NASA
Numerous Anomalies and Scams Abound
___________________________________________________
This
web page is dedicated to NASA Chief Michael Griffin, NASA Historian
Steven J. Dick, and the few remaining Apollo astroNOTS, who
make themselves a worldwide laughing stock with their ongoing claim
of having walked upon the Moon's surface.
If the
Internet and e-mail were around in 1968, I would have been glad to have a
serious open debate with "Apollo believers" on whether the Moon missions
were for real or not. However it is NOT 1968, but 2007 and as such, the
authenticity of the Moon missions can no longer be debated. Neither does
it fall into a "conspiracy theory" as the facts are well known. Conspiracy
theories question what really took place, however it has been a well
proven fact since the mid 80's, that the Apollo Moon missions were
FAKED.
Although it is common knowledge throughout the world that the
Apollo Moon missions were faked by NASA back in the 60's, many gullible
people still accept NASA's claim of sending men to the Moon, without
bothering to carry out any research, or investigation, to see if NASA are
indeed telling the truth. There are some who will NEVER accept the Moon
missions were faked, regardless of how much factual evidence of a fake is
put before them. Those who will not accept that Apollo was a fake, have
been brain washed into believing 38 years of lies emanating from NASA,
whereby they become brain damaged, and lose touch with reality. We've all
come across them from time to time as they reiterate their ridiculous
statements like, "I can see the flag through my telescope", or "I saw the
rocket lift off, and the TV pictures, so it must have happened". They also
make stupid remarks like "What about the Moon rock brought back by the
Apollo astronauts". How do WE know its Moon rock, its only NASA's word,
and if it is, then it was brought back by scoop and return probe, NOT
ASTRONAUTS.
If you
are one who lives in a fantasy world, there is no hope, other than a brain
transplant, however if you are one of those who has serious doubt about
the Apollo Moon landings ever happening, then this site is for
you.
The
comical aspect about NASA's 38 year Moon hoax, (Apollo 8), is how it's
making a worldwide laughing stock of NASA, and the astronauts who claim to
have traveled to the Moon. The most damning aspect however, is that NASA's
Moon landing scam is confusing the younger generation, by giving them a
disorientated view of current space travel and technology. For example,
many youngsters who see the shuttle lift off from launch pad assume it is
going to the Moon. They cannot understand why it's only going 150 miles
into low Earth orbit, when NASA supposedly made 9 manned journeys to the
Moon, (each mission being a return trip of over 500,000 miles), during a 3
year period which began over 38 years ago. Yes NASA made trips to the Moon
look like a 10 minute bus ride to the local shops, and we suckers fell for
it hook, line and sinker. If NASA did send men to the Moon, then space
technology has gone backwards instead of forward. That seems bizarre when
one looks at technology advances, particularly in computer science. Of
course space technology HAS NOT gone backwards. What is bizarre is NASA's
outlandish claim.
Since
1995, more and more encyclopedias are making less and less, and in some
cases no reference at all, to the Apollo Moon missions. Evidently the
publishers have "wised up" to the fact that the Apollo missions were
faked, and no man has been to the Moon and back. "A HOLE IN HISTORY", as
Arthur C. Clarke quoted back in 1969.
During
the 70's, a large percentage of the world population had doubt that the
Moon landings were for real, however there was no material available upon
which to base an investigation, other than the limited number of
photographs shown in a few fictional/fantasy books which endorsed Apollo.
It was the Internet which brought about the downfall and full expose of
NASA's 38 year hoax, as people worldwide now have full access to NASA's
web site pictures, and can see for themselves the pathetic way in which
the photographs have been doctored with the SAME repetitive background.
Prior to 1997 it was not possible to see these pictures, but you can now
check them out for yourself. Sites exposing the Moon landings as fake,
will soon outnumber the untrue Apollo Moon web sites.
The so
called lunar map used for Apollo 17 mission, the quality of which is crap,
however scale is marked in Kms. Now perhaps some of you pro Apollo NUTTERS
out there could tell me WHY this map is marked in Kms, when in the USA the
Imperial system of measurement is ALWAYS used? Even today measurements are
logged in miles, so they were most certainly using miles back in 1968.
Note the alleged landing site marked X and journeys made in varying
directions to the so called Stations which are numbered 1 to 10B. Note
Station 8 and distance it is from LM landing
site. This
picture has been taken from Tuttle's Smithsonian site, and was supposedly
taken by astronauts on the 17th mission. However the picture does not
appear on the official Apollo 17 web site. The Moon's surface was, as we
were told, very dry and dusty. If that be the case then why do those
footprints show up so boldly. The only substance that would leave
footprints showing that boldly would be damp sand, and that's what it
probably is. Note curved light marking in top left hand of picture, and
black crater between the rock and that contraption. There is no evident
sign of the LM in this picture. Photograph shown on left is supposedly Station 6 on the
Moon.
