Tag Archives: Apollo

The Apollo Moon Hoax? Valid reasons to doubt NASA’s historic manned lunar landings

The famous photo of Buzz Aldrin standing in the spotlight is a giveaway in that he is being lit up in a spotlight from alleged sunlight while the ground around him is shrouded in darkness! How can the sun put a spotlight around a particular person like a stagehand pointing a spotlight on an actor or singer on stage?! This was obviously a major screw up, and NASA was reckless for thinking that no one would notice or that they could get away with it. In fact, it was such a blunder that NASA even tried to cover it up by brightening the rest of the surface in subsequent versions of it. Why would they do that if they had nothing to hide?

Here is the original version of it by NASA, which was released to newspapers in 1969:

http://grin.hq.nasa.gov/IMAGES/SMALL/GPN-2001-000013.jpg

Here is the edited version with the surface brightened up for the Lunar Surface Journal to hide the discrepancy:

http://history.nasa.gov/alsj/a11/AS11-40-5903HR.jpg

Apollo defenders can’t explain this at all, so they’ve resorted to deception by claiming that the edited version is the original. But Jarrah White proved unequivocally that the spotlight version is the original one by showing newspaper clippings from 1969 which showed that one in his YouTube video Moonfaker: Posing for Portrait. So again, why would NASA alter the photos if they had nothing to hide?

READ MORE

Was The Movie Interstellar a backhanded admission of the Moon Hoax?

By Admin
February 05, 2015
nasamoonhoax.com

Interstellar, a horrible piece of drek from Christopher Nolan, makes an allusion to the Apollo moon missions being faked.  But it is done in a very backhanded way.  View the following video and listen to the audio of the scene:

First of all, I couldn’t disagree more that this was a good movie.  It was HORRIBLE!  The following review captures my feelings well:

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

It is beyond me how people can claim the movie to be ‘brainy’, ‘intelligent’, ‘well written’… With all the things I read about the movie prior to seeing it makes it the biggest disappointment I’ve experienced from cinema in years. I give 1 star to bring balance to the current rating, in reality this movie is of course not that bad.

The whole idea behind the plot is that McConaughey ended up in this blackhole where 5 dimensions were compressed into 3 dimensions and stuff, and where he was able to manipulate gravity by sending his daughter the message which was imperative for saving humanity. So what in fact happened is through this ridiculously improbable chain of events McConaughey ended up inside this blackhole. All this was apparently the result of a bigger plan all along. Was there really no easier way for (future humans/aliens) to transmit this data, and if they built this time-space warping machine inside the blackhole – means they had access to the data all along? And also means they chose McConaughey daughter on purpose? So I don’t understand, what was this purpose? Could they not have connected their portal to professor’s office a long time ago, or go for one of the ten billion more rational alternatives?

On a side note: is it not funny how McConaughey ignored the message NOT TO GO from the same ‘ghost’ yet followed the rest of the directions? While in the end of the movie he idiotically repeats his feeble attempt. Had he added ‘it’s you dad’ or any other sensible hint he would have saved his daughter years of suffering (and maybe a lifetime for himself when he realises this). And I don’t even want to get into how ridiculous it is that he transmitted data by moving the hands on the watch, which was unaffected after being picked up, meaning it was hardly gravitational manipulation was it? What was the point of trying to be scientific and trying to explain it in this way then. If he could do that, he ought to have found a better solution that did not require his daughter 25 years to figure out.

And anyway, they saved humanity by building this massive station named after his daughter (by that time they knew what he went through and they still named it after her?). Why couldn’t they have done the same thing on Earth? Just build the same g*ddamn station on Earth without needing to harvest their gravitational energy bullsh*t, bam, humanity saved in the same way.

Grand ideas don’t make great movies if you can’t deliver them properly… It is atrocity to compare this to Kubrick’s masterpiece…

READ MORE

Back to the scene.  If you listen carefully, they didn’t say that the moon landings were faked, but that they had to say that they were faked for the purpose of bankrupting the Soviet Union.  In other words, we really went there, but we can’t admit it anymore because it gives people a false hope.  Do you see how devious and evil these people are?

NO, WE NEVER WENT THERE!

Back To My Roots: NASA And Their FAKE Apollo Moon Missions – By Marcus Allen

northerntruthseeker.blogspot.com / Friday, February 14, 2014

It is now just over 35 years since I was first told outright that all of NASA’s Apollo manned moon missions were faked…. At that time, as a 19 year old bright yet brash University student who had at the time so much faith in the “system” and never doubted anything written in our “history” books as well as what was told by our governments and media, it was an eye opener and probably the turning point in my entire life…. It did not take me long after that original revelation to deduce that the entire Apollo program was fake, and that man could not land on the moon for a myriad of different reasons…. For the longest time after that point in 1979 I would tell people outright that Apollo was a fraud, and people would laugh in my face… Well, 35 years later, and after people just do some of their own research, not many are laughing any more!

