Was it really all staged?

Have you ever heard some insane explanation of an impactful event in the world? That, in simple terms, is a conspiracy theory. As Britannica’s definition states, a conspiracy theory is “an attempt to explain harmful or tragic events as the result of the actions of a small powerful group”. These theories are all over the media and have opened a world of speculation regarding absolutely anything. Conspiracy theories can ridiculously range from the tragic death of, for example, Princess Diana, to suspecting that the Illuminati rule the world.

One of the most intriguing theories I’ve heard of is NASA faking the moon landing: the Moon Landing Hoax. This caught my attention tremendously because this event has had such a huge impact on the world’s and humans’ history, not to mention technology, that it would be appalling if it was actually staged.

Apollo 11 was the name given to the first-ever moon landing mission. This mission happened on July 20th 1969, eight years after President John F. Kennedy had set a national goal to land on the moon before the 1970s. On this mission, there were two American astronauts: Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin. Well-known Neil Armstrong was the first-ever man to land on the moon; Aldrin followed 19 minutes later. Notoriously, Armstrong said “That’s one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind”, as he first stepped onto the moon.

Since the 1970s, conspiracy theorists have generated elaborate theories about this event. These stories have insulted all the people who worked hard in order to make the moon landing possible, in addition to all the courageous astronauts who risked their lives travelling into space for us to have more knowledge about the Earth. In 2002, conspiracy theorist Bart Sibrel called Aldrin “a coward and a liar” for staging the landing and the senior astronaut punched him in the face.

But where did it all start? Why do people think it is a hoax? American writer, Bill Kaysing, self-published a book called ‘We Never Went to the Moon: America’s Thirty Billion Dollar Swindle!’ in 1976, which convicts the US government of not being capable of landing on the moon. Kaysing, who used to work in a US space program, believes this because he supposedly accessed results of a secret study by NASA which stated that there was a 0.017% chance of success, meaning the mission was basically hopeless.

In short, moon landing deniers believe that the landing was actually performed in a film studio. The theorists insist that the famous footage holds evidence of the landing being fake. As for every conspiracy, there are some believers and some sceptics, and each will tell you a different side to the story.

As you can see, the flag seems to be waving, which is physically impossible in an environment with zero gravity or wind. This obviously raised the sceptics’ attention. Unfortunately for them, scientists have given the reason why it appears to be moving with the wind. The flag is not actually moving, not in the pictures nor in the video., but It is settling down after being placed, and air resistance makes it slower, so the photo was taken before it had completely settled.

There also appear to be many shadows going in different directions, which is used to prove that there were different light sources, hence the belief that the shadows are cast by studio lights. The believers argue that the sun was low so it distorts the shadows, and if there were multiple light sources there should be more shadows for each object so it wouldn’t make sense.

Furthermore, it is claimed that all the rocks we see in the photos are actually props. There seems to be the shape of a letter C in one of the rocks so it is considered proof that they faked them. This has been debunked by saying that the C doesn’t really appear on the NASA prints. agnified it looks like a hair or an unintentional mark that was transferred onto later copies. In fact, 32kg of moon rock have been collected through other 6 separate missions.

Finally, one of the most popular clues from the pictures is the fact that there are no visible stars. It is obviously common knowledge that the sky is full of stars, and one would assume that in space it would be even clearer, right? But actually, in none of NASA’s photos from the landing can we see stars. Debunkers say that the astronauts took photos focusing on bright white objects, so the technology plus the exposure of the camera would not capture vague or unclear subjects like stars.

There are hundreds of queries that suggest the moon landing was a hoax. Some claims are ridiculous and really step over the line, but some appear reasonable and fair. This is the beauty of all conspiracies. It is really up to everyone’s personal opinion to decide what to believe, but it is interesting to take a look at someone else’s opinions and explore different perspectives. What do you believe is the truth?

