trodas

Girlfriend reacting to prank... with knife: Is not that a "little bit" problem for the whole "male aggressivity" BS feminazy put on?

Micro-satellite to inspect if Americans did land on Moon So, Russians are finally waking up and starting to have good questions. However currently they are using wrong video. First footage "from the Moon" was this:

Just comparing Philae photos of the comet to the alleged Moon photos

Moon versus comet 67P Churyumov-Gerasimenko Comet 67P: Apollo (mostly 15, but others too) pictures from the "Moon": ...spot the difference! Hint: there is no erosion in vacuum of space, so there is no way the mountains will be smooth... No way at all. And they aren't. Even amateur photos of the prominent A15 mount Hadley show very sharp edges in absolute contrast to the round, smooth images of the "very same" mountain from A15 photos: ROFL =:-) NASA mooned the world

/OT Fine. Why then NASA cannot now even lunch people into space? And why there was no-one but allegedly Americans that are walking the Moon? And why - in the devils name - ESA was detected DIFFERENT materials on the Moon that was allegedly brought back by Apollo? http://youtu.be/wHah89QCxVg?t=1m46s OT/ But plese, don't go into off topic battles. We can start a Moon hoax thread and you can present your arguments and I will presend mine. ...wait, actually, there is one: https://board.freedomainradio.com/topic/41061-wtf-nasa/ So please go there. And as I proven the level flight of flight 175 - then I have five questions for "plane defenders": 1 - why this photo is not consistent with the video record, showing the dive of the incomming flight 175? 2 - are you aware, that resistance go up by square and therefore you need extra engine power up, witch is just not there? Aeronautic expert Ben Eadie claim you need 6x the power for such speed: http://youtu.be/8Pax8aMggfI?t=10m24s I quess that when he say "under all circumstances", then he is pretty sure about it. And given a little cals, so I'm sure about it. It cannot be Boeing 767, period. 3 - are you aware, that plane getting close to his maximum speed vibrate and oscilate wildly? And it become harder and harder to control, so precise aiming at high speed into buildings is just not possible. Not by any pilot, not even a great one can reproduce that feat. Overdoing the speed to 140% would result in plane desintegration in air. Same happen in nearly every airplane crash - at certain speed the plane just torn itself into pieces in air. Same recently happen in Ukraine, when Su-25 shoot the pilots of Boeing 777 flight MH17 - BBC report: if on yewtube it won't work, try vimeo: https://vimeo.com/105190194 4 - don't you guys bother the fact, that there is no impact? There is absolutely nothing that can be described as impact of the plane into the building. Can you point me to any distortions or even as much, as slow-down of the "glide-in" the building. Don't this cartoon physic bother you? Or you pretend not to see? 5 - don't bother you deeply, that a very fragile empty aluminium tube, called a commercial airliner, can penetrate chunk of about 30 steel beams with the thickness of front tank armor? You really refuse to see how fragile these planes are, compared to just a truck? So if truck can go thru airplane like hot knife thru butter: ...then how can you explain your deep seated belief, that planes hit the buildings? ... TheBen - thank you very much. It waked me up too. And yet I don't really have all the answers. I don't know how it was done. It bothers me. I would much rather discuss the Moonlandings, where I think I hold my ground pretty well and I have a good deal of strong arguments and fantastic breathtaking evidence why it had to be fake, how it was done, etc. We have even a video of careless stagehand "on the Mooon" )) Yet I have no idea about how the planes on 9/11 was simulated, sadly. And that is a huge credibility problem. However I'm quite certain, that you cannot cut / clip / damage such strong steel culums with fragile aluminium plane. No way to aliminium cut steel. You need damn strong materials like Wolfram or Uranium to punch thru steel by mostly burning just a small hole into it and soldiers need speeds around Mach 4 to 6 to even achieve that. 580mph and aluminium do it? Call your favorite weapons manufacturer that you have a great cheap antitank round in the making! )) Never seen your plane wings wiggle? The "Mooned America" was necessary after the Vietnam fiasco, the space race fiasco, China going termonuclear in just few years, etc. I do understand the need for this "achievment." And this lie is similary big as 9/11 and have a profound impact on all people. For example - even wonder, why Hubble was never used to look at the Moon? Sure, it might not be able to look for the "artefacts" that are simply not there, but it can show how the Moon is like. There are 10km high mountains as well, as deep "seas." The landscape there is very rough and sharp, because there is no water or air erosion to smooth the surfaces. If you just use good amateur telescope, then you see how sharp these mountains are. Yet all Apollo hills are smooth as slick. How that can be? :-) If you are villing to use your eyes, you can destroy the whole hoax with just one picture: http://s923.photobucket.com/user/ax2cz/media/NASA%20hoax/36335main_image3_lg_zps074879e5.jpg.html?sort=3&o=248 But people like to pretend not to see the obvious in fear of rejection of others. Herd mentality. Cannot blame them. Back in prehistoric times, being rejected by your "herd" means death sentence. Yet that is the fundamential drawback that we, as people, have to overcome in order to move on. Or there is no way that we go to the holidays on the Moon - ever.

