Did Elon Musk just confirm that the moon landings were faked?

hedgeless_horseman's picture

 

Mother should I trust the government?
-Pink Floyd, Mother

Elon Musk just announced that SpaceX abandons propulsive landing plans for Red Dragon mission to Mars.

In my opinion, we should not be surprised.  

NASA supposedly used propulsive landing for the Apollo missions to the moon...in 1969.

I ask you to please click the following hyperlinks to read three articles, carefully, watch one 3-1/3 minute video, closely, and then draw your own conclusions about the Apollo Moon landings that we are told occured nearly 50 years ago.

 

First, an article from RT, today:  

 SpaceX abandons propulsive landing plans for Red Dragon mission to Mars


“The reason we decided not to pursue that heavily is that it would have taken a tremendous amount of effort to qualify that for safety for crew transport,” Musk said. “That’s why we are not pursuing it. It could be something that we bring back later, but it doesn’t seem like the right way to apply resources right now.”

 

 

Musk added that he did not think that propulsive landing was the best approach.

 

https://www.rt.com/usa/397023-musk-dragon-mars-propulsive/

 

Second, my article from ZeroHedge, last year, 2016:

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


" My premise is that President Kennedy wasn't an aerospace engineer, he was a politician faced with the Russians and their satellites scaring the shit out of his constituency.  He called our shot, but we couldn't make it.  So they lied." 


http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-03-03/i-velcro-and-used-drink-tang-wa...

 

Third, an article from Physics Professor, Dr. Oleg Oleynik, in 2012, and updated in 2017*:

A Stereoscopic method of verifying Apollo lunar surface images

 

"Thus, based on the above examples, this study concludes that the Apollo 15 photographic record does NOT depict real lunarscapes with distant backgrounds located more than a kilometre away from the camera."

 

"These pictures were, without doubt, taken in a studio set – up to 300 metres in size. A complex panorama mimicking the lunarscape shows degrees of movement, such as horizontal and vertical changes to give an impression of imaginary distance to the objects and perspective."

 

 

http://www.aulis.com/stereoparallax.htm

Hat tip to Medium Giraffe

 

Fourth, a youtube video of the Apollo 11 astronaut press conference upon returning from the moon, July 20,1969*:

Apollo 11 Television Press Conference


 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-RcKLAo62Ro

* Hat tip to Cognitive Dissonance

Do these three guys, who supposedly just came back from the moon with two of them landing and returning, look and sound like they just came back from the moon?

 

And here is the full hour and half press conference. Listen to the actual words and sentence structure as well as the body language, which is screaming out-loud disingenuous...

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-RcKLAo62Ro

 

What do you think, now?

 

Peace, liberty, and prosperity,

h_h

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
PrivetHedge's picture

It tells me you are naive and have bought one of the lies.

Occam's razor: Deadly radiation, inadequate rockets, impossible timescales: They faked it.

That's why we see impossibly precise splashdowns, fake pictures, fake video and dejected astronauts.

shortonoil's picture

There is supposed to be a great big lunar landing base sitting on the moon. Both the Russians, and the Chinese have put satellites around the moon. If that lander wasn't there wouldn't you think that someone would have mentioned it by now? The bullshit is getting deeper and stupider by the day!

Siouxwestern's picture

Lunar truthers have no interest in such obvious things.

 

Silverlok's picture

There is a ready solution to this conundrum; HAve google (alphabet) charter one of Musk's (SpaceX) rockets to put one of thier self driving camera 'cars' on the moon. Then live stream the constant 'street' veiw. Just a thought.

Remember NASA is not some publicly funded science agency. It is technically a division of the department of defense that answers, directly, and only , to the POTUS.

For the Apollo project failure was not an option . Let me restate that: the public/political perception of failure was not an option. In that light, the most likely course of action would have been both a psy-op and real op worked back to back. The public presentation being a threading of the two (producing something similar to the movie 'Capricorn One' ). 

Consider that color motion picture cameras had existed since 1945 and they were ( we were told ) taken to the moon, and then promptly pointed directly at the sun and destroyed? for all missions?

The movies we do have were not direct footage, but instead cameras pointed at television screens of the live feeds that were then transmitted back from the moon...why ?

