# Bethak - The Desi Lounge > Freedom Castle >  Was The Apollo Moon Landing Fake?

## Endurer

*Moonfakers at work for Collier's magazine*
Shocking : See what NASA has done (Long but worth reading) 

Did man really walk on the Moon or was it the ultimate camera trick, asks David Milne? 

In the early hours of May 16, 1990, after a week spent watching old video footage of man on the Moon, a thought was turning into an obsession in the mind of Ralph Rene. 

"How can the flag be fluttering?" the 47 year old American kept asking himself when there's no wind on the atmosphere free Moon? That moment was to be the beginning of an incredible Space odyssey for the self- taught engineer from New Jersey. 

He started investigating the Apollo Moon landings, scouring every NASA film, photo and report with a growing sense of wonder, until finally reaching an awesome conclusion: America had never put a man on the Moon. The giant leap for mankind was fake. 

It is of course the conspiracy theory to end all conspiracy theories. But Rene has now put all his findings into a startling book entitled NASA Mooned America.  Published by himself, it's being sold by mail order - and is a compelling read. 

The story lifts off in 1961 with Russia firing Yuri Gagarin into space, leaving a panicked America trailing in the space race. At an emergency meeting of Congress, President 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. 

And so, says Rene (and a growing number of astro-physicists are beginning to agree with him), the great Moon hoax was born. Between 1969 and 1972, seven Apollo ships headed to the Moon. Six claim to have made it, with the ill fated Apollo 13 - whose oxygen tanks apparently exploded halfway being the only casualties. But with the exception of the known rocks, which could have been easily mocked up in a lab, the photographs and film footage are the only proof that the Eagle ever landed. And Rene believes they're fake. 

For a start, he says, the TV footage was hopeless. The world tuned in to watch what looked like two blurred white ghosts throw rocks and dust. Part of the reason for the low quality was that, strangely, NASA provided no direct link up. So networks actually had to film man's greatest achievement from a TV screen in Houston - a deliberate ploy, says Rene, so that nobody could properly examine it. 

By contrast, the still photos were stunning. Yet that's just the problem. The astronauts took thousands of pictures, each one perfectly exposed and sharply focused. Not one was badly composed or even blurred. 

As Rene points out, that's not all: The cameras had no white meters or view ponders. So the astronauts achieved this feet without being able to see what they were doing. There film stock was unaffected by the intense peaks and powerful cosmic radiation on the Moon, conditions that should have made it useless. They managed to adjust their cameras, change film and swap filters in pressurized suits. It should have been almost impossible with the gloves on their fingers. 

Award winning British photographer David Persey is convinced the pictures are fake. His astonishing findings are explained alongside the pictures on these pages, but the basic points are as follows: The shadows could only have been created with multiple light sources and,in particular, powerful spotlights. But the only light source on the Moon was the sun. 

The American flag and the words "United States" are always Brightly lit, even when everything around is in shadow. Not one still picture matches the film footage, yet NASA claims both were shot at the same time. 

The pictures are so perfect, each one would have taken a slick advertising agency hours to put them together. But the astronauts managed it repeatedly. David Persey believes the mistakes were deliberate, left there by "whistle blowers" who were keen for the truth to one day get out. 

If Persey is right and the pictures are fake, then we've only NASA's word that man ever went to the Moon. And, asks Rene, "Why would anyone fake pictures of an event that actually happened?" 

The questions don't stop there. Outer space is awash with deadly radiation that emanates from solar flares firing out from the sun. Standard astronauts orbiting earth in near space, like those who recently fixed the Hubble telescope, are protected by the earth's Van Allen belt. But the Moon is to 240,000 miles distant, way outside this safe band. And, during the Apollo flights, astronomical data shows there were no less than 1,485 such flares. 

John Mauldin, a physicist who works for NASA, once said shielding at least two meters thick would be needed. Yet the walls of the Lunar Landers which took astronauts from the spaceship to the moons surface were, said NASA, about the thickness of heavy duty aluminum foil. 

How could that stop this deadly radiation? And if the astronauts were protected by their space suits, why didn't rescue workers use such protective gear at the Chernobyl meltdown, which released only a fraction of the dose astronauts would encounter? Not one Apollo astronaut ever contracted cancer - not even the Apollo 16 crew who were on their way to the Moon when a big flare started. "They should have been fried", says Rene. 