Sources

https://www.history.com/topics/space-exploration/moon-landing-1969

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2019/jul/10/one-giant-lie-why-so-many-people-still-think-the-moon-landings-were-faked

https://www.theguardian.com/science/gallery/2009/jun/29/apollo-11-moon-landing-hoax

( https://outspokenpost.com/2022/05/17/was-it-really-all-staged/ )

‘Department of Truth’ #17 touches down on the Moon landing hoax

On the far end of the spectrum of weird beliefs — the way-out-there side — are the people who claim that the 1969 Apollo 11 Moon landing was faked on a Hollywood sound stage. James Tynion IV’s The Department of Truth, published by Image Comics, explores this grand old dame of conspiracy theories in issue #17. Perhaps the strangest aspect of the whole thing is that some people still believe it.

An early sense of wonderment and disbelief, historically, might be more understandable. A 1976 Gallup poll showed that 28% of Americans thought the first Moon landing could have been faked. You can almost see why people would not understand this strange technology that took us so far away. Now in the era of phones that act as mini-computers, denying the Moon landing seems far more laughable — and it is.

'Department of Truth' #17 touches down on the Moon landing hoax

Image Comics

In the issue, we see newly-elected President Richard Nixon discussing landing on the Moon with the future director of the Department of Truth, Lee Harvey Oswald. Importantly, Frank Capra, whose Why We Fight propaganda films were distributed to the public during World War II, is also there. Nixon needs to “get” the U.S. to the moon ahead of the Russians, and he wants to use Capra’s techniques, but Stanley Kubrick’s visions, to achieve it (Kubrick’s opus 2001: A Space Odyssey had been released in 1968).

The main belief behind Moon landing conspiracy theories is that the United States was behind the USSR in the space race, and it was of the utmost importance for us to win. In the world of The Department of Truth, where belief becomes reality, if people saw the U.S. as the dominant superpower, it would happen. And hey, if we didn’t make it to the Moon, then we would have imported all those Nazi scientists during the very real Operation Paperclip for nothing.

Many of the ideas of a faked Moon landing can be traced to Bill Kaysing who, in 1976, wrote a book called We Never Went to the Moon: America’s Thirty Billion Dollar Swindle (in keeping with the apparent rules for conspiracy theory books, it has a long, grandiose title and was self-published.) Two years later, the film Capricorn One (starring O. J. Simpson!) was released. This movie was to the Moon landing what Wag the Dog would become to false flag enthusiasts. It was a “what if?” kind of sci-fi film built around the premise of a faked space mission. And of course, since it was in a movie, it had to be real — if it can be imagined, it must have been created.

Ultimately Kubrick became the hottest name attached to Moon landing conspiracy theories with stories claiming he worked on a sound stage at Area 51 for 18 months to perfect his greatest cinematic masterpiece. Of course, as is common with conspiracy theories, this story both downplays the real, hard work that went into the Apollo 11 mission, while also proposing a hoax that would probably take even more effort to pull off.

Perhaps the most interesting aspect of Kubrick’s implication is the idea that he hid messages about the Moon landing hoax in his other cinematic masterpiece, 1980’s The Shining (it is quite possible that Kubrick was trolling the conspiracy crowd by dressing Danny in an Apollo sweater.) Joke articles have since fooled countless people into thinking Kubrick actually did this, and a 2002 French mockumentary, Dark Side of the Moon, didn’t help matters. And as more information came out about MK-Ultra and COINTELPRO, it became easier for Americans to believe that the official stories put out by the government about all sorts of events had been staged or mythologized.

"Department of Truth" Moon landing hoaxAll this has led scientists to devote more time and energy than they should to debunk these ideas, although that’s probably more effective than Apollo 11 astronaut Buzz Aldrin’s alternative. When confronted, he punched a Moon landing conspiracy theorist in 2002 — don’t worry, Aldrin wasn’t charged with assault. Will Smith, eat your heart out.

