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.
The Conger's picture

Space is fake...outer space is on'y in people minds...no satelites no space walks no rockets in space...the earth is not a ball spinning 1039mph in space...

the not so mighty maximiza's picture

both assumptions are correct.  We went to the moon AND they had a sound stage up.   Alien space craft were flying all over the place, so they would cut transmission and go to the sound stage version.   You could not have them driving the rover with alien space craft flying around in the backround .  there is a reason we stoped sending people back there, we were warned off.  

I had someone in air force who told me they sent people way beyond the moon allready, but they sometimes dont come back.

 

 

 

 

 

daveO's picture

More likely, unmanned ships were sent to moon, with rovers, etc., while the actors stayed at the studio.

Bemused Observer's picture

Landing on the Moon is not exactly 'rocket science'...(no pun intended.) The Moon is, after all, a satellite of Earth's, and within the Earth's protective 'envelope' zone. If we can get to one satellite (the space station) then we can get to another...I have no problem believing we did land there.

 

I would have a problem with the 'going to Mars' thing...now that is a whole different story. We'd have to leave the 'zone', and travel through SPACE...real SPACE, not just the short hop, skip and a jump to the moon's surface. We don't even know if living tissue can withstand that environment...the radiation levels are beyond anything we have actually prepared for...it might not be possible to shield astronauts enough to allow them to make such a trip.

 

I've always said that this whole 'trip to Mars' thing smells like bullshit to me. To attract the investors, but when push comes to shove there will be SOME reason or reasons it can't actually HAPPEN. Of course, the investors won't get refunds.

The Conger's picture

The moon is not a solid object...you can see right through it as it goes through its monthly cycle...at night stars are seen through it and blue sky during the day...its also within our atmosphere as is the sun...they are both about the same size and not the great distance away we are told...we have above us lights all lights not planets....

fel.temp.reparatio's picture

what are you smoking? ...sounds like it's good shit ;-)

antidisestablishmentarianismishness's picture

It's one thing to believe ridiculous shit like this in your teens and twenties but jeezus, when you hit 40 and you're still buying into this crap that's when the neighbors start whispering about the middle aged deludinoid hunkered down in the basement with his reptile pets.  Seek help!

eltxamo's picture

Exactly if you get in your 50s and start believing all the conspiracy theories, Trump happens.

Ben A Drill's picture

The Apollo landing on the moon was filmed at Area 51. I thought everyone already knew that. HH is correct, landing never happened.

PrivetHedge's picture

The later ones were filmed outside - the ones with even lighting on the sand.

The early ones (11/12) with a spotlamp and 20 yards to the horizons were from MGM Borehamwood England on the lunar sound stages of 2001 or the UFO series being made there at the time.

After they were made MGM was bulldozed and a council estate built there, so UFO moved down to Pinewood IIRC where the later series were filmed.

Yippie21's picture

This is all stupid.  We went to the Moon.  Why fake it?  We got Tang for Christ sake!

Haitian Snackout's picture

I thought it was all fake at 10 years old. oxygen, batteries, fuel, life support systems, navigation, controlled rocket thrusters? wtf? food , waste, etc fucking etc, Kept my mouth shut then, but don't think I have forgotten you derworths for all these years. Same butt kissin f'tards that were in my 5th grade class. But carry on with your moon landing fairy tale, it is only small potatoes in the grand scheme. At least I have something you will never know, the truth.

flyingcaveman's picture

My dad got pissed off at me when I said I thought it was fake. I was probably about 10 years old.   I've never seen him get so defensive of anything ever.  It's was like you personally called him a liar.   He was one of those people who would say he knew all along we would go to the moon in his lifetime.  I was denying his dream that he watched 'live' on television.  So I shut up about it after that, because there was no way I was going to win that argument.

Flankspeed60's picture

That's because your dad was right. You should listen to him.

PrivetHedge's picture

You are confusing your own belief as evidence.

Your inability to even discuss the facts means your belief is in charge and in full defense mode.

No one will convince you, the only one who can do that is you. 

If you are really confident try watching some of the best presented videos or visit aulis.com and look at what they are saying.

If you're right, it's not going to be a danger to your belief is it?

shadow54's picture

Anyone can crank out conspiracy theories about the moon landing being fake because the public simply doesn't have the scientific knowlege or equipment to check it.

The flat earth people can even a make a fancy argument about the earth being flat even though they are loonies.

Arguing against the landing because a person doesn't like government workers which astronauts were is a dead giveaway of bias.

