For the ultimate Red Pilling experience, one needs to discuss if the moon landings were falsified and faked, a made in Hollywood movie, designed to turn people’s attention from yet another bloody American war, this time in Vietnam, divert focus away from civil protests, and disruptions, and to impress upon the Russians and its own allies, that the US was still superior, its technology absolute, its national will over-powering. Did the Americans land 12 men on the moon?
As with Rona, when you look for facts and proof, and question $cience or Scientism, you are labelled a conspiracy theorist, anti-science, a denier, phobic, a flat-earther, and probably a racist, fascist, and bordering on being Hitler (yet again). The true-believers will overwhelm the sceptic with sites, studies, proofs, data and models, and point to the cleanly scrubbed Internet, largely devoid of dissenting opinions or they will usher in the corporate-government-vested interest-‘fact checkers’, who will hysterically wail that this-or-that-objection is ‘debunked’. Facts are however stubborn things, as are good questions and demands for evidence. To find $cience simply follow the money and the financial sources who issue and who protect the $cience. The $cience is not interested in truth or evidence.
Thanks for reading Modern Scientism, Cults and the Age of darkness! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.
Did the US government, a bloated, fat, corrupt and larded entity, and its bastard Climate-crazy offspring NASA, actually send 6 missions and 12 men to the moon, during a 4-year period from 1969-1972, using 1960s technology? Is the rather abstract and unimpressive dictum, ‘I saw it on TV’, a reasonable belief or assertion? Does ‘TV’ provide ‘proof’ of a moon-landing or indeed, much proof of anything? Does the dictum, ‘400.000 people worked on the program so obviously they could not all lie’ mean anything? The larger the group the less any individual knows and most of the workforce on any large project work on small tasks, and most are contractors with a limited view of what is going on.
After the Corona Fascism and scamdemic, why would anyone believe in the ‘TV emits truth or reality’ mantra? Can we use our common sense and real science to understand the reality of sending any creature to the moon and the likelihood of that happening? What about the myriad problems with what was shown on the little screen? The literally dozens, if not hundreds of issues, large and small with what was displayed and averred? Should these issues and questions not be answered forthrightly? Or is the use of ad hominins the only defence? Is the only recourse of the ‘moon believers’ to label those who question or probe, a conspiracy theorist, a whackjob, or a flat-earth nutbar? Is that the best which can be offered?
Anti-Catholics often use the ‘Galileo’ affair as evidence of the Church’s immoral superstition and its august ignorance about ‘science’. The Galileo affair is ridiculous in the extreme and had nothing to do with ‘science’ but the politics of a Vatican-paid ‘expert’, funded entirely by the Church, engaging in ad-hominem attacks. Copernicus the Catholic, along with Jesuit astronomers long before Galileo showed up, had discovered and enumerated the patterns of heliocentricity. It was the Protestant Kepler’s math which seemed to provide empirical support for the theory, and it took some 200 hundred years to fully vet and enunciate the detailed proofs. Galileo had not much to add to this debate and did not forward any proof of heliocentricity, except referencing tidal flows, which as the Jesuits had known for some 30 years before Galileo, were from the gravitational forces and attractions between the Earth and Moon. So much for Galileo. Perversely in the modern age of $cientism, instead of giving Catholics and Christians credit for discovering and elaborating heliocentricity, they are pilloried. Where are the Chinese, Japanese, Africans, Atheists, Amerindians, Hindus and Muslims with this discovery? Nowhere to be found. But, say the atheists and enlighteners, let’s use this faux-cause as a club to beat the Catholic Church with.
Scientism and Small Screens
Let’s apply the ‘Galileo affair’ and its standards to the US Government and its claim that in 4 short years, it landed 12 men on the moon. Is the religious belief in the moon landing justified by science and proof? If someone is to challenge the Church of $cience, or Scientism, would he/she/it be subjected to censure, ridicule and pensioned off to a villa in Tuscany, banned and ignored? If so, does that negative and furious reaction to inquiry, highlight that issues do exist with the dogmatic belief that the Americans in 1969 landed on the moon? The proofs should be overwhelming, the evidence mountainous, the claims obvious, the declarations and data transparent and revealing. Are they? Let’s list some objections to the claim that the Americans went to the moon.
