Proof that the Apollo moon missions were faked

[Drifty]

The Apollo footage was filmed in air. Check out the movement of the flaps in this video.

Apollo 15 Rover Traverse Issue
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPzG_4H0anU
(Be sure to watch at the 3:13 time mark)


The bumpy ride causes the flaps to go up but air is keeping them from coming back down.

This would explain why it looks like they're on the moon.
http://apollofake.atspace.co.uk/


More proof of air. Air makes the flag move in this video.

Apollo 15 flag, facing air resistance; proving the fraud of alleged manned moon landings.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gn6MTrin5eU
(2:35 time mark)


These two videos show that the flag had started to move before he got close enough to touch it.

Initial Apollo 15 Flag Movement
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dW9qcL4LiUg

The flag that moved
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oFMpmjEv9o0


This video shows that the flag movement is consistent with atmosphere.

windyz.wmv
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7yc2rVOs00
(00:50 and 1:50 time marks)


So does this one.

Physics of the Moon Flag
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UgUncG26MMA
(18:50 time mark)


Here's some more stuff on the flag.

Moonfaker: LRO, Flag or no Flag?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nRXretl0amQ

Physics of the Moon Flag - part 2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EscIMIkiER8

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_ ... +Are+Alive.
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_ ... ead+Horses.


Other anomalies.

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=U ... QqbjeoyC4Q


Watch how the corner of Collins' jacket moves in this clip.
Apollo_11__The_TV_Transmission_Conspiracy_Theorists_Hate_.mp4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6fqdB1b53jc
(00:52 time mark)

The corner of Collins' jacket swings back and forth the way it would in gravity.


Look at the corners of the jacket the woman astronaut is wearing in this clip.

Discovery Crew Enters International Space Station
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=TejsnPThmd4

That is real zero-gravity and they behave quite differently.


The movement of Collins' jacket corner is very different from that of the straps in this clip which is in zero-G.

Our World: Exercise Equipment
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ofwzby1c7o
(3:17 time mark)


It looks the same as the movement of this guy's jacket corners in gravity.

ISS space station treadmill running
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DTNGNW5Evs4


That footage was not taken halfway to the moon. It was taken in strong earth gravity. One possible explanation is that they were trying to fake zero-gravity in a diving plane and the plane wasn't diving fast enough at that point.

[Drifty]

Here's some proof that the mountains in the background of the footage are not real mountains but backdrops.

Go down about half way on this page to where it says, "The Hills Are Alive".
http://www.ufos-aliens.co.uk/cosmicapollo.html

More on the backdrops here.
http://www.aulis.com/stereoparallax.htm


At bottom of this page there's a picture of the astronaut's visor that has in it the reflection of what looks like some kind of studio light.
http://www.aulis.com/jackstudies_9.html

http://www.apfn.org/apfn/moon.htm


The reason they had to fake the missions was probably space radiation. This article is off-line now but I saved it.

------------------------------------------------------------
Did NASA steal $30 Billion to Fake
The Apollo Moon Landings?
Home Paper Moon Page

ARTICLE IN MEDIA BYPASS MAGAZINE, SEPT. 1997
THE VAN ALLEN ENIGMA
By Phylis and James Collier

In the early 1950's, a 35-year-old State University of Iowa physics professor and some of his students were cruising the cold waters ofnorthern Canada and the Atlantic Ocean, sending a series ofrocket-carrying balloons- which they dubbed "rockoons" - 12 to 15 miles into space.

They were trying to measure the nature of low-energy cosmic raysswirling around the earth. The experiments continued for five more years. Then, in 1958,Professor James Van Allen discovered his monster. Suddenly, his instrumentation warned of a giant beast of a thing, spewing enough deadly radiation counts to kill any human who ventured into its domain unprotected.

Van Allen and his students weren't sure of the size, shape and texture of the monster, they just knew they had encountered an incredible phenomenon.

Then, in l958, as part of the International Geophysical Year (a year in which men like James A. Van Allen were praised for exploring the realms of time and space) the young professor asked the U.S. military to send his experiments deeper into space, this time using a Geiger Counter to measure the intensity of the radiation. He further requested the most sophisticated rockets that would penetrate l00,000 miles into space.

That's when the monster grew all encompassing. It appeared to surround the entire earth and extend out some 65,000 miles, maybe even 100,000 miles. The Geiger Counter confirmed that the region above the earth, and in the path of the rocket, was cooking with deadly radiation. That radiation was born from solar flares that would race through the universe and become trapped by the earth's magnetic field. A deadly mixture of protons and electrons.

