The MOON HOAX

If NASA faked the moon landings, does the agency have any credibility at all? Was the Space Shuttle program also a hoax? Is the International Space Station another one? Do not dismiss these hypotheses offhand. Check out our wider NASA research and make up your own mind about it all.

Re: The Moon Hoax

Unread postby Nasaspotlight on Mon Jun 17, 2013 3:54 pm

Hello again. I wanted to update everyone on a very telling piece of evidence (found online). But first, I want to explain just why I am here. I KNOW for a FACT the moon landing is fake. I laid out some reasons in my months old reply to poor HEIWA being taken in by the gang of sentinels over at hoxers.net. Other evidence exists as illustrated by this 75 page thread. A 75 page thread that just took me the better part of about 24 hours to re-skim through (page by page and post by post) while looking for some specific information I remembered coming across.

When researching this hoax in earnest from about 2008-2011 (before life got in the way of my in depth research) I always tired of the nonsense boiler plate arguments and felt they were a trap as well. We all know them by heart: no stars in the sky, flag flapping, radiation issues, lunar heat/cold issues, Lunar Module issues et al. So I decided to research down rabbit holes I considered “out of the box”. I researched CIA/FBI FOIA docs online (after the a$$tronot’s kid claimed he could call the CIA and have them waxed), I researched the NASA technical document server and more. The one thing that really bothered me was I would casually watch youtube vids of the hoax that would show “mission” video and I always wanted to get my hands on a nice vid copy of the same to analyze frame by frame and look at every piece of the suit and every grain of dirt for any sign of the fakery. And where would you naturally turn to for the videographic record of the Apollo Simulation? Nasa.gov of course (or one of its dozens of sub sites like gsfc,ksc yada yada). Most of the videos offered from NASA where in real player format and even back in 2008-2009 this was obsolete. However, upon recommendation from a family member upon how to view different video files, I installed a movie player that had ALL the codecs available at the time to allow me to view any video file I could get my hands on from the internet. I excitedly went back to download all the real player vids of the fake mission and lo and behold, the videos were terrible. I’m no video expert so I don’t know how to explain this other than in layman’s terms. The vid was really bad quality but the worst part was the vids were tiny. They would take up maybe 5% of a computer monitor and if you went full-screen the resolution was so awful that it just became unwatchable.

I was bothered by this a lot, I considered this more indirect proof of hiding the lie, because who would honestly provide videos of such poor quality for man’s alleged greatest achievement and not even attempt to convert the videos, let alone provide them in at least a normal, if not HD, resolution? But I digress. This annoyance, led me to do some further research and I stumbled onto what I believed to be the best site for proving this fakery. FOOTAGEVAULT.COM. The thing was, I waited and waited, scoured message board after message board, almost all youtube comments on Apollo vids, even the “lie-guarding” sites like bad astronomy and jref forums. Not one other person mentioned this site. Then I came here and saw several references to the site. It is part of the reason I truly enjoy coming to this site and reading, you guys do great research work.

Starting on page 13 of this thread, user TIMOTHYMURPHY first mentions footagevault, and furthermore, goes deeper into one of the main perps behind that site, one Christopher Riley. Not to go too far on a tangent but you always have to check the credibility of your sources and I sure did. Riley was supposed to be a PHD that NASA contracted to basically ‘update’ all the fraudulent Apollo footage shot with the 16mm Mauer motion picture camera. So, naturally, I google Riley to see what else he is up to. I find out he is credited on some hokey UFO crockumentary, the kind that screams “UFOs are real just ask barney hill” type crockumentaries. Now I ask myself why would NASA allow their vaunted PHD, who must have been a real special individual to gain access to the thousands of hours of Apollo footage, to corroborate on some hokey UFO crap? The red flag was raised.

Back on topic, footagevault.com was referenced two more times within this thread; once by what seemed like a shill by the username of “Trystero” on page 59 and once again by user “reel.deel.” on page 60. Footage vault was apparently THE website for television corporations to use to gather authentic (cough cough) Apollo (simulation) footage. They proudly boasted of the BBC and the discovery channel as two of their clients. Once I stumble onto this treasure trove, I began investigating, frame by frame for any proof of fakery I could find.

A majority of the videos are interesting, if not highly suspicious. There were things I can’t really describe such as flashes that would last a few frames but engulf the entire image. These flashes piqued my curiosity so I would pause the video and watch each individual frame (to the best of my ability, with basic movie players on a laptop). What I noticed was buried in some of these flashes were the film slates. The slates would list the: photographer, inspector and the dates. The problem was the photographer (guynes) and the inspector (h. jones) barely exists in NASA records that I could dig up and the dates were a few weeks in advance of the alleged mission launch dates. This didn’t just happen one time or two, this occurred for every single slate from every single Apollo mission. Not all slates are so well hidden in the footagevault videos. Some slates are right there out in the open, some slates are so faint you have to really strain to decipher the “date” from the slate.

Interestingly enough, in the “terms” section of footage vault, there was a disclaimer that always gave me a chuckle and was just more indirect proof of fraud. The disclaimer said (I’m paraphrasing) footagevault is not responsible for any ‘accidental inaccuracies’ (such as the content of shot lists). What exactly is an accidental inaccuracy? It was very nice of them to define it as the content of shot lists, but we all know that was their feeble preemption to modify the lie when evidence was dug out from that site and potentially used against the perps.

I wish the talented crew here at CF had the time to dig through those videos and point out ALL the ‘accidental innaccuracies’ or as we laymen refer to it, the ‘evidence’ that prove the lie of Apollo.

Time for a little update since what I have been relaying to you I have known for a few years now. Try going to footagevault.com today. There is this very strange disclaimer that partly reads:

“Footagevault Limited -Footagevault Limited has ceased trading until further notice. Due to ongoing investigations in to the activities of the company officers of Footagevault Limited and possible legal proceedings, the Footagevault website and other associated IT services have been indefinitely suspended. The officers of the company have been instructed to cease all business activity.”


A simple google search for “Legal action footage vault limited” reveals a similar page only accessible through google’s cache of how it appeared in April that provides a few more details.

If you use the way back machine, you should be able to view the ‘terms’ page that has the interesting disclaimer about accidental inaccuracies.

That’s it for now,I have another post brewing in my head, totally unrelated to this topic of footagevault, but still on topic for the moon landing hoax.
Nasaspotlight
Member
 
Posts: 17
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2012 12:39 am

Re: The Moon Hoax

Unread postby Vext Lynchpin on Mon Jun 17, 2013 7:31 pm

Nasaspotlight wrote:A majority of the videos are interesting, if not highly suspicious. There were things I can’t really describe such as flashes that would last a few frames but engulf the entire image. These flashes piqued my curiosity so I would pause the video and watch each individual frame (to the best of my ability, with basic movie players on a laptop). What I noticed was buried in some of these flashes were the film slates. The slates would list the: photographer, inspector and the dates. The problem was the photographer (guynes) and the inspector (h. jones) barely exists in NASA records that I could dig up and the dates were a few weeks in advance of the alleged mission launch dates. This didn’t just happen one time or two, this occurred for every single slate from every single Apollo mission. Not all slates are so well hidden in the footagevault videos. Some slates are right there out in the open, some slates are so faint you have to really strain to decipher the “date” from the slate.


Very interesting. Do you have any screenshots to back up your story of seeing film slates in the Apollo videos? This is too tantalizing a claim to make without offering a way for anyone to independently verify it. I look forward to seeing this for myself.

(Edit: My apologies if this has been dealt with earlier in the thread. I haven't read all 75 pages just yet; just caught up on the Satellites thread.)
Vext Lynchpin
Member
 
Posts: 43
Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2013 9:11 pm

Re: The Moon Hoax

Unread postby Nasaspotlight on Mon Jun 17, 2013 8:00 pm

Vext Lynchpin wrote:
Nasaspotlight wrote:A majority of the videos are interesting, if not highly suspicious. There were things I can’t really describe such as flashes that would last a few frames but engulf the entire image. These flashes piqued my curiosity so I would pause the video and watch each individual frame (to the best of my ability, with basic movie players on a laptop). What I noticed was buried in some of these flashes were the film slates. The slates would list the: photographer, inspector and the dates. The problem was the photographer (guynes) and the inspector (h. jones) barely exists in NASA records that I could dig up and the dates were a few weeks in advance of the alleged mission launch dates. This didn’t just happen one time or two, this occurred for every single slate from every single Apollo mission. Not all slates are so well hidden in the footagevault videos. Some slates are right there out in the open, some slates are so faint you have to really strain to decipher the “date” from the slate.


