My ex is an astronomer who now works for NASA. I remember her saying that the original blueprints and calculations that got us to the moon are nowhere to be found.
That strikes me as congruent with what you're saying.
I have a dear friend, Ken Johnston, 86 yrs old now, who not only taught them to fly the LEM, but later, after Apollo was shut down, was the archivist at JPL of All of the Apollo Mission Photos. He discovered and experienced more than a few oddities during his tenure at JPL, and, discovered more, decades later. ie, Going thru the dark room between the outer office and the archive area, he observed the techs 'painting out the stars', and when asked why, they said that they were 'ordered to'. He also was asked to preview some 8mm DAC Film for a private audience of a top general and a few others, taken from aboard Apollo 14, which, much to his amazement, showed anamolous lights and structures in the shadow of Aristarchus Crater. Later the next day, when asked to show it for a general audience of JPL Employees, those lights & structures were then missing from the same reel. Subsequent research from a decade ago, showed that 'someone' had 'painted over' those frames.
Finally, Ken's boss 'ordered' him to 'destroy or get rid of' all but two of the five complete sets of All of the Apollo images, or be Fired. He sent one set to his Alma mater, Oklahoma City University, and kept one for himself, most of which he still has. About a decade ago, he had all of the images he still had, digitized. I, and a few others, as well as the Roswell Archive in Roswell, NM, have copies of them.
In the 90's, while working for Boeing in Seattle, he showed his personal, physical set of archival Apollo photos, to researcher and author, Richard Hoagland, who immediately noticed a number of stunning anamolies in the images that Ken himself had never noticed or thought to even look for.
The clip of Buzz answering the little girl's question, cuts off her question; which gives the context for his answer. Her question wasn't, 'Did you actually go to the Moon?' but, 'Why haven't we been back?'
The 2nd clip, of them looking bashful and tongue tied, has perhaps more to do with their relative embarrassment of being directly in the Spotlight, rather than embarrassed about 'lying', although, as implied above, they could've actually been embarrassed for only telling half truths about what they saw instead of the whole truth.
Finally, the recent film 'Fly me to the Moon' is in actuality a probable subtle admission of what probably Did occur...Kubrick was tasked with filming sound stage footage, while Apollo 11 also actually flew to, and landed on the Moon. The real twist is, Why? From the research I've done, over 50 years of it, it is/was just as likely that the sound stage footage was done more to cover up things that they didn't want the public to see.
As for the film being relatively unblemished by radiation, the film canisters, and even cameras, could have had lead shielding.
Seriously? There is a very good explanation for no stars in the photos: they were shot in lunar daytime - no stars in photos on earth in earth daytime either.
Wrong about film. Digital if it even existed back then would have been primitive. Therefore silver halide crystals set in gelatin would have been used and it is highly sensitive to light. EMF is HF would have blasted all the film once exposed to even minute amount of radiation. They would have all been disintegrated even approaching the VA radiation belt. Science trumps theory.
Interesting Geoff. I've often wondered if all the bogus filming and chicanery surrounding Apollo 11 (and following missions) was because they wanted to hide what they actually saw and experienced on the Moon, i.e. the fake Moon landing story is just a foil, to discourage people asking what they really saw. However, it still begs the question why Aldrin told the little girl "we never went"? Was he encouraged to provide a 'red herring'?
"The full clip is the 2015 National Book Festival interview with Buzz Aldrin and a young girl named Zoey. It’s the same segment often shared in short form, and the full interview runs about 1 hour 5 minutes.
Best match
The most likely full source is the YouTube video titled “Zoey interviews Buzz Aldrin” from September 2015. The snippet and transcript show Zoey asking the key question, “Why has nobody been to the moon in such a long time?” and Aldrin answering in context.
Why this is the right clip
That widely circulated “we didn’t go there” quote comes from this interview, but the full context makes clear he was talking about why humans had not returned to the Moon, not denying Apollo 11. Fact-checks from Full Fact and Reuters both identify this as the 2015 National Book Festival interview.
What to search for
Use this exact title if you want the full clip:
Zoey interviews Buzz Aldrin
There’s also a shorter upload titled “Little girl asks Buzz Aldrin why we haven’t been back to the moon.”
Would you like me to pull out the exact timestamp where the moon question starts?"
Anthony, again, he didn't say, 'we never went...' In that EDITED clip, you don't get to hear her Question, which is Actually, 'Why didn't we...go BACK?!?'
Listened to it again. His answer to her "I think I know why. We didn’t go there". We didn’t go to the moon or we didn’t go back? The latter makes no sense in light of what the girl asked him. He's not answering in that case.
Yes, the girl was asking "Why didn't we go back?" And his reply was because "we didn't go". If he meant by that "that we didn't go back" then it makes no sense. In that case he's not really answering her question. We didn’t go back because we didn't go back???
Thank you Madhava, It is because of your lucid and honest writing like this that I can spend my days exploring ancient sacred sites and swimming in the Aegean.
Once your eyes have been opened by enough bullshit narratives that don't add up (JFK, 9/11, Covid come to mind), you start to see the patterns, especially obvious questions that never seem to get definitely answered by the authorities or even acknowledged as rational questions. Dogs that don't bark. I was really surprised by even the existence of solid arguments against the moon landing being real, but I have to admit this event fits the pattern mentioned above. I still don't really get the reasons why it would be faked something like 6 times, you'd think they'd figure they'd made their point and quit while they were ahead. But there are definitely logical, science-based holes in the story that never seem to be definitively cleared up. Also, something I've noticed, often times in these situations the defenders of the official narrative seem unduly aggressive toward those that have doubts. Why should it matter what someone believes about the moon landing? The anger seems like a defense mechanism of some kind, as if against a looming threat, perhaps to a comforting belief in "the authorities" and their benign intentions toward us?