It was then that Van Allen realized the Aurora Borealis, the northern lights, was actually a visual manifestation of that tremendous energy from the sun. You could actually see the radiation swirling in a magnificent and deadly dance. His eventual finding of two such lethal radiation belts, put his name in the history books as the man who discovered the Van Allen Radiation Belts. There was an inner belt and an outer belt. The inner belt went from 40 degrees north and south of the Equator and was basically a doughnut surrounding the earth. Scientific experiments conducted by Van Allen and the military proved that belt was so deadly that no human could survive in its orbit. The outer belt was equally as destructive, and separated from the inner belt by an area of lesser radiation.

Van Allen's conclusion was delivered in a speech to the Academy of Science in 1959. He warned future space travelers they would have to race through these two zones on their way to outer planets.

"All manned space flight attempts must steer clear of these two belts of radiation until adequate means of safeguarding the astronauts has been developed" he said. Moreover, Van Allen advised they would have to be shielded with some extra layers of protection beyond that of the spacecraft itself. These findings were also published in Scientific American Magazine, March, 1959.

Two years later, Van Allen updated his report in Space World Magazine, December, 1961. In brief, he reported that everything he had found in 1959 was still valid. It was also in that year that President John F. Kennedy told an assembled group of students and dignitaries at Rice University in Houston, that it was America's destiny to put a man on the moon by the end of the decade. With that statement, the space race become a political game, worth 30 billion in taxpayer dollars to the winners. National Aeronautic and Space Administration (NASA), which is part of the Department of Defense and the CIA, became the caretaker of Kennedy's dream.

It was their job to build a spacecraft that would meet Van Allen's scientific requirements of safety through the radiation belts. Van Allen stated that the ship's skin, made of aluminum, would not be enough protection for the astronauts. Extra shielding of lead or another substance that would absorb the radiation would be needed. That, of course, posed the problem of weight. More weight created a booster problem. In other words, they would need a bigger rocket to carry a ship that was properly lined against radiation penetration. One of the most interesting of Van Allen's findings was that once protons and electrons hit the aluminum skin of the spacecraft, they would turn into x-rays. The kind the average dentist protects patients against with two inch lead vests. Those rays would naturally penetrate the astronaut's bodies and create anything from nausea and vomiting to eventual death, depending on the length of the exposure.

All of this scientific data presented a big problem for NASA. How could they build a spacecraft that would meet radiation standards and yet get off the ground?

The National Committee on Radiation Protection (NCRP) and the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) had established low "permissible doses" of radiation at levels that were consistent with living on earth. However, where the critical dosage on earth might be 5 rems of radiation in a year, the astronauts would receive that amount within minutes passing through the lower zone of the radiation belt.

In order to penetrate Van Allen's belt, in l965 NASA requested the two regulatory groups modify the existing standards for space flight. It was simply a matter of "risk over gain" and NASA convinced them to change the standards and allow them to take the risk. Whether or not future astronauts would be advised of these dramatically lowered standards and substantial risk is unknown at this time.

The next problem NASA faced was the shielding of the spacecraft. It was solved in a report NASA issued in Aerospace Medicine Magazine in 1965 and 1969. The report was written prior to the first Apollo mission to the moon.

NASA announced that a simple aluminum skin on the command module was enough to protect astronauts from lethal doses of radiation. This conclusion was based on studies NASA had conducted. Now NASA had ingeniously solved their two basic problems, protection and weight. They had eliminated the danger of radiation penetration, along with the problem of radiation shielding and spacecraft weight. We telephoned North American Rockwell, the builder of the Command Module which carried the astronauts to the moon and back. They verified that the craft was not protected by any additional shielding.

It was at this point in our research that we realized the Van Allen Report had been seriously compromised by NASA. Professor Van Allen had become an icon in the scientific community for warning of radiation dangers. One of his most important tenets was that even if you raced quickly through the 65,000 mile belt, which starts 400 miles above the earth's surface (thus allowing for inner space travel) you would still need considerable additional shielding. Were his findings now bogus? We had to speak to Van Allen.

Professor James A. Van Allen now 83, is Professor Emeritus in Geophysics at the University of Iowa. Our first question was why he did not speak up after NASA's claims and defend his original findings. Astonishingly, he told us that his seminal Scientific American article
in 1959 was merely "popular science."

"Are you refuting your findings?" we asked.

