Pembohongan Di Bulan ? ( Moon Fakers? ) - Satu Konspirasi!

Tajuk : Pembohongan Di Bulan ? ( Moon Fakers ? ) - Satu Konspirasi !

Sumber diolah dari : http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/hardtruth/moon_fakers.htm

Neil Armstrong made history on July 20, 1969 by supposedly being the first man to set foot on the Earth's moon. Or was it all faked, staged in a highly secured sound studio? Did they do a good enough job making us believe that he did? Did NASA become ingenious in creating beautiful pictures of Astronauts standing on the moon's surface? I don't know if we'll ever know for sure, but it sure as HECK makes you think twice!


Lakonan yang mantap di bulan : Guna tali untuk loncat-loncat !




If going to the moon was such a big deal and so fun and all that, why did they stop after only going 7 times? NASA says, "they were cancelled due to budget cutbacks." NASA says that they wanted to put more attention towards a space station and something to get them there which we call the "Space Shuttle". So was that cheaper than going to the moon?

TECHNOLOGY

Have you ever thought about how much technology the world had in the late 60's and early 70's? Was it enough to get three men out of the Earth's atmosphere and two of them to the moon? Maybe. But how could that be so when the computers used on the Apollo missions didn't have any more memory than a modern day washing machine. And the computers they used, in size, took up more space than the ship had room for. With that in mind, and the fact that the technology in the 60's was merely squat, how could NASA of generated tens of thousands of such high quality images when there weren't even computers good enough to do so? That's where the thought of a possible sound stage comes into question.

We never went to the moon!!! :




PICTURES

A friend and I were browsing through a disk at school filled with photos of just about anything. To our surprise, we came across a few pictures of Astronauts standing in front of blue screens. If Astronauts pictures were taken from somewhere other than the Earth, why do Astro-nots (could we say) need to stand in front of blue screens? Maybe posing for a faked lunar shot? This whole thing about pictures brings about a whole new controversial subject.

Like...why don't we see stars in any NASA moon photographs? Did they forget to add them while making a fake background? NASA and Scientists claim that the sun seems to be blocking out all light shining from any star in the lunar sky. This, to me, is believable. The only reason the sky on the moon is black and ours on Earth is blue is because we have and atmosphere and the moon does not. We're never on the moon at night. What I mean is, we cannot land on the Dark, far or the Backside of the moon for numerous reasons. Too cold for one and the fact that no radio contact can be made while on the dark-side of the moon. So every time any man is on the moon, he's on the Nearside of the moon or you could say that it is daytime.

The reason that we cannot see stars in the daytime on earth is not because of our atmosphere. Why can we see them at night then? It's because, like I said before, the sun is too bright for any other light to be seen. If you don't believe it, take a flashlight outside and have a little light war with the sun. Who's going to win? Not you!

There is a transcript of the radio interview that was aired on the weeknight program, "Coast to Coast AM with Art Bell" (Page address accessible below) The interview was conducted by Art Bell. The participants were Richard Hoagland and Ken Johnston. This interview titled "Artifacts on the Moon?" brought about a question of whether of not NASA had changed or messed with any of the historical pictures of our astronauts on the Moon. Richard C. Hoagland, who was a science advisor to Walter Cronkite, did some work for NASA - and for a long time has been an advocate that there's much more on the moon, than we've been told. With him in the interview, is Ken Johnston, who was a contractor, taking care of -- actually, he was NASA's data and photo documentation supervisor, by contract. In other words, he's the guy who got all of the photos. BOTH of them in the interview, which was hosted in 1996, declare that there is much more to the NASA Moon landings than NASA is telling us. It's a very interesting interview and I recommend anyone who is interested to read it.


Check out these pictures. I'm sure you've seen them all before. Just normal Moon shots taken When the lunar module lands on the moon, it's powerful engines thrust out approximately 3000lbs of pressure. All of which should have created a tremendous hole in the moon's surface which obviously would be located under the Lunar Module labeled (E) in this photograph. If you would also notice that in the place marked (F), mysteriously there is a footprint. How could there possibly be a footprint under that stationary spacecraft? They would have needed to placed the LM from wherever it was before to where it is now, previous to the taking of this photo. from any of the seven Lunar landings.


Remember the video footage of Armstrong stepping down the ladder while talking to everyone on Earth? And do you remember exactly where the camera had to of been placed in order to see Armstrong from the angle we did? How come we can't see the camera in any pictures such as this? Here is a photo taken by Neil just as he exits the LM. It shows Buzz Aldrin climbing out and getting ready to climb down the ladder. Where's the camera that just a minute or two prior, videoed Neil making his decent?

*Bendera US yang berkibar-kibar!!! tengok kat label G, masih nampak jelas bendera mereka walaupun sekitarnya gelap!!!

This picture is showing a view of the Lunar module. If will look at spot marked (H), you will notice that there is no stars in the moon's sky. If you notice the place marked (G), you will notice that you can plainly see the United States flag on the dark side of the Lunar Module. This could not be a Lunar shot because on the moon, if something is in a shadow you can NOT see it. The reason we can on Earth is because the Earth has air molecules that take light and bend it, spreading it around objects. Light reflects off air molecules and lights up the dark sides of objects. It is atmosphere, bending the sun's light, that makes the sky appear blue. However, on the moon there is no prism of atmosphere to diffuse or bend light so the sky is totally black.

On the moon, the sun's light should be blinding. In fact, the astronauts wear gold tinted face plates on their helmets to cut down 95-percent of the light from the sun.

The dark side of objects in NASA photos should be pitch black, while the lit side should be hellishly bright. Yet, all NASA photos from the moon are softly lit, and they appear to be taken in Earth's atmosphere.


(L), you will notice that one of the crosshairs goes behind part of the moon rover. These crosshairs are in every NASA photograph which are part of the camera and are located between the shutter and the film. How could one part of the picture be in front of the crosshairs and the rest of the photo behind?


This next picture is just a closer view, labeled (P), of the previous photo.


This picture also has something wrong with it's cross hairs. Here is Buzz Aldrin making his first step onto the moon. You can tell by the horizon that the camera was held horizontally. Than why are the crosshairs at such a funny angle. My guess is that when they added the crosshairs in AFTER the picture was taken, they simply placed a clear plastic sheet, that contained the hairs, over each picture and this particular one wasn't aligned right. You can also see that the camera that took Neil's picture earlier, is missing.

*Tengok bendera mereka berkibar-kibar di bulan! ada angin ke kat bulan tu?

This famous NASA photograph is of Neil Armsrong and Buzz Aldrin while on the moon in the Apollo 11 mission. Here they are planting the flag at their lunar landing site. If you look at the position marked (A), you will notice that Buzz's shadow is almost twice the size of Neil's. How could this be possible if the only light source on the moon is the sun? I'll tell you how. If look on the left half of the picture you will notice that the shading is a lot lighter than that of the right side. With the naked eye you can easily tell that in front of Buzz and behind Neil there is a hill or a slight slope with enough of a slant that Neil's shadow is shorter because it's almost as if his shadow is standing up against a wall. But because Buzz is standing at an enough distance from the hill, his shadow is still on the flat ground. Making it appear longer than Neil's. There is a video where this picture was taken from. You can see that there is indeed a hill. I'm in the process of getting hold of it. Hopefully it won't be too long before I can show it to you.


This next picture is also a well know photograph called "Man on the Moon". This picture is very mind boggling to me. In area (B), there is a shadow being cast over the astronauts space suit. Again, if the sun is the only light source and if there is no atmosphere on the moon, the shadow should be MUCH darker.

In the background labeled (C), you can plainly see that the farther back you look it fades darker and darker until finally it's black. This happens on the Earth due to our atmospheric geography, but the moon has no atmosphere which means the horizon should not be faded but should be very sharp, distinct and crystal clear. Letter (D) shows something floating just above the moon's surface. Richard Hoagland, who I introduced you to earlier, claims that if you want to see what NASA doesn't want you to see, just look into the visor of the person being photographed. Here is a perfect example. No one knows exactly what that object is but there's a pretty good guess stated by Ken Johnston, whom I also mentioned earlier.

There is a structure just off of the moon's surface called "the Castle". Any astronaut you ask will tell you that it does not exist. That is because it was invisible to them due to the fact that they had they're visors over their eyes while being on the moon. But there are several pictures that have picked up this so called "Castle".


Here is a photo also showing some strange objects just above the moons horizon. This isn't the only picture containing these exact same things.


This aerial photo taken from a Lunar Module shows the crater-filled surface of the moon. Spot labeled (3) again shows that there are no stars visible in the moon's sky. Where it is labeled (E) there is an unknown object casting a shadow onto the moons surface. I have no idea what it is but obviously it's there.



This next picture is of Alan Bean holding a Special Environmental Examiner container taken from a camera strapped to Conrad's chest. If this picture was indeed taken from a chest Cam, then why are you clearly able to see (L), the top of Bean's helmet? Unless of course he is standing on a huge rock. Where it is marked (M), You can see into Bean's visor. Another example of what NASA doesn't want you to see. Shadows being cast from more than one light source. How can you tell? Well, one light source doesn't make shadows run in non parallel lines. Letter (N) shows the dark side of the test tube. There is a reflection coming from some other light source other than the sun. But it is possible that Alan's space suit is reflecting the necessary light. Label number (7) shows a strange abnormality in the sky. It's not know exactly what it is, but it's there.

*Tengok betul-betul ada berapa orang kat Helmet tu!

This picture is the best though! Look in HIS helmet and if you didn't see two astronauts on the last photo, you will now. There's the 2 men you see in the helmet + the one being photographed. That = 3 men on the moon at once. Remember there were only 2 at a time. Also notice that in the previous photo, the 2nd astronaut has been taken out. Yes they are identical photos.


I have already shown this particular picture to you, but there are things this one shows that the other doesn't. Take a look at the “circled” area. Here you see tracks left behind from the Moon Rover. Do you agree that these tracks are well defined? The fact is that you need a mixture of a compound, and water to make such well defined tracks. If you look at the Rock in the bottom left corner labeled (R), you will notice a letter C carved on it. Perhaps this is a little gag pulled by the props department.

This is supposedly the first footprint on the moon. To me it looks fake. Doesn't it kind of look like clay? The toe curls up. I know this because of the shadow the toe is casting. How can a footprint cast such a big shadow? It looks like it's just sitting there on the ground. Not imprinted like it should be.



This picture shows Buzz Aldrin stepping off of the ladder during the Apollo 11 mission. He is in the HUGE shadow that is being cast by the Lunar Module. You shouldn't be able to see him due to the moon's lack of air molecules.


This picture is quite funny! If you look in the helmet of this astronaut, you will see exactly what NASA doesn't want you to see. YES, TWO astronauts! The 2 visible in the visor + the one being photographed = THREE!!! Only two astronauts were on the moon at a time though. Figure that one out.


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


"...if one of these pictures proves to be fake, then we can class them all as fake."

Listen to this:

This is Neil Armstrong's famous words we've all heard before. "That's one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind." It plays forward and then in reverse. Listen very carefully while it plays backwards.

There's a theory called "Reverse Speech". I says that while we talk we say things backwards. Every so often we say a few things that we may not be thinking exactly, but is in our subconscious memory. For example...O.J. Simpson says, "I killed 'em high" and later on he talks about crack. I heard that Bill Clinton says some interesting things too.
So listen carefully while it plays backwards. I play it forward too because if you want you can save it to your computer and reverse it yourself just so you know that I'm not making this up.

When you're done listening to it, go here to see what he says..."Neil Says"


Interesting points :

An average days temperature on the moon ranges between 260F and 280F. At such temperatures, film melts and human beings become very uncomfortable...DUH! You would probably DIE!

Temperatures at night (the backside) on the moon drop below -41 degrees F. At -40 degrees, materials start becoming very brittle. Electrical items do not work as well. Car batteries are harder to start. The extreme temperature variations from shadow to sunlight would cause significant material contraction and expansion and would make equipment breakdown and failure very likely.

Only 250 to 750 miles about the Earth is our planet's radiation shield. It's called the "Van Allen Belt". It keeps us from being exposed to too much radiation. The moon is over 200,000 miles from the Earth. In order for man to get to the moon, he must go through this radioactive belt. This act is impossible unless you are surrounded by at least 4 feet of lead. "Van Allen Belt" Click here for the whole thing about the Van Allen Belts and the radiation exposed to the astronauts during the Apollo missions.

Why did the one-sixth gravity cause the astronauts to alternate between walking and hopping? There is one sequence where an astronaut looks like he is flexing his knees pretty good to jump but he doesn't travel any higher than a couple of feet. Why? The astronauts were not hopping any farther than what the typical person could hop here on Earth.

There's also a number of times when the astronauts were landing pretty hard on their knees. Were they not running a huge risk of cutting or puncturing their pressurized suits?
Why was video quality so poor for Apollo 11 when more people were watching, compared to later Apollo missions when less people were watching and were less skeptical? In the NASA film "The Eagle Has Landed", why can you see the Apollo 11 Lunar Module and flag through the astronaut walking on the surface of the moon?
After an Apollo 14 astronaut sets up and lets go of the flag, the flag flutters, is still, and then flutters again.

There are millions of micro-meteors traveling at speeds as fast as 6000 mph, which would rip the ship apart.

I'm not sure if we ever did land on the moon. Whether or not you believe we did or not, I hope that after reading my research some interesting questions have been brought to your attention. Because I am still not sure if we actually went to the moon or not, I am hoping that somebody out there would be able to convince me to the truth.

Moon landing hoax – Teori Konspirasi

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

Part 4

Part 5


Untuk mengikuti temuramah dengan seorang penulis buku M.Bara tentang penipuan NASA, sila Klik Sini.

Selamat membaca dan menonton !

Sangtawal Sakranta... [kebenaran tetap ada di sepanjang zaman!]