The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Full ArchivesKevin Barrett Podcasts
“Moon Landing Skeptic” Unveils True Identity; E. Michael Jones on Jewish Privilege, White Identity, and Jeffrey Epstein
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks


First half hour: The viral article The Moon Landings: A Giant Hoax for Mankind? elicited more than 1,500 comments on Unz.com last April. The new updated version on Veterans Today is even better. It may be the best short introduction to the question of why so many people doubt that Americans really walked on the moon between 1969 and 1972. (The best three-hour introduction is Massimo Mazzucco’s film American Moon.)

So who exactly is “Moon Landing Skeptic”? Listen to this show and find out. (Hint: He has impressive academic credentials in both technological and humanistic fields…)

Second half hour: Leading Catholic intellectual E. Michael Jones of Culture Wars magazine just published a book entitled Jewish Privilege…and, miracle of miracles, Amazon has not yet removed it. Perhaps Amazon’s hired censors recognize that Dr. Jones, far from being a racist, is in fact critiquing racist ideologies, including both Jewish supremacism and white nationalism. Or maybe the ADL just hasn’t gotten around to complaining yet. In any case, E. Michael Jones agrees with me that the internet oligarchs’ ongoing assaults on the First Amendment are an outrage—and may even have been designed to elicit violence.

(Republished from Truth Jihad by permission of author or representative)
 
Hide 159 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Mulegino1 says:

    Given the long history of lies by the government of the United States and its camp followers in the establishment media, there is no appreciable reason to believe that men sent by NASA really walked on the moon.

    They lied about the battleship Maine, the Lusitania and Pearl Harbor. They lied about the assassinations of JFK and RFK, the Gulf of Tonkin incident, the first Gulf War, the fake genocide in Kosovo, 9/11, the WMD’s in Iraq, the killing of Bin Laden, Libya, the gas attacks in Syria and the civil war in Ukraine. And they lied about the provenance of the moon rocks, which are frauds.

    Given this known record of mendacity, why should anyone accept these extraordinary claims by the US government with respect to the moon landings? A few ghostly images and the once authoritative voice of Walter Cronkite are no longer enough to justify credibility.

    • Replies: @Iris
    , @anon
    , @getaclue
  2. Anon000 says:

    Entirely apart from his message, E. Michael Jones is a bad pitchman for the anti-ZOG cause. He always comes across as an angry and uncharitable sour kraut. Also, when you read what he’s written on subjects outside of his field of English lit, e.g., science, it’s clear that he— or the writer he culled it from— doesn’t have any real understanding of what he’s talking about. Sad, because when I first heard him his ideas sounded interesting, different.

  3. Che Guava says:

    Thtat isa good article.I sure agree about the owner of 666 Fifth Avenue.

    Also sure, the ‘deal’ is an empjy and inimical thing,

    However, you as a post 911 convert to the mudslime religion (probably because you found that and other events exciting)
    are among the worst-placed to say what you are saying.

    What is your Jihadi nom de Guerre? Barat al Amerik?!that you have or dream of such a name, it is pretty clear that you are on that side of the shadings.

    • Replies: @Talha
  4. gsjackson says:

    There are some pretty well elaborated theories about the Jewish connection to NASA and the space project in the flat earth community. NASA is shot through with Freemasons, including almost all of the astronauts. Freemasonry is essentially a gentile arm of Judaism, and Masons are in effect “spiritual Jews,” as elaborated by Rabbi Wise in the 19th century.

    NASA rests upon a foundation of astronomy that has been largely a Jesuit production (including the Big Bang theory) ever since the introduction of the heliocentric model by Copernicus. They own most of the big telescopes. Jesuits were founded by Marranos, Jews in Spain who were forced to either convert or be exiled.

    So the space program in this view is just another step in the heliocentric narrative, which was created by sun-worshiping secret societies with roots in Babylonic Judaism in order to dethrone God and man’s special place in the universe. Destroying their religious faith makes people all the easier to control.

    But the heliocentric model faced a number of obstacles, starting with why are the stars seen to be in the same place after six months of traveling around the sun. Answer: The sun and stars must be so far away (93 million miles in the case of the sun, quadrillions for the stars) that you won’t notice any difference. Then, since earth has to be a spinning ball going around the sun, what holds the ocean water to the ball? Enter Freemason Isaac Newton with gravity, a mysterious force unobserved anywhere else in nature. Then when 19th century experiments were unable to prove any motion of the earth, enter Jew Albert Einstein with a theory about relative motion and space time curvature that no one can understand.

    As the speculation goes, another such hurdle for the model was faced in the 1950s when Admiral Byrd explored Antarctica, which was subsequently closed off to private exploration, an event followed closely by the beginnings of the space program. NASA’s roots in the 1940s, when it was the JPL, were established by black magic occultists such as Jack Parsons and L. Ron Hubbard. The symbol of a serpent’s forked tongue was chosen very deliberately.

    In this theory, the space program began as a defense maneuver for the heliocentric model, as well as a nice money-making scam. Photographs of the spinning ball earth, along with astronaut testimony were to provide the ultimate proof of a model in which not only the widespread conventional wisdom was invested, but also million of careers, indeed entire fields of academic inquiry, and many trillions of dollars. Billions just to NASA alone each year.

    Now you ask yourself, if this is true, what sort of people would tell lies of these proportions going back hundreds of years in order to manipulate public opinion? And the answer of course is Jews would do it, because we see them doing it every day with Russiagate, or whatever the propaganda talking point du jour is. What seem to be mostly gentile organizations are, in this interpretation, simply fronts for the ongoing Jewish supremacist drive to domination.

    That’s the theory anyway.

  5. Sparkon says:

    I read both articles with interest. The new, revised version at VT needed an additional thorough proofing before publication. I encountered several examples of run-together words:

    “The NASAAct of 1958made”

    “officiallymade”

    “renamed the Lyndon B. Johnson Space Centerin 1973.”

    “TheApollo program stopped”

    There are others. Of course this is a big surprise as VT is renowned far and wide for its error-free copy.

    • Replies: @Kevin Barrett
  6. ” Of course this is a big surprise as VT is renowned far and wide for its error-free copy.”

    😉

  7. Iris says:
    @Mulegino1

    There is no appreciable reason to believe that men sent by NASA really walked on the moon.

    While the photographic evidence is too vast and not conclusive enough, there is non-disprovable scientific and technological evidence that the Apollo missions never made it to the Moon.

    Russian experts with impeccable credentials ( PHD’s) have proven beyond doubt that the Apollo 11 mission did not even reach Low Earth Orbit, that the Saturn V rocket booster was so underpowered that it could not have carried the payload required for a return journey to the Moon, and that the velocities publicised by NASA in their alleged flight plans could not have been achieved.

    • Agree: Mulegino1
  8. @Anon000

    doesn’t have any real understanding of what he’s talking about

    Jones states, “sexual liberation is a form of political control.”

    Such analysis only comes from a brilliant mind. That single sentence alone fully encapsulates the Globohomo agenda currently being implemented and brought down on us like a sledgehammer throughout the entire world.

    It’s unfortunate that your “science” and programming doesn’t allow you to see that.

    • Replies: @anon
    , @Alphonsus
  9. @Iris

    Apollo 11’s radio communication was tracked by multiple radio telescopes, including those in the USSR. Since the USA was claiming victory over the latter in the race to the moon, it is hard to believe that the Soviets would have remained silent if they had discovered that Apollo 11 never reached the moon.

    • Replies: @anon
    , @Iris
  10. @Anon000

    HA! The dude can reference Socrates and Bowie in the same sentence–he speaks truth. You’re a troll.

  11. anon[931] • Disclaimer says:
    @James N. Kennett

    Apollo 11’s radio communication was tracked by multiple radio telescopes, including those in the USSR. Since the USA was claiming victory over the latter in the race to the moon, it is hard to believe that the Soviets would have remained silent if they had discovered that Apollo 11 never reached the moon.

    Exactly. If there was a “moon conspiracy”, Soviet Union and China were part of it.
    If moon landings were fake, both capitalism and communism are fake and the whole Cold War was fake.
    Few conspiracy theorists want to venture into such deep rabbit hole, for obvious reasons.

    • Replies: @Violetta
    , @anon26_
  12. Mr. Anon says:
    @Iris

    Russian experts with impeccable credentials ( PHD’s) have proven beyond doubt that the Apollo 11 mission did not even reach Low Earth Orbit,….

    Who? Name them. Where is their proof?

    • Replies: @Iris
  13. Violetta says:
    @gsjackson

    Excellent summary. It’s indeed staggering to consider how deeply entrenchend Copernicanism is nowadays when actual, repeatable empirical evidence for it is so sorely lacking. The one thing to consider when debating this topic – before getting mired in this or that specific fact or observation – is always who has the right to the null hypothesis, i. e. on whom lies the burden of proof. NEVER give a-priori permission to Copernicanists; THEY have to provide evidence for their assertions, and ad-homs and appeals to authority obviously won’t cut it. Classical cosmology (vulgo: “flat earth”) is the baseline; Copernicanism the very strange and almost wholly unsupported alternative hypothesis.

    • Replies: @gsjackson
    , @JoeFour
  14. Icy Blast says:

    Millions of people seem determined to erase the amazing accomplishments of Werner von Braun and his Rocket Mafia from history. Germanophobia is alive and well, I’m sad to report.

    • Replies: @gsjackson
    , @anon
    , @Iris
  15. anon[227] • Disclaimer says:
    @Mulegino1

    > there is no appreciable reason to believe that men sent by NASA really walked on the moon.

    LOL, you’re an idiot. Several Apollo moon landing sights have been photographed, along with the tracks the astronauts left on the surface.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third-party_evidence_for_Apollo_Moon_landings#New_lunar_missions

    • Replies: @Mulegino1
  16. Violetta says:
    @anon

    If there was a “moon conspiracy”, Soviet Union and China were part of it.

    Indeed. Remember who launched Sputnik.

    If moon landings were fake, both capitalism and communism are fake and the whole Cold War was fake.

    Indeed again. Remember who financed the Revolution of 1917, and read up on Convergence Theory and who prepared the rise of China, specifically the Yale-China association.

    Few conspiracy theorists want to venture into such deep rabbit hole, for obvious reasons.

    Not at all – this is actually babby tier stuff, especially regarding the Cold War.

  17. anon[227] • Disclaimer says:
    @Iris

    > there is non-disprovable scientific and technological evidence that the Apollo missions never made it to the Moon.

    No, there isn’t. The retard is strong with you. Never saw the LRO photographs?

    • Replies: @Simply Simon
  18. The burden of proof falls directly upon NASA and NASA has no proof to speak of. Somehow, despite the moon landings being the accomplishment of the century, NASA failed to preserve their video evidence as well as their engineering archives.

    This massive feat of engineering should be repeatable, but for some odd reason, it isn’t. The explanation for why the moon landings are not possible with today’s technology is that the technology was developed in the 1960s and has been lost since then. Of course, all the ’60s technology that has become obsolete is still available, and the only lost technology is that of the Apollo project.

    That’s kind of odd.

  19. Violetta says:

    No, there isn’t. The retard is strong with you. Never saw the LRO photographs?

    So you’re trying to prove the veracity of one set of NASA fotos by… pointing to another set of NASA fotos? Nice logic!

