Saturday Snack Shack w/ Blackbird9, June 15, 2024

It was good to hear that they were not believers in the “moon landing” hoax. Here’s my take.

archive.org/details/DidWeLandOnTheMoon
archive.org/details/EndgameVostfr
archive.org/details/WeNeverWentToTheMoon_201511
archive.org/details/RalphReneRawInterview
archive.org/details/Season2Episode8BartSibrel
archive.org/details/BartSibrelMoonMyths
archive.org/details/WasItOnlyAPaperMoonApolloHoaxJamesM.Collier1997
archive.org/details/MoonHoaxBuzzSaysHeDidntGoToTheMoon

There are so many impossibilities in NASA’s absurd tale that anyone who can think for himself will see that it is a lie.

However, most of the sheeple don’t want the truth; it’s too painful.

Here’s one impossibility.

The Swedish designer of the camera that Armstrong and Aldrin allegedly used on the moon says that it had no lead shielding; it was merely “painted silver”. And yet the pictures were not fogged at all by the high level of radiation found on the moon. Absolutely absurd.

None of the pictures showed any stars in the sky. And of course it is absurd to say that no photographs of stars were taken because NASA couldn’t afford a tripod or a camera capable of taking time-exposures. They could spend millions of dollars for a “lunar rover”, but they couldn’t afford a device that could photograph stars.

Here’s another.

The lens of the camera used by Aldrin and Armstrong was made so that several cross-hairs or reticles would be superimposed on every photograph. The cross-hair in the center was larger than the others. In one of the pictures, the largest cross-hair was clearly not in the center of the photograph.

Here’s another.

It is evident that fill-in lights were used for some of the pictures. Any expert photographer will tell you that. Even the Swedish designer of the camera that was used says that he cannot explain how those pictures could have been made without a fill-in light. And yet NASA says that no fill-in lights were used.

Here’s another.

Many of the “moon photos” show shadows on the ground that are not parallel. This means that the light source was not the sun. Sunlight produces on a relatively flat, level surface shadows that are parallel.

Here’s another.

At the press conference after their alleged return from the moon, Armstrong and Aldrin said that when they were on the surface of the moon they could not see any stars. They pretended that they were surprised that anyone would think that stars would be visible from the moon.

We have their word on it. There are no stars to be seen in space. Anyone who believes that is not even human.

Think of the darkest, clearest night that you can remember when you looked up at the sky and saw the stars. Now think of how blazingly bright those stars would be when seen from the surface of the moon, where there would be no atmosphere and no dust between you and the stars.

If the astronots had actually been on the moon, they could have faced away from the sun, lifted the reflective visors of their helmets, looked upward, and seen a stunning array of brilliant stars.

Here’s another.

Although the astronauts allegedly left innumerable footprints on the moon, although NASA presented videos of the wheels of “lunar rovers” throwing dust into the air, not one of the six alleged “lunar landers” created a blast crater when it allegedly landed. Not one of the six alleged landers created a depression or disturbed the surface in any way whatsoever with its exhaust jet. Although these rockets allegedly had a thrust measured in thousands of pounds, they were unable even to melt or char the moon’s surface. No dust settled on any of the landing pads of the six alleged landers.

What does that tell those of us who can think? It tells us that those “landers” didn’t land; they were carried to their locations here on earth.

Here’s another.

The video footage allegedly showing the blast-off of the “lunar lander” after the “moon landing” was over shows absolutely no exhaust plume. There should have been a massive, opaque plume.

What does that tell those of us who can think? It tells us that those “landers” didn’t blast off on the moon; they were lifted up here on earth.

Here’s another.

One of NASA’s “moon photos” shows several footprints made by the astronots’ boots. However, it also shows part of a footprint made by a tennis shoe.

Here’s another.

At the beach, one can leave clear and distinct footprints in wet sand, but not in completely dry sand. Because of the perfect vacuum, the surface of the moon is bone dry. And yet the astronots were able to make perfectly formed footprints.

Here’s another.

One of the infamous “moon photos” shows that one of the “moon rocks” has the letter C on it and the ground adjacent to the rock has the letter C on it.

Here’s another.

