I like velcro and used to drink Tang, but about the moon, was NASA really full of horseshit?

hedgeless_horseman's picture


I remember being home on leave from Vietnam and watching the President on television.
He was telling Americans that US forces were not operating in Cambodia.
The US Army had taught me well how to use a compass and a map.
I had just been operating in Cambodia for many weeks.

-A veteran friend of mine
that doesn't live in a multi-million dollar house
and doesn't get big-fat government checks


There are many conspiracy theories about the moon landing, but this article deals only with mine, personally, which is a math problem I need your help to solve. We have some smart people on zerohedge, and access to much better computers than they had in the 60's.  We should be able to do the math.

I have sat in a Lunar Lander, a few years back in Houston, before NASA hung it way up high on the ceiling, where you cannot get close to it. 

It is tiny, especially considering that it is a two-stage space craft, with two separate and complete engines.


The lower stage, below the landing legs' top attachment points, is covered in foil (why foil I do not know).  It houses one of the Lunar Lander's two main rocket engines and the fuel to decelerate the spacecraft from orbital speed (____velocity), and then to land the space craft and its payload (____ mass) gently on the moon without injuring or killing the two government workers inside, unlike these objects.

The upper stage, housing the two aforementioned government workers, also contains a second complete rocket engine, and its fuel, (____ mass).  It separates from the lower stage and accelerates back up into lunar orbit.

I examined the size of the ascent and descent engines, as well as the size of the alleged fuel storage.  It seemed to both me and my kids, intuitively, to be less than credible, even considering that the moon's gravity is 1/6 of the Earth.  Our doubts were reinforced by the massive size of the Saturn V rocket on display, which is described as a giant flying fuel tank.

The size of the lunar lander is of course limited by the fact that they had to fit it in the top of a Saturn V rocket and get it into orbit, along with the Command Capsule and Service Module.

I will concede the fact that they got it up into Earth orbit.  Sure.  There were plenty of eye witnesses at Cape Kennedy.

But down to the moon's surface, landing soft enough to not injure or kill the astronauts, and then back up into lunar orbit?  Come on!  What was Kennedy thinking?  There is no atmosphere on the moon to brake against.  That requires a lot of fuel.  No?  The little toy-sized Mars Rovers supposedly bounced along forever even with an atmosphere, parachute, and retro rockets.

Here is the math problem:

How much fuel, really, and how big would the fuel storage really need to be, for each of the two lunar lander stages ____ cm2?   Do these amounts really fit into the space of the fuel vessels shown here

Remember, there is no margin for error, as there are two lives at stake, and the credibility of the United States government.  Show your work. 

Unfortunately, we really need to do this math, because NASA erased or lost the original film from the surface of the moon, so we cannot use modern analysis on the original high-resolution 2 1/4" negatives, and the eye-witness government workers that allegedly landed on the moon cannot be trusted, considering that they all live in multi-million dollar homes (I have personally been in one in the foothills of Colorado SW of Denver) and they have received big-fat government paychecks over the last 50+ years, not to mention their credibility as people.  

Also, nobody has landed a man softly on the moon and returned him, again, in almost 50 years, with much better technology. What do we call a scientific experiment that is not repeatable by others?

Finally, the amazing Hubble space telescope that is really just a re-purposed spy satellite, is supposedly unable to see the objects that we allegedly left on the moon, like the moon car, but yet we can read the license plate of cars on Earth, through a thick atmosphere.

Any takers that are not NASA employees?  I will trust a Wall Street quant before I trust a government employee.  It's not like this is rocket science.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
No Apology's picture

On a long enough timeline, the believability of the NASA moon landing drops to zero.  Or sooner.

omi's picture

This person is an idiot.


But down to the moon's surface, landing soft enough to not injure or kill the astronauts, and then back up into lunar orbit?  Come on!  What was Kennedy thinking? 


Control system with feedback solves this.


There is no atmosphere on the moon to brake against."

You're not breaking against an atmosphere, you're ejecting particles towards your descent point with some momentum, due to law of conservation of momentum, you would have gained opposite momentum, hence the deceleration. Where do these people come from?


ps. I'm not making a judgement on how real the event was, its' one of those things that you cannot prove either way. So until I'll see material evidence to the contrary, I'd want to believe the moon landing event to be real, but I have my doubts.

