50th anniversary of Apollo 11 on July 20

Charles Martel

Hall of Famer
Joined
Mar 14, 2007
Messages
8,484
Apollo 11: A Complete Guide to the Historic Moon Landing Mission

https://www.space.com/apollo-11-complete-guide.html

18mlpha66cr70jpg.jpg

dims

D_C7oRMXYAA77CD.jpg
 

BeyondFedUp

Hall of Famer
Joined
Oct 30, 2004
Messages
4,468
Location
United States
Last edited:

Don Wassall

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 30, 2004
Messages
31,565
Location
Pennsylvania
I'm not advocating this viewpoint, but I've gone from being an astronomy/space program buff to a more open-minded position on this issue, especially given that the government and the corporate media lie about almost everything, and a large number of smart people believe the moon landings were faked. Curious that JFK's promise of a manned moon landing by the end of the '60s happened right on time in spite of the difficulties encountered during that era, such as astronauts being burned alive. It was a great propaganda victory for the U.S. and accomplished with primitive technology and all the moon landings went off without a hitch -- yet no one's been back there in half a century??? Makes no sense to me given the normal trajectory of both history and technology. Just putting it out there, there's a lot more books, articles and videos on this subject besides the below piece.

The Greatest Hoax of All

by Donald Jeffries

Fifty years ago, our government and its state-run media tell us, Americans sent men to the moon. Neil Armstrong said “One small step,” and all that, and the photographs of the event were startlingly clear. Well, except for all the shadow anomalies, and lack of stars in the sky, that is.

As a twelve year old, and a huge astronomy junkie, I followed the Apollo program nearly as closely as I memorized Major League Baseball batting averages. I knew all the astronauts’ names, and even had a favorite; Jim Lovell, who would head the ill-fated Apollo 13, denying him the honor of walking on the moon.

At the time, I remember being a bit disappointed. I guess I expected the kind of world-wide attention that was depicted in a film I liked as a child; 1964’s The First Men in the Moon. The reaction on Earth just seemed kind of subdued to me in contrast, considering it was the most monumental achievement in human history.

I first started questioning the moon landings in the late 1980s, when I heard about a self-published book from 1974, We Never Went to the Moon, written by Bill Kaysing. I ordered it through the mail; obviously, it was not going to be in any bookstore or library, and that was the method I used to obtain much of my controversial reading material in those pre-internet days.

Kaysing made some great points. I was particularly intrigued by his tale of a disgruntled NASA employee who testified before Congress, and then was found dead, along with his family, in their car which had been conveniently left on some railroad tracks. That seemed pretty standard conspiratorial fare to me, and reminded me of so many similar unnatural deaths I’d read about during my research into the assassination of John F. Kennedy.

In 2001, the documentary Did We Land on the Moon aired on the Fox Network. It was a remarkable program for a major television network. Included were interviews with the widow and son of Virgil “Gus” Grissom, dean of the Apollo program who was actually scheduled to be the first man to walk on the moon. Grissom became a vocal critic of the Apollo program before dying in a launch pad fire with two other astronauts.

I was amazed to hear Grissom’s loved ones basically accuse NASA of murdering him. It was even more astounding to hear such claims aired on network television. Grissom had even hung a lemon over the NASA emblem on the lunar training module, and notably was recorded as telling NASA officials, “You expect me to go to the moon and you can’t even maintain telephonic communications over three miles.” Privately, Grissom had been increasingly dubious of the Apollo program.

Still, I remained somewhat on the fence regarding the legitimacy of the moon landings. Perhaps it was my childish affinity for space travel that kept me half wanting to believe, despite all the good questions that had been raised. Then I read the late Dave McGowan’s “Wagging the Moondoggie” series. Wagging the Moondoggie All doubts disappeared in my mind. We never went there. Period.

McGowan analyzed the absurdity of providing men on the most difficult and challenging flight in history with what amounted to a amateurish-looking, very unstable craft, lined with only a few inches of aluminum foil. Yes, you read that right; our astronauts were protected from the deadly risks of outer space by something we all use to wrap up hamburgers and hot dogs. The craft also seemed far too small for such a momentous trip.

