moon.
8 We are led to believe that only two astronauts walked on the moon at a time, yet in photographs where both are visible, there is no sign of a camera. So who took the picture?
Reason The cameras were mounted to the astronauts’ chests. In the picture above, Plait notes, “you can see [Neil’s] arms are sort of at his chest. That’s where the camera is. He wasn’t holding it up to his visor.”
9 There are many strange reflections in the photos. They could only have come from studio lights on a production set.
Reason If NASA spent millions of dollars on a hoax, do you think they would make such an obvious mistake? The reflections are lens flares. The pentagonal flare seen in some photos is of the aperture of the camera.
10 After the “landing”, artifacts from the trip were supposedly left behind: part of the Eagle, the U.S. flag, and several other instruments and mementos. With instruments like the Hubble Space Telescope capable of peering into the distant of the universe, surely scientists should be able to see the various objects still on the moon. But no such pictures of these objects exist.
Reason There isn’t a single telescope on Earth or in space that has a resolution powerful enough to see these objects. In fact, astronomers can calculate this: given the biggest telescope on Earth, the smallest thing you can see on the surface of moon is something bigger than a house.
11 There’s secret outtake footage from the old Moontruth website that shows a bumble when they were staging the landing. You can clearly see it was a production set.
That’s because it was a production set. Moontruth.com eventually came out as a parody, publishing a disclaimer stating that the clip was a fake. This doesn’t stop people from believing that it still supports the hoax, however. In fact, in true conspiracy theorist fashion, the admission that it was a fake video is seen as “part of the conspiracy”, or “what they want you to think”.
The fact is, if we did go to the Moon, as NASA contends, then the evidence that we did go to the Moon should stand up to scrutiny. That evidence has been in the public domain for 30 years now in the form of photographs, images of spacecraft taken by astronauts in other spacecraft as well as images of the spacecraft heading towards the moon by telescope from the Earth, video records broadcast in real-time and seen in real-time, scientific experiments placed on the moon and moon rock samples returned from the surface. .
12) An average days temperature on the moon ranges from 260 degrees F to 280 degrees F, too (hot) for film to survive. At those temperatures, film crinkles up into a ball.
Reason The mid-day temperature on the moon is indeed around 260 degrees Fahrenheit, however, the low temperature in the dark of night is about minus 250 degrees Fahrenheit! The lunar landings and following exploration was done when the sun was low, within a day or so of local sunrise at the landing site at the time of the landing, so that temperatures were actually quite moderate, even after a full 3 days on the lunar surface. The film in the cameras was also kept in magazines that provided some protection from the extreme temperatures even when left in direct sunlight. In a vacuum without an atmosphere to conduct heat, film inside the magazines it was carried in is quite well protected from the heat of direct sunlight.
13) On the moon, there is only one light source, the sun. This is a shot of Buzz Aldrin and Neal [sic] Armstrong planting the US flag on the moon. If the sun is the only light source used by NASA on the moon, Aldrins shadow A shadows should not be so much longer than Armstrong’s
Reason Most of the difference can be explained by the fact that the moon’s surface is by no means flat and judging by the brightness of the left portion of this image, the top of the left astronaut’s shadow (presumably Armstrong’s) is on a small rise, so appears shorter. The area right behind Armstrong is dark and is a small downslope less well lit by the sun from its low position in the sky, and that is the general area where Aldrin’s longer shadow ends.
Also, compare the height of the two astronauts. The image of Aldrin on the right is about 10% taller than that of Armstrong on the left. If the astronauts are the same height in reality, then this demonstrates the effects of perspective on the apparent size and length of features in the image compared to their actual size or length. The shadow lengths are about 20% different which can easily be accounted for by perspective effects and by local terrain effects.
14) If you will look at area B you will notice a shadow cast across Buzz Aldrin’s space suit. Once again, if the Sun is the only light source used on the moon, this shadow would have been MUCH darker.
Reason The Sun is the primary light source, however, it lights up not only the lunar surface, but the LM, the astronauts spacesuit, and anything else on the lunar surface so that light scattered off of those objects will fill the dark shadows with light. Try going into a small darkened room and shine a flashlight on the wall. The side of you opposite the flashlight which only sees the lighted wall will be lit by the scattered light off the wall from the flashlight spot. The Earth also adds some fill light to the shadows, but the Sun dominates the lighting on the Moon.
Another thing to consider is that the astronauts spacesuit is almost pure white, like a sheet of paper, while the lunar surface is charcoal black. The photographic exposures make the sunlit lunar surface look much lighter in color than it is and also allows the images to show detail in the shadows, particularly of bright white space suits that are not very strongly lit by the scattered light off of the lunar surface, the LM, and anything else on the moon.
Looking at area C you will notice that the surface of the moon fades off into the distance, then is met with the moon’s horizon. In a no-atmosphere environment, the ground shouldn’t have faded out, but stayed crystal sharp unto the moon’s horizon.
Reason This is a simple case of lighting effects. The scattering angle off the near surface is viewed from a steeper angle than that of the lunar surface off in the distance. The local terrain contributes greatly to the brightness of the near surface too. The apparent out of focus of the horizon area is caused by the image being focused on the astronaut in the foreground – simple optics. Also, the Lunar Module reflects significant amounts of light into the area behind Aldrin as can be seen in this image of the general area.
Looking at area D you can plainly see some type of structure reflected through Aldrins helmet. I do not know what it is, but it is there.
Reason There are two items that are seen reflected on the left side of Aldrin’s visor. One is the Solar Wind Collection (SWC) experiment and the second is the Flag. The exact location of the two astronauts in this image is around on the left side of the LM as viewed from in front of the LM (where the ladder is located) so that the smaller, leftmost object is the SWC and the “mystery object” is the Flag. from the Apollo luna surface journal (refered to later as ALSJ) shows both the Flag and the SWC. The famous picture was taken by Armstrong from the area right of the SWC while Aldrin was standing just on the other side of the footpad visible on the right in this image. The two items appear small and far away despite their relative nearness due to the convex, spherical shaped visor, making objects appear farther away than they actually are – not much different from your rearview mirror which does something similar, allowing you a more complete view of the area it shows while shrinking objects seen in the mirror. See the closeup of this image at the top of this webpage for a better view of what is seen in Aldrin’s visor.
15) In this picture, taken from the LEM, you can see at least two abnormalities. In section E you see an abnormal shadow on the moon’s surface. NASA claims that this shadow is the shadow cast by the Lunar Module, but on earth, even when aircraft is flying low to the ground, it does not produce such a clearly defined shadow.
Reason The item labeled E is not a shadow on the lunar surface, but is a silhouette of the nozzle of one of the RCS (reaction control system) engines on the LM. You can find similar silhouette’s of the same nozzles in images taken from the LM cabin out the LM’s triangular windows of the lunar surface.
If you will look at section 3 you will notice there are no stars in the sky. In fact, you will never see any stars in any NASA Moon photographs, or hear an astronaut mention anything about the glorious stars that are visible when out of the earths atmosphere.
Reason There are no stars to be seen in any of the NASA Moon photographs. It is also one of the most easily countered arguments. The lunar photographs show no stars in them because they were exposed for the daylight lit lunar scenes! Similarly, the astronauts eyes are adapted to the daylight scenes around them so they didn’t see stars in the sky either.
One other point – the dark area near the area labeled 3 above the lit part of the lunar surface in this image is in fact the dark side of the moon, not the sky.
16) if you look in areas 6 and J, you will again see no stars.
Reason As you should not – see the previous C section.
In area K you will notice that one side of the LEM in covered in shadow, but somehow the symbol of the US flag in illuminated. This very well could have been a touch up job.