Notice
how the background is identical with the SAME curved light marking, and
crater. However on the horizon, right of center, a white lump, (presumably
this is supposed to be a distant mountain), has suddenly appeared. This
picture was actually taken at Chezin Chotah in Arizona, so the shadows one
sees are natural occurring shadows from sunlight here on planet Earth. It
is but a simple matter to black the sky out, and paste in a background
mountain scene. Split boulders are either caused by boulder falling from a
rocky crag, or ingress of moisture which later freezes and expands.
Neither of these are possible on the
Moon. Now
this is supposed to be Station 9, but that SAME curved light marking, and
crater are there in background, and again picture was taken from exactly
the SAME angle. This is
Station 8, Cochise crater. S'funny innit the picture again shows SAME
background, and yet again picture was taken from the SAME angle. Text
accompanying this picture states "The final parking place of the rover
prior to lift off". Looking at EVA map, Station 8 is the furthest point
North from the LM landing site. Did they walk the 5 Kms back to
LM? Now
this picture, shown right, is Camelot crater which is Station 5. Camelot
crater is over 1 kilometer from the landing site in a totally OPPOSITE
direction to Station 8, (which incidentally is over 4 Kms from Station 5).
Low and behold that SAME curvature of light, but the crater has been
obliterated in this shot. A classic example of shuffling the background
imagery to try and create differing views. Tuttle did a poor job of
blackening the sky in this picture. Look closely on a high resolution
screen, and you will see traces of trees within the blackness of space.
These are the trees surrounding Cinder Lake man made crater field in
Arizona. NASA
claim that picture on left is Station 7, however it is plain to see that
background is again identical, with that SAME curved light marking, and
the angle that picture was supposedly taken is also the
same. This
final picture, taken from ALSJ web site, is portrayed as the Apollo 17
landing site. One does not need to be a photographic expert to spot that
photo, like all the others, has the SAME identical background, and yet the
LM does not appear in the photo's above. The background scene, (canvass
backdrop retained at LRC), has been superimposed, (pasted), onto
pictures which NASA claim are genuine Moon photo's taken at
different locations. Note, no reticules on photo, and yet it was
supposedly taken by the SAME camera. If this picture was taken in 1972,
why did it not appear in any books or magazines until 1994, when it first
appeared in a newspaper, and why is it in color on the ALSJ site, when
other pics are monochrome, especially as they were again taken by the SAME
camera? If the
astronauts covered an area roughly 8 Kms by 12 Kms, and panned their
camera through 360 degrees at various locations, what are the odds against
getting an identical background in each picture? Six separate locations
which are supposedly miles apart, and yet each has the SAME identical
background. In all the pictures one can see a relatively flat foreground,
and an abrupt straight line where that foreground meets the background
hilly area. This is conclusive proof that background hilly scene has been
PASTED onto photograph, and the sky blacked out. If you look at picture on
APOLLO REALITY site, you will see that same flat foreground, and abrupt
straight line where sandy foreground meets bushy area a few yards
back. The
evidence of false backdrops is not so noticeable in the earlier faked
pictures for missions 11/12 and 14. It is the latter missions, ie, 15/16
and 17 where the anomalies are plainly obvious. When questioned about the
authenticity of the Moon landings, NASA's reply is "We do not have time to
answer any questions, the truth is in the photographs". The truth is
indeed within the photographs, and the truth hurts. These photographs are
FAKE, which means the Moon landings are also
FAKE. APOLLO
FAKE
The person responsible for NASA's fake Apollo Moon
pictures. APOLLO
REALITY
How, and where NASA faked the lunar
orbiting/landing, and lift off video's. APOLLO
INSIDER
Detailed info on how NASA faked the astronaut video Moon
scenes. APOLLO
DATA
Data from the Apollo missions which does not add
up. APOLLO
TRUTH
The reason NASA faked the Apollo Moon
missions. APOLLOSCAM
More ridiculous Moon pics with added
humor. APOLLO
LAUGH
You've just gotta take the Mickey. APOLLO
FEEDBACK
Read what the media say about naughty
NASA. APOLLO FRY
UP
How deadly space radiation makes Moon trip
impossible. APOLLO
FACTS
Facts to be considered about Apollo Moon
missions. All sites best viewed at 1280 X 768, or 1280 X
1024 resolution with medium text size. NASASCAM: First
to expose the Apollo Moon pictures as being fake.
First
to expose who faked the Apollo Moon photographs.
First
to expose how NASA faked the lunar landing/orbiting and lift off.
First
to expose where NASA faked the lunar landing/orbiting and lift
of
First
to disclose how NASA faked the astronaut Moon scenes.
First
to disclose why NASA faked the Apollo Moon missions.
First
to expose incorrect info in Apollo data. We do the investigative work, whilst others copy
us. Living in the REAL world, not a FANTASY
one. |
||