This is ridiculous claim. I seen one guy making it already long time ago... but he get pwned badly by evidence: For everyone who believe in Moonlanding happen, check this video about very interesting proof in camera framerate that it was faked: I could provide many examples of how the record is clearly fake using original NASA pictures (from their own webpage) like this: AS15-82-11140 - time 165:39:51 - http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a15/AS15-82-11140HR.jpg AS15-82-11141 - time 165:44:46 - http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a15/AS15-82-11141HR.jpg times: http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a15/images15.html (time: hours of mission:minutes:seconds) Etc. But this is quite OT there. Who want some calculations, why Saturn V cannot do it, then please check Pokrovsky Saturn V investigation: http://www.mediafire.com/?h82zfeuacdtpdf1 ...and Hadley a study in fakery about Apollo 15 fake mountains: http://msp.warwick.ac.uk/~cpr/hadley.pdf ... As for the allegedly possible 140% over the maximum Boeing 767 speed - well, I would call THIS a level flight, don't you? ... But the point you are making is mute. You cannot cut / torn / break / break into heavy steel outside support culums with fragile aluminium wings. In fact, not all of these steel beams, that must be "cuted" to the wings can hide inside of the buildings, are even "cut." Therefore plane is by physic ruled out. I don't know how they did it. And I would very much like to know... there are many people that says that they never seen a plane, just explosion. However we have the flight 11 caught by the firefighters documentary camera. There is sound and picture of something, that just "dive in" into building. This is not possible in real life. The building would have fiercelly resisted that and being much, much stronger that the plane, we would seen some impact... not just "glide-in." This point to the projection, but no idea if that could be done. I fear that it will be too hard to achieve in 2001... As for the "this would be too big conspiracy to keep it quiet" - I disagree. First at all, people are dying all the time. Second - what is "blown wide open" in mainstream media, that is determined by the govt. Or they revoke the license and that it is... And there is a great example of how Russia made their Moonlanding project (they planed 12 unmanned lunches and then maned missions... so imagine the scale of that project - building 12 N1 rockets...!) secret for 30 years: http://youtu.be/mPh079lMhI8?t=4m54s So anything can be done.

Maybe they go for the - get them young and the possibilities are endless...? :)After all, there are some very young shooting kids in USA too - 9 years old:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3f8VmJRuBFY( http://youtu.be/xTM3Z1pdl5M )...but that did not come with the ideological barrage of fanatic religious views like kill all nonbelievers.

Now this is something for Stefan, because this education seems to be the goal of the ISIS and their Islamic state: Is this good parenting? At least I see no spanking (yet) (I'm sure Stefan - or any rational man - did not agree, but I could not help to share this way of parenting as memento, what US is supporting now, despite all the calls for "destruction of ISIS" is the money still flowing... I quess Detroit is fine now, so USA can spendt money to "fix" other countries - even that they did not like the "fixing" at all, lol...) major USA allies funding ISIS: USA helped creating ISIS: Magnum 12 all wanted arm ISIS: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Rm509CQyi0 McCain in bed with ISIS: http://www.dcclothesline.com/2014/06/23/isis-runs-ad-campaign-featuring-photo-john-mccain/ http://wertyzreport.com/clanek/dempsey-spojenci-financuji-isis "Moderate" rebels (since when there is such a thing like "moderate terrorist?!") joining forced with ISIS regulary and did NOT consider them enemy: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/i-am-not-fighting-againstalqaida-itsnot-our-problem-says-wests-last-hope-in-syria-9233424.html So, if you supply weapons in a chaotic (at least) battlefield - how you can guarantee, that they will not end up in the hand of the most radical terrorists? Answer - you can't. This is delusion and lie!

