APOLLO FEEDBACK

There's no doubt in my mind now that Apollo was faked, and it's depressing too because I've been a fan of the space program all my life. I cringe when I see how gullible I've been. The truth is it's easy to convince someone of something when they want it to be true. I always hated that we quit going to the moon instead of setting up bases and stuff there which you expect to happen if we had the tech to go there in the 60's. We should have continued right on, but no they always said the moon program was cancelled due to budget cuts. Its problematic to even put a space shuttle it orbit and that thing is way more advanced than Apollo command modules. No way did they go to the moon in those objects, Earth orbit maybe. But definitely not the moon. Man I used to hate it when people claimed that the missions were faked in the desert, but man that's what happened.

The Saturn V engines do not seem to have the power to escape earth's gravity in order to reach the moon. According to Wikipedia, the F-1 engines of the first stage have an exhaust velocity of 2390 meters per second, which converts to 1.48 miles per second, or 5352 miles per hour. Yet according to the same source, the rocket traveled 58 miles downrange and climbed to 42 miles in altitude, where the first stage burned out at 150 seconds. The rocket thus covered a distance of 72 miles from the launch pad. Its speed could only be 0.48 miles per second, or 1728 miles per hour, not 5352 mph. The ascent of the first stage was well within the view of witnesses on land and at sea, so the 72 mile distance must be correct. The official figure of 5352 mph for the exhaust velocity of the F-1 contradicts observation. If the speed of the rocket was only 1728 miles an hour at the end of the first stage, it is not clear how the J-2 engines of the second and third stages can accelerate the rocket to 24,000 miles per hour needed to escape earth's gravity, even if their exhaust velocity of 9374 mph is the correct value. The suspicion arises that not only the exhaust velocity of the F-1 engine is inflated, but also the J-2. In that case, the Apollo rockets could only reach, at best, low earth orbit. I am curious to see if anyone can explain how Saturn V accelerated to 24,000 mph, given the facts mentioned above.

Dear Sir, With great interest I read through your web page. Having been aware of the hoax for some time now, your web page is very conclusive. There are a few things I feel the need to share with you. Lunar rocks that were supposedly taken amount to many, many kilograms that were brought back to Earth. They would need a huge quarry truck to bring all that back. The Lunar rock investigated in Amsterdam (fossilised tree, hence my subject "luna-teek"). I looked at it with astonishment on the Dutch news. It all was presented as truth but it was all in the humorous section of the news. No conclusions or severe doubts. It was all a "rather small" laugh. Then small-country-minded-ness kicked in and we (the Dutch) were supposed to think. "We are such a small country they won't even present us with a genuine lunar rock" So the whole thing rested with us feeling small, Nasa remaining big.....

2) Those who faked the photos did not make unintentional errors; much to the contrary all the errors are completely intentional and carefully planned, and there are many more of them than people think; in fact the Apollo journal is like a cheese with plenty of holes; I think that there is not a single photo which is not bugged! It seems that those who gave the order to fake the photos thought they could control those who were in charge of the faking, but those who actually did the faking rebelled; they could not overtly confront those who gave the orders; they would have been discredited and would have lost their jobs; so they chose another alternative: Say nothing and completely bug the photos; and they did a damn good job. The whole thing is so laughable that I can't understand why people don't see that the Apollo Journal is nothing but a big farce! I have gathered in web pages all my findings, and I give you a link to my main page: http://www.angelfire.com/moon2/xpascal/MoonHoax/MainPage.htm

Fake Dutch 'moon rock' revealed. The lump of 'moon rock' had been on display for decades. A treasured piece at the Dutch national museum - a supposed moon rock from the first manned lunar landing - is nothing more than petrified wood, curators say. It was given to former Prime Minister Willem Drees during a goodwill tour by the three Apollo-11 astronauts shortly after their moon mission in 1969. When Mr Drees died, the rock went on display at the Amsterdam museum. At one point it was insured for around $500,000 (£308,000), but tests have proved it was not the genuine article. The Rijksmuseum, is perhaps better known for paintings by artists such as Rembrandt, says it will keep the piece as a curiosity. "It's a good story, with some questions that are still unanswered," Xandra van Gelder, who oversaw the investigation that proved the piece was a fake, was quoted as saying by the Associated Press news agency. "We can laugh about it." The "rock" had originally been been vetted through a phone call to Nasa, she added. The US agency gave moon rocks to more than 100 countries following lunar missions in the 1970s. NASA said they had no explanation for the Dutch discovery, but then again NASA have had no explanation to over 40 years of serious anomalies within the Apollo programme, so nothing has changed there.

I don't suppose I ever was a complete "PAN" - as I had never really thought a lot about the "moonlanding" issue, and had just assumed it must be true if it was written in encyclopedias and science journals. Now after carefully reading through your whole site (I think I caught everything?), and studying some other sites about this hoax, I began making my own recordings of the videos they are airing on the Nasa Chanel on my TV service. They seem so totally hokey! One thing I was wondering is whether NASA claims perhaps that some of the footage is little models, etc. just for dramatic effect and impressing an audience? Because the footage looks SO fake, surely they can't claim it is live footage of actual space ships... I am so glad that I have been able to record the videos onto VHS from my TV of many of the old Apollo Mission tapes - the more I see of them, the more obvious it becomes just how fake they really are.

I haven't done as much research as you have, but the landings do look faked. Since I was a kid I wondered how they could get the lander back into orbit with just a little backpack rocket engine on the bottom of it. Sure, the moon has a sixth the gravity, but come on! And of course the astronots left great footprints, but the descent rocket left no blast shadow in the dust before the lander touched down. Lately I have been wondering how the lander on liftoff was able to rendezvous with the orbiter by flying by the seat of the pants. On lift off the orbiter would have been over the lunar horizon, out of radio contact with the lander, and out of sight. There was no GPS system on the moon. Real-time 3D spacial orientation requires at least 3 precisely located (orbiting or stationary) beacons, and the moon had NONE. Earth to this day can't see any of the lander bases (even with the Hubble), so it could not have given real-time coordinates to the ascending lander, especially given the time lag in transmitting data. It is unlikely that gyroscopes could have had enough accuracy to describe the command orbiter's position for the ascending lander to even see it, let alone rendezvous with it. I had thought that though the landings were faked, the capsule was in moon orbit. Your claim that the capsule was in earth orbit is an interesting insight for me, possibly that is why they publish no fotos of the far side of the moon.

First let me say, I am not sure who started the investigations and dug up all the evidence and facts that are obviously irrefutable. In fact on the Fox show, the only thing NASA PR people in charge of damage control could reply was "it's a lie...we are right". My question being that even though the Fox show may not have had all the evidence in hand, how come I cannot find even ONE source to download that show ?????? Write me if you do have it. To those still questioning Why, you have to look at history and realize what was going on during the Lunar Landing years, that is The Cold War. USSR has put the first unmanned rocket in orbit AND the first manned rocket in orbit, in fact they might have captured or utilized best the captured German WWII rocket technology (much like the AK-47 or as originally named Stagg 1944 or MP-44) and you have to give it to the Russian people, on average the communist dictatorship kept the people more educated than in the "free" world. So U.S.A. had to come up with something bigger, grandiose, better, to "prove" to the entire world but mostly our enemies, that we are the most advanced and thus more powerful. The landings were repeated for propaganda purposes, once a lie perpetrated, repetition sets it in the mind of the masses thus brainwashing occurs. Otherwise, how do they explain for all those years that no other nation has even attempted or are attempting today to land on the moon? Squeek I Say !

By having Hoagland embark, (continue really) on this program of discrediting NASA, as more and more of the truth is slipping out due to more and more people who are willing to lift a finger, they are effectively de-sensitizing the public to the grandest scam of them all. Depending on which surveys you raise, 25-80% of the American public believes we've been lied to re: the Apollo Moon missions. Some surveys have indicated that 30% are now of the opinion that it's entirely possible that they hoaxed the whole thing. They're almost there. As these figures seem to change at about 8-10% per year, all they need to do is hold on to it for another 10 years and the majority of the public will be on the page of truth. At that point in time the public will have been let down 'easy', as opposed to having had to endure a sudden shock. Also key - by then all those top nazi NASA execs involved in making the decision to hoax it and pulling it off will be passed on - nobody better to blame than corpse's.

Congratulations for you excellent site! In my (humble)opinion it is the best on the whole web about this subject. I write you about a comment showed in the apollo facts section, in there you can read "Anyone hovering above surface of Moon would be blinded by the high intensity light reflected back" I don´t entirely agree with this fact specially because I notice that whiteness of Moon surface it´s not correct in pictures and video footage from NASA. If you search for the word "albedo"in wikipedia you find that: "The overall albedo of the Moon is around 7% ( although with variations ) it means in other words, that only 7% of the sunlight is reflected. Just for comparison albedo of desert sand is 40%. Now, if you see images from Apollo Missions the whiteness of alleged moon surface is too bright, almost like sand here on earth. I e-mail you because since a year ago I search for an answer to this point. I don´t understand why moon surface is so bright ! If you go to site: http://hubpages.com/hub/high-definition-movies-Moon-surface-from-selene-kagayu, you will see a more realistic view of the moon surface shot by the Japanese probe "Selene". That probe bring us images much more compatible with a 7% albedo Moon surface. Apart from that I think your work is flawless and hope that more and more people can read it in order to spread the truth about the NASA scam! Keep up the good work!!!