The amount of radiation that the astronots received (especially in the Van Allen Belts) was many times the amount needed to kill a human. Yet they did not die or even become ill. Their spacecraft had no shielding against radiation; in fact, the walls were so thin and weak that they could not withstand normal atmospheric pressure.

Here’s another.

During a space-shuttle flight that went higher than its predecessors (although it was far below the Van Allen Belts), the astronauts said that they could see sparks caused by radiation with their eyes shut. CNN reported that this flight revealed that the radiation belts are more dangerous than previously believed. How could that shuttle flight provide any information about the Van Allen Belts that had not already been provided by the seven Apollo flights that allegedly went through those belts? That seems impossible. What does seem possible, even certain, is that Apollo was just another of ZOG’s lies.

Here’s another.

We are told that men walked on the moon in pressurized spacesuits. And yet those men were able effortlessly to bend their arms, legs, and fingers.

Here’s another.

NASA provided a video clip of an astronot driving a golf ball on the moon. Later, they replaced it with a different clip of an astronot hitting a ball because the first one showed that the ball was sliced. (Slicing cannot happen in a vacuum, and a baseball pitcher cannot throw a curve ball in a vacuum.)

Astronot “cavorting on the moon”: “It’s absolutely unreal!”

Here’s another.

We have two video clips that slipped through NASA’s fingers. They both show Apollo astronauts in low orbit around the earth pretending to be halfway to the moon. In one, they darkened the interior of the craft, moved several feet away from a round window that was filled by a view of the earth’s surface, and pointed the camera at the window. The dark interior of the craft surrounding the window was supposed to be the blackness of space surrounding the distant earth.

Why did they ever have to pretend that they were halfway to the moon? Because they were never halfway to the moon. The whole thing was a hoax.

Here’s another.

As soon as the Apollo farce ended, NASA dumped the Saturn V rocket. A new rocket was developed and used to launch the space shuttle. If the Saturn V had been used instead, the first shuttle would have been launched five years sooner and the cost per launch would have been reduced by two thirds. The problem was that the Saturn V was a fraud; it had nowhere near the performance claimed for it.

And on and on and on.

The day after Grissom and 2 other astronauts were murdered by the System, FBI thugs entered Grissom’s home and stole the reports about Apollo that he had written; those reports were never returned to his widow.

NASA inspector Thomas Ronald Baron, who had written a 500-page report detailing the incompetence of NASA and North American Aviation, testified before the congressional committee that was investigating the disaster (Grissom’s murder by immolation). Four days later, he, his wife, and his daughter were allegedly killed when his automobile was struck by a train. (They were almost certainly dead before the train struck their car.) In violation of Florida law, not one of them was autopsied. His 500-page report disappeared.

Bill Kaysing: “The Atlas engine, which was developed at Rocketdyne, was used … to propel the Atlas intercontinental ballistic missile. However, it didn’t work too well. In fact, at one point 14 Atlas [missiles] … exploded consecutively at Vandenburg Airforce Base. They blew up in the air, downrange, on the pad. So the Atlas engine reliability was very low. And this, of course, gave me a very dim view of space, space travel, rockets in general. The Atlas engine was a small version of the F1 engine that was used in the Saturn V for the alleged trips to the moon.”

Bill Kaysing: “Bill Wood is a rocket scientist; he’s been in the business for 25 years…. Well, one point that Bill brought out was that the Saturn V vehicle, using five F1 engines, really was not the configuration that was shown in films of the Saturn V leaving for the moon. Instead, it’s Bill’s contention that they used less powerful engines and simply added fuel to the jet stream to make it appear as though the Saturn V was using five F1 engines. Well, the reason was that the F1 engine, which was tested at Edwards Airforce Base, suffered from a problem in large liquid rocket propellent engines of combustion instability…. [S]hock waves are set up inside the expansion chamber of the rocket, and they resonate and embellish one another until finally the rocket chamber explodes.”