The MIC/Nasa wanted british national Gary McKinnon ( https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Gary+McKinnon&t=h_&ia=web )  pretty badly for 'hacking nasa' . For those of you not up to speed on that; he was overseas ( U.K. ) on a DIAL-UP internet connection when he found an 'open' nasa server, towit the "security" login was name:'admin' and password: 'password'. On said server he found a section dedicated to airbrushing /photoshoping pictures ( from space ) before release to the public.

cal-tech/JPL is in sole control of NASA's spacecraft cameras and camera data feeds. This interesting data bottleneck puts first view and all controll of that data effectively into the hands of one man ( take a look at Dr. michael Malin to get a feel for how nasa does data:https://duckduckgo.com/?q=nasa+%2C+dr+michael+malin&t=h_&ia=web ) .

( as an interesting aside, JPL is (half) joking refered to as Jack Parsons Lab; Jack Parsons was good buddies with Aleister Crowley ( https://duckduckgo.com/?q=nasa+%2C+jack+parsens&t=h_&ia=web )...the truth is always stranger that fiction)

In the early days of nasa they commissioned the BROOKINGS INSTITUTE to do a study about the impact space exploration may have socially/politically: (page 215,  emphasis is mine)

" ...artifacts left at some point in time by these life forms might possibly be discovered through our space activities on the Moon, Mars, or Venus...Anthropological files contain many example of societies, sure of their place in the universe, which have disintegrated when they had to associate with previously unfamiliar societies espousing different ideas and different life ways:others that survived such and experience usually did so by paying the price of changes in values and attitudes and behaviour...how might such information ,UNDER WHAT CIRCUMSTANCE, BE PRESENTED OR WITHHELD FROMTHE PUBLIC?..."

Templar X's picture

 The fact that Elon Musk can't figure out how to do propulsive landings, or do them safely, hardly negates the fact that giants like Wernher von Braun, nearly 50 years ago, did exactly that and returned men safely to the earth from the moon (240,000 miles away).

Watch and learn: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UM8Zbgdst2k

PrivetHedge's picture

Why would watching the propaganda fix the photos, timescales or the radiation?

truthalwayswinsout's picture

The Chatholic Church should have killed Galileo when they had the chance.

Albertarocks's picture

For a rather hilarious rendition of the diagram of the Saturn 5 rocket click this image.  Read the text details.  No worries, it's just a picture:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DFWkSuKVoAARnvZ.jpg

Albertarocks's picture

Holodeck.  Crew quarters at the bottom.  Grow-op.  Pretty funny stuff.

Paracelsus's picture

   Two things have always bugged me about this stuff.

1. F.G.Powers' U-2 shot down over Russia was using an NOAA

(pre-NASA) cover as a weather observation aircraft.

Really good cameras for weather observing.

Why the explosive charge to destroy the aircraft ( AND PILOT)?

2. A really good book on the Apollo moon issues (forget the title)

affected me deeply. The camera sitting on the chest of the space suits

was a Hasselblad but they never used this in their Hasselblad corporate

advertisements. As the difference between light and dark on the moon,

in a vacuum,is around 500 degrees, it would be very difficult to design

a small camera with no cooling system to protect the film.

There are things I wish to believe in, a spiritual afterlife and so on.

There are things I do not wish to believe in. As adults,we must use our

critical faculties and examine the evidence.

NASA was a methodology to milk the taxpayer for closely linked military

technologies,ICBM's versus space flight, during the cold war era.

NATO also is an obsolete relic.

All of this spending during the sixties basically bankrupted the

American Gov't. The chickens came home to roost when the French

sent a cruiser to convert dollars to gold in '72, challenging the

Bretton-Woods "gold window" Gentleman's agreement.

Nixon closed the gold window, scrapped the BW agreement and world

currencies have been floating ever since.

Also, while we were engaged in Vietnam, the Czechs rose up and were

smashed down.

The CIA (VOA) encouraged them to revolt, then abandoned them,

much as they did to the Hill people in Indochina, Bay of Pigs,Cuba,

the Kurds, the Iraqis, etc. etc.

"We are from the Government  and we are here to help".

hedgeless_horseman's picture

 

Good stuff.