(Aldrin, Armstrong, Collins, do these look like men that just conquered the moon, or men filled with shame and guilt?)
It all looked so easy….
Why hasn’t there been a return journey since 1972 if it was that easy to accomplish with what has to be termed, ‘dumb technology’ from 60 years ago. Even in the 1980s, technology was far in advance of that which existed in the mid 1960s. Why no progress, no return, no improvements?
Why does the town drunk Aldrin in 2019 say we never went to the moon? (‘It didn’t happen and we need to know why it didn’t happen'.’)
Where is the original hardware, software, networking, code, documents, rockets, designs, telemetry, logs and metrics? Why aren’t they in full public view? Where is the proof of the entire system, end to end and how it worked? NASA maintains it lost the original systems. How is that possible, if this was the greatest event ‘evah’? I can visit Nelson’s warship The Victory, 218 years after its famous victory at Trafalgar. But we can’t view the original hardware, software, code, designs and rocket replicas from 50 years ago?
Why are ‘we’ still stuck at 250 miles?
Why is the Space station just 250 miles from the earth? Why did the current NASA Orion program which is attempting to go to the moon, agree that a spacecraft cannot go past 3600 miles (minute 3:45 in this link) due to radiation? NASA refuses to release Geiger counter information on radiation levels from the Van Allen belts citing the information as ‘sensitive’. You would need to pass through and back, using massive lead shields which the Apollo 11 did not have. Is the Space Station at 250 miles because beyond say 400 miles, the radiation is so intense, nothing will survive?
The Earth, the Stars, the Flag?
Why did the US Flag move on an atmosphere-less, windless moon surface?
Did Armstrong or Aldrin jerk the pole back and forth and if so, why? The moon’s surface is not granite, and it would not be hard to insert a flagpole and even if there was motion with or against the pole, the flag should be limp not moving.
Why in the above photo, is the Earth so small? It is 4 times bigger than the moon and would loom over it. Why the shadows in all directions? And what happened to the stars? Wouldn’t the moon - without an atmosphere - be drenched in starlight or a perfect platform to view the heavens?
Why did Armstrong, Collins and Aldrin look confused at the post-splash down conference in 1969, when asked if they saw stars from the moon’s surface? Why did they need to look at computer prompters in front of them when they gave their answers which contradicted each other? If you actually were on the moon you would remember every little detail including whether you saw stars or not.
Why is the Earth in this photo so much larger than in the photo above?
1960s technology
Today’s smart phones, resting in your pocket, are millions of times faster and more computationally complex than the software running the NASA module and related equipment. Is it reasonable that a ‘dumb’ system navigated a rocket, module, a landing, the orbiting, the deployment and re-joining of the module with the spacecraft, all the while ‘connected’ to systems in Houston?
How did a lunar module hook up with an orbiting command module thousands of feet above the moon for the return journey? Where was that practiced beforehand? Are we to believe that this complicated manoeuvre was successful without dozens of trials and failures? Why does the actual footage look fake?
1960s Analogue to the rescue
Communications
Why do we need cell towers every few miles to emit 4G or 5G radio signals, yet, with no latency, computers in Houston can immediately communicate with a floating spacecraft travelling at 3000 miles per hour, from 1.000 to 238.000 miles away?
If the speed of light is 186.000 miles per hour, how did Richard Nixon call the astronauts on the moon with little to no latency using a rotaryanalogue phone? Did the landline magically connect to a cell tower somewhere and transmit the sounds to the moon? How does a landline connect to a wireless receiver on the moon? It would take 1.5 seconds for the voice signal to reach the moon and 1.5 seconds or more to be sent back, including a time to think and reply. NASA later edited the original tapes to add latency. There is no latency in the original.
Why is there a photo of the Earth taken from the moon on the wall at the White House, which is shown when Nixon uses his rotary phone to dial the astronauts on the moon? (minute 2:07 below in official footage, you will see the picture of the Earth from the moon on the wall). No latency and a very clear call, no white noise or disruption over 238.000 miles.