  20. gsjackson says:
    @Violetta

    Yes, as one commentator noted recently the correct response when asked to make the case for a flat, motionless earth is: “It’s not a case, it’s an observation.” The burden of proof is on Copernicans to show that everything we can see and experience with our senses is wrong, and it doesn’t appear as if they’ve made much of an effort to do so.

    I suppose the process through which they bypass such proof is a simple enough one, duplicated with evolution. Entice the self-styled intellectuals with an opportunity to stand boldly against what Christianity seems to believe. Then rely on them, with ever increasing Jewish assistance, to take over academia, to the point where if you want to call yourself educated and intelligent you have to accept the belief without question.

    • Replies: @Viking swordsman
  21. gsjackson says:
    @Icy Blast

    It’s interesting that Von Braun chose to summarize all his “amazing accomplishments” with a single Biblical passage on his gravestone, Psalm 19:1 — “The heavens declare the glory of God, and the firmament showeth his handiwork.”

    • Replies: @SolontoCroesus
  22. Mulegino1 says:
    @anon

    It is you who are the credulous idiot. Those photographs are no more convincing than Colin Powell’s test tube full of white powder.

    Why are the so called “moon rocks” proven to be of Antarctic origin? Why was it necessary to show the photograph of a round window in low earth orbit and claim that it was the entire planet earth?

    Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus.

    • Agree: Iris
    • Replies: @eah
  23. anon[300] • Disclaimer says:

    > NASA has no proof to speak of

    Wrong. see the picture above?

    > should be repeatable

    And was repeated 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 (six) times!

    • Replies: @Twodees Partain
    , @Ahem
  24. Clemsnman says:

    Astronauts found glass on the moon’s surface, which is consistent with the theory that our Sun nova’s every 12k years or so. They also surprisingly discovered after a seismic test that the moon is largely hollow, as it rang like a bell.

    Unexpected and unpredicted findings smack of actually being there. All the “it would have been this or that” is not convincing.

  25. JoeFour says:
    @Violetta

    “Classical cosmology (vulgo: “flat earth”) is the baseline.”

    Yes!

    The decisive question is actually very simple: is there curvature …. or not? If there is, we have a round ball. If not, we have a flat plane. Here’s a video that documents an attempt to answer the question using infrared photography:

    • Replies: @gsjackson
  26. @gsjackson

    Fascinating the connection between Freemasons, Jews, and NASA. Thanks for opening another field of inquiry.

    For the past week or so C Span has been pushing a poll that C Span and Ipsos sponsored, that collected opinions of Americans eagerness to re-vitalize NASA, to go to the moon, or to Mars.

    Polls are, of course, one of the propagandists’ favorite forms — the World Union of Jewish Students 2002 Hasbara Manual states this boldly:

    Bandwagon
    Most people, when in doubt, are happy to do what other people are doing. This is the bandwagon effect. People are happy to be part of the crowd, and subtle manipulators can play on this desire by emphasizing the large size of their support. Although it is reasonable that people are given a chance to find out how many other supporters a speaker or movement has, often it is possible to create the impression of extensive support – through gathering all supporters in one place, or through poorly conducted opinion polls – in an attempt to persuade people who are keen to follow the crowd.
    Israel activists can commission opinion polls amongst groups who favour Israel, and use these to give the impression that Israel is the ‘team to support’. Demonstrations, and even photos that give the impression of large numbers can help to create the impression that Israel is even more popular than it is.
    Remember that playing with perceptions of numbers supporting a cause can be problematic if this means that genuine supporters become complacent. https://www.middle-east-info.org/take/wujshasbara.pdf

    .

    [Frank Luntz’s 2009 Global Language Dictionary is more sophisticated but its foundation and pillars rely on “polling.” https://www.transcend.org/tms/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/sf-israel-projects-2009-global-language-dictionary.pdf ]

    Gilad Atzmon’s essay on the BBC’s Israel First orientation is mirrored on C Span.

    What is seldom or never mentioned on C Span — C Span’s ‘sins of omission’ — are the test of C Span’s commitment to genuine communication in contrast to bandwagoning, or propagandizing, or conditioning, or as a nexus of social engineering.
    A seasoned C Span cynic inexorably asks, What is C Span NOT saying; what bandwagon is C Span driving?

    Rick Wiles at TruNews answered those questions:

    July 16, 2019: Today on TRUNEWS we discuss the mysterious bill
    H.R. 1837 “U.S.-Israel Cooperation Enhancement and Regional Security Act”,
    which is supported by two thirds of the House of Representatives and empowers President Trump with warlord-like abilities toward the defense of Israel and creation of space based laser weapons. We discuss how the law would create a joint-Cyber Command in Tel Aviv and forward the vision of Prime Minister Netanyahu’s New Zionist empire in the Middle East. Doc Burkhart, Edward Szall, Matt Skow, Kerry Kinsey. Airdate: July 16, 2019

    https://www.trunews.com/stream/united-zionist-cyber-command-congress-forges-us-israel-alliance-in-direct-energy-space-weapons

    PS If someone knows how to post the TruNews video or podcast, please do so.

    I think that Israel “partnering with” aka stealing from USA , giving both the capacity to dominate & weaponize space is extremely dangerous.

  27. anon[277] • Disclaimer says:
    @Jon Baptist

    Jones states, “sexual liberation is a form of political control.”

    And what then is sexual oppression? Political liberation? I thought the theory around here was that all these liberal scolds are rooted in Puritanism (i.e. crypto-Judaism).

    • Replies: @Jon Baptist
  28. anon[277] • Disclaimer says:
    @Icy Blast

    Indeed.

    Flat Earth/Moon Landing Hoax pretends to be “exposing” Jewish science, but actually is a Jewish psyop to denigrate the achievements of Von Braun and other NS scientists, as well as promote the cosmology of the Jewish scriptures.

  29. @gsjackson

    Speaking of C Span — as part of the network’s week-long celebration of the Apollo moon landing, Bill Barry, NASA’s chief historian, answered phone-in questions, including one about Buzz Aldrin, a Presbyterian elder, who carried a chalice, vial of wine, and a blessed Communion host to the moon, and had “Communion on the moon.”

    Barry replied:

    “Yeah, there was some sensitivity about religious issues, particularly after the Apollo Eight crew read from Genesis around Christmas Eve . . . there was some sensitivity about beingg overtly religious, because the Constitution says we will make no law about the establishment of religion.”

    https://www.c-span.org/video/?462701-4/washington-journal-bill-barry-discusses-50th-anniversary-apollo-11-moon-landing&start=2488 ~ 40 min

    Mythologist Joseph Campbell had a different take entirely from Barry’s: Campbell devoted an entire chapter to “The Moon Walk: The Outward Journey” in his book (and my personal ‘bible’) Myths to Live By.

    Campbell perceived man walking on the moon as the beginning of an entirely new epoch, and to commemorate it with readings from Genesis “had nothing whatsoever to do with the world that they were themselves then actually viewing and exploring. . . . How sad, I thought, that we should have had nothing in our own poetry to match the sense of that prodigious occasion! . . . There was that same old childhood dream of some Babylonian-born Hebrew of the fourth century B.C., telling of the dawn of a world which those three men up there, even as they read, had refuted! How very disappointing! Better by far, it seemed to me, would have been those beautiful half-dozen lines from the opening of Dante’s Paradiso:

    To the glory of Him that moves all things,
    penetrates through the universe, and is resplendent
    in one part more, and in another less.

    In the heaven that most of his light receives
    have I been, and I have seen things, to recount which,
    descending, I neither know how nor have the power.

    In Campbell’s estimation, the Italian poet, Giuseppe Ungaretti, provided a superior contemporary reaction to the Moon Walk, with these lines in the July 27, 1969 issue of Epoca:

    Questa è una notte diversa da ogni altra notte del mondo . . .
    [This is a different night from every other night in the world]
    https://viettaphotography.weebly.com/blog/scatti-letterari-giuseppe-ungaretti-e-la-conquista-della-luna

    (This line is reminiscent of the opening line of the Passover Seder, when Jews celebrate the slaughter of Egyptians, but as Italy’s great artists have done at least since Verdi, the focus is shifted from the inward and murderous to the outward and universalist http://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-oddities-of-the-jewish-religion/#comment-2421632 )

    and “the first verse of a new-world poetry in celebration of the moon-born revelation:”

    Che fai tu, Terra, in ciel? dimmi, che fai,
    Silenziosa Terra?

    [What are you doing, Earth, in heaven?
    Tell me, what are you doing, Silent Earth?]

    (Apparently, Giacomo Leopardi completed the poem:
    Canto notturno di un pastore errante dell’Asia . )

    Ungaretti reads Il fiumi

  30. Zumbuddi says:
    @Talha

    Made me laugh.

    Didn’t hurt at all.

  31. gsjackson says:
    @JoeFour

    Curvature was the issue that I could to some degree check out myself, and consequently got me interested in the globe skeptic movement. Go up in an airplane 35,000 feet and the horizon does always rise to eye level, as the flat earthers say. In flight on a clear Arizona day I can see for a hundred miles in either direction. No curvature apparent.

    From a vantage point in the lower Sierras in Northern California I was able to look out over a 120+ mile expanse between Mt Lassen and Mt Shasta. No curvature is noticeable, though there is supposed to be about a mile and a half of it, according to the globalists’ own formula.

    Mind you, all the globalists will point to ships disappearing from the bottom up as they sail away as one of their unassailable proofs of a globe. That begins at about three miles out, which means that at 120 miles they have gone over a hell of a lot of curvature. Of course, if the flat earthers are right — all receding objects appear to vanish from sight from the bottom up, but just get out a telescope or binoculars and the bottom part will reappear — then this argument is blown out of the water (no pun intended). This I haven’t yet checked out for myself.

    • Replies: @Che Guava
  32. getaclue says:
    @Mulegino1

    @anon I’ve heard that same “there are photographs” of the site that “prove” they were there a number of times and always look– this is total bs — each time I look –I see nothing other than surface shots and arrows–no discernible equipment nothing to “prove” anything–so I wouldn’t be calling anyone an “idiot” based on that–Did you actually look at the photos you link to? If so what do you base your statement of “proof” on?–your “photos” are more of the same–surface shots with arrows– totally useless to back up your position as they show anything at all to support a landing! Are you blind?

    • Agree: Mulegino1
  33. Iris says:
    @James N. Kennett

    it is hard to believe that the Soviets would have remained silent if they had discovered that Apollo 11 never reached the moon.

    They haven’t remained silent: they knew, and used the Moon Hoax secret to blackmail the USA in return for economic benefits.

    The Soviets knew that Apollo 11 was fake. They closely monitored the launch of Apollo 13, which empty capsule never made it to space an fell in the Atlantic off the Azores islands. It was snatched by a stealth Soviet submarine, and handed back to US icebreaker Southwind at Murmansk in Sept 1970, in presence of representatives of the Hungarian government acting as guarantors.

    Below is a photo of the Apollo 13 “transaction”, from the Hungarian Ministry of Defence archives:

    In exchange for their silence, the Soviets got industrial investments, financial loans, the first gas pipeline to Western Europe, large quantities of grain which caused shortage in the USA, and many more economic advantages.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
  34. Alphonsus says:
    @Jon Baptist

    “sexual liberation is a form of political control.”

