The moon landing is fake. Here’s why.
Humans have not been back to the moon since 1972, and have not even been out of low earth orbit (<1% of the distance).
In 1961, space team chairman and MIT professor Jerome Wiesner submitted to Kennedy a report saying “American scientists have discovered the great belt of radiation, trapped within the earth’s magnetic field.” He wrote, “For the time being … space exploration must rely on unmanned vehicles.”
NASA engineers have stated several times that we no longer have the technology to send humans to the moon, and that the radiation from the Van Allen Belt is a challenge to overcome before manned missions to mars1
NASA has stated they lost the original Apollo 11 tapes, all we have is copies of them now. They were part of a batch of 200,000 tapes that were degaussed — magnetically erased — and re-used to save money.2
It was LBJ who took America to the moon because Kennedy was never convinced. LBJ is a total psychopath who was responsible for escalating the Vietnam War, getting Americans deliberately killed in the USS Liberty Israel false flag,3 and may have been involved in the JFK assassination.4
The lunar lander looks like a school science project.
Moon rocks are fake:
The Dutch national museum said Thursday that one of its prized possessions, a rock supposedly brought back from the moon by U.S. astronauts, is just a piece of petrified wood.
"It's a good story, with some questions that are still unanswered," she said. "We can laugh about it."
He said the rock, which the museum at one point insured for more than half a million dollars, was worth no more than 50 euros ($70).5
And that wasn’t the only one.6
There are no stars. All the crews reported not seeing any stars on the moon, or on the way to it. Because the correct astronomical patterns and angles are too difficult to fake in every shot.
The excuse involving loss of institutional knowledge and lack of funding is a cop-out. On 22 February 2024, CNN says:
Regaining past knowledge and experience is a big part of the challenge for the US, Scott Pace, director of George Washington University’s Space Policy Institute, told CNN.
“We’re learning to do things that we haven’t done in a long time, and what you’re seeing is organizations learning how to fly again,” Pace said. “Going to the moon is not a matter of just a brave or brilliant astronaut. It’s a matter of entire organizations that are organized, trained, and equipped to go out there. What we’re doing now is essentially rebuilding some of the expertise that we had during Apollo but lost over the last 50 years.”
Technical know-how, however, is only part of the equation when it comes to landing on the moon. Most of the hurdles are financial.7
These guys lose everything. Lunar Lander blueprints, original tapes, technical-know-how. Mobile phones, LED’s, Cassette tapes and computers were invented in the 60s and 70s, and of course they are astronomically improved by now. If you can go to the moon 6 times in 3 years, there is just no excuse why you can’t go now, 55 years later.
The behaviour of most of the Apollo astronauts is bizarre and inconsistent. The Apollo 11 press conference is covered with an atmosphere of shame. Most astronauts refused to swear on the bible that they went to the moon (see Astronauts Gone Wild by Bart Sibrel).
One thing that doesn’t make a lot of sense is why didn’t the Soviets call them out? Putin said during the Tucker interview that America blew up the Nordstream Pipeline, but there was no point telling the world because “you can’t win a propaganda war against the US.” So maybe the Soviets just thought it would look like sour grapes. OR
A possible reason the Soviets never mentioned anything was explained by Russian science academic Pr Aleksander Popov in a series of documentaries. The Soviets searched for and found the empty Apollo 13 capsule in the North Atlantic ocean that was supposedly on its way to the moon, and blackmailed the US with it for great economic advantages.
The two countries embraced a détente after 1970, but eventually the political honeymoon degraded but the Soviets were caught in the lie by this time. In September 1970, the capsule was handed back to US Icebreaker “Southwind” in Murmansk, twenty-one weeks after it had supposedly departed for the Moon. The event was allegedly documented by this photo:8
I have no idea if that is true or not, it came from a comment in an article.
NASA trained the astronauts in indoor settings reproducing the condition of the moon surface as they imagined it, once the realisation hit that it wouldn’t happen by 1970, the obvious step was to make use of the already existing moon studios. I heard they used concrete powder.
Intuitive Machines’ Odysseus lander tipped over at touchdown, but it’s still kicking
Don't worry, pictures from the moon's surface are coming soon.
They decided to power down the high tech camera made for them by naïve university students, so didn’t get any photos, conveniently.
The Artemis mission keeps getting pushed back, which is the mission to take humans back to the moon for the first time in over 50 years.
