A few questions and facts regarding the fact that the "moon landings" were faked:

1. Why has no one been back to the moon? Supposedly the United States landed men on the moon 6 times from 1969-1972. In the almost 50 years since that time, why hasn't anyone gone back? Why has no other nation (China, Japan, Russia) sent men to the moon?

The answer is because no one has ever been to the moon, including the United States.

2. Addressing #1 above, NASA claims that "they don't have the technology anymore" in order to go to the moon, and that "we destroyed the technology"!

See a NASA spokesman claim this here:



Forbes has an article here from a NASA spokesperson doing damage control, spinning a story about how/why we "no longer have the technology or ability" to go to the moon.

Now which is more likely...a) that NASA "lost" or "destroyed" the ability and technology to go to the moon, or b) that they never had the ability or technology to get to the moon in the first place? How can you get to the moon with 1960s computers and technology and not be able to do it 50 years later?

3. NASA claims that all of the original recordings of video and telemetry data of the "moon landing" were "accidentally erased" and they re-used the tapes and "taped over the original footage". Ooops! These would supposedly be the most important recordings in human history. But they just "accidentally lost" the tapes. Suuuure. No. They intentionally destroyed that information, so that no one could examine it and expose the fact that the "moon landing" was faked.

4. The supposed "lunar lander" looks like a pile of junk constructed by school students for a science project, made of aluminum foil and scrap metal.

5. Video of the "lunar lander" supposedly "blasting off from the surface of the moon" is laughably fake, and looks like it's from a cheap 1960s B scifi movie. Shorter video of this here:



6. The press conference by the "astronauts" of the Apollo 11 mission (first "moon landing") is very bizarre. These men have supposedly just been a part of the most amazing achievement in human history. Yet, at the press conference, they behave in an EXTREMELY strange manner -- somber, depressed, fidgeting, strange smirks, and with fear in their faces and voices. It's like a hostage video -- ie, captors filming a statement by a prisoner of war.

Full press conference here:



7. Analysis of photographs and video allegedly taken of the astronauts on the moon has exposed many problems -- including photographs supposedly taken from locations miles apart on the surface of the moon that have identical backgrounds (mountains, etc), suggesting that the "photographs" were faked with a standard background used. Notably, in all of the photos of the lunar lander "on the surface of the moon", there is no visible crater or hole in the ground directly beneath the lunar lander, which should exist if the lunar lander descended to the surface of the moon using rocket thrusters. There is also not even one spec of dust on the "feet" or landing pads of the lunar lander, when you would expect a huge dust storm to have been caused by the descent thrusters. It is also very interesting that no stars are ever visible in any of the video or photographs supposedly taken from the surface of the moon.


And it's not just the supposed moon landings. NASA is engaged in many other deceptions and frauds -- including the "Mars missions", the international space station, and their portrayal of the nature of our universe in general.

There are numerous videos on YouTube exposing that the videos supposedly showing astronauts in the international space station are faked. They are likely videos made with blue screens and the "astronauts" in wires/harnesses, simulating weightlessness. Here is a good video on this.

Ok.

Thanks. Always room for levity and hilarity.

brickturner said:

---

Thanks. Always room for levity and hilarity.

---

You know what's REALLY hilarious? The claim that they sent men to the moon in a "lunar lander" that looks like a tin can and aluminum foil held together with duct tape.

Absurdity? That NASA "lost" all of the original video and telemetry data, and says that we also "lost the technology" and can no longer "go back" to the moon.

You want to bust a gut? Watch the official NASA video of the "lunar lander blasting off from the moon". Talk about ridiculous.

GuerrillaPack said:

---

brickturner said:

---

Thanks. Always room for levity and hilarity.

---

You know what's REALLY hilarious? The claim that they sent men to the moon in a "lunar lander" that looks like a tin can and aluminum foil held together with duct tape.

Absurdity? That NASA "lost" all of the original video and telemetry data, and says that we also "lost the technology" and can no longer "go back" to the moon.

You want to bust a gut? Watch the official NASA video of the "lunar lander blasting off from the moon". Talk about ridiculous.