I have been part of the growing number of so called “Apollo researchers” for a long time now, and have used this blog as an outlet for any material that shows the fraud of NASA’s Project Apollo in all of its glory… And right now, I want to present a most interesting video that was sent to me just a short while ago via email, and I want to present it right here for everyone to view for themselves.. It is a video presentation of Marcus Allen, editor of “Nexus” magazine, at the 5th British Exopolitics Expo, held at the University of Huddersfield in the United Kingdom on September 28th, 2013… In this video, that I have right here for everyone to view for themselves, Marcus Allen brings forward some very damning evidence of the fraudulence of the Apollo moon program…. I have my own thoughts and comments to follow:

READ MORE

Apollo Astronaut Was Murdered Charges Son Virgil I. “Gus” Grissom

NewsMax /  By Christopher Ruddy / 1999-Feb-11

Apollo Astronaut Was Murdered, Son Charges Virgil I. “Gus” Grissom, the astronaut slated to be the first man to walk on the moon, was murdered, his son has charged in the February 16 edition of STAR magazine.

In another stunning development, a lead NASA investigator has charged the agency engaged in a cover-up of the true cause of the catastrophe that killed Grissom and two other astronauts.

The tabloid exclusive by Steve Herz reports that Scott Grissom, 48, has gone public with the family’s long held belief that their father was purposefully killed during Apollo I.

The January 27, 1967, Apollo I mission was a simulated launch in preparation for an actual lunar flight.

NASA concluded the Apollo I deaths of Grissom, as well as astronauts Edward H. White and Roger Chafee, were the result of an explosive fire that enveloped the pure oxygen atmosphere of the space capsule. NASA investigators could not identify what caused the spark, but wrote the catastrophe off as an accident.

“My father’s death was no accident, he was murdered,” Grissom, a commercial pilot, told STAR.

Grissom said he recently was granted access to the charred capsule and discovered a “fabricated” metal plate located behind a control panel switch. The switch controlled the capsules’ electrical power source from an outside source to the ship’s batteries. Grissom argues that the placement of the metal plate was an act of sabotage. When the one of the astronauts toggled the switch to transfer power to the ship’s batteries, a spark was created igniting a fireball.

Clark Mac Donald, a McDonnell-Douglas engineer hired by NASA to investigate the fire, offered corroborating evidence. Breaking more than three decades of silence, Mac Donald alleges that he determined an electrical short caused by the change over to battery power had caused the fire.

He says that NASA destroyed his report and interview tapes in an effort to stem public criticism of the space program.

“I have agonized for 31 years about revealing the truth but I didn’t want to hurt NASA’s image or cause trouble,” Mac Donald told the paper. “But I can’t let one more day go by without the truth being known.”

Grissom’s widow, Betty, now 71, told STAR she agrees with her son’s claim that her husband had been murdered.

“I believe Scott has found the key piece of evidence to prove NASA knew all along what really happened but covered up to protect funding for the race to the moon.”

Scott Grissom told STAR the motive for his father’s killing may have been related to NASA’s desire not have his father be the first man to walk on the moon because of criticism leveled at Grissom in 1961 after his Gemini capsule, Liberty 7, sunk in the Atlantic.

Critics of Grissom, including novelist Tom Wolfe, have claimed Grissom panicked when his space capsule landed in the ocean, and he prematurely pulled an explosive charge to open the ship’s hatch, causing it to sink.

Fellow astronauts, however, gave Grissom the benefit of the doubt for several reasons. Grissom was a decorated Korean war pilot who had flown nearly 100 combat missions. He was a courageous man not known to panic.

There was also evidence that the explosive device on the hatch could accidentally blow without being pulled — a fact that led NASA to remove such devices from future spacecraft.

Also, had Grissom pulled the explosive release on the hatch, his hand or arm should have had powder and bruise marks. Neither were found.

Grissom, one of the original Mercury seven, was the senior astronaut when the Apollo missions began.

Among the astronauts, Grissom was the most critical of the problem-plagued Apollo program, and the main Apollo contractor, North American Aviation.

Shortly before his death, Grissom had taken a large lemon and hung it around the space capsule as the press looked on. He had suggested publicly that the project could never be accomplished on time.

The Associated Press reported, “`Pretty slim’ was the way [Grissom] put his Apollo’s chances of meeting its mission requirements.”