Very interesting. Do you have any screenshots to back up your story of seeing film slates in the Apollo videos? This is too tantalizing a claim to make without offering a way for anyone to independently verify it. I look forward to seeing this for myself.


Hi Vext, I do and I also have a few of the videos (watermarked with “footagevault” across the center because they were the free download and in standard resolution), I really need access to “upload attachments” like in email, as opposed to uploading pictures to a pic hoster then pointing to it like image shack. But I screen capped the slates, and then tried to organize them in Microsoft paint. I will gladly post those (or the raw screen cap if you prefer) and the videos if I can. You also reminded me, if someone else has the time they should compare the lunar take off vids from the phony Apollo movies, pause the movie when the vehicle is at its highest point (looking down at the landing site), then compare that to the Rorschach tests of the LRO imagery to determine if paths and equipment match up, if I was a betting man, I would say you will find so many discrepancies in this method as to invalidate ALL LRO imagery.

I don’t want to get off topic, I have some extended time off coming up, that should give more than enough time to scrounge through my Apollo folders and post some of the slate pics, but Im afraid it might not happen right away (give me a few weeks).
Nasaspotlight
Member
 
Posts: 17
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2012 12:39 am

VF-1 rocket engines from Apollo Era salvaged from Atlantic

Unread postby DeeJay on Sat Jul 20, 2013 11:41 am

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/technology/2013/03/amazon-ceo-recovers-nasas-apollo-engines-from-ocean-deep/

ABC News article with photos and a video retrospective of some Apollo Missions:
- May 18, 1969 Apollo 10 - Lift-off
- July 11, 1969 Apollo 11 - Man on the Moon!! Flag Fun - Telephone call from President Nixon
- April 23, 1972 Apollo 16 - Getting rock samples & Lunar Lift-off
- April 22, 1972 Apollo 16 - More rock sampling
(this is the order of the video clips)

The article speaks of Amazon.com founder & CEO, Jeff Bezos, now heading back to Florida from the deep Atlantic, at 14,000 feet, with what remains of two VF-1 rocket engines from one of the Apollo Missions. As the serial numbers have been eroded by sand, it will be a difficult task to determine which flight these engines are from. Once cleaned up, they are destined to be put on show.


*************
ADMIN NOTICE (simon): Deeejay, I merged this post of yours with this main Moon Hoax thread. Yes, that Jeff Bezos story fishing Apollo engines in the Atlantic is hysterical, isn't it? :lol:
viewtopic.php?p=2382251#p2382251
DeeJay
Member
 
Posts: 125
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2012 1:18 pm

Re: The Moon Hoax

Unread postby XQB on Sat Sep 07, 2013 6:50 am

So we're told they blasted off to the moon again today. This time it's an unmanned rocket named LADEE.

The lost technology of the '60's still baffles me. Remember the good old days when NASA could zip over to the moon in just 3 days? Poor LADEE's valiant journey will take 10 times longer than that, a whole month!

http://news.yahoo.com/nasa-launching-ro ... 19159.html

"Unlike the quick three-day Apollo flights to the moon, the Lunar Atmosphere and Dust Environment Explorer, or LADEE, will take a full month to get there"
XQB
Member
 
Posts: 64
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 6:43 am

Re: The Moon Hoax

Unread postby lux on Sat Sep 07, 2013 10:03 am

^ That's because the traffic is terrible now. It's all that space junk, you know ...

Image
http://blogs.voanews.com/science-world/2012/03/30/addressing-the-growing-problem-of-space-junk/

:lol: :lol: :lol:
lux
Member
 
Posts: 1914
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2011 10:46 pm

Re: The Moon Hoax

Unread postby simonshack on Sat Sep 07, 2013 10:46 am

lux wrote:^ That's because the traffic is terrible now. It's all that space junk, you know ...


Image Made my day !
simonshack
Administrator
 
Posts: 6773
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: italy

Re: The Moon Hoax

Unread postby hoi.polloi on Sat Sep 07, 2013 11:14 am

http://news.yahoo.com/nasa-launching-robotic-explorer-moon-va-183519159.html wrote:The $280 million mission will last six months and end with a suicide plunge into the moon for LADEE, which is about the size of a small car.


