Top 10 Reasons for Critical Thinking about the 1969-1972 Moon Landings

1. Nixon, the President who had to resign for lying, wanted to beat the Russians by 1969
    and had to justify spending $40 billion on the space program to the American taxpayers.
    All the 6 claimed landings were in 3 years (1969-1972) during Nixon's administration.
 2. Russia's Luna 16 achieved Moon Rock Retrieval by Remote Control (MRRRC) in 1970.  
    NASA has been suspiciously silent about Grumman's Lunar Module Truck for MRRRC.  
    Natural forces such as meteors hitting the Moon, also propelled rocks to the Earth.
    NASA declared the Apollo sites to be No Close Orbit Zones, preventing close inspection.
 3. Van Allen Belts are fields of deadly radiation above Earth orbit from 1000 - 25000 miles
    with up to 100 REM per hour.  Humans can safely take only 1 REM per month (EPA.Gov).
 4. NASA now honestly admits the Orion space capsule requires thick radiation shielding,
    making it heavier, requiring the new, stronger Space Launch System with 3 boosters.
     California Academy of Science estimated 6 inches of lead shielding is required.
    Orion mission scientist Kelly Smith says we could not go through the Van Allen Belt.
    NASA astronaut USAF Colonel Terry Virts said "We only can fly in Earth orbit."
5. Many original plans and tapes from mission suspiciously "lost" or "accidentally erased"
6. Astronauts should have jumped much higher in 1/6 of Earth's gravity.
 7. Questions and answers between the Earth and Moon were faster than the speed of light.
8. Astronauts caught in the act faking view of a far Earth, out window from low orbit.
9. Major chemical differences between the Moon rocks from China's lander and Apollo's
10. Numerous photo anomalies: non-parallel shadows, C rock, backgrounds re-used. 
      Hollywood movie technology for simulations was the world's best  in 1969.
      Overly detailed, elaborate stages under the name of "simulations" to be cited as real. 
11. Not enough room in the LEM for 189 air tanks for Apollo 16's 3 days on the Moon
12. Not enough electrical power in the batteries for cooling, lighting, and broadcasting

The capacity and willingness of the U.S. Government to lie to its citizens and the world
to increase its budget and perceived reputation is literally over the Moon.

With the $30 billion spent for the Moon landing budget,
did the U.S. Government and contractors keep 90%  and spend 10% to fake it?

See Bart Sibrel's Sleuth Journal - Did we walk on the Moon with 1960's technology? (videos)
Dr. James Fetzer's new book: "And I supposed we didn't go to the Moon, either!"

The Moon Race is still on - and Russia could win.


As over-confident America dreams about false landings of 1969-1972, China and Russia are going to the Moon for real - like the "tortoise and the hare".


Putin has his eye on the ball,
to put Russians as first men on the Moon.
www.express.co.uk/news/science/
European-Russians-team-up-colonize-Moon

We fooled the Russians in 1969, but if we don't wake up, Vladimir Putin will have the "last laugh".

If we don't wake up, and get busy, a Russian Cosmonaut may soon say:
"Это один маленький шаг для человека, но гигантский скачок для всего человечества"
Eto odin malen'kiy shag dlya cheloveka, no gigantskiy skachok dlya vsego chelovechestva.
"That's one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind"

Putin's Potential Plan for a Russian as First Man Put on the Moon
1. Put on an act, playing along with Americans who believe NASA landed back in 1969
2. Continue to cooperate on the International Space Station and learn USA's techniques..
3. Send a Lunar Module to dock with the ISS, then take Cosmonauts to the Moon.
4. Diplomatically announce "surprise" no footprints are found from the Apollo missions.
Putin's Plan: Patience, Play-along, Peruse, Prepare, Pounce....Check mate

Russian Official Proposes International Investigation of Moon Landings - June 2015
www.themoscowtimes.com/news/article/russian-official-proposes-international-investigation-into-us-moon-landings/523799.html


Forbes Magazine
China Likely To Beat NASA Back To The Moon
 forbes.com/sites/brucedorminey/2016/03/24/china-likely-to-beat-nasa-back-to-the-moon

Physics-Astronomy Magazine
NASA Scientists Say We Could Colonise the Moon by 2022 - for Just $10 Billion
physics-astronomy.com/2016/03/nasa-scientists-say-we-could-colonise

Open Letter to Senator Ted Cruz
Chairman of the Committee overseeing NASA

Please ask NASA Administrator Charlie Bolden for the truth.
and make a historic speech to Congress, similar to JFK's:
"This nation should commit itself to achieving the goal,
before this decade is out, of establishing a Moon base
and returning astronauts safely to the Earth."


Informing Senator Cruz about the Van Allen Belts, in Dr. Van Allen's home town in Iowa

Open Letter to Donald Trump: 
Make the Moon American Again
Develop real estate the USA pioneers and make it the 51st state
as collateral and sell land to pay off $17 trillion of our national debt.
Somebody will claim the land some day.  Not such a crazy idea after all.
poster   TrumpMoon.com

Russian engineers and satellite camera to verify the Moon landings

Vitaly Egorova and Russian engineers will send a micro-satellite to photograph the Apollo landing sites.
 https://boomstarter.ru/projects/zelenyikot/proekt_sputnika_dlya_fotosemki_luny
English version of the project "crowd funded" via BoomStarter.Ru 
You can donate amounts as low as 50 rubles = $ .80 US Dollars
NEWS: Funding has been successfully received - by 218%
So the project is now in the works!

Fox's Top 10       Bart's Sleuth Journal    Skeptic Forum

Dr. Martin Hendry's top 10 -  Science Week Lecture Series

The Moon is far away - about 238857 miles (384403 km)
This is 30 times the distance of the Earth's diameter of 7918 miles (12742 km)
This is 10 times the circumference of the Earth at the equator, 24901.55 miles (40075 km)
The International Space Station orbits about 254 miles (409 km) above the Earth
The Van Allen Belts start at about 600 - 40000 miles ( 1000 - 60000 km) above the Earth
Here is a graphic to scale (1 pixel = 600 km)

We have believed in the Moon landings from a young age, when our brains were forming.
It will take evidence, meditation, neuro-plasticity, and open mindedness to change our minds now.

1. Nixon's Moon Landings 1969-1972
Nixon: "this is the greatest week since the beginning of the world, the creation"

Hypothesis to be examined:
Richard Nixon, informed by NASA scientists that he could not fulfill President Kennedy's challenge
"to go to the Moon in this decade", due to the Van Allen Belts of deadly radiation and other technical challenges
authorized NASA to fake it 1969-72, just in time to beat the Russians, using Hollywood movie technology
and Grumman's Remote Controlled Lunar Lander to bring back rocks to convince the scientists and Soviets,
and leave the lower half Descent Module as visual evidence for lunar reconnaissance photography satellites.

January 20, 1969 - Nixon becomes President
July 20, 1969 - First Moon Walk - Apollo 11
December 14, 1972 - Last Moon Walk - Apollo 17
August 9, 1974 - Nixon resigns due to lying about Watergate

www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/Russia-calls-investigation-into-whether-US-Moon-landings-happened

2. Remote Controlled Lunar Module Truck and Rover for MRRRC
Moon Rocks Retrieved by Remote Control (MRRRC)


 Remote Control technology has existed since 1937, even in toys in 1969.  Grumman and NASA had it.


Russia's Lunar Tank brought back Moon rocks with their Luna lunar landers from 1970.
China's Chang'e brought back rocks in Oct 2014. .  NASA had landers too in 1969.  
Why is NASA so quiet about its lunar lander and rock retrieval program?  
Is it because people would ask if MRRRC is how the Moon rocks got to Earth?   more..


