The CIA's Langley complex provided the perfect simulation arena for a NASA-lunar 'landing'. Langley would have provided much of the basic material and telemetry which could be married to a film.
It was the phone call that did it for me. We have been lied to about so much. As for the Hollywood connection, I’m not surprised. They have the means to help create a monumental psyop (and this one is not the only example).
Yes the green phone is a classic. I used to believe when younger, until I saw the golfing and jeeps. Then a light swtich went on and physics, technology and reality intruded. I began to wonder, 'how did they get 500 lb jeeps to the moon, within a payload that is about as large as my car?" They also had a sunglass pouch in their 'spacesuits' for the raybans? Did they wear sunglasses? I have come to conclude that they laugh at us and mock us. Collins does not remember stars in 1969, but writes about billions a few years later. He does not even bother to hide the lie.
They don’t try that hard at all since they’re mocking us, agree. The tragedy is that people still fall for it. Critical thinking has gone out of the window and isn’t taught in schools for good reason.
I was born in 1953, so I lived through all of this (don't forget "New Math"). We've been lied to my whole life, and I just woke up to this fact in 2020. I feel like an idiot.
This is indeed true. It relies on the standard model's definitions and assumptions which might be wonderfully wrong. Consider the Moon is ~250 K miles and Mars oscillates at a mean average of ~140 millions per the standard model. Is it reasonable, considering fuel, money, technology and radiation, to propose first an investment of the Moon (we have never been there); as well as Mars? My word, the insanity cannot be explained in plain language. And why? There. Is. Nothing. Out. There.
I have the advantage that I am not an expert and have little to unlearn.
I could live with the notion that the moon and the planets are quite different from what we have learned to believe. Of course, I do knot know what is out there and how far that is away, but NASA claims to have put mirrors on the moon. I have serious doubts about all of this...
Yes they said they put reflectors during the Apollo missions. The Russians were reflecting beams off the moon in the 1950s - this was announced in the media. The moon's surface is luminous, crystalline. It naturally reflects a beam.
I know several (almost many) people with PhDs in physics, one even in astrophysics, that brought up the mirror story when we talked about the alleged moon landings. These people learn lots of complicated maths that most people cannot do, but that does not mean that they have a firm grasp of reality.
My uncle who also was a phycicist at Siemens could not even explain what they were doing at work (microchips development). It is quite insane.
General relativity no one understood. Even those with PhDs did not.
Yes good examples. I know PhDs in physics who have never heard of Michelson-Morley or Sagnac :) Insane to be honest. You can go to newspaper archives and pull out from 1959 and the early 1960s media declarations that the Soviets were beaming signals off the moon, long before Apollo :) The actual surface of the moon (based on recent 'probes') is very different than the rocks and petrified wood collected by the Apollo program. But again, this information is never discussed and kept hidden. 'Science' etc.
Nobody will ever land on The Moon. It’s a plasma light, a cosmic spiritual phenomena, a sentient creation. How could a dusty rock affect tides, women’s bodily functions & plant life…
If they could fool the world with these aluminium foil space crafts - how poor did this new 'mission' look. It was worse than 50+ years ago. And with all the AI I really wonder how many young people believe this stuff?
AI-CGI. A lot of composite manual-made imagery. Green screens in use it looks like. My children's 'group' don't believe that Artemis was real. They are more profoundly sceptical than the 'older' people who watch TV and imbibe and believe. I am guessing that a very large minority don't believe in anything NASA publishes - especially outside the Excited States. I am not in the E.S. but will guess that 80% probably do believe in it.
I am in the US but grew up in Belgium, did not come here until my 40s. I am surprised how many of the Belgians still seem to believe everything on TV. I am surprised every time I come to friend's houses and they have the TV on all day long. Even those that do not watch all day, still seem to believe everything the govt says, and I am pretty sure they got jabbed 4, 5 or even more times. Even though they get sick more often than before the jabs. I can only hope that children grow up more sceptical than our elderly folks - being 68 myself I am one of them but not so easily fooled anymore I guess.
The TV. Honestly, maybe history's worst invention. The manipulation of images, data, words is just fantastic. I remember being caught in the Kyiv 'Orange Revolution' of 2004 (was working there). Fake news cameras on top of the buildings scanned the crowd and said there was an uprising to replace the pro Russian President.
If they had spent 20 mins walking among the tents and orange scarves they would have discovered young, paid ($10-15/hr), bussed in protestors, who were given the scarves, tents and supplies by the CIA and EU. It was 100% organised and funded. The average normie watching it would believe the narrative.
Everything on the idiot box is contrived. None of it should be believed. As you said, see the Rona plandemic for more info. A true IQ test if there has ever been one.
