Disclosure of the moon landing hoax.

Originally posted by choos

but they are already hinting at the prospects, and that is not complete silence. according to you its impossible for any living thing to survive beyond LEO. why can such experts say such a thing which could become a major thing and yet live?

I didn't say "its impossible for any living thing to survive beyond LEO". That's your own version, and it's incorrect.

There is complete silence on Apollo, they're not "hinting" at Apollo in the least. That's why NASA is not concerned about it.

Why does NASA allow their findings to be released at all? They have no other option, really. Apollo was a fake and can't survive anymore. We want to do a real manned moon mission now. It is hard to keep Apollo going, but they still try to.

Apollo will die, finally.

Originally posted by choos

also you havent proven your point.. you only believe that because you only see what you want to see.. you dont actually realise that they are only saying there is an increased risk in an already risky mission. that in no way suggests that it is impossible. thats why everyone is still alive. the only reason you believe it to be the final nail in the coffin for NASA is because you believe that when someone says beyond LEO is hazardous, it must mean without a doubt that it is impossible to survive beyond LEO.

It's not about one's opinion or belief, it's clear as day.

Aluminum cannot adequately shield a crew beyond LEO. Period. That isn't my personal opinion or belief - it is a fact.

Apollo was (mostly) aluminum, so it couldn't shield a crew beyond LEO, therefore we know that Apollo didn't go to the moon

Facts are facts. Clear now?

Originally posted by turbonium1

I didn't say "its impossible for any living thing to survive beyond LEO". That's your own version, and it's incorrect.

so now you are saying that its possible for living things to have survived beyond LEO?? which means they could have gone to the moon.. so then what was your argument again?

There is complete silence on Apollo, they're not "hinting" at Apollo in the least. That's why NASA is not concerned about it.

but they dont need to hint at apollo.. by suggesting, according to you, that its impossible for anyone to survive beyond LEO in those aluminium shells, they are really saying that the aluminium shells that the apollo astronauts travelled in to the moon was all completely faked because it should have killed them.

although that was your reasoning before, seems now you have left the possibility that the astronauts could have survived in those "deadly" aluminium shells.

Why does NASA allow their findings to be released at all? They have no other option, really. Apollo was a fake and can't survive anymore. We want to do a real manned moon mission now. It is hard to keep Apollo going, but they still try to.

Apollo will die, finally.

they do have the option, they can silence people permanently.. i mean thats what they have done so far in over 40 years not one person has claimed that it was faked.. NASA has spent sooo much money on kickbacks to these astronauts that went to the moon and threats on their and their families lives to be quiet.. but they are just going to suddenly be careless and say they should have died beyond LEO and still continue to threaten these surviving astronauts lives. but not the researchers.. no no that would be going too far, cant threaten them at all.

i mean their reputation, funding and the survival of NASA could be at risk. who is going to support the greatest liars of the 20th century??

-meanwhile in an alternate universe- "but really who cares lets just destroy all the little support we have and the little funding we have already, we dont need support, we dont need funding, heck we dont even need our jobs, lets bring out these damning reports saying we faked the apollo moon landings" says the head of NASA.

It's not about one's opinion or belief, it's clear as day.

Aluminum cannot adequately shield a crew beyond LEO. Period. That isn't my personal opinion or belief - it is a fact.

Apollo was (mostly) aluminum, so it couldn't shield a crew beyond LEO, therefore we know that Apollo didn't go to the moon

Facts are facts. Clear now?

and now you have flip flopped back to the astronauts not possibly surviving beyond LEO because of the aluminium shells which , according to you, should have killed them all.

in one post, you have changed your mind regarding their possible survival about 2 times.......

are you trolling now?

Originally posted by choos

are you trolling now?

choos, can you please show us a human being of any nationality outside of LEO who wasn't employed by Richard Nixon at the time?

Didn't think so. This pillar of your argument has been crushed so many times theres nothing left of it but regolithic fines. Pulverized, I'd say. Going even further I'd say this "chapter" of space exploration should be ripped out of the history books and replaced with something a little more believable.

I'd even estimate that some other Pillars of Apollo have been totally smashed to bits... like the CIA negatives locked down in cold storage for 40 years.... or the missing telemetry tapes from every manned lunar mission... the Arizona State University project to erase all the reseau marks from scanned Apollo images... the medical miracles of Alan Shepard going to see a Howard Hughes ear doctor!! under an assumed name! and is magically cured!! of l a b y r i n t h i t i s in an experimental ear surgery.

