But who says there's nothing new under the sun? Now a movie called Apollo 18 suggests a new Moon Hoax, but the opposite of previous ones: not only did we go to the Moon, but we went more times than we admitted to - because we found aliens there.
The last Apollo mission was Apollo 17, launched on Dec. 7, 1972. Several more missions had been scheduled, but were canceled due to cost concerns. After Eugene Cernan and Harrison Schmidt blasted off the surface of the moon on Dec. 15, 1972, no human has set foot on the lunar surface, or even entered lunar orbit.
The premise of this movie - admittedly science fiction, but certain to be taken as fact by many - is that there was a "secret" moon mission after Apollo 17, which encountered aliens, and (as seen in the movie trailer), even brought back one to earth, presumably dead. I guess NASA would have to have already known that aliens were there, in order to run the Apollo 18 mission secretly. Maybe Apollo 17 is supposed to have found the alien evidence, but NASA didn't tell us, and went back in secret.
The movie trailer for Apollo 18 has to be one of the lamest things I've seen in a long while. It seems to show an astronaut blasting off from the Moon in a lunar lander, with what appears to be a dead humanoid aboard. The creature's head looks vaguely Mongolian, with a mustache, but it has female breasts. I'll refrain from making the obvious crude sexual comments here, although surely many won't. Indeed, they've already started on YouTube ("space boobs!!!").
The film is supposed to represent "found footage", as in the Blair Witch Project, Cloverfield, etc. I don't know if the film attempts to explain how NASA could possibly launch an additional Apollo mission in secret. How did nobody notice the massive Saturn V launch from Cape Canaveral? How did thousands of people worldwide perform their necessary support tasks (which they had done several times before, under great media scrutiny), and the news not leak out?
Well, it's entertainment even if it's lame entertainment. But after the movie premieres on April 22, let's see how many conspiracy theorists insist that the story is actually true.
Is there a date for this Apollo 18? Also, why no mention on Wikileaks?
ReplyDeleteBy "date", I assume you mean the date of the supposed Apollo 18 flight. I don't know, I haven't seen the film. Presumably it would be soon after Apollo 17.
ReplyDeleteA good point - Wikileaks provides a handy guideline for judging which rumors are true. If they turn up on State Department cables, presumably they're true!
This video has already been claimed to be "real" on a website. But I suspect that even amongst conspiracy nuts, this one is not likely to be widely taken seriously.
ReplyDeleteAww the video was removed from youtube as a violation against Spam, Scams and commercially deceptive content? Do they mean the clip or the whole movie? Isn't it a movie preview LOL
ReplyDeleteI'm sticking to we never went to the moon. Think about the lander. Jet engines do not work in a space. also not enough fuel for the lander to land and return to orbit. The lander is to small.
ReplyDeleteAnon,
ReplyDeleteYou're right, jet engines don't work in space. That's why they use rocket engines. And it takes far less fuel to blast off from the moon than from earth. These tired old claims have all been dealt with, many times before. Yawn.
Why with all the advanced knowledge we have had since 1969. No one in NASA ever sent up a satellite to zoom in on the moon landings. We can use telescopes to see 20 million light years away but nope can't see the moon landings close up, nope, nada nothing we can't get a satellite to see that? We have a lander on Mars viewing river rocks but can't make a clear picture of the moon landing site or any equipment. Wow makes me a believer. Why don't they use those radiation ( oh that's right block the Van Allen Radiation Belt but can't block radiation here on earth Yes that makes sense) blocking space suits to enter Fucushima Japan plants.
ReplyDeleteTruth is the mortal enemy of a lie. Why do all you mooners make fun instead of offering a clear picture just like the ones of other galaxies and Mars but not the moon. Wow such a simple process to stop people like me from making all these insane questions.