I have owned and operated every type of Hassy body and lens ever made.

Beautiful design and manufacturing.

There is a good reason NASA supposedly "lost" ALL of the 2 1/4" negatives and slides.

PrivetHedge's picture

The total lack of bracketing (or a special film store) after the first rather confident steps on a new surface with new lighting (no sky!) is also a big tell.

The first very few pictures all have perfect exposure and focus, impressive for a studio, let along a manual camera attacjed to your chest that you can't see.

Almost as impressive as bending over in a pressure suite to take a perfectly exposed and focussed picture of your own feet with the same camera sticking 1 foot out of your chest.

The lack of fogging is also rather odd, the aluminum hassleblad body would have been giving off some choice secondary x-ray radiation out there on the surface.

class of 68's picture

exactly.

was an aerial photographer using pentax and mamiyas medium format. no doubt Hassel would have

trumpeted the "accomplishment" 

those pictures are fraught with fraud 

wisefool's picture

The moon missions proved one thing: How much your government hates you. In the old days, there was overt oppression through goons. That still goes on, with the IRS, but now they actually spend the tax money on decieving us as well for things like the moon mission and 911. They do this to take away our God given common sense. Humans need common sense to survive, and they especially need it to fight against tyranny.

The biggest argument the sub 80 I.Q. Appolo believers use is "How could so many people be involved in the lie?" Many rebuttals:

1) George Garlin "It is a big club and you are not in it"

2) How many pensioned, state employed teachers teach that 2 jet liners could bring down 3 modern concrete and steel sky scrapers?

-or- For the non conspiracy based bullet proof argument:

3) Forget the lost telemetry data. Forget the cartoons that pass as the photos and video of the missions. Simply consider the "Moon Rocks." /EDIT.

The "moon rocks" brought back to earth would literally be the most valuable substance in human existence. Not just based on the millions of IRS thug money per gram it cost to to retrieve them, but because they are extraterrestrial material. Subject to forces and energies on timelines longer than human existence. They would be far more precious than even all the gold in fort knox. More rare than the most rare books in the most secret parts of the vatican library. The scientific discoveries that could and would be made from them would be part of saving the human race from extinction, used to create capture technologies for nuclear waste. Only Nobel level scientists would ever get to have access to them, and only then in the most highly secured facilities.

Here is what happened to the moon rocks: They were handed out like candy to tin pot dictators in 3rd world countries and local yokel U.S. State "govenors" and "senators." The stories of these rocks are comedy gold only matched by the purported intelligence of anyone who defends the Appollo missions as real. Actually, it is probably better that the tin pot dictators got them instead of the pathetic excuses for human beings we call our top thinkers like Neil Degrass Tyson, Elon Musk, Billl Nye, Barrack Obama, etc.

Stolen and missing moon rocks

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stolen_and_missing_moon_rocks

gerryscat's picture

The gravity of the moon and mars are the same so your argument about the propulsive landing makes perfect sense. And that stereoscopic photo from Apollo 15 definitely wasn't photo-shopped.

Pasadena Phil's picture

Right. And the moon is hollow too right? Come to think of it, so is the earth! I swear, you people are insane.

I find all of this space alien stuff, like "Ancient  Aliens" and all the UFO shows very entertaining. In fact, one of my neighbors actually buys into this crap hook, line and sinker. But I can walk him through every show and point his nose right into the specific moments where the logic unravels. I'll bet the producers are amused that so many people actually buy into their crap (why do these guys all seem to sport crazy hair?). It can be pretty clever at times, especially when they weave in noted archeologists and famous (mis)quotes from Carl Sagan and others, but it is all crap. Entertaining though.

cj51's picture

the gravity of Earth's Moon is 1.662 m/s2. the gravity of Mars is 3.711 m/s2. so the gravity of Mars is more than twice as strong as Earth's moon. And landing a spaceship carrying people and equipment would be an attempt to land a much greater mass than any of the rovers that have landed on Mars. Parachutes and air bags etc. would not cut it. Mars atmosphere is extreamly thin so Von Braun's Mars glider would have a snowballs chance in hell of flying in the Martian atmosphere. The way we would have to land people on Mars is with a propulsive landing system. I think Musk is being very honest in saying that a propulsive landing on Mars has not been developed sufficiently to attempt an actual mission to Mars.

GreatUncle's picture

Lets put it this way, crash on mars you ain't getting a tow truck to pull you home and in the aftermath there will not be any international rescue AKA thunderbirds on this one. Now "how long does the video last of a person waiting to die" and can I have the royalties because reality TV would make it an instant hit.

MaxFreedom's picture

Earth is flat.

NASA is an Evil fraudalent enterprise.

Don't be a lemming.

Do your research.

 

 

 

Albertarocks's picture

I firmly believe NASA is an evil fraudulent enterprise.

I am not a lemming.

I have done my research and have found that the Flat Earth Society is a black-op set up by the CIA to identify who the really, really stupid people on earth are.  I can only guess as to why they would want to know.  If they're going to cull the population I assume those would be the most logical people to start with?  Yeah... for sure... those would be the most logical people to start with.

Flankspeed60's picture

I am deeply disappointed in H-H. It is now apparent that he and so many others are so consumed by rabid conspiracy theory and revisionist history that their ability to make sound judgements about the real world around them is seriously degraded. There are plenty of ACTUAL conspiracies that lay open the case for legitimate examination - but the moon landings are NOT among them. I worked on that project, as did THOUSANDS of professionals from all walks of life, and the slightest hint that these were faked evokes revulsion and disgust from those of us who consider that endeavor one of the finest and proudest achievements of our collective careers. Twelve heroes walked on the REAL moon - ALL who launched were brought back safely - something that cannot be said of a decades-later project that cost fourteen souls their lives just trying to make it in and out of low-earth orbit. If the sum total of all your research and reasoning leads you to conclude a truthful and knowable event such as the moon landings to be 'false,' then you are unqualified to judge even a dogfight, much less more weighty matters - in which case you should do YOURSELF a favor and STFU.

dangerb407's picture

You are the type of person that the NWO loves, comrade!

GeorgesamaBushLaden's picture

Those ASStronauts weren't heroes. They never went to the moon. It doesn't mean everyone who worked for NASA was part of the conspiracy. Armstrong, Aldrin and Collins sure as hell knew, and you can tell by their press conference. At one point a journalist inquires as to whether they could see an impressive array stars and the solar corona from the moon, to which Armstrong responds, "We were never able to see stars from the daylight side of the moon." Are you f'n kidding me? Then Collins injects: "I don't recall seeing any." He supposedly remained in the lunar module orbiting the moon and never set foot on the lunar surface. He certainly would've seen an impressive array of stars as he orbited.... Face it: all these men worked for the military, and had to help feed the lie, or they would be court-martialed and lose their military pensions.... Since Nixon was president there hasn't been ONE single lunar mission, yet we're to believe there were 6 successful ones between '69 and '72. And you wonder why people question this.

 

daveO's picture

It's the way Collins delivered that line that's the real tell. He appeared to be telling Armstrong to stick with the script. Armstrong looked perturbed. A few years later the Watergate burglars, working for the same boss, were using the same "I don't recall" line to Congress.

cj51's picture

"Since Nixon was president there hasn't been ONE single lunar mission". Should there have been more missions? why? Why would NASA lie about landing men on the Moon? To fool the Russians about power of USA ICBM's? really? I know, I know, don't feed the trolls. I just hate idiots and have a hard time containing myself.

 

PrivetHedge's picture

If you don't think there's a need to visit the moon or mars you should tell the NASA Orion team.

Would save them a lot of effort and heartache over the radiation too.

Son of Captain Nemo's picture

Got news for you Fs

Whether the Apollo Mission astronauts and the NASA community were carefully selected and bought off don't matter at this point.

Here... I'll prove it (http://www.ae911truth.org/)

When the 9/11 Commission left out a 47 story building in their report of what took place that day "3 years earlier" (YEAH it took your government 3 years to develop their story of what happened and in the process left out the third building that collapsed 8 hours later) that housed lots of important .gov people in it along with the "information" it held and the "door dragons" at responsible science agencies like the NIST and academic institutions like MIT and Purdue University said that they didn't exhibit "near free fall acceleration" in the collapse of either the Tower(s) or Building 7 (oh by the way... 3 buidlings 2 planes) you know the Apollo Moon Landing is irrelevant and that the departure from Truth has been a very important part of the American Federal Government for a long... long... time!