Well my eyes have been opened for a long time, like 55yrs long time. And I see zero correlation between the Apollo program and those CIA specials you are talking about. The CIA could care less about the Moon or Apollo. They want money for their wars. They would rather cancel all civilian space missions and spend all that money on their black ops and their forever war agenda.
And what I notice is the extreme aggressiveness of the fringe Moon landing conspiracy fanatics. The realistic Apollo program defenders I find are logical and rational. Just contrast the relaxed nature of Dave Mckeegan vs the fanatical Bart Sibrel.
Since NASA's annual budget is quite hefty, I would say the CIA might be very much a part of the program. NASA's budget has steadily increased since the late 1950s, starting at approximately $89 million, and in recent years has been between $21 billion and $26 billion. That's a lot of money to fake moon landings with. 🤷🏼♀️
I, myself, don't know what the truth is; however, if I am lied to (not only once, BUT MULTIPLE TIMES by those who we elected into office to serve and protect us!) , it takes A LOT to earn my trust back again, so I now question everything.
Yes, we all know they lie all the time. But that doesn't mean they lie about everything. There is no reason to lie about the Apollo missions. The only thing the CIA wants is the money, and if they could they would just cancel the program and take all the money for their wars. Obviously the Saturn V launches & infrastructure were real, you can't fake that, and that's the bulk of the cost right there. So faking the rest of it would be pointless, in fact is the opposite of what they want to do.
And we've seen the quality of their fakes, just study their Charlie Kirk assassination fable. Full of more holes than a ton of Swiss cheese. Almost laughable the crap they are trying to push off on us. I don't think they can fake that good as the Apollo missions would require.
That's just what I said, it isn't a good front because most of the money would have to go to hardware & personnel they could care less about. Lot's of ways to launder money have almost all of it go where they want it to go. Like the missing $trillions in the Defense budget. And their wars. And Covid. And green agenda climate change scams. A millionX easier and better for that purpose.
Wagging the Moondoggie is a clever work of propaganda containing not a single word of truth that undermines the reality of the moon landings - if you think there is one please let me know what it is.
hahaha! I suggest you re-read it and then tell me where the magic batteries are today that back then they would have been needed to power the magic space suits that supposedly kept Buzz and Neil cool in the 270 degree heat in the sun and also warm in the -270 degree cold they would have experienced if they had actually gone to the moon. Which they obviously did not. Or how the magic space suits made by a bra company protected them from micro-meteoroids and intense radiation they would have been bombarded with had they gone to the moon. THEY FAKED THE MOON LANDING. THAT'S WHY THEY HAVE NOT GONE BACK. This conversation is over until they do. Which they won't.
No battery from 1960’s could supply both the intense heat and intense cooling for the time they spent on the moon. Nice try sophist? Supply the spec sheets from 1960’s batteries and the hook-ups and the ac ducts and the vent ducts and the sophisticated electronics needed to instantly switch between the heating and cooling- ALSO how they all fit into the bra company magic suits. Nice try sophist! ALSO where is this incredible battery powered magic suit today??? Let’s walk the Sahara and then Antartica- both EXTREMELY MILD environments compared to the moon.
Not true, the Sahara and Antarctica have EXTREME heat flows. People always confuse temperature with heat, they're not the same thing. Being cold or hot is not about temperature, it's about heat flow. In the vacuum of space or on Mars heat flows are very low, essentially you are living inside a vacuum bottle.
Hahahaha. Thanks for the spec sheets for the non existent batteries and non-existent wiring diagrams for the miracle space suit that was just for show. Sophist. Put up or shut up.
Lol, this Zoomer fool trying to use Fake Intelligence to convince Gen Y people who have seen the original black and white moon landing footage where we saw the strings connected to the lunar module as it circled the paper machete moon model.
Just tell us how they faked that giant Saturn V launches, that's what most of the cost is. If you don't fake that the whole operation would be a silly joke. What possible motive is there to fake all those moon landings. It doesn't make any sense. If they don't want to do it, just cancel the whole thing and save all that money, so they can spend it on what they ACTUALLY want to do, which is endless war.
Yep that's half the cost right there. So why did they waste 10's of $billions on that when they could have saved all of it by just cancelling the program like they usually do? And blow it all on their endless wars. You got no rationale.
Hahahaha. Thanks for the spec sheets for the non existent batteries and non-existent wiring diagrams for the miracle space suit that was just for show. Sophist!!! Put up or shut up. Buzz Aldrins magic suit didn’t existJack. Ergo they faked the landing.
So what. They can shoot a rocket in the air! Wow. 😆😆😆😆
--- "NASA has done next to nothing to address legitimate questions about the footage."
Are you kidding me? Whether NASA or others there are explanations ad nauseam to all the questions raised - just type them into a search engine or AI. I highly recommend lunar photography expert Dave McKeegan's YouTube channel - https://www.youtube.com/@DaveMcKeegan
--- Fall off in images doesn't mean fakery by default, we can see fall off in Apollo images but only in photos where there are nearby objects such as the LEM reflecting light - see excellent explanation by Dave McKeegan on why iconic Man on the Moon photo displays fall off - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EstpDPPhBjE.
American Moon is one of a number of propaganda works (yes there's a psyop saying "we didn't go") and while I think the photographers interviewed are no doubt genuine they are not experts in lunar photography and simply don't take into account object-reflected light causing fall off. Many photos show an evenly-lit expanse of terrain as expected of the alien lunar landscape. My page on American Moon - https://petraliverani.substack.com/p/american-moon-2017-superficially
--- The Hasselblad guy interviewed is not a photography expert he was a Project Manager - see Dave's video referred to above.