Hi I really enjoyed this site on your views of the moon missions. I went through pretty well every photo in the NASA archives and discovered that 99% of the photos show only the front of the LEM on the moon. Any photos of the rear of the craft are ones shot at a great distance. The clincher for me is the one I attached and this needs no words except most garden sheds are built better than this. If you zoom in on the screws you can see they are not even tightened up. Even if you took into consideration that perhaps this part of the craft did not need to be as solid as other parts I would hope they would have done a better job if my backside was strapped into it. My 8 and 11 year old sons could probably hide a lie better than those NASA guys. Keep up the great work.

Hi, I am a believer of the Apollo hoax missions, and as I surfed the internet today I found your site at http://nasascam.bravehost.com. I found it good, although a bit offensive. I strongly believe no man even went to the moon mainly because of technical aspects of the program and the problem of radiation. The hypothesis of being stayed in low orbit after the launches seems very imminent to me. I am writing to you today for a special reason. I don't know if you know about it but about the same time a year ago, almost date to date, I was watching a video on YouTube (or Google, I don't remember exactly) about the Apollo hoax missions. This video had nothing to do with Bible statements, "free" hoax accusations or simple opinion based points of view, as we find many videos like that today . The video I talk about was extremely serious and was made by a team of apparently very technical people. They were only discussing facts according to their own investigations and observations, not saying their personal opinions regarding certain aspects of the Apollo program as I noticed many others do (although these personal opinions are sometimes of valuable considerations, a pure technical fact (even acknowledged by NASA sometimes) is always more credible). Their investigations were so deep, much more deeper than all of the Moon hoax videos I saw on YouTube or Google thereafter, and still today. For exemple, the said team went to the museum where the lunar mobile was exposed and, after being allowed, took several mesures of the dimensions and controls to findout how exactly could astronauts (astroNOTs as you call them) operate it. They took measurements of the dimensions of an astronauts in his suite and came to the conclusion that the habitacle of the lunar module as way too small to be operated by two astronauts as by simply moving in and out of the module they would have (or higly risked to) touched many buttons, controls, etc. that could have caused many problems, and possibly their death. The place was too small, with so many controls, that it was a major treath for security that normaly could not have been accepted. The circular port-holes by which astronauts were supposed to go out and to in were even way too small for an astronaut in his suite to pass in. They found plenty of inconsistencies like that regarding the lunar module operation only, and they even went to ask a NASA engineer that had worked on the project in the time to find "answers" to these facts. During the talk (english is not my first language but I could understand well most of the talk), I remember the NASA engineer (who looked pretty old) starting being mad and impatient as his arguments did not stand in front of the facts the investigation team brought to him. Later on, the team continued his investigations on the lunar module, and one day, they were abruptly denied access to it. They were also saying that all of the numerous datas that "has been recorded" about the many Apollo missions, except maybe some few remaining photos, videos and things like that we find today, were suppressed. No construction plans, technical things, etc... remains (or at least is accessible). They were finding it strange that datas concerning the "greatest achievement of humanity" could have been suppressed like that. In the video, they also went along with many other aspects of the missions in the same technical-true-direct-observable way, everytime concluding that things could not have work. So professionnaly their researches and arguments were, that it completly convinced me that this was the truth.

I agree with you when you say that some people will never change their mind as they believe Apollo missions are true and that man went on the Moon. This video invariantly could, and, I believe, will, because it deals with real technical facts, not with simple personal opinions as we find frequently today, and wich are, with reason, not as credible as facts. For a long time now, I searched for this video again to show it to people I know still believe in the Apollo missions, but I can't find it any more! I strongly believe it has been voluntarily suppressed, for the obvious reason of being able to convince people of the sad truth. The video was more than 40 minutes long, and was on YouTube of Google about a year ago exactly. Have you ever seen or have heard about this video? And by chance, would you have saved it? I would really like to recover this video and definetly save it on my hard drive, backed up. The way things are presented bothers, and thus, I believe, can convince anyone. Good afternoon

Sadly, that was about to happen, when early in 2007 my little sis asked me about Moon landings, as she saw something about them on TV and started to raise serious questions. It is really unexplainable why USA did it 40 years back and no-one ever followed. So I was about to "check things out" and look at some of the photos, because "they" claim there are errors, weird shadows and such. I was a graphician and picture is my everyday life and business. So, I started at NASA page and when the first picture poped out, it was the famous Apollo 8 "Earthrise" http://lunar.gsfc.nasa.gov/images/gallery/apollo08_earthrise.jpg. My dream ended abruptly and painfully in just a moment. I was a speechless. Every perticle in my body screamed "FAKE!" when I look at the picture, it was so unbearable, that I had to stand up from my computer and start walking the house to calm down.

Wow, I was reading your website after my boyfriend told me no one ever walked on the moon.... And I now understood everything!! I'm so mad now when I ask someone about it and they say "Of course they went on the Moon"... Come on its BS!! I just don't understand why no one said anything...how can all these astronauts not say anything to anyone about it.... I would feel so bad if I had to lie about such a thing! I mean, we learnt about that in school, we have to learn who was the first man to walk on the moon...........It's crazzzee !! I wish everyone would be open minded enough to read this web site..... And understand like I did!! Thank you so much to whoever created this site. Hope we learn more about this very soon. I'm gonna keep on spreading the news because..... No ONE knows about the truth! Is there a lot of people out there that knows about this? Or is it just us, like 10% of humans? Here at work, I asked my collegues what they thought of it... and they ALL said "Come on, the Moon isn't that far, of course the Americans went.... ( try to prove your point....)I'm 23, they are adults!! They all think its funny that I think differently.. they laugh, I just keep on reading... I wanna learn every single thing I can, and will be able to prove it one day. To me, just the pictures... hey, the pictures, they are so obvisously fake. I did read most of the links on your site, great research.

Wow. I've just spent the last hour with my eyeballs plastered to your website. I'm 24 so of course I've heard of Neil Armstrong and all of the other Apollo adventures. Obviously being very young, you tend to just believe something instead of questioning its authenticity. Never have I heard anything about this being "fraudulent", if you will. I've asked myself a few times, what's going on in regards to current time and missions to the moon. And why with all of our so called superior technology is it so difficult to make a trip to the moon more frequent, etc... YOU have given me something to think about and for that I thank you. I'm always up for a new idea. I have to admit, the pictures alone are enough to drop your jaw. Matching backgrounds, in all of them..... Well, off to do more research. Thx.

Dear Sir, Congratulations for your excellent website exposing the Moon Landing fraud. In my opinion it is the most informative and, at the same time, funny website on that matter. Having seen the first "live" broadcast in 69 as a four year old and having been a space travel fan afterwards until my late teens, it was a painful process to realize that it was all a fraud. I started suspecting it was a con a few years ago, I didn't want it to be true at first and struggled quite some time (about half a year), but finally the evidence was stronger than my wish not to see it. Even if one has no idea about physics and space craft technology or photography one only has to watch e.g. that Apollo 11 post flight press conference to see that it was a scam. If one possesses just a modicum of psychological intuition, it is almost painful to see how badly they, (especially Armstrong), are lying. However, I doubt that the majority of people will ever acknowledge the fact that it was a fraud. It is too painful and also intimidating for most since it shakes the foundations of people's world view and leaves them insecure as to what else they firmly believed might not be so. Actually I think Apollo, albeit a giant scam, wasn't even the biggest. I know people with PhDs in physics, generally intelligent persons, who say they "can only laugh" about the Moon hoax theory. When I send them to your site they refuse to read it, after all they, as physicists know better. Or do they? Some even become aggressive and insulting when one mentions this topic. Well, it seems the dumbing down process has not spared people with a university education. Never question people's dearly held beliefs, even, or especially, if they are scientists! By the way, what's your take on those Mars rovers "Spirit" and "Opportunity"? They look quite fishy to me also. And how did those alleged moon probes return samples of Moon rock, if NASA has never landed and took off again vertically with a rocket? Did they land using parachutes? ;-) I have a hunch that most, if not all, space travel both unmanned as well as manned, beyond LEO (the Van Allen belts) is bogus. What do you think? Your new addition "APOLLO Q & A" is again very good and funny. I can't stop laughing when I look at that covered cheese tray with the "simulated lunar samples". That's great! Where (and when) did you get that picture? I'll keep recommending it to others who still have eyes to see and brains to think. It's funny how Wikipedia and other propaganda websites refuse to properly link to your site, even on the page which pretends to present the arguments for the Apollo landings being a hoax. Anyway keep up the good work and the great website, I'm looking forward to seeing and reading more from you.

The problem is people don't want to hear the truth.. it means most of what we grew up with was a lie, I used to make spaceships from plant pots! and dreamt of being an astronaut. Sometimes though perhaps the lie is better... Like not knowing the day you will die, if you knew it would change the way you live. A world without the Moon landings which my parents watched and shaped their dreams, means anything could be a sham. I don't believe we landed on the Moon. I say We even though I am from England, but that’s how the western world feels about it, the pinnacle of everything good about science and technology (which replaced god for hopes and dreams.) I can see what you are trying to do, but I don't see what good will come of it.. "NASA announces Moon landings were faked" ... Anger and outrage.. Even bloodshed? I think if it was confirmed the reaction of people will be to never trust authority again, which could be far more dangerous than the original lies. There are some cases when we are not ready for the truth, with the world as it is, this is that time. China launch an unmanned probe to the Moon in 2017, it will be the final chapter on this, as it will become obvious to the world the Moon landings were faked from the footage and data that is recorded. It is likely China will be the first to land a man on the Moon and they will have the proof that they did. Why not let the world endure the lie? and we can be the enlightened ones until 2017 !