How many of you know that the coldest recorded temperature ever recorded on earth was -128.6 degrees? The lowest temperature ever recorded at the surface of the Earth was −89.2 °C (−128.6 °F; 184.0 K) at the Russian Vostok Station in Antarctica July 21, 1983.[1] Lower temperatures have been achieved in the laboratory, including a record low temperature of 100 pK, or 1.0 × 10-10 K in 1999.[2] Let me see we tested equipment to withstand temperatures @ -276 degrees. How many know that we did not record 0 Degrees until 1999 Wow is that amazing or what? We tested equipment to withstand the - 276 degrees for the moon when we did not discover absolute 0 degrees until until 1999 31 years after the fact. Steel fence post cracked at -128.6 degrees. Is anyone aware that the aluminum space craft with stood double those temperatures and blocked radiation? Doesn't anyone wonder how we tested equipment to withstand double the temperature here on earth? With that in mind every part of the mission with unaccounted for data nothing failed. Aluminum freezes and cracks before steel yet oh that’s right that is ambient temperature not like the same temperature we see on Mars.
ReplyDeleteWe tested equipment 31 years before we could reach the temperature needed to test said equipment? Will someone offer a simple solution? Please make your answer so all of us can understand. Minus -274 degrees Fahrenheit is cold don't make a dam where you are. For God's sake their breath would have frozen CO2 freezes at -109 degrees. So did the space men carry blocks of thousands of pounds on their backs in those backpacks? Why did we never see the CO2 escape their back packs? How big of a backpack would have been needed to carry all that ice (water) at 8 pounds a gallon? Was there absolutely no heater on board the Apollo? Why did not the exhalation of CO2 kill the space men? Why were there no blocks of ice shown in the video's inside the craft? Why did we not see expulsion of CO2 gases in none of the footage? Are you aware of how big of an oxygen tank the crew would have needed? How big of a processing tank to evaporate all the water in the form of CO2? Why could we not see the space men's breath when they exhaled in craft? Would the backpack have held all their CO2 for that many hours on the moon it would have weighed hundreds if not thousands of pounds? Even on the craft would they have frozen to death by their own exhalation of CO2 as it freezes at -109 Degrees? Wouldn't the temperature on the moon or space have been at least that cold. It is a fact CO2 freezes at -110 Fahrenheit and boils at -68.8 Fahrenheit. Almost 300 times greater in space and on the moon to boil, 200 times greater to freeze. Could the craft even beging to protect them at these temperatures? If so why do we not use aluminum for such feats of protection here on earth? Why do we not use aluminum shields to stop reactor melt downs?
Me personally I believe NASA has lied all these years. Our science and technology will in the next few years dispel each and every lie told by NASA. NASA you should weigh this heavily and come clean and the truth will set you free and the American people will be on your side. Let this go until we have undeniable truth and you will never recover. If we can see light years away river rocks on Mars, meteorite hitting Jupiter, rings of Saturn, it will not be to far away we will see the truth on the moon soon. NASA you will never recover if you continue to hide the truth.
Science and technology is overtaking your lies.
Oh that's right the space men had film that would not freeze @-274 degrees Fahrenheit. Film that the negatives were changed out in the open on camera yet withstood those temperatures that even today cannot be reproduced a lab with the discovery of -0 degree Fahrenheit in 1999. How did they test all this equipment how, How could they test and not have a failure? Why don't the people at Antarctica use these space suits in stead of all that foul weather gear? All this great technology, why do we not use it to climb mountains, work at the poles, clean-up radiation dumps? Oh you say we are or can? Why can't they be used on power nuclear plants?
ReplyDeleteNo conspiracy can withstand the SIMPLE TRUTH. Simple truth like go into a nuclear power plant with space suit on? Simple Truth show a close up that the world can check of a picture of the serial number on the rover, the footprint, the flag not blowing in the breeze. Anyone of these would stop all conspiracies. Until their is tangible proof positive it is a LIE. I can give undeniable proof the moon is there and no one will disbelieve, but you can't provide undeniable proof we were there that all will believe?
That is what stops conspiracies undeniable proof, after all doubt is the father of conspiracies.
Why is there not one piece of undeniable evidence? Show one picture from a telescope or satellite that shows the footprint, the flag, or the rover. Remember we have been able to read the date of a dime on a sidewalk from space for 35 years. Yet NASA can't provide one undeniable picture of any moon walks or missions. Not a single photograph from any place on earth. Yet we saw the fireball on Jupiter, the rings of Saturn, the rocks on Mars.