---

Ok

Wow......

If you want to research subjects such as the moon landing hoax or 9/11 on YouTube, you may not have much more time to do so.

As many of you may have noticed, YouTube has enacted draconian censorship over the past 2-3 years, and it is only accelerating. Over the last 2-3 years, they have, admittedly, been manipulating their search and "recommendation" algorithm in order to suppress and censor "conspiracy theorist" content. And very recently (on June 5th), they came out with an official statement that they will now outright ban content that "denies well-documented events".

Here is a direct quote from their statement:

"Finally, we will remove content denying that well-documented violent events, like the Holocaust or the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary, took place."


As of right now, they have banned all videos questioning Sandy Hook and the holocaust. It's only a matter of time before they ban all videos that question the "official" story on the "moon landings", 9/11, and other similar events and issues.

Currently, it's difficult to find videos that question the official story on subjects such as the moon landing or 9/11, because when you search for that type of content, YouTube has artificially manipulated the search algorithm in order to promote Establishment content ("mainstream" media sources). So in the search results, you will get 20-30+ Establishment sources pushing the official narrative as the "top results", and you will have to scroll way down before you begin to get the content you are looking for.

Here are some good documentaries exposing the moon landing hoax:

Loons gonna loon.

brickturner said:

---

Loons gonna loon.

---

Ad hominem

Quote:

---

Ad hominem (Latin for "to the person"), short for argumentum ad hominem, is a fallacious argumentative strategy whereby genuine discussion of the topic at hand is avoided by instead attacking the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making the argument, or persons associated with the argument, rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself

---

By the way, the origin of the term "loon" (or "lunatic") is from "lunar", because people in the middle ages believed that insanity was caused by phases of the moon.

Ironically, nowadays a good indicator of insanity is if you buy the official story of the Apollo "moon landings".

GuerrillaPack said:

---

brickturner said:

---

Loons gonna loon.

---

Ad hominem

Quote:

---

Ad hominem (Latin for "to the person"), short for argumentum ad hominem, is a fallacious argumentative strategy whereby genuine discussion of the topic at hand is avoided by instead attacking the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making the argument, or persons associated with the argument, rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself

---

By the way, the origin of the term "loon" (or "lunatic") is from "lunar", because people in the middle ages believed that insanity was caused by phases of the moon.

Ironically, nowadays a good indicator of insanity is if you buy the official story of the Apollo "moon landings".

---

Call me insane then. Nothing you can post (about any topic) will ever convince otherwise.

Some might wonder about the motive for faking the moon landing, and all of NASA's other deceptions. The primary motivation is to provide justification and "proof" for their false cosmology and claims about the nature of the universe -- with the ultimate aim being to cause people to doubt and reject the Bible and the Creator.

It all goes back to the heliocentric model, the theory of evolution, the Big Bang theory, and other ideas which were designed to cause people to reject God and the Bible.

Yes, it is part of the larger Satanic conspiracy. Satan and his minions currently rule this world. They are at the spheres of power in Establishment media, Hollywood, the government, academia, etc. And they are pushing an atheistic, secular, anti-Christian worldview.

GuerrillaPack said:

---

Some might wonder about the motive for faking the moon landing, and all of NASA's other deceptions. The primary motivation is to provide justification and "proof" for their false cosmology and claims about the nature of the universe -- with the ultimate aim being to cause people to doubt and reject the Bible and the Creator.

It all goes back to the heliocentric model, the theory of evolution, the Big Bang theory, and other ideas which were designed to cause people to reject God and the Bible.

Yes, it is part of the larger Satanic conspiracy. Satan and his minions currently rule this world. They are at the spheres of power in Establishment media, Hollywood, the government, academia, etc. And they are pushing an atheistic, secular, anti-Christian worldview.

---

You sir, are a "unique" individual. I fully expect an origin and original meaning for unique from you shortly.

Why are there no stars visible in the pictures taken? That actually piques my interest. If it was on the moon, and I do believe it was, what could cause stars not to show up in the pics?

Dern scientists forgot to photoshop them in.