Furthermore, every Apollo mission before number 11 (the first to the Moon) was plagued with around 20,000 defects a-piece. Yet, with the exception of Apollo 13, NASA claims there wasn't one major technical problem on any of their Moon missions. Just one effect could have blown the whole thing. "The odds against these are so unlikely that God must have been the co-pilot," says Rene. 

Several years after NASA claimed its first Moon landing, Buzz Aldrin "the second man on the Moon" was asked at a banquet what it felt like to step on to the lunar surface. Aldrin staggered to his feet and left the room crying uncontrollably. It would not be the last time he did this. "It strikes me he's suffering from trying to live out a very big lie," says Rene. Aldrin may also fear for his life. 

Virgil Grissom, a NASA astronaut who baited the Apollo program, was due to pilot Apollo 1 as part of the landings build up. In January 1967, he hung a lemon on his Apollo capsule (in the US, unroadworthy cars are called lemons) and told his wife Betty: "If there is ever a serious accident in the space program, it's likely to be me." 

Nobody knows what fuelled his fears, but by the end of the month he and his two co-pilots were dead, burnt to death during a test run when their capsule, pumped full of high pressure pure oxygen, exploded. 

Scientists couldn't believe NASA's carelessness - even a chemistry students in high school know high pressure oxygen is extremely explosive. In fact, before the first manned Apollo fight even cleared the launch pad, a total of 11 would be astronauts were dead. Apart from the three who were incinerated, seven died in plane crashes and one in a car smash. Now this is 
a spectacular accident rate. 

"One wonders if these 'accidents' weren't NASA's way of correcting mistakes," says Rene. "Of saying that some of these men didn't have the sort of 'right stuff' they were looking." 

NASA wont respond to any of these claims, their press office will only say that the Moon landings happened and the pictures are real. But a NASA public affairs officer called Julian Scheer once delighted 200 guests at a private party with footage of astronauts apparently on a landscape. It had been made on a mission film set and was identical to what NASA claimed was they real lunar landscape. "The purpose of this film," Scheer told the enthralled group, "is to indicate that you really can fake things on the ground, almost to the point of deception." He then invited his audience to "Come to your own decision about whether or not man actually did walk on the Moon." 

A sudden attack of honesty? You bet, says Rene, who claims the only real thing about the Apollo missions were the lift offs. "The astronauts simply have to be on board," he says, "in case the rocket exploded. It was the easiest way to ensure NASA wasn't left with three astronauts who ought to be dead." he claims, adding that they came down a day or so later, out of the 
public eye (global surveillance wasn't what it is now) and into the safe hands of NASA officials, who whisked them off to prepare for the big day a week later. 

And now NASA is planning another giant step - Project Outreach, a 1 trillion dollar manned mission to Mars. "Think what they'll be able to mock up with today's computer graphics," says Rene Chillingly. "Special effects was in its infancy in the 60s. This time round will have no way of determining the truth." 

*9 SPACE ODDITIES:* 

1. Apollo 14 astronaut Allen Shepard played golf on the Moon. In front of a worldwide TV audience, Mission Control teased him about slicing the ball to the right. Yet a slice is caused by uneven air flow over the ball. The Moon has no atmosphere and no air. 

2. A camera panned upwards to catch Apollo 16's Lunar Landerlifting off the Moon. Who did the filming?

*3. One NASA picture from Apollo 11 is looking up at Neil Armstrong about to take his giant step for mankind. The photographer must have been lying on the planet surface. If Armstrong was the first man on the Moon, then who took the shot?* 

4. The pressure inside a space suit was greater than inside a football. The astronauts should have been puffed out like the Michelin Man, but were seen freely bending their joints. 

5. The Moon landings took place during the Cold War. Why didn't America make a signal on the moon that could be seen from earth? The PR would have been phenomenal and it could have been easily done with magnesium flares. 

*6. Text from pictures in the article said that only two men walked on the Moon during the Apollo 12 mission. Yet the astronaut reflected in the visor has no camera. Who took the shot?* 

7. The flags shadow goes behind the rock so doesn't match the dark line in the foreground, which looks like a line cord. So the shadow to the lower right of the spaceman must be the flag. Where is his shadow? And why is the flag fluttering if there is no air or wind on the moon? 

