Moon landing claims are often shrouded in much controversy, sometimes heated debate regarding authenticity, having received some seriously challenging questions over the years.
-In light of this, not an exhaustive inquiry, but here are 22 questions to challenge the moon landing claim by NASA’s United States Apollo 11 team in July 1969.
Q1. Did you know that Dmitry Rogozin ex-boss of Russia’s space agency who was deputy prime minister at the time of the 1969 US 11 Apollo moon landing has insisted that it was faked, claiming he had never received any concrete evidence for the event?
Q2. Are you aware that recently Vladimir Putin was informed that A.I analyses had concluded that the photos taken from this Apollo mission were fake?
Q3. Back in the day, world war 2 criminal Werner von Braun and other ex-Nazis had been covertly smuggled into the USA where they had been recruited as rocket scientists. Werner von Braun was the head. The set up was called “Project paperclip.”
-Doesn’t this with regard to NASA and the Apollo mission paint a rather sinister and untrustworthy picture shrouded in secrecy?
Q4. Why were the majority of all Apollo astronauts Free Masons, just like their fathers, was secrecy the common denominator here as with the above mentioned “Project paperclip?”
Q5. What about those people connected to NASA and their suspicious deaths? They had heavily criticized the moon landing project and had witnessed a number of its monumental failures. They had made frequent comments that the project would not work.
-These people included: Government safety inspector Thomas Baron who had testified to Apollo project failure, and then there had also been the suspicious deaths of Grissom, White and third astronaut Chaffey…
Q6. Further, did a number of major personnel leave the project just before the moon landing project because they had given up hope on it working?
-This includes Walley Schirra (Apollo commander), and Robert C. Seamans and James E. Webb both at the time major NASA administrators…
Q7. It was well-established that NASA had been seriously challenged during the project. Challenges had included communication problems, failing rockets and lunar module glitches:
It has been said that the biggest problem of all was radiation. More precisely, the radiation from Earth’s Van Allen belt.
-So, the question here is how had they traversed this Van Allen belt engulfing our planet in a manned space ship avoiding serious radiation harm to the astronauts?
Q8. Further, if the Van Allen Radiation Belt had been overcome then why had it been noted on record that NASA was still trying to solve this problem in 2014 and is still ongoing…?
Q9. Van Allen Radiation was not just a serious threat to humans. It had also posed as a threat to the at the time state-of-the-art camera used: This Apollo 11 Hasselblad camera would have ceased to function in the radiation and 200 degrees below zero atmosphere out in space.
-So how had the film footages been made considering these extreme conditions?
Q10. Leading on from Q9:
Was the NASA-constructed in-house simulation built for training drills also used for the fake moon landing?
-No radiation or extreme temperatures to overcome here.
Q11. In light of the NASA-constructed in-house simulation, could this be used to explain the questionable film footages:
Faking space and relative distances, lighting and darkness trickery, use of an Earth model, fake moon with a NASA stage-built lunar surface and simulated astronaut movement…?
Q12. Following on from Q11, to elucidate:
For example, consider the questionable moon landing photos, such as the one above.
Doesn’t the photo show a number of anomalies: If the sun was the only external light source (ubiquitously bright) then why does the photo show, typical of an artificial light source, a “hotspot” and then a “fall-off of the lighting source? -Same can be said for the other moon landing photos.
Q13. Further, in these photos, as in the one above example, each shadow cast is a different angle to the other shadows, suggesting multiple or local light sources.
As above, if the sun had been the only light source then all shadows from every subject would be running parallel to each other.
-Isn’t this more evidence to support the fake moon landing claim?
Q14. The shadows cast from the sun’s lighting give sharp well-defined edges. With artificial lighting, the shadows are fuzzy edges. Don’t the fuzzy edges of the shadows shown in the moon landing photos give further support to the use of artificial lighting?
-The “fuzzy edges” claim was further supported by baffled Hasselblad camera expert Jan Lundberg.
Q14. Did the lavish set: A multi-million-dollar NASA-constructed in-house moon landing fakery uncannily resemble scenes from Stanley Kubrick’s 1968 film A Space Odyssey 2001, and if so, did he have an involvement in the making of the Apollo project, as some researchers have claimed?
Q15. Not everything on this set was lavishly designed and costly. Did the lunar module with what looks like having a tin foil covering and equally cheap-looking scotch tape suggest that a budget control was at work during its making?!
Q16. Why didn’t this apparently flimsy looking said 10,000 lbs craft leave any surface marks below from its rocket thrust when landing?
Q17. Given that the moon’s atmosphere has no discernible atmosphere; no moisture, then how is it that during the filming we can detect dust and mud flying up into the air when watching a lunar buggy and its wheels in motion?
Q18. When the lunar module took off, leaving the moon’s surface, where was its tail flame that should have been seen, produced from the hypergolic fuel burning inside a vacuum…?
Q19. Further, when leaving the moon’s surface, we can hear the astronauts speaking, but where is the roaring 140 decibel noise of the rocket engine during this so-called take off?
Q20. On the subject of the astronauts speaking, how can the time delay; the time taken to talk, respond to colleagues on Earth (mission base) happen so quickly (only a 1 second delay, which is practically instantly), when considering the roughly 239,000 distance from the moon, it should have been about 5 seconds?
Q21. Did you know that the country of Holland had been given a piece of moon rock by Apollo 11 astronauts Buzz Aldrin and Neil Armstrong which turned out to be Fake?
-The fake moon rock was analysed and turned out to be a piece of petrified wood from good old planet Earth!
Q22. Finally, does the fact that a large amount of Apollo 11 mission data/evidence has mysteriously gone missing indicate a cover-up, conveniently throwing away information that would have exposed the Apollo mission as a monumental hoax?
Take a look at this fascinating video:
Let me put this into perspective. Although this blog looks into an event that happened many years ago, in my opinion, it should not be forgotten. It could be said that it is one of quite a number of “questionable” events, suggesting that our governments and their high place associates should not be trusted to this day.