Leaving aside the incredibly cramped quarters for the human occupants, where did all the batteries fit? Just imagine what kind of battery power was needed here; the craft had to be provided with oxygen, and once it landed on the surface of the moon, it had to furnish both heating and air-conditioning. We are told by science that the temperature varies wildly on the moon; when the astronauts stepped into the shade, they instantly encountered temperatures colder than any found on Earth, and when they stepped back into the sunlight, the temps would have been hotter than the middle of the Sahara Desert. That must have been quite a cooling-heating system in those spacesuits.

The size of the batteries required to provide all the power the astronauts needed must have been quite large. And heavy, of course. Not to mention the batteries needed for the magical temperature control they enjoyed. If you’ve seen the craft they are alleged to have flown in, you will find it hard to believe that huge batteries fit in their somehow. And on the last few trips, NASA added in the dune buggy vehicle we saw the astronauts cavorting around in on the moon’s surface.

How could they have fit this vehicle into that tiny craft? When NASA has even addressed questions like this, the answers don’t leave one feeling confident. In this case, they have claimed that the vehicle was folded up, ala Jetsons-style, and unfolded on the lunar surface. A reasonable person might ask; if we had this amazing technology in the early ’70s, what happened to it? To my knowledge, there has never been a folding car available to the public.

NASA has admitted, in recent years, that the original tapes of the Apollo 11 moon landing were erased inadvertently. You read that correctly; the documentation for the greatest achievement in the history of mankind was accidentally erased. Recently, it has been acknowledged that a sample of moon rocks collected during the Apollo 14 mission actually came from….Earth. That didn’t stop the true believers, however, who merely said it was “very unusual” that the chemical composition was common to Earth.

Speaking of those moon rocks, how did they account for the added payload on the trip home? Since they’d never been to the moon, they had no idea of just how heavy these rocks might be. NASA supposedly factored in every pound of weight, and designed everything to fit tightly, making every inch of space count. So how does a wild card like this fit in?

There are a multitude of other reasons to doubt this story. Richard Nixon supposedly telephoned the astronauts and spoke to them live on the lunar surface. What? Exactly what kind of magical phone line would have been used for that? We lose cell phone coverage today in certain spots on Earth. We’re talking 1969 here. If such fantastic technology existed then, it has been lost to history.

Speaking of fantastic technology, the power of computers in 1969 was akin to what you’d see today in a handheld calculator. And yet, NASA officials have admitted we aren’t technologically ready to go back to the moon today, with infinitely superior computer capability. An astronaut recently admitted, “We don’t have the technology to go to the moon anymore,” because NASA allegedly “destroyed” the technology. What? Does that make any sense whatsoever? Is it the least bit believable?

And how about that shot from the lunar surface of Apollo 17 taking off? What amazing technology- even getting the camera to pan upwards along with the craft. So what happened to this wonderful video camera? Was it a one-shot deal? Why didn’t they continue to use it? As many have noted, at this juncture, we ought to have a live view of the moon available to Earthlings 24/7.

Then there are the views of Earth from the lunar surface. Well, there aren’t very many of them. And the Earth seems smaller than it should be; considering it is much larger than the moon, why does it appear to be about the same size the moon does here on Earth? As a child enamored of astronomy, and later as a critical thinking adult, I expected more. I expected breath-taking views of planets and constellations in those Apollo pictures, with no atmosphere to filter them out. We should have witnessed a sight never seen in any planetarium or on the clearest night on Earth. Instead, we saw zero stars or any other astral bodies, just a few glimpses of Earth.

As Dave McGowan asked, at what point do Americans, and Earthlings in general, start to question this? Here we are on the 50th anniversary. If we haven’t returned by the 100th anniversary, will the majority of people start to wonder why? Progress and technology don’t work this way. Imagine if the Wright Brothers flew a plane a half dozen times, then no one else did for fifty years. Considering the trajectory we were on in the 1960s, we should have traveled to Mars, Venus and beyond by now. We should have bases on the moon, complete with lunar McDonalds and other vestiges of predictable corporate exploitation.

Is it unpatriotic to question this? Am I a “kook” for doubting this amazing alleged accomplishment? Is it unfair to ask how Armstrong, Aldrin, and Collins appeared over a week later on their return to Earth clean shaven? How did they factor in shaving in that situation? And in their initial press conference, they certainly appeared nervous and very un-heroic like, considering they were being lauded as the greatest explorers the world had ever seen.