(source: https://aiptcomics.com/2022/04/01/moon-landing-hoax-department-of-truth/ )

NASA Artemis Moon landing delayed by ‘several years’ as costs go ‘underreported’

NASA's Orion capsule is scheduled to carry astronauts on the crewed Artemis missions later this decade
NASA’s Orion capsule is scheduled to carry astronauts on the crewed Artemis missions later this decade   –   Copyright  John Raoux/AP Photo
By Tom Bateman  with Reuters

NASA’s Artemis mission to put astronauts back on the Moon by 2024 is running late and getting expensive, an assessment by the space agency’s watchdog has found.

A new report by NASA’s inspector general (OIG) found that the agency was likely to overshoot its 2024 target by “several years” as knock-on delays and technical challenges impacted the mission’s timetable.

The OIG also criticised the cost of the Moon landing project, saying NASA “lacks a comprehensive and accurate cost estimate” of the programme.

In all, the mission could cost $93 billion (€82 billion) by 2025, the OIG said.

Last week, the US space agency pushed back the expected date for a lunar landing to 2025. The delay was due in part to legal action by Jeff Bezos-owned Blue Origin, which sued NASA after losing out in a bid to build a Moon landing vehicle for the Artemis programme.

Tony Gutierrez/AP Photo
Blue Origin’s attempt to sue NASA was rejected by a judge earlier this monthTony Gutierrez/AP Photo

In a statement, NASA said the US Congress had not allocated the agency “sufficient funds” to award contracts for Moon landing vehicles to more than one private company.

NASA said the delay was also down to “first-time development challenges,” and the 2024 deadline set by the former Trump administration “not being technically feasible”.

NASA ‘underreporting’ the cost

In its report, the OIG found that NASA uses a rough estimate for the cost of the first three Artemis missions “that excludes $25 billion (€22 billion) for key activities related to planned missions beyond Artemis III”.

The report also accused NASA of “failing to develop an official cost estimate” for the Artemis programme and said it was “underreporting the true funding requirements” of the exploration project.

NASA’s cost estimate for the programme excluded spending on development of the Space Launch System (SLS) – the replacement for the Space Shuttle launch vehicle that was retired in 2011 – as well as the Gateway, a space station orbiting the Moon that is planned to serve as an outpost for astronauts on the Artemis programme.

In its cost estimate, the OIG said NASA was likely to spend $93 billion (€82 billion) on the programme by 2025 and faced a $4.1 billion (€3.6 billion) cost-per-launch for at least the first four Artemis missions.

In a written response, NASA said it had restructured its Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate organisation to ensure effective management and that it agreed it should look for “measurable cost reduction targets” in its Exploration Systems Development arm.

When will we land on the Moon?

Artemis I, the first stage of the lunar landing mission, was originally scheduled to blast off this month, but NASA’s own estimates have pushed the launch of the uncrewed lunar orbiter to February 2022.

The OIG report is more cautious, saying Artemis I has a “higher probability of launch – in our estimation – by summer 2022”.

Artemis II – which will see a human crew fly 40,000 miles beyond the Moon before returning to Earth – faces knock-on delays from the Artemis I mission, the OIG said.

SpaceX/Nasa via AP
SpaceX won the contract to develop a moon lander for NASA’s Artemis missionsSpaceX/Nasa via AP

A key issue for the mission is the availability of parts. To save money, NASA plans to re-use parts of the Orion spacecraft used in Artemis I for the follow-up mission.

Delays to Artemis I could therefore set back subsequent launches.

“NASA is likely to face schedule delays due to the reuse and installation of Orion components following Artemis I and a tight delivery schedule of the Orion service module,” the OIG report said.

Artemis III, the mission that would see humans set foot on the Moon for the first time since 1972, faces numerous issues of its own.

A moon lander due to be built by Elon Musk’s SpaceX is likely to be delayed by 3.4 years, according to an OIG estimate based on previous space flight development programmes and delays caused by Blue Origin’s lawsuit.