Anyway, keep up the good work with the Apollo Defense Front.

For those of you still reading and still have lingering questions about Richard Nixon's Apollo please, and at your own leisure, do search on some of the following topics:

apollo keep out zone it's the #6 hit on google
alan shepard surgery it's the #2 hit on google
nasa reseau it's the #6 hit on google
berry nasa slayton it's the #4 hit on google

Take your time with this material and do your own research. When you feel that you had enough Nazi rocket scientists, power hungry, corporate tax cheats, medical chicanery, anti-communist paranoia and television lunacy... then you can stop. Remembering, it is our scientific duty to challenge the outlandish claims made by NASA during Richard Nixon's Apollo.


www.archives.gov...

"The President held an interplanetary conversation with Apollo 11 Astronauts, Neil Armstrong and Edwin Aldrin on the Moon."
--President Richard Nixon's Daily Diary, July 20, 1969

and then you have this...

Originally posted by choos
so now you are saying that its possible for living things to have survived beyond LEO?? which means they could have gone to the moon.. so then what was your argument again?

To review:

First, you stated "according to you its impossible for any living thing to survive beyond LEO

In reply, I told you that I never said this, which I clearly didn't.

So now, you've twisted it into....

" you are saying that its possible for living things to have survived beyond LEO"

Wrong again. I never said that either. That is your own interpretation/twist on my words, and nothing else.

It is possible we cango beyond LEO and survive - SOME DAY IN THE FUTURE. However, it is NOT possible today.

Originally posted by choos

but they dont need to hint at apollo.. by suggesting, according to you, that its impossible for anyone to survive beyond LEO in those aluminium shells, they are really saying that the aluminium shells that the apollo astronauts travelled in to the moon was all completely faked because it should have killed them.

Notice that you said "according to you"?

That is like saying 'in your opinion'

Which means you don't take it as anything harmful to Apollo, merely a personal opinion, nothing more.

Put another way, you're saying..

'According to turbonium1, their findings show that Apollo was a hoax'.

You just think it's my opinion, so why should NASA care about it?

So why would think NASA would be worried about their findings? Because of my take on them?!?!? Get serious

Originally posted by choos

they do have the option, they can silence people permanently.. i mean thats what they have done so far in over 40 years not one person has claimed that it was faked.. NASA has spent sooo much money on kickbacks to these astronauts that went to the moon and threats on their and their families lives to be quiet.. but they are just going to suddenly be careless and say they should have died beyond LEO and still continue to threaten these surviving astronauts lives. but not the researchers.. no no that would be going too far, cant threaten them at all.

As I said, NASA doesn't care about their findings because it's never connected to the Apollo story. No need to murder them. I suppose murder is an option, just like making them wear pink tutus is also an option, But neither imurder or tutus are options to ever really consider. That's what I mean here.

Originally posted by choos

and now you have flip flopped back to the astronauts not possibly surviving beyond LEO because of the aluminium shells which , according to you, should have killed them all.

in one post, you have changed your mind regarding their possible survival about 2 times.......

are you trolling now?

edit on 17-5-2013 by choos because: (no reason given)

No, you are just twisting what I'm saying.

They couldn't go past LEO in aluminum shells, however you try and twist it around.

The experts say aluminum would actually intensify the effects of radiation beyond LEO. Do you think Apollo makes any sense knowing that, hmm?

Thanks for bringing up the 'apollo keep out zone' - I'd never heard of it before.

I got a good laugh out of it,

Never knew about NASA removing the reseau marks, either.

Now I get it! NASA claims they want 'Apollo keep away zones' to preserve the hisorical sites. They also want to erase reseau marks from the original images to preserve the historical hoax!!

Originally posted by turbonium1
To review:

First, you stated "according to you its impossible for any living thing to survive beyond LEO

In reply, I told you that I never said this, which I clearly didn't.

Apollo didn't go anywhere near to the VA Belts, let alone fly through them. Their thin aluminum shell would become a coffin within these Belts.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

basically you are suggesting any biological thing will die beyond LEO when a thin aluminium shell is used.

So now, you've twisted it into....

" you are saying that its possible for living things to have survived beyond LEO"

Wrong again. I never said that either. That is your own interpretation/twist on my words, and nothing else.

It is possible we cango beyond LEO and survive - SOME DAY IN THE FUTURE. However, it is NOT possible today.

what i meant was you are saying that its impossible for any living thing to survive beyond LEO in an aluminium shell. and you are very adamant on that.

Notice that you said "according to you"?

That is like saying 'in your opinion'

Which means you don't take it as anything harmful to Apollo, merely a personal opinion, nothing more.

Put another way, you're saying..

'According to turbonium1, their findings show that Apollo was a hoax'.

You just think it's my opinion, so why should NASA care about it?

So why would think NASA would be worried about their findings? Because of my take on them?!?!? Get serious

do you know why i say that?? because being hazardous does not mean impossible.. you can even twist it into meaning being hazardous today does not mean impossible today.. do you know why?? because hazardous means risky/dangerous.

scaling mountains is hazardous.. working on an aircraft carrier is hazardous..

in effect by reading those reports to mean that they should have died, is pure speculation on your behalf.. which is why i say "according to you"

As I said, NASA doesn't care about their findings because it's never connected to the Apollo story. No need to murder them. I suppose murder is an option, just like making them wear pink tutus is also an option, But neither imurder or tutus are options to ever really consider. That's what I mean here.

why would they stir the hornets nest though? does NASA/US government enjoy challenges that much?

No, you are just twisting what I'm saying.

They couldn't go past LEO in aluminum shells, however you try and twist it around.

The experts say aluminum would actually intensify the effects of radiation beyond LEO. Do you think Apollo makes any sense knowing that, hmm?

but what was the latent rediation levels?? 10x1 is only 10.. its already reported that the astronauts were exposed to high levels of radiation like ~1.2mSv perday do you get the difference between a long term mission and a short term mission yet? if they were exposed to 1.2mSV per day for a year, yes they would probably die.

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter

Originally posted by choos

are you trolling now?

choos, can you please show us a human being of any nationality outside of LEO who wasn't employed by Richard Nixon at the time?

Didn't think so.

This pillar of your argument has been crushed so many times theres nothing left of it but regolithic fines. Pulverized, I'd say. Going even further I'd say this "chapter" of space exploration should be ripped out of the history books and replaced with something a little more believable.

I'd even estimate that some other Pillars of Apollo have been totally smashed to bits... like the CIA negatives locked down in cold storage for 40 years.... or the missing telemetry tapes from every manned lunar mission... the Arizona State University project to erase all the reseau marks from scanned Apollo images... the medical miracles of Alan Shepard going to see a Howard Hughes ear doctor!! under an assumed name! and is magically cured!! of l a b y r i n t h i t i s in an experimental ear surgery.

Anyway, keep up the good work with the Apollo Defense Front.

For those of you still reading and still have lingering questions about Richard Nixon's Apollo please, and at your own leisure, do search on some of the following topics:

apollo keep out zone it's the #6 hit on google
alan shepard surgery it's the #2 hit on google
nasa reseau it's the #6 hit on google
berry nasa slayton it's the #4 hit on google

Take your time with this material and do your own research. When you feel that you had enough Nazi rocket scientists, power hungry, corporate tax cheats, medical chicanery, anti-communist paranoia and television lunacy... then you can stop. Remembering, it is our scientific duty to challenge the outlandish claims made by NASA during Richard Nixon's Apollo.


www.archives.gov...

"The President held an interplanetary conversation with Apollo 11 Astronauts, Neil Armstrong and Edwin Aldrin on the Moon."
--President Richard Nixon's Daily Diary, July 20, 1969

and then you have this...

go research zond 5.. unless turtles are immune to radiation.......

the keep out zones have been explained to you countless times.. they are not saying you cannot land on the moon, they are only saying you cannot go closer to i think it was 400m from apollo 11 and apollo 17 landing sites.. the others have a smaller keep out zones.. i dont know why this concept is so difficult to wrap you head around.

alan shepard surgery was also explained to you .. cant remember details but there is nothing weird only your imagination of it. the same goes for deke slayton who never went past LEO.

the rest, others can explain to you. but its not like you will even consider any explaination. as you seem to bring up the same dead horse to beat up over and over... no matter how many times its explained to you.

Originally posted by turbonium1
Never knew about NASA removing the reseau marks, either.