Why did the 1997 Challenger spacecraft, at a range of just 400 miles in space, record massive amounts of radiation, this in a zone some 600 miles from the actual beginning of the radiation belts? There was no way it could go any further even if it wanted to (it was designed to go about 400 miles or so into space not any further).
How would anyone survive the radiation within the Van Allen belts, some 30.000 miles deep, in a 1.5-inch aluminium tin can, with no suit-radiation protection? You would need feet of lead as protection. How could someone stand on the atmosphere-less radiation rich moon surface and survive? The radiation on the moon is off the charts and as the Nazi von Braun stated, you would need either to dig a deep hole or find a cave to survive.
The melting point of glass, aluminum, nickel and stainless steel is far less than the 2000 C temperatures found in the Troposphere and Exosphere. This means that the Apollo capsules would have disintegrated when heading into the upper atmosphere.
Acceleration and your head imploding
NASA states that Apollo 11 took 100 hours to reach the moon. 100 hours is 4 days. Let’s say they took 3 days to get there and orbited around the moon some 10 times as NASA claims. The moon is 238.000 miles away. This means an average speed of 238.000 miles / 70-100 hours or between 2-3.000 miles per hour on average. Yet the Van Allen radiation belts are 30.000 miles deep and at this speed it would take 10-15 hours to pass through them unless they were going at speeds that no human has been recorded withstanding.
But…NASA says the Apollo modules using Saturn V rockets, sped through the upper atmophere and the Van Allen radiation belts in 1 hour at speeds of roughly 24.000 mph. Yet nowhere is there any evidence, from tapes, or logs, that any of the Apollo craft ever came close to this speed. Only NASA makes that claim but says the evidence is lost or maybe hidden. Why or how would you lose or hide data and evidence from the most important voyage ‘evah’? Even Magellan had his logs and story written down by hand, through his surviving Italian chronicler who was one of the 12 survivors of the first circumnavigation. But we are to believe that the moon trek data is lost or maybe they have hidden it and won’t share it? I can read Magellan’s original day by day diary, but not look at the actual Apollo telemetry? Isn’t it more likely that the Apollo claims of going 24.000 mph with the command module riding on top of barely tested Saturn rockets, never happened?
Time, acceleration, common sense
Nowhere is there any evidence that a human can withstand acceleration up to 24.000 mph in such a short period of time. To exit the earth’s gravity and atmosphere you would need to be travelling at least at the rate of 24.000 mph by the time you hit 1.000 miles in space. NASA’s own ‘logs’ say that Apollo 7 (the first to orbit the moon), exited the Earth’s atmosphere after 2.5 hours from initital lift-off. After this, it took 3 days to make it to the moon. This makes no sense.
Apollo 7, 2.5 hours after lift off, is given permission to exit the atmosphere, using the Trans-Lunar-Insertion, or the 3rd phase of firing rockets (so 2 rockets were already used by this time). This means that the Apollo craft were no further than 400-700 miles above the Earth, or about to enter the Van Allen Radiation belt. Pace NASA itself, the Apollo craft flew through the Van Allen radiation belts at 24.000 mph. These belts start at roughly 600-1.000 miles up. This means that in 2.5 hours from lift-off the Apollo craft would be no more than 300 to 750 miles up or travelling at roughly 250-300 miles per hour. They would need a vast acceleration over say the remaining 300-500 miles to the Van Allen radiation belts, ramping up very quickly to 24.000 mph. 24.000 mph is 400 miles per minute. Within 1-2 minutes they would enter the radiation belts accelerating at, or be very near to, 24.000 mph. The G force to do this is over 20. This would kill you.
Humans cannot survive for an extended period of time, without injury much beyond 6G. To accelerate from 0 mph to 24.000 mph, in 2 minutes, which is what NASA tells us, the G force is 20.Any G force above 6, experienced for more than a few seconds will injure and kill. Supposedly astronauts experienced around 3G. How then did they escape the Earth’s atmosphere? Where are the logs and metrics on how they survived the 20G for 1 hour, which is the time it took according to NASA, to pass through the Van Allen radiation belts?
No errors with rockets or new tech
We are to believe as well, that Apollo 7, 8 and 10, all of which supposedly circumnavigated the moon, did so with no errors, no issues, on the first try? Not even a monkey or dog as a pilot project to test the launch of a vehicle into space at 24000 mph?