NatePait94 said:

---

Why are there no stars visible in the pictures taken? That actually piques my interest. If it was on the moon, and I do believe it was, what could cause stars not to show up in the pics?

---

THEY will have you believe it's because the landings happened during the day, and the sun and reflection of the sun are brighter than the far away stars.

I dont buy that crap. You should be able to see the stars. There are no city lights on the moon.

NatePait94 said:

---

I dont buy that crap. You should be able to see the stars. There are no city lights on the moon.

---

Can you see stars from Earth during the day?

Then why would you expect to see stars from the Moon during the day? That's when the pictures were taken.

You see blue sky when you're on Earth during the day, because the Earth has an atmosphere. Yet you can't see that atmosphere at night, can you? You can see right into the sky.

The Moon doesn't have an atmosphere to speak of..(it does, but very unlike ours)...but the sun's reflection still blocks out the light from the stars during the day...somewhat. You can still see the stars even in the day, but the pics we see weren't done correctly.
There are PLENTY of pictures of the stars taken from the Moon...better than ever taken from Earth. But keep right on ignoring that.

The answers really ARE simple, folks. Good grief. Every single objection of the conspiracists has been thoroughly debunked beyond any shadow of a doubt, and most of the explanations are pretty simple.
And the conspiracists usually *conveniently* ignore some key facts to make their points.

This is one of the big problems the internet has created....used to be, conspiracy loons were few and far between, and couldn't affect but so many, but now they can huddle up on websites and have an affect on other weak-minded folks. Flat Earth idiots, 911 hoaxers, etc. Never used to have much of a voice, and honestly...shouldn't. Fools like that used to get laughed out of places when they'd spew their nonsense.

Here's a Youtube video for y'all

NASA contradicts themselves on whether they can see stars or not from space during the day (i.e., with the sun shining). At the official Apollo 11 press conference, Neil Armstrong and another astronaut stated that they could not see the stars from the moon during the day, unless they used "optics" equipment. Then, there are astronauts who claim to be able to see the stars during the day from the International Space Station.

Here is a short video with these statements:

Well you are talking about two different places thousands of miles apart so *yawn*.

If we did fake it, why would the Russians keep quiet about it? Wouldn't it be in their interest back then to broadcast the evidence showing that we never landed on the moon?

Pacfanweb said:

---

There are PLENTY of pictures of the stars taken from the Moon...better than ever taken from Earth. But keep right on ignoring that.

---

Really? If you search "why are there no stars in the photographs from the moon?", you will get many articles from "Establishment" sources that acknowledge that none of the photographs showed any stars, and then offer various explanations as to why this is the case -- mainly, claiming that the cameras did not have the appropriate exposure in order to capture the stars. I've never seen a proponent of the official moon landing story point to examples of any photos that did show the stars. Can you reference any of these photos for us?

Pacfanweb said:

---

The answers really ARE simple, folks. Good grief. Every single objection of the conspiracists has been thoroughly debunked beyond any shadow of a doubt, and most of the explanations are pretty simple.
And the conspiracists usually *conveniently* ignore some key facts to make their points.

---

No, they have not been "thoroughly debunked". To the contrary, there are dozens of very serious problems with the alleged "moon landing" story, which have not been refuted or answered, and cannot be -- including NASA claiming that they "cannot go back to the moon" because "they destroyed the technology", faked video footage (eg, of the "lunar landing blasting off"), NASA claiming that they "accidentally lost" 13,000 reels of the original video footage and telemetry data, photos that are fake (showing shadows that intersect, re-used photoshopped backgrounds, etc), the bizarre interviews with the astronauts where they appear to be lying, etc.

Pacfanweb said:

---

This is one of the big problems the internet has created....used to be, conspiracy loons were few and far between, and couldn't affect but so many, but now they can huddle up on websites and have an affect on other weak-minded folks. Flat Earth idiots, 911 hoaxers, etc. Never used to have much of a voice, and honestly...shouldn't. Fools like that used to get laughed out of places when they'd spew their nonsense.

