Above is the exact same 70mm film used in the Hasselblad cameras for the Apollo Moon landing of 1969 which NASA claims withstood the extreme moon temperatures of 253 Fahrenheit (123 Celsius), while at night it can drop to -387 Fahrenheit (-233 Celsius).
I have always wondered about those temperatures as a vacuum does not radiate heat and cold as much as Earth's atmosphere. On reading the unauthorized scientific explanation I can see some validity in this thinking but insufficient to withstand a maximum 7 hour 37 minute exposure on the lunar surface. The seasoned researcher will also note the 'debunking article' makes preposterous claims about 'conspiracy theorists' that unveil the purpose of the article which is to defend NASA instead of examining the many and varied claims that people who study the subject make.
Those familiar with the National Security State shenanigans in the late forties might suspect that man first went to the moon in the 50's with technology that can't be discussed. The official story of the moon landing can easily be disproved with a day or two researching the subject, and actually it's quite fun.
Look at the LEM gold plated foot pad above. Not a speck of dust on it even though the moon is covered in so muchdust the Lunar Rover is probably concealed from ever being photographed again. I'm kidding of course. The Lunar Rover like the Astronauts could not fit inside the LEM and as you will learn from the documentary the Apollo astronauts were unable to exit the LEM as the escape hatch is smaller than the Astronaut with their backpack. The documentary maker above died prematurely in his 50's after making this film but he does suggest that to film the exit they must have used the practice module which had a larger exit gap.
The above mockumentary is amusing because it is a masterpiece of using humour to conceal what is very much in plain sight. In other words it's disinformation.
I haven't discussed the topic for a few years but it seems more people are receptive to the use of Hollywood trickery in selling the Apollo 11 moon landing which may have happened but the photography used is without hesitation studio photography.
If you never got to watch the documentaries on Google Videos I'm afraid your education will never have such a chance again to see videos that are now completely scrubbed from the net.
Not Jay Weidner's greatest interview, but I post it because I keep tabs on how the narrative is or has evolved.
If I was interviewing Jay, I'd be asking him from time to time, 'how do you know that' or 'why did you come to that conclusion'. I'd do the same to a lot of people who make many claims but don't seem to have reconciled their own 2012 interpretations with the present.
Or at least it's not discussed even with hindsight.
I really think there's a hard talk style of interview needed in the esoteric circles. Not for the sake of confrontation but because it's OK to have unprovable claims but it's interesting to see the thinking or experiences behind them.
Otherwise it's just I've got a toroid in my pocket and it's pleased to see you before it folds back in on itself.
This is Jay Weidner's best interview for a long time. I thought I was back in 2011 greedily snorting up 20 hour internet binge sessions of all the secrets on the planet on this one. Jay has evolved his Apollo 11 hypothesis. It's just so much more tighter and resonant than ever before. He get's JFK into it, the real and synthetic Apollo 11 recording dual narrative down. It all just hangs together. You're going to like it if you haven't figured out why it was so important to film the moon landing in a studio while still landing on the moon. I never bought the old story that it was too risky to lose the propaganda race when the obituary speeches had been written for Nixon to read out before they had even taken off.
Jay's only weakness is he wont address the Zionist/Neoconservative faction that orchestrated 9/11, despite a wealth of evidence that is too much rather than too little.
The old Masonic order was taken down and the Neo-Bolsheviks slid into power. Why he can't see this is a blight on his claim to be a truth seeker, but it's not hard given he's paying his bills with a job which if you want to check it out is over here.
The only part of the interview that doesn't stand up is his Rennes-le-Chateaus riff. It's too cheesy to take seriously but then everyone makes mistakes, loses the plot or just makes stuff up for reasons nobody can fully know.
Anyway you should listen to this interview. It often taps into an archetype that at some deeper level just feels more robust than anything you'll find in the corporate media. Be it fiction or claimed fact. Bits of this just ring true.
The crucial point here is to understand that NASA did go to the moon but they sure as hell didn't show us the real films (which are now convenientlylost) and instead used Kubrick to do "backup film" of the landing from a studio in London. It is here that Kubrick developed and perfect the art of front screen projection.
Once you watch the explanatory video which is a film class on front screen projection (all three parts) you'll never look at Apollo footage and miss the tell tale line where a screen is used to project the background. You have a choice in life. You can either believe your tell-lie-vision programming or spend a few hours researching it and have your own mind made up by your own mind. Some people aren't used to it.
Mr Van Allen discoverer of the Van Allen radiation belts declared they were deadly. However since the Apollo missions that line has been retracted and NASA say it's safe for humans. I'm not too bothered either way, as my beef with the Apollo missions is the photography which uses a Hollywood technique of front screen projection. You might not be able to see the line between the stage and the backdrop below but once you do, you can't ignore them in any Apollo mission photography so here's a classic one for you. Once the brain groks the line you can't miss them ever again.
More importantly here is NASA describing the Van Allen belts as deadly. The original post is from here.
