Our Entire Space Program Is A Hoax And A Massive Deception

Originally posted by FugitiveSoul

Originally posted by blocula

Prove we went to the moon, see, it cant be done...

The proof is as simple as having a large telescope and a high powered laser to locate the retro-reflectors left up there.

Of course these reflectors could just be part of an update to the lunar hologram.

edit on 28-3-2012 by FugitiveSoul because: (no reason given)

Just because we "may have" landed something that left behind lasar reflectors on the moon,although whos to say they are really there,doesnt mean humans walked on the moon...

reply to post by Maslo


it was the russians who beat them there but were in on the scheme - joking ( I agree with Bloc and I also agree with everyone else ) see if you can figure that one out.

Originally posted by ypperst
reply to post by blocula

 

One simple question for you: How dumb do you think the Russians are?

Russia and USA was in a battle, to get to the moon first. So don't you think that Russian did every bit they could, to see if they actually did it? If they caught USA in hoaxing, the Russians would be very glad, but they didn't. They saw USA hit the moon first, simple as that.

Who was building the saturn rockets ? German Nazis,who were the experts in mass manipulation...

And deep behind the scenes,there really was no cold war,just gigantic transfers of earthbound technologies and megabucks between russia and the usa,while their common people were dumbed down and kept in a state of constant fear and paranoia and far away from what was really going on,like fabricating outer space and moon mission programs,orchestrating wars and building underground blast proof bunkers for the worlds elites,with our tax money...

reply to post by blocula

thanx for presenting some more hard core evidence,i just read about that only about 3 or 4 days ago...

An analysis of film taken with a camera which was 42 miles away at the time of separation? An analysis of film from a camera which was tracking the rocket? An analysis of the first stage separation and he ignores the other stages? What about the stage that actually got the Apollo assembly out of Earth orbit? That doesn't matter?

"Hard core evidence". What a joke.

The chill of space is generally not a problem because there is no medium for heat to transfer. Astronauts are not in any threat of being frozen, the challenge is in fact, how to get rid of the heat. The only means of heat loss is EM radiation.

reply to post by blocula


Things are not what they seem. Amen! But that does not mean that we did not go. Oh, we went. And we went BIG. I believe that we went REAL BIG! And with color cameras. Cameras with resolution similar to what the average person has today.

I think that our object proof comes from the current state of our "space program". The program was not ended when NASA was cut back with the space shuttle program. DUH. The program shifted, as needed, to a military funded project. IMO, it is necessary, but not fully understood. I believe that this shift should have probably occurred 30 years ago.

So here we are, right, wrong, or indifferent, trying to glean a bit of info that we feel we deserve. And maybe we do. Than again, maybe not. But if you will accept my premise that we are coming from a place where we really know little about ANYTHING happening "up there" then maybe we can accept that this is just "business as usual".

If you are really interested, then look around. Look at the pics of say, Europa, and our moon, etc... You will figure it out! If not, then... Go to sleep... go to sleep my pretty. And enjoy your new color videos from WW2 and not question why we didn't have that tech on the moon and in space...

reply to post by Chemley
Care to try and debunk the hoax evidence in these moon landing photos? > Evidence For "Faked Moon Landings" > batesmotel.8m.com...

reply to post by blocula

mmmkay. Let's start with the first one;

On the moon, there is only one light source, the sun. This is a shot of Buzz Aldrin and Neal Armstrong planting the US flag on the moon. If the sun is the only light source used by NASA on the moon, Aldrins shadow A shadows should not be so much longer than Armstrong's

If there were more than one light source both astronauts would have one shadow for each light source.

They placed a light reflector on the moon that is there to this day in order to measure the speed of information.

That object being there, is proof we have been to the moon.

reply to post by Phage


Lies! Everyone knows the sun doesn't exist. The Nazi scientists built it along with "South America."

When I was a little kid I saw an Apollo launch, met several astronauts. As an adult I have witnessed many shuttle launches, met more astronauts...and engineers, and scientist involved in the space program.
Believe what you want to, even if you are wrong beyond reason.

Originally posted by jazzguy
check out this website.

aulis

the photographic studies fully blew me away

edit on 28-3-2012 by jazzguy because: (no reason given)

The Third view is that some astronauts may well have gone to the Moon, but that the TV coverage and all the Apollo lunar surface photographs were faked. Aulis subscribes to this view.

Ok so I am definitely with the third, I do believe we went. I have looked at the original footage of Apollo 11 and the waving flag "from wind" thing was obviously staged imho. I do believe they never released the original footage for a variety of reasons. An issue of national security suspected to be associated to "ET" presence on the moon ?



Why would they?

The cost of the entire Apollo program: USD $25.4 billion -1969 Dollars ($135-billion in 2005 Dollars). See NASA Budget. (Includes Mercury, Gemini, Ranger, Surveyor, Lunar Orbitar, Apollo programs.) Apollo spacecraft and Saturn rocket cost alone, was about $ 83-billion 2005 Dollars (Apollo spacecraft cost $ 28-billion (CS/M $ 17-billion; LM $ 11-billion), Saturn I, IB, V costs about $ 46-billion 2005 dollars). en.wikipedia.org... Motives Several motives have been suggested for the U.S. government to fake the moon landings - some of the recurrent elements are: Distraction - The U.S. government benefited from a popular distraction to take attention away from the Vietnam war. Lunar activities did abruptly stop, with planned missions cancelled, around the same time that the US ceased its involvement in the Vietnam War. Cold War Prestige - The U.S. government considered it vital that the U.S. win the space race with the USSR. Going to the Moon, if it was possible, would have been risky and expensive. It would have been much easier to fake the landing, thereby ensuring success. Money - NASA raised approximately 30 billion dollars pretending to go to the moon. This could have been used to pay off a large number of people, providing significant motivation for complicity. In variations of this theory, the space industry is characterized as a political economy, much like the military industrial complex, creating fertile ground for its own survival. Risk - The available technology at the time was such that there was a good chance that the landing might fail if genuinely attempted. The Soviets, with their own competing moon program and an intense economic and political and military rivalry with the USA, could be expected to have cried foul if the USA tried to fake a Moon landing. Theorist Ralph Rene responds that shortly after the alleged Moon landings, the USA silently started shipping hundreds of thousands of tons of grain as humanitarian aid to the allegedly starving USSR. He views this as evidence of a cover-up, the grain being the price of silence. (The Soviet Union in fact had its own Moon program). Proponents of the Apollo hoax suggest that the Soviet Union, and latterly Russia, and the United States were allied in the exploration of space, during the Cold war and after. The United States and the former Soviet Union today routinely engage in cooperative space ventures, as do many other nations that are popularly believed to be enemies. However, this suggestion is challenged by the impression of intense international competition that was under way during the Cold War and is not supported by the accounts of participants on either side of the Iron Curtain. Many argue that the fact that the Soviet Union and other Communist bloc countries, eager to discredit the United States, have not produced any contrary evidence to be the single most significant argument against such a hoax. Soviet involvement might also implausibly multiply the scale of the conspiracy, to include hundreds of thousands of conspirators of uncertain loyalty. www.reference.com...

The above makes sense

reply to post by blocula


Thats alot of miles. How much rocket fuel do you need for 480 million miles worth of travel?

reply to post by blocula


Thanks for letting me know because when I went to watch the shuttle launch I must have been on NASA '___'. My wife is right you cannot fix stupid.

reply to post by Unknown Soldier

Please refer to "The Dark Side of the Moon".
en.wikipedia.org...

Here are some outtakes.
www.youtube.com...

It was a joke.


ETA: Oh, you edited out the bit about Kubrick's wife. Good idea.

reply to post by Phage
In the photo you posted the two people are not standing on the same even ground,the guy on the right is standing up on a little hill and thats why their shadow lengths appear different,but in the moon photo they are standing on the same even ground and their shadows are not the same lengths,because the astronauts are being illuminated by over head electric studio lights...

Originally posted by rgzing
reply to post by blocula

 

Thanks for letting me know because when I went to watch the shuttle launch I must have been on NASA '___'. My wife is right you cannot fix stupid.

You watched the shuttle go up and then what did you see? faked blue/green screen movies of astronauts on your tv?

reply to post by blocula


No they aren't. Have you ever seen an anaglyph of the Apollo 11 landing site? It's far from flat.
But how do you know the picture I posted isn't on flat ground? Because of the shadows?

Where are the multiple shadows that multiple light sources would produce in the Moon image?


The shadow argument is so stupid that it makes every person who repeats it look like a fool.

Originally posted by rgzing
reply to post by blocula

 

Thanks for letting me know because when I went to watch the shuttle launch I must have been on NASA '___'. My wife is right you cannot fix stupid.

The Shuttle only orbited the earth it never went to the moon, it is silly to use that as an example. Or make a comparison. You might was well compare an air plane to a canoe. Calling someone stupid because they have a theory that opposes your beliefs is unnecessary and not contributing to your plight.

If anyone disagrees with OP then prove him wrong or at least try


Food for thought, we have yet to reach the deepest depths of our own oceans.

reply to post by Phage
In the photo you posted,the two people are not standing on the same even ground,the guy on the right is standing up on a little hill and thats why their shadow lengths appear different,but in the moon photo the astronauts are obviously standing on the same even ground and their shadows are not the same lengths, because the astronauts are being illuminated by over head electric studio lights...