---

Calling people "loons" and "fools" is not an appeal to logic or facts, which you claim to have on your side. This is ad hominem smear tactics, which is a fallacy of argument that people typically use when they do not have logic and the facts on their side.

The internet has been an amazing blessing for mankind -- with a vastly greater ability to communicate with others, and obtain information and knowledge that previously was very difficult to access. Prior to the internet, most people would only be exposed to information from "Establishment" sources, primarily from Hollywood, television and newspapers, and the government -- who act as gatekeepers to only provide the masses with a biased, monolithic, and limited worldview, which is full of many deceptions. Yes, there are many people who promote lies on the internet -- mainly Establishment sources. But there also many people exposing and telling the truth.

Are you saying that you don't trust people to exercise their own judgement, and think for themselves? You don't think that most people can be exposed to a wide variety of viewpoints and be able to decide for themselves what is true, and what is best? Do you think people are too stupid to do that, and therefore must be told what to believe by the "elite" who run the government and Establishment media?

At least on the internet, you get many/multiple views on every subject imaginable. With the Establishment media, you just get one view on almost every subject. Those who adhere to "conspiracy" beliefs have been exposed to both "Establishment" and "alternative" viewpoints, and are at least using their critical thinking in order to decide what is true. They have exposed themselves to a greater amount of information, in order to make a more informed decision as to what is true or false. Contrast that with people who only believe what the government and Establishment spoon feed them, and never question it or consider any alternative viewpoints. So who is really "weak-minded", gullible, or lazy?

And are you saying that people like me "shouldn't" have a voice on the internet? We should not be able to have websites, or post videos to YouTube, or make comments on forums? You advocate draconian censorship? People are too stupid to think for themselves, and should just be forced to sit down and shut up and believe as they are told to believe by the government, Establishment media, and other "authorities"?

Promotion of censorship is also indicative of someone who does not have the facts and logic on their side. If your view is factually correct, you should have nothing to fear from those who are (in your view) making "erroneous" arguments. The only reason to censor in order to get someone to adhere to your view is because your view is fallacious, and you need to censor those telling the truth (so that your fallacious viewpoints are not exposed).

ZAXPACK15 said:

---

Well you are talking about two different places thousands of miles apart so *yawn*.

If we did fake it, why would the Russians keep quiet about it? Wouldn't it be in their interest back then to broadcast the evidence showing that we never landed on the moon?

---

Are you seriously saying (per the orthodox cosmological theory) that there would be a substantive difference in the ability to see the stars from the moon...as compared to from the international space station? Both (per the orthodox cosmological theory) should have very similar conditions in regards to visibility of the stars -- i.e., virtually no atmosphere.

57% of the Russian people believe the "moon landings" were faked: http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/201808/03/WS5b63ee37a3100d951b8c879c.html

Given that percentage, I surmise that the Soviet and Russian media probably has cast doubt about the alleged moon landings. And remember, the "news" media in the Soviet era (and probably still today in Russia) is an arm of the government.

Did the Soviet government (via Govt officials) ever make any statements expressing doubt about the "moon landings"? I don't know. Maybe they did, and we've just never been told about it.

That said, as a general matter, governments all over the world (United States included) are deeply corrupt, and hardly tell the truth about anything. They are all criminal operations engaged in mass deception. They all have dirt on each other, which can obviously be used for blackmail purposes.

I believe it is highly likely that much of the early Soviet space program was also faked. So the U.S. Government, hypothetically, could have warned the Soviets to not expose the fake moon landings, or else the U.S. Govt would expose the deception in the Soviet space program. Or the U.S. could have threatened them with any number of other consequences.

GuerrillaPack said:

---

Pacfanweb said:

---

There are PLENTY of pictures of the stars taken from the Moon...better than ever taken from Earth. But keep right on ignoring that.

---

Really? If you search "why are there no stars in the photographs from the moon?", you will get many articles from "Establishment" sources that acknowledge that none of the photographs showed any stars, and then offer various explanations as to why this is the case -- mainly, claiming that the cameras did not have the appropriate exposure in order to capture the stars. I've never seen a proponent of the official moon landing story point to examples of any photos that did show the stars. Can you reference any of these photos for us?