Belerophon's picture

Hedgeless, that is actually a fairly straightforward physics problem.  Your son could probably solve it if he was interested.  I will devote some time to it in a few weeks and see.

box's picture

nobody ever landed to the moon. fact is still today nobody can, or else china, russia or some advanced space research/lab would have showed it off as well

ToSoft4Truth's picture

Why can't the Japanese simply make suits out of NASA spacesuit materiel to clean up Fukushima?    Different radiation? 

bigpictures's picture

hoax. thats it. hoaxes. filmed in a hollywood sound stage. the biggest and most effictive weapon is deceit. the original films were accidentally released. They show outtakes, guy wires holding them up, directors narration, a small round window full of Earth being portrayed as a tiny earth from much further away. watch https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ECdgE4y8lc.  Ms. first lady is a dude https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8cgk732vfGQ

The ENTERPRISE called COLUMBIA (the US) will ENDEAVOR to DISCOVER the lost city of ATLANTIS, but all CHALLENGERS will be destroyed!

more masonic bullshit, and you ain't in the club.

learning2's picture

Right ON!!! Right ON!!!

The essential political problem is that the human murder systems are the most extreme form of death control systems. The history of warfare developed militarism as the supreme ideology. Warfare was the oldest and best developed form of social science and social engineering. However, the oldest book on The Art of War starts by saying that "success in war depends upon deceits," and ends by saying "spies are the most important soldiers."

Damn hard time finding you again..I had to login and couldn't resist all the comments and trolls. That took me a couple, plus waiting for scorecard, google, facebook, some cloud and numerous others to load up the data of my tracks and clicks!!

Our, or, rather, the united States (?) government  (or corporation) is a "Murder System"!!

Maybe your comment is the real reason for those trolls... Pushed you way down to hide your excellent post.

EDIT: Of course this didn't post under the writer of the above post (search for line of quote).

dizzyfingers's picture

For what it's worth... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gYQLV9kHtQM

Very interesting. Until I found this article I never thought about this subject. I'm old...I have other things to think about.

Another dragon slain; thanks Hedgeless.

Largebrneyes1's picture

The core question is wether a Saturn 5 rocket could achieve orbital velocity.
If the kinetic energy of an object m1 launched from the a planet of mass M2 were equal in magnitude to the potential energy, then in the absence of friction resistance it could escape from the planet. Without the ability to do independent testing, we are dependent upon NASA for performance data, so if you are a true tin foil hat doubter, there will always be cause for doubt. With that caveat, let's jump in the deep end of the geek pool;

To find the orbit velocity for a circular orbit, the gravitational force will equal to the required centripetal force. The orbital velocity is equal to the SR of 2x gravitational mass of the earth (5.976x10 to the 24th kg) \ radius of earth. So the question is wether a Saturn 5 could achieve this velocity given it's fuel capacity, energy density, and mass.

To calculate the capability of a fully loaded Saturn 5 requires several steps:

Mass of Fully loaded Saturn 5: 2.97mm kg

1st stage -
The S-IC stage had a dry weight of about 289,000 pounds (131 metric tons) and fully fueled at launch had a total weight of 5,100,000 pounds (2,300 metric tons)
Fuel: 203,400 gal kerosene, 318,000 gal liquid oxygen (lox)
Engines: F-1 mixture ratio 2.27: lox to kerosene
Weight kerosene/gal = 6.798 LB /gal
Weight Lox= 9.527 LB/gal
Blended fuel weight/gal = 8.69lb
Thrust = mass flow rate x velocity + (pressure of exit exhaust - free stream pressure) x area exit of exhaust from throat to nozzle, which reads as: F= mVe + (Pe -Po) Ae
Thrust for F-1 engines: +\-7.5mm lbs, (34,000 kN)
Start speed: 0 m/s
Terminal speed at end burn: 2,300m/s
Avg. Rate acceleration: 13.93 m/s
First stage fuel burn: 3,160 gal/second for 165 seconds consuming 521,400 gal fuel
Weight reduction = 27,460lb/second
At 1-s engine cutoff, the vehicle was at an altitude of about 36 nautical miles (67 km), was downrange about 50 nautical miles (93 km),