8. How can the flag be brightly lit when its side is to the light? And where, in all of these shots, are the stars? 

9. The Lander weighed 17 tons yet the astronauts feet seem to have made a bigger dent in the dust. The powerful booster rocket at the base of the Lunar Lander was fired to slow descent to the moons service. Yet it has left no traces of blasting on the dust underneath. It should have created a small crater, yet the booster looks like it's never been fired.



*The Moon or a Studio in the Nevada Desert!*

----------


## Endurer

*These shots of John Young and James Irwin - like many Apollo photos - show a lunar sky without stars (J). Yet with no atmosphere on the moon, stars should be visible - a fact confirmed by Maria Blyzinsky, Curator of Astronomy at the Greenwich Observatory, London. If NASA could not hope to recreate the lunar sky, they may have opted for simple black backdrops. NASA claim that the sunlight was so strong it overpowered the light from the stars. On the shadow side of the landing modules, there are plaques (K) with the American flag and the words 'United States' quite bright and clearly visible, but the gold foil around the plaques is in near darkness. Studio spotlights highlighting these areas, or technicians retouching the prints, could have caused this effect.*


NASA claims the strange shape (E) - in this shot taken from the Lunar Module while it was 95 km above the moon's surface - is a shadow cast by the Command Module's rocket. But when larger aircraft fly at lower altitudes over the Earth, they do not cast such huge and defined shadows.

----------


## Nevermore

http://www.redzero.demon.co.uk/moonhoax/

Take a look at the above site. It looks at the various claims and rumors and explains them in detail. Man indeed *did* land on the moon.

----------


## Endurer

dont think so  :Smile:

----------


## Endurer

dont think so  :Smile:

----------


## Nevermore

Whatever helps float your boat, man. We landed on the moon and it's a fact. If you don't want to believe it, that's up to you.

----------


## kirti

Man really landed on Moon :ye;

----------


## sunil73

If USA fake landing on moon then they should be in big trouble. 

Let's see, Soviet Union that time also supper power and big time enemy.
And Russian are first send man in the earth's orbit. 

If USA plot fake moon landing, why not Russians speaks about this? they could say that American are faking this? They have sufficient knowledge of Space and astronomy. Do think about this, Please be rational.

----------


## sunil73

If USA fake landing on moon then they should be in big trouble. 

Let's see, Soviet Union that time also supper power and big time enemy.
And Russian are first send man in the earth's orbit. 

If USA plot fake moon landing, why not Russians speaks about this? they could say that American are faking this? They have sufficient knowledge of Space and astronomy. Do think about this, Please be rational.

----------


## sunil73

If USA fake landing on moon then they should be in big trouble. 

Let's see, Soviet Union that time also supper power and big time enemy.
And Russian are first send man in the earth's orbit. 

If USA plot fake moon landing, why not Russians speaks about this? they could say that American are faking this? They have sufficient knowledge of Space and astronomy. Do think about this, Please be rational.

----------


## sunil73

If USA fake landing on moon then they should be in big trouble. 

Let's see, Soviet Union that time also supper power and big time enemy.
And Russian are first send man in the earth's orbit. 

If USA plot fake moon landing, why not Russians speaks about this? they could say that American are faking this? They have sufficient knowledge of Space and astronomy. Do think about this, Please be rational.

----------


## NInA

Nice post! i've seen all the decomentry report! it was very interesting!

Man, yet didn't reach to MOON!  :Stick Out Tongue:

----------


## NInA

Thanks 4 sharing!  :Wink:

----------


## sunil73

sharing foolish to foolish this should be consider valuable.

 :applaud;

----------


## sunil73

There are every type to literature available in this time, but it is up to you what you think best for you. There are documentaries about gay marriages, free sex life, liberation in sex relation. My question is , Will all that documentaries are correct?

Endurer, your profile show that you are some kind of marketing Director, well i believe on your profile. So please, be represent yourself as you claim you are. 
I am very sorry if i offend you. Actually from the last 6 years i am living here in europe (basically i am from karachi), i have seen lot of rubbish literature as i mentioned above. So be logical and try to find the truth. 

Thousands of rubbish documentaries been made on Islam and other religion, Is that all true? Please read and forward the literature which is authentic. 

Be perfect like you are using username, Perfectionist. It looks you are living here in europe so use correct information and means to be logical.