NASA-CIA set up the comms centre for Apollo near Perth, so all the comms and live feeds went through that centre, were edited, then distributed to a few TV networks. Everything was controlled.
Thankyou. The disception goes so deep and like many false flags and engineered events still live on. My granddaughter12, proudly relays these stories to me. I won't burst her bubble just yet. It's difficult she loves and looks up to her teachers, who unfortunately are innocent participants in keeping the fraud going. A good plan by those who run the show.
Yes, the 'educators' are uneducated. They are indoctrinated. You can meet PhDs in Physics who have no idea about the fraudulent experiment(s) to determine 'light speed'. Simply believe, memorise, vomit back, defend. NASA never discusses owning the comms via a controlled site in Perth. They have also publicly admitted the signals for Apollo were cloaked and 'radar' or object tracking in 1961, or in 1969 was crude to say the least. You are given the impression that some magical device pointed from the earth to the heavens, picks up and tracks any object in real time, in 1969. Quite absurd and false of course. Even today it is difficult and nigh impossible. In 1961, the 'radar' was vintage WW2. No one was tracking Yuri the actor in 'real time' over say Russia or the deep Pacific, Atlantic or Africa.
And yet technology has certainly moved ahead. I imagine this super fast AI has been around for a long time, just kept from the Sheeple
Technology like earthquake producing machines and other bombs that don't cause infrastructure damage but kill pepole. The bible says the Harlot rides the Beast until the beast destroys her, the pepole follow the Beast thinking it's the New light. Trumps looking like a hero to many ....I guess he's just part of the Beast system. It's good to expose the fraud. I pray people look further into Gods final plan and know this life on earth isn't the final destination.
Indeed. Many of the moon rocks are fake of course. The moon's surface is full of different material not found from the Apollo program (later retrieved by the ESA and others in the 90s for example). Then we have the trip to Antarctica in 1967 where they collected the 'moon rocks', including the petrified wood samples one assumes. The moon surface is apparenlty resilient to massive rocket thrusters :) No holes or dust. We assme that Musk's Deep Fake AI landing on Mars will be similar (on Earth, SpaceX has layers of steel and resin on its landing pads, apparently absent on Mars).
I wasn’t saying the Moon landing is fake. I’m saying the movie version became the shield that kept the public from asking real engineering and environmental questions.
As you've noted elsewhere, there are spiritual layers to this. E.g., reprising old covenant Israel's apostasy, indicted for having "loved... served... gone after... sought, and worshiped... the sun, the MOON, and all the host of heaven" (Jeremiah 8:2). The NASA frauds also mock Christ's bride, the church who, in Revelation 12:1 is (symbolically) portrayed as having "...the moon under her feet."
When you go to explore a dangerous place, you naturally go back to your original landing spot. You don't go every time to a new, different spot becuase you never know what you're gonna land on - it could be a sinkhole or quicksand or just swampy with deep layers of dust. Landing on the moon is throwing the dice.
If you land safely the first time then consider yourself very lucky. And then you look around and prepare the landing spot for the next visit; you don't every time try to land in a totally different spot.
Also you want to know about how the equipment survives, so you always going back to your old spot to check on your equipment and your experiments. The whole idea is to monitor the experiments and how the equipment functions over time in the rough lunar wilderness.
So when they tell these stories that every time they flew to a totally different spot and every time bringing a new golf cart, rather then using the one they brought last time, then you know it's all fake stories.
Good post. Let me highlight the few areas where I disagree for discussions sake.
Moon Suit Cooling - The moon suits are cooled by vaporizing water to vacuum through a porous plate. This is a surprisingly effective means of cooling, which is obviously not available on earth. Explained in document "The Apollo Portable Life Support System - Kenneth S. Thomas." The heat load on the suits comes from two sources, solar radiation and body heat. I've independently checked these numbers and they work out.
Visible Stars - On earth during the day stars are not visible, either by eye or film camera. The same should be true on the moon. The stars should only be visible during lunar night.
Agree - If we actually went that would have been an obvious thing to have photographed. The stars look amazing from my country house, imagine how awesome they would be on the dark side of the moon.
It was the phone call that did it for me. We have been lied to about so much. As for the Hollywood connection, I’m not surprised. They have the means to help create a monumental psyop (and this one is not the only example).
Yes the green phone is a classic. I used to believe when younger, until I saw the golfing and jeeps. Then a light swtich went on and physics, technology and reality intruded. I began to wonder, 'how did they get 500 lb jeeps to the moon, within a payload that is about as large as my car?" They also had a sunglass pouch in their 'spacesuits' for the raybans? Did they wear sunglasses? I have come to conclude that they laugh at us and mock us. Collins does not remember stars in 1969, but writes about billions a few years later. He does not even bother to hide the lie.