2nd stage:
The S-II had a dry weight of about 80,000 pounds (36,000 kg) and fully fueled, weighed 1,060,000 pounds (480,000 kg)
S-J2 engines
Fuel: 80,000 gal Lox, 260,000 gal Liquid Hydrogen (LH)
Weight Lox= 9.527 LB/gal
Weight LH= .5908 LB/gal
Blended fuel weight: 2.70lb/gal
Rate of fuel burn: 944.44 g/s
Weight reduction from burn: 2,550lb/s
Thrust: 1,100,000 pounds-force (4,900 kN) of thrust in vacuum
Second stage burns: 384 seconds
Starting velocity: 2,300m/s
Terminal velocity: 6.995 km/s (25,182 km/h or 15,647 mph).
Altitude at end burn: 110 miles
This speed is close to the orbital velocity for that altitude.

Stage 3:

Burn: 2.5 minutes.
Altitude at end burn: a "parking orbit" of 191.2 km (118.8 miles).
Ending velocity 7.791 km/s (28,048 km/h or 17,432 mph).

After several orbits around the Earth, the rocket's engines re-ignited, and it blasted off for what they call translunar injection. According to NASA data, Saturn V reached an altitude of 334.436 km and a speed of 10.423 km/s, at which time the engines were shut down.

This velocity was less than the escape velocity for that altitude, but it was sufficient to take Apollo 11 to the Moon. The gravitational attraction from the Moon facilitated its motion.

At an altitude of 334.436 km, Apollo 11 had attained a speed of 10.423 km/s. The calculated gravitational escape velocity or speed at that altitude (R = 6705.4 km) is:

se = ?(2*6.674*10?20*5.974*1024/6705.4) km/s

se = ?(118.920) km/s

se = 10.905 km/s

Since the rocket was going to the Moon, its velocity (10.423 km/s) did not have to be the escape velocity or speed (10.905 km/s) for that altitude, especially since the gravitational force of the Moon also had an effect on the rocket.....bottom line, a Saturn 5 could send a payload to the moon,

hedgeless_horseman's picture



The core question is wether a Saturn 5 rocket could achieve orbital velocity.

No.  It is not.

Did you even read my article?  I am willing to concede the Saturn V could put payloads into Earth and lunar orbits.  

The core questions are regarding the Lunar Lander, not the Saturn V.

Your long calculations are no more helpful than Tall Tom's that he has sprinkled very liberally throughout the comments section, and only serve to distract us from the question at hand by appearing to provide a solution, just to a different question. 

I don't know if you intended to be fallacious, but your comment is simply another red herring.

ParticularlyStupidHumanoid's picture

You have just experienced direct communication with a government operative. Still think "they work for us"?

Barnaby's picture

The moon, she said. The moon.

And as she seduced me under a yellow-crimson glow of fresh elm chutes I was instantly naked to the Universe.

For what use is the moon? Procreation? Nighttime illumination of the hunt? Is there any difference?

And as she drained my essence I thought of the silver propulsion in the night sky, the wonders of it all, and when I wasted a moment to bask in the glow she was dismounting me. Then I was alone.

Seeing Red's picture

Very nice!

{Regarding the dimwits -- I often do ignore them as you suggest, but it's fun to play with them sometimes}

Barnaby's picture

Thanks. It just earns you downvotes from the rest of the Seekers or contrarians to mention the anonymous contrarians, thereby adding cachet to an otherwise meaningless gesture, a click. A clique?

Seeing Red's picture

True, yet I'm not the first to bring up the topic.  I don't mind downvotes if I'm having fun (promoting science or whatever).  "Drive-by downvoters" is a phrase I've heard mentioned.  I do try to edit posts to minimize the number of posts.  Therefore I feel a little guilty about this one :-)

Baby Bladeface's picture
Baby Bladeface (not verified) Mar 4, 2016 7:10 PM


Also, nobody has landed a man softly on the moon and returned him, again, in almost 50 years, with much better technology. What do we call a scientific experiment that is not repeatable by others?"

