Re: revisiting Apollo

From: Yoda (briansterling_at_rogers.com)
Date: 07/18/04 

Date: Sun, 18 Jul 2004 20:01:32 GMT

> The `scientific proof of the first moon walk' is one that all can
> share in the very detailed records and televised pictures that remain.
> It was a fact, just as Pearl Harbor was a fact regardless of the spin
> put on the facts.
>
>
>>Ian

The US government openly admitted recently that the moon pictures were
hoaxed on the direct order of President Nixon. And to top it all off,
Stanley Kubrick is the man responsible for the moon landing hoaxed
pictures. In fact nothing was televised from the moon missions to any
home in the entire world. What people watched was made in a studio.
For example there is no 'mud' on the moon, and yet the most famous
pictures of the so-called "first footprint" clearly shows mud. Secondly
many of the pictures show a completely black background to space and
cameras would never show such a thing, especially when you have a
billion dollar project. For the guys at NASA to spend enormous cash on
getting there only to send the cheapest radio shack camera available?
C'mon the public is smarter than that. Or do you expect the world to
believe that 'flags on the moon flutter in the wind' and the glare,
shadows are all the default of the camera?

This blackness to space proves that someone is doctoring the photos or
the photos themselves are a complete hoax. In fact even in many of the
promotional videos made to show satellites, one can clearly see stars in
the background, and if one looks carefully at many images released by
NASA and JPL, sometimes you get to see the fact of distant stars in the
background. I believe these are "accidental errors' in the editing
room, but hey JPL and NASA, thats what you get for lying to the public
from the start of the so called space race. The claim that stars
wouldn't appear in any image because of the relflection of the Sun on
the earth or moon is patently ridiculous, only a naive person would
believe. Heck even in sci-fi movies, which attempt to be extremely
realistic such as 2001: A Space Odyssey, you see stars in the distant
backdrop. Many other such special effects movies could be listed to
prove my point, but those who are convinced against what science tells
us will remain ignorant of simple optical science anyways, regardless of
what you point out to them.

Anyhow the Moon Hoax pictures and video documentary which proves this is
fact was shown on CBC and made by CBC. It featured interviews with many
of the people involved in the hoax, and the reasons for the hoax. The
government felt it needed to show the public something to justify all
the money spent..and a happy good lucky 'one small step for man...'
kinda thing is just what Kubrick proposed albeit unwillingly. Another
thing featured on the documentary was how all those nifty pictures of
'gold leaf' on satellites, the lander was Kubricks idea from the start.
   He felt it would look better. In fact the gold leaf doesn't even exist.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: revisiting Apollo
    ... your belief is that NASA spent billions of dollars ... they actually went to the moon, ... > their technicians and artists place stars in the background. ... > any camera and place it on a tripod and take pictures of stars. ...
    (sci.astro)
  • Re: Occultation of Saturn
    ... Pete Lawrence wrote: ... I strongly suspect that the difference in Moon position is due to the difference in location between Maldon, Essex where I took my picture and Selsey where Pete took his. ... the next problem I have run into is, that I have not looked at the time at which the pictures were made I have compared - Pete's was made at 2:52 and Dave's at 2:59 - I just assumed, that same position of Saturn in relation to the Moon means, that the pictures were taken at the same time ... ... This helps much, but it does not show enough Moon surface details. ...
    (uk.sci.astronomy)
  • Re: revisiting Apollo
    ... Tim listen, I have watched the documentary with interest along with my ... that the moon footage shown to the world as real was in fact hoaxed on ... Are you suggesting the CBC ... Moon landing pictures which inspired the world, ...
    (sci.astro)
  • Re: Moon pix - what are these streaks ?
    ... experience make the pictures blurry. ... not blending with the curvature of the moon. ... Sony digital that produces rather objectionable artifacts anywhere there ... If you are using your camera's "digital zoom" to get ...
    (rec.photo.digital)
  • Re: Query for Brad Guth
    ... island of NASA's Apollo moon looked like. ... pictures of the Moon with shutter speed at normal day time rates -- ... of blue light in it, and video camers can pick that up. ...
    (sci.space.history)
Quantcast