--- Buzz Aldrin is a 33rd degree Freemason and so his ambiguous statement could be a windup to the disbelievers, however, when we consider that he clearly talks about going to the moon at the beginning of the 17m interview with the little girl and otherwise says "we went to the moon" all over the place this ambiguous statement is of little import. Don't matter what Buzz says in any case, the EVIDENCE says the moon landings happened. See Dave McKeegan's discussion - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hBi0Y1c4A9E
Yea I’m not sure if you’re pro moonland or anti with that word salad. Either way. Film back then would never stand radiation. You speak of reflections lmao who cares. Radiation would have destroyed all this electronics and imaging equipment and film.
Very familiar with your argument and in fact just this minute encountered it but it stems from ignorance. Look up the argument that says radiation wouldn't have destroyed the electronics and imaging equipment and then come back and argue against it.
No I don’t think so. When one has advance degrees in STEM. I don’t need to “look it up”. Nor argue against a fan boi whose research involves quoting his YouTube idol. For the record I do know what your referring to and its comedic you believe that line of BS they spoon fed you. Anyone who understands even remedial physics would not believe such nonsense.
You're claiming everything we have done in space is fake, including the Voyager probes, the James Webb telescope (all those beautiful images are fake also), Mars rovers all fake. All of those things are loaded with advanced electronics.
Yes. Have you heard of CGI and photoshop? Your next question will be why would they do that. Power and control. How many trillions of our tax revenue go into these bogus programs? Think globally. Trillions per developed countries. And why are the people that run these organizations so sickens wealthy? Good ol’ boy networks working together to siphon funds from the tax slaves. The storytellers make the stories the little plebs believe and just hand over their money (power) to the people that keep them down whilst making themselves more powerful, meanwhile laughing and mocking you behind closed doors..They need excuses and receipts as to why they spend money now don’t they. ALL media is owned by the same cartel that run this world. You really should look deeper. You’ll encounter a lot of CT crap before you read enough and critically think enough before you use thru the veil. All those nasa stories were filmed in the desert. And studios on a green screen. Seriously start questioning everything and ask questions. It’s naive to think that a machine. Made from elements based off of our periodic table could sustain the radiation. If you look it up. Anything would absorb 1–2 mSv per day. In space give or take where you are at. Electronics 0.1–1 Sv/day ≈ 0.1–1 Gy/day is high sustained exposure. Semiconductor degradation begins.Error rates increase. Now you could apply tungsten or lead shield however it doesn’t block gamma or cray radiation it only slows it down. It’s heavy and expensive. Not great for neutron shielding. Also temps. On avg they claim mats is 81 degrees below zero. Tell me when you have seen electronics work in such conditions? So either they have lied to us about our periodic element chart. Or space. Pick your story. So when you consider all the factors its idiotic to think this is real.
Just a small nit. His saying "going to the moon", and "we went to the moon" is not the same thing as "I landed on the moon" or "I walked on the surface of the moon".
I was being careless - no doubt he said he walked on the moon ... but as I say it doesn't matter what he says, the evidence says they walked on the moon.
Another great article . I appreciate your calm wisdom. I have to curb my irritation when friends who seem intelligent in other ways have fallen for the Flat Earth "I believe that so-called “Flat Earth” theorists have been duped by a counter-intelligence operation which seeks to undermine serious consideration of all legitimate conspiracies." That sentence says exactly what I believe. Not everything we've been told is a lie but a hell of a lot is. My evidence that earth is not flat is the sailors I have met who circumnavigated and reading especially about those who around the world race. I've done some open ocean sailing myself and the sky looks different north and south of the equator. Thanks for this essay.
It’s hysterical to me that the sheeple still believe in space travel. It also provokes reality that few do any actual research or critical thinking. If you even spend 10 mins of looking into the original moon landing some questions should come to mind. Van Allen radiation belts. It would have to be timed precise and even then could you slip thru them? Not to mention the amount of pressure and radiation the ship and astronauts would accumulate would disintegrate them. The only metals known to block radiation are tungsten and lead. Case in point ever get x-rays. How heavy are those lead vests when the place them on you to block radiation. Do you realize how heavy those ships would have to be to block radiation. Also who the gell was filming when the first guy stepped out. Do you know how fragile electronics are to emp. Not to mention radiation. Silver halide crystals exposed to the massive radiation in space would have been overexposed providing zero images of both film and motion pic. Think static for any TV. There would have been no film nor photos. So either the tech is so far advanced they hide elements from us. Or it never happened. Many who have done tons of research blow it apart. Sound studios sets. All acting. Either way. What you think you know is lies. Just like everything in this world….all lies
Calculated dosage passing through the Van Allen belts to the moon and back is a meager 2.1 mSv. You will get 10mSv from a CAT scan. The overall dosage for a Moon mission is largely determined by the level of Solar Proton Flux. Which can in a bad year amount to 406mSv for an Apollo type Moon mission. That won't kill you, it won't even make you sick. Acute dosages of >1000mSv will lead to some radiation sickness. Some long term increase in cancer risk but lower than ~ a hundred things humans do with total apathy.
And no the ideal substance to block the largely charged particle radiation from space is lightweight materials containing lots of hydrogen, like water, polyethylene (plastics). Lead is great for gamma radiation but that is a small part of space radiation dosage.
So many questions surrounding the lunar manned missions. But certainly, the best one is why did we stop? Why has it taken so long to get back there (if in fact we have)? Why have there been so many problems and difficulties in the past 15-20 years? Did we forget the technology? There have been a lot of technical questions raised about the moon missions (aside from the bogus photography) that raise doubt that we could have safely sent humans there and back again. I wasn't aware of what Aldrin had said (in both instances that you provided) so thank you for that. One question I have is why more Apollo astronauts haven't spoken up in the past 50-55 years? A dying man is not afraid for his life if he wishes to blab, so what kind of threats were levelled at them? Or what were they offered in return for silence?
They are free masons. If you read the books of their cult you would understand why they don’t speak up. Furthermore yea old but they still have family who would suffer consequences of their fathers. And considering how all media is entirely owned what makes you think it would be allowed to be shown.