    Jones got this idea from my patron St. Augustine’s teaching on libido dominandi.

    When looking into ideas, one finds that 99.999999736% of them aren’t actually original. And that’s just fine. In spite of devolved, impoverished modern man’s unquenchable lust for novelty, novelty is vastly overrated.

  35. @anon

    I don’t understand why Mr Barrett wastes space bringing up the moon conspiracy nonsense. All the astronauts were test pilots and engineers and there is no conceivable way they would be bought-off to perpetrate such a hoax. Give it a rest.

  36. Alphonsus says:

    What’s the answer to the objection that flying east from a city will eventually lead one back to that same city, thus indicating roundness?

    • Replies: @gsjackson
  37. Iris says:
    @Mr. Anon

    Who? Name them. Where is their proof?

    – Alexander Popov PhD, graduate from the Moscow Engineering Physics Institute (MEPhI) Department of Experimental and theoretical physics. Author of “Americans on the Moon: a Major Breakthrough or a Space Scam? in Russian, 2009.

    – Stanislav Pokrovsky, PhD, author of “Investigation into the Saturn V velocity and its ability to place the stated payload into Lunar orbit”.

    – Gennadi Ivchenkov, PhD, Bauman Moscow State Technical University , author of “ Evaluation of Saturn V rocket engines – Was the Apollo 11 Saturn V Seriously Underpowered?”

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
  38. Iris says:
    @Icy Blast

    Millions of people seem determined to erase the amazing accomplishments of Werner von Braun

    Werner Von Braun was a great scientist, to whom US space industry owes much. But he did not accomplish any lunar landing.

    After the alleged “success” of the 1969 Apollo 11 mission, he left NASA in 1970, aged only 58 years old, and retired shortly afterwards.
    Why do think a scientist at his optimal scientific maturity, at the stage where he can manage other researchers, would just walk away?

    • Agree: Robjil
    • Replies: @Eric Novak
  39. Iris says:
    @Simply Simon

    US astronauts were not necessarily “bought off”; they were probably patriotic people, whose worldview was greatly impacted by the 1962 Missile Crisis, and who believed that apparent superiority in space industry would protect their country from Cold War’s dangerous outcomes.

  40. Sam J. says:

    Go to this site

    https://www.moonhoaxdebunked.com/

    He has a staggering amount of information that NASA went to the Moon. There’s an enormous amount of data that we went to the Moon. To fake it so comprehensively would cost more than actually going there. I personally have never seen any “moon hoax” information that was not readily explained with a little thinking.

  41. @Anon000

    I think he does need to be less of a sourpuss and stop raising his voice when challenged. He may not know a lot of science but what he’s doing doesn’t require an in-depth knowledge. He has an impressive breadth and depth of knowledge in the humanities and history of social science. The race-realist types don’t like him but they themselves are more glaringly weak in humanities and politics than Jones is in science.

  42. @anon

    That weird looking photo isn’t proof of anything. The Apollo project is not repeatable, according to NASA. Have another cup of koolade.

  43. Giuseppe says:

    I read Moon Landing Skeptic’s entire article. While it ran the gamut from compelling (video evidence of practice runs) to silly (encoded messages in the movie The Shining) Alexei Leonov, the first man to walk in space, when asked if the moon landing was a hoax, said absolutely not, he watched the whole thing unfold from Moscow through the Russians’ high powered instrumentation. Case closed.

    • Replies: @Iris
    , @anonymous coward
  44. Patricus says:
    @Iris

    Americans were able to assemble a better team of engineers than Russians. No big surprise. Give Russians credit for achieving many great things. They fall short of world mastery, in fact they have always been laggards.

    • Replies: @Iris
  45. @Anon000

    I think you don’t like Germans and perhaps Catholics. Maybe your Jewish? That would probably follow

  46. gsjackson says:
    @Alphonsus

    The working flat earth map is a round disc, like a plate, with the North Pole at the center and Antarctica as an ice wall around the perimeter that holds in the oceans (see the U.N.logo map). So you can go around the world east and west, as millions obviously have, but not north and south, as no one ever has. The earth is round, at least the part we know of it, but not a sphere.

    These estimates of Antarctica correspond with observations of explorers in previous centuries, such as Capt. Cook, who tried to sail around it. Took three years, and they logged around 60,000 miles. Why not explore Antarctica now to see what’s out beyond the ice wall, and map the area? It’s not allowed, ever since a treaty signed by dozens of nations was put together in the ’50s following Byrd’s explorations. He described on TV an area the size of the U.S. with abundant natural resources, a clip you can find easily online.

    Flat earthers argue that this map explains most flight patterns better than the globe earth does, but note that it is a working map, and that we don’t have a definitive map of earth. They point out maps from earlier civilizations that show many large land masses out beyond the ice wall.

    • Replies: @Sparkon
    , @Alphonsus
  47. Iris says:
    @Giuseppe

    Alexei Leonov, the first man to walk in space, when asked if the moon landing was a hoax, said absolutely no. Case closed.

    You will have to reconsider that.

    Russia has all but officially expressed her position about the Moon landing being hoax.

    In February 2018, RT Arabic, a state-owned Russian TV channel, has aired a documentary featuring Pr Alexander Popov, PhD, who explained how the Moon landing hoax was carried out and how the USSR deliberately kept silent about it, gaining financial loans and economic advantages in return.

    Russia choosing to broadcast information about the Moon landing hoax is a very akin to an endorsement.

  48. Iris says:
    @Patricus

    Give Russians credit for achieving many great things. They fall short of world mastery, in fact they have always been laggards.

    Russians are the undisputed leaders of space industry.

    All modern rocket engines, without exception, including post-Saturn American engines, use Soviet/Russian technology.

    ‘Tubular’ American engines, such as the “miraculous” Saturn V assembly that allegedly propelled Apollo 11 to the Moon, have now been dumped into landfill, have ended up in museums, or occasionally fly in old rockets, such as the US Delta II or the Japanese H-1.

  49. Sparkon says:
    @gsjackson

    The Moon is demonstrably a sphere — or more precisely an oblate spheroid — which anyone can determine merely by observing the Moon’s phases.

    All of the planets and their moons display phases when observed from Earth, meaning they are all generally spherical in shape, including the Sun, whose sunspots (when it has them) sometimes can be observed rotating into view, and later rotating out of view.

    So the Flat Earthers would have us believe that the Earth is a flat disc while all the other bodies in the Solar System are demonstrably spheres?

    I call that special pleading.

    Anyway, as further proof of the Moon’s spherical shape, I refer you to this model from NASA:


    https://www.nasa.gov/centers/langley/multimedia/project-lola.html

    …because when you’re going to the Moon, you need a big model of the Moon, for practice, simulations, and stuff like that…

    • Replies: @gsjackson
  50. @anon

    And what then is sexual oppression? Political liberation?

    It is exactly political liberation. By not becoming a slave to deviant sexual desires, an individual is less likely to become an unwitting proxy warrior for the oligarchic push of the Globohomo and depopulation agendas. See video and Jaffe Memo link below. “Encourage increased homosexuality.” What is the goal for that?
    https://twitter.com/vdare/status/1151540261937283072

  51. El Dato says:
    @gsjackson

    My mind is blown.

    There are people who are even crazier than I thought possible.

    Maybe we are really living in Anti-DeSitter universe and it’s a conspiracy that no-one knows about it and the AdS/CFT is ACTUALLY TRUE AND THE SOLUTION TO EVERYTHING.

    Hey Ron, dontcha want to move the crazy circus to another website? http://www.unz-vixra.com or something?

    • Replies: @gsjackson
  52. Giuseppe says:
    @Iris

    You see what new levels of astonishment one must go to in order to keep the fake moon landing conspiracy narrative alive? The Space Race defined the Cold War and USSR complicity in a fraudulent moon landing is not credible. If you are going to prove that at the height of the Cold War the USSR deliberately allowed NASA to win the Space Race by pulling off the greatest public relations fraud in history, you’re going to have to provide unimpeachable evidence in a language we can understand.

    • Replies: @Iris
  53. gsjackson says:
    @Sparkon

    The flat earthers, or at least the most prominent one, Eric Dubay, argue that the moon, only one side of which can be seen from earth, is not terra firma at all. It is just a luminous source of light, which at certain points you can see through.

    They also say that if you take a look at the planets with your own telescope — and apparently there are some high powered ones available now for personal use — they don’t look like spheres at all, or anything like what NASA produces in photos. Just glowing sources of light also.

    As for the big model, well faking a moon landing is a pretty expensive production too, best carried off with little touches of verisimilitude, such as Buzz Aldrin bringing along the necessities for taking communion on the moon. Of course, anyone who has followed Buzz’s post-astronaut career and how he presents in public might surmise that taking the wine along was a major priority. There’s a recent video out there showing him, to all appearances well into his cups, answering a little girl’s question about why we haven’t returned to the moon: “Well, the truth is we didn’t go.” What he really meant is subject to interpretation, but those were his words.

    • Replies: @Talha
  54. gsjackson says:
    @El Dato

    You see, I have followed the flat earth discussion for a couple of years, first with the assumption it was insanity, then as an agnostic, and then as a deep skeptic of the Copernican model. One of the reasons I’ve moved in that direction is that all the heliocentric people bring to the table, commenting in their many hundreds, thousands, is this sort of ridicule. Almost never an argument, and when they do it is unpersuasive — like the one above: If everything else we can see in the sky is a sphere, then the earth must be too.

    You bring nothing because you’ve got nothing. Stick it where the sun don’t shine, asshole.

  55. Talha says:
    @gsjackson

    I remember reading a person who was involved with long range artillery simply dismiss these guys’ claims since it goes against literally centuries of collective human experience and knowledge that needs to take into account the earth being a sphere in that discipline (whether land or sea).

    That’s probably a good way to figure this out. Put a flat earth team with some artillery and the ability to use flat earth physics calculations versus another team miles away with the ability to account for curvature and Coriolis Effect and see what happens. The team that comes out of it with their legs intact wins.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @gsjackson
    , @Erebus
  56. Iris says:
    @Giuseppe

    you’re going to have to provide unimpeachable evidence in a language we can understand.

    Very detailed evidence of USSR’s complicity in the Moon Landing Hoax is available on the Internet, both in Russian and English language.

    1- A good article about a Soviet nuclear submarine picking up the empty Apollo 13 capsule off the Azores islands, and the capsule being handed back to US icebreaker “Southwind” is available in English:

    https://www.aulis.com/odyssey_apollo.htm

    2- On USSR’s active cover-up for the Moon landing fakery, one can read the translation from Russian to English of Pr Alexander Popov’s book ” Apollo-Soyuz: The Joint Hoax? “.

    But as the years and decades passed, information about the simulation and faking of the Apollo manned missions were surfacing. A thesis was published in Russia based on a number of findings that not one single manned Apollo craft ever flew to the Moon, and none ever managed to even reach LEO. [..]

    Therefore the widely-advertised Apollo-Soyuz flight serves as a convincing cover for all Apollo missions and for the entire Moon hoax program.

    3- Your assessment of the RT video is amusing.
    It wasn’t posted to convince people like yourself of the Moon landing fakery or of USSR’s complicity, but to highlight that Russia was now publicly broadcasting that the Moon mission was fake.