Machines, not men, brought rocks back from the Moon

Perpetuating the Perfect Hoax

NASA knows that some day, the Van Allen Belt problem will be solved and men will land on the Moon.
NASA has already declared the Apollo sites to be No Fly Zones, preventing close inspection forever.
The LMT Descent Module looks just like the one claimed to be used for the Apollo manned landings

The USA fooled Russia into spending billions to counter the "Star Wars" space shield in the 1980's.
NYTimes.com/1993/08/18/us/lies-and-rigged-star-wars-test-fooled-the-kremlin-and-congress.html

3. NASA's new Project Constellation and Orion Mission
 is truthful about the Van Allen Belts of deadly radiation

"NASA's Project Constellation is responsible for making the United States Space Exploration Policy a reality"
- not a fake.


Van Allen Belt of deadly radiation
500 to 60000 miles above the Earth
170 REM will kill within 60 days 20-30%
blindness 20% 30-60 days
70 REM - vomiting, nausea, diarrhoea
Operation Starfish exploded an atom bomb in the belt but made matters worse.


Dr. James Van Allen, of the University of Iowa, was noted for discovering this deadly field of radiation and saved the lives of astronauts.  He was wooed and pressured to call his own research "nonsense".  He gave in somewhat, in an alleged email, but never published any paper refuting his original findings, such as those in Scientific American.
 


Spacecraft would need 10 centimeters of aluminum
(length of a cigarette) to reduce Dose to 10 REMs
But CM and LEM were aluminum
as thin as 1.8 centimeters.  source
Inner Belt 1000-8000 miles
Outer Belt 12000-25000 miles


Scientific American March 1959


Radiation Belts around the Earth


by Dr. James Van Allen


Conclusion on page 47
Click for Complete PDF

Our measurements show that the maximum radiation level as of 1958 is equivalent to between 10 and 100 roentgens per hour, depending on the still-undetermined proportion of protons to electrons.  Since a human being exposed for two days to even 10 roentgens would have only an even chance of survival, the radiation belts obviously present an obstacle to space flight.  Unless some practical way can be found to shield space-travelers against the effects of the radiation, manned space rockets can best take off through the radiation-free zone over

the poles.  A "space station" must orbit below 400 miles or beyond 30,000 miles from the earth.  We are now planning a satellite flight that will test the efficacy of various methods of shielding.

The hazard to space-travelers may not end even when they have passed the terrestrial radiation belts.  According to present knowledge the other planets of our solar system may have magnetic fields comparable to the earth's and thus may possess radiation belts of their own.  The moon, however, probably has no belt, because its magnetic field appears to be feeble... 


Solar flare and radiation foes in a 11 year cycle and was at a peak in 1969. Worse time to go outside the Van Allen Belts.  One of the worst solar flares happened in August 1972 (between Apollo 16 and 17) 960 REM (fatal)
 


Thin glass fiber, silicon, rubber of space suit and sheets of aluminum walls were not enough to protect the Astronauts from radiation.

 

 

The dangerous affects of radiation.  This is what would happen to the Astronauts.
1 Roentgen per month is safe.  50 Roentgens causes sickness, 500 Roentgens is fatal

Roentgen = the radiation that will produce 1 electrostatic unit of charge in one cubic centimeter *
named for Nobel Prize winner Wilhelm Conrad Roentgen (1845-1923).
REM = Roentgen Equivalent for Man


A typical dental ionizing X-ray for a split second
exposes patients to .15 - 0.5 Roentgens per film.
www.paradisedental.us/patient-education/dental-x-rays
Van Allen Belts = 1000 times a dental x-ray.

Even non-ionizing radiation such as micro wave ovens can be dangerous


Captain Kirk and Vulcan Mr. Spock
after he suffers fatal radiation damage
to save the Enterprise.


Gross scene from scary movie
Last House On the Left
Father puts raper of his daughter in a microwave.

MoonFaker: Radioactive Anomaly
www.youtube.com/watch?v=sYzkmHaZJI8

THE DANGER ZONE
Earth is wrapped in deadly belts of radiation
by Dr. James Van Allen
Chief, Radiation Research, Iowa State U.

Space World Magazine, pp 22-23, 49, 53-54
December 1961

"All manned space flight attempts must steer clear of these two belts of radiation until adequate means of safeguarding the astronauts has been developed"

"But, though, mechanical and electronic equipment can operate within the high radiation areas, a living organism cannot survive this level of radiation damage.  Hence, all manned space flight attempts must steer clear of these two belts of radiation until adequate means of safeguarding the astronauts have been developed."

Astronauts going to the Moon allegedly spent about 40 minutes in the Alpha region
1,000,000 particles per square centimeter per second - 179 RADs/hour
and 20 minutes in the 2 million particle region - 30.464 RADS
87 + 30 (to Moon) +87 +30 (to Earth) = 234 RADS
500 RADS is enough to kill a man

NASA confirms the space suits do not protect against radiation: Sickening Solar Flares
http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2005/27jan_solarflares/
"A typical space suit, meanwhile, has only 0.25 g/cm2, offering little protection. "

The Russians knew the Van Allen Belts are deadly too.
Dr. E. E. Kovalev

Radiation Protection During Space Flight
Institute of Biomedical Problems, USSR Ministry of Health
Moscow 123007, USSR

  

Dr. John H. Mauldin
PhD, Science Education, University of Texas; MS Physics, Purdue; BS Physics, Cornell
Worked on the NASA Voyager project
Prospects for Interstellar Travel - American Astronautical Society

John H. Mauldin has a bachelor's degree in engineering physics (Cornell University, master's in physics (Purdue University), and Ph.D. in science education (University of Texas).  He has four books published in science and technology covering mathematical graphics in Perspective Design (1985; second edition now being prepared), physics in Particles in Nature (1986), solar energy in Sunspaces (1987), and optics in Light, Lasers, and Optics (1988).  He has taught physics and engineering at several colleges and universities, done education research and development at MIT and University of Texas, and worked at NASA in electronic power engineering on an early phase of the Voyager missions.

Cosmic particles are dangerous, come from all sides, and require at least 2 meters of solid shielding all around living organisms.

Solar (or star) flares of protons, an occasional and severe hazard on the way out of and into planetary systems, can give doses of hundreds to thousands of REM over a few hours at the distance of Earth [b-Lorr].  Such does are fatal and millions of times greater than the permitted dose.  Death is likely after 500 REMs in any short time.

The Apollo capsule was not even 1/10 meter thick, the Van Allen Belts have over 100 REM/hour, so the astronauts could not have survived going to the Moon.

California Academy of Sciences (1959)
says the Van Allen Belts are deadly. Why not in 1969?
www.youtube.com/watch?v=szh5cuzfiN4


Dr. Earl S. Harold  on his Science In Action series.
California Academy of Sciences
"The Earth is surrounded by intense radiation."


Dr. R. Stephen White, Leader of the
Nuclear Effects Group,  Lawrence Livermore Laboratory
Inner and Outer Radiation Belts


Rocket launched from balloon from a ship
into Earth's orbit


"Rock-oon" (rocket from balloon) put geiger counters
into orbit ranging from 200 to 1500 miles


Radiation increased, then dropped to zero


Above 800 miles the radiation was so intense...


the Roentgens per hour dropped to zero
as the Geiger counter got over-loaded
When the instruments got below the Belt they recovered
 


Pioneer 3 confirmed the results at 65000 miles
and found a 2nd radiation belt
Sr. Staff Physicist Dr. Stanley Freden and Dr. Al Oliver


Low inner belt, about 800 miles, has 1 Roentgen/hour
Inner belt is maximum at 2000 miles out, 10 Roentgens/hour
Outer belt is maximum at 10000 miles out, up to 100 Roentgens/hour
A human should only get 1 Roentgen per month


To be safer, astronauts should go out and in
through the lower radiation regions at the Earth's poles
Inner belt: high energy electrons, low energy protons


Charged particles go through the film plates


Lines created by charged particles are studied on a numbered grid


Cosmic ray particles are absorbed by the atmosphere, protecting us
What shielding is needed to protect astronauts?
 