Now go back to your baseball game and have some fun today and forget about everything I and h_h have said today on this thread!

if your government said that gravity doesn't exist for high rise buildings taller than 47 stories after 9/11 and that men landed on the moon 49 years ago we all should believe them!

Flankspeed60's picture

"Whether the Apollo Mission astronauts and the NASA community were carefully selected and bought off don't matter at this point."

Actually, it does matter. I am privvy to very few 'truths' and I am reduced to rummaging  through the same wreckage of lies, misinformation, disinformation and propaganda, just like everyone else here who is not an 'insider' to most of the events discussed in this blog.  So, given the microscopically small chance that a discussion arises regarding an issue to which I AM an 'insider,' I am going to take special notice. Therefore, when I observe an absolute, undebatable truth characterized as a hoax, I am forced to consider the metrics used by others to gauge the evidence they use to arrive at their conclusions regarding other issues. The reason all this matters comes down to this: Are we REALLY seeking 'truth,' or are we merely seeking group vindication of our collective biases? I am now convinced substantial numbers fall in the latter. We vote, we drive public policy, we influence our friends, our neighbors and our kids. If we are intellectually honest, we should be willing to examine the manner in which we connect dots and form opinions, IN ALL MATTERS, and not be too heavily vested in them. If we cannot do this, we are no different than the global warming cultists and other ideologues who ruin our lives through their faux 'critical thinking.'

PrivetHedge's picture

An absolute, undebatable truth sounds rather like faith and belief to me.

You didn't go, so your evidence is all hearsay.

Your 'absolute, undebatable truth' would be laughed out of any court.

PrivetHedge's picture

There were 3 planes, Flight 93 fell short.

It was always meant to hit WTC7.

Baron von Bud's picture

100% correct Pivet. The third plane got shot down when the air force finally woke up to the scam. It never made it to wtc7 so they had to 'pull it'.

Son of Captain Nemo's picture

"There were 3 planes, Flight 93 fell short.

It was always meant to hit WTC7."

But didn't. Fixed it!

Rubbish's picture

Do us a favor and return your pension.

 

Gold Bitchez..... I pick up pennies

Flankspeed60's picture

I will, as soon as you return your brain. At least, my pension benefits me........

Rabbi Chaim Cohen's picture

Musk and crew are using a broken model to evaluate and engineer this project. If you know anything about Astrophysics and Quantum Mechanics, AND you can think for yourself, you KNOW that it is a broken mess. The Standard Model, as it is called, is festooned with correction factors, placeholders, imaginary bodies, dimensions, energy and particles all fabricated to "prove" what is imagined rather than prove what actually is. Experimentation has been reduced to a tsunami of equations that take page after ponderous page to try continue a line of flawed thinking. There is another model that has been 30+ years gaining momentum. Many of the observed "flaws" in the video account of the moon landings can be explained easily in this model. Don't dive in until you have some time to spend, it is amazing...

https://www.thunderbolts.info/wp/eu-guides/beginners-guide/

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCvHqXK_Hz79tjqRosK4tWYA

PorscheNoSub's picture

I think this model also will best explain the bright areas on Ceres. My suspicion is it is real time spark erosion. 

idontcare's picture

Even those who believed the first few Apollo "TV specials" had to scratch their heads over the missions starting with Apollo 15.  If you believe in mathematics, we barely had enough "weight" wiggle room to put three men in the basic 3 part Apollo spacecraft into Earth's orbit let alone get these guys near the moon, yet we started tossing a 10 ft long dune buggy into the mix (claiming it weighed less than 500 lbs - uh huh) without any "weight ratio" problems.  Likewise, NASA claims that with the landing gear deployed that the entire size of the LEM was appx 23'1" x31"x31" (yeah, I know the "numerology"/"freemasonry" crowd are salivating now....) so the question is where the heck did these guys put an appx 10ftx 4ft x 4 ft dune buggy when  the crew compartment was only 12'4" h x 14'1" diameter.  Oh yeah, it supposedly fit with all the communications equipment and other "tools" in the small compartment on the upper "right side" of the LEM (yep, it must have been folded up, but didn't we see a panel open and a full dune buggy emerge like magic on TV?).  