They don’t try that hard at all since they’re mocking us, agree. The tragedy is that people still fall for it. Critical thinking has gone out of the window and isn’t taught in schools for good reason.
I was born in 1953, so I lived through all of this (don't forget "New Math"). We've been lied to my whole life, and I just woke up to this fact in 2020. I feel like an idiot.
We do not even know how far the moon is away...
This is indeed true. It relies on the standard model's definitions and assumptions which might be wonderfully wrong. Consider the Moon is ~250 K miles and Mars oscillates at a mean average of ~140 millions per the standard model. Is it reasonable, considering fuel, money, technology and radiation, to propose first an investment of the Moon (we have never been there); as well as Mars? My word, the insanity cannot be explained in plain language. And why? There. Is. Nothing. Out. There.
I have the advantage that I am not an expert and have little to unlearn.
I could live with the notion that the moon and the planets are quite different from what we have learned to believe. Of course, I do knot know what is out there and how far that is away, but NASA claims to have put mirrors on the moon. I have serious doubts about all of this...
Yes they said they put reflectors during the Apollo missions. The Russians were reflecting beams off the moon in the 1950s - this was announced in the media. The moon's surface is luminous, crystalline. It naturally reflects a beam.
I know several (almost many) people with PhDs in physics, one even in astrophysics, that brought up the mirror story when we talked about the alleged moon landings. These people learn lots of complicated maths that most people cannot do, but that does not mean that they have a firm grasp of reality.
My uncle who also was a phycicist at Siemens could not even explain what they were doing at work (microchips development). It is quite insane.
General relativity no one understood. Even those with PhDs did not.
Yes good examples. I know PhDs in physics who have never heard of Michelson-Morley or Sagnac :) Insane to be honest. You can go to newspaper archives and pull out from 1959 and the early 1960s media declarations that the Soviets were beaming signals off the moon, long before Apollo :) The actual surface of the moon (based on recent 'probes') is very different than the rocks and petrified wood collected by the Apollo program. But again, this information is never discussed and kept hidden. 'Science' etc.
https://youtu.be/XhIwZuPGfss
Among R Foster’s theories was that the moon was in fact made of plasma, not rock, and that landing on it would not be possible.
I saw that years ago.
I think it is quite strange that they interviewed this man when today even his identity seems to be unclear.
Nobody will ever land on The Moon. It’s a plasma light, a cosmic spiritual phenomena, a sentient creation. How could a dusty rock affect tides, women’s bodily functions & plant life…
I'm looking forward to reading this.
If they could fool the world with these aluminium foil space crafts - how poor did this new 'mission' look. It was worse than 50+ years ago. And with all the AI I really wonder how many young people believe this stuff?
AI-CGI. A lot of composite manual-made imagery. Green screens in use it looks like. My children's 'group' don't believe that Artemis was real. They are more profoundly sceptical than the 'older' people who watch TV and imbibe and believe. I am guessing that a very large minority don't believe in anything NASA publishes - especially outside the Excited States. I am not in the E.S. but will guess that 80% probably do believe in it.
I am in the US but grew up in Belgium, did not come here until my 40s. I am surprised how many of the Belgians still seem to believe everything on TV. I am surprised every time I come to friend's houses and they have the TV on all day long. Even those that do not watch all day, still seem to believe everything the govt says, and I am pretty sure they got jabbed 4, 5 or even more times. Even though they get sick more often than before the jabs. I can only hope that children grow up more sceptical than our elderly folks - being 68 myself I am one of them but not so easily fooled anymore I guess.
The Excited States LOLOL
The TV. Honestly, maybe history's worst invention. The manipulation of images, data, words is just fantastic. I remember being caught in the Kyiv 'Orange Revolution' of 2004 (was working there). Fake news cameras on top of the buildings scanned the crowd and said there was an uprising to replace the pro Russian President.
If they had spent 20 mins walking among the tents and orange scarves they would have discovered young, paid ($10-15/hr), bussed in protestors, who were given the scarves, tents and supplies by the CIA and EU. It was 100% organised and funded. The average normie watching it would believe the narrative.
Everything on the idiot box is contrived. None of it should be believed. As you said, see the Rona plandemic for more info. A true IQ test if there has ever been one.
Can you kindly explain Australia's role in the broadcast. Thete was even a film made about it called 'The Dish'?
NASA-CIA set up the comms centre for Apollo near Perth, so all the comms and live feeds went through that centre, were edited, then distributed to a few TV networks. Everything was controlled.
Thankyou. The disception goes so deep and like many false flags and engineered events still live on. My granddaughter12, proudly relays these stories to me. I won't burst her bubble just yet. It's difficult she loves and looks up to her teachers, who unfortunately are innocent participants in keeping the fraud going. A good plan by those who run the show.