----------


## adams001

yea me too dun agree :x

----------


## surdy

:O ... this is amazing 
i just googled for this , look what i got 
the other side of the story http://pirlwww.lpl.arizona.edu/~jscotti/NOT_faked/ dunno what to belive

----------


## nashid78

they have a quite good point there..............in the days of technology u never know

----------


## sachintendulkar

Is this true?? Atlease the snaps prove that it was fake...
could be the snaps are fake

----------


## mohitsharma

no sorry, dont think so

----------


## jr064

this debate about the fake landing will never be resolved. Both sides of the story seem credible.

----------


## _Adonis_

> There are every type to literature available in this time, but it is up to you what you think best for you. There are documentaries about gay marriages, free sex life, liberation in sex relation. My question is , Will all that documentaries are correct?


To start up with... There's a difference in reports, documentaries and literature. No wonder they are the somehow related, but they are not as similar as you expect them to be.

The documentaries are not always true, as there's no such condition to assert for them to bring out the mere truth in documentaries. Documentries are heavely dependant on the perceiver's mind, as they are generally made by using a neutral approach to the subject, but having a biased opinion deep down.

The issues concerning gays and homosexuals are not related to this topic, so I'd rather prefer not to talk about them here. 




> Endurer, your profile show that you are some kind of marketing Director, well i believe on your profile. So please, be represent yourself as you claim you are. 
> I am very sorry if i offend you. Actually from the last 6 years i am living here in europe (basically i am from karachi), i have seen lot of rubbish literature as i mentioned above. So be logical and try to find the truth.


Blah ... 






> Thousands of rubbish documentaries been made on Islam and other religion, Is that all true? Please read and forward the literature which is authentic.


Again, I'd strictly stick to the topic as to assert that the authentency of an article cannot be turned down by considering some bad examples. 

Use google, and browse a little bit concerning these things, you will get to know about the hoaxes of Apollo Mission.





> Be perfect like you are using username, Perfectionist. It looks you are living here in europe so use correct information and means to be logical.


As for being logical, the language, the way of writing, way of presentation and expression matters more than the material presented. So ....

----------


## _Adonis_

> If USA fake landing on moon then they should be in big trouble. 
> 
> Let's see, Soviet Union that time also supper power and big time enemy.
> And Russian are first send man in the earth's orbit. 
> 
> If USA plot fake moon landing, why not Russians speaks about this? they could say that American are faking this? They have sufficient knowledge of Space and astronomy. Do think about this, Please be rational.


The peace treaty, my friend ...

The world is on a cobweb dude, the great spider will swallow everyone someday after using us.  :Smile:

----------


## _Adonis_

> Nice post! i've seen all the decomentry report! it was very interesting!
> 
> Man, yet didn't reach to MOON!



Well, its quite an eccentric case, as though, Apollo landing was not the only moon landing. We hope that the other landings wont be hoaxes

----------


## Endurer

> There are every type to literature available in this time, but it is up to you what you think best for you. There are documentaries about gay marriages, free sex life, liberation in sex relation. My question is , Will all that documentaries are correct?


and the question is?




> Endurer, your profile show that you are some kind of marketing Director, well i believe on your profile. So please, be represent yourself as you claim you are. I am very sorry if i offend you. Actually from the last 6 years i am living here in europe (basically i am from karachi), i have seen lot of rubbish literature as i mentioned above. So be logical and try to find the truth.


what is logic or how do you (at your best) explain the scope of being 'logical? what has living-in-europe-from-bla-bla-years got to do with logic? 




> Thousands of rubbish documentaries been made on Islam and other religion, Is that all true? Please read and forward the literature which is authentic.


refer to the post made by _Adonis_, enlightenment guaranteed!




> Be perfect like you are using username, Perfectionist. It looks you are living here in europe so use correct information and means to be logical.


contradiction _en masse_. wait we have europe(?) to blame :ang9:

----------


## DonWit

why discuss

it does not concern us...

when somone from the subcontinent will land on moon then i will debate...

why waste time debatin bout biased n ******
Americans

----------


## _Adonis_

> why discuss
> 
> it does not concern us...
> 
> when somone from the subcontinent will land on moon then i will debate...
> 
> why waste time debatin bout biased n ******
> Americans


It's important ....

The reason is that we need to have the up-to-date knowledge of Astronomy and the people who are currently the forebearers of this business ...