Reason But it isn’t a touch up job. See the section describing shadows on Aldrin’s spacesuit. The area is lit by scattered light off of the lunar surface. Which is the same reason for why Irwin’s shadowed spacesuit is visible as well, or the shadowed parts of the rover, etc.
17) This is a picture of Alan Bean holding up a Special Environmental Examiner Container [sic]. This picture was taken off a camera that was strapped to Conrad’s chest. If the camera was attached to Conrad’s chest, the top of Bean’s helmet L should not be in this picture.
Reason The device Bean is holding is called the “Special Environmental Sample Container” (or SESC). There are several reasons why we see the top of Bean’s helmet here. First, the lunar surface is not flat and from the location of the middle of the frame here, it is apparent that the relatively short Pete Conrad is probaby standing on higher ground than his taller crewmate Alan Bean. Second, the helmet is roughly spherical in shape, so we can see around towards the top of it and finally, because of the backpacks, the astronauts tended to lean forward somewhat to balance in the lunar gravity. The same aguments made for this image could be made for the picture of Buzz Aldrin shown earlier.
If you will look at the Environmental sampler that Al Bean is holding, N, The reflection is coming from a light source other than the sun, but it is possible that light is being reflected off the space suit.
Reason It is being lit by sunlight scattered off of Bean’s spacesuit.
There is a strange anomaly in the sky 7, It is yet to be determined what that might be.
Reason It may not be determined by the theorist but it is pretty clear that it is scattered light from the bright sun which is off to the left in this image. See, for example, the glint of sunlight on the top left part of Bean’s visor. Bright sunlight impinges on many lunar photographs, many much worse than in this image. Any experienced photographer will be very familiar with lens flare and scattered light when taking photographs towards a bright light such as the sun.
All of the shadows reflected in Bean’s visor M are going off in separate directions, not in parallel lines like they should be.
Reason And why should they be going off in parallel lines? The astronaut’s visor is spherical in shape which badly distorts the images seen reflected in it.
18) I would like to direct your attention to the circled portion of the screen. These Lunar Rover tracks are quite well defined, don’t you agree? Well, the fact is, you need a mixture of a compound, and water, to make such defined lines.
Reason The lunar dust is very fine and adhers to boots and anything else despite its lack of water. It clumps together in the form of any pattern imprinted on it. No need for water to make it do this. Try imprinting a coarse object into a pile of dry flour or dry dirt. You will find that it tends to work similarly despite its being dry. Similarly, you can easily see shoe prints, tire tracks, animal tracks, etc., in dry dirt here on Earth – without any water to help.
If you look at the rock labeled R you will notice a the letter C carved in the rock. Perhaps a gag left by the props department?
Reason This is an artifact of the particular scan of this print. It does not appear in the original image.
19) About 20 miles about the Earth, there is a radiation belt named the Van Allen belt. No human can get through this belt, If you try than you get hit with 300+ rads of radiation. Unless they are surrounded on each side by 4 feet on lead.
In fact, the Van Allen radiation belts extend from about 600 miles up to more than 40,000 miles from Earth with the region of highest radiation intensity being between around 2,000 miles and 12,000 miles above Earth. The astronauts exposure to those radiation belts is brief (less than 4 hours total – they begin their time in this region while traveling at 25,000 MPH! And they pass through it twice, once outbound, and again on their return. They spend less than an hour in the densest part of the belt.) and they are well protected in their spacecraft. Here is a link to a webpage that describes the radiation environment and physiological effects on the Apollo astronauts.
Also, the belt is toroidal in shape (like a donut) and the trajectories of the Apollo spacecraft were designed to avoid the worst part of the Van Allen belts. Even the discoverer of the Van Allen belts, Professor James A. Van Allen, has noted that the belts would not have been dangerous to the Apollo astronauts given their trajectories and their spacecraft.
20) There are millions of micro-meteors traveling at speeds up to 6000 MPH, which would tear the ship to pieces.
Reason In fact there are many more than “millions” of bits of would be meteors out in space, and they travel at speeds as high as at least 120,000 MPH! Despite the large numbers and high speeds, the space density of these objects is quite low so the average interval between impacts on an astronaut is extremely low. The spacesuits the astronauts wore on the lunar surface had layers designed to stop such small particles (we’re talking micron sized bits!) to protect the astronaut.
21) When the LEM set down on the Lunar surface, it gave out 3000 lb. worth of thrust. This would have created a massive hole underneath the Lunar Module, but in pictures of the Lunar Module, the ground underneath is untouched.
Reason On the contrary, there are many photographs which show the disturbance of the lunar soil under or near the Lunar Module. Despite the hydrogen/oxygen engine producing a thrust of some 60,000 pounds (about 20 times the thrust of the LM descent engine!), the engine produced a mark on the desert floor that was barely recognizable. Given that the descent stage engine bell is about 5 feet across at the bottom, and that thrust of the engine at touchdown was about 3,000 pounds, that blast pressure of the rocket exhaust was only about 1 pound per square inch – not much different from the pressure caused by the weight of an astronaut on the Moon standing on one foot while walking across the surface.
NASA, on their web page have presented the most compelling piece of evidence as proof of the moon landings. Actually, they presented 841 pounds of evidence in the form of moon rock. Moon rocks are absolutely unique, and there’s no process on Earth that could simulate their creation. That is, they can only be created on the moon itself.
Dr. David McKay, Chief Scientist for Planetary Science and Exploration at NASA’s Johnson Space Center (JSC) is quoted: “I have here in my office a 10-foot high stack of scientific books full of papers about the Apollo Moon rocks. Researchers in thousands of labs have examined Apollo Moon samples — not a single paper challenges their origin! And these aren’t all NASA employees, either. We’ve loaned samples to scientists in dozens of countries [who have no reason to cooperate in any hoax].”
Even Dr. Robert Park, Director of the Washington office of the American Physical Society and a noted critic of NASA’s human space flight program, agrees that humans have indeed landed on the moon. He was quoted by NASA in saying, “The body of physical evidence that humans did walk on the Moon is simply overwhelming.”
Conspiracy theories like the Moon Landing Hoax can be debunked, torn apart, shredded, and thoroughly disproved with hard science every day, but that usually won’t make a difference to true believers. There is always a certain segment of people out there who will refuse to believe despite overwhelming evidence. Those diehards will never be convinced.
Savage and Hyneman said they found similarities between the hoax and the other myths they have tested. “There seems to be a common tendency among conspiracy theorists, as well as among a lot of people with entrenched belief systems, to get stuck on an idea and never give up. Conspiracy theories are not really a special category — maybe you can call them myths, but in reality they are an obsession that people want to maintain. You can’t really expect that reasonable evidence will change anyone’s mind if they are determined.”
In what you would hope would be the final headshot to put down the Moon landing hoax once and for all, the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter has taken several high resolution photographs over the last few years of all six Apollo landing sites.
The continued popularity of the Moon landing hoax conspiracy theory is odd, given the continuing accumulation of evidence against it.
Part of the reason may be that with the advent of Photoshop and the increasing use of photorealistic special effects in movies people have become used to the idea that images and videos can be convincingly altered, forgetting that these techniques were virtually non-existent in 1969.
Another part may be due to a growing distrust of government, and a growing list of scandals showing that, yes, sometimes governments do conspire against their citizenship.
But any theory, including conspiracy theories, must be based on evidence, and nothing that has been offered as evidence against the Moon landings holds water.
A human walking on the Moon is one of the greatest ever human achievements, and it is disheartening and frustrating to see people try and erase it from history by insisting it never happened.