NASA’s efforts to develop the next generation of spacesuits is another bottleneck, the OIG said, after the agency was forced to fast-track its schedule to meet former president Donald Trump’s 2024 moon landing deadline.

“The suits will not be ready for flight until May 2025 at the earliest,” the report stated. ( Source: https://www.euronews.com/next/2021/11/16/nasa-artemis-moon-landing-delayed-by-several-years-as-costs-go-underreported )

Fake Holiday: First Moon Landing

Today is the anniversary of the first Moon landing on 20 July, 1969. The first of many other fake landings (and everything else we have done in space).

With that in mind, here is an old article on fake Moon landing. There are many on the internet as well as videos. You can find more on this blog if you type in “moon landing” in the search bar. Go to Duckduckgo.com to find a ton more.

Fake Moon Landing

One way to introduce people to the flat earth is by talking about the moon landing. You don’t start off by saying it was fake but you introduce facts that makes you friend start to question the narrative. For example, ask how Gus Grissom was able to talk on the microphone with a background noise of 140 decipals. Then introduce another fact. Of course, you can just show him this or other videos.

We know the moon landing was fake because there is no other planet out there. I had learned about the fake moon landing years before I heard about the flat earth and I’m sure you did, too, if you were investigating government lies at an earlier date. Then, when I learned about the flat earth, it makes sense that the moon landing was fake, too. Unfortunately, there are good people who are Truth Seekers that know the moon landing was fake but still believes in the heliocentric model of the universe. God willing, in time they will be open to know about the flat earth.

La Pluma Más Rápida del Oeste – Albino Galuppini

   Una de las cosas que me llamó también la atención fue la manera en la que fue escrita la obra. El autor de esta biografía se llama Albino Galuppini, italiano que incursiona con este primer libro en versión española en toda latino America. Un libro, a mi parecer, muy bien documentado lo que demuestra una ardua labor investigativa.
Esta, es la primera parte de la biografía, describe eventos que lo transformaron en un amante de la ecologia, de lo bien que se vive en la naturaleza con pocos recursos y su empatía por los más necesitadosesitados.

Fue un visionario que, en los años 50, había anticipado que la única solución para poder continuar viviendo en este mundo sin lástimar el medio ambiente, sería el delimitar nuestro consumo. Viviendo mejor y gastando menos.

   Leyendo este libro, he paseado imaginariamente por la Sierra Nevada de California  buscando pepitas de oro y sumergido en las aguas termales de pequeñas lagunas secretas en el Oeste Nord Americano.  Navegado por la Bahia de San Francisco, plácidamente, ¡y saborando ricas hamburguesa de soya y spaguetti con tomates maduros!

https://www.lulu.com/en/en/shop/albino-galuppini/la-pluma-m%C3%A1s-r%C3%A1pida-del-oeste-parte-1/paperback/product-vqzy88.html

 

Why Did So Many Apollo Astro-nots Die Mysterious Deaths in Just Three Years Time?

From: aplanetruth.info

Charred remains of fire on Apollo 1 that killed three astronots….so the story goes..

Just before we sent a man to the moon, as the official story goes, there were many mysterious deaths of Apollo candidates for the Moon shot. Were they silenced because they could not be mind controlled or counted on to keep the Great Lie going?

*****

Apollo/Satan and his fall from Heaven.

Apollo is a powerful God which has inspired several “demonic” or Abyssic Gods. Known as Helios by Nero Caesar, Phoebus or “Shining,” Apollo is the twin brother of Artemis (Diana). His center of worship was at was at Delphi and was renowned throughout the ancient world for its oracular advice delivered by a priestess called the Pythia the Chthonic serpent/dragon.

Nero Caesar and Domitian actually considered himself a manifestation of Apollo as he is the God of Illumination, Light, Music, Medicine and more. His arrows send plague and death which earned him the Biblical name of Apollyon or Abaddon, the King of the Bottomless Pit/ Lucifer.

“Apollo” is another name for Satan or Lucifer.

Isn’t it odd that NASA would name its first exploration of another celestial body after the great deceiver of men himself, Satan?

****

Deaths of key people involved with the Apollo program In a television program about the hoax theory, Fox Entertainment Group listed the deaths of 10 astronauts and of two civilians related to the manned spaceflight program as having possibly been killings as part of a coverup.

•Ted Freeman (T-38 crash, 1964)

•Elliott See and Charlie Bassett (T-38 accident, 1966)

•Virgil “Gus” Grissom (supposedly an outspoken critic of the Space Program) (Apollo 1 fire, January 1967) Ed White (Apollo 1 fire, January 1967) Roger Chaffee (Apollo 1 fire, January 1967)

•Ed Givens (car accident, 1967)

•C. C. Williams (T-38 accident, October 1967)

•X-15 pilot Mike Adams (the only X-15 pilot killed in November 1967 during the X-15 flight test program – not a NASA astronaut, but had flown X-15 above 50 miles).

•Robert Lawrence, scheduled to be an Air Force Manned Orbiting Laboratory pilot who died in a jet crash in December 1967, shortly after reporting for duty to that (later cancelled) program.

•NASA worker Thomas Baron Train crash, 1967 shortly after making accusations before Congress about the cause of the Apollo 1 fire, after which he was fired. Ruled as suicide.

•Paul Jacobs, a private investigator from San Francisco, interviewed the head of the US Department of Geology in Washington about the ‘moon rocks’. Did you examine the Moon rocks, did they really come from the Moon? Jacobs asked – the geologist did not respond, only laughed. Paul Jacobs and his wife died from cancer within 90 days.

•Lee Gelvani claims to have almost convinced James Irwin, an Apollo 15 astronaut whom Gelvani referred to as an “informant”, to confess about a cover-up having occurred. Irwin was supposedly going to contact Kaysing about it; however he died of a heart attack in 1991, before any such telephone call occurred. Spacecraft testing and flying high performance jet aircraft can be dangerous, and all but one of the astronaut deaths (Irwin’s) were directly related to their rather hazardous job. Two of the astronauts, Mike Adams and Robert Lawrence, had no connection with the civilian manned space program. Astronaut James Irwin had suffered several heart attacks in the years prior to his death. There is no independent confirmation of Gelvani’s claim that Irwin was about to come forward. Moreover, if there was a coverup (that the Apollo 11 and subsequent landings were faked), the coverup would logically have occurred in 1969 and subsequent years – yet all of the deaths listed above occurred in 1967 or earlier.

Copy and WIN : http://ow.ly/KNICZ

****

10 Dead NASA astronauts, 1964-67

On 27 January 1967, two years before the first moon landing, Virgil “Gus” Grissom, Ed White and Roger Chaffee were killed in a devastating fire on the Apollo 1 launchpad during a full scale launch simulation. Grissom was greatly liked by his peers, was a strong character, and occupied a central position in the NASA space program. Many had predicted that it would be Grissom who would be the first to walk on the moon.

But Grissom was also an outspoken critic of the program. Among his last words before he died, when there was a communications failure with the capsule just prior to the fire, were: “How are we going to get to the moon when we can’t communicate between two buildings?”

Moments later, the capsule burst into flames with the astronauts sealed inside. They were consumed by the fire with no chance to escape. His widow Betty and his son Scott both still maintain that the astronauts were killed deliberately by sabotage – and that their many questions have never been adequately answered.

Clark McClelland and John Lear insist that there was also a fourth astronaut who died in the capsule, a member of an alternative space program… the “real” one, employing top secret advanced technology, which was highly classified. After the fire, according to McClelland and Lear, a heavy cover-up ensued that continues to this day. (Please see Project Camelot’s interview with John Lear for more details. Lear states that the fourth astronaut’s name is known.)

