Home Miscellaneous Moon Landing Hoax

Moon Landing Hoax

462
0
SHARE

What about the Moon Landing story?

Have you ever wondered if it’s strange that decades before the internet, nanotechnology, and cloning, NASA were able to elaborate and build a rocket that could not only land on the moon, but also to live broadcast the event to 600 million people? Neil Armstrong said “that’s one small step for a man, one giant leap for mankind” when he stepped onto the surface of the moon for the very first time on July the 21th of 1969… supposedly.

Here bellow you will encounter 8 examples that will try to prove that the Moon landing was a hoax.

Let’s locate ourselves in history, for our minds to comprehend the environment that the world was submitted in. in the 1960s the world had a technology were they were only trying to figure out how to develop a computer’s mouse, that’s why many people have always questioning the authenticity of the moon landing event. Here below are the top 8 lines of evidence that are trying to expose the moon landing as a hoax.

 

The Images

The American flag will flutter gently in the non-existing breeze in this iconic image. It shows a citizen from the United States of America planting a flag on the moon while the flag is waving. First, there is no breeze in the moon, which means there is no air in the moon’s atmosphere and that is how we get to know that there is no wind. This will be one of the most obvious stuff there are out there in the moon landing hoax. NASA says that it is not a wind blowing, but instead is the flag being crumpled from the rolled up journey… but please have your own thoughts.

 

 

One Sun, Two Sun

We all know we only have one Sun out there for us, we also know there is a vast ocean of star. But when you see the next picture, after you look closely, you might wonder if there is more than one sun? You can see in the picture that the shadows don’t match. NASA brought out some pictures and videos to tell planet Earth that they have successfully reached a moon landing. But people, soon after started questioning about something a little weirder about the pictures of the moon, for example the angles of the shadows do not match. Shadows are caused by light sources, and the only light source in the moon would be the Sun. so logically all shadows should be parallel to each other. The many shadows of the picture run in different directions, almost if the shadows in the photo are caused by the different lights in the set.

Where the Stars At?

Other information missing on those two pictures above is that you can’t see any stars. The abundance of twinkling stars in the night sky. The moon lacks of clouds and also enjoys a complete absence of artificial light; you should be able to see even more stars with the naked sight. Only that, in these pictures, you can’t. in all of the photos taken in the moon landing, you can’t see any star. Obviously the quality of the 60s pictures are not amazing, but now days you can capture the stars in a photo taken from your phone, so shouldn’t the high tech of NASA be able to reach a star with a picture?



 

The Same Rock again!

NASA took pictures in different locations showing how they have explored sites that are actually miles apart. Acknowledging that, why do the pictures from Apollo 15 show identical backgrounds? The photographic evidence clearly shows the same patterns of gently hills and valleys. They even mark these places. “Why to bother creating new sets, we should use the same ones repeatedly… no one will notice.”

 

The C rock

It could be craved by nature, but after you see the picture, you start wondering why does that rock have a letter “c” on it? When we see these kinds of things, we literally see that those are technical problems form being sloppy on set. There is a C printed on the rock. The perfect molded or symmetry of the letter C shows that it is not from nature. But we can tell that for order, some of the things to be used in a set can be marked with references of letters. But there is no pleasurable argument of the letter C naturally exposed on the surface of the rock.

 

Careful with the Radiation!

We all know thru local learning that radiation can be very dangerous to be with. To be overexposure to it, can bring radiation poisoning and even death, so we know it should be avoided at all costs. If you want to fly to the moon, you have to know that you will encounter a band of radiation known as Van Allen radiation belt. The questioning here is that if the aluminum coating from the space craft is enough to protect a human body knowing that they spent over one hour and a half traveling that radiation band. NASA of course said yes, but an hour and a half sounds like long time.

 

What is that in the Helmet?

Apollo 12 moon landing showed up many photos of their trip. So the people started wondering the photos around and noticed some unusual thing reflected on the astronaut helmet. It seems to be something hanging from a wire or perhaps a rope. It actually looks like a light used in the Hollywood movie studios. Obviously the photo quality is a bit rash making it impossible to identify the device or object. But the question “what could possibly be hanging in the air at the moon?” there should be nothing there, absolutely nothing.

There is no Impact?

Have you ever seen the picture of the astronaut’s footprints in the moon dust? They would describe the dust as the “talcum powder or wet sand.” Knowing that, why aren’t there any signs of an impact from the lunar module arrival? Imagine a big aircraft landing in a talcum powder field, would at least left some king of impression in the surface right? This is just another proof to be held to use blindingly against the moon landing hoax.



LEAVE A REPLY