LADEE? That's pretty delightfully adolescent. Just a wee little laddy plunging the depths of mistress moon, herself? And his own "small car", as well, to impress her. No more buggies. Laddy's just got himself some wheels he wants to take for a spin and flirt where only landing skirts have been before. I guess in a way, NASA is just one big phallic fertility dance.

But 280 million dollars seems like quite a chunk to go missing after this inevitably fruitless mission. In an employer's market like we have in the States now, what could possibly justify a quarter billion dollar moon mission? Are they just trying the delay tactic of inspiring people to make more babies and get distracted with family building? :lol:
hoi.polloi
Administrator
 
Posts: 5061
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Re: The Moon Hoax

Unread postby CitronBleu on Sat Sep 07, 2013 11:52 am

Stunning amateur footage of LADEE's launch has surfaced over the weekend:


full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3tcQsAOUCeo
CitronBleu
Member
 
Posts: 272
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2012 7:45 pm

Re: The Moon Hoax

Unread postby hoi.polloi on Sat Sep 07, 2013 3:26 pm

Surely, what NASA is "accomplishing" with these moon hoaxes can in some way be described as creating extremists and potential terrorists, using the neocon's own favorite definitions.

1. Siphoning funds into a "homegrown" religious extremism (using public tax dollars no less!)
2. Broadcasting the religious views (dummy launches) en mass and inciting others to their extremist views
3. Stirring involvement of the public into their extremist religious ceremony (What do you think they really launched into the air to incite the amateurs?)
4. Using military-level technology to take control of airwaves and control perception on a minutiae level
5. Causing possibly dangerous chemicals to spew into the atmosphere (or at least the launch area), thereby making their launches a sort of chemical weapon for causing harm to life on Earth
and
6. Terrifying the public with shining lights in the sky, making people think the Russians are possibly bombing or the USA is in some kind of ICBM war

I could be wrong. But it seems as though NASA is a terrorist organization. Look, this NASA guy has a beard. And why is he depicted so close to a Boeing aircraft? Beards and aircraft are making me uncomfortable. Perhaps we should report him to Homeland Security.

beardNASA.JPG

http://www.nasa.gov/about/highlights/le ... t5-slide49
(Actually, does this shuttle look like it's really there in the picture or does it look like graphics from the video game Halo?)

This Mason Peck fellow — NASA's Chief Technologist — is also a little on the beardy side. What could this engineer be hiding in his beard?

629689main_peck_226.jpg
http://www.nasa.gov/about/highlights/peck_bio.html

This guy — well this image of a guy-like individual — a Mister Steven W. Squyres (with helpful squares on his shirt as a mnemonic device) doesn't have a beard, but he has that kind of extremist glare. We might want to have him be taken in by the FBI for questioning. If they can get him out of this seemingly endless 13-day mission:

597041main_Squyres_226.jpg

http://www.nasa.gov/offices/nac/members/squyres-bio.html wrote: Dr. Squyres is currently participating in a unique 13-day undersea expedition in the Florida Keys to simulate a future human mission to an asteroid, taking the first steps toward learning how to do asteroid exploration by humans.


(Just how long can 13 days really be, after all?)

It seems in their bios an awful lot of these people spent decades working for NASA before they ended up ... still working for NASA. How does one get into NASA, exactly, then? Is it one of those 'friend of a friend of a sim' cases?
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
hoi.polloi
Administrator
 
Posts: 5061
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Re: The Moon Hoax

Unread postby I, Gestalta on Sat Sep 07, 2013 3:59 pm

Ha! If only the population could be smart enough to support you as a career stand-up comedian. Then again, even if you were to perform such onstage material to an uninformed crowd---powerpoint presentation, flips charts and all---you would probably still get some laughs playing it totally straight. I'd open with, "I could be wrong, but it seems as though NASA is a terrorist organization".

You would be perceived as "random" and, hence, funny. "Random" is unfortunately the new sarcasm, and has been for more than a decade.
I, Gestalta
Member
 
Posts: 149
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 9:00 pm

Re: The Moon Hoax

Unread postby lux on Sun Sep 08, 2013 2:54 am


full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9dXheNicK4s

This little NASA social event was held a few days ago as a prelude to the LADEE thing. I only watched a few minutes of it. It's too boring to sit through the whole thing but I did spot something interesting at about 0:17:30

"Veteran" space shuttle ass-tro-not John M. Grunsfeld reminisces about his first space walk.