1 inch of lead to stop 90% of protons
6 inches of lead to stop 99% of protons


spacemath.gsfc.nasa.gov

NASA's Dishonest Space "Math"

Dishonest NASA propaganda says Van Allen Belts are "misunderstood" and harmless.   But the "calculations" assume an Astronaut is 1 gram absorbing only 1 square centimeter of radiation and never multiplies by the size and mass of the Astronaut.  It only applies to very tiny Astronauts.  A typical Astronaut has a surface area of .85 square meters (850 square centimeters) is 180 pounds or 82 kilo grams or 82000 grams.  Why would NASA be trying to hide the radiation danger of the Van Allen Belts if they really went to the Moon?


http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2005/27jan_solarflares

Apollo 12's Alan Bean doesn't know beans about the Van Allen Belts
www.youtube.com/watch?v=-2FTZhyuJy8 - from interview by Bart Sibrel

Web  Site Mission - Truly Go to the Moon
not just with Grumman's Remote Controlled Lunar Module Truck

The purpose of this web site used to be to defend the official Moon landing story,
but during the process, we realized Nixon's 1969-1972 landings were fabricated,
even if done with good intentions, to avoid nuclear war with Russia at the time.

1. To boldly go where no man has (truly) gone before

2. Inspire Americans and NASA to establish a Moon base by 2020
with reasons to make it a high priority as a vital strategic location.

3. To promote truth about our accomplishments so far,
and stop resting and sleeping on past false laurels

4. Acknowledge the Van Allen Belt radiation problem
then solve it.  We can't solve a problem until we confront it.

5. Prevent "Tortoise and the Hare" situation
America sleeps, dreaming about a 1969-1972 fantasy,
while Russia or China land on the Moon first.

  Yutu rover emblazoned with Chinese Flag as seen by the Chang'e 3 lander on the moon on Dec. 15, 2013. Credit: China Space
The easiest country to beat to the Moon is the one that sleeps, dreaming it already went.

Bad news: the USA never really landed men on the Moon in 1969-1972

Good news: an American can still be the first on the Moon in this generation.

Corporations made billions from the Moon race and wanted it to continue.

Did all the money go to space exploration, or did some go for black ops or weapons development?

President Nixon's competition with the Russians



All the Moon "landings" happened during 1969 - 1972
during the administration of Richard Nixon
the only President who had to resign due to lying (about Watergate).

No More Lies and Propaganda

Adolph Hitler - Mein Kampf
"they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie"

Joseph Goebbels, Nazi propaganda minister
"when one lies, one should lie big, and stick to it"

"That's one small misstep for man, one giant heap for all mankind."

If there was a Lying Olympics, the USA Government would be #1.

A person given a counterfeit bill wants to believe it is real.
The American public dearly wants to believe we landed.
But truth is even more dear for Americans.

 
Star Trek's Captain Picard to Ensign Crusher - and NASA:
"The first duty of every Star Fleet officer is to the truth."

It is better for America to admit the Truth
than for other countries to expose the lie.

Russia's President Vladimire Putin
potential speech

President Obama
recommended speech

The Americans have lied about me.  They lied about Ukraine.   And they lied about landing on the Moon.  How can anyone believe them on anything?   (Potential speech by Vladimir Putin)

 President Nixon was a troubled man, and a Republican.  He was under considerable pressure at the time to beat the Russians in the race to the Moon.  But my administration is one of transparency.  We must be honest with the American folks.  I have directed NASA to release records related to the alleged landing on the Moon during President Nixon's term of office.  We look forward to landing an American man, or woman, as the first person on the Moon.

Science Fiction of the 1960's

Star Trek (original series)

2001: a space odyssey

Apollo Moon Landings

September 8, 1966 - June 3, 1969

April 3, 1968 -

July 20, 1969 - December 19, 1972

$190 thousand  per episode

$12 million

$25.4 billion

Perhaps this is why Star Trek stopped one month before Neil Armstrong's walk, despite great
TV viewer ratings, and a million fan petition, because the special effects were more believable than Apollo's.


Apollo was a big illusion done on a movie set
(from an episode on 9/22/1967 of Star Trek)  MP3

Gene Rodenberry and Stanley Kubrick made better scenes and special effects in their films.
 
Stanley left many clues that he helped fake the Moon landings, in his movie The Shining

The International Moon and Star Registry
Occupy the Moon

If we landed men on the Moon in 1969 we should be able to do it again.

A Moon base would be a highly beneficial base for the USA as a position of influence for any travel beyond the Moon If the USA could go, we would.

The USA has enough money to bail out bankers for $700 billion.  A single air craft carrier costs about $10 billion $30 billion should be no problem.


Now that we have a Space Station, where hundreds of Astronauts have gone,
a good platform for going on to the Moon, there is no reason for not going after 43 years
-- unless the Van Allen Belts of deadly radiation are an obstacle.

Major Clues to Moon Landing Fakery

After 45 Years, it is about time to objectively consider the evidence
It does not take Sherlock Holmes to see the landings could be faked
The cleverest high tech hoax in human history fooled even scientists
There are too many questions and alternative explanations.

First of all.  It  just looks fake.  The most expensive science fiction movie of all time
    
Camera lights visible on Apollo photos.  Scene from James Bond 007 (1971). Capricorn One (1978). 

NASA simulation and high jump on Destination Moon (1950)


Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin training for Apollo 11

Where could the Moon film editing studio be to have such expertise?

U.S. Air Force Motion Picture Squadron
8935 Wonderland Avenue, Los Angeles, California - at the corner of Hollywood Place
Fully functional, self-contained, state-of-the-art filming, editing, and special effects video.
    
 

A stereoscopic method of verifying Apollo lunar surface images
OLEG OLEYNIK, Ph.D
Department of Physics and Technology
Kharkov State University, Ukraine
http://www.aulis.com/stereoparallax.htm


The Apollo 15 photographic record contradicts the stereoscopic parallax verification method. The apparent change in the relative positions of objects by moving the camera when the camera angles are separated by several tens of cms show that:

Thus, based on the above examples, this study concludes that the Apollo 15 photographic record does NOT depict real lunarscapes with distant backgrounds located more than a kilometre away from the camera.

These pictures were, without doubt, taken in a studio set.

Did we really go to the Moon? Startling New Evidence & Analysis
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E1zze78wvLs


One technique to give astronauts a bouncing walk was to suspend them from a helium balloon.
More photos of the oversly elaborate simulation sets that would be cited as real

http://apolloreality.atspace.co.uk/

Top Moon Anomalies - TMA

5. Many original plans and tapes from the Moon Landing were "accidentally erased" or "lost"
 Yes erased!   Huge Red Flag.   www.reuters.com/article/2009/07/16/us-nasa-tapes
   
http://www.collectspace.com/news/news-071709a.html
www.smh.com.au/news/national/one-giant-blunder-for-mankind-how-nasa-lost-moon-pictures/2006/08/04/1154198328978.html
Originally stored at Goddard then National Archives, then returned to Goddard in 1984 and lost

Plans showing how Lunar Rover fit in the LEM were destroyed by Boeing
Yes destroyed! Why?    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQYvRF3K0FM   (23 minute point)
 These precious records should have been stored under high security.

