This is no
conspiracy theory, you stupid journalist. These are facts.
| One single little
light above at the left side
|
 |
Frontal photo
from Alan Bean (APOLLO 12, picture no.
as12-49-7278). On the left side in the background
parts of the ceiling construction of the film
studio an a single spotlight can be seen.
from: Gernot L.
Geise: Neue Widersprüche um Apollo [New
contradictions about Apollo]; In: EFODON-SYNESIS
Nr.5 / 2002; http://www.efodon.de/html/archiv/weltraum/apollo/ap2002-1.htm
(June 2005)
This scene is produced at the moon hall in Houston.
|
This is no conspiracy
theory, you stupid journalist. These are facts!
| An entire row of
spotlights mirrored on the helmet
|
|
Frontal photo
from Alan Bean (APOLLO 12, picture no.
as12-49-7281, cutout). On the helmet Charles
Conrad is mirrored who is taking the photo (this
is an impossibility), but add to this there can be
seen a total row of spotlights of the studio.
Compare with the upper photo where no spotlight
can be seen.
from: Gernot L.
Geise: Neue Widersprüche um Apollo [New
contradictions about Apollo]; In: EFODON-SYNESIS
Nr.5 / 2002; http://www.efodon.de/html/archiv/weltraum/apollo/ap2002-1.htm
(June 2005)
This scene is produced at the moon hall in Houston.
|
This is no conspiracy
theory, you stupid journalist. These are facts!
| A wrong camera
position coming from the top
|
|
The famous photo from Buzz Aldrin
(Apollo 11, AS11-40-5903). Who has taken it? From
Armstrong it cannot be because the position from
which it's taken is too high. Hasselblad's camera
has been fixed on the chest (as here on Aldrin's
chest). The mirrored skyline on the helmet seems
to be copied in later: It's not corresponding with
the angle of the photo.
from: Anonym:
Die Apollo-Mondflüge: Betrug oder grandiose
Technik-Geschichte?
[Anonymus: The Apollo moon flights: Fraud or great
technique history?]
http://www.artemodus.de/cars/MOND.HTM
(June 2005)
This scene is a photo composition.
|
This is no conspiracy
theory, you stupid journalist. These are facts!
|
The shadows are going
in all directions
As many different shadow lines seem to have the
condition that there are many different spotlights.
|
|
 Apollo 16,
photo number AS16-107-17446. Astronaut Charles
Duke at the Rover.
Shadows in all directions are only possible on
the "moon", when there are coming many
spotlights from different directions. Or the
photo is a bad "composition"...
Image without indication of the shadow lines:
from: Serge Brunier: Aufbruch ins All [start
into space]; Edition Cosmos 2001, p.98.
This scene is a photo composition .
|
This is no conspiracy
theory, you stupid journalist. These are facts!
| An "American" flag
without shadow |
Another example of failed photo montage is the
following photo where not only the shadow lines are
different, but the shadow of the flag is missing
totally:
|
|
Moon lie:
Photo with astronaut Edwin Aldrin, Apollo 11,
AS11-40-5874 und AS11-40-5875.
Shadow lines are going in all directions, and the flag has no
shadow.
Photo from: Barbara Hehner / Greg Ruhl: Auf dem
Mond. Augenzeugen berichten [engl.: On the moon.
Eye witnesses are reporting]; Carlsen Edition,
Hamburg 1999, p.30. But the eye witnesses are no
eye witnesses...
According to NASA this photo is the original. But
also on the original NASA photo a shadow of the
flag cannot be found:
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a11/as11-40-5875.jpg
This photo
is a photo
composition.
|
The same photo exists also mirror-inverted.
|
|
Moon lie:
Photo with astronaut Edwin Aldrin, Apollo 11,
AS11-40-5874 und AS11-40-5875.
Shadow lines are going in all directions, and the flag has no
shadow at all, also mirror-inverted not.