As well Apollo 9 circumnavigated the Earth’s atmosphere, with no errors or issues on the first try? Supposedly Apollo 9, testing the ‘lunar module’ (doing what tests exactly no one knows), performed 151 orbits around the Earth, traveling 4,214,543 miles in 10 days. This is a mean speed of 17.560 miles per hour. The furthest distance from the Earth was 300 miles. According to their flight plan, they achieved ‘Earth Orbit Insertion’ or their 300 mile height within 11 minutes of take-off. This means that in 11 minutes they travelled 300 miles up, or again, with a speed of 17.560 per hour, which they apparently kept up (notwithstanding many questions about rockets, fuel and propulsion) for 10 days at roughly G Force 20? You would not surive this in real life.
Saturn V Rockets
If the Saturn V rockets could achieve 24.000 mph speed why were there so many issues with them before 1969? Why did Apollo 7 in 1968, use the Saturn 1B rocket and not Saturn V? NASA records 2 very short test flights for the Saturn V in 1967 and 1968. Yet a short 12 months later we are to believe that the Saturn V used for Apollo 8’s test journey was fully built, tested and quality assured? Since when in history has that happened on a big project without issues and failures? The first time the Saturn V is used to ‘go to the moon’ it works flawlessly? Is that real life? Or was the Apollo 8 a fake, the pilot program for the film and audio making?
How did the Saturn V rockets have enough fuel to power a 500.000-mile journey? Wouldn’t they need to be, pace von Braun the purported head of the 1960s space program, (who bizarrely resigned just after the ‘first landing’) the size of the Empire State building? Why was the Saturn V rocket – the finest ever made supposedly – scrapped after 1973? Where is the logic in spending billions and then throwing it away?
(Nazi von Braun, strutting on a moon set, 2 months after the supposed 1969 splash down of Apollo 11, this looks exactly like the supposed ‘footage’ of the landing or not?
The Landings
Why no noise on landing? Why no crater from a massive 18 tonne machine and its huge engine? Supposedly Armstrong turned off the engine just before touching down. Yet no hole.
The lunar landing module looks like a homeless shelter. Thin, with a huge engine and a pilot seat bolted on top. It is navigated by skillfully tilting the machine, much as you would with a power-glider. Just a year before Apollo 11, Armstrong crashed the LEM. Yet, on the moon, there were no issues with the LEM, which is an entirely new way to fly.
The Apollo 11 landing is so poorly staged, so obviously filmed, it is painful to watch. Just before touchdown Armstrong says ‘engine off’, but there is no engine noise in the background. No noise whatsoever, even though the 18 tonne LEM is supposedly propelled by a massive 10 thousand pound thruster engine. (min 1:57 below). The landing is just ridiculous with a ‘camera’ supposedly next to the massive engine.
The spacesuits were extraordinarily cumbersome, offered no radiation protection and could not be put on in ‘5 minutes’ in a cramped lunar module. Yet the astronauts seem to changing clothes more often that a highstepper on a catwalk.
NASA claims that the little 1.5 inch thick aluminium can was coated with ‘ablative heat shields’, and that the earth’s atmosphere acted as a brake. Nowhere is this explained or detailed as to feasibility. Rockets are never mentioned for the return journey or re-entry.
How did they survive the re-entry and what is with the ‘splash down’ theatrics? The tin can would explode travelling at 24.000 mph through the atmosphere and where did they store the 3 huge parachutes in the little tin can? Why was no one injured, sick, radiated, or suffering from something? Why did they look so happy, not even jet-lagged?
Weird Images
Where is Buzz Aldrin?
(Buzz Aldrin’s visor, Apollo 11, reflecting back a crane, wires, and Armstrong)
Why is there a horizon behind Aldrin, but also one showing in his visor. Since when do we have 2 similar horizons in one location? Where is this astronaut?
Supposedly the astronauts were using a chest high camera which miraculously survived the extreme temperatures on the moon, but many of the photos look to be taken from the eyeline not from chest height.
How would an 18-tonne unit not leave a massive imprint on the moon surface?
Who is taking this photo and why is the Earth so small ?