So there it is, science, reason, and rationality has been applied to the moon landing conspiracy theories, hopefully now at least some moon hoax believers will choose to accept the facts and not their fantasy.
The main pillar of any conspiracy requires a few select people keeping a really, really, really big secret. Looking at the numbers, the select group required to successfully fabricate the appearance of hurling metal capsules containing humans at our orbiting neighbor and then retrieving them, additionally keep their story straight for the next 45 years and never, ever slip up…
So, there are really two sides to this story, the NASA side which is… They went to the Moon. and everyone is telling the truth. OR, they never went to the Moon, and somehow 400,000 people have never, ever, ever, ever let it slip that they made a bunch of fake moon rocks, or the rockets shot up didn’t really go anywhere. It’s all a big ruse. The thought 400,000 people have managed to keep their mouths shut is definitely the more romantic perspective.
NASA just keeps sticking to this story that they sent people to the moon. In fact, they just keep on producing more of their “evidence”. They recently published high resolution images of the surface of the Moon captured by their own Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter.
According to NASA the astronauts placed retro-reflectors during their missions which reflect light directly back to Earth. Apparently these can be used this to calculate the distance to the Moon with 1 cm accuracy. So, if you want to confirm that humans went to the Moon for yourself, you could just point a high-power laser at the landing sites. Sure, there are many large independent institutions which have verified the existence of these retro-reflectors, but who knows, maybe they’re some how pawns of our silent and vigilant 400,000 co-conspirators.
THE FIVE FACTS THAT PROVE NASA GOT TO THE MOON AND BACK
The Soviets did not dispute it.
At the height of the Cold War, winning the space race represented a massive feather in the ideological cap of the anti-Communists. As such, if there had been any way to discredit the United States, you can be sure the Soviet Union would have found it. The political damage they could have wrought would have been enormous had they been able to discredit the moon landings. Given that the Soviets were still suffering from the embarrassing climb-down of the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962, any opportunity that would have allowed them to embarrass the United States would surely have been grasped with both hands. The fact that in the 40 years since that momentous occasion in human history, not one person from the Soviet camp has produced evidence to dispute the veracity of the moon landings, is as telling as any other evidence you care to name. It has been suggested that the Soviets were in on the hoax; this is too ludicrous for words, especially in an era when tensions between the two countries were so high. It is suggesting complicity in something which would be immensely damaging to their own regime, and that’s simply absurd. Forget the arguments; the deafening silence from the Soviet camp is as incontrovertible as any other evidence.
The number of photographs
It seems obvious to the point of absurdity, but the sheer number of photographs — none of which show anything terrestrial — is pretty compelling evidence. Much has been said about light sources, errant shadows and so forth, but this is all based on how light behaves in Earth’s atmosphere. The moon has no atmosphere to speak of, and so refraction and reflection will be slightly different. The Lunar Module was covered in reflective paneling, and so would have had a major effect on the way light was reflected onto the surface. Undulations in the moon’s surface would also have an effect on shading. The lack of stars has also been cited as proof, but the cameras were set to daylight exposure and would not have picked up the stars anyway. We should also consider the fact that the astronauts — who were extremely well trained photographers by the time of the mission — were there to photograph the moon, not the view of the stars from the moon’s surface. The sheer number of photographs which were taken, and the absence of anything more than weak circumstantial evidence, is a strong argument.
Rock samples are universally acknowledged as being non-terrestrial
The Apollo Program, between Missions 11 and 17, collected some 382 kilograms of moon rocks, which were brought back to Earth for analysis. Every scientist who has studied these rocks has accepted that they are of non-terrestrial origin and there is no peer-reviewed article that contradicts the claim they are from the moon. Moon rocks have a very specific geological composition which is distinct from both rocks on Earth and other celestial bodies, such as meteorites. Accusations that these samples could have come from lunar meteorites are specious; the first lunar meteorite was not discovered until the 1980s, and up until now, only 30 kilograms of lunar meteorite rock have been discovered — less than ten percent of the mass that was brought back from the moon. Added to this is the fact that lunar rocks are not subjected to the same geological processes as those on Earth, and the rocks brought home were found to be in excess of 600,000,000 years older than the oldest known rocks on Earth. If you need any more evidence, the composition of those lunar rocks is identical to Soviet samples. Had there actually been a difference, you can be sure the Soviets would have pointed it out.
No one on the inside disputed it
It is interesting to note that out of all the people who have claimed the moon landings were faked, not one of them had any direct involvement with the program. As Dr. James Longuski, a professor of Aeronautics and Astronautic Engineering has pointed out, the sheer scale of the project would have made it impossible to keep everybody quiet. Over the course of the Apollo project, he estimates that over 400,000 people, or the equivalent of a small city, were involved in working on the project. The odds of every single one of them choosing to keep silent for over forty years, and not producing any evidence, or a memoir, or an overheard conversation suggesting the landings were faked, is another hugely compelling argument. There is so much money to be made by the person who definitively proves the Moon landings were faked, that someone would surely by now have tried to capitalize on that. The fact that no one has suggests that there is no hoax.
It happened again and again and again
As Charlie Duke, an astronaut on the Apollo 16 mission said, “We have been to the Moon nine times. Why would we fake it nine times, if we faked it?” It is a pertinent question and it does seem that if you are going to tell a lie, it is far easier to do it once and then stop, than to keep exaggerating the lie over the course of the next few years. Sooner or later somebody would have made a mistake to give the game away. The fact that nobody did, again, illustrates the fact that indeed, these astronauts did make it to the moon. With six separate Apollo missions actually reaching the Moon, and each time making multiple moonwalks, it seems a ridiculously elaborate hoax, at a cost of millions, if not billions of dollars to perpetrate.
While the moon landings were incredibly difficult and dangerous, the evidence we have presented here offers a convincing argument of the truth behind the matter. While ridiculously elaborate and misguided conspiracy theories add a frisson of mystery, they should never be allowed to diminish what was an incredible achievement by the United States Of America.
===================================================================I To add more credence to the moon landings I have included the below transcripts from astronauts on the moon. These transcripts do however, introduce the reader to another equally controversial subject, What some would say is “Proof of EBE existence.”
A bizarre proof of landing
The following are excerpts of conversations from Apollo Astronauts on the Moon to Mission Control – which show that the Astronauts came across some strange and hard-to-explain structures and unusual sightings of unidentified craft – whilst on the surface of the Moon
Dr Farouk El Baz, one of NASA’s foremost scientists, confirmed public suspicions when he stated ‘not every discovery has been announced to the public’. Is this the understatement of the millennium? Why is it that relatively few people have been allowed total access to the massive NASA archives (photographs which are supposedly in the public domain).
Instead we have to make do with the two or three dozen ‘reproductions’ that appear in the ‘official’ textbooks, despite literally millions of photographic images obtained by NASA. Something is seriously amiss.
Also the original photographs are huge (32″x24″) so by the time they have been reduced to fit the pages of a regular book the clarity and quality reduced by the copying process make most of the images pretty meaningless. In many cases, researchers are left with little more than ‘smudges’ and ‘blurs’.
Even so, despite all these obstacles, there is still hard evidence when these photographs are scrutinized under the proverbial – and literal – microscope, that points to the fact that virtually everything NASA has told us about the Moon is a lie.
The REAL NASA MOON PHOTOS, for example show all kinds of structures, seemingly both old and new, such as domes, pipelines, and even pyramids. So why aren’t these photos in the public domain? You can see in several of NASA’s film footage, the American flag ‘flapping in the wind’ and yet the Moon according to NASA has no atmosphere, because it is a vacuum! One film clearly shows a desperate astronaut trying his level best to hold the flag still!
