APOLLO HOAX mother of media fakery

[simonshack]

*


THE MOON HOAX : Is The Myth still alive - 44 years on?

Updated on: May, 15 - 2013

If you are one of those folks who still believes that men landed on the moon back in 1969, please take a little time reading this concise exposé as to why I do not believe so. I won't overwhelm you with data and details which you may have already come across perusing the many sites questioning the Apollo landings. I'll just keep it simple - while 'teasingly' proposing your brain to interact with a mostly photographic, logical, no-nonsense approach to this whole affair. So here we go.

Please explain and demonstrate with your best technical knowledge why Buzz Aldrin turned transparent as he allegedly was captured on film (by WHAT sort of 1969 camera - and remotely operated by WHOM and HOW?) as he descended from the 'lunar module' ladder. Here is the 'historical moment' for you to observe:

Buzz Aldrin - clearly not wearing a transparent spacesuit

Well, how many of you have seen the longer version of this clip? For some unfathomable reason, Buzz decides to jump UP again on the ladder. Then, at about 1min into the clip, we see a silhouette that must be meant to be Neil Armstrong emerging out of nowhere - aimlessly hopping around Buzz's back!


full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3CMlHmURHm0

Here's another 'transparently' fake film sequence.
Yes, it is exactly what NASA showed on TV in 1969:

source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RMINSD7MmT4

The questions I have, dear reader, are the following
- and I dearly hope you will share them with me:

1- Do MOST people believe in this?
2- Why does ANYONE believe in this?

This is an Ockham's Razor-type issue. If you can't tackle it due to limited photographic knowledge, that's ok - I will fill you in: as it is, there is simply no alternative description of this other than that what we see here is a poor celluloid film montage - the sort of which was used back then, way before Photoshop or any other slick digital imaging-software was available. Of course, you may question my competence in this field (remember, I wish to keep this article simple and free from technicalities). In this case, however, it is up to you to find any credible experts of your choice and submit them this simple, straightforward question: "WHY do these astronauts appear to be transparent?"

So please select any photographic/ cinematic expert of your choice. If this expert tells you it's a quite legit and authentic film clip, you will then have to process this 'expert explanation' (to a never-seen-before-phenomena)- and evaluate its credibility with your own brain. Yes, at the end of the day, it's all up to you. You are free to believe that the above images are real - although you might wonder why they are, objectively speaking, so very strange. It is your choice to believe in the reality of this Apollo 11 imagery - but your brain should tell you that this belief is nothing but a matter of faith - much like the blind, unquestioning faith that many cults and religions require from their followers.

This mother-of-all-media-hoaxes paved the way to what we have today: a continuous string of fraudulent TV imagery - designed to control and dumb down this planet's population. It is high time to understand this - unless we are to be completely led into dupe-land by the so-called "powers that be"(or as I like to call them, "The Nutwork"). It is high time for sharp and honest people to wake up to this simple fact: TELEVISION is the current Weapon of Mass Distraction. Switch it off now - and switch on your brains - if you haven't done so already. Better late than never, don't you think?

[simonshack]

*


OFFICIAL NASA PICTURES ONLY

The Moonhoax has been exposed a long time ago. Still however, many people still believe that the Apollo missions were real. So, unlike many other researches using dubious source material, let's now look at pictures easily found on the official NASA website (2009): http://www.nasa.gov/home/index.html

PLEASE KEEP IN MIND THAT ALL THE BELOW IMAGES WERE UNEXPLICABLY RELEASED IN THE 1990'S - OR LATER.

Here is the (in)famous "Moon Rover" in the middle of a moonscape. How did it get there without leaving wheelprints?


Here's another close-up view of the "Moon Rover":


Ok, so naysayers will say: "THE MOON-SAND WAS SO COMPACT THAT IT DIDN'T LEAVE ANY VISIBLE WHEEL/OR FOOTPRINT".

Well... NASA supposedly now has (since 2009) a "Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter(LRO)" circling the moon which is allegedly "mapping the moon surface". Here's what they claim: "The probe will make a 3-D map of the Moon's surface and has provided some of the first images of Apollo equipment left on the Moon."
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/LRO/m ... index.html

So, if 'astronaut footpaths' can be seen from this distance - why can't we see any "Moon Rover" wheelprints??

We then have the old lighting issues that many good brains have tried for decades to point out to the general public - a growing grassroot effort - yet clearly not a major threat to this day to the well-established, trillion-dollar NASA hoaxing enterprise and its unequalled propaganda structure :


This other NASA picture shows an "Astro-naught" with an American flag. All I have done here is a simple, gradual contrast change of this photograph. A strange shape is revealed in the background. Do I know what it is? No - but it simply proves beyond any shadow of doubt that this is a manipulated photograph.


But of course, you will STILL have friends and family members believing that we went to the moon. You may want to show them this official NASA picture of the APOLLO11 "Lunar Module" - as an amusing, social conversation piece. You may, for instance, simply ask them if this "THING" has the looks of any sort of serious, state-of-the-art spaceship:



Some will say: "OK, maybe APOLLO11 was faked to jump ahead of the Russians in the space race. But the successive APOLLO missions were REAL". That's when you will have to show them this gif loop comparing two images allegedly snapped during the very same "APOLLO15 mission":

When was the picture WITHOUT the Lunar Module taken? BEFORE or AFTER the Apollo15 visit to the moon?