Hippity Hoppity
Why the ridiculous bunny hopping on the moon’s surface? The force of gravity is 1/6 of that of the Earth. In reality they would be bounding, not hopping. It looks simply like a double-speed video of someone jumping up and down on Earth, or attempting to run while hopping. It is painful to watch. (below is astronaut John Young you will notice a wire right in the middle of his pack, at the top, which pulls him up)
Sand buggies?
Why the jeeps? NASA today claims to be building EVs for moon surface travel. Didn’t they already invent this? There is no oxygen on the moon, so combustion engines don’t work. How were they powered? Were they fuelled or charged before the flight? If battery powered, where are the battery designs and replicas, and what was the longevity of a charge? And how did they get the jeeps to the moon? NASA maintains they folded up like armchairs and weighed 462 pounds….does this look like an armchair weighing 500 pounds? And apparently 3 of them are still on the moon.
Rocks of Ages
NASA claims it collected lots of moon rocks. Yet these are all behind closed doors and not allowed to be studied or viewed especially by ‘deniers’. Why is this? Why are some petrified pieces of wood? Why did von Braun and an entourage go to Antarctica in 1967? What were they looking for? Perhaps meteorites or space debris? NASA claims it was a bonding exercise for von Braun and his Nazi’s to work out differences with some of the other highly paid management. Who actually goes to Antarctica before a moon launch to vacation and bond?
Just coincidences (and murders)
Gus Grissom and his crew were incinerated in the cockpit of an Apollo craft in 1967, some 2 weeks after Grissom went public with his statement that there was no way the craft was going to the moon and after he affixed a lemon to the module’s door. NASA claims that the murder was just an accident, and in less than a year all the ‘problems’ were fixed allowing for continued testing by Armstrong and his crew. QA Manager Baron, described by his co-workers in various NASA ‘documentaries’ as a crank and strange person, was murdered along with his family in a car and train ‘accident’ just 2 days before he was to testify to Congress, using his 500 page report which has since disappeared, on the impossiblity of going to the moon.
Armstrong and Monastic life
Armstrong disappeared after the landing. He hid in deep dark rural Ohio. He gave 2 short press conferences. His last speech makes no mention of the moon and cryptically refers to peeling back layers of obstacles to actually get to the moon. I thought you went there Neil? What layers impede space travel Neil? No books, no political campaigns, no higher office, no running of NASA or its training program. No top gun training, no movie appearances, no stardom, nothing. Was the man and his family threatened to keep silence and to always remain very, very quiet?
How did Armstrong become so wealthy, when he never worked after 1970, never sat on a board or started a business, and there is no public record of his working anywhere? When he died in 2012 his estate and his alone, was worth millions. Was he paid to keep quiet?
There are plenty more questions and issues with the supposed ‘greatest event evah’.
Sebril and his search for answers
Bart Sebril, one-time moon landing acolyte, and movie director produced some films on the moon landing hoax, including the must see ‘A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Moon’. His books are also worth reading, and his website shows highlights of issues with the moon landing. He was targeted, kidnapped and drugged by the US government, probably the CIA. Sebril was followed, assaulted, threatened and beaten. Why would that happen if Sebril, playing Galileo, was only interested in finding scientific evidence for the moon landings? Wouldn’t the authorities, happily, gleefully and honestly work with him and overwhelm him with proof? Why the vitriol, lack of cooperation, violence, attempted murder, and hate if the ‘evidence’ is so obvious?
In this video and his book, Sebril confirms the following:
Yuri Gagarin was the first man in Space on April 12, 1961, and the United States launched its first astronaut, Alan Shepard, shortly after on May 7, 1961. Shepard flew a fifteen-minute parabolic orbit of just over three hundred miles with a maximum altitude of 116 miles compared to Gagarin (who was in space for one hour forty-eight minutes, flying a complete twenty-five-thousand-mile orbit of the Earth at a maximum altitude of 203 miles). [my note: Yet a short 8 years later, the boys are flying 238.000 miles and landing on the moon and since 1972, nothing.]
The light shown in the landings is electrical, not sunlight and the shadows of the landing are all over the place, due to the many different lighting standards and locations used. Shadows always flow in the same direction, not in different directions.