They were the subject of perhaps the first scientific discovery of the Space Age, and yet we still don't know much about them. The radiation belts that surround Earth are home to killer electrons, plasma waves, and intense electrical currents that can disrupt and destroy the electronics on satellites. But the behavior of the Van Allen Belts—named for James Van Allen, who led the team that discovered them in 1958—is wildly unpredictable.
This artist's conception shows the radiation belts (green), which are two doughnut-shaped (torus) regions full of high-energy particles that fill the near-space around Earth. The blue and red lines between and around the belts depict the north and south polarity of the planet’s magnetic field. The inner belt, a blend of protons and electrons, can reach down as low as 1,000 kilometers (600 miles) in altitude. The outer belt, comprised mainly of energetic electrons, can swell to as much as 60,000 kilometers (37,000 miles) above Earth’s surface. Both rings extend to roughly 65 degrees north and south latitude.
The radiation belts were discovered during the flight of the very first American satellite. Van Allen and colleagues had installed a Geiger-Müller tube on Explorer 1 to detect cosmic rays, and as the satellite made its eccentric orbit around the Earth, the readings periodically went off the top of the counter’s scale. It happened again during the flight of Explorer 3 several months later. Several followup missions proved that the space around Earth was not empty, but instead enriched with electrons, protons, and energy created by interactions between Earth's magnetic field (or magnetosphere), the solar wind, and (occasionally) cosmic rays arriving from beyond the solar system.
Fifty-four years later, NASA has embarked on a missions designed specifically to understand the space weather in the dynamic and erratic Van Allen Belts. At 4:05 a.m. Eastern Daylight Time on August 30, 2012, the Radiation Belt Storm Probes (RBSP) were launched into orbit on a United Launch Alliance Atlas V rocket that lifted off from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station in Florida. (Watch video of the launch here.) The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory (APL) built and will operate the twin RBSP spacecraft for NASA’s Living With a Star program.
The identical twin spacecraft will fly in separate orbits across the inner and outer Van Allen radiation belts. The mission is starting near the height of the Sun’s 11-year cycle, or solar maximum. Activity on the sun influences the behavior of the radiation belts, though scientists are puzzled by that behavior. Sometimes a solar storm can swell the belts with particles and energy, creating havoc for Earth-orbiting satellites by accelerating electrons (aka, “killer electrons”) and creating electrical currents. Other times, the radiation belts grow very calm and depleted during Sun storms. Occasionally, no change is detected at all.
The RBSP satellites are designed to observe how and when killer electrons are energized, to sample the electrical and magnetic fields in Earth’s space, to count particles, and detect plasma waves of different frequencies. The ultimate goal is to improve the prediction of space weather; that is, how solar activity can cause geomagnetic storms that upset telecommunications and electronics.
Neil Armstrong had to lie about the Apollo mission. You can see from the press conference that it's more chilled and more depressing than an obituary reading. At least on someone's death there are fine words about the life of a person and here the Apollo Astronauts are practically traumatized at having to compound the fiction with lies.
It seems there was no choice, and they had to. There's plenty of evidence that many (particularly later) were clockwork oranged including missing memories and extreme nausea when trying to recount their Apollo mission stories.
Twenty five years later in the second video I've embedded, Neil Armstrong urged young people to go into space and remove truths protective lies referring to a quote by Winston Churchill on war.
The first victim of war is truth - Aeschylus
The space race was considered the greatest victory of the cold war.
Nobody knows what really happened but spend time with the arguments and a lot of the official narrative simply doesn't add up. That's an uncomfortable thought for a lot of people who trust elite institutions but there's nothing I can do about that. It is as it is.
Hilarious. I thought this was a double cheeseburger James BondApollo moon landing pantomime moment when I watched the movie originally as a lad, but now it all makes chutzpah piss taking sense. I've got a good documentary on the subject loaded up in drafts and scheduled for later tonight. It starts off slow but gets a lot better in the second half. Or you can just get stuck in over here.
Forty years ago when NASA instructed their visual department to use double sided sticky tape, cropped masking and paint brushes to conceal the good stuff on the moon they don't want us to see but need us to pay for they didn't know some Dutch guy would be using state of the art forensic image software to show how blatant they censor reality. What is on the moon that is so mind blowing we can't be shown? Ancient architecture? Ancient Aliens? Who knows but it doesn't get more damning than this.
Bravo. The most detailed, professional, granular and comprehensive take down of NASA I've seen and heard yet.
However I think the real genius of this work is how it takes the viewer into space and lets them live out what a space lunar mission is all about. It's a postmodern irony that to do this so extraordinarily well it had to dramatise the lies, falsification and mendacity. I will be posting this on my blog. It deserves a wide audience.
The footprint snapshot above is of both a spacesuit boot and a stagehand footprint from the Apollo 15 mission though it's difficult to ascertain if it's NIKE or Clarks footwear. The newly released clip underneath it is from Jay Weidner'sterrific documentary on how Kubrick shot the Apollo moon landings. It's a nuanced subject though so please pay attention to the words we use. Just because Kubrick shot the backup footage (while shooting 2001 A Space Odyssey) doesn't mean that the astronauts didn't go. It's likely they or later missions did, but they had to to sanitize/simulacra the footage and photography for reasons we can only guess. It's a fascinating insight into the extraordinary lengths the system can go to if it wants to keep a secret from the sheeple back on Terra. Some say Governments can't keep a big project secret but if you haven't considered how Project Manhatten was kept so super secret that even President Truman didn't know about the A Bomb when Roosevelt died then that's probably an important one to factor into your own analysis and conclusions. Lots more of the background on this in the moon landing tags below.
UPDATE: My popular Youtube account with hundreds of hours of uploads was closed down earlier because of the above documentary. It is now embedded from Google Videos where I originally secured it. Many other users have uploaded it to Youtube, yet I was singled out immediately after writing my post below this notice. This blog was also closed down.
I've since managed to rescue this blog by repeating an authorization action by SMS that by coincidence I only did last week to prevent unauthorized access on my Gmail account from Honduras. Google Kindly provide information like that when accounts are being compromised on different continents.
It's fair to assume that my post below has annoyed the living heck out of someone. I have my suspicions, but more importantly while we figure out why my post is a threat I'm going to appeal to Google as to why I'm being penalised for transferring a video from one Google platform to another. I don't hold Google accountable as there is no business that is not subject to outside pressure. Update II: I've now used a Youtube upload. It isn't mine but its the same film I lost my account over. Such is life.
It features some surprising guest appearances unless one factors in that it's a CIA sponsored "mockumentary" disinformation classic that muddies the waters beyond recognition and in a way that is very hard to explain. The give away is heavyweights brought in on a nudge and wink to cloak the story in the "ridicule curtain" most notably, chief lizard Donald Rumsfeld, Dr. Henry (Heinz) Kissinger, Alexander Haig and two decent humansBuzz Aldrin and Stanley Kubrick's widow, Christiane Kubrick. The former is obliged to and the latter is likely unaware that heart attacks can be arranged.
The tone of the documentary is heavy "ridicule curtain" most effectively lowered around the UFO question in the fifties when the CIA purchased The National Enquirer to successfully drive the subject out of polite company and into low income/education demographics. The doc/mockumentary begins with low key revelations of NASA working closely with Hollywood at the time of the Moon landings and is meant to be tonally ironic. However these have now been subsequently proven by Jay Weidner in his first class and excellently researched technical film documentary Kubrick's Odyssey.
Over the course of the tale, Karel facilitates the credibility of the ridicule curtain through by and large telling the truth with a preposterous honesty that the serious mind cannot entertain. He even postulates that not only did Kubrick help NASA fake the moon landings but that he was eventually killed by the CIA to cover up the truth (not accurate he was taken out for his film Eyes Wide Shut before it was finally released.)
The appearance of Rumsfeld and Dr. Kissinger who definitely know all the dirty laundry affairs of State are a touch of genius in terms of strategic communications planning.
Every time the elite tiers need to kill a meme they wheel out the big guns. This one worked well though they never counted on Jay Weidners stubborn, persistent and scholarly approach to the subject that leaves the serious researcher in no doubt.
As if Universe knows I just got shafted on my Youtube account some random (not me) has uploaded Jay Weidner's recently released secret-spilling documentary "Kubrick's Odyssey" to Youtube. It was only released this year and reveals a film-makers eye on Kubricks exposure to the secrets of the 20th century. This film will probably get pulled so try to watch it before it goes.
The documentary is twenty times more explosive than the mockumentary CIA number which is confusing. Jay lays it all out for you here. Just hold judgement for a hour (or more) before you make your mind up.
Personal note to Jay: I've plugged your documentary a hundred times with links to your site where people can buy the movie but in light of my recent news I hope you'll be OK with this post.
This digs a little more into the mind control issues required for the astronauts and the 2001 Space Odyssey military industrial complex connections to the faked moon landing. Humanity can never grow up till we begin to question the Santa Claus lie.
I'm just listening to Bart Sibrell who made this documentary. His ability to apologise for making Buzz Aldrin punch him in this documentary posted above has motivated me to repost it because I like people who know how to say sorry.
I think what's important with the Moon Landing Hoax is the ability to consider that you've been lied to. You don't have to change your mind, but to be so inflexible as unable to have an open mind with so much evidence is a little unhealthy, although not uncommon. Personally it's Jay Weidner's front screen projection explanation of lunar photography that does it for me but this is still an excellent and persuasive documentary. The BBC purchased it for airing but never showed it. Understandable really as the whole jig is up when people wake up to this subject.
If you start questioning the moon landings. What else are you going to question?
Here's the interview with Bart Sibrell on Coast To Coast and a fascinating addition with Art Bell in the Philippines interviewing Dr Colin Rourke, a credible interviewee on the subject.
I should add that I've not yet heard an account that explains all the anomalies. Just because I reject NASA's explanation doesn't mean I actually know for sure what went down. It's quite a complex (and often complicated) subject. Some people get very emotional over it. Update: The Colin Rourke video has been deleted.