“My first spacewalk was 8 hours and 40 minutes and I don't ever remember anything but the spacewalking tasks. We were so focused ... we were so busy ... things were going wrong ... we were fixing things ... and I just don't remember, you know, looking around and saying ... 'Wow, we're orbiting the Earth, we're in a space shuttle, we're in a space ship, look how black the space is' … nothing!”


:blink:
lux
Member
 
Posts: 1914
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2011 10:46 pm

Re: The Moon Hoax

Unread postby hoi.polloi on Sun Sep 08, 2013 3:10 am

Good find, that's akin to the Aldrin rambling found by Bill Kaysing.

Buzz Aldrin wrote:We were to become public relations men for space exploration -- in a sense, salesmen. The word
made me terribly uncomfortable and self-conscious when it was first used [...] I was incredulous...she had really believed all that crap she had read about me - about her - about all of us? Suddenly, all my life...became tinged with a crazy unreality.


viewtopic.php?p=2377366#p2377366
hoi.polloi
Administrator
 
Posts: 5061
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:24 pm

Re: The Moon Hoax

Unread postby lux on Tue Sep 17, 2013 12:07 am

SpaceX has cows and LADEE has a frog:

Image

NASA claims a frog was blasted skyward during the LADEE launch. Story here.

What is it with these guys and animals? I guess they think it makes it more real to have some animal life wander into their hoaxes.
lux
Member
 
Posts: 1914
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2011 10:46 pm

Re: The Moon Hoax

Unread postby simonshack on Tue Sep 17, 2013 12:42 am

lux wrote:What is it with these guys and animals? I guess they think it makes it more real to have some animal life wander into their hoaxes.


For those who may not be aware of this rather kinky / creepy obsession the space hoaxsters have with animals, insects and bugs - let me just re-post this old post of mine. (Allow some time for the animated gifs to upload).


******************

BUGS, BIRDS, BATS AND FLIES


Looks like SPACE X really love those bugs, birds, bats and flies 'spicing up' their launch animations... :rolleyes:


SPACEX Falcon9 launch (May 27, 2016)
The SpaceX MOSQUITO
(approx 1 minute before alleged rocket launch of [b- and JUST as puff of smoke bursts out of rocket tower)
Image
source: https://youtu.be/wPYOtCFSLKw?t=1188

SPACE X Dragon9 launch (March1, 2013):
THE DRAGONFLY: (25sec before lift-off)
Image
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... W4#t=2363s

SPACEX Falcon9 launch (Oct 7, 2012)
THE FALCON BAT:(19sec before lift-off)
Image
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... zXU#t=583s

SPACEX Falcon9 launch (June 4, 2010)
THE FALCON BUG: (3sec before lift-off)
Image
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... Hng8#t=86s
(my old post about the Falcon bug): http://www.cluesforum.info/viewtopic.ph ... 7#p2354997

SPACEX Falcon9 launch (June 4, 2010)
THE FALCON BIRD: (1sec after rocket exits lens view)
Image
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... HrP0#t=61s

I guess that's why the call them software 'bugs' ? :P Seriously now - the folks behind this crap must have severely fried minds.
I wish America will soon wake up and stop this ongoing sham.

I sincerely hope NO ONE will dare say that these insects and birds passing in front of these lenses within 20 seconds of these four launches is "a matter of coincidence". Please know that the above loops are all extracted from videos which last several minutes - during which NO insects are seen passing in front of these lenses. Moreover, any experienced photographer will know that insects passing close to a lens (focused on a distant object) will NOT be captured on film with any significant detail. Therefore, the most plausible conclusion is that these insects and birds have been inserted digitally - into these digitally-crafted rocket launch animations.

*************************
EDIT- November 11, 2013. Today, I happened to bump into this other bug - from an old alleged Apollo launch...
So it would seem that this is an older 'inside joke' than I previously imagined. These NASA jokers are pretty pathetic buggers :

Image

Image
simonshack
Administrator
 
Posts: 6773
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: italy

PreviousNext

Return to Apollo, and more space hoaxes

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests