Submitted by Abhishek
Rai
abhi.ar@gmail.com
On July 20, 1969, the human
race accomplished its single
greatest technological achievement
of all time when a human first
set foot on another celestial
body.
|
 |
On
this particular day Neil Armstrong
made history by supposedly being
the first man to set foot on the
Earth's moon.
Or was it all faked, staged in a
highly secured sound studio? The
idea that we went to the Moon, and
that we were successful in our Apollo
endeavors is so firmly embedded
in the cultural lives of most people
on this planet, that to voice the
opinion that this might be untrue
will raise the voices of many people
against us. If this opinion is correct,
then the majority of us have been
fooled; that, we've been taken for
a ride that has lasted for 34 years.
A ride that is been generating its
own momentum and most of us are
still on it!
Throw this research I am trying
to answer a long awaited question
that was first asked in July 1969;
“Did the Apollo missions really
land a man on the Moon and return
him alive to the earth, or is the
record incorrect?” (This article
has been written to prove, once
and for all, that we are not being
told the truth about the NASA film
footage of the Apollo missions.
This will surprise even the most
hardened believers and convince
many people that the whole Apollo
moon project of the late 1960's
and early 70's were a complete hoax.
This is an extensively researched
and balanced assessment of the people
and parallels within the NASA’s
Apollo space programs and an in-depth
examination of the material regarded
by NASA as proof that the Apollo
astronauts did indeed walk on the
lunar surface.
This report demonstrates that lighting
from different sources was used
in the Apollo photographs and none
were taken on the Moon, and shows
that impossibly high photographic
tricks were employed. The images
should have been taken from cameras
fixed to the astronauts' chest brackets,
but instead taken from a different
angle. It also analyses the lunar
surface photographs that appear
to be encoded with deliberate mistakes
and gives an evidence by providing
the mistakes in the comparison between
the still images and the claimed
'live' TV coverage of the Apollo
missions. It also highlights the
severe dangers of space radiation,
provokes the discussion of many
subjects that some may not wish
to address, including new hypotheses
concerning gravity and light. This
research contains a special coverage
on the photographs displayed by
NASA on their website and will reveal
“how Michael J Tuttle manipulated,
(doctored), pictures taken here
on planet Earth, and then posted
them on NASA's web pages as genuine
Moon pics”.(Robin Cook, 2001)
Back in 1969-72 NASA claimed to
have sent seven Apollo rockets to
land on the moon, six of which made
it successfully on the moon. The
story lifts off in 1961 with Russia
firing Yuri Gagarin, into the space,
leaving a panicked America trailing
in the space race. At an emergency
meeting of Congress, President John
F. Kennedy proposed the ultimate
face-saver, put a man on the Moon.
With an impassioned speech he secured
the plan an unbelievable 40 billion
dollars. Bill Kaysing, the Head
of Technical Publications and Advanced
Research at Rocketdyne Systems (1956
– 1963), states that it was estimated
in 1959 that there was a 0.0014
chance of landing man on the Moon
and returning him safely to Earth.
This took into account the effects
of radiation, solar flares and micrometeorites.
He could not believe in 1959 that
man could go to the Moon (David
Milne, 2004).
However, only 2 years later, American
President John F. Kennedy set a
goal in May 1961, when he made the
following famous speech. 'I believe
that this nation should commit itself.
To achieving the goal, before this
decade is out, of landing a man
on the Moon and returning him safely
to the Earth. No single space project
in this period will be more impressive
to mankind or more important for
the long range exploration of Space.'
It was just eight years later in
1969 that man finally left Earth
and set foot on the Moon... Or so
we have been led to believe (Dave
Cosnette, 2003). If going to the
moon was such a big deal and so
fun then why did NASA stop after
only going 7 times? NASA says, "They
were cancelled due to budget cutbacks."
NASA says that they wanted to put
more attention towards a space station
and something to get them there,
which we call the "Space Shuttle"(No
Author, 1999). So let me ask them
one question, was that cheaper than
going to the moon?
At the dawn of the new millennium
some thirty four years later, our
present state of technology is inadequate
for the safe passage of human beings
through the potentially lethal radiation
that awaits all those who venture
through the Earth’s radiation belts
into deep space, whether to the
Moon, Mars or beyond. Have we ever
thought about how much technology
the world had in the late 60's and
early 70's? Was it enough to get
three men out of the Earth's atmosphere
and two of them to land on the moon?
Maybe. But how could that be so
when the computers used on the Apollo
missions didn't have any more memory
than a modern day washing machine!
And the computers they used, in
size, took up more space than the
ship had room for. With that in
mind, and the fact that the technology
in the 60's was merely enough advanced,
how could NASA generate tens of
thousands of such high quality images
when there weren't even computers
good enough to do so? That's where
the thought of a possible sound
stage comes into question. (No Author,
1999).
Sending men to the Moon and bringing
them back safely is widely held
to be the greatest technical achievement
of mankind so far. In fact the greatest
achievement of the second millennium.
Indeed the landing of the Apollo
astronauts on the Moon is now considered
by many to be the benchmark by which
human power and technology is measured.
But now 34 years later have we lost
the technology to travel safely
into deep space since Apollo? Or
did we not have it in the first
place?
The first question, which comes
into play, is that how were the
NASA people able to overcome the
space odd things? There are some
of the reasons why no man has ever
set foot on the moon surface. Firstly,
an average days temperature on the
moon ranges between 260F and 280F.
At such high temperatures, film
melts and human beings become very
uncomfortable. But while looking
at the videos and the photographs
it doesn’t seem that the Apollo
astronauts had any problem in walking
on the moon surface. Secondly, temperatures
at night (the backside) on the moon
drop below -41 degrees F. At -40
degrees, materials start becoming
very brittle. Electrical items do
not work as well. Car batteries
are harder to start.
The extreme temperature variations
from shadow to sunlight would cause
significant material contraction
and expansion and would make equipment
breakdown and failure very likely.
But NASA faced none of these problems.
Thirdly, only 250 to 750 miles about
the Earth is our planet's radiation
shield. It's called the "Van
Allen Belt". It is doughnut-shaped
regions encircling Earth and containing
high-energy electrons and ions trapped
in the Earth's magnetic field. Explorer
I, launched by NASA in 1958, discovered
these two regions of intense radiation
surrounding the Earth. The inner
region is centered at about 3000
km above Earth and has a thickness
of about 5000 km. The outer region
is centered at about 15,000 -- 20,000
km above the surface of the Earth
and has a thickness of 6,000 --
10,000 km. It keeps us from being
exposed to too much radiation. The
moon is over 200,000 miles from
the Earth. In order for man to get
to the moon, he must go through
this radioactive belt. This act
is impossible unless you are surrounded
by at least 4 feet of lead. Fourthly,
there are millions of micro-meteors
traveling at speeds as fast as 6000
mph, which would rip the ship apart.(No
Author, 1999)
There are many examples of anomalies
and inconsistencies in the Apollo
photography. I would like to show
some astonishing evidence that shows
glaring mistakes or anomalies on
the 'OFFICIAL RECORD' of NASA film
footage and still photographs.
Continuity errors: There are numerous
examples of such 'mistakes'. For
instance in Apollo 16 during the
'jump salute', the PLSS backpack,
which contained the life support
systems, has a different fabric
orientation of the triangular top
flap in the still picture when compared
with the TV coverage of the same
event which does not show this triangular
top flap. There is a glaring difference
in continuity between the still
photograph and the TV coverage,
yet both events allegedly occurred
at the same time and were recorded
at the same time. The two images
should correspond. The triangle
of fabric cannot have 'flapped up'
in the still photograph and not
have done so in the TV coverage.
