NASA engineers intentionally gave evidence that Apollo photos are faked

I had noticed some anomalies on Apollo photos which led me to think that I could find something by making comparisons between photos.
I have decided to investigate in the totality of the Apollo journal.
I have started to make systematical comparisons between photos.
The photos often come in pairs, and I know why now: In a pair of photo, you can introduce in one of the photos of the pair something which contradicts the other one.
I have also systematically compared what I was seeing in the visor of the astronaut with what I was seeing on the photo.
I have also made systematical close-ups by enlarging parts of the photo in which I was suspecting there was something interesting to see.
I have also added luminosity to parts of the photo where I could guess something was hiding.
I also have much used animations which are very revealing and help see the anomalies and peculiarities of the photos.
All this work has not been done for nothing, it has been very enriching, very informative.
I am completely convinced of two things after this intensive work:

1) The photos are definitively faked, without the least doubt.

2) Those who faked the photo were not seeking to make them convincing, much to the contrary; they gave every evidence they were faked.
I think they took the whole thing as a big farce, of which they were thinking it would be short lived, so much some anomalies are absolutely enormous!
But, in spite of all these anomalies, these obvious incoherences, the photos have gone throughout time.
Of course there are some people who have started to notice some anomalies; but they think they have been made by negligence.
Bill Kaysing talked of "unfortunate" errors; these errors were not unfortunate, Mr Kaysing, they were absolutely intentional, planned, purposed to be found out.
In fact it seems that those who made the fakings did not agree with those who gave the orders, and thought it was a ridiculous comedy which had to be exposed.
Of course, they could have made the fakings very realistic, and spoken out afterwards to say they were forced to fake the photos, but nobody would have believed them; the government would have said they were frauds, and the only result is that they would have been discredited, and the photos more credible than ever.
So they preferred an alternative: Say nothing, but completely bug the photos, and let those who would find the anomalies expose the fraud.
I have seen by the examination of the photos that these people were very competent, were knowing everything about spatial geometry, photography, and perspective; they have been playing with them.
They would have been perfectly able to make the faking very credible, and the errors would not have existed, or at least not enough to feed a hoax.
The moon hoax only exists because these people wanted it to exist, they are the real creators of the moon hoax.
If they had played the game exactly as the government would have wanted them to, then the moon hoax would not exist, and myself I would not be contesting the photos, and I would even say that those who contest them are idiots with no clue.

Of course, when you read this, your first reaction is that I have lost my mind, I'm messing up.

But if you examine in detail my evidence, you might start to think that I might not be so far from the truth.


You'll find a bried summary of my evidence on this web page:

A bried summary of my evidence



And you'll find my full evidence on my web pages:

My full evidence about the faked photos of apollo


Now, why were the photos faked?
The fact that the photos were faked doesn't necessarily mean that the moon landings didn't actually happen (although it might).

It might be just because the astronauts were not able to take decent photos on the moon (or may be no photos at all).

Unless the cameras they used on the moon were radiation shielded, which to my understanding, they weren't, then there's a problem. The film wasn't damaged at all by radiation, and all the pictures are strikingly clear. The only moon they set foot on was taxpayer butts, IMO.

Stanley Kubrick was probably the genius behind alot of the footage, he never said as much of course, but it's interesting to note that he was known to work in references to his other films in his material, like the 2001 album in Clcokwork Orange. In the Shining, Danny is walking though the hallway and has a very home made looking sweater on of one of the Apollo missions.

WHEN I HEADED TO your site i expected a revelation.......
what i found is speculation and a lot of missinterpretation on YOUR behalf...

dissapointing.......

Nothing in the first link

i could'nt be bothered with the second.......

reply to post by twitchy


Here some info from NASA on what type camera was used

A comprehensive set of camera equipment was carried on board Apollo 11. This included two 16mm Maurer motion picture film cameras, a color television camera in the orbiting Columbia, and a black and white TV camera outside of the lunar module to transmit to Earth Neil Armstrong's first steps on the Moon's surface. A Kodak stereo close-up camera was used to film the lunar soil from only inches away. Three Hasselblad 500EL cameras were carried.

Two of the Hasselblad cameras were identical to those carried on the earlier Apollo 8 and 10 lunar orbit missions. During the Moon landing one Hasselblad was left aboard the Command Module Columbia, which remained in lunar orbit. Two were taken on the Lunar Module Eagle to the Moon's surface.

history.nasa.gov...

Please post replies in the original thread..

Original Thread

Closing

Thank you

Semper