Now I get it! NASA claims they want 'Apollo keep away zones' to preserve the hisorical sites. They also want to erase reseau marks from the original images to preserve the historical hoax!!

why bother with keep out zones of a mere 400m at their furthest i think it was?? shouldnt they have a keep out zone of 50nm from the surface of the moon?

apparently there should be no equipment there.. or did they autonomously plant the flag and camera and all the scientific equipment there?? with super advanced bi-pedal robots??

cause if they used those super advanced bipedal robots well then.. i might be inclined to believe in the hoax.


sorry its not 400m.... its a mere 75m for the apollo 11 site.... and 200-225m for the apollo 17 site

The exclusion zone for Apollo 11′s site will result in a keep-out zone of 75 meters from the lunar module descent stage, where as the zone will extend 200-225 meters from the Apollo 17 site.

However, for the Apollo 12, 14, 15 and 16 sites, more access should be provided to individual components and artifacts, NASA added, allowing for future robotic missions to get within touching distance of Apollo hardware – as much as they won’t be allowed physical contact.

This additional access is shown as buffer zones, with a three meter buffer for descent stages, one meter buffer distance for the Lunar Rovers, experiments, sampling sites and flags, while no restrictions are recommended on the footprints and rover tracks outside the identified keep-out zones.
www.nasaspaceflight.com...

OMG 3m how will any camera be able to properly resolve the descent stage at a ginormous distance of 3m......

Originally posted by turbonium1
Thanks for bringing up the 'apollo keep out zone' - I'd never heard of it before.

I got a good laugh out of it,

Well, people visiting the Louvre aren't allowed to get too close to the Mona Lisa, either. That doesn't mean it isn't real.

Personally, I think it makes sense to try to preserve the historical integrity of the Apollo 11 site by not having robotic probes (or people in the future) climb all over it. It makes perfect sense. probes can still get close enough to photograph it (75 meters, as mentioned above). The other sites could be made more accessible.

By the way, this is only a "request" by NASA. I don't think there is a law that would prohibit someone from sending a robotic probe to climb all over the Apollo 11 site or have a probe land right on the U.S. flag. It just makes good common sense not to do so.

reply to post by choos


These denials, choos, are just not good enough. I already know what the next phase of the plan is... it was exposed by Dr. Carol Rosin at the Disclosure Project. Remember the sequence that Werner von Braun gave to Rosin??

Communists, Rogue Nations, Terrorism, ASTEROIDS and finally E.T.

The next phase in the von Braun conspiracy is : ASTEROIDS

Have you not been watching the NASA news this week? Certainly a lot of asteroids out there

Huge Rock Crashes Into Moon, Sparks Giant Explosion
NASA Announces Brightest Lunar Explosion Ever Recorded
Close call: Massive two-mile-wide asteroid will miss Earth, according to NASA
Close encounter: Asteroid nearly 2 miles wide to pass Earth this month

Do you want some quotes on what NASA Administrator Charles Bolden has said recently? Why is NASA so goddamned protective of the Apollo sites, and the Moon, in general?

"They all have dreams of putting humans on the Moon," he said. "I have told every head of agency of every partner agency that if you assume the lead in a human lunar mission, NASA will be a part of that. NASA wants to be a participant. Source www.foxnews.com...

Why does every moon mission need NASA's help? Is it so NASA can sabotage the foreign missions? Is it so NASA can destroy foreign satellites if they get too close to the truth on the Moon?

Why does Administrator Bolden, who authorized of the Keep Out Zones (and was a US Marine Corp. General who operated NO-FLY-ZONES in the middle east, natch) still so protective over the Apollo mythology? Bolden is even an ex-astronaut and there is no more perfect man for the job.

BOLDEN: "IF YOU ASSUME THE LEAD IN A HUMAN LUNAR MISION... NASA WILL BE A PART OF THAT ." Because NASA has to protect the secrets of Nixon's Apollo.

how much fuel did nasa use to go to the moon and back 500,000 miles and how much do they use to go 280 miles to the space station anybody got that figures handy

reply to post by SayonaraJupiter


protective???

for the apollo 12,14-16 sites you can get within 1m of the flag, science experiments and the rover.. how is that "so goddamned protective"????????????

1 metre........ are you seriously suggesting that NASA is trying to hide something by suggesting a barrier of a ginormous distance of 1m from the Lunar Rovers, experiments, sampling sites and flags, and 3m for the descent stage for the apollo 12,14-16 sites..


what are they hiding within those astronomical distances?

reply to post by billdadobbie

this isnt a car or an airplane. to travel 200,000 miles in space is not the same as travelling 200,000 miles on earth. when sufficient momentum has been achieved they can effectively float/fall to the moon without the use of engines.