Is mistaken assumption that moon landing project a scientific experiment. Primary purpose of moon landing was propaganda. US of A was falling behind space race to USSR. First artificial satellite? Sputnik, 1959. First photographs of far side of moon? Luna 3, 1959. First man in space? Yuri Gagarin, 1961. US of A needed do something firstly before Soviet Union. Once accomplished, propaganda mission complete.

Not repeatable by others? Why not? Biggest impediment is cost and could be justified expense in 1960-ies by US to save face after Soviet accomplishments. Difficult to justify today.

"Finally, the amazing Hubble space telescope that is really just a re-purposed spy satellite, is supposedly unable to see the objects that we allegedly left on the moon, like the moon car, but yet we can read the license plate of cars on Earth, through a thick atmosphere."

Comment reflects a poor understanding of Hubble space telescope design and basic optics. Space telescope designed for viewing distant objects, thousands and millions light years distant. Spy satellite and is designed for viewing objects from orbital height 100 - 200 km. Big difference. Might as well complain that binoculars protozoans on a glass slide can not view.

Want to see lunar landing sites and I recommend below:

Apollo 11

Apollo 12

Apollo 14

Apollo 15

Apollo 16

Apollo 17

buy polar's picture

Great links. Sorry if this has already been answered, but why are there never any stars in photos from the moon?  Seems like they would be extra bright without the atmosphere... That's something that's always bugged me.

Axenolith's picture

the sun overpowers their light at the location and the landing sites are always in sunlight as the moons orbit and rotation are synchronous

Seeing Red's picture

We have a serial downvoter.  Dude (or dudette) ... you need help.  Maybe read a book on critical thinking, or take a class ... how about high-school-level physics?  Or is that too scary for you?

EDIT:  And again here ... HA-HA-HAH (the consistency is amusing ... please, by all means, stay anonymous)

Barnaby's picture

Ignore them would be my suggestion.

Sturm und Drang's picture

..."The galaxy is on Orion's belt."

Seeing Red's picture

The size of the Saturn rocket isn't just a function of the Earth's greater gravity.  When you do multi-stage rockets, the stages get exponentially larger (1st stage is the biggest).  In effect, you design the smallest stage first (or have a mass budget), and work (seemingly) backwards from there.

Also, the moon's radius is smaller, so the gravity well is smaller (this reduces lander fuel requirement).


Once again, the moon-landing denial playbook:

1)  See video or pictures that don't correspond to something on Earth.

2)  Ignore Lunar environment (easier with no physics background).

3)  Conclude landing was faked and took place on Earth (even though this makes a [simple] rational explanation harder).

4)  BONUS:  Ignore the many related engineering issues.*

* For example, leaving the command module in lunar orbit saved a lot of fuel, which actually made the Saturn V smaller than it might have been


EDIT:  Hey junkers, how about an explanation when you're not too busy (blogging about creationism or whatever it is you spend your oxygen on).

I'm curious which bogus argument (I've looked at dozens) is currently making the rounds ....

Droid Fuel's picture

Michelson Morely, Michelson-Gale, Airey's failure
and most important Sagnac Effect. 

if you are not aware of these 4 experiments then you are probably still worshiping the Relativity god. 

Barnaby's picture

One suggestion, it's San(g)-YAK. Thank you for your postings.

janus's picture

for the last several months, a profound and fundamental change has by degrees and sequences effected in me a seismic shift in perception.

whenever i apply the capacity to reason over a given 'thing' -- whatsoever it may be -- i begin with first principals, and then migrate to conclusions predicated on these immutable and incontrovertible Truths.  

for the last four or so years, janus has undertaken a study of temporal power, its substance, its mechanics and, most importantly, its weakness(es).  the lazy-minded and reductive thinker will look out over the expanse of pax-american and conclude that her power rests in the ability to distribute resources, to kill/maim/destroy, to administer and enforce laws -- the visible projections of power.  these are but organs of power, not the power itself.  in much the same way arms, legs, hands & feet are the visual implements mobilized to effect the will of a sentient creature, so too are the institutions and armaments of this world's order.  

will is the animating force that sets these organs to action, but apriori of will is belief.  belief is the germ and genesis of all will and therefore all action. 