ReplyDeleteIn the beginning NASA (fools god) big liars said let there be moon landings and there were millions of phony pictures that NASA (Fools god) lost. The greatest event in the Godless peoples lives LOST, LOST. Why you say how could they, why would they not have copies, why would the greatest event be lost, why there is only one reason to eliminate all proof of the NASA (fools god) lies. Created the biggest crap story since the bible. Then all the wise men said look there is the rover, the base, that is only 240,000 miles away, why does Google earth have better close-ups of the earth than god NASA has of the Moon? How can this be NASA god has photos of millions of light years away of the big bang but does not have a picture of the footprint, the flag, the tire of the rover, yet NASA god has pictures of round river rocks of Mars, Rings of Saturn, the meteor hitting Jupiter. OMG can this be true maybe its all fake? How can they take pictures 100,000,000,000 miles farther than the moon that is only 240,000 miles away and we can't make out crap. OMG how can this be? Why can we see other galaxies but OMG we cant see the dust or rocks of the Moon from earth? Wow it don't take much to make you clowns believe this crap so why can't you believe in a GOD that at least everything he has come to pass? Uh no I don't believe in God but NASA takes good pictures millions of miles away, I can't help it if my NASA (fools god) can't get their camera to work on earth to pictures of the moon from here. I am a believer in the great NASA god i believe oh great liar of the universe NASA. I know that a single picture form a satellite or Hubble could prove beyond a shadow of a doubt NASA god landed little humanoids on the moon but we just don't have that capability yet. One single photo of absolute undeniable proof. That's all just 1 (ONE) clear shot from Hubble of the moon landings. Oh well I just guess we don't have that kind of technology yet. Wow I believe all those other great photo's are real cause they NASA says so?
ReplyDeleteHere is NASA'S next excuse I want to tell you before NASA does. Well when we shot that there nuke up there on the moon it obliterated everything so when we show you our new pictures there won't be anything there to look at. No you don't say.
ReplyDeleteCryogenic Processing
ReplyDeleteMaterial: Recycled Rubber from Tires, Industrial Scrap
Rubber, and Post-Consumer Scrap Rubber Products
Issue: Cryogenic processing employs the use of liquid nitrogen to lower the rubber materials temperature well below its freezing point. While frozen, the rubber is shattered with a mill or similar piece of equipment. The resulting material has clean, fractured surfaces and low steel and fiber content due to the clean breaks between the fiber, steel, and rubber.
Best Practice: The temperature of liquid nitrogen is -320°F at atmospheric pressure. Most rubber compounds freeze at their glass transition temperature of about -80°F. At temperatures below the glass transition temperature, the rubber changes from an elastic material to one that is brittle and easy to grind by impacting it. The use of cryogenic temperatures can be applied at any stage of size reduction of scrap tires. The choice of feed material for a cryogenic stage depends on the feed material available and the characteristics of the desired products. Typically, the size of the feed material is a nominal 2 inch chip or smaller.
The chips are fed at a constant rate into a heat exchanger where they are cooled by direct contact with liquid nitrogen. The most efficient precooler utilizes countercurrent heat exchange where the liquid nitrogen is sprayed onto the rubber near the exit end of the precooler. The liquid nitrogen is vaporized as it cools the rubber and the cold nitrogen vapor is passed back toward the feed end where it is further warmed by the rubber. The warm nitrogen gas is vented to a safe location while the cold rubber is fed to the grinding mill.
Lets see the rover tires are made out of a special rubber that withstands 4,00000000000 degrees and the air in the tires have special moog vales and special moon non freezing oxygen. No conspiracy possibilities here.
rdbob,
ReplyDeleteNASA has photographed the Apollo moon landing sites, using the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter:
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/LRO/multimedia/lroimages/apollosites.html
Poof, there goes another conspiracy claim.
Cryogenic Processing
ReplyDeleteMaterial: Recycled Rubber from Tires, Industrial Scrap
Rubber, and Post-Consumer Scrap Rubber Products
Issue: Cryogenic processing employs the use of liquid nitrogen to lower the rubber materials temperature well below its freezing point. While frozen, the rubber is shattered with a mill or similar piece of equipment. The resulting material has clean, fractured surfaces and low steel and fiber content due to the clean breaks between the fiber, steel, and rubber.