    RT broadcasts in 4 languages. The fact that only RT Arabic aired the program is probably due to the real threats exerted on this TV channel’s local licences. However, broadcasting such interview without even contradicting the scientist means that Russia is now officially endorsing the Hoax thesis to the eyes of dozens of millions of Arabic-speaking supporters.
    So, good luck burying your head in the sand.

  57. gsjackson says:
    @Talha

    Don’t believe everything you read. Or anything, for that matter, unless you can verify it yourself in some way. You can find the exact opposite points in the flat earth material. Neither artillery, nor bridge or railroad builders, submarine propulsion, any number of things you might think would require taking account of earth’s curvature and motion, do not. You can fire a cannon ball from the same point both east, while the earth is supposedly spinning in the same direction, and west presumably against the earth’s rotation, and it will travel the exact same distance.

    The era of mass communication we live in is so shot through with agenda-driven propaganda that it has rendered the culture of “experts” and the argument from authority a dead letter, at least in my mind. Does that make modern life one giant epistemological challenge, knowing whom or what to believe? You bet.

    • Replies: @Talha
  58. Alphonsus says:
    @gsjackson

    Sounds like madness, complete madness, very much in line with today’s reigning diabolical disorientation.

    • Replies: @gsjackson
  59. Talha says:
    @gsjackson

    Hey, like I said; I’m all for two opposing artillery teams settling it in real time for the world to see – no problems whatsoever.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @Viking swordsman
  60. @Giuseppe

    he watched the whole thing unfold from Moscow through the Russians’ high powered instrumentation

    Translation error. He didn’t watch some secret Soviet ‘instrumentation’, he watched the same live TV feed that everyone else in the world watched.

    He’s just a boomer with the usual ‘but I watched it live on teevee!!’ boomer canard.

    (Boomers think TV is a source of ground truth, instead of a propaganda box. Go figure.)

    • Replies: @Sparkon
    , @Giuseppe
  61. Mr. Anon says:
    @Iris

    And their proof? Can you state what it is? Can you provide a list of their publications so that we might judge with what authority they speak. I mean – you are using an argument from authority here – so we have to evaluate it on those grounds. Absent a compelling argument, why should I give a damn what some guys on the internet claim. In any event, there are lots of PhDs in aeronautical engineering in the U.S. who say we did go.

    I did find this on the web discussing Pokrovsky’s assertions:

    http://www.moonhoaxdebunked.com/2017/07/710-is-it-true-that-saturn-v-wasnt.html

    • Replies: @Iris
  62. Mr. Anon says:
    @Iris

    All modern rocket engines, without exception, including post-Saturn American engines, use Soviet/Russian technology.

    ‘Tubular’ American engines, such as the “miraculous” Saturn V assembly that allegedly propelled Apollo 11 to the Moon, have now been dumped into landfill, have ended up in museums, or occasionally fly in old rockets, such as the US Delta II or the Japanese H-1.

    You don’t know what the Hell you are talking about. You know nothing about any of this.

    • Replies: @Iris
  63. Mr. Anon says:
    @Iris

    It was a “boilerplate” capsule, used to train recovery crews.

    http://www.astronautix.com/n/nasaslostbotoryofbp-1227.html

    You people are all idiots.

  64. gsjackson says:
    @Alphonsus

    Funny, that’s exactly what the official story sounds like to me: 15 billion years ago an explosion happened for some reason, and ever since earth and everything else has been flying away from the explosion at about 1 million mph. Eventually human beings showed up on one of the hurtling spheroids, having morphed from single cell amoebas into sea creatures who crawled onto the land, eventually became monkeys and finally people who write poetry and build civilizations.

    Our spheroid spins around at 1,000 mph at the equator, while revolving around a sun that often looks close enough to touch but is actually 93 million miles away. This solar system is traveling around the Milky Way galaxy at over half a million mph, while the galaxy joins everything else in beating feet away from that explosion 15 billion years ago. None of this motion nor the curvature of the spheroid we’re on can be detected by our senses or proved through observable experimentation. Only through ‘thought experiments’ by ‘VERY SMART PEOPLE.’

    All of this is taught in American public schools as fact. Not theory, fact. You want to talk about madness, indeed diabolical madness. Nothing fits the definition better than believing that horseshit unquestioningly. I believe they call it the madness of crowds. ‘Where are we all going? Over the cliff. Cool.’

    • Replies: @Mevashir
  65. Iris says:
    @Mr. Anon

    Absent a compelling argument, why should I give a damn what some guys on the internet claim

    Your comment displays basic comprehension problems.

    Pr Popov did not “make claims on the Internet”. He wrote a book published in Russia, a first-class country in space industry, where there is plenty of competent aeronautical scientists and engineers able to understand and contradict his arguments, if they were wrong, demolishing his professional reputation in the process.

    Furthermore, his thesis are translated to English and published on the Aulis website. Is there any reason why Western scientists believers of the “Apollo miracle” do not take the pain to pen a refutation? And I mean a serious, scientific refutation of an identical scientific level, not the forum drivel you posted.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
  66. Sparkon says:
    @anonymous coward

    You babbled:

    He’s just a boomer with the usual ‘but I watched it live on teevee!!’ boomer canard.

    (Boomers think TV is a source of ground truth, instead of a propaganda box. Go figure.)

    Wrong. Apparently, you can’t be bothered with even simple fact checking before running your mouth.

    Alexi Leonov was born in 1934, and is no Baby Boomer.

    By contrast, I am a Baby Boomer — the last generation of Americans who had a good education. Those of us born between 1946 and about 1953 were the last generation of Americans who learned to read before the boob tube took over, and that is reflected in our very high SAT scores, among the highest ever.

    But don’t let facts get in your way.
    And don’t let Boomer Envy ruin your day.

  67. Iris says:
    @Mr. Anon

    Lol, baselessly undermining Russian technological achievements is such an original counter-argument !!!

    The US government ordered Russian-made rocket engines in 2018, at nearly the same time when the newly-created US Space Force was being established as a new branch of the US armed forces.

    Why would the US military rely on Russian rocket engines, ignoring the sanctions Russia has been under? Any clue?

    https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2018/08/01/us-space-contractor-signs-deal-continue-buying-russian-rocket-engines-a62409

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
  68. @Iris

    So given the choice between some conspiracy fellaw on RT.com, a propganda channel, and an actual cosmonaut who was actually present in Soviet russia – which was about to loose the moon race after spending billions of rubels and, infact, never called the Apollo missions a hoax – and who had a first row seat to watch the events unfold, you choose the former?

  69. @Talha

    gsjackson wrote:
    >I’m all for two opposing artillery teams settling it in real time for the world to see – no problems whatsoever.

    Hold on, didn’t you just claim this has already been done?
    Quote;

    gsjackson says:
    July 20, 2019 at 5:06 pm GMT • 100 Words

    […]

    “You can fire a cannon ball from the same point both east, while the earth is supposedly spinning in the same direction, and west presumably against the earth’s rotation, and it will travel the exact same distance.”

  70. Mr. Anon says:
    @Iris

    Why would the US military rely on Russian rocket engines, ignoring the sanctions Russia has been under? Any clue?

    Beacause they’re cheaper and some of them are pretty good.

    The Atlas Rocket uses Russian engines. The Antares Rocket does do, but they have a tendency to blow up.

    The Delta Rocket does NOT use russian engines. Neither does the Falcon.

    Every rocket engine built in this country up through the end of the Cold War was built independently of Russians or their know-how, including the RS-68, the RS-25, the RL-10, the H-1, the J2, the F-1, the Space Shuttle SRB, and various other solids. The Merlin was also developed in the United States, and not by Russians.

    You are an ignoramus. You know nothing of which you opine on.

  71. Mr. Anon says:
    @Iris

    Pr Popov did not “make claims on the Internet”. He wrote a book published in Russia, a first-class country in space industry, where there is plenty of competent aeronautical scientists and engineers able to understand and contradict his arguments, if they were wrong, demolishing his professional reputation in the process.

    What does he claim? You don’t even seem to know. So you are just taking it on authority. Why are your authorities better than mine? Or my own personal knowledge?

    So what is his argument? Can you say? Do you know?

    I don’t think you understand a single goddamned thing about any of it.

    Furthermore, his thesis are translated to English and published on the Aulis website. Is there any reason why Western scientists believers of the “Apollo miracle” do not take the pain to pen a refutation?

    Because it’s a waste of time trying to talk stupid people out of being stupid.

    And I mean a serious, scientific refutation of an identical scientific level, not the forum drivel you posted.

    “forum drivel”? Aulis is “forum drivel”.

    • Replies: @Iris
    , @Iris
  72. @Iris

    >All modern rocket engines, without exception, including post-Saturn American engines, use Soviet/Russian technology.

    During the Cold War none were Russian. Of the vehicles today, Falcon, Delta, Minotaur, Pegaus etc. and all the new ones under development, use american engines. And boosters. It’s only the first stage on Antares and Atlas that use Russian engines. And thats only quite recently, from 2000. The second stages, however, use american engines.

    • Replies: @Iris
  73. @gsjackson

    >The burden of proof is on Copernicans to show

    It’s rather the other way around. In law or philosophy the burden of proof usually lies with the one opposing or disputing a generally accepted norm or status quo. Hence the famous quote by Carl Sagan: “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence”

    >that everything we can see and experience with our senses is wrong

    Can you see the electrons running your computer? Does anything exsist if you can’t see it?

    There is no contradiction between our senses and Copernicanism. Our senses (I suppose you mean our vision) simply does not care whether the Earth is flat or spherical. Everything outside our line of sight is simply invisible regardless of our mental perspective.

    Indeed, Copernicus wasn’t even proposing a spherical Earth: it had been accepted knowledge since the ancient Greeks. Then Newton came around and pointed out that the Earth wasn’t actually spherical, but an ellipsoid.

    • Replies: @gsjackson
  74. @Simply Simon

    There is a lot you don’t understand.

  75. gsjackson says:
    @Viking swordsman

    Speaking of our “line of sight,” watch someone walk a mile down the road and see if you have any thoughts about the limitations of human vision. Because the jerry built Copernican system, with the sun 93 million miles away and the stars quadrillions, apparently holds that there are none.

    I’m sorry, but regardless of what many millions of people believe without giving the matter a second thought, the burden of proof is on a contention that is utterly preposterous on its face. Not just extraordinary claims, but apparently absurd ones. Especially when it is all jerry built on dodgy theories that can’t be proved by dodgy characters like Newton and Einstein.

    “…. a spherical earth had been accepted knowledge since the ancient Greeks.” This almost certainly isn’t true. Some Greeks postulated a ball earth, but every map known of until Copernicus was of a flat earth. Again though: “accepted knowledge” doesn’t really cut it as an arbiter of truth, especially in this era of easily propagandized masses.

    • Replies: @Viking swordsman
    , @Erebus
  76. Iris says:
    @Viking swordsman

    During the Cold War none were Russian.

    The point I was making is simple: why have the “tubular” cooling jacket American technology used on the Saturn V F-1 rocket engines been completely abandoned, and the US (and everybody else) reverted to “double-shell” cooling jacket Soviet technology , which is the technique overwhelmingly used today?

    The F-1 rocket engines allegedly used by NASA to propel the Apollo missions (1969-1972) had truly “miraculous” performances in terms of payload.
    According to NASA publicity material, the Saturn V first stage mass ratio (the ratio of the rocket’s wet mass to its dry mass) was an astonishing 17,5. It would make it the best ever, and unbeatable to date, as mass ratios are 14.4 for US H-1 first stage, 15 for Russian Proton booster, 15.2 for Soyuz 2nd stage, 16 for Atlas II, and finally 17 for the Space Shuttle.

    So how come such miraculously powerful and efficient engine technology (F-1) was completely abandoned after the Apollo missions ?

  77. Iris says:
    @Mr. Anon

    So you are just taking it on authority. Why are your authorities better than mine?

    Because it is “your” authorities, not “mine” who claim having achieved something completely out of the ordinary 5o years ago, and having “forgotten” how they did it, so cannot repeat their “exploit” today.
    This is a discussion forum about political cover-ups, remember?

    Aulis is “forum drivel”

    Are you pretending not to understand the point I repeatedly made?
    Aulis website is merely translating to English some of the very rich scientific and technological literature publicly available in Russia, debunking the Apollo hoax.

    Russia is a large country, with a respected space industry tradition, and has a credible voice outside her frontiers. A lot of people worldwide can see that the Apollo king is naked, even if Americans can’t.

    Because it’s a waste of time trying to talk stupid people out of being stupid.

    [Shrug]
    The “stupid people” who believed Apollo was a hoax were first the Chief Designers of the Soviet Space Industry Sergei Korolev, Valentin Glushko, Vladimir Chelomey, as stated in their recently released letters and reports to the CPSU Central Committee.
    http://www.epizodsspace.narod.ru/bibl/biblioteka.htm

    Other “stupid” people debunking the myth are Physics and technology professors A. Popov and A. .Velyurov, who have PhD’s and accomplished professional careers:
    http://www.manonmoon.ru/
    http://free-inform.ru/pepelaz/pepelaz-13.htm

    The only reasonable and honest argument brought up by a “believer” in the UR main Moon Hoax article was that, by now, some qualified whistleblowers would have spoken up. Well, they did, albeit in Russian.

    One last thing: I don’t interact with people who use foul, vulgar and gross language, so not likely to reply to you again if you don’t tone down.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
  78. Ahem says:
    @anon

    How odd.

    I mentioned these photos as the fourth (or thereabouts) answer in this thread and it was blocked by the Admins.

    And yet, yours got through the filter.

    How odd.

  79. Che Guava says:
    @gsjackson

    On, a clear day, one may see the curvature of the Earth from a seashore, or, better still, a mountain near the sea.

    One of my small regrets in life, is not having been a Concorde passenger in a window seat, as for the first time in my life, I would have been able to afford it.

    Still, the ancients in Europe, and later China knew that the Earth is round. The Catholic-Orthodox also knew, because of visible evidence and access to ancient sources.

    FFS, an ancient Greek mathematician (Demokritos, IIRC, who also discerned the nature of matter as based on atoms) made an accurate estimate of the Earth’s diameter well over 2,000 years ago. I may be attributing that wrongly, but it was known.

    The ‘flat earth’ representations, at least in Europe and, later, China, were purely symbolic.

    However, mndern flat Earthers are amusing.

    • Replies: @Iris
    , @gsjackson
  80. Iris says:
    @Mr. Anon

    So what is his argument? Can you say? Do you know?

    There are many striking arguments, which I already posted in the Lind Dinh Moon Hoax article.

    I will repeat one argument I favour, because it is a black-and-white Physics-based argument, but also one pretty easy to understand by almost any logical mind.

    When flying outside of Earth’s atmosphere, rocket engines make a hole and leave a trace in the cloud layers they traverse. Ordinary clouds are located at a maximum of 12-13 km high above see level.
    This is why, when flying in commercial plane at cruise speed (above 10,000 feet), one doesn’t see any clouds above .

    This is illustrated by a photo taken from a NASA aircraft located at 10,000 feet high, showing the Columbia shuttle having made a hole in the cloud layer and progressing higher in a completely clear sky.

    NASA, as it happens, never released a continuous footage of Apollo 11 ascent. But people had personal Super 8 cameras at the time, and such a continuous amateur film was found with enthusiastic NASA/IBM employee Phil Pollacia.

    Pollacia’s film frames were checked and perfectly match NASA footage. The amateur film shows that the Apollo 11 rocket first crosses the cloud layer at second 105 of its flight. So Physics and meteorological science tells us that at sec 105, Apollo 11 was at about 8km above sea level.

    On the other hand, NASA Apollo 11 postflight trajectory record states that at sec 105, the rocket was 24 km up, the altitude necessary to escape Earth gravity after having used 60% of its fuel.

    In other terms, Physics tells us that the Apollo 11/Saturn V rocket assembly was lagging 3 times behind its official flight plan (8km instead of 24 km), and could have ended nowhere but in the Atlantic ocean.

    So what should we believe? Physics, or yet another Deep State “miracle”?

  81. Iris says:
    @Che Guava

    FFS, an ancient Greek mathematician made an accurate estimate of the Earth’s diameter well over 2,000 years ago.

    You are very correct.
    Earth’s circumference was calculated with an amazing accuracy by Greek scientist Eratosthène (276 to 194 BC), at 39,375 km calculated against 40,075 km actual.

  82. Sparkon says:

    Caption: This detail of a July 20, 1969 photo made available by NASA shows astronaut Neil Armstrong reflected in the helmet visor of Buzz Aldrin on the surface of the moon.

    We’ve all seen the famous pictures allegedly taken on the Moon where an astronaut’s visor acted like a fun house mirror, and we could see one astronaut reflected in the visor of the other, but on Earth, the astronaut’s helmet visors were strangely transparent.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
  83. Mr. Anon says:
    @Iris

    Because it is “your” authorities, not “mine” who claim having achieved something completely out of the ordinary 5o years ago, and having “forgotten” how they did it, so cannot repeat their “exploit” today.

    It was not out of the capabilities of the time. And we have not “forgotten” anything. It is simply not worth repeating – not for a government. For private entrepreneurs that it is a different matter, and some of them ARE trying to go to the Moon.

    This is a discussion forum about political cover-ups, remember?

    I don’t care what it is supposed to be. It is evidently a forum for technically illiterate people to gas on about things they know nothing about.

    Are you pretending not to understand the point I repeatedly made?
    Aulis website is merely translating to English some of the very rich scientific and technological literature publicly available in Russia, debunking the Apollo hoax.

    No, it is a fringe website publishing horses**t. What journal are these articles in?

    The “stupid people” who believed Apollo was a hoax were first the Chief Designers of the Soviet Space Industry Sergei Korolev, Valentin Glushko, Vladimir Chelomey, as stated in their recently released letters and reports to the CPSU Central Committee.

    I don’t read Russian. And, anyway, yeah – soviet flunkies would never lie to their commissar masters, would they?

    Other “stupid” people debunking the myth are Physics and technology professors A. Popov and A. .Velyurov, who have PhD’s and accomplished professional careers:
    http://www.manonmoon.ru/
    http://free-inform.ru/pepelaz/pepelaz-13.htm

    Wah, wah, wah. So what? America is full of much more distinguished physics and engineering professors who don’t dispute that America landed men on the Moon.

    One last thing: I don’t interact with people who use foul, vulgar and gross language, so not likely to reply to you again if you don’t tone down.

    Good. Don’t interact. Do you think I care? You are an idiot.

    • Replies: @gsjackson
  84. Mr. Anon says:
    @Iris

    When flying outside of Earth’s atmosphere, rocket engines make a hole and leave a trace in the cloud layers they traverse. Ordinary clouds are located at a maximum of 12-13 km high above see level. This is why, when flying in commercial plane at cruise speed (above 10,000 feet), one doesn’t see any clouds above .

    You sound like a stupid person. There are lots of kinds of clouds, at various altitudes. Commercial aircraft fly at 30,000 – 35,000 ft., much higher than 10,000 ft.

    NASA, as it happens, never released a continuous footage of Apollo 11 ascent. But people had personal Super 8 cameras at the time, and such a continuous amateur film was found with enthusiastic NASA/IBM employee Phil Pollacia.

    NASA released lots of footage of the launch. There is no continuous footage because no single camera could film it at both low altitude with high resolution and high altitude with any resolution.

    Pollacia’s film frames were checked and perfectly match NASA footage. The amateur film shows that the Apollo 11 rocket first crosses the cloud layer at second 105 of its flight. So Physics and meteorological science tells us that at sec 105, Apollo 11 was at about 8km above sea level.

    That is a ridiculous assertion based your child-like understanding of clouds.

    As I said, you appear to be an exceedingly stupid person, who understands nothing about technical matters. Your opinions are worthless and irrelevant. Nobody cares what nobodies like you think. That is why you are reduced to howling at the Moon from an obscure internet chat-room.

    You people are ridiculous and laughable. I’m laughing at you now.

    • Replies: @Iris
  85. Iris says:
    @Mr. Anon

    Thirteen insults, zero counter-arguments. An exemplary “believer”.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
  86. gsjackson says:
    @Che Guava

    Next time you see that curvature make a video of it and Youtube will ensure that you get millions of viewers. You will be a hero to a flagging (though still arrogant) band of global polemicists who try to engage in the Youtube wars on this subject, mostly young Brits. Seriously — you will be DA MAN.

    Eratosthenes. His experiment works the same assuming the sun going around a flat earth is about as far away as it appears to be. He probably got the distance of the sun’s daily rotation about right.

    As far as what the actual circumference of the earth is, that figure apparently has been arrived at by satellites, which flat earthers believe are also a fraud, sprung straight from Freemason Arthur Clarke’s imagination into space within a decade.

    Glad you are amused. Life is best journeyed through laughing as much as possible.

    • Replies: @TravisBaskerfield
  87. Che Guava says:

    Thank you

    I bad forgotten the name, so really randomly picked Demokritos. So a double thanks for it. OTOH, I only want to be coorect on the flow of things.

    My own opinion on the Eastern Roman Empire, they had things we don(t know of know, look at the dome of the Ctathedral of Saint Sophia.

    I may be repeating myself here.

  88. gsjackson says:
    @Mr. Anon

    According to this American astronaut, we didn’t precisely forget the technology, we “destroyed” it.

    • LOL: Iris
    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
  89. Mr. Anon says:
    @Iris

    Thirteen insults, zero counter-arguments. An exemplary “believer”.

    I’ve provided plenty of counter-arguments. You’ve ignored them. Your kind always does. It was you who asserted that all American rocket engines are derived from Russian designs. I made a post proving you wrong – which you interestingly ignored.

    You Moon Hoax idiots are all the same. You bring up A. A is refuted. Then you move to B. B is refuted, then you mention C, etc.

    You are stupid people who make stupid arguments.

    And – frankly – insults are all you deserve.

    • Replies: @anon
  90. Mr. Anon says:
    @gsjackson

    He’s wrong.

    You think the World is flat. I don’t give a flying f**k what you think. You are a nitwit.

    • Replies: @gsjackson
  91. Mr. Anon says:
    @Sparkon

    Gosh. Maybe they used different visors when they were training on Earth. Ones that weren’t gold-coated. Maybe they used different suits.

    This is supposed to be proof that it was all fake?

    You people are such ridiculous clowns.

  92. Mr. Anon says:
    @Iris

    Why don’t you address the original point? You claimed that American engines are all Russian.

    They aren’t. You are wrong. Go back and address that, you stupid ninny.

    In any event, you are an idiot, who knows nothing about rocketry. There is more to a rocket’s overall performance than that of it’s first-stage. A rocket has several stages; their performance differs to meet different needs for a given flight profile. And performance is not all that is important. Cost is a factor too.

    You are just a bloviating nitwit, opining about things you don’t understand at all.

  93. Sparkon says:

    With the LEVA on and the visors down, the moonwalkers were looking through three layers – the EMU pressure helmet, the protective visor and the gold sun visor.

    So obviously Armstrong didn’t have his gold sun visor pulled down for at least some practice sessions, probably so he could see better what he was doing, but such defeats the purpose of the practice or training, I’d suggest, because it wasn’t being conducted under realistic conditions, i.e. with reduced light. Of course, they didn’t have the reduced 17% lunar gravity either…

    With the gold visor down, the Apollo astronauts would have filtered out 90% of the visible light, according to this guy, along with almost all UV, and nearly all IR.

    The transmittance of the total visor assembly was 10 percent in the visible range (.39 to .75 microns) and one percent in the UV range (.25 to .39 microns). The total transmittance’ in the IR range was 5 percent (.75 to 2.5 microns).

    http://www.collectspace.com/ubb/Forum29/HTML/001289.html

    With their vision obscured by the reflective gold sun visors, the Apollo astronauts would have had a rather dim view of their surroundings. No wonder they needed to practice. Too bad they didn’t pull down their visors to make it even more realistic.

    • Replies: @Twodees Partain
  94. @Giuseppe

    Live news footage of the moon landing was not broadcast in the USSR.

    Exactly. Which is why a Soviet cosmonaut needed security clearance and special equipment to watch live American TV.

    It wasn’t “Soviet instrumentation” he watched, it was simple old American TV. (Except that you need special equipment to do that in 1969 USSR.)

  95. gsjackson says:
    @Mr. Anon

    FB, is that you? At the same time you’re racking up all those points on the Teaching Holocaust thread you’re over here devastating us as well with skillfully deployed vituperation? Impressive versatility.

    • LOL: Iris
  96. anon26_ says:
    @anon

    I can see the Soviet Union maybe being in on it, but I don’t see why China would or how.

    Back then China was poverty-stricken and, on top of that, was very technologically backwards even though they had their own national science councils. Doubt they cared to monitor Apollo 11’s communications (with the consideration in mind of whether or not they could do it with consistency and reliability) unless they could gain some scientific/technological knowledge from it, which I don’t see how they could. According to moon landing researchers, Russians, having their own space program and research, knew by that time that reaching the moon and coming back would be impossible; so there would be a reason for them to monitor communications so they could have a card to play against the Americans in the future.

    China did not have a space program. They probably believed and went along with the American narrative that it was possible to go to the moon. So what would be the point for them to monitor American space communications? All the “photos”, “film footage”, and “audio communications” were all publicly broadcasted to the international press anyways; so if China believed the Americans, in their minds what they would have gotten from monitoring communications would be just a duplicate of what would be available publicly.

    Plus, China had way bigger concerns at that time, like trying to feed all the poor and malnourished and building up basic industrial production.

  97. Giuseppe says:

    All that are pushing this crazy certifiable nutcase idea that the USSR colluded with NASA to pull off a moon landing hoax at the height of the Cold War are truly missing the bigger picture. If what you assert is true, then the Cold War itself was a complete hoax, and even a bigger hoax than the moon landing. And even bigger than that, bigger than war is peace, bigger than slavery is freedom, bigger than ignorance is strength, is the idea that Eurasia is really Oceania.

    I counsel reality. My words have ended.

    • Replies: @Iris
  98. @Iris

    >when flying in commercial plane at cruise speed (above 10,000 feet), one doesn’t see any clouds above

    Clearly not the case, and so I can only hope you get the chance to fly on a airliner some day.

    https://tinyurl.com/y6s4qhnh

  99. @Iris

    >The point I was making is simple: why have the “tubular” cooling jacket American technology used on the Saturn V F-1 rocket engines been completely abandoned, and the US (and everybody else) reverted to “double-shell” cooling jacket Soviet technology , which is the technique overwhelmingly used today?

    Firstly, it would be prudent if you could provide exact references on the “Soviet technology” assertion.

  100. @gsjackson

    >the burden of proof is on a contention that is utterly preposterous on its face.

    So it would seem you are acknowledging you can not prove that the Earth is flat, so you instead avoid the issue alltoghether by simply shifting the burden of proof?

  101. Erebus says:
    @Talha

    That’s probably a good way to figure this out.

    Another way is to have 2 ships leave the same port and travelling at the same speed over the ground (SOG) heading for the same destination, but one steering a constant compass course and the other steering a Great Circle Route.

    The team that comes out of it with their legs intact wins.

    For some extra urgency, provision ships for the shorter anticipated voyage. The first one into the destination port determines the argument. The other one goes adrift and starves after running out of fuel along the way. If one uses airplanes instead, the contest ends catastrophically for the loser.

    Until reading this thread, I hadn’t considered the possibility that some flat-earthers were earnest. Live ‘n learn. The human psyche is capable of dredging up all manner of silly notions and embedding them in a world view. Of course, not all of them can be lived by for long and the worst of them can mean the loss of more than one’s legs.

    PS: gsjackson seems to be unaware of moving frames of reference.

    • Replies: @Talha
    , @gsjackson
  102. Talha says:
    @Erebus

    That is another good experiment.

    I know when the sun sets here in Illinois, and I call my mom in California, she says it’s still light outside, and I’ve done FaceTime with her so I know it’s true.

    Honestly though, I don’t particularly care if someone thinks the world is flat – more power to them. I just don’t want them piloting the aircraft I’m flying in, but otherwise, I’m sure they’re fine folks.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @gsjackson
  103. gsjackson says:

    The prima facie case is that the earth is flat and motionless because that is what we perceive. Its motion and curvature cannot be proved, according to Einstein, ergo burden of proof over to the globalists.

    But you want some proofs it’s flat:

    • Replies: @Viking swordsman
  104. gsjackson says:
    @Erebus

    “PS: gsjackson seems to be unaware of moving frames of reference.”

    I’m not. Do enlighten.

    • Replies: @Erebus
    , @gsjackson
  105. Erebus says:
    @gsjackson

    Some Greeks postulated a ball earth, but every map known of until Copernicus was of a flat earth.

    Rubbish. You’re confusing helio-centric cosmology first conclusively established by Copernicus with the spherical model of the Earth, which is indeed ancient.

    Strabos described Crates’ globe ~150BC. Since a century before that, and right through the “dark ages” to Copernicus, the spherical Earth was a given amongst educated persons. The oldest surviving terrestrial globe, the “Erdapfel” dates from the early 1490s, 50 yrs before Copernicus published his De revolutionibus.

    • Agree: Iris
  106. Erebus says:
    @gsjackson

    Do enlighten.

    At #58, you said:

    You can fire a cannon ball from the same point both east, while the earth is supposedly spinning in the same direction, and west presumably against the earth’s rotation, and it will travel the exact same distance.

    Imagine yourself on a moving walkway, walking first one way and then the other. Now imagine yourself watching a person do that. What’s the difference?

    Get it now?

    • Replies: @gsjackson
  107. gsjackson says:
    @Talha

    Yeah, you definitely want somebody who’s adept at hitting landing strips that are moving away or towards you at 800 mph. That’s got to take some serious skill.

    But you know, pilots don’t make any adjustments downward to adjust to the curvature and avoid flying off into space. The official story apparently is that the plane is carried along by the earth’s atmosphere, which keeps it at a uniform distance from the earth a it traverses the curve.

    And you do know, don’t you, that different times of daylight in different parts of the world is explained just as well by a sun rotating around the earth, just as it appears to do?

    In his book The Grand Design Stephen Hawking wrote that the Ptolemaic system explains all observable phenomena just as well as the Copernican system, and was not disproved by the Copernican system. He simply preferred the Copernican system because math equations were easier to work out by assuming the sun as stationary (within the context of the solar system).

    • Replies: @Talha
    , @Mevashir
  108. gsjackson says:
    @gsjackson

    I should say rather that I am unaware. Unless you’re just going to talk about Einstein and relativity, which I truly don’t understand and I doubt you can clarify it. And I’m a bit more inclined to credit the Michaelson-Morley experiment in which no movement of the earth was detected, which Einstein was attempting to explain away.

  109. @gsjackson

    >The prima facie case is that the earth is flat and motionless because that is what we perceive.

    What about blind persons? By this logic, one can not prove that anything exist beyond the line of sight either; that I do not exist because you can not see me; that the airplane is motionless because I can not perceive that it is flying at 500mph. But that would be rather silly perceptions, I think you would agree.

    So how, exactly, would you prove by scientific means that the Earth is flat and not, say, a qube or trangle?

    How would you, for instance, explain why we are not falling off the flat Earth, seing as our vision is actually projected upside down on our retina and simply rearranged by our brain: our perception is diametrically reversed and we are all stuck to the ground on an upside down Earth and thus we should be falling off into the sky below us.

    And do take the time to put it in writing, not links to videos, if you don’t mind.

    • Replies: @gsjackson
  110. anon[137] • Disclaimer says:
    @Mr. Anon

    > You Moon Hoax idiots are all the same. You bring up A. A is refuted. Then you move to B. B is refuted, then you mention C, etc.

    That’s the Creationist tactic called the “Gish Gallop.” Same mentality.

  111. Violetta says:

    Seems like NIDF (NAShA internet defence force) is out in force again. As always, strong on insults and ad-homs, weak on actual arguments that couldn’t be debunked by a curious 14-year old. Masons and their moonie fanboys are getting desperate, and rightly so: without the moon hoax as a baseplate, the whole Copernican house of cards comes tumbling down.

    • Agree: gsjackson
  112. Iris says:
    @Giuseppe

    certifiable nutcase idea that the USSR colluded with NASA to pull off a moon landing hoax

    Nice to see you can do without the Tourette syndrome, FB.

    I have already replied 476 times to the question you keep repeating in hope of a different answer: the collusion between USA and USSR to hide the Moon Hoax was reported in a Russian book, published and widely read in Russia, and translated to English on the Aulis website.

    Furthermore, the thesis was publicised without criticism on Russian state-owned RT Arabic TV channel. All links posted in my comments above.

    I suggest you make a call to President Putin and tell him to lock his “nutcase” journalists in some asylum. Best.

    • Replies: @Viking swordsman
  113. Viewed from a technical standpoint alone, 3 flawless moon landings and retreivals could not have occured. As would be readily confirmed by anyone, like myself, having spent his entire working career of 50+ years in the technical field.

  114. gsjackson says:
    @Viking swordsman

    Nah, not worth the time. I’ve said most of what I know, and you’re not interested in clarifying anything, just obscuring the issues into pointless nonsense.

    Do have a look at Dubay. If you can refute any two or three of his proofs — let’s say so that a literate adult can assent to the argument and then paraphrase it without looking — then you too can be an internet star. The globalists seriously need reinforcements, so if you think these probing questions and hypotheticals of yours would carry the day, go for it.