it naturally follows that false belief leads to false action and destruction; and right belief results in right action and productive yield.  

as regards my policy of 'first principals', i've of late concluded that all efforts in service to pax american (all of which is predicated on The Lie), are false and antithetical to right action.  in the same way we discredit a witness's statements once we've established that part of his testimony is false, janus applied the same standard to uncle sam.  

if we can establish that uncle sam (but, my brothers, it goes WAY past america...this system is truly ecumenical) has lied (and we can), all of everything he asserts as truth MUST be viewed with dubious skepticism; and by extension, the same criteria must me applied to every single institution and associated network.  in point of fact, we SHOULD assume that EVERYTHING is a lie, unless we can by our own faculties establish a given 'fact' as incontrovertibly true. 

unless, that is, one prefers being held captive within a matrix of lies and subject to slavery -- for no reason other than to perpetuate yours and your neighbor's slavery.  and one should never discount this possibility as remote; it is instead the rule that mankind has, up until now, preferred the lie and its attendant slavery.  fear reigns in the heart of men, and has from the beginning.  

as Christ said, "Light did but come into the world, and men preferred the darkness instead."

but i hold that humanity as a whole can be likened to the individual (and vise versa), only scaled in time and scope.  and insofar as an individual goes through stages of maturity, from the toddler, to the child, to the teen, etc...so too does humanity progress through stages.  perhaps (and this is my great hope) humanity is now able to separate itself form the yoke of temporal power, and serve ends that it ordains (individually) as right and proper.  perhaps people can at last organize for the express purpose of the individual's advance, and for that reason only.

we have tried to serve idols and contrived 'gods'...that didn't work.  then we served men who claimed to be gods...again, a false belief.  then kings.  then tyrants.  and now, by fits and starts, we are learning to serve our selves.  if we orient the energies of our belief and faith to a Good and all-powerful Creator God, in serving ourselves we will serve God.  

i have no cause in common with this world's powers; nor does anyone else i know.  yet they demand our service, fealty, fortune and above all faith.

we are so thoroughly conditioned to believe that service of the self is an unqualified evil that it rankles our conscience.  at the same time, we trill with jingoistic fervor when it comes time to send our sons to die for the cause of ecumenical serfdom...for fiat currencies, for control of the few over the many.    

it is in this spirit that i've of late put all things in the crucible of Truth.  my experiments have rendered a metaphysical law relative to this system and what we're taught: whenever there is motive and means to lie, you can be sure all manner of falsehoods are to be found.

you are not some accidental nor meaningless meat-sack hurtling aimlessly through a void, nor speck of dust swirling in a cosmic commode of galactic and unfathomable dimensions.  you are not born to serve the ambitions and ends etched out by your fellow mortals.  you are a creature formed in the image of an immortal God.  you are frightfully and wonderfully made. moreover, no matter how much this world tries to convince you otherwise, do 'know' that you have great value to God and this universe.

the other day a high-priests of the materialist-dialectic asked that we reconsider Pascal's wager, and the questions -- both implicit and explicit -- provoked when considering the bet.

before i continue, i'd like to ask warren buffet a question of my own, "what profit it a man to gain the world and lose his soul?"

oh oracle of omaha, i suggest you put that in your pipe and smoke it.  as your form folds in on itself, as you sink into terminal diminution and the grave's advance quickens by proximate degrees, i'd like to know if the deal you made was worth the compensation.  

and, mr. buffett, even if it still is for you an acceptable arrangement, may i remind you that once you cross over, all 'bets' are off and you will have to give an account.  but, being the ledger-man that you are, i'm sure you're well prepared to answer every entry.

now, it is clear that tptb are aware of The Lie's diminishing utility; it is furthermore clear that they are preparing for its expiry.   do they therefore intend on revealing the truth in response to The Lie's exposure?  hardly.  they are instead preparing another web of lies to ensnare a credulous and fretful species as they react in repulsion.  

they are anticipating humanity's pinging away from the present paradigm, and have been preparing a channel about which to conduct the collective energies of mankind once it kicks against this present iteration of the lie.  in other words, the devil is about to adorn himself in a new disguise...a change of masks, as it were.  