"Following a successful uncrewed test flight in late 2022, the agency had planned to launch a crewed lunar flyby mission called Artemis II in November 2024. In a press briefing last Tuesday, NASA officials revealed that because of various hardware issues, the mission is delayed until September 2025. Artemis III—the program’s first crewed lunar landing—has slipped as well, pushed back to September 2026."
And back in 2010, there were space missions proposed that have been quietly forgotten:
While NASA has officially given up its plans to send humans back to the surface of the moon anytime soon, a contractor [Lockheed Martin] is proposing a mission to send a crew to a stationary spot in orbit over the far side of Earth's neighbor…
Last February, the White House issued its proposed NASA budget that aced out former President George W. Bush's Constellation program. That plan had benchmarked 2020 as the date to replant the feet of U.S. astronauts on the moon after the last set of moonwalkers departed the landscape back in 1972.
Instead, President Obama laid out the goal of sending astronauts beyond the moon and into deep space. He aimed to land people on an asteroid for the first time in history by 2025, and send a crew to Mars by the mid-2030s. (NBC News)9
Considering that Artemis has been pushed back to almost 2027, its obvious that they were a little optimistic about space. Of course, they won’t actually land people on the moon in the Artemis mission. Just like Dave McGowan predicted in 2011 in his famous moon landing series that they wouldn’t actually complete any farside missions.10
The only other thing that is hard to explain is how so many people kept it secret. I don’t really know. It could be that compartmentalisation and working on a “need to know” basis enabled the hoax. I do know that people are extremely conformist and dim, so for me it is entirely possible.
It just seems like its all a big show to me. I mean supposedly Richard Nixon called Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin while they were on the moon. And on their first mission too.
I don’t know about the rovers to the moon and to Mars, they might be fake too. NASA gets a lot of funding and might just use it to set up pretend missions in a desert somewhere.
But I do not think the Earth is flat and I do think the space station and satellites are real. Nevertheless Elon is definitely delusional about getting people to Mars anytime soon.
https://www.unz.com/article/how-lbj-mooned-america/
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-nasa-tapes/moon-landing-tapes-got-erased-nasa-admits-idUSTRE56F5MK20090716
https://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-remembering-the-liberty/
https://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-the-jfk-assassination-part-ii-who-did-it/
https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna32581790
https://www.unz.com/article/the-moon-landing-a-giant-hoax-for-mankind/
https://edition.cnn.com/2024/02/21/world/moon-landing-attempts-challenges-scn/index.html
comment by Iris at https://www.unz.com/article/how-lbj-mooned-america/?showcomments#comment-5084944
https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna40354733
https://centerforaninformedamerica.com/moondoggie-14/
Hi Windsor, thanks for putting your thoughts across on this theory. I have to admit, I am personally not convinced it was fake, yet. It would need more incontrovertible evidence. I think the moon rovers are credible for one thing. I'm no expert on the moon landing event, but another thing for me that would be hard to fake is the live broadcast of the rocket launch to billions of people. I mean could it be that the astronauts actually landed on the moon, but never their space capsule? I have done some analysis on the computer code that IBM did for the space shuttle computer (years after these events of course) and that certainly was genuine enough to launch a space craft. Some of the best scienctific code ever written, with a very low error rate per line of code. The level of subterfuge you describe would have to be enormous.
Windsor, you’ve picked a loser here. Many aspects of your critique don’t add up. For example, Kennedy—the skeptic( ?) who knew this was impossible (?)—spoke nationally supporting the effort. Johnson simply continued the effort Kennedy started. Also, why did we fake (?) numerous trips to the moon—thereby increasing the chances of a leak among by expanding/continuing the conspiracy. Also, one mission was a failure and the world watched as the capsule rounded the moon and barely made it back through ingenious jury rigging. Why do this? Finally, I know a number of folk involved with the Mars Rover project (it was transferred to my old university). There are probably 80 folks just there who were involved in launch and landing and control of the Rover. All of them conspirators or useful idiots?
As to the points made of travel beyond our Van Allen belt, I agree. However, the radiation exposure is a cumulative effect of much longer duration than any 10 day moon mission. For Mars this is seen as significant, for the Moon, not so much. As far as critiquing Musk and his colonization desires for Mars. Spot on. Musk is part dreamer and part grifter. He wants a self sustaining Mars colony, yet the physical conditions on Mars are *worse* than the physical conditions on Antarctica! Yet, we’ve never produced a self sustaining Antarctica “colony” of for that matter, down the road from me, a self-sustaining “Biosphere” (another failure).
I could go on, but to what point. Thanks for today’s missive.