We are also told that the famous Neil Armstrong ‘footprints’ will remain etched on the Moon’s surface forever. We are told this precisely because the Moon’s ‘atmosphere’ is a vacuum. The laws of physics demand that dust becomes hardened and will compress in a ‘vacuum’ therefore ensuring the ‘footprints’ remain undisturbed. And yet great plumes of dust can be seen spewing forth from underneath the ‘Moon Buggy’ as it travels across the lunar surface. Is this ‘vacuum theory’ some kind of wild hoax by NASA?
Another NASA cover-up are the small cloud formations that have been photographed above the Moon, again in a vacuum?. And while were on the subject of clouds what about the ONE HUNDRED MILE WIDE CLOUD OF VAPOR that was detected by NASA’s own instruments. This embarrassing ‘anomaly’ was promptly dismissed by NASA scientists as being the result of the considerable volume of urine ejected by the Apollo Mission astronauts! What were they drinking?!
For decades strange ‘lights’ and artificial seeming structures have been observed and recorded on the Moon by amateur astronomers. Science writer Joseph Goodavage observed that over two hundred white ‘dome shaped’ structures had been seen and catalogued, only for them often to vanish and reappear somewhere else?. There are even color photos from the Apollo 8 missions that clearly show evidence of green vegetation on the lunar hills.
These unusual findings, when added together with the anomalies which Richard Hoagland has shown to exist on Apollo Moon photographs, provide compelling evidence for an ongoing NASA cover-up of what the Apollo Astronauts really discovered on the Moon from 1969 to 1972.
The following Apollo Astronaut conversations were mostly taken from the out-of-print book “Our Mysterious Spaceship Moon” by Don Wilson
Apollo 16 Mission: April 16 – 27, 1972
Charles Duke, Thomas Mattingly and John Young land in the Descartes highlands:
Duke: These devices are unbelievable. I’m not taking a gnomon up there.
Young: O.K., but man, that’s going to be a steep bridge to climb.
Duke: You got – YOWEE! Man – John, I tell you this is some sight here. Tony, the blocks in Buster are covered – the bottom is covered with blocks, five meters across. Besides the blocks seem to be in a preferred orientation, northeast to southwest. They go all the way up the wall on those two sides and on the other side you can only barely see the out-cropping at about 5 percent. Ninety percent of the bottom is covered with blocks that are 50 centimeters and larger.
Capcom: Good show. Sounds like a secondary …
Duke: Right out here … the blue one that I described from the lunar module window is colored because it is glass coated, but underneath the glass it is crystalline … the same texture as the Genesis Rock … Dead on my mark.
Young: Mark. It’s open.
Duke: I can’t believe it!
Young: And I put that beauty in dry!
Capcom: Dover. Dover. We’ll start EVA-2 immediately.
Duke: You’d better send a couple more guys up here. They’ll have to try (garble).
Capcom: Sounds familiar.
Duke: Boy, I tell you, these EMUs and PLSSs are really super- fantastic!
It is obvious that the astronauts are talking in code – meant to disguise what they are referring to. The big question is why the excited cries? Can this be *merely* due to the collecting of Moon rocks, as they would have us believe? Or did they find something much more substantial, which was not meant for public knowledge?
Apollo 16: Describing Domes and Tunnels on the Moon
Duke: We felt it under our feet. It’s a soft spot. Firmer. Where we stand, I tell you one thing. If this place had air, it’d sure be beautiful. It’s beautiful with or without air. The scenery up on top of Stone Mountain, you’d have to be there to see this to believe it – those domes are incredible!
Mission Control: O.K., could you take a look at that smokey area there and see what you can see on the face?
Duke: Beyond the domes, the structure goes almost into the ravine that I described and one goes to the top. In the northeast wall of the ravine you can’t see the delineation. To the northeast there are tunnels, to the north they are dipping east to about 30 degrees.
Eugene Cernan, Ronald Evans, and Harrison Schmidt; Landed in the Taurus-Littrow Valley; Dec 7 – 19, 1972. Check out the following weird conversation that took place:
Mission Control: Go ahead, Ron
Evans: O.K., Robert, I guess the big thing I want to report from the back side is that I took another look at the – the – cloverleaf in Aitken with the binocs. And that southern dome (garble) to the east.
Mission Control: We copy that, Ron. Is there any difference in the color of the dome and the Mare Aitken there?
Evans: Yes there is… That Condor, Condorsey, or Condorecet or whatever you want to call it there. Condorecet Hotel is the one that has got the diamond shaped fill down in the uh – floor.
Mission Control: Robert. Understand. Condorcet Hotel.
Evans: Condor. Condorset. Alpha. They’ve either caught a landslide on it or it’s got a – and it doesn’t look like (garble) in the other side of the wall in the northwest side.
Mission Control: O.K., we copy that Northwest wall of Condorcet A.
Evans: The area is oval or elliptical in shape. Of course, the ellipse is toward the top.
Again we have another example of code being used to disguise what has been found. For example, “Condorset Hotel”. Why the codes, if there are no secrets being discussed.
Why not explain to the American people openly what is going on? After all, they have paid for the mission.
“Although NASA has always held that the findings of lunar and space expeditions have never been held secret, it is interesting to note that Dr. Farouk El Baz, one of NASA‘s foremost scientists, does admit ‘not every discovery has been announced’.”
Another strange Apollo 16 “ground-to-air” conversation
Capcom: What about the albedo change in the subsurface soil? Of course you saw it first at Flagg and were probably more excited about it there. Was there any difference in it there – and Buster and Alsep and LM?
Duke: No. Around the Alsep it was just in spots. At Plum it seemed to be everywhere. My predominant impression was that the white albedo was (garble) than the fine cover on top.
Capcom: O.K. Just a question for you, John. When you got halfway, or even thought it was halfway, we understand you looped around south, is that right?
Young: That is affirm. We came upon – Barbara.
Wilson writes (p.140): “Joseph H. Goodavage, whom included this conversation in a Saga magazine article, comments: “Barbara? That really needs some explanation, so I made an appointment with NASA geologist Farouk El Baz at National Aeronautics and Space Museum. Here’s how part of our conversation went:
Saga: What do you suppose Young meant when he said they came upon “Barbara“?
El Baz: I can’t really say. Code perhaps …
Saga: But Barbara is an odd name for something on the Moon, isn’t it?
El Baz: Yes, an enigma. As I suggested, perhaps a code, but I don’t really know.”
Apollo 17 conversation
They find something startling, and are ordered to immediately switch to code DMP (lunar module pilot): What are you learning?
Capcom: Hot spots on the Moon, Jack?
DMP: Where are your big anomalies? Can you summarize them quickly?
Capcom: Jack, we’ll get that for you on the next pass.
CMP (command module pilot): Hey, I can see a bright spot down there on the landing site where they might have blown off some of that halo stuff.
Capcom: Roger. Interesting. Very – go to KILO. KILO.
CMP: Hey, it’s gray now and the number one extends.
Capcom: Roger. We got it. And we copy that it’s all on the way down there. Go to KILO. KILO on that.
CMP: Mode is going to HM. Recorder is off. Lose a little communication there, huh? Okay, there’s bravo. Bravo, select OMNI. Hey, you know you’ll never believe it. I’m right over the edge of Orientale. I just looked down and saw the light flash again.
Capcom: Roger. Understand.
CMP: Right at the end of the rille.
Capcom: Any chances of – ?
CMP: That’s on the east of Orientale.
Capcom: You don’t suppose it could be Vostok? (a Russian probe).