Bill Wood: “The first eight feet past the end of the exhaust nozzles of these F1 engines—the exhaust is black. It’s not glowing; it’s a black exhaust, just as if you were to have some type of a shroud around the end of the engine with maybe kerosene being injected into the exhaust so that when the smaller engine fires down the center of this, it ingests air … and it taking about eight feet for this heated kerosene to mix with air before it catches on fire behind the engine. And that seems to produce this 800-foot-long fuel-rich flame that is flapping in the air behind the Saturn V. The flame behind the Saturn V doesn’t look very much like the flame behind other rockets using the same propellants. There’s no normal mode of operation that would cause an engine like that to produce this dark zone. To do that, it would have to be running so fuel-rich that it would be so inefficient that it couldn’t possibly produce the performance that was claimed for it. It’s possible that they never really did solve the combustion efficiency problem with the F1 engine, and they decided that just for show purposes they would produce an engine that produced a giant flame sort of like a huge flame flower, and we all know that flame throwers don’t produce much thrust.”

Bill Wood: “The LEM proposal was amazingly short. This was a 110-page document where Gruman proposed the entire LEM program, which was a 6.9 billion dollar program, and that’s an outrageously small document for anyone to submit and ask for 6.9 billion dollars. There’s no way that a reviewer could determine whether or not the contractor is going to accomplish anything worthwhile based on 110 pages of documentation for that size program. When I checked into 10 other programs of similar size like the C5A and large submarine orders or aircraft carrier orders—this type of thing—all of the proposals were between 5,000 pages and 86,000 pages with an average of 38,000 pages, and yet we see this one standing there all by itself with 110 pages.

“And it appeared … that this may have been a situation where they knew that if anyone checked, someone would say, ‘Well, in order to win this you had to submit a proposal, right? So let me see the proposal.’ So they had to produce a proposal, but they didn’t go to the trouble of producing one of decent length. A 110-page proposal is about appropriate for a 1.4 million dollar program which is 5000 times smaller than the claimed LEM program. Now, you wouldn’t need a very long proposal if you weren’t really going to build a LEM that had to work.”

Bill Kaysing: “Apollos 1 through 6 were all failures, dreadful failures. They blew up on the pad, they blew up 50 feet in the air. Apollo 6, the last one in which I think we had truthful data, was a total fiasco. It took off; second stage didn’t ignite; everything went wrong that could go wrong…. From Apollo 7 on, they decided to falsify information, and that’s what they did.”

Bill Kaysing: “In 1959, I was working with advanced research at Rocketdyne, and their own studies proved that radiation levels on the moon were lethal. This corroborated Russian research. The Russians claimed that for a man to survive on the moon with the radiation emitted from solar and cosmic sources, he would have to be shielded by four feet of solid lead.”

Bill Kaysing: “The sounds of engines run up in excess of 150 decibels. This is far beyond the capability of anybody to converse when you have sound at that high level. Now, the engines inside the lunar module—both the descent engine and the ascent engine—emitted this type of noise, and yet in broadcasts from the moon we hear the astronauts conversing in a normal tone of voice and saying things like ‘Quiet ride.'”

Bill Kaysing: “On December 7th, 1975, I was invited to discuss my book at radio station KOME in San Jose, California…. About halfway through the broadcast, the engineer came into the … room … , and he said, ‘We’re off the air.’ Subsequent investigation indicated that someone in a helicopter had dropped napalm on the KOME transmitter in the Gilroy Hills, causing a quarter of a million dollars worth of damage and effectively cutting off the station from the air for three days.”

If the arguments for the fraudulent nature of the Apollo program can be “easily disproven”, then why was it necessary for the System to napalm a radio station?

The napalm attack was necessary to protect the lie.

Bill Kaysing: “After [Neil Armstrong] allegedly returned from the moon, he gradually became more and more reclusive. Today, he will not talk about Apollo with anybody under any circumstances.”

It doesn’t sound as though he’s too proud of his “giant leap for mankind”, does it?

Bill Kaysing: ” … in August of 1991, James Irwin [Apollo 15] called me at my home, and he said, ‘I understand you’ve written a book called We Never Went to the Moon.’ He said, ‘Come to think of it, this phone could be tapped.’ He said, ‘I want you to call me at my home on Friday.’ … So I said, ‘OK, Jim; I’ll call you,’ and he gave me his home phone number. Well, when I called him on Friday, James Irwin was dead; he had died of a heart attack.”

The murder of Irwin was necessary to protect the lie.

