Watch the documentaries below for astronaut fakery caught red-handed.
http://www.ufos-aliens.co.uk/cosmicapollo.html
Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin gave a moon rock to Holland that turned out to be petrified wood.
In western Australia during the live broadcast of the Apollo 11 moon landing, several people saw a very unusual occurrence. One viewer, Una Ronald watched the telecast and was astonished with what she saw.
The residents of Honeysuckle Creek, Australia, actually saw a different broadcast to the rest of the World. Just shortly before Armstrong stepped onto the Moons surface, a change could be seen where the picture goes from a stark black to a brighter picture. Honeysuckle Creek stayed with the picture and although the voice transmissions were broadcast from Goldstone, the actual film footage was broadcast from Australia. As Una watched Armstrong walking on the surface of the Moon she spotted a Coke bottle that was kicked in the right hand side of the picture. This was in the early hours of the morning and she phoned her friends to see if they had seen the same thing, unfortunately they had missed it but were going to watch the rebroadcast the next day. Needless to say, the footage had been edited and the offending Coke bottle had been cut out of the film. But several other viewers had seen the bottle and many articles appeared in The West Australian newspaper.
Western Australia received their coverage in a different way to the rest of the World. They were the only Country where there wasn’t a delay to the ‘live’ transmission. Bill Kaysing says ‘NASA and other connected agencies couldn’t get to the Moon and back and so went to ARPA (Advanced Research Projects Agency) in Massachusetts and asked them how they could simulate the actual landing and space walks. We have to remember that all communications with Apollo were run and monitored by NASA, and therefore journalists who thought they were hearing men on the Moon could have easily been misled. All NASA footage was actually filmed off TV screens at Houston Mission Control for the TV coverage… No one in the media were given the raw footage.’
Bill Wood is a highly qualified scientist and has degrees in mathematics, physics and chemistry, and a space rocket and propulsion engineer. He has been granted high security clearance for a number of top secret projects and has worked with Macdonald Douglas and engineers who worked on the Saturn 5 rocket (the Apollo launch vehicle). He worked at Goldstone as a Communications Engineer during the Apollo missions. Goldstone in California, USA, were responsible for receiving and distributing the pictures sent from the Apollo to Houston. He says early video machines were used to record the NASA footage here on Earth by the TV networks. They received the FM carrier signal on Earth, ran it through an FM demodulator and processed it in an RCA scan converter that took the slow scan signal and converted it to the US standard black and white TV signal. The film was then sent on to Houston. When they were converting from slow scan to fast scan, RCA used disc and scan recorders as a memory and it played back the same video several times until it got an updated picture. In other words the signal was recorded onto video one then converted to video two. Movie film runs at 30 frames per second, whereas video film runs at 60 frames per second. So in other words the footage that most people saw that they thought was ‘live’ wasn’t, and was actually 50% slower than the original footage!!!
From Wikipedia regarding The Apollo Fraud:
“Some people insist that the Apollo moon landings were a Cold War deception of the Nixon administration. However, ’empirical’ evidence is readily available to show that manned moon landings did occur. Anyone on earth with an appropriate laser and telescope system can apparently bounce laser beams off three retro-reflector arrays reported to be left on the moon by Apollo 11, 14, and 15, suggesting deployment of the lunar laser ranging equipment at asserted Apollo moon landing sites, implying equipment constructed on earth was transported to the surface of the moon. In addition, in August 2009, NASA’s lunar reconnaissance orbiter claimed to send back high-resolution photos of the estimated Apollo landing sites. These government issued pictures show not only what is reported to be the faint shadows of the descent stages of the lunar landers allegedly left behind, but also apparent tracks of the astronauts’ walking paths nearby in the lunar dust.”
At first (and only) glance, these appear to be relevant arguments, yet each one is, surprisingly, most easily and unconditionally refuted with only a modicum of further investigation beyond the initial conditioned interpretation. First of all, it has recently come to light through employee “whistling blowing” that United States spy agencies regularly use “Wikipedia”, as well as hundreds of other websites, for deceitful misinformation purposes, as they can anonymously post intelligent sounding pro-government thesis to the masses, intentionally contradicting and smugly belittling Truthful “conspiracy theories” of very real crimes, of which they themselves have committed, in an attempt to conceal their wrongdoing through such contrary postings.