Originally posted by choos

what are they hiding within those astronomical distances?

Maybe they are hiding E.T. or Ancient Astronauts? Maybe they are hiding the Apollo sites because they didn't really tell us the whole truth about what they found up there? Maybe they landed with robots instead of real men? I don't know completely. What I do know for sure is that NASA is awfully protective of it.

Originally posted by SayonaraJupiter

Originally posted by choos

what are they hiding within those astronomical distances?

Maybe they are hiding E.T. or Ancient Astronauts? Maybe they are hiding the Apollo sites because they didn't really tell us the whole truth about what they found up there? Maybe they landed with robots instead of real men? I don't know completely. What I do know for sure is that NASA is awfully protective of it.

awfully protective?? how so?? by suggesting that there should be a keep out zone?? i wonder who is going to enforce it? robotic security guards on the moon? these are mere suggestions.. you are looking too hard into it.

like soylent said, theres a real keep out zone for the mona lisa.. perhaps the lourve is hiding something inside the mona lisa..

Originally posted by choos
[basically you are suggesting any biological thing will die beyond LEO when a thin aluminium shell is used.

what i meant was you are saying that its impossible for any living thing to survive beyond LEO in an aluminium shell. and you are very adamant on that.

Now you're on the right track, finally!

My position is based on the experts, who state aluminum is inadequate shielding for humans beyond LEO. The experts that state aluminum actually intensifies the radiation.

Apollo had nine manned missions which supposedly went beyond LEO, and radiation wasn't a problem in the least for them! There were no effects on their health from this radiation, in all the years since then. ,

That is simply ridiculous, on so many levels.

Originally posted by choos

in effect by reading those reports to mean that they should have died, is pure speculation on your behalf.. which is why i say "according to you"

It is not pure speculation, it is based on known facts.

Apollo was a hoax, based on those facts alone.

Originally posted by choos

why would they stir the hornets nest though? does NASA/US government enjoy challenges that much?

They can't stop progress, however much they would like to. We've reached a critical point now. To go to thm moon for real cannot be done without exposing Apollo as a fake.

Originally posted by choos

but what was the latent rediation levels?? 10x1 is only 10.. its already reported that the astronauts were exposed to high levels of radiation like ~1.2mSv perday do you get the difference between a long term mission and a short term mission yet? if they were exposed to 1.2mSV per day for a year, yes they would probably die.

edit on 18-5-2013 by choos because: (no reason given)

You assume this is well known, but it's not. See their own documents and you'll soon find that out

Originally posted by turbonium1

Now you're on the right track, finally!

My position is based on the experts, who state aluminum is inadequate shielding for humans beyond LEO. The experts that state aluminum actually intensifies the radiation.

Apollo had nine manned missions which supposedly went beyond LEO, and radiation wasn't a problem in the least for them! There were no effects on their health from this radiation, in all the years since then. ,

That is simply ridiculous, on so many levels.

but that does not mean that the radiation was immediately deadly.. like i said before, they were there for only a short amount of time.. no where in those reports say that the radiation was a prohibitive factor. you have come to your own conclusions that radiation would be intensified so much that anyone onboard those aluminium shells should have died.. but that is your own speculation. there is more proof to suggest that the radiation was higher than LEO missions such as the ISS or shuttle missions than there is of your proof or thinking that they should have died.

It is not pure speculation, it is based on known facts.

Apollo was a hoax, based on those facts alone.

the experts have said it increases the dangers of travelling beyond LEO.. its not prohibitive.. again you are speculating and drawing your own conclusions to what the experts are saying.. show me where it says that the apollo astronauts should have died?

so i repeat, they were exposed to higher than normal levels of radiation but it still was not enough to kill them.. im not sure but i think they were exposed to about 1.2mSv perday but that was for at most 12 days. if they were exposed to that levels for 360 days than yes it would probably be deadly.

do you get the difference between a long term mission and a short term mission yet?