Pacfanweb said:

---

The answers really ARE simple, folks. Good grief. Every single objection of the conspiracists has been thoroughly debunked beyond any shadow of a doubt, and most of the explanations are pretty simple.
And the conspiracists usually *conveniently* ignore some key facts to make their points.

---

No, they have not been "thoroughly debunked". To the contrary, there are dozens of very serious problems with the alleged "moon landing" story, which have not been refuted or answered, and cannot be -- including NASA claiming that they "cannot go back to the moon" because "they destroyed the technology", faked video footage (eg, of the "lunar landing blasting off"), NASA claiming that they "accidentally lost" 13,000 reels of the original video footage and telemetry data, photos that are fake (showing shadows that intersect, re-used photoshopped backgrounds, etc), the bizarre interviews with the astronauts where they appear to be lying, etc.

Pacfanweb said:

---

This is one of the big problems the internet has created....used to be, conspiracy loons were few and far between, and couldn't affect but so many, but now they can huddle up on websites and have an affect on other weak-minded folks. Flat Earth idiots, 911 hoaxers, etc. Never used to have much of a voice, and honestly...shouldn't. Fools like that used to get laughed out of places when they'd spew their nonsense.

---

Calling people "loons" and "fools" is not an appeal to logic or facts, which you claim to have on your side. This is ad hominem smear tactics, which is a fallacy of argument that people typically use when they do not have logic and the facts on their side.

---

See folks, this is how these people react: There's an abundance of everything listed here that blows what this person is saying right out of the water, and his response, like most is "Nuh uh" or "it's faked".

Plenty of pictures of stars taken from the moon here, with lots of detail on the equipment used:
https://lightsinthedark.com/2017/04/04/these-photos-taken-from-the-moon-show-lots-and-lots-of-stars/

All the "faked" claims easily debunked here: (among other places)
https://lightsinthedark.com/2014/05/22/no-the-moon-landings-werent-faked-and-heres-how-you-can-tell/

All common sense things, btw.

Yes the internet has been a good thing in a lot of ways, but bad in the way I described. Sorry, but calling deniers/conspiracists/flat earthers "loons" is simply telling it like it is. I am not even TRYING to to have an intelligent debate with folks who lack intelligence to debate. People like that, typically others would run across them, listen for a bit, and then leave shaking their heads. And summarily dismiss what they said, as it is all utter drivel.
If it was a debate where you had some actual facts, that would be different...but you don't, and it's really not any different from your view, either. You simply dismiss facts with a "that info came from the gov't so it's a lie".
Sorry, it's not. There's no way anything as big as the moon landing could have been faked. No possible way.
Too many people involved, someone would have talked and it all would have come crashing down.

Oh, and the fact that we can bounce laser beams off the deflector left on the Moon is also proof, along with the pictures of all the Apollo landing sites taken by the lunar orbiter. It's far beyond debate that we went, multiple times.

Are there any pictures taken on the moon that have astronauts in them with stars visible in the background?

I understand that you can see stars from the moon. That bit is obvious. The original moon landing pictures, as best I recall from what was posted earlier in the thread, didnt have any astronauts or stars in the same picture. That was peculiar to me as I would think that stars would be in the background regardless of the time of day. Like you said, completely different atmosphere. I for one, may not understand how light works well enough. It could be as simple as me not being educated enough, which would be fine.

NatePait94 said:

---

Are there any pictures taken on the moon that have astronauts in them with stars visible in the background?

I understand that you can see stars from the moon. That bit is obvious. The original moon landing pictures, as best I recall from what was posted earlier in the thread, didnt have any astronauts or stars in the same picture. That was peculiar to me as I would think that stars would be in the background regardless of the time of day. Like you said, completely different atmosphere. I for one, may not understand how light works well enough. It could be as simple as me not being educated enough, which would be fine.

---

You last two sentences are the answer as to why. They absolutely took pictures of the stars from the moon, as evidenced in one of my previous links.
The answer as to why stars don't show up when you take a picture ON the moon is also there.

But here is a detailed explanation:

"Typically the answer the Moan Hoaxers give is that since there is no air on the Moon, the sky appears black. Therefore we should be able to see the stars in the sky. Since we don't see any stars in the sky in the Apollo pictures, that means they are fake. If they're fake, then we must never have gone to the moon. It was all a hoax.

The truth is, the lunar landscape is so bright that the camera exposure settings to take a good lunar landscape photo are not sensitive enough to image the much (much Much MUCH) fainter stars that are in the lunar sky. If the camera was set to record the stars, the moonscape would be washed out white and featureless.

Since it is apparent that many folks don't understand how camera settings work, I have made this image gallery to show four different scenes taken at different exposure settings to show the vast difference in brightness between daylight scenery and night time sky. As they say, "a picture is worth a thousand words." But here's a description anyway."

He has a list of pictures taken at different exposures that explain it with a visual.
You don't see the stars in moon pics for the same reason you can't walk outside and see them right now, at 9:31 am, EST. It was DAYTIME when they were taken.

http://www.skywise711.com/Skeptic/MoonPics/MoonPics.html

So, basically, Armstrong, Aldrin, and the others were always on the light side of the moon when pics were taken?

NatePait94 said:

---

So, basically, Armstrong, Aldrin, and the others were always on the light side of the moon when pics were taken?

---

The moon is tidal locked to the earth, meaning it doesn't rotate other than to have the same face towards earth at all times. To get to the "dark" side of the moon would require flying to the backside, away from earth

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

Okay. Let me reword the question. Were the astronauts on the moon in direct sunlight when their photographs were taken?

NatePait94 said:

---

Okay. Let me reword the question. Were the astronauts on the moon in direct sunlight when their photographs were taken?

---

Yes. The moon is on a 28 day cycle, 14 days in the sun, 14 in the dark. They were in the sun the entire time they were there. It's very cold on the side that is dark.

So they were always in the sun. They could see stars with their eyes, as eyes are much better than a camera lens at filtering out things.

Pacfanweb said:

---

NatePait94 said:

---

Okay. Let me reword the question. Were the astronauts on the moon in direct sunlight when their photographs were taken?

---

Yes. The moon is on a 28 day cycle, 14 days in the sun, 14 in the dark. They were in the sun the entire time they were there. It's very cold on the side that is dark.

So they were always in the sun. They could see stars with their eyes, as eyes are much better than a camera lens at filtering out things.

---

It's important to recall that the dark side was radio silence and therefore much less desirable for our initial landing site.

Pacfanweb said:

---

See folks, this is how these people react: There's an abundance of everything listed here that blows what this person is saying right out of the water, and his response, like most is "Nuh uh" or "it's faked".

Plenty of pictures of stars taken from the moon here, with lots of detail on the equipment used:
https://lightsinthedark.com/2017/04/04/these-photos-taken-from-the-moon-show-lots-and-lots-of-stars/

All the "faked" claims easily debunked here: (among other places)
https://lightsinthedark.com/2014/05/22/no-the-moon-landings-werent-faked-and-heres-how-you-can-tell/

All common sense things, btw.

---

The alleged photograph at the link provided is not from a normal camera. It is supposedly taken by a "far ultraviolet camera or spectrograph" -- which virtually no one has or knows anything about. So this would be an ideal excuse in order to fake a "photograph". Remember that Neil Armstrong and the other astroNOTs on the Apollo 11 mission said that they could not see stars during the daytime with the naked eye. So, NASA cannot have us believe that a regular camera could capture the stars. Searching that image in google, it is only referenced on a few websites on the entire internet. And it doesn't exactly look like a photograph to me. It could easily be an "artist illustration".

Pacfanweb said:

---

Yes the internet has been a good thing in a lot of ways, but bad in the way I described. Sorry, but calling deniers/conspiracists/flat earthers "loons" is simply telling it like it is. I am not even TRYING to to have an intelligent debate with folks who lack intelligence to debate. People like that, typically others would run across them, listen for a bit, and then leave shaking their heads. And summarily dismiss what they said, as it is all utter drivel.

---

You act as if those who deny the alleged "moon landings" are in some "super extreme fringe minority". We're not. As I cited earlier in this thread, 57% of Russians believe the "moon landing" was faked, and it's 16% to 25% of the British public, and 14% of Americans. That's quite a sizeable number of people.

Pacfanweb said:

---

If it was a debate where you had some actual facts, that would be different...but you don't, and it's really not any different from your view, either. You simply dismiss facts with a "that info came from the gov't so it's a lie".
Sorry, it's not. There's no way anything as big as the moon landing could have been faked. No possible way.
Too many people involved, someone would have talked and it all would have come crashing down.

Oh, and the fact that we can bounce laser beams off the deflector left on the Moon is also proof, along with the pictures of all the Apollo landing sites taken by the lunar orbiter. It's far beyond debate that we went, multiple times.

---

I've cited numerous facts. Either you have not read my posts, are you are lying and selectively ignoring those facts. And I've provided logic and reason in discussion of those facts. Not just "it's from the government, so it's a lie". That's a strawman argument.

The government is absolutely able to keep massive secrets (for decades and decades), and engage in all sorts of cover-ups -- including on secret projects involving hundreds/thousands of people. Are you familiar with how "classified" operations work? Many times the truth is not known for many decades, until the classified documentation is released. For instance, they can keep new models of aircraft and weaponry secret for decades -- all under the threat of heavy punishment from the government for leaking of such "classified" information.

And there are whistleblowers and others who used to work for the government who have spoke out and exposed NASA's lies. But that information isn't exactly broadcast far and wide, because the Establishment media works to suppress that kind of information from reaching the masses.

It's been proven that you can bounce laser beams off the surface of the moon itself. There is no need for a deflector. So the fact that laser beams can bounce off the surface is not proof that any deflector is up there.

A: 14% of Americans think it's a hoax. That's not many. And I question even that many, your figure is probably falsified and very high. I don't care how many Russians think it's a hoax, they were brainwashed for decades and are still recovering. Also don't care about the Brits, but that # is likely BS as well.
So yes, it's absolutely a small minority.

B. A camera that "nobody knows anything about"? Just because YOU don't know anything about it doesn't mean "nobody does".


There's the camera.

Quote:

---

Dr. George Carruthers, right, and William Conway, a project manager at the Naval Research Institute, examine the gold-plated ultraviolet camera/spectrograph, the first moon-based observatory that Carruthers developed for the Apollo 16 mission. Working for the Naval Research Laboratory, Carruthers had three years earlier received a patent for a Far Ultraviolet Electrographic Camera, which obtained images in electromagnetic radiation in short wavelengths.

Apollo 16 astronauts placed the observatory on the moon in April 1972, where it sits today on the moon's Descartes highland region, in the shadow of the lunar module Orion. Asked to explain highlights of the instrument's findings for a general audience, Dr. Carruthers said "the most immediately obvious and spectacular results were really for the Earth observations, because this was the first time that the Earth had been photographed from a distance in ultraviolet light, so that you could see the full extent of the hydrogen atmosphere, the polar auroris and what we call the tropical airglow belt."

---

So anyone who had at least a 1st grade working knowledge of how to Google something could easily find out about this camera.
https://www.nasa.gov/image-feature/looking-back-dr-george-carruthers-and-apollo-16-far-ultraviolet-cameraspectrograph

Here is Dr Carruthers' Wiki page. He is very well-known and so is his work, and so is his camera.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Robert_Carruthers


C: You have cited no facts. Everything you've cited is false. That you believe they are facts does not make them so. You haven't provided a single legitimate link or source, just conspiracy nonsense

Plus, YOU are the one who refuses to accept facts. As I said before, folks like you simply put their fingers in their ears and close their eyes when presented with actual evidence, or resort to the old, reliable copout, "it's faked because you can't believe the government".

D: No, there are no legitimate whistleblowers or people who were involved in any sort of coverup that are speaking out. Zero.

E: Reflectors on the moon for lasers increase accuracy. So while you can bounce one off the moon itself, it's much more accurate to have a reflector there, and since we had people traveling to the moon anyway, we had them placed on the moon.