The fact that billions of our tax dollars are being spent each year by the government for the very purpose of concealing their own crimes and lying to their own citizens, is utterly disgusting.
When they use statements like “empirical evidence (Because the Emperor says so?) is readily available to show that the manned moon landings did occur”, it not only shows their arrogance (which, in and of itself, demonstrates their blindness to the facts), it also exemplifies their desperation to make an argument, that is so much losing ground, that they have to resort to the tactic of claiming that if you don’t agree with them, you are somehow deficient in intelligence. Again, if the “moon landings” were so obviously real (even though they cannot be repeated today with fifty years more advanced technology and the farthest a man can travel from the earth to the moon today is 1/1000th as far as they allegedly could travel half a century ago), and there is no proof whatsoever of the missions deliberate falsification, then there would be no need whatsoever for the hundred plus films and websites, which took tens of thousands of hours to produce, solely dedicated to reassure the public of the “moon landings” genuineness! The fact that there are, is proof itself that mounting evidence does exist which proves the “moon missions” to be a forgery, otherwise the deceptively claimed “obviousness” of their authenticity would speak for itself, without the need of hundreds of websites to defend them. When a structure needs such repeated precarious support and maintenance, this alone is evidence that the structure is not sound to begin with.
First of all, it was proven in 1962 that a laser can be bounced and calibrated off of the moon without a manmade reflector thereon, simply due to the reflectivity of the lunar surface. NASA simply designated these reflective locations as “landing sites” for the very purpose of contriving this evidence. Additionally, Russia put a manmade mirror on the moon’s surface during the time of the “Apollo” missions for this same claimed reason, using instead an un-manned probe that would not have to suffer the biological ravages of lethal space radiation en route, one of the main reasons NASA was, and still is, unable to send humans to the moon. Don’t believe me? Click HERE to see the March 1959 issue, Volume 200, Number 3, of the magazine “Scientific American”, article entitled “Radiation Belts Around the Earth”, to see how deadly and impenetrable space radiation is beyond the safety of low earth orbit where the space station currently resides (at an altitude of merely 250 miles above the earth, the moon being about 239,000 miles away, or roughly 1000 Times farther). Furthermore, seeing how all of these lasers have their data computer controlled, it would only take one computer hacker to manipulate the information shown on a viewing screen, making even the employees of NASA ignorant of the facts. (This was precisely the case at “mission control” during the “moon missions”, where dozens of computer “operators”, actually just read the contrived preprogrammed data on their screens like news anchors, who do not write their own words, openly admitting afterwards that they could tell no difference whatsoever between a “real” flight and a “simulation”.)
Secondly, to say that additional “new” photographs from the criminal NASA are evidence that “prove” the “moon landings” were real . . . is laughable. They already faked high resolution, full body pictures, of an astronaut standing on the “moon’s” surface nearly fifty years ago, so what is it to fake additional pictures now, with almost five decades better “Photoshop” technology, of such simple things as alleged tiny shadows of lunar landers or supposed faint footpaths, from miles above the moon’s surface, allegedly taken from NASA’s orbiting satellites? These diehard believers are just seeing what they want to see, like a naïve spouse of a cheating partner, accepting the fox’s evidence that they didn’t steal a chicken.
Additional arguments against the fraud are reported to be the hundreds of thousands of people throughout the industry who contributed to the “moon missions”, who allegedly would have been informed of the fraud and kept it a secret. Again, seemingly a good argument, yet it is not with only a little extra thought. Do you really think the CIA would be so careless as to tell hundreds of thousands of low-level contractors the goings-on of a top-top-secret project? Would the CIA really be so inept as to tell the person making the rocket’s door handle, or the glove or the boot of the spacesuit, that they were secretly faking the moon landings and to be sure not to tell anyone??? Do we really think the CIA is stupid enough to tell hundreds of thousands of low-level workers something they wanted to keep as a strict secret??? Furthermore, to say that “because my uncle worked at NASA and believed the ‘moon landings’ were real is proof that they were real”, is like saying that because my uncle worked as a vender at the Super Bowl and believed that the game was honest, that this is proof that the football players didn’t cheat.