as Christ said, "be ye not deceived."  this a commandment, not a suggestion.

one more thing before i continue:  do not likewise be deceived into thinking that janus advocates on behalf of institutional churches.  may they all -- every last one of them -- be condemned.  may their every edifice be reduced to rubble.  may their every (well-paid) priest and preacher become a beggar.  for it is my sincerest belief that if Christ were here today, he would have fiercer words for today's churches than for the saducees and pharasies of his day.

doubtless, tptb is a threat.  we can submit or fight -- in that the option of flight has been removed...there truly is no where to run, this shit is absolute and covers the whole of the earth.  

returning again to pascal's wager, janus is going to make a bet of his own.  i bet that Truth is greater than the lie.  i bet that God is greater than the devil.  i bet on the individual over and against the collective.  i bet on me against them.

this system is most assuredly a beast; as with all other beasts, its essence does not permit stasis. it must continue moving, advancing and expanding, lest it collapses and dies.  one peculiar feature of its expanse has been the people's interconnection.  they must hazard the revelation of truth for the purpose of this systems expansion.  even though we are deceived, we submit by volition...we choose our servitude; but only from wildly exaggerated fears of the alternatives.  the unfathomable horror of each individual pursuing his own good is presented as a helter-skelter madhouse of all at variance with each; when in truth, excepting anomalies, all are seeking very similar ends: to raise and provide for the ones we love, to be happy and safe in our possessions and to serve God.   and yet, we are led to believe that if man were permitted this 'luxury' all 'hell' would break loose.

i have new for you bitchez, hell is now.  you have been sold a lot of counterfeit goods in service to false idols.  why do you think that society is suffering a mass neurosis?  why is it that all must be drunk or medicated just to deal with 'reality'?  why is it that so many lives end in suicide and overdose?  it is because they have substituted a lie for the truth, and our innermost being is repulsed by it...we just don't -- as yet -- know why.

the most powerful weapons we have are represented in two words: NO & IF.

no is the only absolute we know.  no has within it the power to overturn empires.  no is a rejection and negation of the lie.  after all, The Truth is not subject to negation nor rejection -- it simply 'is' and maintains of its own accord.

IF is the great contingency and hinge upon which all possibility swings.

they want to kill off most of the world's population.  not because we face resource scarcity; rather because their absolute power is imperiled by the sheer numbers of persons.  they are not nearly as powerful as they'd have you believe.  they'd have already done as much if they felt they could.  they need your faith; they need your abeyance; they need your yes...give them a no.

they also have all your 'ifs' tidily satisfied, with a whole new web ready to absorb the ricochet of your faith as it moves away from 'this' unto 'that'.  what 'if' you start making your own 'ifs'...what if you're all grown up now...what if you don't need a master anymore?

in the end, we can all lead, follow or get out of the way.  for my part, i think it's best if we all got out of the way.  who needs leaders or followers?  we have technology sufficient to make our own way; to serve our own ends; to discern truth and lies; to know good & evil, and choose from among them.

they want you to believe that the future is set, destined...is it?  is our future a dystopian hell of helter-skelter?  or will it usher in an age of greater liberty, freedom and legitimate progress unknown in all ages past?  it's a yes or no question predicated on one gigantic IF.

"i am the master of my fate/

i am the captain of my soul"






MoHillbilly's picture
MoHillbilly (not verified) Mar 4, 2016 2:22 PM

I saw moonrocks at the state fair in the early 70's   Cased closed

Sock Monkey Posse's picture

Zero punctuation almost earned a down-vote, but then I saw what you were doing...

dexter_morgan's picture

The earth doesn't have to be flat to make the moon landing a hoax. Ever ponder all the shadows that fall in various directions and cameras that got somehow setup to capture the astronauts initial exit from the LEM - Freakin magic it was.

But, because that is BS it doesn't follow that the earth is flat.


Barnaby's picture

Well, truthfully none of us will ever stand on the regolith, so it might just as well be a wheel of cheese in the sky.

And Mythbusters covered the shadow question, like an albedo-bright whitewash.