Hi, Fantastic site! On the nasascam page with the same backgrounds from the Apollo17 mission. Do you know the NASA pictures, like AS17-134-20345 for these pictures? I'm interested in the last one there with the module in front of the funky mountain range and then the third up with the guy walking away with the bad background and the same mountain range without the module. These two are enough. It's unreal. But going through the NASA pics is an ordeal so if you have the NASA ref numbers, please let me know. NASA today says that it takes 12 hrs to decompress for a space walk. The suits today aren't pumped to 1 atmosphere because that would be hard to move in. But back then they have two answers for no decompression. One is that the suits were pumped to 1 atmosphere, which is nonsense cause they couldn't bend their elbows and the other one is that they operated in 100% O2 environment, which is also impossible because that would kill a person near instantly. It's just rife with bullshit. It's unbelievable, absolutely astonishing, and it comes as no surprise that Apollo was a fake.

Hi Just been re-reading your excellent site again, and laughing at all the mistakes that NASA made with their cover up. Now it occurs to me to ask - and I can't find this anywhere on your website - about the so-called take off from the moon. Unless I have remembered wrongly, I seem to recall that as the lunar module blasted off from the moon surface, the camera watching it followed it upwards. How could this be? Did they leave somebody behind to follow the arc of the moving craft? Did the chaps back on Earth do it remotely? Hard to see how this could have happened when there would have been a delay of several seconds. Or did the astronots do it remotely whilst also concentrating on lots of other stuff at the same time? AND WHO FILMED NEIL ARMSTRONG COMING DOWN THE LADDER FOR THE FIRST TIME????

Hi, Great site! How in the world did you get all those photos? You have a connection to NASA? On July 20th 1969 I was celebrating my sixth birthday with a bunch of my little friends. I remember the TV being on in the living room and my dad watching it intently. He said we were landing on the moon. Me and my friends wanted to be astronauts and land on the moon someday. Cut to 40 years later. When I was watching some nasa videos (particulary the Lander lifting off the moon) when I said...no way, that looks so fake. So I started looking into it more. Yours is by far the most informative site I have found. I am convinced now we didn't land on the moon. I also remember one of the shuttle astronuats...maybe Ryder, not sure, but I remember that she had been studying how to get to the moon and she mentioned that we probably wouldn't land on it till about 2025. It was those types of things that peeked my curiosity. Anyway, thanks for taking the time and effort to put your site together. I'll share it with my friends.

Hi there. Just been reading through ya site and find it amazing. I'm 44 and was 6 in 1969. I remember being facinated by the TV pictures in early 70's and amazed as well. For years I was sceptical, always used to say to my dad, they put a man on the moon, but now 40 years later, they struggle to put a man in orbit. How come with technology advances, have they gone backwards. Since the advent of the shuttle missions I have become more and more scepticle and for the last few years adamant that they never went to the moon. Its only people like yourselves that will show NASA up for what they are, cheating, lieing bastards! I therefore assume that Neil Armstrongs "First leap onto the moon" was filmed much earlier or was infact somebody else in the suit. Its all very naughty, people have gone to their grave believing it to be real. The truth must come out. Keep up the good work. You do a great job exposing the whole sorry affair.

I've been very impressed by your Apollo Reality site. The pictures were very interesting and the analysis was well presented. I am very interested in finding out more information about the historical photos from the LRC. Can you provide any further information about the sources for these photos and/or the book that some of them were taken from? Any background information available would be appreciated and helpful for my research.I think it was really the rail that got me. Why would you need to simulate the movement at a specific speed? I can understand doing some kind of trial run, but since everything would be so different in actual space why the need for the EXACT copy to scale? The other factoid I found enlightening was that Boeing destroyed their copies of the plans for the rover. The plans should have been sent to the Smithsonian. As for the astronauts - I think they were told they were filming the scripted version just in case of technical difficulty to give the people a show. Judging by the looks on their faces, they weren't told about the scam until shortly before their scheduled trip to the moon. The press conference film from Apollo 11 is one of the most telling documents in US history. Please let me know if you have any larger copies of any of the photos. Somewhere on my computer I have a copy of one of the official Apollo photos that shows the stage lights overhead. That's another favorite. Thank you for posting these records for others to see.

Dear Sir: Like you, I am a total disbeliever in the moon landings. My father had been in the OSS during WWII and one day, shortly before he died, told me in confidence that we had never succeeded in landing on the moon. While the original OSS forerunner of the CIA was disbanded, many of the original OSS people were rehired by the CIA. My father had maintained contact with these people for decades. My Dad had the coveted 'Q' clearance and worked directly under General Donovan. Because of his high security clearance, he was later hired by North American Aviation/Rockwell to sit in on and take the minutes of the executive, engineering, government meetings. My old man had been a Chief Yeoman in the Navy and could type extremely fast and accurate as well as take Gregg shorthand.

My father was never prone to exaggeration. I was told by him about the lunar landing scam in the early 1980's. We had never discussed anything pertaining to national security whatsoever. During our conversation, I mentioned NASA and it brought up a very ugly moment. My father referred to them as "....a bunch of goddamn nazi's." He was referring to SS Maj. Werner Von Braun. In the 1940's, German rockets were nothing to brag about. Even in the 1950's when the Nazi's took over the American rocket program, successful flights were virtually nonexistent. Yet, in 1961, Kennedy proclaimed that we would put a man on the moon and return him safely to earth. In essence, we went from the first liquid rockets (V2's) to the giant Saturn rockets within the span of 25 years. That would be the same equivalent of going from the 1918 Sopwith Camel biplane fighters to the Concord in 25 years. It simply didn't happen. Now that the old exNAZI regime have passed on, NASA is saying that we "might" be able to get a man on the moon in another 10 to 12 years. I can vividly remember all of the positive NASA talk from the 1960's. Now, decades later, NASA doesn't seem to be so sure about their capabilities.

What a superb site: exhaustive research and categoric proof that NASA (Nasty Axis Scandal Agency) faked all the Apollo missions. No human has ever ventured beyond low Earth orbit. 500,000 miles round trip without refuelling, using the technology of forty years ago---wow! No tension in any of the astronots voices and movements---like they were holidaying in Honolulu, and not the first humans ever to walk (wired!) on an alien planet. A hitchless program, except for Apollo 13's joke of a publicity stunt mission. We must keep up the pressure until, as the late great Bill Kaysing said, Apollo is exposed, then everything else will unravel like Pandora's box: IRS/CIA/NASA/Pentagon/White House etc. finally on the runs (sic) and fugitives to a new, real, democratic, people's justice system.

I worked for the government for a lot of years and your cynical, disresptful, ridiculing of Nasa and the Pans is completely justified. This is how THEY operate when they want to discredit something that is factual or at least worthy of investigation. Anything out of the mainstream propoganda (like truth) is never met with honest respect and scientific curiosity but with Galileo-era Catholic church heresey accusations. (conspiracytheorist[one word on purpose] buzzword is the current word of choice. If only they knew what the word theory meant. The radiation problems has always been my objection to going to the moon, Apollo 13 was another big stumbling block, you watch a dramatization of Apollo 13 and they supposedly flew back mostly in the LEM?? with virtually no protection from solar radiated heat?? you'd have to be at least a Bishop in the church of the PAN to believe that. Thanks and keep up the good work.

Hi. What I like about your site is that you take NASA pictures of everything to do with Apollo, and then point out what’s wrong them. No other hoax sites do this, as they all seem to regurgitate the same old anomalies such as shadows, flag blowing, C rock, no stars, and no blast crater etc. I looked at the “battered LM” picture, and agree with you it looks ridiculous, but I just love your humorous comments, like those on the Apollo Laugh page. I rolled about laughing when I saw the close up picture of the Lunar Module, and fully agree with what you say, “it’s a botch job”. I contacted Grumman (now NorththropGrumman) by e-mail, and asked them if they really did build the LM as shown in your picture, and placed a link direct to the picture in your index_files. Guess what, I am still waiting for a reply after 4 weeks. This only adds more weight to the evidence the LM is indeed a joke, and the landings were indeed a fake. Keep up the good work.

Just wanted to thank you 1000 times. Your pages about the Apollo missions"NASASCAM" is just among the VERY BEST stuff I EVER found on the wholenet. Not only the facts, it's put brilliantly with every word of it. This is first class entertainment. I think Apollo was a lie absolutely after reading this, and having been dis-educated by lying history books. Sadly I think among the ranks of "biggest scams in history" are other contenders to be found now, and they're much, much more dangerous. One can only hope that they will one day be hit by exposure as mercilessly as you did to Apollo. I have a recommendation for your Nasascam pages: A hot topic about whether Apollo moon missions were real is that sooner or later telescopes should be able to get better pictures of the supposed landing sites. So far they have not proven it, although some pictures circulate on the net that show a "nothing" and claim it's the Apollo LM site. You could maybe add some information about this lack of evidence to your site.