Photo montage is also photo montage when the photo
is mirrored. It's a photo montage.
from: Brian Jones: Weltraumforschung [engl.: Space
research]; Herder Edition 1990, p.49
|
This is no conspiracy
theory, you stupid journalist. These are facts!
| A shadow of an
astronaut is much too long |
At another
photo of Apollo 11 there can be seen two
astronauts which - so the official version says -
they are taken from a photo camera by remote
control from the earth, and the camera is fixet at
the top of the landing sphere. The photo shows how
the astronauts are fixing the "American" flag. But
the shadow from the right astronaut is much too
long compared with the shadow of the left
astronaut, absolutely not real:
|
|
Moon lie
Apollo 11: The shadow of the right astronaut is
much longer than the shadow of the left
astronaut. The shadow of the right astronaut is
much too long between vertex and waistline. The
proportions are not right.
Photo from: Barbara Hehner / Greg Ruhl: Auf dem
Mond. Augenzeugen berichten [engl.: On the moon.
Eye witnesses are reporting]; Carlsen Edition,
Hamburg 1999, p.31. But the eye witnesses are no
eye witnesses...
This is photo composition.
|
This is no conspiracy
theory, you stupid journalist. These are facts!
| Moon landing sphere
without crater - the space suit is not blown up
|
|
On the left: The moon landing sphere
from APOLLO 12: Moon lie Apollo 12: Landing without
any landing crater, and the space suit is not blown
up.
Astronaut Bean aside the landing sphere: Here you
see precisely that under the power unit the
dust is not blown away and there is no landing
crater burnt into the moon's soil.
And when this scene is taken in the vacuum on the
moon: Why the space suit is not blown up?
|
From: Anonym: Die Apollo-Mondflüge:
Betrug oder grandiose Technik-Geschichte?
[Anonymus: The Apollo moon flights: Fraud or great
technique history?]
http://www.artemodus.de/cars/MOND.HTM
(June 2005)
This scene is at the simulation center in Houston.
|
This is no conspiracy
theory, you stupid journalist. These are facts!
| Dust around
the landing foot - no dust on
the landing foot - landing feet in cling film?
|
|
Left: One of the landing feet from
landing sphere "Eagle" (APOLLO 11): As it's visible
from the many of the traces there never had been
blown away any dust by the power unit during the
landing.
This photo is made at the simulation center at
Langley or Houston.
|
I ask myself
what can this be good for to pack the landing feet
into cling film? The feet had not been of metal but
of heat proof and cold proof materials? Or should be
hidden that there was put in a plastic or a peace of
wood?
from: Anonym: Die Apollo-Mondflüge: Betrug oder
grandiose Technik-Geschichte?
[Anonymus: The Apollo moon flights: Fraud or great
technique history?]
http://www.artemodus.de/cars/MOND.HTM
(Juni 2005)
|
No dust on the landing foot, but around
is a lot of "moon dust":
|
|
Moon lie:
Another landing foot without dust on
it, but with much dust around
it with many footprints. These circumstances are
impossible when a sphere should have been landed
by power engine.
Image from: Serge Brunier:
Aufbruch ins All [start into space]; Cosmos Edition
2001, p.93
This photo is made at the simulation center at
Langley or Houston.
|
This is no conspiracy
theory, you stupid journalist. These are facts!
| An art photography with
crosses in shadows? |
|
Moon lie: Crosses in shadows. It's a bad
photo composition...
|
Sun art
photography with crosses in shadows. Why should
astronauts have time on the moon for such jokes?
Image from: Serge Brunier: Aufbruch ins All [start
into space]; Cosmos Edition 2001, p.95 |
This is no conspiracy
theory, you stupid journalist. These are facts!
|
Moon stones are
radioactive and must not be investigated
without protection suit
|
 |
"Moon
stones" from APOLLO 12. When it's radioactive
why it's analyzed
without
radiant protective clothing?
from: Anonym: Die Apollo-Mondflüge: Betrug oder
grandiose Technik-Geschichte?
[Anonymus: The Apollo moon flights: Fraud or great
technique history?]
http://www.artemodus.de/cars/MOND.HTM
(June 2005) |
This is no conspiracy
theory, you stupid journalist. These are facts!