I don't know why anybody believes anything he's told.

janus's picture

"Well, truthfully none of us will ever stand on the regolith, so it might just as well be a wheel of cheese in the sky."

true.  but we can bounce radar against this dome and measure how long it takes to return.  

and to think, we were led to believe that waves "bounce off" the 'ionosphere'...hog-wash.  this is yet another instance where we're expected to suspend disbelief and belief for the sake of absurdity.  it is so often the case that the 'laws' of science contravene one another.  when this happens, you can be sure that you're dealing with a religion, not a science. waves do not 'bounce off' a layer of air, they pass through.  furthermore, the air up there is supposedly far less dense...and the science i know -- and have observed -- is that energy follows the path of least resistance...in other words, far from bouncing off, the waves would pass through with greater faculty in the ionosphere.    

we are all such fools.  i bought it all, too...hook, line and sinker.

not any more.

just like 'W' said, "you can fool me once, but...but...but...you're not going to fool me a second time."


Barnaby's picture

The only Math I know on the subject is Math Boylan.

With my own eyes I will never see the earth from space, and as I have been wicked here, never will I see the face of God. I was told by man to believe in celestial balls and beings. And so what always surprises me is that Flat Earth proponents generally cleave to the godly. And that, dear friends, is a mystery for the Ages.

Charming Anarchist's picture

It is no mystery at all. 

<<With my own eyes I will never see the earth from space,>>

-- and yet ancient folks knew what could not be seen. 


Somebody must have told them. 

Son of Captain Nemo's picture

This is all the fault of the Truth movement and guys like John Gross and Shyam Sunder at NIST who told us that 47 story steel structures  (that weren't part of an original government investigation 6 years later that housed offices for the SEC, FBI and CIA) can indeed collapse due to intense heat from "burning office furniture"!...

If you can make 80,000 ton steel frame buildings collapse due to burning office furniture and simply say "I know I can't really believe this shit myself"...  it's pretty amazing but this can actually happen -just trust me... because I work for a respected government agency that says you should trust me... then unfortunately... I've got a moon landing to sell you!

VWAndy's picture

Trust in government has got to be one of the worst beliefs one could hold dear. When trusting my fellow working stiff friends has paid off well for me many times.

Citxmech's picture

The truth that the Govt. lies to us does not mean everything out of Govt. is a lie.  


VWAndy's picture

So whats your point? That we should trust them because they might not be lying this time? Having a bit of trouble following this logic.

Son of Captain Nemo's picture

So whats your point? That we should trust them because they might not be lying this time? Having a bit of trouble following this logic.


Perhaps if I had stated that by not mentioning the near free fall acceleration in the collapse of the Twin Tower(s) and Building 7 ANYWHERE in the "9/11 Commission Report" is the equivalent of your government telling you that the World is indeed flat and that if man were meant to fly he'd have wings!..

But the clincher is that you would

1) First have to have knowledge and understanding when you heard that this was indeed true but absent from the report (along with Building 7)


2) Care

After all this time and damage to our integrity as a Nation we might as well collectively laugh at ourselves!!

Think the moon landing (true or untrue) is the least of our worries at this stage in our existence!!!

Citxmech's picture

Thanks Tom.

Here's the logic:

When the FAA says that pilots shouldn't fly drunk - do you automatically assume that since the Govt. lies, that drunk pilots are actually a good idea?

Govt. lies sometimes.  The trick is finding out when.

VWAndy's picture

Thats an interesting point. Cept it brings into question of how drunk is too drunk? The government declares a legal limit that works for them. Is that really the limit beyond witch its no longer possible to do the job. Obviously not.

Citxmech's picture

Oh come on.  I guess we don't need insulation on electrical wires, and washing your hands after you poop is bad for you too?

VWAndy's picture

Lol you do know that most animals dont wash up after pooping. And just so you know elecricity dont care if you get zapped.

Axenolith's picture

Yea, they do, and in case you haven't ever noticed it's by licking their asses. Curiously, everything that licks it's ass seems to have about an order of magnitude shorter lifespan than us... Don't forget though, correlation doesn't necessarily equal causality.

Citxmech's picture

Now you're just being obtuse.