Bill Kaysing: “Paul Jacobs was a top investigator in San Francisco. I went to see him to get his help. I said, ‘Paul, help me with my Apollo hoax project.’ He says, ‘All right, I will. I’m flying to Washington next week; I’ll go see the head of the U. S. Department of Geology,’ and he did. And he asked the geologist, ‘Did you examine the moon rocks? Did they really come from the moon?’ The geologist just laughed. Well, there’s a sad ending to this story. Paul flew back from Washington, I met with him again in San Francisco, and he told me that he had determined that the Apollo project was a hoax and that people at high levels were keeping it a secret. Unfortunately, Paul and his wife died of cancer within 90 days.”

Revilo P. Oliver: “Professor Goldman … claimed that he and ‘most historians’ regarded history as a ‘weapon’ to be used for ‘determining people’s ideas and attitudes.'”

Bart Sibrel: ” … von Braun … said that once you landed on the moon, you’d have to immediately go into a cave to protect yourself from micro-meteorites…. He said there would be a 50% chance of a catastrophic failure every 24 hours from micro-meteorites.”

Bart Sibrel: “The space shuttle only goes as high above the earth as Florida is wide. So if you had a globe about a foot across … that would be about half an inch above the globe. The moon would be … 30 feet away. What we’re claiming is that they went 100,000% farther than the space shuttle has ever gone nearly four decades ago….

“And the space shuttle going 200 miles above the earth has already killed 14 people. And yet we’re to believe that nearly four decades ago with that much older technology and experience and ability, they went 250,000 miles away six times, landed on another world, and never killed anybody….

“They’re saying that we can return to the moon 50 years after going the first time. And their alleged new rocket [is] called Apollo on Steroids, meaning the rocket … now that we need has to be so much bigger than the rocket [with which] we successfully went to the moon back then….

“Then they said going to the moon is the logical first step to Mars and beyond…. Then why do we need to repeat it the seventh time?

“And he said we need to … learn how to protect the astronauts from radiation. Well, just do it the same successful way you did it before.

“Von Braun … originally said to make it in one rocket to the moon the rocket has to be taller than the Empire State Building and weigh 800,000 tons. The rocket they used weighed no more than 6500 tons….

“[S]ince 1972, no country—not the Soviet Union, not China, not Japan, not Great Britain—no one has ever claimed to send a human beyond earth orbit.”

Bart Sibrel: “Kelly Smith from NASA went on camera about four years ago and said that the radiation belt surrounding the earth which is about 750 miles above the space station—he said it’s dangerous and we must first learn how to protect astronauts from this radiation before we can send people through this region of space…. And then they launched the Orion spacecraft about three years ago with geiger counters to go into this radiation field … they come back with two geiger counters, and I say, ‘Can I please have those readings?’ And they say, no, that information is classified…. [W]hy is that amount of radiation classified? Because if they told you, it would prove that the astronauts couldn’t possibly go through it and survive.” [If Apollo astronots went through the belts 14 times, why did Orion have to measure the radiation levels?]

Professor James A. Van Allen: “The acceptance of such grandiose proposals by otherwise rational individuals stems from the mystique of space flight, as nurtured over many centuries by early writers of science fiction and their present-day counterparts. Indeed, to the ordinary person space flight is synonymous with the flight of human beings. The simple taste for adventure and fantasy expressed in that sentiment has been elevated in some quarters to the quasi-religious belief that space is a natural habitat of human beings.”

Did you hear what the discoverer of the Van Allen Radiation Belts said? The idea of sending men to the moon is a “grandiose” “fantasy”.

Revilo P. Oliver: “Professor Van Allen lists sixteen projects of the highest scientific importance and one that is merely utilitarian which were aborted or crippled by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration in 1981 so that funds for them could be diverted to the construction of the ‘space shuttle,’ which, at enormous expense, chiefly benefited newsmen and the operators of boob-tubes, and produced virtually no increment of either scientific knowledge or usable technology. One has only to look at the list to see that a vast amount of highly important knowledge about the solar system, the universe, and even the earth itself was prevented or indefinitely postponed, just to give a few men an adventurous and exciting joy ride and to fascinate the audience that stares at television screens in a semi-hypnotic trance.“