Virgil Grissom was in the process of writing an extensive and detailed report that was highly critical of the Apollo program, which he was planning to give to his United States Senator as soon as it was completed. Even more shocking than this, I (Sebril) was informed that CIA agents came to the Grissom household just minutes after Virgil’s death and illegally confiscated this critical report, which somehow, they knew about, and then abruptly left, without even informing Betty at that time of her husband’s recent demise.
When the Apollo One fire occurred on January 27, 1967, it was Thomas Baron, who worked in the quality control department of North American Aviation (NAA), that the United States Congress turned to for answers. NAA was subcontracted to NASA for the Apollo project and Baron had written a five-hundred-page report, which he submitted to Congress, containing detailed analysis of NASA’s inability to reach the Moon in less than a ten-year period, rather than the two years remaining in deceased Kennedy’s naïve 1969 deadline. Just like the original videotapes, blueprints, and flight data from all of the Apollo missions, Baron’s critical and comprehensive report of the severe inadequacies of the Moon landing program, mysteriously disappeared from the National Archives right after it was submitted to Congress.
Just like protesting Grissom, Baron too had a fatal “accident”, only days before his next scheduled congressional testimony, in which Baron was planning to present an even more detailed and damaging report on NASA & NAA, something that the CIA was not about to allow to happen.
To my incredible surprise, there were actually very few pictures of the two acclaimed astronauts allegedly standing on the Moon, very few, only about two dozen.
In fact, I could not find a single still photograph of the most famous man in the world at the time, Neil Armstrong, claiming to be standing on the lunar surface. When I went in person to the NASA archives in search of such an image, to all of the librarians’ extraordinary astonishment, there were no still pictures of Neil Armstrong standing on the surface of the Moon.
[The earth-in-the-window-trick, all on film sent to Sebril]. The astronauts placed a transparent colour photograph (transparency) of the circular Earth, some twelve inches so in width, in front of the circular window. This transparent photo was perfectly backlit by the reflecting earthshine, like a colour x-ray on top of a projecting light box. The Apollo 11 crew then very carefully inserted a black crescent shaped piece of material on top of their one-foot transparency of the Earth to make it look like it was the dividing “terminator line” between night and day. With the camera at the back of the spacecraft filming this, and with the interior of the spacecraft completely dark, it looked as if the Earth was floating in space at some great distance away, when it was really just a transparency of the circular Earth in front of the brightly backlit circular window from Earth orbit! Ingenious! [Minute 38 here]
From the Earth, the daily moonrise and moonset are always inspiring moments, however, lunar astronauts will see something very different: viewed from the lunar surface, the Earth never rises or sets. Since the moon is tidally locked, Earth is always in the same spot above the horizon, varying only a small amount with the slight wobble of the moon.
How did the very basic onboard computer, calculate in real-time, communicating exchanges with Earthbound computers, manage the precise rendezvous with the LM, which started at zero miles per hour as it supposedly launched from the lunar surface, and then allegedly synchronized itself perfectly with the height and speed of orbiting command module, which was supposed to be traveling at three thousand miles per hour around the Moon, all without missing each other even by a fraction of a second, which would have had fatal consequences for the crew in the returning Moon lander? No one will ever know.
In December of 2014, NASA sent its new Orion spacecraft, un-manned, directly into the Van Allen radiation belts and then promptly returned it to Earth for study. According to NASA, the purpose of the Orion mission was “to test the instruments.” What “instruments” were onboard the Orion spacecraft? Two Geiger counters to measure the radiation inside of the belts, which have to be passed through to reach the Moon. Didn’t NASA already have these measurements fifty years ago from the Apollo missions, if indeed astronauts actually went through the radiation belts to the Moon and back? Why is it so important to “test the instruments” inside of the radiation belts? To see if humans can survive traversing it for the very first time!
Then we have the landings. On some Apollo missions, the 10 thousand pound thruster rocket engine made no sound on landing, on other missions a loud sound. Yet the actual footage reveals that the moon surface never moves. Just the ‘voice over’ giving you a countdown on the number of feet until the landing.
(Sebril) It was in Cernan’s interview, filmed at his home, that he stated that the descent engine to the Moon was “very loud”, all the while forgetful that Apollo 12’s Alan Bean had said that he could not hear the descent engine at all “because of the vacuum of space” (their repeated catch-all excuse for unexplainable inconsistencies). Furthermore, during Cernan’s alleged “loud engine” decent, as he transmitted conversations of what he was supposedly doing while he was allegedly landing on the Moon, he forgot that no sound at all was actually heard in the background.
Returning to the film footage itself, the descent and landing of the Lunar Module is frankly preposterous. The problem is that Moon. Watch the sequence again and listen to the conversations going on. At various points the crewmen give their altitude: twenty-one thousand feet, forty-two hundred feet, three thousand feet, fourteen hundred feet...then they're down. If you concentrate on the Moon's surface, it's hard to figure out what's going on; the Moon doesn't seem to change or really get any closer. At no time do its craters or rocks seem to be more than an inch or so deep or high. The surface doesn't get any more detailed, nor its features any larger or more three-dimensional. It looks pretty much the same from four thousand feet as it does from three feet. Features that should have been great rocks or craters when seen from a great height turn out to be tiny pebbles or depressions beneath the Lunar Module as it lands. The perspective is just all wrong. If you run the sequence through at double speed you'll see exactly how the effect of descent is achieved; by the camera lens simply zooming in.
What the hell is going on?
Back to Galileo. Galileo offered that the Copernican theory of heliocentricity was a fact, though he never referenced the complex mathematics of the Christian Kepler in his presentation. Galileo simply wanted the Church and its laity to believe in him and his ideas. The Church asked for proof, which took some 200 years. There is nothing illogical in asking for proof.
Turn the abused Galileo reference on its head. If the moon landings are so obvious, so real, so ‘scientific’, shouldn’t the proof in original material, original footage, original technology, original designs, original logs and telemetry and original footage and in common sense and logic be so obvious and overwhelming that only a ‘conspiracy theorist’ or ‘flat earther’ would object? Wouldn’t manned missions to the moon and beyond, using our somewhat sophisticated technology which in the 1980s was far better than that of the 1960s, today be a normal occurrence? Why does NASA keep delaying its purported ‘returning’-to-the-moon-mission? Why hasn’t another country even come close to solving the man-to-the-moon riddle? Why haven’t Chinese or Russian moon probes or lunar telescopic analysis confirmed the American moon landings, and the supposed enormous detritus of jeeps, equipment, flags, containers, golf clubs, food packages and garbage? Are the Americans really that smart? Or is Hollywood just that good?
Could the moon landing be similar to the Corona fascism and scamdemic? Are the parallels between the purported Apollo space program and the psychological-$cientism operations of Corona not glaringly clear? Did the US government and every G20 government not replace reality with fantasy during Corona? Made up data, false models, endless propaganda, fake actors dying from the virus, the theatre of face nappies, plastic coverings everywhere, empty hospitals with mannequins, the fraud of gene-therapy poisons being injected into every human, the TV and little screen and online echo chambers pumping out the same images and remorseless fear pornography to convince the unwashed masses that the greatest plague in history, with a death rate of 0.3% was upon them and only ‘government’ and compliance could save them?
Was Corona not just another instantiation, a clear copy of the moon landings and the use of the US controlled-media to convince a population of the ‘truth’ and cement its faith in the ‘science’ and to unquestioningly obey and follow what the government says? Didn’t the moon landings turn the masses into believers of aliens, space travel, the unbounded vistas of ‘science’ and the impossibility of a created universe and God? Didn’t Hollywood enshrine the God of Space and Scientism through Star Trek, Star Wars, 2001 Space Odyssey and the endless propaganda around space in the 1960s and 1970s and into the current decade? Do not most people subscribe to a religious belief in shuttling to the moon on a space-bus sometime in the near future, or Hans Solo or ET flying, zipping, zooming and zapping through inter-stellar space at Mach 10? Don’t most profess to believe in aliens and oblong spinning, gyrating and physics-defying flying objects?
Are we not all victims of endless media and propaganda, dating back to the 1960s?
Thanks for reading Modern Scientism, Cults and the Age of darkness! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.
Wow. Eye opening!