    • Replies: @Viking swordsman
  115. gsjackson says:
    @Erebus

    I get some extraordinarily tortured reasoning deployed to explain away why no motion of the earth can be detected. One of the very slender threads the Copernican model hangs by.

    • Replies: @Erebus
  116. Talha says:
    @gsjackson

    Hey look, if you feel it is just as well explained by the sun rotating around a flat earth (I assume my mom is on the other side) then that’s great. I really have no inclination to convince you otherwise. It doesn’t bother me that some people live their lives believing the earth is flat.

    Again, I would just not want to be flown by a pilot that believes that. By the way, is there a group of official aviators that are part of the flat earth society and willing to put their name on it?

    Peace.

    • Replies: @Iris
  117. @Iris

    >Furthermore, the thesis was publicised without criticism on Russian state-owned RT Arabic TV channel.

    It could be mistaken for the archtypical KGB disinformation plot. Remember, Putin was a career KGB/FSB officer for most of his adult life until he hit politics, and many of his closest allies in the Kreml have been former KGB comrades.

    A few exerpts from a 1983 interview with Soviet defector and KGB agent Yuri Bezmenov:

    >>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NUMMDJf6Q7Q

    quote:
    “To change the perception of reality of every american, to such an extent that despite the abundance of information noone is able to come to sensible conclusions
    Exposure to true information does not matter anymore
    A person who is demoralized is unable to assess true information
    The facts tell nothing to him, even if I shower him with information, with authentic proof, with documents and pictures. …he will refuse to believe it..

    Eliminate the principle of free market competition
    Put in place a big brother government
    with a benevolent dictator who will primise lots of things
    never mind if the promises will be fulfilled or not
    He will go to Moscow to kiss the bottoms of the new generation of Soviet assassins
    He will create false illusions that the situation is under control
    It’s a great brainwashing process
    /quote

    • Replies: @Zumbuddi
  118. Erebus says:
    @gsjackson

    If the simple reasoning embedded in my walkway example tortures you extraordinarily, you are in possession of an extraordinarily fragile intellect.

    Using trains instead of a walkway, it was my primary school intro to Relativity Theory many decades ago. Something tells me trains would have made it no less tortuous for you.

    With the dumbing down of American education, perhaps we shouldn’t be surprised that the notion of a flat earth is making a comeback. My spidey sense tells me that it may be a leading indicator that the West’s mental constructs are heading back to the European dark ages from which the West sprang.

    • Replies: @gsjackson
  119. Iris says:
    @Talha

    By the way, is there a group of official aviators that are part of the flat earth society ?

    Also, is it a coincidence if every time the public questions a real institutional conspiracy (the Moon Landing hoax, Nine Eleven “Planes” terror attack, the Bilderberg oligarchy), an obviously ludicrous counter-conspiracy theory (Flat Earth theory, Wood’s Directed Energy Weapons, reptilian Royals) suddenly appears, to muddy the waters and make all genuine truth seekers look like lunatics?

    • Agree: Mevashir
  120. gsjackson says:
    @Erebus

    Your example is not hard to understand, it simply is flimsy, unpersuasive evidence for the Copernican system. A last ditch effort to pull its chestnuts out of the fire.

    Maybe I have a fragile intellect, but would you like to compare academic credentials, since the argument from authority seems to be the only one that carries any weight with you? Bring it then. I’ll give you my name and the institutions that granted the degrees so you can check. The Bar and Mensa membership — you can check it all.

  121. gsjackson says:
    @Iris

    Do you think that my purpose here is to distract attention from the moon landing hoax and discredit those who argue for it? Seriously?

    If you listen to the interview again you might notice how the flat earth discussion got started. Neither Barrett nor Guyenot could think of any significant Jewish influence in NASA. I said there is some but you have to trace it back through the secret societies, and the people doing that are those challenging the heliocentric system. I presented the theory, and certainly expected all the intellectual frauds who like to strike poses of superiority to surface, and indeed you have.

    • Replies: @Iris
  122. Talha says:
    @Iris

    Also, is it a coincidence if every time the public questions a real institutional conspiracy to muddy the waters and make all genuine truth seekers look like lunatics?

    Hmmm…didn’t think about this. Good point.

    I was thinking on the way to work that this might be an experiment to see and push the limits of what one can do with online tools of thought manipulation. If you can convince a number of people the world is flat, what else can you possibly pull off?

    Peace.

    • Replies: @Iris
  123. @gsjackson

    No nonsense, and let’s follow normal netiquette for any discussion forum: present the agruments you like from Dubey or any source, so that anyone can follow it without looking at Youtube videos.

  124. Iris says:
    @gsjackson

    Well, I actually quite liked many of your comments and would certainly never have dared calling you a fraud !!! So, thanks for the clarification, LOL. Yet another demonstration that most people don’t deserve a shred of respect…

    You did not appear to be “distracting attention” from the Moon Hoax discussion: you seemed to be rejecting the Hoax too.
    Take what people say at face value: some ridiculous conspiracies theories are deliberately produced by the powers-that-be to bury the truth about real political conspiracies. Flat Earth Theory is definitely one of them.

  125. Iris says:
    @Talha

    Much, much worse than that.

    If you can convince the public that Nine Eleven truth seekers believe in Aliens having brought down the Twin Towers with hand-held DEW’s, than the public will accept ever-lasting mass murder and wars with resignation. The Deep State thanks Judith Wood.

  126. Zumbuddi says:
    @Viking swordsman

    Every American parent should be. “Kicked in the bottom” with this information, then vaccinate his children against the process.

    John Taylor Gatto was in sync.

  127. @Giuseppe

    ” Live news footage of the moon landing was not broadcast in the USSR.”

    In fact “live news footage of the moon landing” wasn’t broadcast at all. Your mind may be coming to you after all.

  128. @Sparkon

    Isn’t it interesting that the “space suits” that these high tech visors were attached to were made by Playtex out of their ordinary underwear fabric? Amazing, isn’t it, how this material was suitable for “pressurized space suits”, being impervious to radiation and micro-meteorites was well?

    I’m just amazed that anyone still believes all of this hokum and remains willing to defend it just because they saw a TV program when they were 7 years old.

  129. Violetta says:
    @Iris

    Also, is it a coincidence if every time the public questions a real institutional conspiracy (the Moon Landing hoax, Nine Eleven “Planes” terror attack, the Bilderberg oligarchy), an obviously ludicrous counter-conspiracy theory (Flat Earth theory, Wood’s Directed Energy Weapons, reptilian Royals) suddenly appears, to muddy the waters and make all genuine truth seekers look like lunatics?

    What is and what is not “an obviously ludicrous counter-conspiracy theory” obviously depends on your current state of knowledge – after all, for normies, the moon landing hoax, 9/11 and Bilderberg are ridiculous conspiracy theories. Believing state-sanctioned narratives is what makes them normies in the first place.

    While smear-by-association tactics definitely exist, always remember the magical mantra “what is the evidence?”, and as soon as you apply this with due diligence to matters of cosmology, the holes in the Copernican paradigma will become glaringly obvious.

    Regarding reptiloid beings and bloodlines, I don’t have an opinion on that topic, as until now I have never looked into it. I don’t even know if it’s meant to be taken literally or as some kind of metaphor. But I will say that in the famous/infamous “I Am a ROFSCHILD, Axe me a Question” thread the mysterious OP mentions some potentially very interesting things regarding different types of intelligences on this planet. The whole thread should be studied very diligently by anyone interested in the near and medium term future:
    https://ia802300.us.archive.org/8/items/rofschildv1/IAmARofschildAxeMeAQuestion.html

    To lighten the mood, enjoy “Flex Like David Icke” by Pink Guy:

  130. eah says:
    @Mulegino1

    Why are the so called “moon rocks” proven to be of Antarctic origin?

    I’ve never heard that — but it seems pretty clear that a “moon rock” given to the Dutch PM (no less) by Neil Armstrong (“) is now known to be petrified wood — yet strangely, I do not believe there has ever been either an apology or an explanation for that — ?

  131. @Iris

    Von Braun never retired. He died. You have earned a doxxing by Buzz Aldrin. I’ve texted him your address. He prefers 2×4’s over golf clubs for breaking facial bones. It’s the arthritis in the hands…

  132. @Sparkon

    At VT our ex-CIA editors train us to insert at least five proofreading errors in every 1000 words of copy. If we told this much truth in error-free copy “they” would have to kill us.

  133. Iris says:

    Head of NASA’s human exploration program William Gerstenmaier demoted as not enough progress is made for Moon “return” in 2024:

    https://www.theverge.com/2019/7/10/20689737/nasa-william-gerstenmaier-associate-administrator-human-exploration-demoted

    Shame NASA didn’t think of making photocopies of those magical Apollo 11 blueprints; they wouldn’t have lost their jobs.

  134. “An epic lunar laser experiment is still going strong, five decades after the Apollo astronauts set it up on the surface.

    The moonwalking crew of Apollo 11, which landed on the moon 50 years ago this month, put special retroreflectors on the lunar surface, as did the later crews of Apollo 14 and 15, in 1971. (Another retroreflector, built by the French, sits on the Soviet Lunokhod 2 rover that landed without a crew in 1973.)

    The NASA experiment, called the laser ranging retroreflector, is “a special type of mirror with the property of always reflecting an incoming light beam back in the direction it came from,” explained the Lunar and Planetary Institute (LPI) in a statement. And the reflector is key for measuring the distance between the Earth and the moon, the institute added.” https://www.space.com/apollo-retroreflector-experiment-still-going-50-years-later.html

    Res ipsa loquitur.

    • Replies: @Sparkon
  135. Sparkon says:
    @streamfortyseven

    The first laser light was bounced off the Moon on May 9, 1962 by a team of researchers from MIT. Despite what people think, even a laser beam spreads out quite a bit over a quarter million miles:

    The first time this was done, MIT scientists using a ruby laser to bounce a light beam off the moon in a series of pulses, estimated that its area on the moon’s surface was just four miles in diameter. Later they were able to reduce this to under 2 1/2 miles.

    According to the Wikipedia article, the laser beam width is four miles now.

    At the Moon’s surface, the beam is about 6.5 kilometers (4.0 mi) wide and scientists liken the task of aiming the beam to using a rifle to hit a moving dime 3 kilometers (1.9 mi) away. The reflected light is too weak to see with the human eye. Out of 1017 photons aimed at the reflector, only one is received back on Earth, even under good conditions. They can be identified as originating from the laser because the laser is highly monochromatic.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_Laser_Ranging_experiment

    So, we were able to bounce laser beams off the Moon already by 1962, but we can do it better now, apparently, because of the laser reflector, even though it returns only 1 out of every 1017 photons beamed its way.

    No word on the photon reception rate at MIT in 1962, but the fact remains they didn’t need any reflectors to bounce a laser beam off the Moon.

    Therefore, laser beams bounced off the Moon are proof only that laser beams do bounce off the Moon, a fact demonstrated already by 1962, long before the Apollo astronauts could have put any reflectors in place on the lunar surface.

    • Replies: @Violetta
  136. Violetta says:
    @Sparkon

    No word on the photon reception rate at MIT in 1962, but the fact remains they didn’t need any reflectors to bounce a laser beam off the Moon.

    Therefore, laser beams bounced off the Moon are proof only that laser beams do bounce off the Moon, a fact demonstrated already by 1962, long before the Apollo astronauts could have put any reflectors in place on the lunar surface.