The Grissom family had reason to doubt the official NASA ruling from the beginning. Even before Apollo I, Grissom had received death threats which his family believed emanated from within the space program.

The threats were serious enough that he was put under Secret Service protection and had been moved from his home to a secure safe house.

According to his wife, Grissom had warned her that “if there is ever a serious accident in the space program, it’s likely to be me.”

The Apollo I disaster led to a series of Congressional hearings into the incident and NASA. During the hearings, one launch pad inspector, Thomas Baron, sharply criticized NASA’s handling of the incident and testified that the astronauts attempted to escape the capsule earlier than officially claimed.

Baron was fired soon after giving the testimony, and died, along with his wife, when his car was struck by a train. Authorities ruled the deaths as suicide.

During the Congressional hearings, Senator Walter Mondale questioned the efficacy of manned space programs. Manned space flights were opposed by many of the leading space scientists at the time, including Drs. James Van Allen and Thomas Gold.

Capricorn One

Percy and Bennet surmise that Capricorn One was an effort by Apollo whistleblowers to tell the truth about the space program.  It could well be, but we just don’t know.  It’s also possible that the writer Peter Hyams felt the moon landings were faked and wrote it without any input from whistleblowers.  Alternatively, he simply could have used the real world events to inspire his work of fiction.  There are some startling aspects of the movie, however.  Capricorn One has NASA (itself!) involved in a conspiracy to dupe the American people about a mission to Mars, passing off studio footage of actual Mars footage.  The primary difference between the events in the movie and the claimed real life Apollo hoax is that the movie’s destination was Mars.  More amazingly, NASA is portrayed as taking part in murders and elaborate cover-ups in order to maintain their deception.  I feel that no major release would ever portray NASA as a murderous agency today.

A particularly striking scene from the film was when the NASA video controllers manipulated the filmed simulation by running the tape in slow motion to make it look like they were influenced by gravity weaker than the Earth’s.  Aside from the detail that Mars’ gravity would not be so different from the Earth’s as to necessitate what looks like a 50% reduction in speed, this depiction is exactly what NASA seems to have done with the footage from the moon.

READ MORE

A Stereoscopic method of verifying Apollo lunar surface images

by OLEG OLEYNIK, Ph.D.c
Previously of the Department of Physics and Technology
Kharkov State University, Ukraine

Photographs taken on the lunar surface during the Apollo missions are regarded as the most compelling pieces of evidence that mankind went to the Moon.

The photographic validation method presented here is based on the detection of two-dimensional objects among three-dimensional objects, and determining the mutual arrangement of these objects in space and the distance to them by applying a technique known as stereoscopic parallax.

The word parallax derives from the Greek parallaxis meaning “alteration” where parallax is the difference in the apparent position of objects caused by shifting camera position. To achieve such a result, images are overlapped and are deducted/subtracted from each other using the function “difference” in an image processing application such as Photoshop®. Optical transformations are used when images are subtracted. During image convergence simple operations are applied: x and y axis scaling, rotation and distortion plus two additional processes: perspective and shift.

Such processes are referred to below as “optical transformations”.  Objects further than two kilometres distant, with a minor camera shift, have zero parallax.
Using Photoshop® the sequence of steps deployed is as follows:

  1. Two overlapping images are placed on different layers – thereby creating a PSD file.
  2. Application of function “difference” to the upper layer (subtraction of images from each other).
  3. Optical transformations are applied: axes x and y scaling, rotation, distortion, perspective and in addition a shift to the requirement specified above. As a result maximum density black for the background is obtained.
  4. The layer is returned to the normal view: function “normal”.
  5. The PSD file is pruned to remove non-overlapping parts.
  6. Sequentially, the converted layers are carried over into the application’s GIF animator.
  7. A stereoscopic GIF image is obtained that permits the creation of a 3D effect, even on a flat screen.

Stereo Wiggle
Fig. 1.  A stereoscopic image or ‘wiggle’ stereoscopy. GIF-animation allows the creation of a crude sense of dimensionality, even with monocular vision. Stereoscopic imagery can also determine the relative position of objects in space and enable judgment of their remoteness. Image Wikipedia

If any given image was taken inside a pavilion or dome with a panoramic background, i.e. when there are no distant objects with null parallax, then such a 2-dimensional object can be detected among any 3D bodies. In the case of such a finding, reaching the conclusion that there was deception could be stated with confidence.

READ MORE

A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Moon

Award winning filmmaker Bart Sibrel presents his highly acclaimed (and much hated) controversial documentary showcasing newly discovered behind-the-scenes out-takes from the first mission
to the moon, proving that the crew never left earth orbit.