The Apollo telemetry data was "lost" by NASA's National Science Data Archives
"We have been unable to track it down.  We don't know where this telemetry data ended up.
Unfortunately I'm afraid I can't really give you much of a clue as to where this data ended up, and whether it still exists or not."
Dr. David Williams, NASA Archivist, Goddard Space Flight Center
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OICIsG8Rqyk#t=480  F0hsMJj9Q-A
 MoonHoax.com/site/evidence.html

      
Gene Kranz   NASA Flight Director, Houston
"I haven't seen anything that indicates the telemetry data is even in existence."
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OICIsG8Rqyk#t=422

Director Ron Howard asked for original Moon landing film
and soon afterwards NASA "lost" the tapes, and the only machine that could play them was disassembled.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gYQLV9kHtQM

How Did Moon Rocks Get to the Earth?
Two Basic Techniques: 1) Remote Control   2) Natural Forces

1) Remote Control Technology - since 1937
Russia's Luna landers returned Moon rocks to Earth 1970-1976
China's Chang'e landers returned Rocks in 2014
Why is NASA quiet about lunar landers that can return rocks?
NASA could have landed some too, and given actual Moon rocks to scientists.


Russia Space Agency

Lunar
mission		 Sample
returned		 Year
Luna 16 101 grams (3.6 oz) 1970
Luna 20 55 grams (1.9 oz) 1972
Luna 24 170 grams (6.0 oz) 1976
Total 326 grams (11.5 oz) .72 lb

 


Luna 16, 20, 24
1970 - 1976


Remote controlled machines, not men
returned Moon rocks to the Earth

Why doesn't NASA advertise a similar lunar lander program?
NASA has announced matching every other feat of Russia. 
Why not an unmanned lander that  returns Moon rocks to Earth?
Is an unadvertised mission how NASA got rocks to give to scientists?

Moon Rocks Retrieved by Remote Control (MRRRC)

http://www.technologyreview.com/view/428030/soviet-moon-lander-discovered-water-on-the-moon-in-1976/
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luna_24

Russia's Remote Controlled Lunar Tank
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GFIFO8fVVWM

Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter photos of descent stages of unmanned LEM.
Ascent stage brought back rocks from the Moon as did Russia's Luna 16 in 1970.
http://lroc.sese.asu.edu/featured_sites/lroc_features/Apollo%2011/feature_highlights

The USA is the world's leader in Remote Control


Grumman's unmanned Lunar Module Truck - LMT
Lunar Payload Module - LPM

Moon Rocks are the "rock hard evidence" of a Moon landing.
They are the "800 pound gorilla" to persuade even rocket scientists.

842 pounds of Moon rock were brought back to Earth from the Apollo missions.
But they did not have to be manned missions.  They could be unmanned.
The astronauts did not have to go through the deadly Van Allen Belts of radiation.

Grumman built the LM Truck to deliver equipment to the Moon by Remote Control.
www.astronautix.com/craft/apotruck.htm

9 Apollo missions could bring the reported 842 pounds of Moon rock back to Earth
Apollo 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 & 17 included a LM going at least to Moon orbit.
It is possible that the LM for Apollo 9 also went to the Moon for rocks, making it 10.
Grumman's LMT along with a Rover could bring back 9 x 100 pounds = 900 pounds
The unmanned Ascent Stage could take off with the rocks by remote control..

The Descent Module provides perfect "evidence" of the Moon landing,
once telescopes are powerful enough.  The Apollo sites are no fly restricted zones.
The Rover left tracks, and could place some of the ALSEP experiments.
No footprints after 45 years could be blamed on "solar wind" or something.

Remote Control Retrieval of actual Moon Rocks satisfied the scientists
Grumman's remote controlled Truck was the Trick for the perfect hoax

Keep on Truckin...
A popular saying and songs by and during the 1969-1972 Apollo missions
Grateful Dead - the astronauts would be dead from bolts of hundreds of Roentgens through their heads
Eddie Kendricks - it was a Temptation to use Grumman's remote control LEM to fake the landings
 Keep on truckin' those Moon rocks back to satisfy the scientists and Soviets.

Even kids had Remote Control technology in 1969 - for LEGO, toy trucks, and lunar rovers

If LEGO and Mattel had remote control technology in 1969, so did NASA
www.industrynewscorp.com/remote-control-cars-a-brief-history

First Remote Control Aircraft in 1937

During 1937, these two men (Ross Hull and Clinton B. DeSoto) successfully built and flew
several large R/C gliders in the first public demonstration of controlled flights
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio-controlled_aircraft

Walter and Bill Good paticipated in the 1937 National Aeromodeling Champtionships

The Good brothers give a flight demonstration for Henry Ford Sr. (age 80) in 1940.

 
Boeing's patented Remote Control Take Over Technology (RCTO)
Flight Termination System (FTS) or Anti-Terrorism Auto-Land System (ATALS)
www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/diagrams-boeing-patents-anti-terrorism-auto-land-system-for-hijacked-210869/
patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=/netahtml/PTO/srchnum.htm

Remote Control - even of an F16

http://fox2now.com/2013/11/21/f16-being-flown-by-remote-control


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio-controlled_aircraft

Remote Controlled Lunar Modules

The astronauts would not go along with a hoax unless it was fool proof.
Something had to be left on the Moon to satisfy skeptics.
The Lunar Module Truck Descent Modules are visible from lunar orbiters, looking just like LEM DMs.

Perpetuating the Perfect Hoax

Even if tourists can go to the Moon, they will only be allowed to fly far overhead of these No Fly Zones.
No landings or walking on the Apollo sites will be allowed - "to preserve history".
No one will be able to closely examine the sites, ALSEP experiments, rovers or human foot prints.
The perfect hoax.

China Lunar Lander (Chang'e), Lunar Rover (Yutu) and Rock Retrieval


China's Chang'e rover

NASA could have sent a similar rover 1969-1972

2) Natural Forces

Moon Meteors from Antarctica - according to NASA

Meteors hitting the Moon at an angle, going at least 8,600 kmh (5,100 mph),
propel rock upwards, escaping the Moon's gravity and get caught in Earth's gravity.
The north and south poles face one direction, and receive a larger number of rocks.
Antarctica's snow helps prevent shattering upon impact.
NASA.gov/exploration/home/Lunar_strike.html
NASA.gov/mov/139981main_impact.mov (Quicktime 2 MB)
Huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/01/huge-meteorite-found-antarctica-rock-largest


Dr. Werner von Braun and NASA scientists went to Antarctica 7 January 1967


Why would they have time to do this during the intense Moon Race?


They gathered meteorites from the Moon.  What for?
 


A meteor from Antarctica is  indistinguishable from Moon rocks


They brought boxes of Moon meteors back to NASA


Professor Gerald Wasserburg PhD (U. Chicago), Professor at CalTech, Apollo 11 Moon Rock Scientist


He can identify Moon rocks under chemical analysis and microscopes
Supposedly 750 pounds were brought by the Apollo missions.

Dr Wasserburg said that Brian, a scientist from the Smithsonian, sent him a meteorite from Antarctica.  After an investigation by a team of scientists for 1 1/2 years, they concluded that it was a rock from the Moon.

Aron Ranen's interview video
www.youtube.com/watch?v=bxEZXyQk4rs#t=316
www.MoonHoax.com


Conclusion: Antarctica meteorites can even convince scientists they were from the Moon

Dr. David Griscom is another top Moon rock scientist.


Let us remember Werner von Braun worked for the Nazi's.

     
Ian Whillans and John Schutt found a Moon rock in Antarctica in 1982
"The lunar origin of this specimen was immediately recognized by scientists at the Johnson Space Center"
Of course - since they have been passing off meteorites as Apollo Moon rocks for years.
The Earth-Moon System book


The Air & Space Museum in Washington DC displays a tiny "Moon Rock" for the public.


Is this an Apollo Moon rock
or just part of a meteorite?
Lying to millions of kids?


Pitiful, obviously man made triangular piece with unnatural straight edges. This shows little respect for the public.