Yes, the 'educators' are uneducated. They are indoctrinated. You can meet PhDs in Physics who have no idea about the fraudulent experiment(s) to determine 'light speed'. Simply believe, memorise, vomit back, defend. NASA never discusses owning the comms via a controlled site in Perth. They have also publicly admitted the signals for Apollo were cloaked and 'radar' or object tracking in 1961, or in 1969 was crude to say the least. You are given the impression that some magical device pointed from the earth to the heavens, picks up and tracks any object in real time, in 1969. Quite absurd and false of course. Even today it is difficult and nigh impossible. In 1961, the 'radar' was vintage WW2. No one was tracking Yuri the actor in 'real time' over say Russia or the deep Pacific, Atlantic or Africa.
And yet technology has certainly moved ahead. I imagine this super fast AI has been around for a long time, just kept from the Sheeple
Technology like earthquake producing machines and other bombs that don't cause infrastructure damage but kill pepole. The bible says the Harlot rides the Beast until the beast destroys her, the pepole follow the Beast thinking it's the New light. Trumps looking like a hero to many ....I guess he's just part of the Beast system. It's good to expose the fraud. I pray people look further into Gods final plan and know this life on earth isn't the final destination.
Peter Duke from The Duke Report, reveals many CI A deceprions
The movie they made was to avoid answering questions about the moons surface they didn't want to the public to ask.🤷🏼
Indeed. Many of the moon rocks are fake of course. The moon's surface is full of different material not found from the Apollo program (later retrieved by the ESA and others in the 90s for example). Then we have the trip to Antarctica in 1967 where they collected the 'moon rocks', including the petrified wood samples one assumes. The moon surface is apparenlty resilient to massive rocket thrusters :) No holes or dust. We assme that Musk's Deep Fake AI landing on Mars will be similar (on Earth, SpaceX has layers of steel and resin on its landing pads, apparently absent on Mars).
I wasn’t saying the Moon landing is fake. I’m saying the movie version became the shield that kept the public from asking real engineering and environmental questions.
Okay so you admit it was faked :) Thanks.
I admit the public version was fake not the landing correct
Great work!
Thanks Jennifer, glad it helps and was of interest.
As you've noted elsewhere, there are spiritual layers to this. E.g., reprising old covenant Israel's apostasy, indicted for having "loved... served... gone after... sought, and worshiped... the sun, the MOON, and all the host of heaven" (Jeremiah 8:2). The NASA frauds also mock Christ's bride, the church who, in Revelation 12:1 is (symbolically) portrayed as having "...the moon under her feet."
I have a three word response to Apollo true believers: Van Allen belts.
Looked into it and surprisingly enough they are not a show stopper. Feel free to check my math:
https://erikbuilds.substack.com/p/van-allen-belts-an-obstacle-to-a
“Unstabbinated” - let’s see if thriving democracies allow that. LOL.
Appreciation and blessings from Sydney Aus.
When you go to explore a dangerous place, you naturally go back to your original landing spot. You don't go every time to a new, different spot becuase you never know what you're gonna land on - it could be a sinkhole or quicksand or just swampy with deep layers of dust. Landing on the moon is throwing the dice.
If you land safely the first time then consider yourself very lucky. And then you look around and prepare the landing spot for the next visit; you don't every time try to land in a totally different spot.
Also you want to know about how the equipment survives, so you always going back to your old spot to check on your equipment and your experiments. The whole idea is to monitor the experiments and how the equipment functions over time in the rough lunar wilderness.
So when they tell these stories that every time they flew to a totally different spot and every time bringing a new golf cart, rather then using the one they brought last time, then you know it's all fake stories.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/3gDG023plXCJLVpvHZ8qtBf/find-the-apollo-landing-sites
Right, when the simulation has worked the first time, you do it again.
The problem for the fanboys is that NASA has quite different locations for the landings, depending on the year and source.
After all is was only 250F - what is not to love about Tranquility Bay and the Trump Tower there?
Good post. Let me highlight the few areas where I disagree for discussions sake.
Moon Suit Cooling - The moon suits are cooled by vaporizing water to vacuum through a porous plate. This is a surprisingly effective means of cooling, which is obviously not available on earth. Explained in document "The Apollo Portable Life Support System - Kenneth S. Thomas." The heat load on the suits comes from two sources, solar radiation and body heat. I've independently checked these numbers and they work out.
Visible Stars - On earth during the day stars are not visible, either by eye or film camera. The same should be true on the moon. The stars should only be visible during lunar night.
Then we should have photographic proof taken when the command modules were in orbit on the back side.
Agree - If we actually went that would have been an obvious thing to have photographed. The stars look amazing from my country house, imagine how awesome they would be on the dark side of the moon.
Isn't it because of our atmosphere? Is there a layer of atmosphere on the moon?