----------


## Endurer

an article about why they feel like going back to the moon:




> The recent release of the details of NASA's proposed plans for human return to the moon in response to President Bush's "Vision for Space Exploration" last year has drawn much comment -- some positive, some negative and some simply perplexed.
> 
> Although the reasons for undertaking the program were clearly articulated in the president's speech, it is important to reexamine why the moon is its cornerstone and what we hope to achieve by returning there.
> 
> The moon is important for three reasons: science, inspiration and resources. All three are directly served by the new lunar return architecture. This program has the potential to make significant contributions to our national economy and welfare.
> 
> *The moon is a scientific laboratory of extraordinary facility, richness and benefit. The history of our corner of the solar system for the past 4 billion years is preserved and readable in the ancient dust of the lunar surface. This record is lost on the dynamic and ever-changing surface of Earth. Other planets do not record the same events affecting Earth and the moon, including impacts, space particles and the detailed history of our sun. The recovery of this record will let us better understand the impact hazard in the Earth-moon system as well as unravel the processes and evolution of our sun, the major driver of climate and life on Earth.*
> 
> The moon is a stable platform to observe the universe. Its far side is the only known place in the solar system permanently shielded from Earth's radio noise. That allows observation of the sky at radio wavelengths never before seen. Every time we open a new spectral window on the universe, we find unexpected and astounding phenomena; there is no reason to expect anything different from the opening of new windows on the universe from the surface of the moon.
> ...




```
source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/26/AR2005122600648.html
```


recently I've read about 'an explosion on the mood' here goes the news by NASA:




> [img=right:b46ec846b8]http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2005/images/lunartaurid/sitemap_new_med.jpg[/img:b46ec846b8] December 23, 2005: NASA scientists have observed an explosion on the moon. The blast, equal in energy to about 70 kg of TNT, occurred near the edge of Mare Imbrium (the Sea of Rains) on Nov. 7, 2005, when a 12-centimeter-wide meteoroid slammed into the ground traveling 27 km/s.
> 
> "What a surprise," says Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) researcher Rob Suggs, who recorded the impact's flash. He and colleague Wes Swift were testing a new telescope and video camera they assembled to monitor the moon for meteor strikes. On their first night out, "we caught one," says Suggs.
> 
> [img=right:b46ec846b8]http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2005/images/lunartaurid/impact2_med.jpg[/img:b46ec846b8] *Right:* An artist's concept of the Nov. 7, 2005, explosion. Credit: NASA/MSFC. "The chance of an astronaut being directly hit by a big meteoroid is miniscule," says Cooke. Although, he allows, the odds are not well known "because we haven't done enough observing to gather the data we need to calculate the odds." Furthermore, while the danger of a direct hit is almost nil for an individual astronaut, it might add up to something appreciable for an entire lunar outpost.
> 
> Of greater concern, believes Suggs, is the spray"the secondary meteoroids produced by the blast." No one knows how far the spray reaches and exactly what form it takes.




```
source: http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2005/22dec_lunartaurid.htm
```

----------


## erendis

whaaaat? if america wanted to 'fake' landing on the moon, then they would have beat the russians

----------


## sanseh

Absolutely not!!!

----------


## narry007

The logic sure seems to be waterproof ... but somehow a hoax of this magnitude .... hmmm .... i just know ..

----------


## snakhtar

People please come back to reality, because this news is fake and is only being hyped in third world countries. 
Man did go to moon!! Those who don't believe in it. God help them!

----------


## shamimkashif

nice

----------


## shamimkashif

nice

----------


## Riko100

Man didnt land of the Moon well not the first supposed landing by USA. They are a country i admire in some ways but i hate them in many do. They lied to the world because the Russians did something the Americans didnt expect they would do before they did.

----------


## iKash

*A very interesting read, but I still believe that we did land on the moon. Cheers. =)*

----------


## Doddy

*Niave?*

Oh common, the USA fooled the world, the russians know it was faked, but how can you prove it? Penetrate National Security? If you believe the moon landing was real then you may aswell say the Iraq war was TOTALLY justified and it really wasn't for their oil!
Keep your blinkers on if you wish, and wallow in the pure ignorance the media provides you all too regularly! 

If you can't make it...FAKE it.

----------


## niceguy

I am really not sure which side to take on this topic. Honestly, if it is a hoax, it is a fairly big one. I wouldn't be surprised though, the US is always wanting to prove their superiority. There were some rumors about the pics being taken in Area 51 where the landscape was similar to the moon landing pics.

----------