No the Moon landings had nothing whatsoever to do with CIA's JFK assassination, 9/11 or their war on terror. In fact they could care less about the moon, or Mars.
There is nothing stupendous about going to the moon or landing on the moon. China, Japan, India have all put landers on the moon recently. Even the Russians were able to land two large Rovers on the Moon in 1970 and 1973.
You can see the Moon Reconnaissance Orbiter photos right now. And the Japanese SELENE probe to the Moon & the Chandrayaan-2 Indian Moon orbiter. It would be an incredible job to fake those. They would have to match ground observations and invent fine detail to be compatible with that. For what purpose? A crazy notion.
In 2008, the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) SELENE lunar probe obtained several photographs showing evidence of Moon landings.[1] On the left are two photos taken on the lunar surface by the Apollo 15 astronauts August 2, 1971 during EVA 3 at station 9A near Hadley Rille. On the right is a 2008 reconstruction from images taken by the SELENE terrain camera and 3D projected to the same vantage point as the surface photos. The terrain is a close match within the SELENE camera resolution of 10 metres.
AS15-82-11121: Apollo 15 Lunar Roving Vehicle
AS15-82-11121: Apollo 15 Lunar Roving Vehicle
AS15-82-11122: Apollo 15 photo
AS15-82-11122: Apollo 15 photo
3D SELENE reconstructed photo
3D SELENE reconstructed photo
Everything You Need To Know About China's Moon Missions, The Space Race:
And all the amateur astronomers and hundreds of foreign science institutes with hundreds of radio & optical telescopes will be suckered in. I still can't figure out why you figure NASA would go to all that incredible expense & trouble to fake a moon landing. If they didn't want to spend the money, just cancel the program, they do it all the time. In fact cancelling these type of mission is the norm not the exception. And yet here they are going to great lengths and cost to do another series of human moon landings. I suppose you figure that's going to be fake too?
Even been around 'old' people? People with dementia, mild or severe?
This is from Perplexity:
"The full clip is the 2015 National Book Festival interview with Buzz Aldrin and a young girl named Zoey. It’s the same segment often shared in short form, and the full interview runs about 1 hour 5 minutes.
Best match
The most likely full source is the YouTube video titled “Zoey interviews Buzz Aldrin” from September 2015. The snippet and transcript show Zoey asking the key question, “Why has nobody been to the moon in such a long time?” and Aldrin answering in context.
Why this is the right clip
That widely circulated “we didn’t go there” quote comes from this interview, but the full context makes clear he was talking about why humans had not returned to the Moon, not denying Apollo 11. Fact-checks from Full Fact and Reuters both identify this as the 2015 National Book Festival interview.
What to search for
Use this exact title if you want the full clip:
Zoey interviews Buzz Aldrin
There’s also a shorter upload titled “Little girl asks Buzz Aldrin why we haven’t been back to the moon.”
Would you like me to pull out the exact timestamp where the moon question starts?"
My ex is an astronomer who now works for NASA. I remember her saying that the original blueprints and calculations that got us to the moon are nowhere to be found.
That strikes me as congruent with what you're saying.
I have a dear friend, Ken Johnston, 86 yrs old now, who not only taught them to fly the LEM, but later, after Apollo was shut down, was the archivist at JPL of All of the Apollo Mission Photos. He discovered and experienced more than a few oddities during his tenure at JPL, and, discovered more, decades later. ie, Going thru the dark room between the outer office and the archive area, he observed the techs 'painting out the stars', and when asked why, they said that they were 'ordered to'. He also was asked to preview some 8mm DAC Film for a private audience of a top general and a few others, taken from aboard Apollo 14, which, much to his amazement, showed anamolous lights and structures in the shadow of Aristarchus Crater. Later the next day, when asked to show it for a general audience of JPL Employees, those lights & structures were then missing from the same reel. Subsequent research from a decade ago, showed that 'someone' had 'painted over' those frames.
Finally, Ken's boss 'ordered' him to 'destroy or get rid of' all but two of the five complete sets of All of the Apollo images, or be Fired. He sent one set to his Alma mater, Oklahoma City University, and kept one for himself, most of which he still has. About a decade ago, he had all of the images he still had, digitized. I, and a few others, as well as the Roswell Archive in Roswell, NM, have copies of them.
In the 90's, while working for Boeing in Seattle, he showed his personal, physical set of archival Apollo photos, to researcher and author, Richard Hoagland, who immediately noticed a number of stunning anamolies in the images that Ken himself had never noticed or thought to even look for.
The clip of Buzz answering the little girl's question, cuts off her question; which gives the context for his answer. Her question wasn't, 'Did you actually go to the Moon?' but, 'Why haven't we been back?'
The 2nd clip, of them looking bashful and tongue tied, has perhaps more to do with their relative embarrassment of being directly in the Spotlight, rather than embarrassed about 'lying', although, as implied above, they could've actually been embarrassed for only telling half truths about what they saw instead of the whole truth.
Finally, the recent film 'Fly me to the Moon' is in actuality a probable subtle admission of what probably Did occur...Kubrick was tasked with filming sound stage footage, while Apollo 11 also actually flew to, and landed on the Moon. The real twist is, Why? From the research I've done, over 50 years of it, it is/was just as likely that the sound stage footage was done more to cover up things that they didn't want the public to see.
As for the film being relatively unblemished by radiation, the film canisters, and even cameras, could have had lead shielding.
Seriously? There is a very good explanation for no stars in the photos: they were shot in lunar daytime - no stars in photos on earth in earth daytime either.
What a load of total bunkum.
They would be blinded. There is no way.
Wrong about film. Digital if it even existed back then would have been primitive. Therefore silver halide crystals set in gelatin would have been used and it is highly sensitive to light. EMF is HF would have blasted all the film once exposed to even minute amount of radiation. They would have all been disintegrated even approaching the VA radiation belt. Science trumps theory.
Interesting Geoff. I've often wondered if all the bogus filming and chicanery surrounding Apollo 11 (and following missions) was because they wanted to hide what they actually saw and experienced on the Moon, i.e. the fake Moon landing story is just a foil, to discourage people asking what they really saw. However, it still begs the question why Aldrin told the little girl "we never went"? Was he encouraged to provide a 'red herring'?
From Perplexity:
"The full clip is the 2015 National Book Festival interview with Buzz Aldrin and a young girl named Zoey. It’s the same segment often shared in short form, and the full interview runs about 1 hour 5 minutes.
Best match
The most likely full source is the YouTube video titled “Zoey interviews Buzz Aldrin” from September 2015. The snippet and transcript show Zoey asking the key question, “Why has nobody been to the moon in such a long time?” and Aldrin answering in context.
Why this is the right clip
That widely circulated “we didn’t go there” quote comes from this interview, but the full context makes clear he was talking about why humans had not returned to the Moon, not denying Apollo 11. Fact-checks from Full Fact and Reuters both identify this as the 2015 National Book Festival interview.
What to search for
Use this exact title if you want the full clip:
Zoey interviews Buzz Aldrin
There’s also a shorter upload titled “Little girl asks Buzz Aldrin why we haven’t been back to the moon.”
Would you like me to pull out the exact timestamp where the moon question starts?"
he says they did return because they didn't go there. They went to the desert in Nevada, not the moon.
Anthony, again, he didn't say, 'we never went...' In that EDITED clip, you don't get to hear her Question, which is Actually, 'Why didn't we...go BACK?!?'
Listened to it again. His answer to her "I think I know why. We didn’t go there". We didn’t go to the moon or we didn’t go back? The latter makes no sense in light of what the girl asked him. He's not answering in that case.
Yes, the girl was asking "Why didn't we go back?" And his reply was because "we didn't go". If he meant by that "that we didn't go back" then it makes no sense. In that case he's not really answering her question. We didn’t go back because we didn't go back???
Thank you Madhava, It is because of your lucid and honest writing like this that I can spend my days exploring ancient sacred sites and swimming in the Aegean.
That's why I am here
Faked. No stars in the background. We are already there with better tech, but not NASA, never a straight answer.
Once your eyes have been opened by enough bullshit narratives that don't add up (JFK, 9/11, Covid come to mind), you start to see the patterns, especially obvious questions that never seem to get definitely answered by the authorities or even acknowledged as rational questions. Dogs that don't bark. I was really surprised by even the existence of solid arguments against the moon landing being real, but I have to admit this event fits the pattern mentioned above. I still don't really get the reasons why it would be faked something like 6 times, you'd think they'd figure they'd made their point and quit while they were ahead. But there are definitely logical, science-based holes in the story that never seem to be definitively cleared up. Also, something I've noticed, often times in these situations the defenders of the official narrative seem unduly aggressive toward those that have doubts. Why should it matter what someone believes about the moon landing? The anger seems like a defense mechanism of some kind, as if against a looming threat, perhaps to a comforting belief in "the authorities" and their benign intentions toward us?
Well my eyes have been opened for a long time, like 55yrs long time. And I see zero correlation between the Apollo program and those CIA specials you are talking about. The CIA could care less about the Moon or Apollo. They want money for their wars. They would rather cancel all civilian space missions and spend all that money on their black ops and their forever war agenda.
And what I notice is the extreme aggressiveness of the fringe Moon landing conspiracy fanatics. The realistic Apollo program defenders I find are logical and rational. Just contrast the relaxed nature of Dave Mckeegan vs the fanatical Bart Sibrel.
Since NASA's annual budget is quite hefty, I would say the CIA might be very much a part of the program. NASA's budget has steadily increased since the late 1950s, starting at approximately $89 million, and in recent years has been between $21 billion and $26 billion. That's a lot of money to fake moon landings with. 🤷🏼♀️
I, myself, don't know what the truth is; however, if I am lied to (not only once, BUT MULTIPLE TIMES by those who we elected into office to serve and protect us!) , it takes A LOT to earn my trust back again, so I now question everything.
Yes, we all know they lie all the time. But that doesn't mean they lie about everything. There is no reason to lie about the Apollo missions. The only thing the CIA wants is the money, and if they could they would just cancel the program and take all the money for their wars. Obviously the Saturn V launches & infrastructure were real, you can't fake that, and that's the bulk of the cost right there. So faking the rest of it would be pointless, in fact is the opposite of what they want to do.
And we've seen the quality of their fakes, just study their Charlie Kirk assassination fable. Full of more holes than a ton of Swiss cheese. Almost laughable the crap they are trying to push off on us. I don't think they can fake that good as the Apollo missions would require.
Why cancel the program when it provides a good front for money laundering?
That's just what I said, it isn't a good front because most of the money would have to go to hardware & personnel they could care less about. Lot's of ways to launder money have almost all of it go where they want it to go. Like the missing $trillions in the Defense budget. And their wars. And Covid. And green agenda climate change scams. A millionX easier and better for that purpose.
Excellent summation. Thanks doc. They faked it. Humans built the pyramids of course. A French architect figured out. Overwhelming evidence shown here:
https://www.ancientaliensdebunked.com/the-pyramids
For some moon landing laughs read genius Dave McGowan’s brilliant and DETAILED “Wagging The Moondoggie” 😆https://centerforaninformedamerica.com/moondoggie/
Wagging the Moondoggie is a clever work of propaganda containing not a single word of truth that undermines the reality of the moon landings - if you think there is one please let me know what it is.
https://petraliverani.substack.com/p/wagging-the-moondoggie-a-masterwork
hahaha! I suggest you re-read it and then tell me where the magic batteries are today that back then they would have been needed to power the magic space suits that supposedly kept Buzz and Neil cool in the 270 degree heat in the sun and also warm in the -270 degree cold they would have experienced if they had actually gone to the moon. Which they obviously did not. Or how the magic space suits made by a bra company protected them from micro-meteoroids and intense radiation they would have been bombarded with had they gone to the moon. THEY FAKED THE MOON LANDING. THAT'S WHY THEY HAVE NOT GONE BACK. This conversation is over until they do. Which they won't.