"Absolutely not," he answered, "I stand by them." In the next breath, Van Allen again acquiesced to NASA's point of view. He became positively mercurial in his answers. Basically he defended NASA's position that any material, even aluminum without shielding, was adequate to protect the astronauts from the radiation he once called deadly. When we asked him the point of his original warning about rushing through the Belt, he said, "It must have been a sloppy statement." So there we were, down the rabbit hole, chasing Van Allen through halls of mirrors. Was he taking the line of least resistance to government pressure? Was he trashing his own report in order not to be labeled a whistle blower? Could this renowned scientist actually be capable of a "sloppy statement" and blatant hyperbole published in a scientific journal?

If you don't believe we went to the moon, then you will say that NASA created the perfect cover story. It allowed them to continue receiving funding for a spacecraft they could not build, to enter a region of space they could not penetrate. If you believe we went to the moon, then you have to disregard Van Allen's years of research and published findings. You would also have to believe that aluminum, and not lead, is adequate protection against radiation in the very heart of the Belt. . .exactly the spot where Apollo rocket ships entered from Cape Canaveral in Florida.

[Drifty]

Here's some more alternative info on space radiation.

http://apollotruth.atspace.co.uk/
(excerpt)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There is an old saying that "A liar needs a good memory". Nowhere is this more true than in the Apollo program. NASA tell lies to cover up previous lies, and other discrepancies uncovered by people investigating the Moon landings. Altering previous data, removing photographs, and retracting statements made, only re-enforces the evidence that NASA are on the run, and being forced into a corner to which they cannot escape. The actions of those under investigation makes the investigator more aware they are bluffing. The longer that person, or persons, who make the extravagant claims continue, the more lies they have to tell in order to counteract it, until it reaches the point where it becomes ridiculous. That point was passed in July 1999, when NASA officials were questioned about the Moon landings on television. They dodged the all important questions like a drifter dodges the heat.
Many Apollo astronauts have long since died, as to have many of the original NASA officials involved in the scam, consequently current officials, who know that Apollo was a fake, have not quite got it right when talking openly in public. Perhaps the biggest slip of the tongue was made by NASA Chief Dan Goldin when interviewed by UK TV journalist Sheena McDonald in 1994. He said that mankind cannot venture beyond Earth orbit, 250 miles into space, until they can find a way to overcome the dangers of cosmic radiation. He must have forgot that they supposedly sent 27 astronauts 250,000 miles outside Earth orbit 36 years earlier.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This link is dead. I wish I'd copied the whole article when the link was active. I only have the excerpt.
two sets of radiation data
http://hey_223.tripod.com/bulldoglebeau ... /id82.html
(excerpt)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To prove his thesis, Rene tries to get certain solar data from NATIONAL
OCEANIC & ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION, (NOAA) using clever techniques
to
disguise his true intentions, [i.e. to get true data on solar flares.] NOAA,
unfortunately, proved to be as cagey as Rene in dodging the giving out of any
really good DETAILS on this matter, [you know, where the devil resides.]
Rene, seeing games being played, deduced that there must be two sets of data,
one which is sent to scientists on the preferred list, and one sent to the
likes of Rene as casual strangers. (p.125)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://ocii.com/~dpwozney/apollo5.htm
http://hugequestions.com/Eric/MoreInfoF ... lenge.html
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index ... &hl=apollo

MoonFaker: Exhibit C. PART 5
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f2rotplZn0g

Lunarcy: NASA's Radiation Problem
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OKB5u_VTt6M

Lunarcy: NASA's Radiation Problem II
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcytzf7PkRA

Lunarcy: NASA's Radiation Problem 2.5 4 Dummies
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J6DhY1NvmIc

Lunarcy: NASA's Radiation Problem III (Major Solar Flares)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T1ltWMbHdDU

Lunarcy: NASA's Radiation Problem 3.5 Addendum
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mnckudD9oa8

Lunarcy: NASA's Radiation Problem IV (Radiation Everywhere)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LiTzo3G_hvo

Lunarcy: NASA's Radiation Problem 4.5
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dFiIR7hA1rM

MoonFaker: Cold War II. PART 2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=toI1Xw9paW4

MoonFaker: Radioactive Anomaly. PART 1.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9xlKooAbKpM
(23 parts)


Here are some documentaries on the Hoax.