I know electricity doesn't care - the point was that this is an area where govt and most people agree:  housefires and electrocution are bad, m'kay?

VWAndy's picture

Trusting the government or anyone blindly is just as silly. My point being why should I or you trust them on anything without some proof? A paycheck perhaps?

Tall Tom's picture



The truth is that you need to apply your brain and not trust anything JUST because the US Government declares it..


The best way to get away with lying IS to tell a whole lot of truth and then, following that, insidiously slip in the lie.



Fireman's picture

Mercans do not question dear leader & your elite guardians of the holy hubris rotten apple pie upon which you are fed. Listen not to these dissidents, malcontents & unamercan non sheeple rabble rousers. Remember Pentacon Kill Industries, the Washing town whore house & its all mighty 1% empowered psychopathic scum are in control.

Do not doubt or falter or YOU TOO will be going on a permanent FEMA Punishment Park Japanese style sojourn. Now on your knees & let US prey & prey & then some



Remember o protoplasmic sons of Merca the sacred WASPish trinity of doctrinal tenets upon which the religion of the dogma of the Holy Hubris is erected.

More fractured fairy tales for morons and cynics deviating from the electronic sheeple pen lovingly erected by our corpofascist owners.


Ask not what Merca can do for you my fellow sheeple but indeed what you can
do for the 001%. That is the meaning of a true patriot and the e$$ence of love
that binds US and keeps US a great nation. Do not be led from the flock by
those that cast doubt on our Sacred Trinity of the Holy Hubris and the tenets
upon which our exceptionalism is erected.

ONE: Know ye that the evil Lee Harvey with magic bullets did alone smite the Knight of Camelot coz said Knight wanted to give away our stuff to the le$$er

TWO: Our War Machine with NaSA did “land” a tin can on the moon “and do the other things” that Camelot Guy had promised before they blew his brains out
in a car live on TV and waiting for the light to change. This mooning was  pulled off with fred flintstone technology after microwaving our moononauts and boiling their brains  in the Van Allen Belt, then cruising a further 380,000 klicks out to deep deep space where no man had ventured before....to finally “land”  (pun intended) on the cheese ball. Then our guys scouted around in their “moon” buggy  a tad, shot a round of golf and after delicious nutritious snacks and some more “Hassleblad”  bad selfies and mock "moon" rock snapshots blasted 60 miles up into lunar orbit, did dock with mother ship orbiting there at 4000 MPH, magically copulate can and mama ship and then blast home another 384,400.00 kms to splash down in time for more kodachrome moments and then home to catch Archie Bunker on late nite TV. (Be not ye tricked by those that tell you that almost 50 years later we can’t even manage to get into the low orbiting Intl Space Station at 400 kms without that damn Vlad Putin’s rocket ships.) Our "moon scapades" stuff  IS still up there on the moon….the other side of course and the Chinese and Ruskies are so blind they couldn’t find it!

THREE: 17 cunning camel herders from the feudal abomination of Saud (our
best buddy and keeper of our fiat petroscrip Saudi Mercan toilet paper IOU
dollah currency) did blow up Merca on 9 11 coz they hate our freedoms and the
selfle$$ spreading of our dung like demokracy among the lesser tribes. This
they did with magic carpet expertise and our NSA GESTAPO found Mr Atta’s
perfectly preserved passport (Allah Snack Bar) blocks away from the Thermite
Towers and for this reason we had to wage war on all and sundry who dared U$e
any toilet paper currency other than our own blood spattered and much smeared
soft triple-ply U$er toilet paper to preserve the freedom$ of Planet Merca.

All these and more true lies are the very foundations upon which our exceptionalism is built. Should so much as one of these beliefs be cast into doubt…then my fellow sheeple our entire sheep farm would be in jeopardy and you would very quickly be shorn and become mutton.



hedgeless_horseman's picture



That is a badass comment, Fireman! I gotta party with you.

LA_Goldbug's picture

"17 cunning camel herders from the feudal abomination of Saud did blow up Merca on 9 11 coz they hate our freedoms and the" "

Yepp, they timed it so well that they caught our trillion dollar defense systems to be looking the other way while they flew around the USA. Amazing timing. Hell, lets just buy box cutters and invade Russia.