Nexus magazine editor Marcus Allen acknowledged in Secret Space DVD that he contacted the Apollo spacesuit manufacturer and inquired if the suits could be used for radiation protection at toxic radiation clean-up sites. Allen says they told him, 'No - no radiation protection'. The following is an itemization of ILC Dover and the Apollo suit construction layers. To stop radiation penetration molecular density is required. Typically this means several centimeters of solid lead or multiple inches of solid aluminum for starters. PhD Astrophysicist James McCanney acknowledged at a public lecture to some 200-300 people that the Apollo moon missions were, "a gigantic hoax". After citing the issue of the Van Allen belts of radiation as the overwhelming trump card he further pointed out a picture of Pluto on a NASA website as proof that we can resolve the lunar landing sites.

My husband just showed this site to me and I have to let you know my son as well as my husband (and quite a few other people who know me) have ridiculed me for my beliefs that we indeed did NOT land or even travel to the moon. I happened to be working for a corp. that was producing piece parts for the Apollo 11 mission. After the supposed success of the mission several representatives of NASA came to visit and thanked us heartily for our assistance and our ability to make the parts required in the time frame they were needed. I never for one minute fell for it and a year or so later I went to visit my niece in DC and while visiting the Smithsonian, I discovered that the entire Moon landing was recreated perfectly (a little too perfectly) down to the same rocks. I am wondering if they will ever come clean about the hoax they have laid on the American people, not to mention the residents of the entire World. Big sham and shame.

AS A MATTER OF FACT I WAS STATIONED AT LANGLEY AFB FROM 1961 TILL 1966. LANGLEY WAS CIA HEADQUARTERS TACTICAL AIR COMMAND HEADQUARTERS AND NASA HEADQUARTERS OF COURSE...I WAS THE ENGINEER WHO HELPED DEVELOP THE LUNAR EXCURSION MODULE SIMULATOR, WITH LINK GROUP IN PALO ALTO CALIF FROM 1966 TILL 1970. BULLSHIT IS WHAT OUR FEDERAL GOVT DOES FOR A LIVING.... I AM JUST NOW COMING OUT OF A BLACKOUT CONCERNING THE APOLLO MISSIONS..YOU SEE I REALLY BELIEVE WE WENT TO THE MOON BECAUSE I TRAINED THOSE GUYS TO LAND THERE..IN THE SIMULATOR..THAT IS..AND LET ME TELL YOU IT WAS NO DREAM TO SIMULATE SOMETHING THAT HAD NEVER BEEN DONE..IN FACT WE JUST MADE SOME THINGS UP AS WE WENT ALONG THE MOONS CURVATURE GENERATOR FOR ONE THING IN THE SIMULATOR WE USED THE EARTHS RADIUS. PLEASE SEND ME A COMPLEMENTARY COPY OF ANY INFO YOU HAVE ON THIS COVERUP............

Hi I've been researching the moon landing fraud for about six years now, and have found many good reasons to believe that it was a fraud and I'd like to mention on my website (www.apolloanomalies.com) the evidence you provide on yours regarding the staging of the approach to the moon (the photos of the studio showing the lunar globe etc), and although I've read most everything on your site, I haven't yet found anything noting where these photos originated or how it is that you obtained them. I probably overlooked where these photos originated or how it is that you obtained them. My question then is how did you come into possession of these photos that show NASA preparing a stage for faking the moon approach? Did a NASA insider provide them to you? I need to know at least in general terms your answer to this question in order to provide these photos as evidence on my site, even if your answer is you can't tell me, I understand if you have to protect your source.

My goal has always been to provide evidence that cannot easily be refuted and I want to have something to tell people when they ask me where your photos originated. Is there anything I can tell them that you can tell me? Also, is it alright if I display the same few photos (of the preparation of the studio) on my website? I'm currently enhancing my argument that the attitude adjustments made by the lunar rover while in orbit around the moon were fake and I think your photos add to the argument. I plan to have a link to your site when I'm done... BTW, *I think* that Bart Sibrel's "Apollo 11 Monkey Business" video has some significant film footage that was clearly shot using the studio lunar globe. You can tell because the lunar surface shown in some of the film clips on Sibrel's video appear to match the exact color of the globe as seen in your photos. You should check out his video if you haven't done so already. You've got a great website. Very fine work and it's brutally devastating to the folks on the "other side of the fence". Keep it up!

Hello NASASCAM and thank you kindly for these great Photos. Clearly, the photos are faked and it is about time that somebody at NASA was hung for misleading the American population and the entire World. What is Punishment in the U.S.A. for repeatedly lying to the people around the Globe and cultivating a plethora of dis-information to further deceive the citizens of Planet Earth. If you ask me, death is too good for them. Maybe we should have them sent to Guantanomo Bay in Cuba for about 5 years worth of sensory deprivation. I know, we'll give everyone on Earth the chance to drive a hot poker up the backsides of all those at NASA and in the Government Agencies that force-feed us with lies and deceit. Anyway, your site was refreshing to see. Some truth, for once, in a Web of lies. What I am hoping for is to go into space, myself, perhaps step on another world, maybe. None of this will be possible if the Human Race continues to allow it's elected Governments to lie to us and deceive us on a Global and daily basis. I sincerely hope that you can express the sentiments of this letter to the masses. God knows, I've tried. I find people so locked into their way of thinking that their minds are not open to any new or unexpected information. HOW SMALL ARE WE? Thank you for your site and for your time.

I really appreciate your website. It is so clear to me the moon landings are frauds and fake. Yours is the best site I've ever seen indicating such a thing. This is a topic that gets many upset and angry at me if I voice my scepticism. I think you might enjoy the fact that LDS Apostle, who would become Church President (AKA Mormon Church) Joseph Fielding Smith. All through the 1960's moved about in conferences and congregations throughout Utah and Idaho stating that Man would not go to the moon. I have many uncles and aunts who heard him state this to be the case. I'm sure there were many who objected to his "lack of patriotism" for such statements. He was also a pilot as well, so was not in the dark as to aviation. Thanks for the great site.

On this page: http://apollofacts.bravehost.com Do you have time (and patience) to footnote or provide an index for the sources of these tantalizing facts? These are indeed fascinating. On this page: http://apolloreality.bravehost.com Is the source of these pictures public? Where do they come from - what does NASA and the PANs have to say about these. I don't know if you have the time and energy to consider the comments above. I occasionally forward a link to your site to many of my religious friends and they have looked at your stuff seriously with their children. A comment that offended a few was your offhanded remark "Size does matter." While this kind of jocularity has a place with some people, some shy away from it. And religious people take your information especially seriously, so why alienate them. In my opinion it is a case of diminishing returns. Keep up the good work. May G-d Almighty show the truth with kindness and mercy.

WOW! You did your homework. I felt for years that NASA was hiding something and anyone who took the time to listen to me about NASA's scam would think I was nuts. Now I am relieved to say they don't think like that anymore, especially since there is so much detailed information on this subject to prove otherwise. I am wondering why hasn't NASA been taken to court yet? Since they deceived the entire world and are getting away with it. What will it take for justice to prevail? Am eager to see what will happen in the future and the fact that President Bush is currently planning a 1,000,000,000,000 manned mission to Mars in the next 10 years and the majority of society believe this will happen......They need to know the TRUTH, and save the tax payers millions of their hard earned dollars on this Satanic lie! Thanks for taking the time to read my email. I hope you will continue your sterling work on this subject and may GOD show you the way. God Bless.

I have finally found a place being your site that I can call home. Your web site is exactly what I have believed for a long time. I feel better now knowing there truly are great numbers of people that can use their brain and see it all was a fake. They wasted millions if not billions of Americans money. I still don't know why unless it was to show the Russians that the USA could do it first. Where did all the money go and what was it used for? Many unanswered questions remain. I get so tired of idiot people I meet on the street that as you say hook, line and sinker believe that cause it was told to us and we seen some pictures on the television that it happened. When you do your homework on this subject you see that the evidence of us not going far greater than we did go. I remember all through middle school studying about the Moon and all the missions and taking tests and being graded on it and its all bullshit. Just a bunch of bullshit lies that all my teachers really believed and tried to brain wash me to believe it too. I am a grown man now and have children of my own and I tell them the Moon landings were faked regardless of what they teach my children in school. They try and brain wash them in school and when they get home that get a big dose of reverse information that we did not go. There was much that you did not mention. Just a few examples is how did the cross hairs on the camera get behind some of the images or how come the LM did not make a huge crater when it landed if the soil was so soft and powdery or how come on some pictures the astronauts were all lit up bright white but in the background behind them the LM was dark as pitch? I seen one of the rocks somewhere had a letter on it. Multiple shadows in some pictures would mean multiple light sources. Have a great day and feel free to share my letter with all that want to know the truth.