 

The study of  "Moon rock" presented to the Netherlands, later found
 to be petrified wood, does not seem to be true.

youtube.com/watch?v=mHALUGcEEiQ

usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/offbeat/
2009-08-27-moon-rock-museum_N.htm

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1209445/Fake-dutch-moon-rock-causes-embarrassment-museum.html
 

NASA's Lunar Sample Compendium - List of all the Moon Rocks

Large Moon Rock Meteorite on Auction

One of world's largest Moon rocks, 4 pounds, came from the Moon as a meteorite
and was put up for at auction for about $340,000.  It came to Earth by natural forces.
Three of the small Russian Luna rocks sold for $442,500


www.space.com/17650-moon-rock-lunar-meteorite-auction.html

Government has lost much Moon rock and alleges it is a crime to sell
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3i9xdeVJHts

Chemical differences between Apollo rocks and Russian rocks
 


Harvard - Smithsonian
Center for Astrophysics

Rust was found, especially in Apollo 16 rocks
They attribute it to "contamination" of the samples
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1982LPSC...12..253H


Ferric Iron Oxide (rust) is Iron
mixed with Water plus Oxygen.


Hunter and Taylor analyzed many rock samples
and found a lot of rust

20 had abundant rust
including sample 61016
Sample 61016 - Big Muley 11.7 kg (26 pounds)
The largest rock allegedly from the Moon
allegedly from South Ray Crater debris
Water found from 1 to 6 parts per thousand
Russian only found 1 ppt by drilling 143 cm deep

There is no mention of a scale to measure the weight of the Moon rocks
A weight scale would only work on the Moon where there is gravity
to determine the weight of the rocks, which would be necessary
to compute the re-entry trajectory upon return to Earth

8. Chemical Differences between Apollo rocks and Chinese Chang'e rocks
 


Chinese National Space Agency
HQ in Beiging
Differences Chinese Chang'e lander and Yutu rover in Chromium, Strontium, Yttrium and Zirconium
CCTV: China's Moon Mission
Chang'e-3 analyzes chemical composition

Chinese Academy of Sciences
Chang'e-3 satellite payload APXS
Active Particle-induced X-ray Spectrometer
cas.cn/resources/archive/news_archive/nu2013/201312/t20131231_115128.shtml
Chinese Yutu found 11 major elements by spectral analysis including Calcium, Titanium, Manganese, Alumninum and Iron


Lander and rover confirmed by NASA LRO
(better than photos of Apollo landers)
http://www.space.com/24145-china-moon-rover-lander-nasa-photos.html

 

Iron - Apollo and Chang'e about the same
Aluminum  Apollo high, Chang'e low
Calcium - Apollo low, Chang'e high

Chromium - Apollo low, Chang'e high
Potassium - Apollo low (except A14), Chang'e high
Silicon - Apollo hith, Chang'e low

Strontium - Apollo low, Chang'e high
Titanium - Apollo low, Chang'e high
Yttrium - Apollo low, Chang'e high

Jarrah White,  MoonFaker:  Chinese rocks https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ar8FNxiU-tM

Moon Rocks from Mauna Kea in Hawaii


Buzz Aldrin on the Big Island Hawaii
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NubIUec1LmI


Apollo Valley, Big Island, Hawaii


Mount Mauna Kia, Hawaii

Dan Rasky, a senior NASA scientist, agreed. 
"It has a very lunar like terrain"


Apollo 17 and rover, using the same background

Laser Light Retro Reflector


"Proof" of the landing is said to be the Lunar Laser Retroreflectror, but...


Laser is reflected by the Moon anyway.  Everyone knows about how well Sun light is reflected by the Moon.  Duh.
youtube.com/watch?v=bxEZXyQk4rs


Dr. Caroll O. Alley (U Md) demonstrates a laser reflector returns laser in parallel path back to the source. 


Beam "a" from Earth hits at an angle and bounces off
Beam "b" hits the center and bounces back to source
Beam c from a different location bounces off at an angle
The Moon reflects light from the Sun anyway. 
It is a sphere, so the middle point will naturally bounce back to the laser source

more

Apollo Lunar Surface Experiments Package
None of the experiments have been providing data since 1977
except the suspect Laser Retroreflector (see above)

I am hopeful that one of the experiments in the ALSEP package will provide proof of landing, and am researching them now.  But some went ASLEeP within a few weeks. Wikipedia says "they were turned off on 30 September 1977, during President Jimmy Carter's administration, due primarily to budgetary considerations." (But the government had enough money to waste on other stuff.)


NASA's Goldstone Station
Controlled the TV feed from Moon


All the video input came through dishes at 2 GHz (too high for others to receive at the time) in Australia and California, owned and tightly controlled by NASA. 


Dish in Australia was controlled by NASA
No live TV feed was provided the public.


Flag waves as astronaut passes by
on Apollo 15
www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0IgEAFssxY


2 odd lights. No impact crater
from 10000 pounds of thrust


Shadows from the far away Sun
should be parallel.  Only a close by
light could create such shadows.


Flag moves slightly as astronaut passes by.
This should not happen in a vacuum.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymwE1sNm82Y


Sun behind casts shadow
This is what it should look like
if he was really in front of the Sun.


But this is what NASA released
showing too much detail in the shadow.
The Sun looks oval and would be brighter


NASA refuses to focus the Hubble telescope on the Apollo landing sites, with various excuses, such as it is too bright.


Projector lights visible in reflection


Same background used for different locations
Many examples in this video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W79mIGx9Ib4#t=6032


Slow motion sped up 2 times looks normal
The hopping is pitifully low for 1/6 gravity.


No stars.  Horizon sudden drop off
Star positions are too hard to fake.
Why no photos of the stars?


No stars


Moon shadows should be parallel.
They seem to come for a huge lamp.


Lens cross hairs behind object.
Is someone trying to tell us something?


The "C" rock placed in location
"C" on the ground?
 

 
Buzz Aldrin in shadow is bright
while in a shadow
He should have been in the dark
(computer simulation)

Earth View - Coincidence or Copy?

In two photos, from different times, the Earth faces the same direction with the same cloud positions.
This is very unlikely, and indicates that the Earth from photo "a" was reduced and added to photo "b".

 
a) Frame AS11-44-6553 from lunar orbit     b) AS-40-5924 from lunar surface

Size Comparison - Apollo 17 - the Earth should be the size on the right

From angelfire.com/moon2/xpascal/MoonHoax/ApolloEarth  by Pascal Xavier

Is the Earth big or small when viewed from the Moon?

NASA's Deep Space Climate Observatory (DSCOVR)
2015 Aug photo of Moon and Earth from 1 million miles
https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/from-a-million-miles-away-nasa-camera-shows-moon-crossing-face-of-earth


Photo from Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO).  Earth is 6 times bigger than the Moon.

Reflection from Aldrin's Boot


Buzz Aldrin's right boot heel shines.  Dr. David Groves has analyzed an actual Apollo astronaut boot and determined that a second light source was 2.2 degrees to the right of Neil Armstong, impossible since the Sun was the only source.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W79mIGx9Ib4#t=1915

The iconic photo by Neil of Buzz Aldrin has many problems.
Fall off area should be well lit, since Sun is to Buzz's back
Buzz's front should be darker, in a shadow
Neil's camera was mounted on his chest as shown by the reflection.
Central reticle is near Buzz's right boot, so Neil is looking down.
Neil would have to be about 8 feet tall to look down on Buzz
Neil's shadow in the reflection is going in the wrong angle.
Horizon is higher on the right than the left
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W79mIGx9Ib4#t=2371

 
Same story on Apollo 12 with chest camera near height of Alan Bean's head


Marcus Allen points out in a lecture in Great Britain
that astronaut Irwin had the camera and Scott did not.
So how did Scott take the photo of Irwin?   Oops!
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LVR2WTK20Ig


AS15-88-11863  AS15-88-11864

 


Oops!
He has the camera.
How is the photo taken?

 

More


Sophisticated simulations were abundantly available


It takes 1.28 seconds for light to go to the Moon,
the same for conversations by radio.