They can't stop progress, however much they would like to. We've reached a critical point now. To go to thm moon for real cannot be done without exposing Apollo as a fake.

so NASA are going to try to hint people to destroy NASA's credibilty and possibly funding because apparently they no longer need it or their jobs, OR, NASA enjoys stirring the hornets nest and be bitten hundreds of times before they actually kill it.

brilliant...

funny how you say you cant stop progress.. about the hardware on the moon, hypothetically, eventually one day someone or thing will return to the moon and view the apollo hardware left on the moon. now apparently the hardware shouldnt exist on the moon because man was not able to leave LEO.
so it must have been done by what?? super advanced humanoid robots that planted everything there exactly as the photos and videos suggest? or were these super advanced humanoid robots controlled by the real astronauts and the robots were given fake skin (mission impossible style) to appear like the astronauts for each mission while the real astronaut hid in a super secret room on the aircraft carrier that would eventually pick them up.. so since only the astronauts and Nixon knew it was a hoax, that means most likely Nixon designed and engineered these super advanced robots..

brilliant!!!!

You assume this is well known, but it's not. See their own documents and you'll soon find that out

like i said, the apollo astronauts received about 1.2mSv PERDAY where as the ISS gets about 150mSv PERYEAR

Originally posted by billdadobbie
how much fuel did nasa use to go to the moon and back 500,000 miles and how much do they use to go 280 miles to the space station anybody got that figures handy

The numbers won't tell you that much, since most of the fuel consumed in *any* space mission is burned in the first 40-70 seconds. That's the (rather large) drawback to launching from the bottom of a 9.8m/sec/sec gravity well.

Another thing to keep in mind is that the Space Shuttle, big as it was, was *dwarfed* by the Saturn V. The Shuttle could put a 26.5 ton payload in low Earth orbit. The Saturn V could put 130 tons in the same orbit. That alone should tell you that comparing their fuel consumption isn't going to be too informative.

Also keep in mind that space flight isn't about altitude, it's about something called 'delta v' (shorthand for 'change in velocity'). In the case of a flight to the ISS, it's not enough to simply toss a payload 280 miles straight up...you have to give it sufficient lateral acceleration to orbit Earth, rather than falling back down. In the case of a lunar flight, you have to accelerate your vehicle sufficiently to not only achieve stable orbit, but to enter a transfer trajectory from Earth orbit to Lunar orbit, which is a much higher delta v than a simple orbital mission.

With those bits of info out of the way, here are the raw numbers you wanted:
The three stages of a Saturn V had a total fuel capacity of about 2,810 tons of fuel and oxidizer.
The Space Shuttle's external tank held about 69 tons of liquid oxygen and 117 tons of liquid hydrogen, for a total load of 186 tons...about 40% more fuel than the third stage of a Saturn V stack (130 tons).

reply to post by Brother Stormhammer


thank you that was going through my head the other night that is what makes ats so good someone always has the answer it would take me weeks to find it

Originally posted by choos

funny how you say you cant stop progress.. about the hardware on the moon, hypothetically, eventually one day someone or thing will return to the moon and view the apollo hardware left on the moon. now apparently the hardware shouldnt exist on the moon because man was not able to leave LEO.
so it must have been done by what?? super advanced humanoid robots that planted everything there exactly as the photos and videos suggest? or were these super advanced humanoid robots controlled by the real astronauts and the robots were given fake skin (mission impossible style) to appear like the astronauts for each mission while the real astronaut hid in a super secret room on the aircraft carrier that would eventually pick them up.. so since only the astronauts and Nixon knew it was a hoax, that means most likely Nixon designed and engineered these super advanced robots..

brilliant!!!!

By the way... Nixon wouldn't be the designer or engineer -- that job belonged to Howard Hughes and Hughes Aircraft, who just happens to be the builder of the Surveyor spacecraft.

The original negotiated cost of the Hughes contract for seven spacecraft was $67 million. Final Hughes contract costs came to $365 million, over a fivefold increase;

For that amount of money (in 1960's dollars) Hughes Aircraft (the CIA front) could have build an entire fleet of Surveyors and landed them precisely wherever Farouk El-Baz wanted them to land, precisely at each location that was later claimed by NASA to be a 'manned' Apollo landing site.

If Hughes had a contract for 7 Surveyors costing $67 million...
14 Surveyors would cost $134 million...
21 Surveyors would cost $201 million...
28 Surveyors would cost $268 million...
35 Surveyors would cost $335 million...
and that leaves an final $35 million to keep people quiet.

How did Hughes keep workers quiet? Pay them people lots of overtime, tell them not to ask questions about it.