Did we really go to the Moon?

[Bill Ryan]

Posted by scotslad (here)
Forgive me if not deemed relevant here, but I seem to remember something about a "coke bottle" appearing on official moon landing footage. Was this correct, or am i myself simply off planet/base about this. What was the official and unofficial relevance of it, and does anyone know the truth. Curious.

Here's the coke bottle story, from Mary Bennett and David Percy's Dark Moon:

~~~

In western Australia, a woman pseudonymed "Una Ronald" stayed up late to watch live Apollo 11 coverage and saw a Coke bottle kicked across the screen. When the coverage was repeated the next day, the bottle had disappeared.

The inhabitants of western Australia did not see the same version of the moonwalk as the rest of the world. Since the radio telescope receiving the signal was located in eastern Australia, the Australian television stations just copied the signal directly before it was sent off to America and the rest of the world.

Una Ronald actually saw a delayed broadcast of videotape flown to Perth from Sydney. There was no direct hookup across the Australian continent so the western Australians had no way of seeing it live.

In contrast to the grainy, indistinct images of the astronauts, the Coke bottle was clear and sharp and unmistakable. The unknown Australian whistle-blower was sending the message that the Apollo 11 telecast was nothing but a big marketing ploy.

When Una and her friends watched the repeats, the bottle was not there. But a week or so later, letters to the editor appeared in The Western Australian newspaper from other people who had seen it. The Western Australian declined to respond to our inquiries about those letters.

[Bill Ryan]

See also this thread:

• Richplanet - New evidence on Stanley Kubrick faking the Apollo Moon landing

[sunwings]

Documentary Room 237 explores the possibility that Kubrick´s film the shining, was a confession to helping fake the moon landing.




Source: Watch on Vimeo

[Nick Matkin]

To those who understand the Apollo radio communications, it is quite clear the moon landings were real. Features like Doppler shift, propagation delay, and direction - to list only two - cannot be faked. If so perhaps someone could explain how?

These aspects of communications were received and analysed - even in the 1960s - by well-equipped amateurs spread around the world who would have noticed something clearly very odd had the transmissions not been genuine.

Not only that, but there are masses of engineering documents describing the problems and solutions for radio communications, radar, telemetry data etc. that engineers were using at the time. So to those of us who realise what was involved in just this aspect alone... well those who believe the hoax nonsense are not only maliciously ignorant of the facts, but I consider them to be deluded. Harsh I know, but what other explanation is there?

Those who have no engineering background and don't want to or are incapable of appreciating the facts, well they can just carry on living in their fantasy while the rest of us do stuff. (I'm not suggesting all those of a non-technical background are delusional - just a tiny few regarding this topic. You won't find any qualified communications engineers believing this hoax BS.)

And in any case, haven't various non-US lunar orbiters photographed the Apollo landing sites?

[Bill Ryan]

Hey there, Nick — 100% fully agreed with your points.

'The Apollo landings being faked' is of course a little vague. That tends to mean different things to different people, so discussion can sometimes slide around all over the place.

To me, that means the photos and film were faked. But yes, they did go to the moon, and land, and return... and what really happened there is unclear. Many have assumed that the fakery of the photos means they never went at all. That's not necessarily so, of course.

[Carmody]

Just to be fair, if such a thing is possible, here's an article that disagrees with my bit of musing (and recollections on reading about it) re Von Braun.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-monsters.html

[Peter UK]

John Lear seems to be emphatically convinced that there was no moon landing.

I'm sure somebody can comment on that.

[Nick Matkin]

If the live TV pictures were real (and I understand the various technical problems that had to be overcome to achieve this, particularly regarding the different TV standards between US and Europe - so for me live video was undoubtedly real), why would they fake the film and photos? I've seen some photos that appear to have been touched up - some surprisingly clumsily - but faking the film? Surely landscape inconstancies between film and video would be really obvious. Maybe some folks think they are?

The analogue NTSC TV standards/definition used at the time for the early missions, along with the limited transmission power, probably rendered moving images that were far too ropey for serious scientific study, so I guess that's why they used film too. But how could any scientific study not immediately recognise fake lunar film footage?

[Carmody]

I watched the Apollo 11 film/vid/doc last night.... and the very first full super high rez panoramic color shot shown (once they landed, of the moon surface), had a very subtle stitch spot in it, near the middle.... What that means, no one knows...

[DaveToo]

Posted by Bill Ryan (here)
Hey there, Nick — 100% fully agreed with your points.

'The Apollo landings being faked' is of course a little vague. That tends to mean different things to different people, so discussion can sometimes slide around all over the place.

To me, that means the photos and film were faked. But yes, they did go to the moon, and land, and return... and what really happened there is unclear. Many have assumed that the fakery of the photos means they never went at all. That's not necessarily so, of course.

Bill I have asked this question several times now above, but no one has attempted to answered it yet.

Let's go with the assumption that they landed on the moon and the photos/videos were faked.

I was told that they faked the photos/videos as a backup. That is, in case the operation was a failure, they could save face and fall back on the prepared photos/video.

But you and others in this thread are claiming the landing was a success. That would mean the 'backup' photos/videos were not required for use.

Why not use the actual photos/videos from the landing, WARTS AND ALL?

[Wind]

What's more interesting to me is the question that do people still actually believe that we haven't gone to the Moon since 1972?

[Sunny-side-up]

Posted by Wind (here)
What's more interesting to me is the question that do people still actually believe that we haven't gone to the Moon since 1972?

Nice one wind

[amor]

I am fairly certain I placed this comment into another discussion of this subject. However, for completeness of information, I am placing it here again.

I was on a Caribbean Island the day Apollo 11 ascended to the Moon, sleeping next to my husband at a beach house, when I had a most unusual experience which awakened me. Upon checking his watch I found it was 4:00 pm in the afternoon, Eastern Daylight Time. It was the day after we saw the live "African Ballet" after which I was introduced to Caludette Colbert. During my sleep I had an extreme experience which was not like any dream. I was sharing an experience telepathically with someone else, a man, undergoing a great Gravity acceleration force which was an awful feeling. I felt that my brain was about to explode. Simultaneously, the man's thought came to me, "This is a space ship." In the background, I heard the many voices of the people in the NASSA control room. I was in a state of absolute terror while experiencing those G forces. Because I was living in a remote area away from newspapers and seldom listening to the radio, I had no idea about the space program and what was happening.

The next day, I turned on the radio and at that moment the news bulletin told of the flight to the moon and that THE STRONGEST RADIO SIGNAL THAT WAS EVER BROADCAST HAD BEEN MADE ON THAT OCCASION. That is when I realized what my experience was all about. I did not make note of the date. However, this computer said the blast off occurred on July 16, 1969 at 9:35 AM. I am unable to account for the difference in time of my experience and the blast off time, hours earlier. Perhaps it is due to the discrepancy between the false story photographed on Earth and the actual departure for the moon. However, I do think it interesting that one of the astronauts was said to have been doing psychic experiments while on the flight.

When they were actually on the moon, they saw huge saucers and aliens on the other side of the crater watching them. It occurred to me that along with the conventional explanation, they could have been time traveling tourists witnessing an historical event from their past.

[amor]

I am fairly certain I placed this comment into another discussion of this subject. However, for completeness of information, I am placing it here again.

I was on a Caribbean Island the day Apollo 11 ascended to the Moon, sleeping next to my husband at a beach house, when I had a most unusual experience which awakened me. Upon checking his watch I found it was 4:00 pm in the afternoon, Eastern Daylight Time. It was the day after we saw the live "African Ballet" after which I was introduced to Caludette Colbert. During my sleep I had an extreme experience which was not like any dream. I was sharing an experience telepathically with someone else, a man, undergoing a great Gravity acceleration force which was an awful feeling. I felt that my brain was about to explode. Simultaneously, the man's thought came to me, "This is a space ship." In the background, I heard the many voices of the people in the NASSA control room. I was in a state of absolute terror while experiencing those G forces. Because I was living in a remote area away from newspapers and seldom listening to the radio, I had no idea about the space program and what was happening.

The next day, I turned on the radio and at that moment the news bulletin told of the flight to the moon and that THE STRONGEST RADIO SIGNAL THAT WAS EVER BROADCAST HAD BEEN MADE ON THAT OCCASION. That is when I realized what my experience was all about. I did not make note of the date. However, this computer said the blast off occurred on July 16, 1969 at 9:35 AM. I am unable to account for the difference in time of my experience and the blast off time, hours earlier. Perhaps it is due to the discrepancy between the false story photographed on Earth and the actual departure for the moon. However, I do think it interesting that one of the astronauts was said to have been doing psychic experiments while on the flight.

When they were actually on the moon, they saw huge saucers and aliens on the other side of the crater watching them. It occurred to me that along with the conventional explanation, they could have been time traveling tourists witnessing an historical event from their past.

[Spaceball Ricochet]

Posted by Sunny-side-up (here)
Yes I think we got there but not without help.

Without extraterrestrial help?

I think they got lucky..but they made it unaided and should be respected for their bravery and guts in seeing it through..as should all those who died tragically in the pre Apollo 11 exercises in order to eventually make it happen.

It was only ever going to be a one-horse race as the Russians efforts had met only with disaster, hence their later claims that they were never interested in reaching the Moon.

The Chinese survived the Van Allen belts unscathed..and so if so now why not then?

[Jad]

The moon landing is a topic I am fascinated about and the amount of contrasting theories about it would make a sane person go crazy! One thing I like to point out about this which makes me certain that there is a huge hole in the official story is the press conference that the 3 astronauts did right after they got back to earth.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=BI_ZehPOMwI

We all have seen soccer players celebrate after winning the World Cup, and we seen the sense of joy and pride in their eyes when they talked to the press afterwards. Well these 3 astronauts did something more amazing than kicking a ball into the net! They freaking went to the moon! In fact they were the first 3 (at least officially) to do this so you can imagine the sense of pride that they must feel about this. They are true heroes.

Now I’m no body language expert but all I can see is 3 defeated people who are struggling to keep a straight face while telling their story. You could even feel shame and sadness in their eyes. But that’s just my personal opinion. Please let me know what you guys think.

I will also post the last press conference that Armstrong done in the White House where he was almost in tears and talking about the “truth protective layers”. My speculation here is that he is referring to the secret tech that helped them get to the moon that’s hidden from the public. So yea I definitely think we went to the moon, but we definitely didn’t get the full exact story.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=PUx1SURbb3g

[Spaceball Ricochet]

Posted by DaveToo (here)

Posted by Bill Ryan (here)
Hey there, Nick — 100% fully agreed with your points.

'The Apollo landings being faked' is of course a little vague. That tends to mean different things to different people, so discussion can sometimes slide around all over the place.
that means the photos and film were faked. But yes, they did go to the moon, and land, and return... and what really happened there is unclear. Many have assumed that the fakery of the photos means they never went at all. That's not necessarily so, of course.

Bill I have asked this question several times now above, but no one has attempted to answered it yet.

Let's go with the assumption that they landed on the moon and the photos/videos were faked.

I was told that they faked the photos/videos as a backup. That is, in case the operation was a failure, they could save face and fall back on the prepared photos/video.

But you and others in this thread are claiming the landing was a success. That would mean the 'backup' photos/videos were not required for use.

Why not use the actual photos/videos from the landing, WARTS AND ALL?

DaveToo..

It does seem ambiguous to say that the photos and videos "were faked" when the Moon landing itself was genuine. Does this mean that the photos/videos were "dressed-up" before being put on display for the benefit of the public..although this would imply that they were not so much "faked" as "tarted-up"?

They did use many of the original photos and videos but would only have shown the "pick of the bunch". Out of the hundreds of shots taken many of the 'warts and all' ones would have been discarded due to their poor quality, showing nothing but a disappointing mish-mash of light and shadows. Their gloved hands must have made the task of taking photographs very awkward.

When you think of the Moon and how reflective it is in the night sky it's easy to imagine how the light must bounce around up there on the lunar surface, striking objects at unusual angles and imbuing any videos or photos with an unreal or "staged" quality.

Perhaps this in itself helps contribute to the sceptical mind on a subliminal level the notion that the whole Moon landing thing was 'rigged-up'..

[Patient]

Posted by Jad (here)
The moon landing is a topic I am fascinated about and the amount of contrasting theories about it would make a sane person go crazy! One thing I like to point out about this which makes me certain that there is a huge hole in the official story is the press conference that the 3 astronauts did right after they got back to earth.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=BI_ZehPOMwI

We all have seen soccer players celebrate after winning the World Cup, and we seen the sense of joy and pride in their eyes when they talked to the press afterwards. Well these 3 astronauts did something more amazing than kicking a ball into the net! They freaking went to the moon! In fact they were the first 3 (at least officially) to do this so you can imagine the sense of pride that they must feel about this. They are true heroes.

Now I’m no body language expert but all I can see is 3 defeated people who are struggling to keep a straight face while telling their story. You could even feel shame and sadness in their eyes. But that’s just my personal opinion. Please let me know what you guys think.

I will also post the last press conference that Armstrong done in the White House where he was almost in tears and talking about the “truth protective layers”. My speculation here is that he is referring to the secret tech that helped them get to the moon that’s hidden from the public. So yea I definitely think we went to the moon, but we definitely didn’t get the full exact story.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=PUx1SURbb3g

Just a thought and theory - if there were saucers on the moon, or anything similar, and the astronauts come back to earth imagine the debriefing that they would have gone through. If I was sitting in their seat, I would be afraid to say anything that would get me and my family into trouble.

So thinking along those lines, I imagine that they would not want to raise their eyes to anyone because they would not want to answer any questions in case they answered in a wrong way.

Imagine being the first people on the moon and not be able to tell the truth of your experience?

[Sunny-side-up]

A lot of aspects relating to the moon landing but,

no mention of masonic Apollo pilots in this OP yet?

[Tintin]

Inspired in large part by the Mary Bennett and David Percy book "Dark Moon' mentioned by Bill here those of you interested in this topic may be fascinated by this in-depth and genuinely sensible overview of the anomalies and inconsistencies with regard to the official version of events, and attendant PR.

We've placed these in the Avalon Library for you now.

What Happened on the Moon (Part 1):
http://avalonlibrary.net/What_Happen...oon_part_1.mp4

What Happened on the Moon (Part 2):
http://avalonlibrary.net/What_Happen...oon_part_2.mp4

Bear in mind, at least this is my perspective, (and, again do see Bill's Arthur Neumann reference here), that any broadcast or dissemination of 100% genuine footage that would have been taken would have likely blown the lid off the existence of the Secret Space Program, in some way.

From Bill's post mentioned above:

"Most of the missions did indeed go to the moon, but some photos and film footage were fabricated for PR purposes, and - remarkably – some advanced technology was borrowed: a lightweight nano tech-skin shielding combined with a charged-field technology were utilized on some of the craft to provide very effective radiation shielding, combined with other technologies used to protect the astronauts from Gamma and other hazardous radiations and energetic particles during the journeys. Additional advanced “alien” technologies were added to land the Lunar Module and assist take-off from the moon.

Hence all the cleverly crafted decoy imagery and staging.

And they'd have got there before 1969 in all likelihood.

The crash retrievals of Roswell and Aurora, and others in the mid to late 1940s and the technology acquired and learnt, and understood, ought to confirm with some reasonable possibility that the 'how' in the official Apollo narrative isn't really viable, but, with knowledge on how to get around those issues already worked out made the (multiple) landings a reality using more advanced secret technology.