Neil Armstrong, especially, maintained a very private existence after the moon landing. He granted few interviews, and seemed noticeably uncomfortable when asked about his fantastic experience. That just doesn’t ring true to me. As they age, people normally grow even prouder and if anything attempt to justify the things they’ve done in their lives. If what we’re told is true, Armstrong had no reason to justify anything, and should have been as proud as anyone could ever be.

Knowing what we know of our government’s tendency to lie and cover up, is it really a reach to think that NASA would lie about something this momentous? Regardless, no “investigative” reporter is going to look into the matter, because our state-run journalists don’t investigate anything. They will instead join in the chorus of derision directed at naysayers like me. They are only skeptical of skeptics.

This is not only the greatest hoax, but the most essential cover up in America’s history. After all, would we really expect our reflexively corrupt leaders to admit they engineered such a gigantic fake, and have continued to lie about it for half a century? Look at the evidence, and judge for yourself.

https://donaldjeffries.wordpress.com/2019/07/18/the-greatest-hoax-of-all/
 

icsept

Master
Joined
Oct 12, 2008
Messages
3,775
Location
Oklahoma
Unfortunately, I’ve reached the conclusion that NASA is not a scientific organization, but a branch of military propaganda. Also, my observations of the moon lead me to believe it has been mis-described. It does not appear to be a rock in space that can be landed upon. Nevertheless, congratulations to the US government for being the first to successfully convince the public of their alleged space exploits.
 

Charles Martel

Hall of Famer
Joined
Mar 14, 2007
Messages
8,484
I will refute his points.

The size of the batteries required to provide all the power the astronauts needed must have been quite large. And heavy, of course. Not to mention the batteries needed for the magical temperature control they enjoyed. If you’ve seen the craft they are alleged to have flown in, you will find it hard to believe that huge batteries fit in their somehow. And on the last few trips, NASA added in the dune buggy vehicle we saw the astronauts cavorting around in on the moon’s surface.

Speaking of those moon rocks, how did they account for the added payload on the trip home? Since they’d never been to the moon, they had no idea of just how heavy these rocks might be. NASA supposedly factored in every pound of weight, and designed everything to fit tightly, making every inch of space count. So how does a wild card like this fit in?

SCIENCE LESSON: Gravity is 1/81 on the moon what it is on earth. The rocks and batteries would have weighed 1/81 on the moon what they weigh on earth. They would have been weightless in space.

As Dave McGowan asked, at what point do Americans, and Earthlings in general, start to question this? Here we are on the 50th anniversary. If we haven’t returned by the 100th anniversary, will the majority of people start to wonder why? Progress and technology don’t work this way. Imagine if the Wright Brothers flew a plane a half dozen times, then no one else did for fifty years. Considering the trajectory we were on in the 1960s, we should have traveled to Mars, Venus and beyond by now. We should have bases on the moon, complete with lunar McDonalds and other vestiges of predictable corporate exploitation.

Civilization has regressed in many ways because of Cultural Marxism: lower standards in schools, affirmative action, political correctness, a welfare state that rewards people who are too lazy to work, the dumbing down of young people by the (((media))) etc.

One example of how we've regressed: adults generally didn't read comic books in the 1960s - if they did, they would have been considered retarded. At that time, it was agreed than anyone over 12 shouldn't read comics, yet many adults do read them today.

It has happened before: Europe was more advanced in 100 AD with Roman Civilization than it was in 700 AD during the Dark Ages, people were less superstitious, there was better technology, better medicine, better literature, better communication, better roads, better bridges, better sewers, etc.


Is it unpatriotic to question this? Am I a “kook” for doubting this amazing alleged accomplishment? Is it unfair to ask how Armstrong, Aldrin, and Collins appeared over a week later on their return to Earth clean shaven? How did they factor in shaving in that situation? And in their initial press conference, they certainly appeared nervous and very un-heroic like, considering they were being lauded as the greatest explorers the world had ever seen.


Silly. Of course they shaved before appearing to the public on earth.

Then there are the views of Earth from the lunar surface. Well, there aren’t very many of them. And the Earth seems smaller than it should be; considering it is much larger than the moon, why does it appear to be about the same size the moon does here on Earth? As a child enamored of astronomy, and later as a critical thinking adult, I expected more. I expected breath-taking views of planets and constellations in those Apollo pictures, with no atmosphere to filter them out. We should have witnessed a sight never seen in any planetarium or on the clearest night on Earth. Instead, we saw zero stars or any other astral bodies, just a few glimpses of Earth.