(See Fig-1-2)
Artificial lighting: There is a
clear evidence that lighting was
used in the still photographs, yet
no lighting equipment was taken
to the Moon. For example the sequence
of pictures of Aldrin, descending
the ladder in total darkness during
Apollo 11. On analyzing the boot
of Aldrin it was found that a directional
light was used, it was apparently
placed just to the right of the
camera position(Fig-3). This finding
regarding the location of the light
source is supported by a process
known as 'ray tracing'—full details
can be found in DARK MOON(Fig-4).
Another example of artificial lighting
is (Fig-5), this picture is showing
a view of the Lunar module. If will
look at spot marked (H), you will
notice that there is no stars in
the moon's sky. If you notice the
place marked (G), you will notice
that you can plainly see the United
States flag on the dark side of
the Lunar Module. This could not
be a Lunar shot because on the moon,
if something is in a shadow you
can NOT see it.
The reason we can on Earth is because
the Earth has air molecules that
take light and bend it, spreading
it around objects. Light reflects
off air molecules and lights up
the dark sides of objects. It is
atmosphere, bending the sun's light,
that makes the sky appear blue,
this is known as ‘scattering of
light’. However, on the moon there
is no prism of atmosphere to diffuse
or bend light so the sky is totally
black. On the moon, the sun's light
should be blinding. In fact, the
astronauts wear gold tinted faceplates
on their helmets to cut down 95-percent
of the light from the sun. The dark
side of objects in NASA photos should
be pitch black, while the lit side
should be hellishly bright. Yet,
all NASA photos from the moon are
softly lit, and they appear to be
taken in Earth's atmosphere. In
(Fig-6) you can very well see the
astronaut inspite of he being in
total darkness. This is not all
there is a photograph which depicts
the presence of the SPOT LIGHT used
for providing artificial lighting
on the so-called surface of the
moon. (Fig-7) Shows us how NASA
has fooled us for the past thirty-four
years. One can very well see the
spot lights used over the top of
the photograph and (Fig-8) shows
a tremendous view of the spot light
in the visor of the helmet of the
astronaut. Is it not the same spot
light which we use in the theaters?
High camera angles: The analyses
of the pictures has also been done
which has been imaged from impossibly
high camera positions, when these
images should have been taken from
chest height. For example, the classic
still photograph of Buzz Aldrin
standing alone (Fig.9) was apparently
taken from a surprisingly high position
(about 2 feet higher than chest
height) when such pictures should
have been taken from a camera fixed
to a bracket on the chest. The photographer
reflected in the gold visor is neither
standing on an object/rock to give
him extra height, nor is he holding
the camera at eye-level. The reflection
in the visor simply does not fit
with the rest of the picture. The
astronaut would have to have been
about two feet taller to account
for the high camera position.
Cross shadow problem: - There is
a clear evidence of the fact that
the photographs provided by NASA
were edited and the crossheads were
added after the photographs were
clicked(see Fig-13) as the shadow
of the cross-hairs is also projected
on the photographs.
Other defects: - There were many
other defects in the NASA’s photographs
and T.V. coverage like the position
of the Lunar Module was changed
while transferring it from one place
to the other(Fig-14). No one would
believe it but the fact is that
the Lunar Module was shifted with
the help of wreckers (cranes), which
can be easily seen in the photographs
published by NASA (Fig-15). There
is another drastic mistake in the
costumes of the astronauts which
can be seen in the photographs and
the videos(Fig-16). Many photographs
have been discovered which show
that NASA had made backgrounds showing
the moon from ‘plaster of Paris’(Fig17).
When the astronauts landed on the
Moon they tried to do core drillings.
They were only able to drill down
about twelve inches and they hit
solid titanium! This is impossible
for a naturally formed planet/moon.
So according to the NASA people
“IS MOON AN ARTIFICIAL SATELLITE…?”
But how did man manage to collect
the rock sample if we didn't go
to the Moon??? 750 lbs or so were
said to be collected on the Apollo
missions. This maybe so, but according
to official NASA records, only a
couple of pounds were actually collected
by the astronauts.