    This is indeed the dirty secret of the “muh reflectors!!” crowd. The Soviet did it as well at the Crimean Astrophysical Observatory in 1964 and 1966 (as cited in https://tmurphy.physics.ucsd.edu/apollo/doc/Bender.pdf). For a detailed overview why the reflectors couldn’t even work in principle I can recommend the following site: http://www.angelfire.com/moon2/xpascal/MoonHoax/ApolloReflectors/ApolloReflectors.HTM

  137. This is indeed the dirty secret of the “muh reflectors!!” crowd. The Soviet did it as well at the Crimean Astrophysical Observatory in 1964 and 1966

    So far the US, Soviets, Italians, French and recently the Chinese have accomplished this. The private SpaceL mission, with its own retroreflector, crash landed in april and the MoonLight/Moon Express mission is due later this year. The Chinese measured the distance to the moon from 385,823.433 km to 387,119.600 km.

    The Indian Chandrayaan-2 probe is underway as we speak and is currently in a high eliptical orbit between 241.5 x 45162 km with Trans Lunar Insertion is planned for aug. 14. and expected moon orbit reached by aug. 20.

    Hardly convincing.

  138. We landed on the moon. My father was an engineer for Apollo 11 and wrote the software for the navigation system on the lunar module. As a child, I remember watching the Saturn V rockets liftoff on trips to Florida. The science is well-established; there is no way this could all have been a hoax. Some reports of studios filming the lunar walk may have their roots in efforts of television networks to have a ‘plan B’ in place in case the camera feed from the lunar module went dead (it didn’t). There was a lot of live television time that had to be covered. See the article here

    http://naplesdailynews.fl.newsmemory.com/?publink=0f7701bde

    I think it’s likely that the ‘moon landing as hoax’ theory has been propagated to discredit alternative accounts of events such as the JFK assassination, 9-11, etc.

  139. Greg Felton says: • Website

    This is the sort of lazy, infantile drivel that gives dissenting opinions a bad name. NOBODY here has any evidence the moon landings were faked. We just have reflexive anti-government prejudice as shown by the first post:

    “Mulegino1 says:
    July 18, 2019 at 3:12 pm GMT • 100 Words

    Given the long history of lies by the government of the United States and its camp followers in the establishment media, there is no appreciable reason to believe that men sent by NASA really walked on the moon.”

    This is a false argument (guilt by association) and the prejudice it betrays explains why informed debate is now all but impossible. There is space junk on the moon: how did it get there?

  140. Iris says:

    @Greg Felton

    There is space junk on the moon: how did it get there?

    It is undisputed that artificial objects were sent to the Moon during unmanned missions.

    The Lunokhod 1 Soviet rover, sent in 1970, returned images and lunar soil analysis performed with an embedded spectrometer. It remains on the Moon to the day, and its retro-reflectors were located twice by independent US (2010) and French (2013) observatories.

    Real samples of Moon soil, in the order of 100’s grams, were also collected by unmanned missions and returned to Earth, but nothing in order of the 300+kg of stones NASA allegedly brought back.

  141. Violetta says:

    “CalicoTunaPro_2019”, “Greg Felton”, “Iris” – NAShA shills and fanboys regurgitating the same old BS debunked a thousand times already, exploiting the serial-position effect on a dying thread exactly as established in their laughable forum-busting handbooks.

    Pathetic.

  142. old BS debunked a thousand times already

    By all means, do elaborate.

    • Replies: @Violetta
  143. Violetta says:
    @Viking swordsman

    I’m referring to the 20 to 30 pseudo-facts Copernicanists love to regurgitate without checking in the least if they actually support their masonic worldview.

    Muh ship on the horizon, muh curvature, muh airplane routes, muh coriolis effect, muh satellites, muh moon rocks, muh moon reflectors, muh constellations, muh Eratosthenes etc. etc. ad nauseam, every single one of them having been answered to many times already – yet they keep coming back. Repetition really is the mother of indoctrination.

    • Replies: @Viking swordsman
  144. @Violetta

    So let’s make this very simple: the sunset. Impossible with a flat earth, right?

    • Replies: @Violetta
  145. @gsjackson

    I believe Eratosthenes used geometry/trigonometry. He knew that at the Summer solstice, a vertical pole at a certain town left no shadow. By measuring the length of the shadow at a location some 500 stade south and regarding the earth as a globe, he arrived at his figure.

    • Replies: @Violetta
  146. Mevashir says:

    Really well written Kevin. You must be a genius to be able to assimilate and articulate so much complex and variegated information!

    BlesSings to you!

    • Replies: @Mevashir
  147. Mevashir says:
    @Mevashir

    Another thing to consider from your perspective as a Muslim convert: going to the moon represents a conquest of the Divine Feminine (represented by the moon and manifested most clearly in Judaism and Islam) and an arrogant assertion of the primacy of the Masculine (represented by the Sun and manifested in Christianity).

    • Replies: @Kevin Barrett
  148. Mevashir says:
    @gsjackson

    Well stated. The goal of the American educational system is to teach people … until they are no longer able to think.

  149. Mevashir says:
    @Iris

    So so true. I thought that the flat earth comments here are expressly designed for the purpose of making a mockery of Kevin’s well constructed argument about the Mooning of America.

  150. Mevashir says: • Website
    @gsjackson

    “And you do know, don’t you, that different times of daylight in different parts of the world is explained just as well by a sun rotating around the earth, just as it appears to do?”

    How can the sun “rotate around” a flat earth? LOL

    And why is the Copernican system “Masonic”?

    Both Copernicus and Galileo were devout Catholics.

    Do you really believe the bible texts, 2000-3000 years old, are the last word in observable reality and quantifiable science?

    • Replies: @Violetta
  151. @Simply Simon

    You’re WRONG. The evidence that this was real is LAUGHABLE. Check out Jim Fezter’s and We didn’t Go to the Moon Either and a 2001 Fox Documentary “Did we really go to the moon?” which is censored by You Tube so you have to type in all of the words plus 2001 FOX. YT’s censorship alone should tell you you are WRONG.

  152. Violetta says:
    @Viking swordsman

    So let’s make this very simple: the sunset. Impossible with a flat earth, right?

    Not at all. Don’t be deceived by language – “the sun setting” is just a figure of speech, after all. What you – we – are actually perceiving is a luminous sphere gradually getting smaller and disappearing at the horizon, an observation completely in line with the classical cosmological model. From an observer’s point of view, a huge and far away sun “setting behind the horizon” is functionally identical to a small and near sun “disappearing into the night”.

  153. Violetta says:
    @TravisBaskerfield

    I believe Eratosthenes used geometry/trigonometry. He knew that at the Summer solstice, a vertical pole at a certain town left no shadow. By measuring the length of the shadow at a location some 500 stade south and regarding the earth as a globe, he arrived at his figure.

    The important part being, of course, “regarding the earth as a globe”. His computations assuming a spherical Earth and a much larger and distant Sun work exactly the same way as assuming a planar Earth and a small and near Sun instead. It’s a huge misconception, one usually fostered by the public school system, that Eratosthenes somehow “proved” that Earth is a sphere, or even set out to do so in the first place. Same as with Copernicus – people should actually read the sources (fragments in Eratosthenes’ case) they love to proffer.

  154. Violetta says:
    @Mevashir

    How can the sun “rotate around” a flat earth? LOL

    The same way almost all Copernicanists still speak of the sun “coming up” or “going down”, i. e. it’s a figure of speech. The sun does rotate, after all – above a planar Earth, but within the firmament.

    And why is the Copernican system “Masonic”? Both Copernicus and Galileo were devout Catholics.

    If they would have been “devout Catholics”, they wouldn’t have created their systems in the first place. The essence of masonry (= judeo-satanism for the goyim) is the corruption of the natural and divine order: “Instead of on a motionless Earth at the center of the universe you are only living on an insignificant speck of dust shaped like a sphere, circling a central fire within a vast, meaningless emptiness, goy!” (Aristarchos, Pythagoras, Galileo, Copernicus, Newton).

    That’s why the hypothetical angle between the equator and Earth’s “axis of rotation” is purported to be 66,6 degrees; that’s why Earth’s “orbital speed” is purported to be 66.6k mph; that’s why the polar circles are purported to be located at 66.6° N and S latitude.* There are many of those number games Masons love to play.

    * https://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/factsheet/earthfact.html (you have to do some conversions, e.g. between km/h and mph)

    Do you really believe the bible texts, 2000-3000 years old, are the last word in observable reality and quantifiable science?

    Yes. Take your appeal to novelty and shove it.

  155. Holbylta says:
    @gsjackson

    why are the stars seen to be in the same place after six months of traveling around the sun. Answer:

    they aren’t. the stars move all over the sky as the seasons change.

    Then, since earth has to be a spinning ball going around the sun, what holds the ocean water to the ball?

    probably the same thing that keeps any ball together. how come you don’t disintegrate when you turn around?

    here’s a better question: why is there a curved horizon? why do soap bubbles form and float? why don’t baseballs fall apart in the air?

    Enter Freemason Isaac Newton with gravity, a mysterious force unobserved anywhere else in nature.

    try jumping off a roof, you’ll experience gravity in short order.

    Then when 19th century experiments were unable to prove any motion of the earth

    it’s been proven for the six thousand years of civilization and by life itself. all motion is relative: I could say the Earth is perfectly still and everything else is moving around it in some pattern. when I drive on a highway i’m really standing still, but the world speeds up. Coepernicus and Galileo and the Church were all right together, they were both right. Everything is relative to something else or it can’t be seen by comparison.

    enter Jew Albert Einstein with a theory about relative motion and space time curvature that no one can understand.

    everyone understands E=MC2, but it must be the Jews anyway

  156. @Mevashir

    Can you recommend any sources on the Divine Feminine in Judaism?

    I agree that one of the distortions (tahrif) in Christianity is its repression of the Divine Feminine. The Trinity “father-son-spirit” is an all-male reproductive fantasy. The repressed element is obviously the mother. The return of the repressed takes the form of mariolotry.

    But doesn’t the Torah often portray Yawheh as an all-too-human, all-too-male patriarch (and a bit of a psychopath)?

    The Qur’an’s first two tangible descriptions of God (ar-rahman ar-rahim) roughly translate as “the All-Merciful, All-Compassionate” and derive from the root meaning “womb” yielding the connotation that God’s loving mercy towards creation is like a mother’s love for her children. Other “most beautiful names of God” highlight qualities associated with masculinity including glory, strength, etc.

    But Islam is very clear about God being neither male nor female. The Qur’an purifies discourse on God to remove the anthropomorphism that has crept into distorted versions of earlier scriptures. Worshipping an anthropomorphic god is just cosmic narcissism.

    • Replies: @Mevashir
  157. Mevashir says:
    @Kevin Barrett

    Hi Kevin. Good to hear from you. I replied directly to your email address. I am no longer participating in UNZ threads. I was run off of a different thread by some hyper capitalist Kch brother trolls.

    Even RU makes me suspicious. He is a Harvard graduate Tech Millionaire and certainly no friend of compassionate capitalism or socialism. Let’s see if he would ever let you write an article about usury!

    If you feel the comments I emailed to you are useful you may repost them in this comment thread but I will not do it myself.

    Shalom Salaam

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Kevin Barrett Comments via RSS