Hi... I must of been a PAN at times :) then I wasn't, then I was...but recently I said to myself... they faked em! Reading your pages was a delight, thank you...I’m researching this all because of my father really who worked the for MOD in the UK, he lectured on space travel and even wrote something for President Carter named 'Moon shot'... I remember him as a child bringing home models of the lunar rover... I even built myself an airfix Saturn V (the truth is almost as plastic as that model)... I suppose everyone (or most) believed it at the time... I’m dedicated to finding and outing the truth on this matter...It was always a surprise to me the lack of 'time' between those communications between Houston (missing control) and astroNOTs on the Moons surface... instant almost, even today’s live sat link-ups are slow and buggy... also the lack of any pictures of the abandoned lunar rover or experiments, or the bottom half of the LM from space or earth... not one picture... they can read a newspaper from space using a satellite... why not this?... even the latest scanning probe (took pictures of the Moon for a year I think) which crashed on the lunar surface just a month or so ago showed nothing above the Apollo landing sites... (there was an excuse about this if i remember) it was on the BBC website...I re-watched Capricorn One a few days ago... great film, puts me in mind of the tragic Apollo one astronauts. Thanx again for your pages, wonderful stuff, hey I hope you don't mind if I ask a question... someone the other day I was speaking to about this replied to my suggestions about faked Moon landings by telling me that surely the Russians at the time would have smelt foul play...?... anyways, thanx again.

Dear Sir, I thoroughly enjoyed reading your Faked Moon Landings site. Have you thought to challenge NASA to pro-actively once and for all disprove your claims by commissioning independent astronomers to train their deep space telescopes on the supposed landing sites on the surface of the Moon where the remains of all those supposed Apollo missions would still be sited? Especially now with the ongoing construction of the EBT telescope on the Peruvian plateau at 5000m, surely they will have enough optical resolution to spot the landing sites and examine for variations on the lunar surface? What about satellites orbiting the Moon? Are there any out there mapping the surface for the European space agency - or old Soviet satellites? Surely they would be ideally located to spot the lower half of all those supposed LEMS left on the surface? A minor observation about the American flag planted on the surface. If it was not weighted at the base, how did it stay supported in the maximum 1 or 2 inches of "Moon dust" that was there, according to the boot prints we see. Also, are there boot prints in the fine dust very near the LEM? if so they should most certainly NOT be there, when we witness the supposed footage of Armstrong’s LEM making the first "landing" and blasting away the surface material shortly before landing. Two inches of superfine dust would have been easily scoured from the surface for a radius of at least 50ft from the descent thruster itself. Lastly, a "Nutter" friend of mine said the conspiracy theory was ridiculous because they (NASA) would have had to keep so many people quiet on this. Surely it would have taken hundreds of people at NASA and elsewhere to be "in" on the hoax? Why has no-one ever blown the whistle and come out in the open to the media to state, say, that he was there on the "Moon" film set? Agreed about Armstrong. Why hasn't he been strutting the world stage the past 40 years, appearing in movies and docu's and reveling in the glory of being the "first ever human to walk on the Moon"? He doesn't add up at all does he? Your comments on this would be very much appreciated, The soundtrack to the first panorama features the famous Armstrong " One small step. . ." speech. The end bit of that, after he had supposedly stepped off the LEM onto the Moon, and the first words he speaks - so is therefore supposedly standing on the lunar surface right below the steps - comment on the fineness "like charcoal" of the dust right there and on the "sole of his boots". First of all how could he possibly bend his leg up as we can do on earth, and twist it around at the knee to actually see what was on the sole of his boot in a thick, pressurised spacesuit? Secondly and even more telling; a couple of inches of charcoal-fine dust at the foot of the lander would have been blasted for many metres away from the surface by the thrust of the descent rocket. But I must say Sam, those pictures showing the same background on locations km’s apart really does take the biscuit! What is NASA’s response to your challenge on these? Thanks Sam, You're a gem of a bloke. Well done! NASA's failure to even take up, let alone argue your points means they are defeated in the debate. The US government have too much to lose by admitting the truth even 38 years on. It's truly pathetic. Keep up the good work!

Thank you very much for your informative site. I find it shocking and totally indecent that I am a 25 year old and for the vast majority of my life have taken it as fact that NASA landed man on the Moon. I have considered evidence on both sides of the case and come to the same conclusion as you have: IT WAS FAKED. This is an interesting subject and one I shall take up with my grandfather. You see he was an electrical systems engineer during the Apollo missions, working at the tracking station located in Canarvon, Western Australia, Australia. He has various momemtoe’s from the missions, and photographs. I will have to approach the subject carefully as I’m sure no one would like to find out their life work has been a sham. If he sheds any new information on the subject I have not already read on the net would you be interested? PS great website keep on delivering the REAL information.

I have done many researches about bogus distances claimed by NASA. If you are interested I can show them to you. I also debated them with pro-apollo people. Imagine that a small rock was seen from a distance of , supposedly, around a kilometer away. They were arguing with me that that crater and that small rock can be seen. Of course, it makes no sense. I have prepared a powerpoint presentation about the photos with bogus distances, and as I said I can send them to you if you want. It is just depressing to speak to people who would come up with the weirdest scenarios to defend their case. It is amazing how tiny people' s brains become when they have a firm belief in something. So, I sympathize with you when you receive their emails. By the way, I would like to compare the response of Buzz Aldrin to Sibrel's video, the one that showed Buzz to be "training' on using the camera to film the Earth on a transparency. He said, "Well you are speaking to the wrong guy. Why don't you speak to NASA chief. We were just passengers". Compare this to soldiers at Abou Ghraib prison who said when approached: we were just commanded soldiers. This is a very strong thing indicating that he knows that he is guilty, but try telling that to a pro-apollo person. It is obvious that nothing can convince them. It was my mistake to try to speak to them again.

Hi, Recently I started doing my own mini research of the Moon landing controversy and within days I came across many inconsistencies in the NASA photographic evidence. I would like to share with you one of my findings. The following link points to a NASA Apollo 14 (or 15) video file depicting two astronauts on the surface of the Moon helping each other with some task while another person inside the (EML?) Moon lander zooms the video camera in and out as well as pans the camera from one side to another side with perfect sync. This would exclude the possibility of any remote control, not to mention I could not find any document to support the motion that the video camera was remote controlled from Earth. Does it not prove the presence of a third person and a deception at the same time? One more thing, if you go to the web site from my link below, you can download videos from all the Apollo's missions. I personally watched perhaps 10-15 of them and I can not find one that would show that there was any delay in radio communication with Huston - the back and forth trip should have taken a little less then 3 seconds; if you add the fact the signal was relayed via Australia and/or other locations, would that not add even more delay?

I have doubted the truth of the supposed Moon landings ever since I can remember. Your site has convinced me even more. There is however one more point that does not seem to be discussed on any of the sites concerned with this issue: when NASA launches a satellite, space shuttle or whatever, the majority of the launch-craft is composed of first and second stage rockets and of course thousands of litre’s of fuel; and that's only to launch into an earth orbit, some two hundred miles or so up. All of that fuel and power is needed to break free of the earth's gravitational pull. Also, the craft is launched from a specially constructed launch-pad, something they don't have on the Moon of course. Now first of all let me say that I am no rocket scientist, but I can't help but wonder how NASA expects us to believe that the landing craft or indeed the final stage of the orbiting space craft contained enough fuel to break free of the Moon's gravity and then propel it across 400 000 km to earth! Even though the Moon has a gravitation pull of only around 0.16 G, I believe that a launch on earth is way more efficient due to the thrust of the rockets acting on the atmosphere (essentially "pushing against" the surrounding air) On the Moon with no atmosphere, this would simply not be the case, so all power to move the craft is reactionary. Also I don’t see any room for adequate fuel on that lander! Just some points to ponder. Keep up the good work.

Good site ya got there. The more pix Nasa puts on the net, the easier it gets to prove their scam. Photoshop is NASA's best friend and worst enemy. Here's something very odd that I've never seen before: "Apollo Lunar Surface Journal - Technical Debriefings" have the most bizarre typing on Earth. These pdf files presumably are photocopies of the originals. The font changes randomly word to word, with bold and italics thrown in at helter skelter. Either their prehistoric word processors were schizo (which makes trusting the prehistoric LEM computer an insane risk), or something really sloppy is going on with censorship. Check it out. Apollo 17 is the one I read 1st. Also odd that the astronots discussed food, piss and poop ad nauseum, but apparently never mentioned the word "radiation". They said the simulators were "perfect" at predicting the lunar landing... No wonder CIA ran NASA, with that much BS to script. http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/alsj-tecdbrf.html NASA telescopes zoomed in on Apollo landing sites in great detail but no landers visible in photos, so NASA just pencilled them in - total proof of the scam http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a11/a11j.html

I once met a bloke in our local supermarket who was an avid Apollo fan. He had all the DVD's etc, and would scoff at any suggestion the Moon landings were fake. I told him to study the video's and photographs, and look for discrepancies which proves they are fake. He went away thinking I was some kind of nut to suggest the landings were fake, however the next time I saw him he was extremely excited. He asked me to go back to his place and look at one of his Apollo DVD's. He admitted that although he had played them a few times, he hadn't studied them very hard, in other words he wasn't looking for any anomalies. The video he played back was of Apollo 17 astronaut Schmitt supposedly bouncing on the Moon. "Look" he said. "There's a bloody wire showing above his head, so he's suspended in some way, what a bloody con". He took the DVD out of his PC, then threw it in the nearby waste bin. I told him to take his Apollo DVD's down to the local charity shop. "Some PAN will probably buy them" I said. I think they sold for about 50p. Cheap at any price, but then NASA's scam is a cheap hoax. Brilliant web site, the best on the net for exposing the Fake Moon Landing's, keep it up.