Of course they couldn't see stars. We don't see them on earth when the sun is up either. On a clear moonless night, we can see over a thousand stars if the plane of the Milky Way is high in the sky. But with a full moon, we see fewer than a thousand. When the sun is up we see none.

Had they landed on the dark side of the moon, if the earth was also obscured by the horizon, there would have been many stars. But they wouldn't have been able to see what they were doing.


Neil Armstrong, especially, maintained a very private existence after the moon landing. He granted few interviews, and seemed noticeably uncomfortable when asked about his fantastic experience. That just doesn’t ring true to me. As they age, people normally grow even prouder and if anything attempt to justify the things they’ve done in their lives. If what we’re told is true, Armstrong had no reason to justify anything, and should have been as proud as anyone could ever be.

I grew up around a lot of Highland Scots, and Neil Armstrong had the typical personality of smarter Highland Scots: practical, steady, reserved, rather quiet, no nonsense.

Knowing what we know of our government’s tendency to lie and cover up, is it really a reach to think that NASA would lie about something this momentous? Regardless, no “investigative” reporter is going to look into the matter, because our state-run journalists don’t investigate anything. They will instead join in the chorus of derision directed at naysayers like me. They are only skeptical of skeptics.

This is not only the greatest hoax, but the most essential cover up in America’s history. After all, would we really expect our reflexively corrupt leaders to admit they engineered such a gigantic fake, and have continued to lie about it for half a century? Look at the evidence, and judge for yourself.


Silly man. As if the USSR wouldn't have figured out it was a hoax. What a propaganda victory that would have been for them!

I'm sure that many people who hate the accomplishments of white men will continue to deny this great achievement. But men actually did walk on the moon, and ALL of them were white.
 
Last edited:

CrazyFinn

Mentor
Joined
May 14, 2015
Messages
649
I used to laugh and ridicule people who brought up the moon landing conspiracies and the fact that we never went there. But over the years, being a fully functioning adult with critical thinking skills, I’ve had the chance to look at all the evidence and now fully believe it never happened. It’s a painful realization because it is regarded as the greatest technological achievement in the history of mankind, by white men no less.

I don’t know Donald Jeffries, but the points he makes are among many that should make everyone seriously question the Apollo moon landings, all 6 of them.

I’ll just touch on one of them. The Wright Brothers invented and built the first airplane in 1906. In about 50 years, we had advanced to the point that we were heading to the moon. And 50 years later? Despite technology moving forward on an exponential scale, we haven’t been back and aren’t anywhere near another mission.

So, from Wright Brothers -> Landing on the moon -> Nothing?? I’m having a hard time accepting this.

And lastly, here’s a picture of the lunar module, looks like something put together by a bunch of kids in their backyard for a school science experiment.

DACA7C6C-E105-4ECD-84B4-8276D80F7777.jpeg
 

Extra Point

Hall of Famer
Joined
Oct 21, 2012
Messages
6,289
One of the problems about the claim that the moon landings were faked is that the spacecraft headed to the moon was tracked by observatories around the world, including those in the Soviet Union.

If there was no craft reaching the moon you can bet the Soviet Union would have proclaimed it. So would have observatories around the world.
 

white lightning

Hall of Famer
Joined
Oct 16, 2004
Messages
21,492
I have no doubt it was hoaxed. You can't even get cell coverage all around america is countless places. I'm a big camper. Also the battery technology and computers in those days
were a joke. I've seen hundreds of documents and vidoes. It was a fake and the whole world is in on the fake. There is a reason for this and it's related to the big bang theory and us
coming from the apes along with the shape of the earth. I will stop here though as the secrets go very deep down the rabbit hole. Every man should question everything.

It's all about disproving where we come from and who made us.
 

Charles Martel

Hall of Famer
Joined
Mar 14, 2007
Messages
8,484
You can't even get cell coverage all around america is countless places.
Cell phones have their limitations - even in the 1960s, there were better means of communication.

I had a cheap shortwave radio in 1969 that would pick up stations from all over the world. Even on our ordinary AM radio, I used to listen to baseball and hockey games after dark from thousands of miles away.

We can hear noise from billions of miles away with radio telescopes.