Wilson writes (p. 141):
“The Vostok flights took place in the early sixties and were *strictly Earth orbiters*. They never reached the Moon!“
Apollo 16: Another strange conversation
Wilson writes “While on the Moon, did any of our astronauts see any indication of alien handiwork, such as strange constructions, disturbances or the like? Consider this strange Apollo 16 conversation:”
Orion: Orion has landed. I can’t see how fat the (garble) … this is a blocked field we’re in from the south ray – tremendous difference in the albedo. I just get the feeling that these rocks may have come from somewhere else. Everywhere we saw the ground, which is about the whole sunlit side, you had the same delineation the Apollo 15 photography showed on Hadley, Delta and Radley Mountains …
Capcom: O.K. Go ahead.
Orion: I’m looking out here at Stone Mountain and it’s got – it looks like somebody has been out there plowing across the side of it. The beaches – the benches – look like one sort of terrace after another, right up the side. They sort of follow the contour of it right around.
Capcom: Any difference in the terraces?
Orion: No, Tony. Not that I could tell form here. These terraces could be raised but of (garble) or something like that …
Casper: (Mattingly in lunar orbit overhead): Another strange sight over here. It looks – a flashing light – I think it’s Annbell. Another crater here looks as though it’s flooded except that this same material seems to run up on the outside. You can see a definite patch of this stuff that’s run down inside. And that material lays or has been structured on top of it, but it lays on top of things that are outside and higher. It’s a very strange operation.
Wilson writes (p.142):
“And we might add that this is a very strange conversation. What are the real meanings of such terms used here as structure, blocked field, beaches, benches, terraces and the like? NASA claims that they are just metaphoric terms to describe unusual natural formations.”
Strange Apollo 17 conversation about “Watermarks” on the Moon
Capcom: Roger, America, we’re tracking you on the map here, watching it.
LMP: O.K. Al Buruni has got variations on its floor. Variations in the lights and its albedo. It almost looks like a pattern as if the water were flowing up on a beach. Not in great areas, but in small areas around the southern side, and the part that looks like the water-washing pattern is a much lighter albedo, although I cannot see any real source of it. The texture, however, looks the same.
Capcom: America, Houston. We’d like you to hold off switching to OMNI Charlie until we can cue you on that.
LMP: Was there any indication on the seismometers on the impact about the time I saw a bright flash on the surface?
Capcom: Stand by. We’ll check on that, Jack.
LMP: A UFO perhaps, don’t worry about it. I thought somebody was looking at it. It could have been one of the other flashes of light.
Capcom: Roger. We copies the time and …
LMP: I have the place marked.
Capcom: Pass it on to the back room.
LMP: O.K. I’ve marked it on the map, too.
Capcom: Jack, just some words from the back room for you. There may have been an impact at the time you called, but the Moon is still ringing from the impact of the S-IVB impact. So it would mask any other impact. So they may be able to strip it out at another time, but right now they don’t see anything at the time you called.
LMP: Just my luck. Just looking at the southern edge of Grimaldi, Bob, and – that Graben is pre-Mare. Pre-Mare!
Capcom: O.K., I copy on that, Jack. And as long as we’re talking about Grimaldi we’d like to have you brief Ron exactly on the location of that flashing light you saw … We’ll probably ask him to take a picture of it. Maybe during one of his solo periods.
Notice that the Capcom reiterates that it was a *flashing* light. It was therefore *no* meteor impact that they were witnessing. Notice also that the Lunar Command Pilot specifically mentions the word “UFO“.
Wilson writes (p. 60):
“This last conversation makes it obvious that both our astronauts and NASA do not take these sightings of light or UFOs lightly. Maps were marked and photographs were taken at the sites of these occurrences.”
While the Apollo 17 astronauts were discussing the “Watermarks”, the sighting of the UFO occurred. The conversation then returns to the Watermarks.
DMP: O.K. 96:03. Now we’re getting some clear – looks like pretty clear high watermarks on this – CMP. There’s high watermarks all over the place there.
LMP: On the north part of Tranquillitatis. That’s Maraldi there, isn’t it? Are you sure we’re 13 miles up?
Capcom: You’re 14 to be exact, Ron.
LMP: I tell you there’s some mare, ride or scarps that are very, very sinuous – just passing one. They not only cross the low planar areas but go right up the side of a crater in one place and a hill in another. It looks very much like a constructional ridge – a mare-like ridge that is clearly *as constructional as I would want to see it*.”
Apollo 15 – Appenine Mountains of the Moon
David Scott, Alfred Worden, James Irwin; went to the Appenine Mountains of the Moon, July 26 – Aug. 7, 1971. Conversation about discovering strange “tracks“:
Scott: Arrowhead really runs east to west.
Mission Control: Roger, we copy.
Irwin: Tracks here as we go down slope.
MC: Just follow the tracks, huh?
Irwin: Right we’re (garble). We know that’s a fairly good run. We’re bearing 320, hitting range for 413 … I can’t get over those lineations, that layering on Mt. Hadley.
Scott: I can’t either. That’s really spectacular.
Irwin: They sure look beautiful.
Scott: Talk about organization!
Irwin: That’s the most *organized structure I’ve ever seen*!
Scott: It’s (garble) so uniform in width.
Irwin: Nothing we’ve seen before this has shown such uniform thickness from the top of the tracks to the bottom.
Wilson writes: (p. 145):
“What are these tracks? Who made them? Where did they come from? Does NASA have an answer for the people?”
Another weird conversation about tracks
Made by Harrison Schmitt, a trained geologist and the only civilian ever to walk on the Moon (all the rest were military men, or as Hoagland would say – “good soldiers”, who did what they were told).
Schmitt: I see tracks – running right up the wall of the crater.
Mission Control (Gene Cernan): Your photopath runs directly between Pierce and Pease. Pierce Brava, go to Bravo, Whiskey, Whiskey, Romeo.
Wilson writes (p. 145):
“If this is not code, what is it? And why switch to the use of strange meaningless “code” words if NASA was not trying to cover up something startling, something that needed to be hidden from the public? In fact, science writer Joseph Goodavage maintains that “whenever something was discovered, the astronauts and CAPCOM apparently switched to a prearranged code, sometimes even on an alternate publicly unmonitorable channel.
NASA scientist Farouk El Baz admitted in a magazine interview that NASA did commit itself to a secretive search for various things on the Moon. ‘We’re looking for something – something …’ He admitted that ‘a huge bridge-like structure in Mare Crisium has been reported … That is all I can say about it.’ When asked if ‘that was a bridge – that you’ve actually found artificial structures or some kind of intelligently placed artifact?’
El Baz quickly denied it. ‘No. No. I am not admitting such a thing. But when you start to think about it, almost anything is possible. There are almost no limits [to] how you can interpret the many things astronomers have been observing and reporting for several centuries. Now the astronauts are seeing many anomalies close up’.”
Apollo 15 – sees white objects Astronaut sees white objects flying by.
Capcom: You talked about something mysterious …
Orion: O.K., Gordy, when we pitched around, I’d like to tell you about something we saw around the LM (LEM or Lunar Excursion Module). When we were coming about 30 or 40 feet out, there were a lot of objects – white things – flying by. It looked as if they were being propelled or ejected, but I’m not convinced of that.
Capcom: We copy that Charlie.
Wilson writes (p. 54):
“What could these mysterious flying objects have been? … Can this be considered another UFO sighting? What did the astronaut mean when he reported that these peculiar ‘white things’ were *perhaps* ‘being propelled or ejected‘? And by whom?”
Apollo 11 – “I say that there were other spaceships!”