1. The “magic batteries”
The Apollo lunar suits were powered by a Portable Life Support System (PLSS) backpack.
The PLSS contained:
• Silver-zinc batteries
• Oxygen supply
• CO₂ removal system (lithium hydroxide)
• Cooling water pump
• Radio transmitter
• Telemetry electronics
The batteries were not unusual. Silver-zinc batteries were widely used in aerospace because they have very high energy density.
Example:
• The Apollo 11 PLSS battery
o about 121 watt-hours capacity
o powered the system for roughly 4 hours of EVA
These batteries were consumed during the mission and not preserved as artifacts, which is normal for mission hardware.
________________________________________
2. Cooling in sunlight (not 270 °C)
The “270° heat” claim is incorrect.
Important distinction:
• The Moon’s surface temperature can reach about 127 °C (260 °F) in sunlight.
• But astronauts do not heat to the surface temperature.
In vacuum there is no air to conduct heat. Heat transfer occurs mainly by:
• radiation
• contact
The suits controlled temperature using a Liquid Cooling and Ventilation Garment (LCVG).
This was essentially water-cooling underwear:
• tubes circulated cool water around the body
• heat was removed through a sublimator in the backpack
• water evaporating into vacuum carried heat away
This is actually more efficient than air cooling.
________________________________________
3. Protection from cold
The Moon can reach about −173 °C (−280 °F) in shadow, but the suits prevented heat loss by:
• multiple insulation layers
• vacuum-compatible reflective materials
The Apollo suits had about 21 layers including:
• neoprene
• aluminized Mylar
• Beta cloth (fire-resistant glass fiber)
These layers dramatically reduce radiative heat loss.
________________________________________
4. “Bra company” myth
The suits were indeed sewn by a company that made bras:
Playtex
But that actually helped, because they specialized in precise flexible garments.
The suits were designed collaboratively by:
• NASA
• ILC Dover (Playtex division)
• Hamilton Standard (life-support system)
The sewing precision required was extremely high because:
• the suit had to remain airtight
• yet still flex for movement
This is closer to pressure-suit engineering than clothing manufacture.
________________________________________
5. Micrometeoroid protection
The suits included a micrometeoroid garment layer made from:
• Beta cloth
• Kapton
• Teflon-coated fiberglass
Micrometeoroids are dangerous but:
• impacts during a few hours on the surface are statistically unlikely
• the layered fabric design disperses small particle impacts
Spacecraft use similar Whipple shield concepts today.
________________________________________
6. Radiation exposure
The radiation claim is also often misunderstood.
The Moon has no magnetic field, but astronauts were exposed for only a few days.
Measured doses during Apollo 11 were about:
• 0.18 rad (1.8 mGy)
For comparison:
• a CT scan ≈ 5–10 mGy
So the radiation exposure was not extreme during those missions, especially since no major solar flare occurred.
________________________________________
7. Why the technology isn’t “missing”
Nothing disappeared:
• PLSS units are preserved in museums.
• Apollo suits are preserved and studied.
• NASA documentation describing their design is public.
For example:
• National Air and Space Museum holds Neil Armstrong’s suit.
• Multiple PLSS units exist in NASA archives.
________________________________________
✅ Summary
The claim relies on several misunderstandings:
• Apollo suits were powered by ordinary silver-zinc batteries, not “magic”.
• Temperature control used water cooling and insulation, which works very well in vacuum.
• The suits were engineered aerospace garments, not simple clothing.
• Radiation and micrometeoroid risks were real but manageable for the mission duration.
All of this technology is documented, preserved, and consistent with modern space engineering.
No battery from 1960’s could supply both the intense heat and intense cooling for the time they spent on the moon. Nice try sophist? Supply the spec sheets from 1960’s batteries and the hook-ups and the ac ducts and the vent ducts and the sophisticated electronics needed to instantly switch between the heating and cooling- ALSO how they all fit into the bra company magic suits. Nice try sophist! ALSO where is this incredible battery powered magic suit today??? Let’s walk the Sahara and then Antartica- both EXTREMELY MILD environments compared to the moon.
Not true, the Sahara and Antarctica have EXTREME heat flows. People always confuse temperature with heat, they're not the same thing. Being cold or hot is not about temperature, it's about heat flow. In the vacuum of space or on Mars heat flows are very low, essentially you are living inside a vacuum bottle.
Hahahaha. Thanks for the spec sheets for the non existent batteries and non-existent wiring diagrams for the miracle space suit that was just for show. Sophist. Put up or shut up.
Petra is insane, good luck!
Lol, this Zoomer fool trying to use Fake Intelligence to convince Gen Y people who have seen the original black and white moon landing footage where we saw the strings connected to the lunar module as it circled the paper machete moon model.
I watched the original black and white moon landing broadcast, could see the strings as their paper machete craft circles "the moon"
Just tell us how they faked that giant Saturn V launches, that's what most of the cost is. If you don't fake that the whole operation would be a silly joke. What possible motive is there to fake all those moon landings. It doesn't make any sense. If they don't want to do it, just cancel the whole thing and save all that money, so they can spend it on what they ACTUALLY want to do, which is endless war.
They launch them, they turn and land in the ocean, they retrieve parts. That's how NASA has the whole thing on display, or did last time I visited.
Yep that's half the cost right there. So why did they waste 10's of $billions on that when they could have saved all of it by just cancelling the program like they usually do? And blow it all on their endless wars. You got no rationale.
Hahahaha. Thanks for the spec sheets for the non existent batteries and non-existent wiring diagrams for the miracle space suit that was just for show. Sophist!!! Put up or shut up. Buzz Aldrins magic suit didn’t existJack. Ergo they faked the landing.
So what. They can shoot a rocket in the air! Wow. 😆😆😆😆
There are responses to everything you raise:
--- "NASA has done next to nothing to address legitimate questions about the footage."
Are you kidding me? Whether NASA or others there are explanations ad nauseam to all the questions raised - just type them into a search engine or AI. I highly recommend lunar photography expert Dave McKeegan's YouTube channel - https://www.youtube.com/@DaveMcKeegan
--- Fall off in images doesn't mean fakery by default, we can see fall off in Apollo images but only in photos where there are nearby objects such as the LEM reflecting light - see excellent explanation by Dave McKeegan on why iconic Man on the Moon photo displays fall off - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EstpDPPhBjE.
American Moon is one of a number of propaganda works (yes there's a psyop saying "we didn't go") and while I think the photographers interviewed are no doubt genuine they are not experts in lunar photography and simply don't take into account object-reflected light causing fall off. Many photos show an evenly-lit expanse of terrain as expected of the alien lunar landscape. My page on American Moon - https://petraliverani.substack.com/p/american-moon-2017-superficially
--- The Hasselblad guy interviewed is not a photography expert he was a Project Manager - see Dave's video referred to above.
--- I'd suggest the Netherlands fake rock is part of the psyop "we didn't go" - see my post on ChatGPT faker, Signal before Silence, who spends 10m of her 45m talk on the fake rock - https://petraliverani.substack.com/p/chatgpt-fakery-now-featuring-in-the. See also this interesting and amusing history of the fake rock - https://onebigmonkey.com/itburns/maansteen/maansteen.htmlv
--- Buzz Aldrin is a 33rd degree Freemason and so his ambiguous statement could be a windup to the disbelievers, however, when we consider that he clearly talks about going to the moon at the beginning of the 17m interview with the little girl and otherwise says "we went to the moon" all over the place this ambiguous statement is of little import. Don't matter what Buzz says in any case, the EVIDENCE says the moon landings happened. See Dave McKeegan's discussion - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hBi0Y1c4A9E
My page on the moonhoax psyop - https://petraliverani.substack.com/p/moon-landings-hoax-psyop
Yea I’m not sure if you’re pro moonland or anti with that word salad. Either way. Film back then would never stand radiation. You speak of reflections lmao who cares. Radiation would have destroyed all this electronics and imaging equipment and film.
Very familiar with your argument and in fact just this minute encountered it but it stems from ignorance. Look up the argument that says radiation wouldn't have destroyed the electronics and imaging equipment and then come back and argue against it.
No I don’t think so. When one has advance degrees in STEM. I don’t need to “look it up”. Nor argue against a fan boi whose research involves quoting his YouTube idol. For the record I do know what your referring to and its comedic you believe that line of BS they spoon fed you. Anyone who understands even remedial physics would not believe such nonsense.
You're claiming everything we have done in space is fake, including the Voyager probes, the James Webb telescope (all those beautiful images are fake also), Mars rovers all fake. All of those things are loaded with advanced electronics.
Yes. Have you heard of CGI and photoshop? Your next question will be why would they do that. Power and control. How many trillions of our tax revenue go into these bogus programs? Think globally. Trillions per developed countries. And why are the people that run these organizations so sickens wealthy? Good ol’ boy networks working together to siphon funds from the tax slaves. The storytellers make the stories the little plebs believe and just hand over their money (power) to the people that keep them down whilst making themselves more powerful, meanwhile laughing and mocking you behind closed doors..They need excuses and receipts as to why they spend money now don’t they. ALL media is owned by the same cartel that run this world. You really should look deeper. You’ll encounter a lot of CT crap before you read enough and critically think enough before you use thru the veil. All those nasa stories were filmed in the desert. And studios on a green screen. Seriously start questioning everything and ask questions. It’s naive to think that a machine. Made from elements based off of our periodic table could sustain the radiation. If you look it up. Anything would absorb 1–2 mSv per day. In space give or take where you are at. Electronics 0.1–1 Sv/day ≈ 0.1–1 Gy/day is high sustained exposure. Semiconductor degradation begins.Error rates increase. Now you could apply tungsten or lead shield however it doesn’t block gamma or cray radiation it only slows it down. It’s heavy and expensive. Not great for neutron shielding. Also temps. On avg they claim mats is 81 degrees below zero. Tell me when you have seen electronics work in such conditions? So either they have lied to us about our periodic element chart. Or space. Pick your story. So when you consider all the factors its idiotic to think this is real.
I will look into your links and references.
Just a small nit. His saying "going to the moon", and "we went to the moon" is not the same thing as "I landed on the moon" or "I walked on the surface of the moon".
I was being careless - no doubt he said he walked on the moon ... but as I say it doesn't matter what he says, the evidence says they walked on the moon.
Moron trusts cgi images from NASA and AI. Enough said. NASA had cgi before everyone else. They developed it. Siggraph etc.
It is no surprise that an uncivil response contains an assertive argument with no backup.
all images of earth from space are cgi fakes
Another great article . I appreciate your calm wisdom. I have to curb my irritation when friends who seem intelligent in other ways have fallen for the Flat Earth "I believe that so-called “Flat Earth” theorists have been duped by a counter-intelligence operation which seeks to undermine serious consideration of all legitimate conspiracies." That sentence says exactly what I believe. Not everything we've been told is a lie but a hell of a lot is. My evidence that earth is not flat is the sailors I have met who circumnavigated and reading especially about those who around the world race. I've done some open ocean sailing myself and the sky looks different north and south of the equator. Thanks for this essay.
No idea what I believe to be true anymore...
I understand. We may never know what is true. Our mission is to identify what isn't true. This is entirely achievable.