Never before in all of recorded aviation has a flying machine worked on its first attempt, much less the most complicated one ever imagined, landing on another heavenly body on its maiden voyage, and returning roundtrip with a crew that lived to tell,
all with 1960’s technology. (More computing power is found today in a $10 watch.)

According to William Kaysing, a NASA contractor for Apollo,
a classified interdepartmental memo rated the odds of a successful and survivable manned lunar landing on its first attempt at one in ten thousand. That is why the returning men of the mission looked so dejected rather than triumphant at their press conference,
as they were blackmailed into lying about the alleged greatest accomplishment of mankind, to the detriment of their own souls.

The Faked Apollo Landings

http://www.ufos-aliens.co.uk/cosmicapollo.html

Here’s 33 things that need to be answered!

1) Sceptics argue that the lack of stars on Moon photographs is acceptable, despite zero atmosphere to obscure the view. Yuri Gagarin, pronounced the stars to be “astonishingly brilliant”. See the official NASA pictures above that I have reproduced that show ‘stars’ in the sky, as viewed from the lunar surface. And why exactly do you think there are hardly any stars visible on Apollo films taken from the Moon? The answers simple – Professional astronomers would quickly calculate that the configuration and distances of star formations were incorrect and so NASA had to remove them to make sure they could keep up the scam.

2) The pure oxygen atmosphere in the module would have melted the Hasselblad’s camera covering and produced poisonous gases. Why weren’t the astronauts affected?

3) There should have been a substantial crater blasted out under the LM’s 10,000 pound thrust rocket. Sceptics would have you believe that the engines only had the power to blow the dust from underneath the LM as it landed. If this is true, how did Armstrong create that famous boot print if all the dust had been blown away?

4) Sceptics claim that you cannot produce a flame in a vacuum because of the lack of oxygen. So how come I have footage on this page showing a flame coming from the exhaust of an Apollo lander? (Obviously the sceptics are wrong or the footage shows the lander working in an atmosphere)

5) Footprints are the result of weight displacing air or moisture from between particles of dirt, dust, or sand. The astronauts left distinct footprints all over the place.

6) The Apollo 11 TV pictures were lousy, yet the broadcast quality magically became fine on the five subsequent missions.

7) Why in most Apollo photos, is there a clear line of definition between the rough foreground and the smooth background?

8) Why did so many NASA Moonscape photos have non parallel shadows? sceptics will tell you because there is two sources of light on the Moon – the Sun and the Earth… That maybe the case, but the shadows would still fall in the same direction, not two or three different angles and Earth shine would have no effect during the bright lunar day (the time at which the Apollo was on the Moon).

9) Why did one of the stage prop rocks have a capital “C” on it and a ‘C’ on the ground in front of it?

10) How did the fibreglass whip antenna on the Gemini 6A capsule survive the tremendous heat of atmospheric re-entry?

11) In Ron Howard’s 1995 science fiction movie, Apollo 13, the astronauts lose electrical power and begin worrying about freezing to death. In reality, of course, the relentless bombardment of the Sun’s rays would rapidly have overheated the vehicle to lethal temperatures with no atmosphere into which to dump the heat build up.

12) Who would dare risk using the LM on the Moon when a simulated Moon landing was never tested?

13) Instead of being able to jump at least ten feet high in “one sixth” gravity, the highest jump was about nineteen inches.

14) Even though slow motion photography was able to give a fairly convincing appearance of very low gravity, it could not disguise the fact that the astronauts travelled no further between steps than they would have on Earth.

15) If the Rover buggy had actually been moving in one-sixth gravity, then it would have required a twenty foot width in order not to have flipped over on nearly every turn. The Rover had the same width as ordinary small cars.

16) An astrophysicist who has worked for NASA writes that it takes two meters of shielding to protect against medium solar flares and that heavy ones give out tens of thousands of rem in a few hours. Russian scientists calculated in 1959 that astronauts needed a shield of 4 feet of lead to protect them on the Moons surface. Why didn’t the astronauts on Apollo 14 and 16 die after exposure to this immense amount of radiation? And why are NASA only starting a project now to test the lunar radiation levels and what their effects would be on the human body if they have sent 12 men there already?

17) The fabric space suits had a crotch to shoulder zipper. There should have been fast leakage of air since even a pinhole deflates a tyre in short order.

18) The astronauts in these “pressurized” suits were easily able to bend their fingers, wrists, elbows, and knees at 5.2 p.s.i. and yet a boxer’s 4 p.s.i. speed bag is virtually unbendable. The guys would have looked like balloon men if the suits had actually been pressurized.