Just like a pyramid of power in any business, what the employee, the manager, and the regional manager knows about the business’ actual agenda, is completely different than what the CEO at the very top knows. Remember, there were only three people (“trusted” government employees) who were actually there at the time of the “moon missions”, with no independent press coverage whatsoever. As demonstrated in my film “A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Moon”, the three crew members were indeed on the rocket, they did launch into earth orbit on July 16th, 1969 (to attain realistic “zero gravity” flight photography within the spacecraft), they did splash down in the ocean eight days later (to add to the authenticity), yet the rest of the mission, everything beyond earth orbit (which is only as far as astronauts can go today with fifty years more advanced technology), was completely contrived, like a masterful illusionist, by satellite data manipulation, complete media control, and professional movie sets. After all, what is easier to do, to actually build a rocket and travel to another planet with 1960’s technology on the very first attempt, or to simply make a movie set about it? The age-old argument “The simplest explanation is the True one“, which many Apollo proponents deceptively use to suggest the “moon missions” were real, actually proves the fraud instead!
The simple fact is, it is easier to fake a moon mission than to actually do one . . . the exact reason why the recent film “The Martian” was filmed in an earthly simulated television studio, rather than on Mars.
See also: http://www.thesleuthjournal.com/land-moon-1960s-technology/
In 2020, Wikileaks downloaded their entire database. Included in that massive treasure trove of hard evidence of US Government criminality and corruption was a series of clips of the faked moon landing that NASA has denied for decades. The upshot of this stunning video evidence, that proves once and for all the transparent moon landing hoax, is that it casts a dark shadow on the entire Apollo Space Program—a program that would have cost nearly $300 billion in 2019. Only by watching the entire video-documentary below can anyone apprehend the sheer depth and breadth of this unparalleled hoax and monstrous deception.
Even FOX distributed an excellent documentary under the title Conspiracy Theory: Did We Land on the Moon? The highly qualified professionals who provided testimony for this film offered evidence that is irrefutable. It’s well worth watching this film because of how well it elucidates 3 crucial points that prove the Moon landing hoax. These points were made by Bill Kaysing, an analyst and engineer at Rocketdyne—the company that designed the Apollo rockets. The following statements are almost exact quotes from Kaysing and can be found in the preceding video documentary.
- There were no stars in the photos or video footage despite the clarity of deep space. Stars were completely missing from the dark black lunar sky.
- The American flag was waving even though there is no air on the Moon.
- There was no blast crater beneath the Lunar lander (aka Apollo Lunar Module).
What significantly distinguishes APOLLOgate from the obvious “Moon landing hoax” is quite HUGE. The “Moon landing hoax” starring Neil Armstrong has been presented over the years as an isolated incident when in fact it is merely one of several staged hoaxes. Every manned Apollo mission was a fraudulent enterprise designed to profoundly deceive the American people. Hence, the entire Apollo program over a decade long was carried out as a highly orchestrated deception the likes of which the world has never seen. Not only did NASA not put those 12 men on the Moon, Apollo Missions 11 though 17 were not even undertaken to land on the moon. Rather, each of these utterly fake Moon missions was executed in such an elaborate and convoluted manner so as to considerably strain credulity.
Stanley Kubrick Filmed the Fake Moon Landings
The interview below was released in December 2015 from a 1999 interview with film maker Stanley Kubrick.
In early 1964 Stanley Kubrick had just finished his black satire Dr Strangelove and was looking to do a science fiction film. While directing Dr. Strangelove Kubrick had asked the US Air Force for permission to film one of their B-52 bombers for the movie. The Pentagon turned him down. The movie, Dr. Strangelove, was about a flight squadron that had been ordered to fly to Russia and drop nuclear bombs on that country. The Pentagon read Kubrick’s script and rejected his request to actually film the inside, and outside, of a B-52. The reason for this rejection was that Kubrick’s film was clearly a satire on the military and US nuclear policy. The Pentagon did not want to assist Kubrick in this satirical undertaking.
Undaunted by the rejection, Kubrick used various special effects to create the B-52 in flight. When viewing Dr. Strangelove today, these special effects look quaint and old fashioned, but in 1963 they looked very good. It is possible that someone in NASA saw what Kubrick had done in Dr. Strangelove and, admiring his artfulness, designated Kubrick as the person best qualified to direct the Apollo Moon landing. If he could do that well on a limited budget – what could he do on an unlimited budget?