Poroschenko Mariupol Academi guards en So the Poroschenko in Mariupol is guarded by Academi security - this is the infamous Blackwater company, that renamed after all the murders and torture they did no Iraq to "Academi"... it is a US security company. So the "president" of Ukraine got not Ukrainian, but US guards. http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/ukraine-poroschenko-besucht-soldaten-in-mariupol-a-990458.html However the sme Poroschenko is, at least since 2006, agent of Washington: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article38760.htm ...and they speak about him in the US diplomacy circleas as "our insider"... Ukraine if the Ukrainians or for USA?

These times almost everyone seems to be convinced by the massmedia propaganda, that Russia is the "bad guy". So, since I like the challenge, let me show you different perspective before jumping to conclusions (yea, everyone was up in arms, when "they" blamed Iraq for having a WMD and it turned out to be a lie, so, a little skepticism is in order, I would say. So, let's start with what these people that toppled the Ukraine govt are: Oleh Tyahnybok doing their party salute Shocking? Wait, it get way better in a second... First at all, let me say that I did not favor Russians at all. After all, between 1968 and 1991 they occupied us when we tried make socialism with human face - eg. democratize things. However as any superpower, I believe that Russia will do bad things, if they can get away with it, like USA do. I mean - USA do support terrorists from ISIS, that is known genocidial maniacs, they tried to blame Assad for the gas attack made by them in Syria, recently they destroyed Libya (because Kaddafi think it could get away with creating own currency, that will whole Africa use to sell their resources instead of using worthless dollar - he was wrong), not so long ago invaded and destroyed Iraq based on just lies, same with Afghanistan, Vietnam (Gulf of Tonkin lie), Panama, Guatemala, Cuba, atd... All based on lies. So I believe that even if Russia could get away with this, they won't be doing such horrible things, simply because they have no history of doing such wars. On the other hand, USA have an over hundred years of experience in this field. Since the USS Maine exploded in Havana harbor and they quickly blamed the Spanish (w/o investigation, like the MH17 flight case) and invaded Cuba in war for it (1898-1901). So since I'm a bit skeptical, then it is a good point to made, that it was not Russia, who invested over 5 billions in Ukraine for regime change: ...and this was acomplished using neonazi groups: http://s923.photobucket.com/user/ax2cz/library/banderovci And the USA influence was so big, that they are deciding, who will be in the govt and who not: So the "voting" was just a scam... and it really was a scam, we have proofs that they use voting cards of other people to vote for them: So I challenge you - where is the "Russian evil"? I did not see it. We also know, that some from the new coalition, sponsored by USA, is responsible for the escalation using snipers that shoot people from both sides, to kill enought people to make crysis. The investigation of this incident (never heard about it, right?) was done by a long time critic of the Berkut police, so not exactly a not biased guy, right? Yet still he claims he find NO EVIDENCE that the snipers have anything to do with the Berkut police: http://scgnews.com/ukrainian-mp-investigation-shows-no-evidence-snipers-in-kiev-were-police So we know, who shoot and killed people - especially that the shooting was done from the neonazi controled places. There is also no doubt about who burned alive people in Odesa: http://scgnews.com/the-odessa-massacre-what-really-happened ...and you can even see the Majdan girls preparing the Molotov coctails for this killing: Funny, how they have the fire extinguisher ready. What about the people that get burned to death? They value themselved, but burning alive others just because they are do not agree with them. And these radicals even photographes theirself with the bodies of the burned alive people - on the video you can see, how they walk the place, taking pictures and making fun of this: http://lifenews.ru/news/132525 Also we know, who is bombing and mass killing civilians: http://scgnews.com/video-ukrainian-air-force-caught-bombing-civilians-osce-confirms http://en.ria.ru/photolents/20140704/190807140_1/Ukrainian-Crisis-Bombed-out-Houses-of-Kramatorsk-and-Luganskaya.html ...and once again - Russia is not doing this, so where are some evicende about the "bad Russia"? I only see normal people in critical situation: ...that are under attack, w/o weapons and w/o training, much less airsupport and artillery. This guys are trying to protect their families and other civilians, afte the people decided, that