Best Practice: The temperature of liquid nitrogen is -320°F at atmospheric pressure. Most rubber compounds freeze at their glass transition temperature of about -80°F. At temperatures below the glass transition temperature, the rubber changes from an elastic material to one that is brittle and easy to grind by impacting it. The use of cryogenic temperatures can be applied at any stage of size reduction of scrap tires. The choice of feed material for a cryogenic stage depends on the feed material available and the characteristics of the desired products. Typically, the size of the feed material is a nominal 2 inch chip or smaller.
The chips are fed at a constant rate into a heat exchanger where they are cooled by direct contact with liquid nitrogen. The most efficient precooler utilizes countercurrent heat exchange where the liquid nitrogen is sprayed onto the rubber near the exit end of the precooler. The liquid nitrogen is vaporized as it cools the rubber and the cold nitrogen vapor is passed back toward the feed end where it is further warmed by the rubber. The warm nitrogen gas is vented to a safe location while the cold rubber is fed to the grinding mill.
How many of you know that the coldest recorded temperature ever recorded on earth was -128.6 degrees? The lowest temperature ever recorded at the surface of the Earth was −89.2 °C (−128.6 °F; 184.0 K) at the Russian Vostok Station in Antarctica July 21, 1983.[1] Lower temperatures have been achieved in the laboratory, including a record low temperature of 100 pK, or 1.0 × 10-10 K in 1999.[2] Let me see we tested equipment to withstand temperatures @ -276 degrees. How many know that we did not record 0 Degrees until 1999 Wow is that amazing or what? We tested equipment to withstand the - 276 degrees for the moon when we did not discover absolute 0 degrees until until 1999 31 years after the fact. Steel fence post cracked at -128.6 degrees. Is anyone aware that the aluminum space craft with stood double those temperatures and blocked radiation? Doesn't anyone wonder how we tested equipment to withstand double the temperature here on earth? With that in mind every part of the mission with unaccounted for data nothing failed. Aluminum freezes and cracks before steel yet oh that’s right that is ambient temperature not like the same temperature we see on Mars.
ReplyDeleteWe tested equipment 31 years before we could reach the temperature needed to test said equipment? Will someone offer a simple solution? Please make your answer so all of us can understand. Minus -274 degrees Fahrenheit is cold don't make a dam where you are. For God's sake their breath would have frozen CO2 freezes at -109 degrees. So did the space men carry blocks of thousands of pounds on their backs in those backpacks? Why did we never see the CO2 escape their back packs? How big of a backpack would have been needed to carry all that ice (water) at 8 pounds a gallon? Was there absolutely no heater on board the Apollo? Why did not the exhalation of CO2 kill the space men? Why were there no blocks of ice shown in the video's inside the craft? Why did we not see expulsion of CO2 gases in none of the footage? Are you aware of how big of an oxygen tank the crew would have needed? How big of a processing tank to evaporate all the water in the form of CO2? Why could we not see the space men's breath when they exhaled in craft? Would the backpack have held all their CO2 for that many hours on the moon it would have weighed hundreds if not thousands of pounds? Even on the craft would they have frozen to death by their own exhalation of CO2 as it freezes at -109 Degrees? Wouldn't the temperature on the moon or space have been at least that cold. It is a fact CO2 freezes at -110 Fahrenheit and boils at -68.8 Fahrenheit. Almost 300 times greater in space and on the moon to boil, 200 times greater to freeze. Could the craft even beging to protect them at these temperatures? If so why do we not use aluminum for such feats of protection here on earth? Why do we not use aluminum shields to stop reactor melt downs?
Me personally I believe NASA has lied all these years. Our science and technology will in the next few years dispel each and every lie told by NASA. NASA you should weigh this heavily and come clean and the truth will set you free and the American people will be on your side. Let this go until we have undeniable truth and you will never recover. If we can see light years away river rocks on Mars, meteorite hitting Jupiter, rings of Saturn, it will not be to far away we will see the truth on the moon soon. NASA you will never recover if you continue to hide the truth.