No one knows how the powers-that-be convinced Kubrick to direct the Apollo landings. Maybe they had compromised Kubrick in some way. The fact that his brother, Raul Kubrick, was the head of the American Communist Party may have been one of the avenues pursued by the government to get Stanley to cooperate. Kubrick also had a reputation for being a notoriously nasty negotiator. It would have been very interesting to have been a fly on the wall during the negotiations between Kubrick and NASA.
In the end, it looks like Stanley Kubrick faked the moon landings in return for two things. The first was a virtually unlimited budget to make his ultimate science fiction film: 2001: A Space Odyssey, and the second was that he would be able to make any film he wanted, with no oversight from anyone, for the rest of his life.
Except for his last film, Eyes Wide Shut, Kubrick got what he wanted.
It is uncanny the way that the production of 2001: A Space Odyssey parallels the Apollo program. The film production started in 1964 and went on to the release of 2001: A Space Odyssey in 1968. Meanwhile the Apollo program also began in 1964 and culminated with the first moon landings on July 20th 1969.
Also it is very interesting to note that scientist Frederick Ordway was working both for NASA and the Apollo program and was also Kubrick’s top science advisor for 2001: A Space Odyssey.
Once he negotiated the deal, Stanley, got to work. The most pressing problem for Kubrick in 1964 was to figure out a way to make the shots on the ground, on the surface of the moon, look realistic. He had to make the scenes look wide-open and expansive, like it was really done on the moon and not in a studio back lot.
No one knows how many things he tried but eventually Kubrick settled on doing the entire thing with a cinematic technique called Front Screen Projection.
It is in the use of this cinematic technique that the fingerprints of Kubrick can be seen all over the NASA Apollo photographic and video material.
What is Front Screen Projection?
Kubrick did not invent the process but there is no doubt that he perfected it. Front Screen Projection is a cinematic device that allows scenes to be projected behind the actors so that it appears, in the camera, as if the actors are moving around on the set provided by the Front Screen Projection.
The process came into fruition when the 3M company invented a material called Scotchlite. This was a screen material that was made up of hundreds of thousands of tiny glass beads each about .4mm wide. These beads were highly reflective. In the Front Screen Projection process the Scotchlite screen would be placed at the back of the soundstage. The plane of the camera lens and the Scotchlite screen had to be exactly 90 degrees apart. A projector would project the scene onto the Scotchlite screen through a mirror and the light would go through a beam splitter, which would pass the light into the camera. An actor would stand in front of the Scotchlite screen and he would appear to be ‘inside’ the projection.
Today Hollywood magicians use green screens and computers for special effects and so Front Screen Projection has gone the way of the Adding Machine and the Model T, but for its time, especially in the 1960’s, nothing worked better than Front Screen Projection for the realistic look that would be needed both for the ape-men scenes in 2001: A Space Odyssey and the faked Apollo landings.
To see how Front Screen Projection looks on the screen let’s examine the ape-men scenes at the beginning of Kubrick’s film 2001: A Space Odyssey. While viewing the stills from these scenes, or watching them in the film, one has to remember that the early scenes in 2001 with the actors in Ape costumes were all done on a soundstage. None of what you are seeing in the ape-men scenes at the beginning of 2001 was actually shot outside. The scenes that surround the ape-men in 2001 are actually slides of a desert being projected onto Scotchlite screens standing at the rear of the set.
In order to create these desert backgrounds Kubrick sent a photographic team to Spain to shoot 8” X 10” Ektachrome slides. These slides were then projected via the Front Screen Projection system onto the Scotchlite screen. The actors in ape costumes stood in front of the screen acting out the script.
If you watch 2001 on DVD you can actually see the ‘seams’ of the screen occasionally behind the gyrating apes. Kubrick was doing Front Screen Projection on such a huge and grand fashion that the technicians were forced to sew together many screens of Scotchlite so that Kubrick could create the vastness needed for the ape scenes to be believable.
In this still taken from an early scene in 2001 you can see the seams in the blue sky if you look closely.
VIDEOS:
BELOW: Scenes from Fake Moon Landing
Chronological History of Events Related to the Moon Landing