I must say I love your site. I heard about the possible fakings, but only heard countless repetitions of flapping flag and shadows. Thanks for reading. I will admit, your comments about Apollo nuts or whatever you call them being mind-sick are rather disconcerting and unnecessary. In fact they could potentially diminish your credibility. Sorry, that's just a little critique. I greatly enjoy doing research on anything and everything, and this is no exception. Even though I can't see the pictures due to blindness I still find the written aspects quite fascinating. I've always been interested in conspiracy theories, although I need lots of proof to convince me. I'll have to think about this and do further research. Thanks a lot for spurring me on. Anyway, have a fabulous day.

Hello I have never believed the N.A.S.A. pictures, I am into photography, and chest mounted hasselbald cameras are hard to use acurately and to get crisp clear shots, all arranged too beautifully, yeah right thats crazy!! In 1969!! just think about it going to the moon look at us to day still trying get off the ground, still faking the Mars maps, look at the Mars maps in 60's through 70's ice caps on each end!! Now why are they trying to see if their is water their Duh?!! This is 2005 36 years from what some people would call the most greatest time in history. Why hasn't N.A.S.A. gone back just play around mess with the old gadgets in 1969 place a commemorative plaque their!! Crazy!!? I was wondering where I can get some video footage of the astroNots faking lunar mischief!! or send me something!! Thanks God Bless!!

I enjoy your site and wondered if you wouldn't mind accepting some more information about your subject. There is an hour-long, one frame-per-second video diary of the astronauts on the surface of the Moon. In that video, if you carefully observe the shadows, in several frames you can actually see two vertical lines that appear to be suspension cords attached to the backside of one of the astronauts. Now, I wouldn't be so bold as to say that it's anything "exposing," but I would like to get your opinion on them. Then, if you feel that it warrants nothing, you could post the images on your site. Also, since I'm a very experienced Photoshop user, I wondered how Mike Tuttle came into your work. How did he come into it? How did you find out about him?

Hi, thanks for your site, it's very interesting, but I cannot load this "wily" picture: 08d2c780.jpg. I have been a Apollo-believer for many years until three months before a cousin posted me a german link http://www.gernot-geise.de/apollo/apollo.html. I was perplexed and fascinated and searched for other sites on the web. So I found Your site. Now I'm convinced, that never a man travelled to the moon! If one has a brain which is not TV-damaged and biased, only one conclusion is possible: The whole thing was a fake! Your sites are very convincing! I found a pro-apollo-site too, which seems to show some anti-fake examples, e.g. Kodak developed a special film for high-temperature environments, dust-anomalities, radiation-problems etc. Do You know this site? I would be enjoyed to know how to refute those nonsense. http://www.lunaranomalies.com/fake-moon.htm Can You help me to answer this? Best Thanks in advance Daniel (sorry for my English)

Excellent research!!!I Always had my doubts about the Apollo flights because of the van allen belts and cosmic ray storms. I do believe we did some space flights. I'm 26 years old and have an open mind. I always wondered why in1960's-70's they sent ships to the moon like it was so easy with limited technology ! Now with such advance technology they struggle to put manned spaceships in space to orbit the earth. They always make sure they stay in the safe-zone below the van allen belts. I also believe nasa faked the pictures to make us believe the astronauts were on the moon. Also the apollo ships do not look strong enough to with stand the dramatic temperature changes on the moon and while in orbit also cosmic ray storms and van allen belts to protect the astronauts.

Nice Job. When are you going to update us on the steel structure? I watched all the videos on the apollo archive site. The astro"nots" are clearly suspended from a cable in at least 2 of the videos. Anyone who examines this information would surely see this. I'm surprised Fox didn't have it in their tv show. I have delved even deeper into the photos. They probably just used trucks and bobcats to spread the dirt and ash or whatever they thought would fake everyone out. What an interesting slice of history. I think your one page did more to show what was really used and how it was done than any other page I have seen. People that believe haven't looked at any evidence, they are blindly following what they have been spoon fed. My wife thought I was absolutely crazy when I first told her I thought it was possibly faked. I don't think she is completely convinced yet. It is tough to get people interested in looking at the evidence! I had a long conversation with my aunt tonight and sent her a link to your page. She thought I was crazy too. I'm sure you hear it too. I'm a pretty "do your own homework" kind of person and enjoy looking at the information. In Ohio, there are many more believers than non-believers. I get the "oh god, he's nuts" look anytime I mention it. They then start thinking about it, but are too lazy to go and look at any evidence and fall back into believing their government wouldn't lie to them. I feel the same way about Bush. If he truly believes we went, he looks like a complete fool. We are going to have a nice new space rocket to take them there astronauts up to that there moon! How ridiculous this entire lie is. Your work with the Langely information is just excellent. I'm surprised Fox's special didn't go there. I think it is the most compelling of all information I have seen. Feel free to include me in any emails or thoughts you have. I really enjoy occasionally putting a few hours into it. I'll email you my page when I get it done.

I like it!!!!! You don’t bother with the waving flag or shadow stuff at all. That stuff is debatable and can be proven wrong, however you focused on primarily good stuff I hadn't seen on any other site, the bummer was that some of the last pictures on the Apollo reality link don’t show. Try to fix it, as I'd be really interested to see what u have to say. Thanks anyway. I have another question. I am very impressed with all the people working on the spheres and it definitely proves your point, but how do people know they are real? Can you match names with faces? If so who are they? they got ID's? or work records? even names would prove the fraud? I hoped that those two men in the sphere and placards photos could be seen. I had a hard time figuring out why they would take photos of the faking in the first place, not that I question the fraud. Keep up the awesome work, and send me that picture if you can.

Very glad to rediscover your website after it was moved from Zyweb! Hope the bandwidth problems can be resolved. From reading your feedback it appears that you also operate an e-mail discussion list. If this is the case, please add me to it. I was 12 years old, in Sydney, during Apollo 11. We were all ushered into the school assembly hall to watch the momentous broadcast. I was very blasé about the whole thing, thought it was no big deal as it was only the moon, not one of the planets. However, I remember an odd moment in this footage -- a clear distance shot from behind, in dark space, of Apollo 11 traveling towards the moon. I recall wondering, where and in what was the cameraman??? But for a few decades I never questioned the moon missions. I accidentally discovered the hoax information on the Internet about 3 years ago. It is such a blatant, shocking fraud. It makes me cringe to think that any of us could ever have believed it. NASA's own footage condemns their story. I have the various books and videos and almost everyone who has seen them comes to the same conclusion --some simply refuse to come to any conclusion. There is one point I'd like to see expanded in your "Facts" section. I have found that arguments with PANs about light, shadows, and stars in the photographs can run in endless circles. However, I think the greatest blooper in the whole scenario is the Lunar Rover. Just how did it get to the moon? Where and how did it fit into, onto, or under the LEM? The interior of the LEM is obviously too small, and the exit hatch laughably insufficient. It can't be placed near the engine exhaust and in any event due to the metal struts around the exhaust there wasn't a large enough space. Someone sure, what was the counterbalance on the other side? Where are the photographs or plans evidencing any scheme or attachment? Where any footage of it being unloaded or detached? I realize it's claimed that the original plans have been "lost" but I believe that there is enough information available on the relevant dimensions for a good proof of fraud. Also, from a religious point of view, I just love the Van Allen Belts. They are like God's electronic fence -- His way of saying "Thus far, and no further." I believe that the current and previous Mars missions are also utter rubbish. The real issue here, the black hole for tax dollars, is gaining military control of near-Earth space. All the rest is expensive, feel-good propaganda for the sheeple. I completely agree with you. After having my eyes opened to the Apollo fraud, I saw some pics from the Sojourner/Viking missions. There were screaming signs of fraud! For example, one of the little gizmos was portrayed on "Mars." The platform was open and there was a regular orange household extension cord linking some of the elements -- the kind of extension cord I use to run my dishwasher from a different circuit since my wiring dates from 1928. THIS survived a journey of millions of miles and a corrosive atmosphere??!? Also, I can't give names here, but I showed all the Apollo info to a good friend of mine. Her husband is in the film industry and immediately recognized some fraudulent techniques. Plus, she showed the videos to her relative, whose father is one of the top engineers in his field. He worked for Hughes for decades, holds classified patents, and still has the sort of security clearance, in retirement, that means two government agents have to be in the operating room if he is under anaesthetic. My friend's relative told his father about what he had discovered about the Apollo fraud, expecting to be laughed at, but his father only smiled and said, "That's right, we only know what NASA tells us." Believe me, this response speaks volumes! Sarah B.

Hello! I think you have the best Apollo-scam site. I can see why the Apollo supporters rarely mention your site and instead criticize the sites that are less intelligent. Apparently the government has been getting away with so many scams that they have a lot of confidence to do even more and bigger scams. I also used some of your photos to create a short PDF file on Apollo to create something for "Conspiracy Tasting Parties": I was wondering if you remember the source for your remark: "Incidentally ALL RECORDS pertaining to the faking of Apollo, are stored under 24 hour guard at LRC, and not due for declassification until 2026" I have not been able to find any remarks about Apollo records being classified. Where is that info? And do you recall the source of your photos of the " 20' diameter sphere" or the guys painting them to look like the moon? I would like to add the sources to my PDF file, and a link to your web site. Your web site seems to get overloaded sometimes, however.