The one big fake thing that is proved just by the naked eye alone is 9-11, in which the buildings were demolished, and from that evidence you understand that it was all set up.

Haitian Snackout's picture

So I suppose  by your logic that detectives, antique appraisers, pawn shop owners are all conspiracy theorists because they assume the product is fake until proven otherwise. But you don't call them that do you? No, you refer to them as professionals. Now bugger off.

outofnowhere's picture

'Against stupidity, the gods themselves contend in vain.' Schiller

This article is pure stupidity. I'm no god and I'll contend no longer.

 

dangerb407's picture

You are correct.  Our module wrapped in gold Reynolds Wrap made it there and we were even able to take off again from the surface of the moon!!

Haitian Snackout's picture

Don't forget that the umm... vacume of space had to be careful not to destroy the the LM the second it was deployed.

 

Milton Keynes's picture

On the Moon, you have to do Propulsive landing.  

On Mars, you can do Air Drag, you can do a lifting re-entry, you can even do Airbags.

 

If you look at Viking,  the Viking landers rode an Aeroshell down, then lit a thruster to land.

Other Mars Surveyor, popped AirBags.

There is even discussion of popping wings and flying through the martian atmosphere.

Are there better ways to land on Mars then Propulsively?  Probably..

A shaped lifting body pulling a hypersonic turn through the atmosphere, like a waverider?

or really big balutes that double as airbags, but, that's Mars.

You want to land on the moon you either build a really big space elevator or you land on rockets.

Seriously....

 

This is one of the dumbest posts I've ever seen.

Wahooo's picture

Those guys talk like engineers, nothing more nothing less.

PorscheNoSub's picture

I agree. Engineers with stage fright.

I wouldn't be surprised if they had to memorize certain lines for the press conference or read from a teleprompter/cards to help humanize the otherwise non-mainstream or generally (emotionally) inaccessible aspects of the program i.e. partially or totally scripted press conference. At that point your aren't genuinely communicating your experience but what the Public Relations office thinks the general public wants to hear about. Nerd Out of the Nerdery situation or Hot Shot Meets the Parents. I know in general people's eyes glaze over pretty quick if anything gets technical. "We went fast as shit" turns into "It was quite interesting the high rate of speed we were traveling relative to the Earth."

tangent's picture

Musk said nothing to indicate the moon landing was fake. I looked into this for many hours and came to the conclusion that only when we get a complete map of radiation levels over one full year by an independent agency can we know if the NASA craft was possible. Already a mapping program is in place but I cannot figure out what the data means.

11th_Harmonic's picture

Holy shit. I must have blacked out for a few minutes. I thought I was visiting ZH, but I suddenly found myself reading comments from the confines of a virtual padded room whilst typing with my nose, as my digits were restrained via straightjacket.

j/k

Seriously though, I'm a bit surprised to see an article on this topic here, and I'm even more surprised at the positions of some of the regulars.

Anyway, in this day of mis/disinformation where the truth is effectively substituted with lies, I really can't solidify a position on the moon landing(s). I'm not privy to any concrete information (that I've taken the time to research more thoroughly) that would support either argument, so I'll just get down to the brass tacks and state: I'm suspicious, but I really don't know--I don't intend to argue imaginative conjectures. I'll place this topic under "Buck Rogers" and move on, knowing that most of you reading this are either inquisitive, suspicious as I, or just simply bat shit crazy.

Don't get me started on "flat earth". I might go postal.

dangerb407's picture

Whatever, we made it there with a fuc*iing Reynolds Wrap bodied lunar module.    Go back to watching CiaNN gullible sheep dude and parrot what pedo Tepper tells you

11th_Harmonic's picture

For the record, I up-voted for the snide sarcastic reply. Certified assholes are the only individuals most likely to appreciate your artistic endeavors.

ableman28's picture

I am running a special on Heavy Weight Alcoa Wrap.  This stuff really holds up to about any cranial shape you can get it into.  Easily good for 50 wearings provided you are reasonably careful.

I personally certify that when used ina double layer this will totally block all alien and domestic intelligence agency transmissions.

For a limited time only, I can also provide a companion dust and chemtrail filter.  There is just no point in blocking alien brain waves if your just going to wind up inhaling chemicals designed to make you sympathetic to feminazi's and gay people.