Science and technology is overtaking your lies.
by all means..don't ever give up, don't ever give in ....and above all, don't ever indent
Delete4. Why were these suits not used when Chernobyl exploded since they were cold resistant and heat resistant to -274 degrees below zero. +174 degrees Fahrenheit? How could they test these simple plastic suits for such temperature? Scientists on earth were unable to get to absolute 0 degrees until 1990. Steel fence post crack and split at North Pole. Yet the aluminum capsule withstood temperature yet not able to test on earth until 30 years later.
ReplyDeleteThe hottest temperature on earth is so far below the moon temperature not any comparison.
ReplyDelete5. Why with today’s technology is the NASA not building a satellite or telescope to view the moon trash left by the so called moon landings? This would end any and all controversy but I guarantee they will never do it not because they can’t but because they never went there is nothing of any so called space men moon walk on the moon. Just a simple picture that ordinary people can see for themselves not NASA’S made up stories.
1. How could NASA lose the most important documents in history film, pictures all records of moon landing?? How convenient. Today’s technology would expose the crooks and liars for exactly what they are frauds. Anytime evidence is missing it’s not accidental but like the hoax was planned.
There is much more but you like the conspirators never give any factual proof. Everything is always conjecture never concrete. Concrete is something that is totally irrefutable.
Since the moon was in shadow, why didn’t the rubber tires on the rover not pop? Why did dust kick up the surface should have been frozen? Especially since now they say the moon has a lot of water.
Men lie, Governments decieve, why does everyone try to make people that are asking for something so simple as proof become ridiculed and made fun of. Obviously people like yourself that question nothing will believe whatever our Government wants you to believe.
ReplyDelete1. Are you aware that our science of what we know here on earth defies the moon landing.
2. Temperatures on the moon in daylight are: 265 degrees F... Where did we test equipment for that?
3. Temperatures on the moon at night are: -170 Degrees below zero. 10 times that of the blue dot temperatures. where did we test equipment for that?
4. Now this is something I find almost astonishing for even the scientific community to believe. We on blue dot were able in the year 1993 for the first (1st) time were able in a laboratory to create temperatures below absolute -273.15 Celsius now this is a proven fact. How did NASA test suits, metal, all equipment, that could not protect men from this type of temperature when there was no way to test this temperature until 1993. We want to go into space but will not be able to test our equipment until 1993, 24 years after the fact.
5.How smart were we then? That we would know how to test for those temperatures even though we would not have the ability to test these temperatures until 24 years later.
6. How can you have a flame with no atmosphere Still you cannot have a flame which today is scientifically proven. Yet when the pod lifts off there is clearly a flame.
7. How did the camera take a picture of the pod lift off with a flame?
8. How did film that will withstand those temperatures even today have not been nor will be developed?
9. Steel here on earth in Alaska freezes at -135 degree windchill factor. Yet the craft that was covered in alumionin with less thickness than aluminum foil today, withstood extreme temperatures from sunlight to dark in minutes of each other and it withstood without stress or fatigue.
10. Why did our government not know without definitive proof this would happen on the most important event in American History? Therefore show something that would undeniable by the American Public. We can go to the moon but we cannot show conclusive proof.
11. How did all the materials of the 60's not freeze or melt from the extreme temperatures.
12. How do we know the temperatures were correct and not even colder or hotter than figured?
13. How were more pictures taken of all the moon shots than time allowed for any work to be preformed.
The real reason no stars in the moon pictures is so all us dummies couldn't track or plot the stars as they would have shown positions from Earth instead of the moon. You guys keep believing these lies cause it will not be long befor eactual proof will show NASA as the frauds they are. They call us nuts but you will be called far worse for upholding these ignorant lies. Common sense proves beyond a shadow of a doubt the moon shot never was, nor never will be by a man.
ReplyDeleteNo proof blurred pictures for 40,000,000,000 billion dollars yes proof for you not for me this is exactly why NASA will never produce an undeniable photo cause there aren't any. 40 billion and this is proof? show one close up that cannot be disproved. not lines that are bigger than what foot prints could make. Are you serious trails that big for 3 days yes your right i can see the little ants that were stuck to the boots. All NASA or you bunch of government promoters WILL NEVER SHOW AN UNDENIABLE PHOTOGRAPH NEVER? All these blurred nondiscernable photos prove absolutely nothing. We have the technology to have closeups of the serial numbers on the rover. They will NEVER< NEVER produce 1 undeniable photo or they would have 50 years later. NASA could have ended this the minute it started and everyone would have shut up. The TRUTH is the enemy of a lie.
ReplyDeleterdbob, your massive walls of text will never be forgotten. I commend you for your tenacity. NASA certainly has a lot to answer for as soon as they can get an interpreter.
DeleteWell, a little whois lookup can answer lot of questions about the website where the footage from.
ReplyDeleteRegistered through: GoDaddy.com, Inc.
Domain Name: LUNARTRUTH.COM
Created on: 20-Jun-11
Expires on: 20-Jun-12
Last Updated on: 20-Jun-11
No more comment. :)
so then what your saying is that apollo 18 is not real???
ReplyDeleteWow RdBob thats a whole lot information. You do not aknowlege that NASA HAS taken pictures of the landing sites - despite Robert pointing it out to you.
ReplyDeleteIts really only now I know what we are up against Robert, as Skeptics. Theres one born every minute is a very appropriate saying.
Keep up the superb work,
all the best Scott in the UK.
I agree with RdBob because he is using sound, proven physics and chemistry to show the moon landing was a hoax.
ReplyDeleteYet he calls everyone 'godless' and the moon hoax he says, is tantamount to the Bible hoax. Then somewhere else he states that man is too stupid to believe in God, who is real, and Whose every word has come to pass (which is true, btw, but old RdBob's a bit confused....all this moon hoax stuff's got him a tad mixed up).
Well RdBob, can't have it both ways. Calling the Bible a hoax could get you into some future trouble.
Let me lay it out for you: Bible True (King James)
God Real. Monn Landing Fake. Apollo 18 Real Big Fake.
Reply Anonymous: My apology I in no way meant the bible was a hoax. I meant the godless always say the bible is a hoax. I believe that Jesus Christ came in the flesh and is of God. I am not mixed up these so called astronomers, scientist, and NASA people have been lying to the public or openly concealing absolute facts about the Moon and Mars. They have knowledge that the Moon is Green, Brown, and Blue not the Silvery White and gray we see from earth. Yet this information is not taught or available to citizens. They have stolen knowledge and I am angry.
ReplyDeleteHaha go check out this "proof" of land which was posted above
ReplyDeletehttp://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/LRO/multimedia/lroimages/apollosites.html
What a bunch of low rez, cant see anything pictures. All you can see is a little blip that looks like a rock with a shadow on it. Stop screwing around and point Hubble at the moon... oh wait they did and what do we get? More black and white pictures (wheres the color?) and extremely low resolution. NASA is a joke.
Isn't the name for the Apollo 18 film, rocky crab-like creatures "The Watchers"? I saw them also in the 2014 film, NOAH, starring actor Russell Crowe. What they are, I understand from NOAH, are the fallen angels that were cast from heaven after rebelling against God by helping ADAM after he had sinned. They were once light, but became light encrusted in rock and mud on earth when they crash landed. They also had many legs/arms and were crab-like. The moon has no water to make mud. The moon just has rock and dust, so I find it hard to believe that "The Watchers" could become "mud & rock encrusted light entities" on the moon. Most "Watchers" crash landed on the earth, but I suppose some may have been sucked into the moon's gravitational pull??? But wouldn't they have had a free return trajectory back to earth? Not sure how that works? Perhaps a spacecraft is much heavier and thus is sling shot back to earth instead of being pulled down to the moon. But wouldn't have all the ejected LEM spacecraft been sent back to earth (on a free return trajectory) instead of being crash landed back to the lunar service after docking with the CSM spacecrafts in lunar orbit? Not sure how that works. Maybe the LEMs are sent back to earth on a free return trajectory and burn up in the earth's atmosphere? "The Watchers" do not need food and water, so that clears up the question on how some biological life form could survive on the moon. "The Watchers" aren't biological living entities. Can anyone clarify for us here please how free return trajectory works on a CSM but not on an ejected LEM, nor on a "Watcher" entity?
ReplyDelete