I'm interested in the things you have to say about the Apollo hoax as I am a grade 12 student currently enrolled in the International Baccalaureate Program and have to compose a thesis for my extended essay. I am interested in using not only the Apollo Hoax as my thesis, but in using your site as one of my main references. The only flaw, however, I find with using your site as a reference, is this: Although you do provide a very strong case with relevant facts and figures in a logical manner, you immediately lose any credit as a reputable source with your last few paragraphs which come off as little more than a personal attack against Apollo supporters. Granted, they're against what appears to be the stronger side, but to blame it on their having a disillusioned mind, some sort of mental problem? And then to become little more than insulting, though you hide it by using big, fancy words to make it sound as if you're more credible than they are. I repeat, I am interested in the rest of your site, as I find your material to be nothing less than very convincing. I would appreciate if you could send me a list or some point-by-point layout of the most convincing points of the Apollo Hoax, and, if possible, other web sites which you believe are good sources (as I require 30+ references for this thesis). Again, I'm not taking a shot at your site; I find it to be well-written and very logical. I just wish you didn't discredit yourself with those last few paragraphs on your "Apollo Truths" section.

Hi, Great site....... just got thru going over all the comments from others. Question...do you have info available as to how and where these pix got out-of-bag? Any dates available as to when they were shot and who took them? Those pix of the rotating sphere, fake lunar surfaces, and trolley mounted camera, are REAL KILLERS. I do radio shows on these issues and it would be great to have some back-up info of documentation as to their authenticity etc. I forget if I mentioned it in my last letter, but I heard Dr. Brian O'leary speak at an expo here in SF a few months back. (He didn't 'go to the moon' but he was in the program.). I asked for an interview which he granted. Then, as I acknowledged that I wanted to ask him about the Apollo Missions, he clammed up and changed his tune altogether, saying that he didn't want to go backwards......... imagine, he considers it going backwards talking about one of the 'greatest achievements' in history. Of course we know what that means......... he doesn't want to get trapped in that quicksand. Regards WC.

I'm mainly e-mailing to tell you your links are broken on some of your most important photos. I'm not a scientist, and I don't know yet what I think for certain about the hoax theories. I never entertained the slightest doubt about the Apollo missions, and just went looking at the info for a lark, expecting to have my mind settled quickly that the missions were genuine. Instead, I find inconsistencies all over the place. It's troubling. I am unresolved about a number of things. The majority of sites do seem to be NASA and others refuting the claims of people who see inconsistencies in the photo records of the Apollo missions. I've noticed, though, that they refute as little as possible, every time. For example, the C rock photo shows two C's, but NASA only bothers to explain that the one on the rock is a hair. The one on the ground next to it, I guess they figure nobody will notice if they don't mention it. Or maybe they haven't noticed it themselves. I'm troubled about the blue light coming in through the windows in every film clip, the fact that I seem to be able to clearly make out in most photos exactly where the ground stops and the backdrops begin, and the fact that the "stars" issue and explanations change every time I look. There are stars in many of the photos. Then there are photos which don't have any. One of the debunkers claimed that there ought to be stars, and since then NASA's said no, there shouldn't be. Either way there's a problem here, and I'm not enough of a scientist to know which it is. There's a problem about the light on the flags, and Buzz, and there's a big problem with the cameras being on peoples' chests, because how on earth would they manage to get shots where nobody's head is cut off ever, and everything that's supposed to be in the shot, is in the shot. Plus, why are their stride lengths normal? Why doesn't anyone throw a moon rock up to show it goes for miles? I'm still not sure about anything. Well, good luck fixing your photo links. I think your site shows a lot of work and thought, and is very impressive, regardless. One thing occurred to me about the elaborate moon surface fakes, and the sphere, and so on. Perhaps they were making those for a planetarium? Are those sets and props actually on display somewhere? If not, then that is very suspicous.

Hi there, It seems fairly obvious that the whole moon landing thing was put together on earth, possibly by people who felt guilty about not being able to live up to the expectations of JFK. My particular interest is with Apollo 13 and I am trying to find more information on this particular flight. Was the problem really with the actual flight or the lack of enthusiasm from the general public. It appeared that they had already grown bored with the moon landings and the only way around this was to create "Space Heroes". Basically then my hypothesis is that the whole "Houston we've got a problem" story was created to increase interest and ensure public support for the following missions. Just wondered what you thought about this. A. J. Noice BSc. (Hons)

Hi, I'm very interested in the Apollo story and the all the evidence I have seen so far makes me more certain that all the TV footage and Pics of all Apollo missions were a fake. I so happened to stumble along your web site, which explains the LEM orbiting the Moon and how it was staged. I just want to know where you managed to find those pictures and from what book. I haven't managed to find any of these pictures on NASA's site and a lot of pictures in the official record are missing as well. Please help a researcher out. It is quite interesting you say that many pics are being removed. Last night I went to the Apollo Archive Site www.apolloarchive.com and downloaded all Apollo 17 & 16 pics in the Gallery. Everybody knows about the C-Rock in the Apollo 16 Record. If you look at C-Rock pic, measure roughly the length of shadow made by the left rear wheel of the rover. Once done look at the picture (non-C-Rock), the giveaway is that the astronauts leg should have the shadow of the Rovers left wheel covering it. This proves this image has been digital created to dismiss Ralph René's claim. Check it out and tell us what you think. Instead of NASA simply removing pictures, they are carefully adding pictures to the archive site daily. Most of the pictures shown in the hoax videos and web sites haven't been posted on the Archive Site only the ones that they have to use (example Aldrin reflecting the Landing shot) pictures. It's good to finally talk to somebody who is open minded. Most people dismiss the hoax theory as they can't comprehend how it could be done.

I found your web site: http://www.geocities.com/fakemoonpics/ and have wondered for years why the Hubble Space Telescope cannot simply be pointed at the moon and forever settle this issue once and for all? (Although I must admit I'm still laughing from your reference to the lack of tire tracks from the moon lander "dune buggy"...how did they propose that they removed it from the LM anyway???) Really tho. They're claiming that they're able to directly see 3x jupiter size planets orbiting (or being flung away from, as the case may be) nearby stars (7 light years?) ... which if so, even if I haven't bothered to run the numbers - if indeed I could anyway - seeing the space hardware that was supposedly left behind should be a relatively simple matter. (What? The surface of the moon is too bright to point such a sensitive instrument at without damaging it? Fine - do so when there's a new moon or something!) Could "we the public" force the issue? Would we get more fabricated photographs? Or might NASA have to admit that they've squandered a few hundred billion of our dollars over the years? (Ya know, I always wondered why we never went "back"!)

I am a Computer technician and I do web pages and graphics and with the software today you can do anything. I searched quite a bit on the internet about his subject and the more I search and really start to look closely at the photo's you can see they have been cleaned up and altered. The photo I sent you does show the flagpole shadow on the ground between the guy and the flag by his foot, and a slight shadow above his head. I still believe that isn't the shadow of the flagpole above his head because the suits they where have an antenna on top of them on the left side of the space suit. By the size of the flag and the height it should be casting a shadow way over his head. Also, what tipped me off at first was how the heck did they snap the photo when the third guy is in orbit?? I suppose it could be a camera on the very top of the ship, but why crawl all the way to the top of the LM to mount a camera just to take a photo of them mounting a flag, when they could of easily put a tripod on the ground next to them? They supposedly did all this care and stuff and planning while there, but it was a high risk just getting to the moon let alone land safely on it. We can't even land a rover robot on mars right in 2000 40 years later. From the other web pages I gone through, there are no blast marks from the LM landing. How did they get all that equipment and a lunar buggy that's the size of a sand rail there? In every picture is shows the ground fading off into blackness but the entire area where they are is lit up really bright and casting dark shadows, but things lit up in the shadows. I came across a picture from NASA's own site, that was without a doubt edited. It was another picture of both of them facing each other. It shows footprints lit up so bright on the ground all around him like they was molded in white plaster. Then down at the very bottom of the picture on the ground is another footprint that isn't lit up at all. Other photo's I seen show the same mountain range in the background. Someone once said that man can't survive in space beyond 250 nautical miles from earth. Although we sent men to the moon that's 300,000 or something like that. Because the radiation would just cook them to death, even with a space suit.

You need to host it on somewhere other than geocities as I got a bandwidth limit reached message after reading 75% of it. I'm keeping an open mind on the subject, but what I do think is that yours and other skeptics evidence has been a lot more intelligent and well thought out than skeptics on other issues. Either this is because it is easier to get evidence against because it did not happen, Apollo skeptics are more intelligent or a combination of both. Mind you, I've never met a person who was interested in astronomy who was dumb. Until someone takes a picture, or doesn't take a picture when they can, of the landing sites where it can be shown once or for all one way or another, keep up the good work and scientific inquiry. I bet you have struggled against the scientific mass, but I like the way you put your case forward and evidence to back it up, irrelevant of whether you are right or wrong, it's a nice piece of work. Don't know if you already noticed this but, in the film of the lunar lander blasting off, the camera pans up to follow it and zooms in slightly. Now, unless they left a cameraman behind, or someone in the lander was working the camera by remote control (surely excessive for the purposes of a slightly better cinematic presentation) the film could not possibly have been shot on the moon.