Thomas Ronald Baron was a safety inspector in Apollo 1’s construction. After the fire, Baron testified before Congress that the Apollo program was in such disarray that the United States would never make it to the moon. He claimed his opinions made him a target, and on 21 April 1967 reported on camera to news reporters that he and his wife had been harassed at home. As part of his testimony Baron submitted a 500 page report detailing his findings. Exactly one week after he testified, Baron’s car was struck by a train and he, his wife and his stepdaughter were all killed instantly. Baron’s report mysteriously disappeared, and to this day it has never been found.

The Apollo program continued, and so did the string of untimely deaths. Between the years of 1964 and 1967 a total of 10 astronauts lost their lives in freak accidents. These deaths accounted for an astonishing 15% of NASA’s astronaut corps.

Apollo 1 Astro-nots praying over Apollo Command Module…why?

“How are we going to get to the moon if we can’t talk between two buildings?” Ed Grissom, Apollo 1

The issue of mysterious and untimely deaths also plagues the moon shots. Were whistle-blowers silenced? The January 1967 death of Gus Grissom, along with Ed White and Roger Chaffee in the Apollo 1 fire, is a possibility. One of the more prominent debunkers of the “we-never-went-to-the-moon” crowd has published his “disgust” that Bill Kaysing would suggest that Gus Grissom was murdered in order to silence him.

Who else makes such a “disgusting” claim? Grissom’s wife and son do. They both believe that the Apollo 1 fire was no accident, and that the truth is being covered up. They have evidence that such a notion might be true, and Grissom’s son Scott is calling for an official investigation into the matter as of 2002. Grissom was critical of NASA, hanging a lemon on a NASA simulator before he died.

People associated with the Apollo 1 simulation on the day of the fire remarked on the strange atmosphere that prevailed. Grissom told his wife that if somebody died in an “accident,” it would likely be him, and not because he was accident prone. Straight-talking Grissom apparently made the NASA brass uneasy with his observations. During the Apollo 1 simulation, just before he died, the communications with the Command Module completely broke down, and Grissom said in exasperation, “How are we going to get to the moon if we can’t talk between two buildings?”

Lola Morrow was the astronauts’ secretary. On the show Moon Shot she can be heard describing the atmosphere on the morning of the fire. She described the mood of Grissom, White and Chaffee as one she had never seen before. Before each flight and major event, the astronauts were eager to get to it. Not that day. They obviously did not want to do the simulation.

Clark MacDonald, an engineer working for McDonnell-Douglas, was hired by NASA to investigate the fire. He now has admitted that more than thirty years earlier, NASA destroyed the evidence he gathered, as well as the report he produced, for “public relations” reasons. MacDonald determined that an electrical short started the fire when the battery power was switched on. Grissom’s son Scott was granted access to the Apollo 1 craft, where he gathered evidence that he says pointed to sabotage, and that there has been a cover-up of it. (Source)

Grissom’s death (taking White and Chaffee with him) is not the only strange one. Bill Kaysing thinks that another man was silenced by murder. Thomas Baron was an inspector for North American Rockwell, the contractor that built the Command Module. The astronauts are united in the opinion that what Rockwell produced was of initially poor quality. The astronauts comment on it in Moon Shot.

Baron was not an engineer, and only had a high school education, but was the detail-oriented fanatic that all technical organizations need. His pals gave him the initials “DR,” which stood for discrepancy report. His supervisor ran out of discrepancy report forms regularly, because Baron used so many of them. He was the squeaky wheel. He made some of his findings public, and Rockwell fired him about three weeks before the Apollo 1 fire. Baron originally produced a fifty-five-page report, and finished a 500-page report that he delivered when he testified to Congress in April of 1967.

His testimony received a hostile reception. A few days later he was dead. His car was struck by a train, killing not only himself, but also his wife and stepdaughter. In shades of Casolaro and Wilcher, his death was officially ruled a suicide. It was worse than that, because he did not only “kill” himself, but also murdered his wife and her child. It took some interesting psychology to arrive at that conclusion, going from being overly conscientious to becoming a murderer.