Using discernment daily. Yes…
The only walking on the moon was a song by the Police.
It’s hysterical to me that the sheeple still believe in space travel. It also provokes reality that few do any actual research or critical thinking. If you even spend 10 mins of looking into the original moon landing some questions should come to mind. Van Allen radiation belts. It would have to be timed precise and even then could you slip thru them? Not to mention the amount of pressure and radiation the ship and astronauts would accumulate would disintegrate them. The only metals known to block radiation are tungsten and lead. Case in point ever get x-rays. How heavy are those lead vests when the place them on you to block radiation. Do you realize how heavy those ships would have to be to block radiation. Also who the gell was filming when the first guy stepped out. Do you know how fragile electronics are to emp. Not to mention radiation. Silver halide crystals exposed to the massive radiation in space would have been overexposed providing zero images of both film and motion pic. Think static for any TV. There would have been no film nor photos. So either the tech is so far advanced they hide elements from us. Or it never happened. Many who have done tons of research blow it apart. Sound studios sets. All acting. Either way. What you think you know is lies. Just like everything in this world….all lies
Calculated dosage passing through the Van Allen belts to the moon and back is a meager 2.1 mSv. You will get 10mSv from a CAT scan. The overall dosage for a Moon mission is largely determined by the level of Solar Proton Flux. Which can in a bad year amount to 406mSv for an Apollo type Moon mission. That won't kill you, it won't even make you sick. Acute dosages of >1000mSv will lead to some radiation sickness. Some long term increase in cancer risk but lower than ~ a hundred things humans do with total apathy.
And no the ideal substance to block the largely charged particle radiation from space is lightweight materials containing lots of hydrogen, like water, polyethylene (plastics). Lead is great for gamma radiation but that is a small part of space radiation dosage.
Evidence that having. MD doesn’t make you smart or wise.
So many questions surrounding the lunar manned missions. But certainly, the best one is why did we stop? Why has it taken so long to get back there (if in fact we have)? Why have there been so many problems and difficulties in the past 15-20 years? Did we forget the technology? There have been a lot of technical questions raised about the moon missions (aside from the bogus photography) that raise doubt that we could have safely sent humans there and back again. I wasn't aware of what Aldrin had said (in both instances that you provided) so thank you for that. One question I have is why more Apollo astronauts haven't spoken up in the past 50-55 years? A dying man is not afraid for his life if he wishes to blab, so what kind of threats were levelled at them? Or what were they offered in return for silence?
They are free masons. If you read the books of their cult you would understand why they don’t speak up. Furthermore yea old but they still have family who would suffer consequences of their fathers. And considering how all media is entirely owned what makes you think it would be allowed to be shown.
No the Moon landings had nothing whatsoever to do with CIA's JFK assassination, 9/11 or their war on terror. In fact they could care less about the moon, or Mars.
There is nothing stupendous about going to the moon or landing on the moon. China, Japan, India have all put landers on the moon recently. Even the Russians were able to land two large Rovers on the Moon in 1970 and 1973.
You can see the Moon Reconnaissance Orbiter photos right now. And the Japanese SELENE probe to the Moon & the Chandrayaan-2 Indian Moon orbiter. It would be an incredible job to fake those. They would have to match ground observations and invent fine detail to be compatible with that. For what purpose? A crazy notion.
Third-party evidence for Apollo Moon landings:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third-party_evidence_for_Apollo_Moon_landings
"...SELENE photographs
In 2008, the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) SELENE lunar probe obtained several photographs showing evidence of Moon landings.[1] On the left are two photos taken on the lunar surface by the Apollo 15 astronauts August 2, 1971 during EVA 3 at station 9A near Hadley Rille. On the right is a 2008 reconstruction from images taken by the SELENE terrain camera and 3D projected to the same vantage point as the surface photos. The terrain is a close match within the SELENE camera resolution of 10 metres.
AS15-82-11121: Apollo 15 Lunar Roving Vehicle
AS15-82-11121: Apollo 15 Lunar Roving Vehicle
AS15-82-11122: Apollo 15 photo
AS15-82-11122: Apollo 15 photo
3D SELENE reconstructed photo
3D SELENE reconstructed photo
Everything You Need To Know About China's Moon Missions, The Space Race:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-yrO_bD9YXo
And all the amateur astronomers and hundreds of foreign science institutes with hundreds of radio & optical telescopes will be suckered in. I still can't figure out why you figure NASA would go to all that incredible expense & trouble to fake a moon landing. If they didn't want to spend the money, just cancel the program, they do it all the time. In fact cancelling these type of mission is the norm not the exception. And yet here they are going to great lengths and cost to do another series of human moon landings. I suppose you figure that's going to be fake too?
Even been around 'old' people? People with dementia, mild or severe?
This is from Perplexity:
"The full clip is the 2015 National Book Festival interview with Buzz Aldrin and a young girl named Zoey. It’s the same segment often shared in short form, and the full interview runs about 1 hour 5 minutes.
Best match
The most likely full source is the YouTube video titled “Zoey interviews Buzz Aldrin” from September 2015. The snippet and transcript show Zoey asking the key question, “Why has nobody been to the moon in such a long time?” and Aldrin answering in context.
Why this is the right clip
That widely circulated “we didn’t go there” quote comes from this interview, but the full context makes clear he was talking about why humans had not returned to the Moon, not denying Apollo 11. Fact-checks from Full Fact and Reuters both identify this as the 2015 National Book Festival interview.
What to search for
Use this exact title if you want the full clip:
Zoey interviews Buzz Aldrin
There’s also a shorter upload titled “Little girl asks Buzz Aldrin why we haven’t been back to the moon.”
Would you like me to pull out the exact timestamp where the moon question starts?"
he never went "there" because he went to the Nevada desert not the moon
2 minute sketch comedy apropos you will enjoy. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SzBhydrf7po