What Happened on the Moon
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W79mIGx9Ib4

Was it only a Paper Moon - James Collier - LEM Analysis
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QQKtV9dX5FE

Conspiracy Theory: Did They Land on the Moon? FULL - HD
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ybJMuowl0UU

A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Moon
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xciCJfbTvE4

Astronauts Gone Wild
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qr6Vcvl0OeU


Be sure to watch some of these.
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=MoonFaker

[Drifty]

Here's some stuff about the moon rocks.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kSIlgQhUi9A
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4AQQHTjeMkA
http://www.geschichteinchronologie.com/ ... -ENGL.html
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_q ... sited&aq=f


Here's some stuff about the "No stars" issue. I don't have any background in photography but different astronauts say different things about the visibility of stars. They contradict each other.

http://hugequestions.com/Eric/Astronaut ... -trip.html
(excerpt)
------------------------------------------------
"Seeing the bright blue sky turning pitch-black and seeing stars appear while it is day time is absolutely mind-blowing."
------------------------------------------------

https://spaceflight.nasa.gov/gallery/im ... 32103.html
https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap070621.html
http://hugequestions.com/Eric/Astro-Nuts-see-stars.html

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic ... ding-hoax/

The elbow has it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=--AaixSNCUg


Here's an expert in special effects explaining why he thinks the lunar rover footage was faked.

Lunar rover on the moon. Was it a RC model? (Extended Edition)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eK3R2en4p_8


http://www.aulis.com/investigation.htm
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/moon.htm

[exploited]

Where is Buzz Aldrin and his famous right hook when you need him?

[John Galt]

is there any evidence that you would accept as proof that the moon landings happened?

lunar rocks were given to 140 nations after America landing on the moon and collected material and brought it back home. these rocks contain special geological features only found in meteorites and lunar rocks -- features that can't form in atmosphere. they've all been independently verified. i suppose you'd might reply that america found a bunch of meteorites, kept them secret, and used them as proof of their visit, but occam's razor is clear that the moon landings happened. the technology to fake it would have been a harder undertaking than actually landing on the moon -- which was phenomenal itself. do you think china, russia, japan, and india have reason to continue to accept America's lie, and doctor their own photos from their own probes to the moon that show the landing sites? why? embarrassing america would be great for any one of them. the orbiters -- not just NASA's -- around the moon do show the landings. they show the footprints (trails) https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/apol ... Q7scFXyvIV)



i mean i could just go through the internet and find debunking of each of your claims, but what would really satisfy your concerns? what would convince you of the truth?

[NAB]

2018 and we get a spate of Moon Landing is Fake posts? Awesome.

Algorithm or the real thing?

[Kane]

Trump ordered the NSA to offer distractions throughout social media.

This is what they came up with.

[Drifty]

[John Galt]

why do i think it moved? it either didn't move (it moved like, a centimeter if it actually did, and they had bad equipment for video recording so it could be an artifact of the recording), or the fine powder that the covers the moon moved as the astronaut stepped on the surface near the flag, thus causing the flag to slightly shift

while Japan did not put a probe down, they did 3-D map the whole moon. and what they ended up creating was a 3D space that looked like the the pictures from the moon at the landing site, something that they could not have guessed correctly if the Americans didn't land

the apollo missions themseves were tracked by lots of people and governments. some civilians could record their radio recordings from the moon. governments used radar to track them to the moon and back. a freaking boys grammar school was able to track the apollo craft going to the moon using a radio


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third-par ... n_landings

if you just put that aside, say things like there are no control for moon rocks, you are just throwing away actual science that was able to determine rocks were lunar. lunar rocks have features that earth rocks don't have, and earth rocks have way more things that lunar rocks don't have

there are reflectors left on the moon that you yourself can visit an observatory powerful enough and note their existence. while they do not prove that humans went there, they do prove that something man made is there. if you look at the LRO satellite imagery provided by the LROC science operations center which has multiple independent non-US institutions involved in it, you'll see the reflectors... and trails left by the people. they are different than trails left by rovers, also present. you'll see the shadows of the flags, except for Apollo 11 which was too close to the lander and was blown down by the lander's exhaust

there is basically no evidence that the lunar landings were fake compared to the tsunami of evidence that it happened. why do you persist in thinking that it was fake? why must you see footage that meets whatever your specification is?

if a rover was to land on the moon and show everything there would that be acceptable? or would, in order to prove the initial landings were real, would you need another set of human landings in high definition, to the same place, while also shining a flashlight back to earth at the same time that you could see with your naked eye? your instistence that it is not real is like insisting Australia isn't real: it's not real since you haven't been there.

i'm certainly not asking you to take it on faith. i'm asking you to take it on the fact that it happened because of the evidence is complete in favor that it did happen