One theory is that he was distraught over the Apollo 1 fire, so he killed himself and his family. I have not heard about anybody else connected to the Apollo program killing themselves or becoming murderers over the Apollo 1 “accident.” How strange that the biggest whistleblower did. Just what are those odds? The 500-page report disappeared, and has not been seen since.

The moon hoax debunkers have lined up behind the official explanation. Jay Windley thinks that Barons’ report has come up missing partly because it had little investigative value, and that Baron may have indeed killed himself, but if he were murdered, it would have been a private contractor, not NASA, and if they wanted to silence him, they should have done it before he testified. Jay may be right, but I have encountered far too many conveniently timed deaths during my investigations to make my suspicion go away, especially when Grissom’s son thinks he was murdered.

Killing whistle-blowers such as Thomas Baron was standard operating procedure for the defense establishment, if it related to military matters. I know people who have been involved in Department of Defense whistle-blowing activities. It could get pretty scary. Sometimes, people would simply “disappear,” Jimmy Hoffa-style.

When billions of dollars are at stake, murdering a few people with “big mouths” or who otherwise stand in the way is standard activity. That is the nature of American-style capitalism. Why should it be different regarding space matters? I was challenged to provide some evidence of what I know about whistle-blowers, and without naming names, this footnote presents a little of what I am aware of.[62]

James Irwin was an Apollo 15 astronaut. He became a Born Again Christian, leading an effort to find Noah’s Ark. According to what I have read and heard, in 1991, Irwin contacted Kaysing to have a chat. Why would Irwin call a “kook” such as Kaysing? Four days after allegedly trying to contact Kaysing, Irwin was dead from a heart attack. Did “Born Again” Irwin want to unburden his conscience? Irwin had heart disease, so that may explain it, but the spooks can apparently induce heart attacks using normally undetectable means. ”

The landing of the first human on the moon is still considered a hoax

The idea of ​​the Moon landing was a hoax starting out as “hunch, intuition”, before turning into “true belief” —that the US lacked the technical know-how to get to the Moon. Kaysing actually contributed to the US space program, between 1956 and 1963.

He was an employee of Rocketdyne, a company that helped design the Saturn V rocket engine. In 1976, he self-published a pamphlet entitled We Never Went to the Moon: America’s Thirty Billion Dollar Swindle, which sought evidence for his convictions through crude photocopies and ridiculous theories. .

Despite the incredible volume of evidence (including 382 kg of lunar rock collected on six missions; evidence from Russia, Japan and China; and images from the NASA Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter showing traces made by astronauts in lunar dust), belief in the moon – hoax conspiracies have been developing since 1969.

Among 9/11 whistleblowers, anti-vaxxers, chemtrailers, flat-Earthers, the idea that the Moon landings were faked is no longer a source of outrage. It is just a given fact.

Podcast character, Joe Rogan, is one of those dubious ones. Likewise with YouTuber Shane Dawson. A sociology professor in New Jersey came to light last year for telling his students the landings were fake.

Now the conspiracy has to document how NASA was “so lazy”, that it used the same lunar explorers for Apollo 15, 16 and 17. Or how “they’ve been trapping us for years”; or to bring up the fact that there is “one thing I couldn’t think of …”

“The reality is, the internet has made it possible for people to say whatever they like to more people than ever before,” lamented Roger Launius, former Chief Historian of NASA. “And the fact is, Americans love conspiracy theories. Every time something big happened, someone had a counter explanation. “

Read Also:  Corona crisis: New York looks to autumn with concern – Panorama

It turns out that the British also love conspiracy theories. Last year, the daytime TV show This Morning welcomed a guest who argued that nothing can walk on the Moon because the moon is made of light. Martin Kenny claims, “In the past, you saw the Moon landings and there was no way to check it. Now, in the technology era, many young people are now investigating on their own. ”.

( https://www.world-today-news.com/the-landing-of-the-first-human-on-the-moon-is-still-considered-a-hoax/ )