The "moon stones" come from
Chile
The professor for geology John
L. Parker examined and analyzed the "moon stones"
at Maine University. In this institute also scientist Nelly Wason was
researching. During her research work in Atacama desert in the North
of Chile she detected a strange sort of stone.
Later she found out that the composition was exactly
corresponding to the "moon stones" which John L. Parker had
examined.
Paker already had died when Nelly Wason was detecting this.
She became mistrustful and examined Parker's estate. In his
remarks she found the proof that Parker and a PR man from
NASA Mark Lecoq
always knew well that the "moon stones" never had been from
the moon but from Atacama desert from Chile.
The
last thing
A curbed horizon on the helmet of astronaut Buzz Aldrin.
This is a painted picture, it's not a photo, you stupid
journalist.
Conclusion: The "USA" are a dictatorship
democracy and not capable for the truth - a
"Nuremberg" for the "USA"
It's not important to discuss about a turned flagpole anymore
which had been turned or not to give proofs for the lie of the
moon.
The landing on the moon is a fraud, and the "American"
population had been cheated out of 40 billion Dollar.
The moon landing had been staged for a bluff against Russia in
the Cold War, not more.
The fact that something like this can happen is a sign that in
the "USA" something with the structure of democracy seems to
be heavily wrong. The secret communities of the Free Masons
and the Illuminates have too much power, respectively other
groups don't have any power. The "USA" are a dictatorship
democracy of the Free Masons, not more.
And all this is very deplorable because terror "USA" - slowly
but steadily - are really getting on the world's nerves. We
need a "Nuremberg" for the "USA" so the "USA" will at last
achieve a structure reform which corresponds to a democracy.
The secret communities of the Free Masons and the Illuminates
have to be dissolved completely. These Free Masons are not at
all "free", but they are obsessed by black magic and betraying
other people.
40 bn $ fraud sum? And these human beings are still free and
walking around the world?
The "Nuremberg" for the terror "USA" could be in Den Haag...
But it's strange that until now there has not been fount one
single judge against these terror "USA".
Why the journalists do not believe the facts? Moon landing is
a lie.
This is no
conspiracy theory, you stupid journalist. These are facts!
More links about the moon lie
2013: Impossible views with the camera on board:
Recommendation
of literature
-- Gernot L. Geise:
Der grösste Betrug des Jahrhunderts? Die APOLLO-Mondflüge
[English: Biggest fraud of the century? APOLLO flights];
Hohenpeissenberg 2000, ISBN 3-932539-23-0; EFEDON
publisher, European community for early technology and
margin area of science.
-- Anonymus: Die
Apollo-Mondflüge: Betrug oder grandiose
Technik-Geschichte? [Anonymus: The Apollo moon
flights: Fraud or great technique history?] http://www.artemodus.de/cars/MOND.HTM
(June 2005)
-- Goddard's Journal; http://iangoddard.net/moon01.htm
(June 2005)
-- Serge Brunier: Aufbruch ins All [start into space];
Cosmos Edition 2001
-- Brian Jones: Weltraumforschung [engl.: Space research];
Herder Edition 1990
-- Barbara Hehner / Greg Ruhl: Auf dem Mond. Augenzeugen
berichten [engl.: On the moon. Eye witnesses are
reporting]; Carlsen Edition, Hamburg 1999. [But the eye
witnesses are no eye witnesses, but they are actors under
military order...]
[Comment: The most tremendous fraud
of the century ist the financing of Communism and of
the Third Reich
The false landing of the moon is not the biggest
fraud of the century. The most tremendous fraud is the
financing of Communism and
the Third Reich by swanky and arrogant "American"
financiers at the same time, and Communism had been
financed also after
1945 yet. The clique of the "US" government
(all "Free Masons" and "Illuminates") has created their
enemies themselves to
be always the "winner" at the end and to agitate on each
other. THIS is the MOST TREMENDOUS FRAUD OF THE CENTURY,
and the "USA" has never been torn to trial for these
crimes. But the "Nuremberg" for the "USA" will come for
sure... Michael Palomino]