For almost 50 years I rabidly believed in Apollo, then I started looking suspiciously at the technical specifications while rewatching all the available video from all the Apollo missions (which I'd originally watched as a very small, impressionable child hooked on ST:OS to boot) and ya know.........(I hate being lied to, don't you?).

 

..... and then there was always that big head scratcher for me since I was a kid (and I got hit in school for asking this one):  Why did the Earth look so small from the moon? (run the numbers for yourself)

PrivetHedge's picture

That buggy was also strapped onto the SIDE of an LM that had a single motor to balance on.

There was no talk of balancing ballast or redesign for the imbalance.

Also note they used a winch system for a buggy that they should have been able to easily lift out on the moon.

oncemore's picture

http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/LM-descent.htm

 

Well here is some simplified data.

I do not trust it unless I have gone through it.

Everyone, who has finished the secondary school, should with the help of newtonian pfysics,  be able to make a spread sheet an calculate the parabola trajectory.

It is not quite parabolic, it is rather a spiral,  accelerating from 1900 m/s to zero, descending from 60 km above to surface ( what is the radius of the moon there, 1738 km), this do e within 10 minutes. It is on. The very edge, if I weight in, that they have been 38p0k km out.. Or lrt mre say it this way: they did have a zero margin of error. They repeated it from 11 to 17 w/o 13. This is astonishing.

PrivetHedge's picture

Ignore that guesswork study and read the actual Apollo 11 journal online at NASA.

It's full of time vs distance to earth, you just read them off.

It's this NASA data that shows they spent over 11 hours in the Van Allen belt region.

Here:

Outward

2:44  in https://history.nasa.gov/afj/ap11fj/02earth-orbit-tli.html

8:30  in https://history.nasa.gov/afj/ap11fj/04nav-housekeep.html

5.75hrs, 3.8 orbits

 

Inward

189:28 https://history.nasa.gov/afj/ap11fj/26day9-reentry.html

194:53 https://history.nasa.gov/afj/ap11fj/26day9-reentry.html

5.5 hours, unknown orbits.

Vardaman's picture

ZeroHedge is becoming the drooler Olympics.  False Flag!

Raul44's picture

"Saturn gave us magnificent ride, both into earth orbit and on a trajectory to the moon."

^............................................. .....................  w.......  HAAAAAAAAAAATTTTTT???????!!!!!

Cloud9.5's picture

I live in Florida.  I watched these things go up.  That does not matter. Fact will dissolve into fantasy.  The revisionists will rewrite history and the truth will be whatever serves the power brokers at the time.  Yesterday is a memory.  Tomorrow is a hope.  Now is all there is.  

TwelveOhOne's picture

I lived in Florida also, and also watched them send some metal up to splash into the ocean far off-shore.  (You can even see it arcing back down.)

That's not evidence that they're getting into "space".

GeorgesamaBushLaden's picture

Seeing rockets get launched is hardly proof we landed on the moon. ALL alleged moon landings happened while Nixon was president (supposedly 6 successful about 6 months apart), and there hasn't been a singe one since. Why? We have superior technology, yet we're supposed to believe that NASA (with their inflated budget) feel no need to venture back. I'm calling bullishit on that; and this is from a guy who used to have NASA and moon mission photos posted all over my wall.... Look up the Van Allen Belt, and once you've done your homework you'll realize there's no way in hell those ASStronauts could safely travel through a 10,000 mile thick belt of highly charged radiation. The would have been cooked like a poodle in a microwave oven.... Apollo 11 was produced at Stanley Kubrick's studio.

 

DavidFL's picture

The reason there are no more missions to the moon is because it is pointless. Nothing up there. Someone please explain the value. A mars landing would be equally as useless as another moon landing. These were and are jobs programs and really serve little purpose.

Mustafa Kemal's picture

"The reason there are no more missions to the moon is because it is pointless"

the problem with this logic is that then many other government programs would have been terminated -because they are pointless, except as a way to gouge