 

Extra Point

Hall of Famer
Joined
Oct 21, 2012
Messages
6,289
Another argument against the moon hoax theory is that the US made 5 more manned landings on the moon. If the first landing was for political purposes, because the US declared that it would do so, why did they fake it 5 more times? Why not just say we accomplished our objective and stop the program?
 

CrazyFinn

Mentor
Joined
May 14, 2015
Messages
649
I remain open to the possibility that the moon landings were real if there’s irrefutable evidence. Until then, my position is that they were staged.

A few more points from me:

The Russians didn’t say anything because it would’ve exposed their own BS space program. Their activities during the space race in the ‘50s and ‘60s were highly secretive. Many of their failures were hidden and the few successes were greatly exaggerated, like Leonov’s space walk in 1965. The Russians did beat the Americans to a number of milestones, but never landed anyone on the moon because it was impossible.

All we got after the alleged moon landings was the space shuttle program for a series of LEO missions. We have never left the earth’s orbit. The Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo programs accomplished a great deal, including the Saturn V rocket, the pinnacle of rocket technology. A number of spacecraft were launched and orbited the earth, but that’s as far as it went, we never went to the moon.

The technology to fire off a spacecraft from earth, bring it to moon’s orbit, land it there, have astronauts get out and walk around, then get back and lift off from the moon, dock with the command module, and finally return to earth did not exist 50 years ago and does not exist today in 2019.

One last thing, the great German scientist Wernher von Braun, father of the Saturn V program (and the V-2 rocket in Germany during WWII) actually made a number of small movies (with Disney I believe) in the ‘50s covering many space related subjects. Here’s one video in which he talks about the possibility of a manned moon mission, but only if the rockets are launched from a space station above earth:

 

Jimmy Chitwood

Hall of Famer
Joined
Aug 10, 2005
Messages
8,975
Location
Arkansas
i don’t know enough about the surrounding issues to be certain either way, but my default reaction is to always believe that the government is lying. if not about the big picture, then they are certainly about the details ... and they’re usually lying about the big picture.

my hunch is that something more akin to the opposite is what actually took place. rather than never going back to the moon, i suspect we (government operations) never left and have continued expeditions/operations there ever since. there’s an abundance of evidence suggesting the moon is not what we’re taught, but rather it is hollow and possibly some sort of giant, built structure (or something equally bizarre).

 
Last edited:

white lightning

Hall of Famer
Joined
Oct 16, 2004
Messages
21,492
I remain open to the possibility that the moon landings were real if there’s irrefutable evidence. Until then, my position is that they were staged.

A few more points from me:

The Russians didn’t say anything because it would’ve exposed their own BS space program. Their activities during the space race in the ‘50s and ‘60s were highly secretive. Many of their failures were hidden and the few successes were greatly exaggerated, like Leonov’s space walk in 1965. The Russians did beat the Americans to a number of milestones, but never landed anyone on the moon because it was impossible.

All we got after the alleged moon landings was the space shuttle program for a series of LEO missions. We have never left the earth’s orbit. The Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo programs accomplished a great deal, including the Saturn V rocket, the pinnacle of rocket technology. A number of spacecraft were launched and orbited the earth, but that’s as far as it went, we never went to the moon.

The technology to fire off a spacecraft from earth, bring it to moon’s orbit, land it there, have astronauts get out and walk around, then get back and lift off from the moon, dock with the command module, and finally return to earth did not exist 50 years ago and does not exist today in 2019.

One last thing, the great German scientist Wernher von Braun, father of the Saturn V program (and the V-2 rocket in Germany during WWII) actually made a number of small movies (with Disney I believe) in the ‘50s covering many space related subjects. Here’s one video in which he talks about the possibility of a manned moon mission, but only if the rockets are launched from a space station above earth:


For all the evidence you need all you need to do is look up Werner Von Brauns tombstone. It talks about the firmament which God created which cannot be breached. NASA calls this same thing the Van Allen Belt and the radiation and heat are too intense to pass through it even with todays technology. It's impossible to make it through it alive unless we advance dramatically. You have to travel through it both ways going to the moon, mars, etc.
 

The Hock

Master
Joined
Mar 16, 2008
Messages
3,902
Location
Northern California
Faking six moon landings was a tremendously involved and expensive endeavor.

A fake Mars landing was supposed to be next but budget cuts in the secret Fake Space Expeditions program forced its cancellation.
 
Top