Nice to know many facts about Apollo Manned missions from your web site. I am working as a Scientist in Dept. of Space, Govt. of India. Infact I have been skeptical about US manned missions to moon since 1996 when I read about the failure of DCX-A vertical landing test. I believe the facts published in your site. Please read my ideas below carefully. The main controversy is whether US has the technology to achieve vertical landing of a spacecraft. If we assume that US still doesn't have the technology, what about the recent spacecraft landings on mars? Are they faked as well? Even the Apollo missions are at least believed as entered into low-earth orbit and returned to earth. If it is so, how US has achieved vertical landing of Apollo Command Module on earth? Are there any photographs available? Even USSR had launched manned spacecraft's into earth orbits and returned safely. How vertical landing was possible on the earth, while is argued that it is not possible on moon. And if vertical landing was really possible, why US had struggled and ultimately failed to test DCX-A. These are all, what I feel as mysteries in the space exploration history. Thanks for reading the above matter. I hope you will respond to my queries as soon as possible.

Hello I've been reading your site as of late and find it interesting and captivating. Originally I took an extremely skeptical view to your claims, however at the very least, I say that that there needs to be some explaining done by NASA. I especially question why the black background shows no stars, the sky should be lit up with all kinds of pin lights from said stars---hell I can see them from earth even with ambient light and with earths atmosphere. I always questioned how the hell they got that Land rover on the moon. As a kid I remember saying why did they add fender guards --its added weight, takes up space and is absolutely useless. I also question how we went to the moon so often, and then as TECHNOLOGY increased exponentionally---we cant get back there. At the very least, I'm keeping an open mind. Even in the best of circumstances the only proof that we went to the moon is the photos and video NASA gave us, and that appears to be riddled with problems which NASA could easily refute if the were telling the truth yet they refuse to. I don't understand why they will not declassify the rest of the documents for another 24 years--WHATS THE HOLD UP? Here's a question you can help me with: With all the incredible telescopes we have on earth (KIT PEAK) has there been anyone that has seen the flag and rover we left behind on the moon? This would help shed truth one way or another---yet I've never read of such an account. Thanks great site, I now plan on renting the old movie Capricorn One which I was told was an account of how this whole event was staged on a Hollywood studio stage. Thanks Scott.

Hello. I am a student living in New Zealand and am researching the moon landing and whether or not it was a hoax. I have to represent both sides of the story and would like to know if you could help me. Do you know of any scientists/proffessionals experts who I could contact about info on the landing being a hoax? I have looked around a bit but I can only find contacts for those who believe it actually happened. I know a lot of the more commonly found examples of supposed evidence (the flag, the dust, the backgrounds etc.) but I was wondering if there are any that you can think of that are not very well known. I really need this answered soon as I only have a few more weeks to do this project. Thank you for your help. Yours sincerely, Dane Jacobs

Hi! I completely agree with you on this, I found your site extremely interesting and convincing- not that I needed to be... Another couple of facts you might be interested in: As you know, the flag ripples, and there is no breeze on the moon, NASA claim the inertia of placing the flag in the ground would have caused this, but according to science buffs I have talked to the inertia would have to be very great for this to happen and it would be impossible in a gravity-free zone. Plus, haven't people who were connected with the landings, with the exception of Armstrong and Aldrin, all died in suspicious circumstances?? maybe they (NASA) were worried that they would let slip all the dodgy goings on. Do you have any evidence that NASA currently hasn't the technology to put a man on the moon, I have done extensive searches looking between the lines, but have found nothing. If you could prove it I think that could be the clincher! If you have any info that could back these up, especially the suspicious deaths, then I'd be very grateful.

Great site, I read it all and have been following this hoax for about 3 or 4 years since David Percy was on UK TV discussing the faked moon shot on an obscure late night TV prog. Your site and reasoning is the best yet with the best info and the questions I always wanted to ask...you asked 'em! Just think, I was 12 when we , ahem, landed on the moon. Even as THE most naive 12 year old British kid I wondered why the TV reception of the landing was so crap. We were SO engrossed with Apollo 8 and not quite so much with 9 and 10 and even though I was allowed to stay up for Apollo 11s live landing I fell asleep! Didn't FEEL real next day on replay actually! And yes, who DID take the footage of Armstrong descending that ladder for the 1st step on the moon? Er, did they chuck a camera out the LM onto the moon and hope it stood in the right place and remotely cranked it up? What really gauls me is that we never questioned the authenticity. Yet, it is more plausible to be faked than it EVER was as a reality project. 1969 eh? Computers? They had NO chance to do it for real. As ever, thoroughly disillusioned as to why the astronauts could not leap 6 foot high when in all the comics we read this is what 1/6 G would allow! We were SO disappointed as kids that these moon walkers were so, well, unathletic! Now we know why!

Hi, My name is Rodolfo Arispe and live in Panama, Latin America. For a long time I've been ridiculed for thinking there were something wrong with the man in the moon story. I.'s born in '69 and grew up been teached at school that the men really got a feet in the moon. So at university, my partners couldn't believe how a computer programer as me could doubt such "fact". I felt like a freak and avoided talking about my believes until now when I found your web site and began to read the whole thing. Yours is one of the best sites with information about the subject and I founded honest enough because no advertising was found. But skeptical as I've always been, I question myself about who you are and your relation and grade of expertise with the whole moon hoax subject. In fact, I visited the David Percy's site and was really disappointed in the way they drive you to buy their video and book. That takes all the credit from the honesty of their statements. How could we know that your inexpensive web site is part of the campaign to help those winning lot of money out of the conspiracy theories, that seems to be selling very well this days? We don't know each other, but I identify myself with your cause and share the worldwide growing interest in unveiling this moon landing stuff. The explanations you expose in your site are very interesting but there are 2 things I still puzzled my mind on:

1. Why the rest of the world have kept a passive position about this things?. I mean, why other countries like Germany, former USSR, France, etc. that certainly have a scientists and experts on space programs have not challenged (not in 69 not now) the USA achievements. Is the rest of the world (friends and enemies of the USA) fool enough to believe the moon hoax story. You won't say though are all (in 30 years) part of the whole conspiracy, don't you? 2. Why did you put an image of "winnie" in your site. Aren't you afraid that such childish behavior takes out the credibility or impartiality of your case or statement. I mean, was that gross image necessary to state your point of views or show a rebel standing. Honestly, among adult, serious and concern people, that pic shows some kind of deliberate "stay out of here if you don't like it" message. As a matter of fact, I'm afraid of telling others in schools/universities about your site, just because of that picture.

I believe I've finally uncovered NASA's Apollo "nerve center. Try locating any documentation that supports our lunar lander test flights. NASA constructed several for live pilot as well as real-time system and technology testing and, these were configured as 1/6th scale (as far as weight) so that the entire lander concept could fully demonstrate basic rocket flight as well as obvious stabilized flight considerations and safety factors, and as that being at equivalent to lunar gravity. True, these lunar landers were never intended for reentry into an atmosphere, however, as far as rocket thrust and establishing stabilized flight, the 1/6th scaled units should have performed quite nicely. (OOPS!) Guess what, I only recall those test flights which were so unstable that they "all" crashed and exploded, and these were mostly tethered, having all sorts of external auxiliary command control options and, they still "every single one "crashed" and exploded. So, I asked of my "GUTH Venus" discovery critics (mostly NASA moles) to come up with NASA's extraordinary proof, that of a movie film of at least one successful test flight. I felt, as long as my critics were insistent upon that of my delivering that all essential extraordinary proof (of which I believe SAR imaging is essentially about nothing but representing that of extraordinary proof), I thought it fair to ask the same of their pagan god (NASA) which is ignoring if not outright opposing my little discovery, a discovery which I would have thought should have nothing whatsoever to do (one way or the other) with those questionable or not Apollo missions (wrong!). I've said and offered to those NASA moles, I will post a link to any such Apollo documentation, however, it's been 11 months and counting and, still nothing. So, besides all the controversy over those Apollo lunar images having questionable content as well as fundamental photographic issues, the entire context over such images is mute, if in fact the lander never managed to deliver our astronauts in the first place. Now I know that NASA documents everything (in triplicate) and film records every moving event, especially those of our first achievements in obtaining purely rocket powered and rocket stabilized flight technology, so, where the hell are all those films (16mm & 35mm)? My URL page pertaining to this, as well as other lunar issues is as follows: http://geocities.com/bradguth/moon-02.htm Only because of all the flack which my "GUTH Venus" discovery was receiving, did I look harder at all the Apollo stuff. Fortunately, I'm somewhat of a commercial photographer, experienced, and I own several 70mm cameras as well as film development and enlarger equipment and, I therefore fully understand the implications of the total process of taking, processing and producing prints and, I now understand why so many have questioned those images supporting the Apollo missions. Besides not having access to that movie film of those essential test flights, without having those original 70mm negatives, no one, including NASA, can prove a damn thing and, besides all sorts of other questionable mission issues, as far as I can determine, NASA needs to be the one providing the "extraordinary proof" and not that of my discovery. http://geocities.com/bradguth I'll help support your anti-Apollo URL sites if you can do a little something for promoting mine. I believe what I have discovered is bigger then any Apollo ruse, but I seem to be up against that NASA firewall because, I also questioned those Apollo missions and then more so questioned the morals and motivation behind it all (a big no, no as far as getting anywhere with the likes of NASA).