Apollo 11, with Neil Armstrong, Michael Collins and Edwin Aldrin was the first Apollo flight to land on the Moon, on July 20, 1969. While Collins flew in orbit around the Moon in the command module, Armstrong and Aldrin descended in the lunar module, landing in the Sea of Tranquillity at 4:17 P.M.
According to hitherto un-confirmed reports, both Neil Armstrong and Edwin “Buzz” Aldrin saw UFOs shortly after that historic landing on the Moon in Apollo 11 on 21 July 1969.
I remember hearing one of the astronauts refer to a “light” in or on a crater during the television transmission, followed by a request from mission control for further information. Nothing more was heard.
The following astonishing conversation was picked up by ham radio operators that had their own VHF receiving facilities that bypassed NASA’s broadcasting outlets.
At this time, the live television broadcast was interrupted for two minutes due to a supposed “overheated camera”, but the transmission below was received loud and clear by hundreds of ham radio operators.
According to Otto Binder, who was a member of the NASA space team, when the two moon-walkers, Aldrin and Armstrong were making their rounds some distance from the LEM, Armstrong clutched Aldrin’s arm excitedly and exclaimed:
Armstrong: What was it? What the hell was it? That’s all I want to know!”
Mission Control: What’s there?… malfunction (garble) … Mission Control calling Apollo 11…
Apollo 11: These babies were huge, sir!… Enormous!… Oh, God! You wouldn’t believe it! … I’m telling you there are other space-craft out there … lined up on the far side of the crater edge! … They’re on the Moon watching us!
Wilson writes (p. 48):
“Binder ends his report with this observation: ‘There has, understandably, been no confirmation of this incredible report by NASA or any authorities. WE cannot vouch for its authenticity, but if true, one can surmise that mission control went into a dither and then into a huddle, after which they sternly [ordered] the moonwalkers to ‘forget’ what they saw and carry on casually and calmly as if nothing had happened. After all, an estimated 600 million people around the world were hanging on every word spoken by the first two men to leave footprints on the Moon.”
The book “Celestial Raise” by Richard Watson and ASSK [P.O. Box 35 Mt. Shasta CA. 96067 (916)-926-2316); 1987; page 147-148] records the following (continuation?) of the above remarkable dialogue of Apollo 11, which was picked up by hundreds of ham radio operators in the USA:
During the transmission of the Moon landing of Armstrong and Aldrin, who journeyed to the Moon in an American spaceship, two minutes of silence occurred in which the image and sound were interrupted. NASA insisted that this problem was the result of one of the television cameras which had overheated, thus interfering with the reception.
This unexpected problem surprised even the most qualified of viewers who were unable to explain how in such a costly project, one of the most essential elements could break down… Some time after the historic Moon landing, Christopher Craft, director of the base in Houston, made some surprising comments when he left NASA.
The contents of these comments, which is included in the conversations [below], has been corroborated by hundreds of amateur radio operators who had connected their stations to the same frequency through which the astronauts transmitted. During the two minute interruption – which was not as it seemed, NASA, Armstrong and Aldrin with Cape Kennedy, censored both image and sound. ‘I say that there were other spaceships.’
Here is reproduced completely the dialogue between the American astronauts and Control Center:
Armstrong & Aldrin: Those are giant things. No, no, no – this is not an optical illusion. No one is going to believe this!
Houston (Christopher Craft): What … what … what? What the hell is happening? What’s wrong with you?
Armstrong & Aldrin: They’re here under the surface.
Houston: What’s there? (muffled noise) Emission interrupted; interference control calling ‘Apollo 11’.
Armstrong & Aldrin: We saw some visitors. They were here for a while, observing the instruments.
Houston: Repeat your last information!
Armstrong & Aldrin: I say that there were other spaceships. They’re lined up in the other side of the crater!
Houston: Repeat, repeat!
Armstrong & Aldrin: Let us sound this orbita … in 625 to 5 … Automatic relay connected … My hands are shaking so badly I can’t do anything. Film it? God, if these damned cameras have picked up anything – what then?
Houston: Have you picked up anything?
Armstrong & Aldrin: I didn’t have any film at hand. Three shots of the saucers or whatever they were that were ruining the film
Houston: Control, control here. Are you on your way? What is the uproar with the UFOs over?
Armstrong & Aldrin: They’ve landed here. There they are and they’re watching us.
Houston: The mirrors, the mirrors – have you set them up?
Armstrong & Aldrin: Yes, they’re in the right place. But whoever made those spaceships surely can come tomorrow and remove them. Over and out.
A certain professor, who wished to remain anonymous, was engaged in a discussion with Neil Armstrong during a NASA symposium.
Professor: What REALLY happened out there with Apollo 11?
Armstrong: It was incredible, of course we had always known there was a possibility – the fact is, we were warned off! There was never any question then of a space station or a moon city.
Professor: How do you mean “warned off”?
Armstrong: I can’t go into details, except to say that their ships were far superior to ours both in size and technology – Boy, were they big!…and menacing! No, there is no question of a space station.
Professor: But NASA had other missions after Apollo 11?
Armstrong: Naturally – NASA was committed at that time, and couldn’t risk panic on Earth. But it really was a quick scoop and back again.
According to a Dr. Vladimir Azhazha:
“Neil Armstrong relayed the message to Mission Control that two large, mysterious objects were watching them after having landed near the Moon module (LEM). But this message was never heard by the public – because NASA censored it.”
According to a Dr. Aleksandr Kasantsev, Buzz Aldrin took color movie film of the UFOs from inside the module, and continued filming them after he and Armstrong went outside.
Armstrong confirmed that the story was true but refused to go into further detail, beyond admitting that the CIA was behind the cover-up.
Cosmonaut Shadowed By Structured UFO
In April of 1979, Cosmonaut Victor Afanasyev lifted off from Star City to dock with the Soviet Solyut 6 space station. But while en route, something strange happened. Cosmonaut Afanasyev saw an unidentified object turn toward his craft and begin tailing it through space.
“It followed us during half of our orbit. We observed it on the light side, and when we entered the shadow side, it disappeared completely. It was an engineering structure, made from some type of metal, approximately 40 meters long with inner hulls. The object was narrow here and wider here, and inside there were openings. Some places had projections like small wings. The object stayed very close to us. We photographed it, and our photos showed it to be 23 to 28 meters away.”
In addition to photographing the UFO, Afanasyev continually reported back to Mission Control about the craft’s size, its shape and position. When the cosmonaut returned to earth he was debriefed and told never to reveal what he knew, and had his cameras and film confiscated.
Those photos and his voice transmissions from space have never been released. It is only now, with the collapse of the Soviet Union that Afanasyev feels that he can safely tell his story. “It is still classified as a UFO because we have yet to identify the object.”
During the late 60’s and early 70’s, NASA’s Apollo Mission astronauts all experienced close encounters with ‘unidentified space vehicles‘. According to the first man on the Moon, Neil Armstrong, who took part in the Apollo 11 Mission, the reason why the US government changed their plans to build a ‘Moon City’ was because they were told to change those plans by unknown extraterrestrial voyagers… ‘The fact is we were warned off’ Armstrong told a NASA symposium. ‘There was never any question then of a space station or Moon City.’
According to a former NASA employee Otto Binder, unnamed radio hams with their own VHF receiving facilities that bypassed NASA’s broadcasting outlets picked up the following exchange:
‘Buzz’ Aldrin who was also with Armstrong on the Apollo 11 mission, was said to have taken color film footage of alien craft, Armstrong later confirmed that this footage had indeed been shot by Aldrin, only to be confiscated by the CIA on their return to Earth. Fearing for his wellbeing, Armstrong refused to go in further details, except to confirm that the CIA were behind an extensive cover-up campaign regarding the US space program and consequent encounters with UFOs. In 1979, former chief of NASA Communications, Maurice Chatelain, confirmed that Armstrong and Aldrin had encountered UFOs on the Moon. To this day Chatelain vehemently protests the truth of their accounts.
In December 1965, Gemini astronauts James Lovell and Frank Borman also saw a UFO during their second orbit of their record-breaking 14 day flight. Borman reported that he saw an unidentified spacecraft some distance from their capsule. Gemini Control, at Cape Kennedy told him that he was seeing the final stage of their own Titan booster rocket. Borman confirmed that he could see the booster rocket all right, but that he could also see something completely different.
During James Lovell’s flight on Gemini 7
Lovell: BOGEY AT 10 O’CLOCK HIGH. Cad
Capcom: This is Houston. Say again 7.
Lovell: SAID WE HAVE A BOGEY AT 10 O’CLOCK HIGH.
Capcom: Gemini 7, is that the booster or is that an actual sighting?
Lovell: WE HAVE SEVERAL…. ACTUAL SIGHTINGS.
Capcom: …Estimated distance or size?
Lovell: WE ALSO HAVE THE BOOSTER IN SIGHT…
‘The encounter was common knowledge at NASA,’ Chatelain said. ‘All Apollo and Gemini Flights were followed by space vehicles of extraterrestrial origin – or UFOs, if you prefer to call them that. Every time it occurred, the astronauts informed Mission Control, who ordered absolute silence‘. He added ‘I think Walter Schirra, aboard Mercury 8, was the first astronaut to use the code name ‘Santa Claus’ to indicate the presence of Ufos‘. But it was James Lovell, on board the Apollo 8 Command Module, who came out from behind the Moon and said, for everybody to hear ‘Please be informed that there is a Santa Claus!’ Even though this happened on Christmas Day, 1968, many people sensed a hidden meaning in those words.’
Chatelain also published an article in 1995 that confirmed that not only did the Apollo Moon Mission encounter UFOs, but that they also found ‘several mysterious geometric structures of unnatural origin on the Moon’.
Another former astronaut, Dr Brian O’Leary, who was speaking at a science conference in 1994 confirmed the cover-up.
THE PROOF “IT DIDN’T HAPPEN”
HOW DO WE KNOW THE MOON LANDING WAS FAKED?
The theory that the moon landings were hoaxed by the US government to assert their victory in the space race over Russia, is something which has grown in popularity over time.
Recent polls indicate that approximately 20% of Americans believe that the U.S. has never landed on the moon. After the Apollo missions ended in the seventies, why haven’t we ever been back? Only during the term of Richard Nixon did humanity ever land on the moon, and after Watergate most people wouldn’t put it past Tricky Dick to fake them to put America in good standing in the Cold War.
IT HAS TO BE NOTED, that 11 Apollo astronauts were mysteriously killed before making their missions, 3 had oxygen pumped into their test capsule until it exploded, 7 died in 6 separate plane crashes, and 1 died in a car crash, highly unlikely coincidence or did they not agree to fooling the world for a cold war gag.
Below is listed some of the proposed evidence to suggest that the moon landings were hoaxes. I tried to include NASA’s explanations to each entry to provide an objective perspective.
The Waving Flag
Conspiracy theorists have pointed out that when the first moon landing was shown on live television, viewers could clearly see the American flag waving and fluttering as Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin planted it. Photos of the landing also seem to show rippling in a breeze, such as the image above which clearly shows a fold in the flag. The obvious problem here is that there’s no air in the moon’s atmosphere, and therefore no wind to cause the flag to blow.
Countless explanations have been put forward to disprove this phenomenon as anything unusual: NASA claimed that the flag was stored in a thin tube and the rippled effect was caused by it being unfurled before being planted. Other explanations involve the ripples caused by the reaction force of the astronauts touching the aluminum pole, which is shown to shake in the video footage.
Lack of Impact Crater
The claim goes as follows: had NASA really landed us on the moon, there would be a blast crater underneath the lunar module to mark its landing. On any video footage or photograph of the landings, no crater is visible, almost as though the module was simply placed there. The surface of the moon is covered in fine lunar dust, and even this doesn’t seem to have been displaced in photographic evidence.
Much like the waving flag theory, however, the lack of an impact crater has a slew of potential explanations. NASA maintains that the module required significantly less thrust in the low-gravity conditions than it would have done on Earth. The surface of the moon itself is solid rock, so a blast crater probably wouldn’t be feasible anyway – in the same way that an aeroplane doesn’t leave a crater when it touches down on a concrete airstrip.
Multiple Light Sources
On the moon there is only one strong light source: the Sun. So it’s fair to suggest that all shadows should run parallel to one another. But this was not the case during the moon landing: videos and photographs clearly show that shadows fall in different directions. Conspiracy theorists suggest that this must mean multiple light sources are present -suggesting that the landing photos were taken on a film set.
In one shot (AS14-64-9089) studio-lighting representing the sun is seen reflecting off a black background, a photographic effect that couldn’t happen in the blackness of space, and could only reflect off a background (BUSTED)
NASA has attempted to blame uneven landscape on the strange shadows, with subtle bumps and hills on the moon’s surface causing the discrepancies. This explanation has been tossed out the window by some theorists; how could hills cause such large angular differences? In the image above the lunar module’s shadow clearly contradicts that of the rocks in the foreground at almost a 45 degree angle.
The Van Allen Radiation Belt
In order to reach the moon, astronauts had to pass through what is known as the Van Allen radiation belt. The belt is held in place by Earth’s magnetic field and stays perpetually in the same place. The Apollo missions to the moon marked the first ever attempts to transport living humans through the belt. Conspiracy theorists contend that the sheer levels of radiation would have cooked the astronauts en route to the moon, despite the layers of aluminum coating the interior and exterior of the spaceship.
NASA have countered this argument by emphasizing the short amount of time it took the astronauts to traverse the belt – meaning they received only very small doses of radiation.
The Unexplained Object
After photographs of the moon landings were released, theorists were quick to notice a mysterious object in the reflection of an astronaut’s helmet from the Apollo 12 mission. The object appears to be hanging from a rope or wire and has no reason to be there at all, leading some to suggest it is an overhead spotlight typically found in film studios.
The resemblance is questionable, given the poor quality of the photograph, but the mystery remains as to why something is being suspended in mid-air (or rather lack of air) on the moon. The lunar module in other photos appears to have no extension from it that matches the photo, so the object still remains totally unexplained.
Slow-Motion Walking and Hidden Cables
In order to support claims that the moon landings were shot in a studio, conspiracy theorists had to account for the apparent low-gravity conditions, which must have been mimicked by NASA. It has been suggested that if you take the moon landing footage and increase the speed of the film x2.5, the astronauts appear to be moving in Earth’s gravity. As for the astronaut’s impressive jump height, which would be impossible to perform in Earth’s gravity, hidden cables and wires have been suggested as giving the astronauts some extra height. In some screenshots outlines of alleged hidden cables can be seen
Lack of Stars
One compelling argument for the moon landing hoax is the total lack of stars in any of the photographic/video evidence. There are no clouds on the moon, so stars are perpetually visible and significantly brighter than what we see through the filter of Earth’s atmosphere.
The argument here is that NASA would have found it impossible to map out the exact locations of all stars for the hoax without being rumbled, and therefore left them out – intentionally falling back on an excuse that the quality of the photographs washes them out (an excuse they did actually give).
Some photographs are high-quality, however, and yet still no stars are shown. Certainly eerie, considering you can take pictures of stars from Earth in much lower quality and still see them.
The “C” Rock
One of the most famous photos from the moon landings shows a rock in the foreground, with what appears to be the letter “C” engraved into it. The letter appears to be almost perfectly symmetrical, meaning it is unlikely to be a natural occurrence. It has been suggested that the rock is simply a prop, with the “C” used as a marker by an alleged film crew. A set designer could have turned the rock the wrong way, accidentally exposing the marking to the camera.
NASA has given conflicting excuses for the letter, on the one hand blaming a photographic developer for adding the letter as a practical joke, while on the other hand saying that it may simply have been a stray hair which got tangled up somewhere in the developing process.
The Layered Cross-hairs
The cameras used by astronauts during the moon landings had a multitude of cross-hairs to aid with scaling and direction. These are imprinted over the top of all photographs. Some of the images, however, clearly show the cross-hairs behind objects in the scene, implying that photographs may have been edited or doctored after being taken. The photograph shown above is not an isolated occurrence. Many objects are shown to be in front of the cross-hairs, including the American flag in one picture and the lunar rover in another.
Conspiracy theorists have suggested NASA printed the man-made objects over a legitimate photograph of the moon to hoax the landings – although if they really planned on doing this, then why they used cross-hairs in the first place is a mystery.
The Duplicate Backdrop
The two photos from the Apollo 15 mission shown above clearly have identical backdrops, despite being officially listed by NASA as having been taken miles apart. One photo even shows the lunar module. When all photographs were taken the module had already landed, so how can it possibly be there for one photo and disappear in another? Well, if you’re a hardcore conspiracy theorist, it may seem viable that NASA simply used the same backdrop when filming different scenes of their moon landing videos.
NASA has suggested that since the moon is much smaller than Earth, horizons can appear significantly closer to the human eye. Despite this, to say that the two hills visible in the photographs are miles apart is incontrovertibly false.
It’s the Same Rocks & Mountains…Again…And Again
NASA has marked out the exact locations of the moon landing missions, showing how they have explored sites that are miles apart. With that in mind, why do the photos from the Apollo 15 mission show identical backdrops? NASA swears that these photos were taken in different locations, yet the photographic evidence clearly shows the same patterns of gently sloping hills and valleys. It’s almost like NASA were just getting sloppy by the time they hit the Apollo 15 mission. “Why bother creating new sets, we’ll just use the same ones repeatedly…Surely no one will notice.”
Buzz Aldrin in consecutive Apollo 11 photos changes from white gloves, to dark gray gloves, back to white gloves, and back to dark gray gloves
There is never a burn print under the lunar lander, nor is there any dust/dirt on the landing pod feet, as if it was just set down gently onto a stage
There are many pictures which show moon rovers with no wheel tracks in front or behind them (as though they were set down into place) even though there are many footprints all around
There are pictures of astronauts shown with footprints all around them, but no prints leading to or from where they are, as if they were lowered into place by wire
There are shots that appear out of sequence in the timetable given
There are shots which show camera cross-hairs being overlayed onto the original
Photo AS11-40-5922 close-up of the Apollo 11 Eagle is classic, looks uncannily like cardboard, construction paper, scotch tape and wires
In the 6 moon missions the total time on the moon amounted to 4834 minutes and the total number of photographs taken was 5771; this means they were taking an average of one photo every 50 seconds, covering vast distances, all while supposedly doing many other tasks, collecting rocks, planting flags, making repairs, driving moon rovers etc.
NASA made all networks record their feed for TV broadcast, so that’s why we only ever see the grainy recording of a recording on TV, and now NASA says they lost the original high-definition video and data telemetry tapes so they can never be verified
Blueprints and designs of certain machines are missing from both NASA and the companies which supposedly constructed them such as the Apollo Lunar Module and rover
Van Allen Belt, Russians could never get beyond because of intense radiation that recquires 4 feet of lead shielding too heavy to rocket into orbit; and in 1969-70 the Van Allen Belt was at it’s 11 year cycle peak radiation yet somehow American astronauts and their film was able to survive this without shielding
There are no stars in any of the moon pictures/video, just complete darkness; they couldn’t make a perfect model in a studio, even a planetarium layout can only be seen in absolute darkness, spotlighting from the “sun” would block out the “star” lighting; so they cover this by saying the sun is SO bright on the moon that the astronauts couldn’t remember seeing stars either
The moon walk is in half-speed slow-mo; if you speed it up x2 the astronauts are clearly in Earth gravity walking normally with long strides
The flag in many photos and videos is shown flapping in the wind on the supposedly atmosphere-less moon
Werner Von Braun took a NASA team to Antarctica in 1967 and was purported to be collecting “moon rocks.” Later Bill Kaysing (author of “We Never Went to the Moon: America’s Thirty Billion Dollar Swindle”) hired his private investigator friend Paul Jacobs to check with the head of the US Department of Geology in Washington and ask, “did you examine the Moon rocks, and did they come from the Moon?” The geologist simply laughed and insinuated that people high in the US government knew all about the cover-up.
The astronauts rarely give public interviews or take questions at speaking events and were very unconvincing on their first interview back from the moon
Buzz Aldrin punched Bart Sibrel who called him out on the hoax after he wouldn’t place his hand on the Bible and say he went to the moon
Buzz Aldrin Jr. (Apollo 11), Gordon Cooper Jr., (Mercury 9, Gemini 5), Donn Eisele (Apollo 7), John Glenn Jr., (Mercury 6), Virgil Grissom (Apollo 1&15, Mercury 5, Gemini 3), James Irwin (Apollo 15), Edgar Mitchell (Apollo 14), Walter Schirra Jr. (Apollo 7, Sigma 7, Gemini 6, Mercury 8), Thomas Stafford (Apollo 10&18, Gemini 7&9), and Paul Weitz (Skylab 2, Challenger), all these astronauts are Masons
The first director of NASA was Werner Von Braun one of hundreds of NAZI rocket scientists brought into America through the OSS Project Paperclip
Nazis and Masons are not the most historically trustworthy folks
Why didn’t NASA make some sort of light/flare display from the moon that people could see without their TVs to prove they were there?
Why no color video on Apollo 11 when we know the astronauts had a color camera with them?
Did you know…
Official NASA footage clearly shows an Apollo module taking off from the lunar surface, evidently minus any conventional propulsion system? What you see is a series of ‘bolts’ clamping the module to the Moon’s surface explode and the module simply floats up into space. Is this evidence of an antigravity propulsion in use by 1969? Or simply a computer-simulated take-off from Hollywood Studios?
The Stanley Kubrick Theory
This loose extension of the popular conspiracy theory states that acclaimed film director Stanley Kubrick was approached by the US government to hoax the first three moon landings. There are two main branches of this somewhat implausible theory: one group of believers maintain that Kubrick was approached after he released 2001: A Space Odyssey (released in 1968, one year before the first moon landing), after NASA came to appreciate the stunning realism of the film’s outer-space scenes at that time; another group contends that Kubrick was groomed by the government to film the moon landing long before this, and that 2001: A Space Odyssey was a staged practice run for him.
How come when the Moon gravity is one sixth of the Earth’s own gravitational pull? Even bearing in mind their heavy spacesuits which NASA claim weigh 185-190lbs, plus the astronauts weight, the total weight relative to Earth should have been 62 pounds or about four and a half stone.
Buzz Aldrin says in his book that he weighed only 60 pounds, if this is the case they should have been able to jump at least six feet, but as official film footage shows, the astronauts struggle to jump over eighteen inches!
According to the laws of physics, this simply doesn’t add up.