But Seriously, It Sure Looks Like NASA Faked the Lunar Landings - Is That Possible?

Don't get me wrong, we probably indeed went to the moon but those nice pictures we saw were not the "right stuff!"

The January 1997 Foretean Times Magazine has an excellent article on the work of David Percy. He's a photographic expert who is convinced the Apollo lunar shots were faked. Fortean Times has published a number of the pictures and Percy promises many more in a soon to be released book. But here's a few that I think should cause us to wonder, "how honest has NASA really been with us in the past?"

I find this picture especially suspicious. Notice in the upper right that the shadow of the lunar lander extends directly to the right - towards the 3 o'clock position. Then how come the rocks in the lower right foreground have shadows that point to the lower right or 4 o'clock position? Shadows from a source of light that is nearly 100 million miles away (the sun) should be parallel! Even if you take into account that perspective would call for a "vanishing point" - or a point in space where the parallel shadows apparently converge, then according to this picture, that vanishing point (in this case also the source for the light) should be within the field of view as indicated where the two yellow lines cross.

Here's another great example of shadows not being parallel! This is from a 'live' TV shot from the lunar surface. Those shadows are way out of alignment! Even taking into account that lunar surface is not quit level here does not explain the tremendous difference in shadow direction. NASA really messed up this one!

And here's a picture they just plain screwed up!!!

Woops! Looks like the NASA "set decorator" messed up placing rock "C" into the set and left the "C" showing! By the way, something else to wonder about - How come none of the Apollo pictures show any lunar "dust" on top of the rocks? You'd think after a few million years, they'd be dusty - unless they forgot to put the dust on them.

I guess even 'Disney Studio' people can screw up now and then... ooooops, I didn't say that. I shouldn't even think bad things about a fine organization that provided years of 'family fantasy' entertainment to America. Besides, they are now the most powerful entertainment and 'news' provider in the world. I'm sure they didn't need a single favor from the government to get that big. And wasn't it nice of NASA to help that Opie guy with the making of Apollo 13. I don't think a government agency has ever provided that much help to a movie company, that's just plain nice!

What about the ancient glass domes Richard Hoagland claims still exist on the moon?

I have enormous respect for the courage and insights of Richard C. Hoagland. His work with the "Face on Mars" and the "Pyramids" is excellent. He's been a tireless watchdog over NASA - an agency that needs watching! I fully agree with Richard that NASA has hidden much about what they know of the true history of the solar system.

But I have a different interpretation of Richard's data concerning the Apollo missions. I agree that there are many artifacts and strange things on the moon that NASA is hiding. But I think the "structures" that show up in the dark lunar sky in Richard's computer enhanced pictures are not the remains of ancient lunar domes but rather dark material draped over scaffolds (the fake dark lunar sky) that NASA never dreamed could some day be "pulled into view" by computers. I think Richard is right. NASA's astronauts probably did find many "stunning" artifacts that they are hiding to this day. But I think the cover-up went one step beyond Richard's theories - they actually covered-up the landings! While we saw guys on movie sets, the real astronauts may have indeed been walking amid some ancient wonders that might have inspired the entire world.

Is this the real reason they refuse to point the Hubble Space Telescope at the moon?? It's true, they won't. They say the moon is too bright. They expect us to believe they can't vary the aperture? Why don't they get a good Hubble picture during a lunar eclipse?? That should give them plenty of time!

Is this why they never left anything to orbit the moon to send back pictures of the changing lunar surface? We have thousands of satellites in orbit around the earth right now that send us back everything from MTV music videos to the temperature of migrating squid tenacles and we don't have anything orbitting our own moon??? There was only one mission to orbit something around the moon since Apollo and that was a Pentagon mission - and when they were done they removed the Pentagon satellite (called Clementine) from lunar orbit. They never have released the good hi-resolution pictures from Clementine.

Oh, yes. They did hold that news conference in early December 1996 to say the Clementine probe found water on the moon - but that discovery was actually made in 1994. In fact, a couple of Rice professors theorized about ice near the lunar poles back in the early 70's and they had Apollo data to back them up and they were nearly ridiculed to death. What the hell is really going on???

To be Continued!!!!