7.
Fast Talking NASA and Apollo 16 conversed with no delay between question and answer.
It should take 1.28 seconds each way


How did Conrad detach Surveyor 3
camera without a cable cutter or tools?
More shadow problems


Lunar Rover dust "rooster tail" did not go
higher than it would have on Earth.


All landings happened during administration of
Nixon who had to resign for lying about Watergate

Apollo 14 Busted by "3rd Man on the Moon"
Edward Mitchell and Alan Shepard  - and a Whistle Blower's foot pops up
Camera man with honesty stuck his hand (or foot) up quickly in protest to the fakery.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LouHGOEMmK0
http://next.nasa.gov/alsj/a14/a14.clsout2.html#1351957

Lies about Hand Damage from Lunar Gloves
Gene Cernan: "my knuckes being rubbed raw."
"my hands were nothing but blisters.  The skin on my knuckes was gone."

Hands look just fine.


Walt Disney and Dr. Werner Von Braun (PhD, U of Berlin)
Why would a scientist meet with the master of fantasy and illusion?

 Google Moon


People can now see cars and people with Google Earth from 400 mile high satellites
Why not a LEM with Google Moon from a 50 mile high satellite?
Why the Cover Up Patches?


Google Moon Apollo 11 area looks faked from 50 miles high
Why is there a need for a special Cover Up patch?


NASA Headquarters in Washington DC


Satellite View of NASA HQ in Washington DC from 400 miles


Cars are visible - about the size of a LEM

NASA is the world's best at simulations - which could be submitted as real
You can even buy "Moon simulation soil" online


You can purchase NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC) approved Lunar Simulant for experiments .
From www.Orbitec.com for $30 per kg (or $135 for 5 kg) plus shipping.  Also Mars simulant.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xQLyyFt2miU#t=569

Flagstaff Arizona


Moon landing site recreated in Crater
National Park in Flagstaff, AZ


Making craters for replica of Sea of Tranquility
http://astrogeology.usgs.gov/rpif/videos/making-craters
USGS used explosives to make craters

Highly secure military base at Area 51


Area 51 is a secure military base. Trespassers are shot.


Area 51 has covert operations going on


Area 51 has craters that look like Moon craters


Comparison of Moon crater with Area 51 crater


Veritcal background then a gap then horizontal foreground


Note the join line at the gap between horizontal and vertical


6. Trampolines and Wires


Astronauts obviously on hidden trampolines
 www.youtube.com/watch?v=a-59IEz-MNc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=16D0hmLt-S0
Lunar Olympics - Astronauts jumping in 1-6 earth gravity.mp4


Astronauts obviously on wires
www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zz9Bzi_GyD0

The Moon has 1/6 of Earth's gravity.
John Young only jumped about 1.3 feet high (see analysis)
This is how high Apollo 16 astronaut John Young should have jumped.
People can jump higher than he did on Earth.   Pitiful

Even old movies were more realistic about the jump, and the stars
George Pal and Irving Pichel, the director of Destination Moon consulted scientists
with the goal of maximum authenticity and detail with the 1950 technology
including calculations of how high an astronaut could jump on the Moon.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FeSmD28ivPs

Mythbusters  Discover Channel 2008 - Proves the Myth
with a perfect match of the Apollo jump salute with harness and slow motion
Mythbuster Adam Savage, not an athlete, jumps higher than the Apollo 16 astronaut
Jarrad White's video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=23BIb_PMJ4M


Jump Salute - supposedly at same time (A16)
Triangular flap above and behind helmet flies up.
Where is the dust cloud, like the other photo?
 


Oops.  Discontinuity error
Triangular flap should be snapped down
The 2 Jump Salute photos are not simultaneous.


Astronaut who fell is pulled up as if by wires
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W79mIGx9Ib4#t=7207


Hammer and feather drop experiment "proof"
simply slow down film and use plastic feather


James Webb resigned as NASA Director in Oct 1968
just before the first men to go through the Van Allen
Belt of radiation and orbit the Moon, Apollo 8.  Why?


Apollo 11 Press Conference

 Neil Armstrong at his Gemini 8 (left) and Apollo 11 (right) mission
press conference.  He looked much happier years earlier
even though Gemini only orbited the Earth.


Astronaughty liars sad and fidgeting at press conference
They look ashamed.  Why were they not happier?

  
Why no photos of Neil on the Moon, except one of his back.


On all other major steps into space, animals were used first.
Why not for Apollo?   Testing on humans?


2 Astronauts of similar heights
have different sized shadows.
Only possible with a big light, not Sun
 

Camera Film gets exposed with radiation

 
Film was not anything special, but ordinary Kodak Chrome-X 64  160 ASA (ISO)


Camera was a Hasselblad 500 EL/70 camera with Zeiss 60mm lense.  Film would not withstand radiation. 
Hasselblad never advertised that their camera was used on the Moon.  Why?
Perhaps it was evident to them that the landings were faked.


Dr. David Groves subjected Kodak film of a color image to 25 REM of radiation and it became light grey
Apollo shots show no signs of radiation, temperature (warping in heat or cracking in cold), or micrometeorite damage.

No 360 degree nor upward videos
Even though this would be easy to do with the Astronaut turning in a circle.
panoramas were done with still camera photos stitched together.
So the lighting, equipment, and camera crew could get out of the way


 

 
An astronaut removes his radiation shield, yet none of them got sick.
None were even Sun tanned much less burned from solar radiation
First photo of Neil Armstrong after walk on July 20, 1969 - no sun burn.


Many examples of reticle cross hairs, which should be in front, seen behind objects.


Reticle appears behind the Lunar Rover post.  Oops.


No sound or vibration from LEM descent engine
while Neil and Houston fast talk
Noise should be in the very loud 140 decibel range
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0IgEAFssxY#t=754


10000 pounds of thrust at 5000 degrees
would have made a loud sound and a lot of heat in the LEM


The LEM proposal was very short - just 110 pages for $6.9 billion
without many specifics about how it would actually work.
Submarine or air craft carrier proposals are usually 5000 - 86000 pages
for an average 38000 pages.  110 is ok for $1.4 million
A short proposal is ok for a LEM that is not expected to work.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W79mIGx9Ib4#t=11123


LEM had hypergolic fuel (ignites instantly upon merging and stored with no special coolant.  Nitrogen tetroxide was the oxydizier
Unsymetrical dimethylhydrazine UDMH was the fuel, which burns burns a dark red opaque gas
 H2NN(CH3)2

 

But on the ascent there is no flame at all!
It should have looked like the drawing.
But is looks like a toy lifted by a string.


No landing crater.  No dust on the landing pads..
Even while supporting 2300 pounds of LEM and astronauts
During landing, the surface dust would be blown away
so there could be no Astronaut foot prints near the LEM.
Dust that was blown up, would eventually settle down
on the LEM foot pads, but we do not see such dust.


Apollo 13 problem on 13th day, 13th hour
Fra Maura highlands landing site
would be dark during their entire mission.
NASA never lands in the dark.
So they never did plan to land A13.


Why was Saturn V dropped if it was so good, tried, and tested?   Supposedly it could put payload into Earth and Moon orbit, including LEM and Lunar Rover
Why did technology get worse with time?


If the Saturn V was so strong,
why not put a Shuttle on top?


Puts only 1/6 as much payload into only Earth orbit
as Saturn V supposedly did (including LEM)
Costs 3 times as much, and to develop.


Large light source in reflection  in fake looking Sun - too big (A17) -
many of these found.  Convex helmet should make Sun appear smaller, not larger.


What are the two lights in the upper left doing there?
Why no shadow on the astronaut's body?


Note how close the horizon is.  The lander shadow in the reflection is almost to the horizon.

Is Earth big or small?  NASA make up your mind.
 

Space Suits should have no wrinkles if filled with air in a vacuum
The suits should balloon


Michael Collins in Earth simulation with wrinkles in his suit
Ed White on Gemini 4 with suit puffing with air pressure in a vaccum at 5.2 psi


Suit on Moon with wrinkles at 3.7 psi


Astronaut has wrinkles in his suit - no puffing and
 holds a flag when the inflated gloves did not permit
picking up anything less than 1 inch.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ji24WNxfHiE


There should be puffiness - like the Michelin Man


Space Station suits have few wrinkles


Apollo 16 hand exposed with inner glove, not thick outer glove.  Fingers could not bend that much with high pressure in suit against a vacuum.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0-eazmX6-vc

MoonFaker:  Jarrah White  www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ji24WNxfHiE


Weak, contradictory, and uninformed testimony by Alan Bean, Lunar Module Pilot, Apollo 12.
"I'm not sure we went far enough out to encounter the Van Allen radiation belt.  Maybe we did."  
A scientist did not know the danger or distance of the Van Allen Belt ?
See  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-2FTZhyuJy8#t=85  www.MoonMovie.com

 


Eugene Cernan Apollo 17 ("last man on the Moon")
contradicts Alan Beam's testimony on something that should be obvious and the same. 
Did the LEM engine make noise or not?
Alan told investigative reporter Bart Sibrel the LEM was silent,
in a vacuum.  But Eugene says the rocket noise was very loud.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Djbjx89rLU


Astronauts went on a world tour to visits heads of state

If we had the technology over 42 years ago in 1969 - 1972
why can't we go to the Moon more easily now?


Apollo Computer 1969
 "How do I access the app store?"
1,000,000 Hz speed
4,000 byte memory


Apple Computer 2014

1,300,000,000 Hz speed
36,000,000,000 byte memory

www.buzzfeed.com/daves4/welcome-to-the-fuetch?bffb#.umk5bmvvl
128 Megabytes to 128 Gigabyes - 1000 times more in 6 years

Surveyor 3 Unmanned Lunar Lander 1967

   
Supposedly Apollo 12 landed near Surveyor 3 which landed in 1967 and too photos of the Moon.
Why no deep  marks on the surface from the Surveyor landing, when it dropped several meters after engine cut off?

On the Surveyor 3 material supposedly brought back to Earth:
"all participating investigators concluded that no material or surface features were found that definitely could be stated to be meteoritic in origin."
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19720019081.pdf   page 11

Microbes were discussed in the report, which supposedly withstood 31 months in a vacuum Surveyor was on the Moon.

Surveying the Surveyor


Alan Bean sells autographed photos for $239.  The photo on the right says it is Pete Conrad.
How did he detach the camera which was fastened strong enough to withstand a landing
so it could be brought back to Earth, studied, and put in the Smithsonian Museum?
Where are any tool such as cable cutters, wrench or screw driver?
Why no photos of the Surveyor after the camera was removed?
Why does the LEM appear to be next to a fake black stage background?

  
Alan Bean and AstronautCentral.com will sell you an autographed photo for $239
Mastercard, Visa, American Express, and Discover cards accepted


Google Earth has cartoon graphics for the LEM and Surveyor 3
However there is no justification for these graphics.
Surveyor 3 is visible about 100 feet to the left of the label

There is no justification for the graphics on Google Moon.
 

 
More shadow problems.   Retouching photos

Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter Camera (LROC) photos
NASA still faking the photos

 
If the white letters can have a fake shadow, why not the LEM?
Why no similar photos from China, Russia, or Japanese orbiters?
Why don't these appear on Google Moon?

LRO photos were "processed" for a few days after receipt before releasing to the public.

Jarrah White: LRO photos disprove landings
www.youtube.com/watch?v=P5kHPexBIWk

MoonFaker: LRO, SELENE & Clementine
www.youtube.com/watch?v=lLYiiwyH4IA

Chang'e, Clementine, & Apollo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3rd4ue5vnfs

LRO at 50 km
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OKj5fckUX-c

Earth satellites over 12 times higher have better resolution than Moon satellites?


GeoEye satellite shows Rome from 641 km or 400 miles with enough resolution to see cars and people


Half-Meter Per Pixel Resolution:
LROC of Apollo from 50 km (31 miles, left) and GeoEye of parking lot cars from 641 km (400 mi, right)
www.youtube.com/watch?v=OKj5fckUX-c#t=515
Why would resolution from 400 miles on Earth, through atmosphere, be better than LRO's through vacuum?

8.  Astronauts Caught in the Act of Faking
a view of far away Earth - from low orbit
 www.youtube.com/watch?v=xciCJfbTvE4?t=1928
 Earth in Round Window Trick
the final nail in the coffin...the smoking gun...from...
A funny thing happened on the way to the Moon by Bart Sibrel


1. Be in low Earth orbit


2. Move camera far from round window


3. Turn out the lights


Earth looks like a fake model - too turquoise


 

May be the Strait of Tiran, Gulf of Aqaba and Red Sea, north side down

"Third Party evidence" of the Moon Landings
including LRO (part of NASA)
wikipedia.org/wiki/Third-party_evidence_for_Apollo_Moon_landings

"These images are the most effective proof to date to rebut the "landing hoax" theories."
Fakable computerized images are not very effective.


Japanese JAXA/Selene computer graphic on right supposedly matches
Apollo 15 Lunar Rover photo - but it does not match very well. 
Plus it is only a graphic.
Why couldn't JAXA submit a photo of the LEM or Rover from above?

"As with SELENE, the Terrain Mapping Camera of India's Chandrayaan-1 probe did not have enough resolution to record Apollo hardware. Nevertheless, as with SELENE, Chandrayaan-1 independently recorded evidence of lighter, disturbed soil around the Apollo 15 site"

Table Mountain Observatory, Madrid Apollo Station, Honeysuckle Creek and Goldstone is all a part of NASA
but is STILL listed in the article, who is supposed to be about INDEPENDENT VERIFICATION

So, that's the best "evidence"?
Basically, there is NO third party evidence verifying the Moon landings.

7% believe Moon landing was faked.  9% not sure, 83% believe
 http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2011/PPP_Release_National_ConspiracyTheories_040213.pdf

So who would have to be "in on it"?

In a top down military, with compartmentalization of knowledge on a "need to know" basis only a small number would need to know.  These would include:
The astronauts on the missions (but not necessarily other astronauts, or family members)
President Richard Nixon
NASA Director Thomas O. Paine (who took over in October 1968 when James Webb quit prior to Apollo 8)
NASA Flight Director Gene Kranz (possibly he could have been sent false readings)
CAP Com
About 10 covert operatives to control the feed of data to Mission Control and the TV feed from Australia
CEO's of major manufacturers such as Lockheed and Grumman (optional)
Eveyone else would be just following orders and have a limited view of  the big picture.


Russian and American cooperation

Using Taxpayer Dollars to Fund Covert Satellite Surveillance Program


Control of space means control of the world.
From space, the masters of infinity...
There is something more important tan the ultimate weapon
and that is the ultimate position,
The position of total control over Earth
that lies somewhere in outer space.

Amplifier and repeater could have been placed on the Moon
to make it appear that men landed on the Moon.
and to send back seismic data, simulate experiments set up by men.
For example, the Russians have a roving vehicle, as does China.

They can do many functions that men were supposed to have done.

Lunar Rover Milage

NASA has the opportunity to put a rover like Opportunity,
which they have on Mars, to prove the Astronauts landed on the Moon
and restore their reputation, and remove all doubts.
Same with Sprit (2004) and Curiosity (2012) Mars landers
 
It would be helpful to see what has happened on the Moon since 1972. 
Why no Moon rovers?  Unless it would prove the landings were faked.

NASA Astronauts speak out


James Irwin,  Lunar Module Pilot for Apollo 15, the youngest astronaut who resigned and started a church, was the first to die, of a suspicious heart attack Edward Kaysing said James called him to confess several days before.

August 8, 1991.