19) How did the astronauts leave the LEM? In the documentary ‘Paper Moon’ The host measures a replica of the LEM at The Space Centre in Houston, what he finds is that the ‘official’ measurements released by NASA are bogus and that the astronauts could not have got out of the LEM.

20) The water sourced air conditioner backpacks should have produced frequent explosive vapour discharges. They never did.

21) During the Apollo 14 flag setup ceremony, the flag would not stop fluttering.

22) With more than a two second signal transmission round trip, how did a camera pan upward to track the departure of the Apollo 16 LEM? Gus Grissom, before he got burned alive in the Apollo I disaster A few minutes before he was burned to death in the Apollo I tragedy, Gus Grissom said, ‘Hey, you guys in the control center, get with it. You expect me to go to the moon and you can’t even maintain telephonic communications over three miles.’ This statement says a lot about what Grissom thought about NASA’s progress in the great space race.

23) Why did NASA’s administrator resign just days before the first Apollo mission?

24) NASA launched the TETR-A satellite just months before the first lunar mission. The proclaimed purpose was to simulate transmissions coming from the moon so that the Houston ground crews (all those employees sitting behind computer screens at Mission Control) could “rehearse” the first moon landing. In other words, though NASA claimed that the satellite crashed shortly before the first lunar mission (a misinformation lie), its real purpose was to relay voice, fuel consumption, altitude, and telemetry data as if the transmissions were coming from an Apollo spacecraft as it neared the moon. Very few NASA employees knew the truth because they believed that the computer and television data they were receiving was the genuine article. Merely a hundred or so knew what was really going on; not tens of thousands as it might first appear.

25) In 1998, the Space Shuttle flew to one of its highest altitudes ever, three hundred and fifty miles, hundreds of miles below merely the beginning of the Van Allen Radiation Belts. Inside of their shielding, superior to that which the Apollo astronauts possessed, the shuttle astronauts reported being able to “see” the radiation with their eyes closed penetrating their shielding as well as the retinas of their closed eyes. For a dental x-ray on Earth which lasts 1/100th of a second we wear a 1/4 inch lead vest. Imagine what it would be like to endure several hours of radiation that you can see with your eyes closed from hundreds of miles away with 1/8 of an inch of aluminium shielding!

26) The Apollo 1 fire of January 27, 1967, killed what would have been the first crew to walk on the Moon just days after the commander, Gus Grissom, held an unapproved press conference complaining that they were at least ten years, not two, from reaching the Moon. The dead man’s own son, who is a seasoned pilot himself, has in his possession forensic evidence personally retrieved from the charred spacecraft (that the government has tried to destroy on two or more occasions). Gus Grissom was obviously trying to make a big statement as he placed a lemon in the window of the Apollo I spacecraft as it sat ready for launch!

27) CNN issued the following report, “The radiation belts surrounding Earth may be more dangerous for astronauts than previously believed (like when they supposedly went through them thirty years ago to reach the Moon.) The phenomenon known as the ‘Van Allen Belts’ can spawn (newly discovered) ‘Killer Electrons’ that can dramatically affect the astronauts’ health.”

28) In 1969 computer chips had not been invented. The maximum computer memory was 256k, and this was housed in a large air conditioned building. In 2002 a top of the range computer requires at least 64 Mb of memory to run a simulated Moon landing, and that does not include the memory required to take off again once landed. The alleged computer on board Apollo 11 had 32k of memory. That’s the equivalent of a simple calculator.

29) If debris from the Apollo missions was left on the Moon, then it would be visible today through a powerful telescope, however no such debris can be seen. The Clementine probe that recently mapped the Moons surface failed to show any Apollo artefacts left by Man during the missions. Where did the Moon Buggy and base of the LM go?

30) In the year 2005 NASA does not have the technology to land any man, or woman on the Moon, and return them safely to Earth.

31) Film evidence has recently been uncovered of a mis-labelled, unedited, behind-the-scenes video film, showing the crew of Apollo 11 staging part of their photography. The film evidence is shown in the video “A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Moon!”. and appears above in the ‘Why Did Apollo 11 Astronauts Lie About Being In Deep Space?’ section.

32) Why did the blueprints and plans for the Lunar Module and Moon Buggy get destroyed if this was one of History’s greatest accomplishments?

33) Why did NASA need to airbrush out anomalies from lunar footage of the Moon if they have nothing to hide? The Apollo mission was meticulously planned, yet there were still flaws in the plan which the public is being made aware of as time goes on. Unlike a simple game of bingo where nothing is planned and no strategy is involved the Apollo mission was thought out and at the time there seemed to be an answer to every question that arose. As times change and more research is being done on the mission the tables are beginning to turn and the public is starting to see the truth.

READ MORE