It would not be impossible to irradiate
a rock or put it in a vacuum to
get the same result. Why would NASA
fake the Apollo Mission? The main
reason why the US Government and
NASA faked the 'official record'
is because they could not be seen
to be the weak link, especially
when you consider that during the
60's, the USA were at the height
of the Cold War with Russia. Also,
their own President had forecast
that before the end of the 60's
Man would be on the Moon. It would
be better to try and fool the public
and hoax the footage, rather than
let their biggest rival in the World
strike a huge moral victory by beating
them to the Moon. If man really
went to the Moon, why did NASA drop
the successful Saturn 5 launch rocket
after the last Apollo mission? The
shuttle weighs 3/4 heavier than
the Saturn 5 Rocket, puts only 1/6th
of cargo weight into orbit and costs
3 times as much to launch. Why scrap
a rocket that can outperform its
newer model? The Shuttle was first
flown 2 years behind schedule.
This will reveal how Michael J Tuttle
manipulated, (doctored), pictures
taken here on planet Earth, and
then posted them on NASA's web pages
as genuine Moon pics. The Pro Apollo
cannot seem to get it into their
pea sized brains the fact that THE
MAJORITY OF NASA's FAKE MOON PICTURES
WERE CREATED IN THE MID 90's. Ninety
five percent of NASA's fake Moon
pictures on their web site WERE
NEVER SEEN PRIOR TO THE LAUNCH OF
THE INTERNET. They had to produce
a considerable number of fake Moon
pics, otherwise the public would
want to know why there were so few.
The task was handed to Michael J.
Tuttle in 1994, and here is how
he did it using early versions of
Adobe Photoshop.(Fig-22) shows how
a normal beach photograph taken
on the earth and the with the help
of some tricks was converted into
MOON PHOTOGRAPHS.
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. All these matters
underline one simple fact: A representative
of humanity (mind’s imagination)
may well have gone to the Moon in
1969, but the images published by
NASA of a manned lunar landing do
not appear to be the true and accurate
record of such an event. From the
sheer weight of evidence the firm
conclusion of this investigation
has to be that, in the case of Apollo,
NASA stated that the agency was
doing things one way when in fact
a hidden program proceeded in a
very different manner.
REFERENCES
Apollo fake. Fake
picture by Michael J. Tutle (1994).
Retrieved on March 19, 2005, from
http://www.geocities.com/fakemoonpics.
Cosnette,
M. (2003, March 30). The Apollo
hoax. Retrieved on March 21, 2005,
from http://www.ufos-aliens.co.uk/cosmicapollo.html.
Garber,
S. NASA Apollo 11. retrieved on
March 22, 2005, from http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/ap11ann/introduction.htm
Milne,
D. Did man really walk on the moon.
Retrieved on March 23, 2005, from
http://www.chennaiads.com/articles/nasa.asp.
Moon
message. Was the US moon mission
a scam. Retrieved on March 26, 2005
from
http://theinternetforum.co.uk/moon/moonmessage.html
Mr.
Freedom.(2002, October 28). Proof
of faked Apollo footage. Retrieved
on March 27, 2005, from http://science.krishna.org/Articles/2002/10/012.html
NASA,
numerous anomalies and scams allowed.
Retrieved on March 27, 2005, from
http://www.geocities.com/nasascam/.
NASA
website. Vision to reality. Retrieved
on March 22, 2005 from http://www.nasa.gov/externalflash/Anniversary_VisMar/index_noaccess.html
NASA
website. Simple search. Retrieved
on March 21, 2005 from http://search.nasa.gov/nasasearch/search/search.jsp?nasaInclude=Apollo+11
Or
planet. Retrieved on March 26, 2005
from
http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/hardtruth/planetsindex.htm
Overstreet
K. Ground zero. Retrieved on March
26, 2005 from
http://batesmotel.8m.com/. (1999,
January 26)
Teague,
K. Apollo image gallery. Retrieved
on March 24, 2005 from http://www.apolloarchive.com/apollo_gallery.html.
|