And are you aware of the fact that NASA contends that these two videos actually show the REAL lift-offs of their Apollo 15 and 17 lunar modules? Can any sound mind, in this day and age, lend any credence to these laughable images - supposedly shot by a remotely controlled camera? (Note the "Apollo17" clip featuring both a zoom out and an upward panning.)

APOLLO 15 MISSION imagery:____________________APOLLO 17 MISSION imagery:


I don't know about you - but I laugh wholeheartedly everytime I watch these two clips. At the same time. I feel genuinely sorry for the people who keep believing in this utter farce - now well over 40 years after it was concocted and sold on TV by the silly NASA pranksters. Does this old, global hoax still matter? That is up for you to decide. You are, after all, the captain of your own brain - and you are still (in principle) wholly free to steer your ship in any direction that you desire.

Ultimately, we owe it to this planet we live upon (and to its beauty and inherent intelligence) to uphold its sanity in the face of those who wish to subvert our minds for their own profit and social control.



THE APOLLO 11 PRESS CONFERENCE

Ok, so I'm going to embed here a short, edited version of the infamous Apollo11 conference: btw, it is actually presented by a guy who believes in the Moon Landings! But if you wish to just watch the entire, unedited official version of this excruciatingly painful press conference, please go here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wUqTNobEIRo


full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IQp7U5z4714


***********************************************************************************************************************************************
This is just a short introduction to the NASA Moon Hoax. For more info and discussions about the Apollo Hoax on this forum, please go to: http://www.cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=59

[reel.deal]

*


THE LEM PROPOSAL: A MEASLY 110-PAGE DOCUMENT !...

This has got to be the simplest, most logical way of convincing any stubborn NASA-believers that the Apollo program was a hoax from start to finish - and from the word go. If this won't do it, nothing will : such people may not even wish to be helped exiting their fantasy world. Thankfully, there is still intelligent life on Earth - sooner or later it will have to prevail.

(The below video and text was originally posted by reel deal on the Moon Hoax thread)

Simon Shack - May 19 2013
**********************************************




full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qnHw-qwD3aM

NA$A can has 110-page document proposal to cover entire $6.9 Billion Apollo LEM program.

Bill Woods transcript:
"10 other programs of similar size; like the C5A, large submarine orders, or aircraft-carrier orders, all of the proposals were between 5,000 pages & 86,000 pages; with an average of 36,000 pages. And yet we see this one, standing there all by itself, at 110 pages. And it appeared to be, to me, that this may have been a situation where they knew that if anyone checked, that someone would say "well, in order to win this, you had to submit a proposal, right? so let me see the proposal."

So they had to produce a proposal, but they didnt go to the trouble of producing one of decent length. A 110-page proposal is about appropriate for a $1.4 million dollar program, which is X 5,000 times smaller than the claimed LEM program. Now you wouldnt need very much; a long proposal if you werent really going to build a LEM that really had to work. If you were going to be building LEMs that ended up in museums or on displays then you could probably do that for a few million dollars, and that might only require a 110-page proposal..."


my college paper was around 80 pages, a few pics, couple references pages & 10,000 words...

[simonshack]

*

WERNHER VON BRAUN - AND WALT DISNEY
or - how the global space hoax all started

The beauty of this venture of mine (attempting to alert my fellow earthlings to the massive hoaxes and deceptions we have all been fed with) is that the old, official documentations of the so-called 'cold war space race' are now my best resource to show how pathetically cartoonish the whole concept of 'space conquest' was in the first place.

Here is a classic - produced by Walt Disney, for his good friend Wernher Von Braun. Enjoy!


full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2fautyLuuvo

I'm sorry, but if you cannot see that Wernher Von Braun was but an actor enacting the "American dream of space supremacy" (in the eyes of the US populace), there is little more that I can do to convince you about it - beyond making you aware of the very existence of the above Walt Disney production. Keep in mind that it was made in 1959 - ten years before the supposed "Apollo 11 moon landing". Yet, at the time, Von Braun had already drawn up plans for "geostationary satellites for worldwide communication" (in his own words,"in order to reach and help the poorer regions of this planet") and a project for "a permanent international space station"...


****************
You may comment on this on our public MOON HOAX thread: http://www.cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=59

Are the successive and current NASA programs (Space Shuttle /ISS, MARS rovers, etc) any more credible than the phony Apollo missions? Has NASA now 'wisened up' and finally become a serious, scientific enterprise? Judge for yourself:

ENDEAVOUR - and the spaced-out NASA efforts
http://www.cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=935

Fakery in Orbit: THE I$$
http://www.cluesforum.info/viewforum.php?f=23

MARS & the Curiosity Rover - NASA's latest hoax
http://www.cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=1391

[simonshack]

*

This has to be the silliest (or most 'retarded', if you will) "APOLLO 17" image of all :



SOURCE: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Apol ... norama.jpg


Sure, we are told that this panoramic image was " Composed of 24 images: AS17-134-20408 to AS17-134-20431"...

This is supposed to be image N° AS17-134-20410 (the one depicting 'the Sun'):


It all makes perfect sense, doesn't it?