 


Dr. Brian O' Leary.(PhD, Astronomy, Berkeley)
Taught wiht Carl Sagan at Cornell University
"If some of the film was spoiled, it's remotely possible they (NASA) may have shot some scenes in a studio environment to avoid embarrassment"
September 1999


"Regarding the Apollo mission, I can't say 100% for sure whether these men walked on the Moon."
www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0IgEAFssxY#t=313
Jan 27 1940 - July 28, 2011


Sally Ride
Ride Report of 1987 concluded that if NASA spent billions they would be able to return men on the moon perhaps by 2010.  Why not right away, if it had been done 6 times?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ride_Report


Edward White, Virgil "Gus Grussom, and Roger Chaffee of Apollo 1


Gus did not believe the rocket to be ready for the Moon, and put a lemon on the NASA rocket
January 22, 1967.


Days later, on January 27, 1967 - about 2.5 years before the Moon landing, the capsule caught fire, killing the 3 astronauts.

 

10 Apollo astronauts - 15% of them died
in strange accidents between 1964-1967

NASA Safety Inspector Thomas Ronald Baron
wife and daughter died in "accident" one week after testifying


Thomas Robert Baron was a Safety Inspector for NASA for Apollo 1.


He investigated the Apollo 1 fire, and found many safety problems with the Apollo program


He testified before Congress, with a 500 page report, that there were so many problems NASA would not make it to the Moon


One week after he testified, Thomas Baron's car was struck by a train also killing his wife and daughter

Thomas Baron's 500 page report mysteriously disappeared and has never been found to this day..

In Memory of

Apollo 1 Challenger STS-51-L Columbia STS-107
Virgil "Gus" Grissom
Edward H. White II
Roger B. Chaffee		 Fancis "Dick" Scobee
Michael J. Smith
Ellison S. Onizuka
Judith A. Resnik
Ronald E. McNair
Shannon Christa McAuliffe
Gregory B. Jarvis		 Rick D. Husband
William C. McCool
David M. Brown
Kalpana "K.C." Chawla
Michael P. Anderson
Laurel B. Clark
Ilan Ramon

NASA Scientist

Dr. Richard Feynman, PhD, Physics
Nobel Prize Winner
Investigator of the Challenger Disaster

NASA owes it to the citizens from whom it asks support, to be frank, honest, and informative.  And so that these citizens can make the wisest decisions for the use of their limited resources for a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations for nature cannot be fooled.
Carl Sagan, PhD, Physics
Cornell University

“One of the saddest lessons of history is this:
If we’ve been bamboozled long enough, we tend to reject any evidence of the bamboozle.
We’re no longer interested in finding out the truth.
The bamboozle has captured us.
It’s simply too painful to acknowledge, even to ourselves, that we’ve been taken.
Once you give a charlatan power over you, you almost never get it back.”

Apollo had a 83% success rate
Since then,unmanned mssions to Mars only succeeded 7 or 25 or 28%

Debunking Moon Landing True Believers

Argument Rebuttal
It is unpatriotic to question the Moon Landing It is patriotic to be intelligent, and insist on truth from our government
We saw it on TV TV can be easily faked, as are all science fiction
There were Moon rocks Meteors knocked fragments into Earth's gravity and Antarctica
Moon Rock Retrieval by Remote Control (MRRRC) is an explanation.  Even Russia had MRRRC in 1970 with Luna landers.
Too many people would have to be in on it The Manhattan Project hired over 100000 and kept the atom bomb secret
Someone would talk Gus Grissom, James Irwin, and Tom Baron tried, and died in "accidents"
Laser beams bounce off the reflectors And the Moon surface anyway, plus Russia's lunar rover laser reflector
Russia would have exposed the fraud Putin is playing his cards as necessary.  Russia has its own frauds to hide.


Destination Moon (1949) movie is more realistic than
Apollo (1969) - the most expensive science fiction film
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hWCiNuH0ubY

Destination Moon (1949)

Apollo Mission (1969)


Earth looks more realistic, including stars


Earth looks a fake turquoise model, with no stars


Earth is visible, and large with distant horizon


Big light is visible, with short horizon. No Earth.


Blast under descent rocket on Moon


No sign of descent blast


Astronauts can jump high on the Moon


Pitifully low jumps


They brought a telescope


They did not bring a telescope


Camera angle makes sense


Camera angle is off


Camera shot is from proper angle, and shows large Earth


Camera is too high
No Earth in background on any photos

If Destination Moon looked like Apollo, movie critics would give it bad reviews.
It would not win an Oscar Award for Special Effects

Destination Moon (George Pal Productions 1950)


Above is a photo taken of Gene Cernan by fellow astronaut Jack Schmitt.  Schmitt is reflected in Cernan's helmet visor. But when the reflection is ENLARGED, right, we see that Schmitt has no camera and is not taking a picture, but also is missing his PLSS personal life support system. Center photo shows what he would look like with PLSS and camera. Oh, by the way, life cannot be sustained on the moon without the PLSS. And photos cannot be taken without a camera. These oddities raise the question...
Was this photo taken on the moon?
...from a suggestion by Duane Daman

Does the US Government ever send citizens into deadly radiation?
American soldiers ordered to stand in front of an atomic blast, for testing purposes

How Did They Pull It Off?

Unmanned Lunar Module Truck Hypothesis

Men remained in Earth orbit as the LEM went to retrieve rocks from the Moon

Even if a LM Descent Module is actually on the Moon, it could have been a remote controlled Apollo LM Truck.
http://www.astronautix.com/craft/apotruck.htm
Its remotely controlled Lunar Rover could have left tire tracks
A remotely controlled Ascent Module could have brought back bona fide Moon rocks.

Variations of the LM Truck were built by Grumman. The project was allegedly cancelled in 1968.
Or the Truck became classified, in order to leave a Descent Module, and bring back rocks.
 

How will the Cover Up Continue in the Future?

Once NASA can figure out how to get through the Van Allen Belts of deadly radiation,
and truly get men on the Moon, the Apollo "landing" sites will probably be restricted no fly zones,
to give time for someone  to walk around making foot prints, and place the ALSEP experiments

Apollo landing sites will be classified no fly zones for "historical purposes"
They may blow up the sites and claim a meteor hit them.


http://www.nlpwessex.org/docs/cosmicmission.htm
"Limitless undying love which shines around me
like a million suns. It calls me on and on across the universe
Jai guru deva"

President Bill Clinton
My Life - autobiography, 2004

"Just a month before, Apollo 11 astronauts Buzz Aldrin and Neil Armstrong had left their colleague, Michael Collins, aboard spaceship Columbia and walked on the moon...The old carpenter asked me if I really believed it happened. I said sure, I saw it on television. He disagreed; he said that he didn't believe it for a minute, that 'them television fellers' could make things look real that weren't. Back then, I thought he was a crank. During my eight years in Washington, I saw some things on TV that made me wonder if he wasn't ahead of his time."


Although JFK wanted NASA to "go to the moon in this decade",
if the Van Allen Belts turned out to be a problem,
he would not want LBJ and Nixon to lie about going.

"Back" to the Moon for Good - and for Real

lunar.xprize.org


Will the first Moon Base be Chinese, Russian or American?

       
Which country will lead our future Star Treks?

Facebook.com/groups/moontruth

TruthForHealth.org
False beliefs in the brain are like malware in your computer

Conveniently located near Capitol Hill and NASA Headquarters

American Moon Association
1629 K Street NW, Suite 300
Washington, DC  20006
202-221-5022
info@AmericanMoon.org
American Moon Association
Lobbying Congress and NASA for an American Moon Base by 2020


American Moon Association
1629 K Street NW
Washington, DC 20006
Lobbying Congress for truth and a Moon base by 2020
 AmericanMoon.org
MoonTruth.org

सत्यं एव जायते
Satyam Eva Jayate
Truth Alone Triumphs