I'm guessing about 90% of ZeroHedges current readership will be interested in purchasing the combo package.

dangerb407's picture

You should buy some to wrap around your stupid AF lunar module Mr. gullible fu*k.  Like that POS ever made it to the moon, stupid AF moron

SquadronVBF94's picture

So where is your engineering evidence? What you don't have any? I didn't think so. So tell us what is the structural load created by a Delta of one atmosphere?

dangerb407's picture

STFU and go shove your support of the gold Reynolds Wrap space module which withstood space projecticles and Van Allen Belt radiation up your Deep State arse.

PrivetHedge's picture

Evidence that something didn't happen?

No, NASA is supposed to prove they did it. So far they have failed.

ableman28's picture

I am running a special on Heavy Weight Alcoa Wrap.  This stuff really holds up to about any cranial shape you can get it into.  Easily good for 50 wearings provided you are reasonably careful.

I personally certify that when used ina double layer this will totally block all alien and domestic intelligence agency transmissions.

For a limited time only, I can also provide a companion dust and chemtrail filter.  There is just no point in blocking alien brain waves if your just going to wind up inhaling chemicals designed to make you sympathetic to feminazi's and gay people.

I'm guessing about 90% of ZeroHedges current readership will be interested in purchasing the combo package.

IdioTsincracY's picture

hahahahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

+100000000

IdioTsincracY's picture

I still remember when Nikita Khrushchev came out and said:

"The Americans did not land on the moon. It was all fake, because

nobody can go through the Van Allen belts".

It really destroyed the US credibility

dlweld's picture

Whatever Krushchev says is the gospel truth for sure.

dangerb407's picture

You are correct.  We had gold magic Reynolds Wrap to conquer the Van Allen belt

quesnay's picture

Ah those were the days. I still remember Ronald Reagan's clearly explaining the benefits of socialism in his eloquent speech

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs".

IdioTsincracY's picture

Hate my a$$ away, you pseudoexpert of nothingness.

Still you can't overcome the simplest question of all.

Even the Russians acepted the whole landing as true.

Up yours! ... and I mean up and away to the moon!

SmittyinLA's picture

My grandma always said the moon landing was bullshit, I think my grandpa designed and assembled nuclear bombs, he had above top secret clearance-whatever that means, they murdered him when I was 2, "lab accident" not sure what to think anymore.

Last week I saw a glitch in the matrix, I showed my dad and brother, the said it was a light reflection from the house up the street with the blue flashing party lights, I thought that too till I blocked the reflection, the glitch still showed.I think we live in a physical reality created and bound by collective consciousness. We can do Mars if we think we can do Mars, I think, but one has to ask why bother when Earth is so cool?

I can't think of a worse prison than Mars.

Reichstag Fire Dept.'s picture

How the hell are you gonna land on the moon?

It's made outta cheese!!

Parmasian cheese on the surface, judging by the foot prints...

Twee Surgeon's picture

1969, I was about 7+. We were at School and it was cool as everything stopped so all the munchkins could watch the Moon landing.

Yorkshire, Leeds to be exact, smack in the middle of England.. We waited with milky school milk breath and it came on around 10.30ish AM, if I remember rightly.

(By Satellite from America no less!) We were all thrilled...but...true story... the sky turned black and stayed black as if there was an Eclipse, I think there was a Thunderstorm ? It was as if it was night. I have never seen such a similar event in my following years and I'm 55ish. Been around a bit.

Just curious if anyone else on ZH remembers seeing that in that area ?

So I'm sitting on the Moon on my Lawn Chair with a bottle and some bottle rockets full of Oxygenated Black powder. I Ignite the fuse of the bottle rocket with my trust Zippo Lazer lighter. What happens next ? Does the bottle rocket go woosh or does it burn out and pop in the bottle ?

PorscheNoSub's picture

Assuming you mean the oxidizer is with the fuel (some new advanced hypothetical bottle rocket), woosh. If the chemical reaction is independent of oxygen in Earth's atmosphere the reaction can still take place. Some form of exhaust would exit out of the body of the bottle rocket in predominantly one direction. Rocket engines currently don't use gases directly from the atmosphere as an oxidizer for the fuel: both are carried on-board. Also, hypergolic propellants do not need an ignition source other than the 2 chemicals mixing so a "spark" isn't necessarily a prerequisite.

 

Flight will be decidedly extra erratic though because that normal predictable (-ish) flight is determined by aerodynamic forces (probably more like when you break the stem off). 

TwelveOhOne's picture

Then again, if there's no atmosphere to push off of, does the exhaust actually move the vehicle forward?  See Brian Mullin (among others) on YouTube.

GestaltNine's picture

to me the most damning evidence that no one has ever been outside of Earth is it is impossible to pass through the Van Allen Belts, Van Allen wore suspenders