Landing Area Apollo 11
On July 20th 1969 the USA reported about the successful first manned Moon landing with Apollo 11. In the night to July 21st there was a so called live broadcast of the astronauts stepping on the Moon.
An involved scientist told me that at that time 30% of the Americans thought that this Moon landing was faked.
Moon or not Moon , that is the question :
2 pictures of the NASA homepage of Apollo 11:
(Link to picture 2: http://www.history.nasa.gov/alsj/a11/AS11-40-5928.jpg)
It has a similar close-by and low horizon line as the picture 2.
(The video can be found under http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a11/video11.html#Step at 109:42:28.)
On picture 3 the height of the camera is about 2 m, and the distance to the horizon about 20 m. Therefore the inclination of the line of sight down to the horizon is roughly 1:10. To view directly into space, without seeing any landscape behind that border, one would have to stay on an isolated mountain on an altitude of more than 8'600 m - and all this in the sea of tranquillity.
Sketch of the landing site which allows seeing a horizon as in picture 3.
Red line: line of sight from the camera over the border directly into space.
For the calculation: see the paper.
Since there are no such high and steep mountains on the Moon, the pictures must have been taken somewhere else.
With these pictures and the "live" broadcast, which had been available already before the expedition, the Moon landing got a perfect media event. Everybody has it in best remembrance and due to the high quality of the pictures also in a colourful one.
The discussion can be more open now and there are for the time being other questions to ask, e.g.: would the astronauts have hardly made any pictures to be able to focus on the experiments – or wouldn’t they have been in the position to make so many high quality pictures in the short time?
With the knowledge that all these are studio pictures, all detail discussions about unnatural illumination, the waving flag, missing traces from the rocket engine and other possible inconsistencies are now superfluous and clarified in all.
As a consequence the live video should have appeared tilted as well in 1969, as the following pictures demonstrate:
Left: View from the tilted TV camera
Middle: Same picture, as it should have appeared on a television set (just rotated)
Right: Official still image from the live video
(The left and the middle picture were established from the original one on the right.)
The so called live video has therefore not been shot from the official camera position. This contradiction is not a proof for studio pictures, because the documentation could just be wrong. But in another context the tilt of the camera is used to explain the tilt of the horizon...
... and I made further investigations:
- Only with luck, i.e. if the Sun does not emit any noteworthy ionising proton radiation, one can endure a Moon flight without radiation damage.
- The officially reported total dose value of 1.8 mGray for a flight to the Moon and back could only have been achieved with an at least 7 mm thick aluminium (equivalent) radiation shielding and with an almost perfectly quiet Sun.
... and to the Lunar Laser Ranging
What do you think, dear reader, are there any laser range measurements on lunar retro reflectors?
If yes, do the retro reflectors have been placed by Apollo astronauts or by robots? And if no, then we would have a real problem with science! Read the LLR documentation.
Below a picture of the Apollo 11 Post Flight Press Conference, just when in the beginning the 3 “heroes” are presented – or do they rather look like accused and feeling guilty?
Because of the various inconsistencies in the Apollo 11 documentation and because of the downplayed high radiation risk one can conclude that
- only a facade was shown to the public in 1969
- Armstrong & Co. must always have remained below 500 km altitude
Thanks to the today’s information potential it is now possible for everybody to see through these fakes.
But the willingness to look into this matter in an unbiased way is often not yet available. In this sense NASA & Co. have done an extremely solid work and they still do it today.
I think that nowadays we can learn therefrom for other areas of life, e.g. how our media work, and also how Wikipedia is censored; see under Potpourri or directly here: /potpourri-en.shtml#Wikipedia
A proof of image fakery in the case of Apollo 15, Apollo 12 and Apollo 14 by Colin Rourke, Professor of Mathematics:
... with a summary of my findings on the Apollo 11 landing site pictures: http://www.aulis.com/tranquility.htm
Here my 15-minutes-summary: https://www.kla.tv/16607
In 1969 when the USA reported about a successful Moon landing I was 14 years old and proud of such a technical achievement. I never took information about possibly faked pictures seriously until December 2008 when I looked closer to a picture I saw accidentally. I found a trace, followed it, and at the end the case cleared up.