they did not want to be in one stat with murderour neonazis, that grab the power w/o legality. Who can blame them? Where is their right to choose? And even people, working for Majdan TV, do not doubt that the previous president was removed from power unconstitutionaly, witch make all other things (new president, govt) unconstitutional too: On top of that it seems, that the story of shooting down of the Boeingu 777 flight MH17 with Buk AA system is getting seriously out of the windows, when the plane wreckage show clear 30mm bullet holes in cockpit area: So because we know, that the Buk fire missiles and not 30mm canon, and the Su 25 or Su 27 are both using a 30mm canons, then we know, that the neonazis must be responsible for the shooting down of the Boing 777 flight MH17. Even oldest Malaisia papers is wrinting about it todays: ...together with experts that pointed this out: http://outsidermedia.cz/dorazily-mh17-výstřely-z-kulometu/ And the eyewitnesses saw in the close proximity of the shooted down plane two military jets: Backup for YewTube censorship: http://vimeo.com/103784552 Is BBC credible enought? Then the case is closed and crystal clear, right? So now once again - where is the "bad Russia"? If people have the rigt for self determination, then they have the right to not bow down to these neonazi criminals and get away from them. If someone have hard time to understand this, then he probably also not understand, how important was for USA to steal Russia the important Sevastopol navy base on Crimea. That forced Russia to act and they will have to act even with force, when necessary. Luckily for them, people vote the Crimea problem easily and w/o doubt. So, peacefull transit. How peacefull is Iraq, Afghnanistan or Libya these days, hmmmm? It should be mentioned that the Crimea was "given" to the Ukraine by Khrushchev, who was not any right to do so and he was also Ukrainian, so... In turn, Ukraine make a good money rending the Crimea base to Russia, and they pay w/o complaining. Also there are absurd high payments for the gas transport thru Ukraine. Also Russia bite their tongs and pay. But this was enought. So they get, what they are asked for Yet US navy base on Crimea - that was over the top. Look at it this way - if the USA was right in 1962 to stop the militarization of Cuby by Russia, then Russia had the right to stop the USA (known war criminals) militarization of Crimea - using force, when necessary. So where are the evidence, that Russia is the bad guy in this conflict, that caused, payed for and supporting extensively USA and EU with NATO? I see no evidence of Russia doing anything wrong, however I'm able to read about what USA is after. This is no secred. Obama outstanding friend and mentor, war criminal Zbigniew Brzezinskij: http://youtu.be/dkamZg68jpk?t=9m15s ...put it deadly seriously and presicely this way: "without Ukraine Russia ceases to be empire, while with Ukraine - bought off first and subdued afterwards, it automatically turns into empire…According to him, the new world order under the hegemony of the United States is created against Russia and on the fragments of Russia. Ukraine is the Western outpost to prevent the recreation of the Soviet Union." http://www.strategic-culture.org/pview/2013/12/17/what-west-wants-from-ukraine-enthralled-by-paradigm-offered-by-brzezinski-i.html Details, like the quit of the RT moderator Liz Wahl in live broadcast, was fabricated sarade: http://youtu.be/MqUztAX7ozw?t=6m17s ...or what about the US navy put in end of 2012 already tender for reconstruction of the Savastopol base on Crimea for use of the US navy: ...or that the CIA chief visited secretly capital city of Ukraine before the massacres of the civilians started: http://news.yahoo.com/cia-chief-visited-kiev-weekend-white-house-174243734.html ...or what about that the neonazis from Kyev is trying to attack so desperately for the control of the Eastern Ukraine (Novorossia now), because IMF told them, that they are not going to get the loan (therefore defaulting) w/o control of the Eastern Ukraine...! http://www.cnbc.com/id/101631226 ...that is almost too much warmongering to even comment on. So, at current time, I see nothing that can be blamed on Russia. Who want to blame them anyway and for what? Because of what these neonazis are doing on Ukraine, there could be excused even a full scale military aggression from Russia, to end the civilians massacres. If these neonazis do not understand anything else that shooting and killings, then so be it. These old Stephan Bandera guys are up in arms again and the West is supporting them. Since when fashism is okay? ...oh, well, of course, I forget. USA do not support any faschists: http://www.globalresearch.ca/there-are-no-neo-nazis-in-the-ukraine-and-the-obama-administration-does-not-support-fascists/5370269

James Dean - I do not agree. First, it is not that old (1969-1972 and we are at 2014). Second, if the photographic material is faked (and I see no other way to explain the irregularities), then the event is faked. The obviousnes of some of the "mistakes" make me believe that the "errors" are intentional. Other errors are just cost-saving. For example this: Is from this video: http://youtube.com/watch?v=GpYa8Yrakcw Now the video is there: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tA6Jo4KydyQ Check times 14:01 and 17:10 times. Next day, another space... same scene I find that funny and I believe that the pictures tell the story pretty well. (and we are not yet even scratching the surface of the errors) Same here. The reaction is invaluable to study and it show how deeply we are manipulated. Even Stefan recently pointed out that the notion, that the Moonlandings are faked, are just laughable and not worthy discussing. That is what make me post this thread. I have proofs that the conspiration exist. There are many reasons, why Russians did not blow the whistle on USA, some are more plausible that others: http://youtu.be/nZN3PI7HRvU?t=32s However we have a proof of the conspiracy. The Russians, after they "lost" (for the first time in anything worth mentioning in space exploration - a hint) the Moon race, they pretended that they are never in the race to begin with: http://youtu.be/mPh079lMhI8?t=3m52s To put long story short, they managed to keep for 30+ years in secret their Moon program, witch produced 17 N1 rockets - http://www.astronautix.com/lvs/n1.htm - (size of Saturn, only more powerfull!) and 3 unmanned test of their Lunar Lander and their "Moon" engines are still best in the world, better that anything USA ever do: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MZnYr94aa9E ... And the proof? CIA had the photos of N1 rocket on the ramp since the beginning: http://youtu.be/wZI8uLCsjlU?t=33m35s So there you have a proof that they are in bed together all the time, never ratting big lies on others. USA never blow the whistle on, for example, the biggest Russians nuclear incident (hint, it was not the Tschernobyl), same is valid for the other way around. IMHO the biggest lies are never exposed by govts, because they might lead people to question every governments. I have no idea, I think that I'm not in position to speculate there. No reasearch done in thi field. If you insist, then since everything was made just as if the Saturn V can go with the capsule to the Moon, then the money was actually spendt on the stuff that they show up. And that was costy show The budget for the simulation is included from the go, because there is the ASP project (Apollo Simulation Project), witch was designed that it can deliver the mission data to Huston, as if the mission really go and Huston cannot distinguish between the simulation and real event. So that take us only to handfull of people, that know about it. Probably only one problematic part was the dropping of the capsule to the sea. They do it (some believe) only with A11 and A12, because the cargo crew was caught by airliner pilot in case of A11, so... they have to stop doing it. Consequently, all zero gravity shoots are under 30 sec in later missions, witch can be simulated using the "vomit comet" plane. To put long story short, the number of people involved in the fakery if rather surprisingly small and the costs are not much different, if we go, or if we did not. In all cases you have to fire up the Saturn V rocket, witch end up in some ocean, and that cost most. If there is a surplus (given how govt run companies are effective I dubt that), then the Vietnam war, that is raging at the time, surely welcome any funds. And I believe that honest people in NASA did all possible efforts to get the technology as much forward, as possible, when the funds are available. Still, Shuttle cost 6x much to launch and can deliver 3x less weight as payload. That make the Saturn V super cost effective. If fact, it was so much effective per price rocket, that there was no reason why not put Shuttle just on top of the 2nd stage of Saturn V and it can fly right away. All the years of developing the main booster could be saved, if the Saturn V really work, as they say it did (eg. reaching the performance they claim it reached). So if you just compare the prices of launch, then you see, that the Apollo program was surprisingly cheap, compared to real space exploration costs (even in terms of lifes). I disagree completely. First at all, there are the proofs already and good luck refuting them. But second and much more importantly, the impact will be serious. That is, because this lie is kept for so long (how long lasted the WMD in Iraq lie?) and it grow so big. And as with every major lie, exposing the lie cause more people to being thinking, what else they are lying us about...?! You say it change nothing. Well, I say that - if you take the WMD in Iraq lie, then it give us a clear and well usable argument, that everytime someone claim that what he see/hear in media is credible, then all one need is to point at this Iraq WMD lie and that it is. Now this become a powerfull argument, witch saved us from USA targeting Syria. Because people starting to having secon thoughts, we are spared that war. So as you can see, every exposed lie (and the bigger, the better) counts. Therefore I passionatelly disagree that the Moon hoax is futile quest. Also I believe that we can go, should go and have to go into space and we will never get there, if we believe in crazy fairytales like this: http://spaceflightnow.com/mars/mera/040106columbia.html (hint - where do you see the JPL logo on the "Mars" photo of the rover?) It is not a theory, when there is a evidence. But I will still answer. Well, I took on another big lie, that need to be killed. For example - holohoax Sounds explosive enought, right? Currently... do you remember the WTF7 reported as collapsed, 20 min ago, when WTC7 is still standing in the background video? ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MbhKvi3yNLo ) Well, there we have a predecesor: MoonFaker: Premature Separation

Proof, that Apollo astroNOTs cannot survive the journey thru the Van Allen belts, not even by this way, the ex-CIA Robert A. Braeunig thought he will sping it, so the crews spendt only 40min in the less intensive part of the belts and 20 in the more intensive part: http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/apollo11-TLI.htm It is nonsense, because Apollo astroNOTs always claim, that they go straight for the Moon (or more precisely to the place, where Moon will be, when they got there - witch is another rason, why they cannot "hit the mark" by manual control and only one mid course correction) and that it confirmed by Apollo flight journals, triangulating using stars on simgle spot in the space, not using any parabolic way, that would require more corrections in course and entierly different level of calculation. This cannot be done "by hand", so the parabolic way is nonsense even by Apollo standards. To make matters worse, the Moon is orbiting the Earth with ange to equator (inclination) 28.65°: http://www.psrd.hawaii.edu/Dec96/earmoon.html This is kinda close to 30° inclination, witch is regarded as the worsest inclination to get more radioactve exposure. So the results witch Jarrah calculated, would be much, much more worser in reality. Yet even when we accept the Braeunig fantasies as true, even then the radioactive doses are so high, that there is no chance to survive this journey at all: MoonFaker: Radioactive Anomaly III

It would be priceless, if you actually bother to even read my argument, RuralRon:"The center of each Apollo photo is marked by the biggest cross. Therefore we see, that there is no cropping, that could make this photo possible." Bastii - see? That is why Because it is kind of interesting, to what lenghts people go, to protect their cherished views. Group psychology (not to be different, no to think differently, that is scary!) force them to alter the reality they see.I never seen anything as amazing, as this.Perspective? Nah!Reading what I actually write? Nah!Selective focus on some seemingly possibly refutable arguments, while ignoring the white Elefant in the room? Yay!...New studies: ‘Conspiracy theorists’ sane; government dupes crazy, hostilehttp://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/07/14/whatabout7/

Bastii - why would not be the story of this grand hoax would be absolutely (albeit chilly a bit, when come to the real fact why we did not go) stunning to anyone? I wanted go to the stars and I still want to go. Sadly there is probably no way we can set the foot (w/o getting seriously injured by radioactivity) on at least the Moon, but we can go for sure. 2m of water shielding keep thre radiation levels sustainable, altrough not clearly safe. But we never go, untill we stop living in fairytales. RuralRon - then please someone explain the perspective to the offending (mostly my brain :-) ) party Never the less, you did not see even surface scratchec, of what I did for a research. Mostly it is based on other people research, but I finding new things almost each time I look at the images or data (for example the number of Sun flares happening during Apollo missions are beyond belief). For example, my trackless Rover series: http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a15/AS15-88-11902HR.jpg http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a15/AS15-88-11901HR.jpg http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a17/AS17-140-21354HR.jpg http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a17/AS17-143-21932HR.jpg http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a17/AS17-143-21857HR.jpg http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a15/AS15-86-11603HR.jpg http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a17/AS17-142-21796HR.jpg - how do the astroNOTs get back to the LEM?! No tracks, lol... (some scenes are made using models only) http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ed/Apollo15LunarRover.jpg http://apolloanomalies.com/missing_tracks.htm :laugh: ... Wanna see something even better? Okay. Dr. Colin Rourke (Mathematics Institute, University of Warwick) got the balls not to be restrained about what will people think and he took a look at the Apollo 15 photos of "Moon" Hadley mountains. These are so obvious fakes, that it beg a little explaination - on Moon, there is no atmosphere, so, no erosion. Therefore most of the mountains are sharp and harsh. And quess what - where ALL Apollo fotos show a nice smooth mountains, there telescopes show pretty rough terrain, very sharp and edgy mountains... but even that is not the best kick out of the study: http://msp.warwick.ac.uk/~cpr/hadley.pdf Hadley: a study in fakery (version 2) The IMHO best argument is on page 10, slightly mentioned as: "The shadow is not consistent with the supposed method of photography being used. ...the shadow of the astronaut taking the photo must point back to his feet which are at centre bottom. You can easily produce a photo with a shadow like the one in this photo, by tilting the camera. Take your digital camera out next time there is sun and experiment. No photo taken with the camera level with respect to your body (as it must be if fixed to your breastplate) can produce a shadow like this." http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/images/print/AS12/47/6984.jpg Where is the problem? First at all, there is a apparent hotspot near the shadow of the head of this astroNOT. That itself prove, that this is a studio light, so we are not on Moon. But there is a worser problem. The center of each Apollo photo is marked by the biggest cross. Therefore we see, that there is no cropping, that could make this photo possible. The biggest problem? Well, the shadow of the astroNOT, that is supposedly taking the picture, is not pointing to him, but to another person (stative), and his(her) shadow is not even present on the picture. ... It must look like THIS: http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a11/AS11-40-5930HR.jpg http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a12/AS12-47-6941HR.jpg http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a12/AS12-47-6985HR.jpg http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a17/AS17-136-20744HR.jpg And NO, never once like this: http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a11/AS11-40-5961HR.jpg http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/images/print/AS12/47/6984.jpg http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a12/AS12-46-6848HR.jpg http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a12/AS12-46-6796HR.jpg ... Of course I managed, after brief search, to find many similar ones: http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/frame/?AS11-40-5962 http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/frame/?AS11-40-5961 http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/frame/?AS11-40-5928 http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/frame/?AS12-46-6730 http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/frame/?AS12-46-6751 http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/frame/?AS12-46-6753 http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/frame/?AS12-46-6775 http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/frame/?AS12-46-6776 http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/frame/?AS12-46-6796 http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/frame/?AS12-46-6846 http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/frame/?AS12-46-6848 http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/frame/?AS12-48-7059 http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/frame/?AS12-48-7082 http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/frame/?AS14-64-9099 http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/frame/?AS15-86-11596 http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/frame/?AS15-86-11644 http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/frame/?AS17-137-21008 ...etc... Nice, huh? Shadow of astoNOT, if present, must always point to the middle of the screen (because of fixed camera on chest) - if it does not, then he is not the one, who taken the picture. How do you like that?

Well, the medium sized rock, that is close up from top to the right shadow, is present on ALL the images. Therefore your perspective claim is wrong. This is seriously wrong understanding of perspective. Try it in real life. You quickyl realize, that no matter how much steps you took, the several miles away background never change. This is so obvious, that your attempts to push this "logic" is completely beyond any reasoning. For the very last time - try this, before making utterly wrong claims. For the record - only way that the sidestep of astroNOT could have cause this is, if the astroNOT was very close to the rocks. For example if the distance between the photographer and the object was SAME as the sidestep lenght, then the change in ange will be 45°. That would be serious, that could bring the object behing the cover. However if the sidestep is less that 1m and the object is about 15m away, then the change in perspective is mere 6°. If the object is several miles away, then the change in ange is nonexisting and only important thing is, how close are the rocks and how wide are the space between them, compared to the sidestep. In all cases, the rock has to be (at least partly) visible. ... Whatever. Let's move on to more harder stuff All the Apollo TV telecasts are made by the Rover camera. Allegedly. So there is no place for second camera and also in the life broadcast, there cannot be cuts, right? Yea, that would sane man say. It is not life broadcast, when there is a cut... so, what is this?! Apollo 17 flag ceremony - so much for live broadcast, huh? http://pictureshack.ru/images/75252_Apollo_17_fading_flag_ceremony.gif Original video: http://ulozto.cz/xhyELjA/apollo-17-fading-flag-ceremony-wmv Fading flag video discovery by Jarrah White: