So Who Put That Flag On The Moon?

[Pimander]

So many questions...

Cosmic..

Oh yes, I forgot...

While we're on questions, how many times have you remote Viewed the Moon?  If you were successful, you must have a few answers by now.

[Cosmic4life]

Oh yes, I forgot...

While we're on questions, how many times have you remote Viewed the Moon?  If you were successful, you must have a few answers by now.

Well actually I have never RV'd the Moon or Mars for that matter....always something else to do here on crazy Planet Earth...
Anyway, RVing these places on my own is pretty pointless.....we need at least 10 people viewing it simultaneously to compare results and define commonalities.

It is an OddBall...no doubt about that...composed mostly of Aluminium and Titanium, and hollow
It could very well be a Generation ship...who knows...at this point I am in the dark looking for the light switch.

C..

[Littleenki]

Well actually I have never RV'd the Moon or Mars for that matter....always something else to do here on crazy Planet Earth...
Anyway, RVing these places on my own is pretty pointless.....we need at least 10 people viewing it simultaneously to compare results and define commonalities.

It is an OddBall...no doubt about that...composed mostly of Aluminium and Titanium, and hollow
It could very well be a Generation ship...who knows...at this point I am in the dark looking for the light switch.

C..

Good point on the multiple viewers, especially with the Moon which we have no proof of how and what it really is.

I like the hollow theory, though..very interesting. VERY!

Personally I Rv the Moon for relaxation and dont really go for any definite exacting facts about it, just drift across the surface and admire the anomalous features...very soothing.

Cosmic, you never finished the RV thread and I have an idea..why not we get any here who wish to, RV the moon at a preset time on a specific night when it's full(my favorite) and see what happens. Ive already checked out Antarchus crater, and find it to be very odd and unusual compared to the phtos of it Ive seen..not quite what it appears in them...

Im game, are you?

Cheers!

[Cosmic4life]

Good point on the multiple viewers, especially with the Moon which we have no proof of how and what it really is.

I like the hollow theory, though..very interesting. VERY!

Personally I Rv the Moon for relaxation and dont really go for any definite exacting facts about it, just drift across the surface and admire the anomalous features...very soothing.

Cosmic, you never finished the RV thread and I have an idea..why not we get any here who wish to, RV the moon at a preset time on a specific night when it's full(my favorite) and see what happens. Ive already checked out Antarchus crater, and find it to be very odd and unusual compared to the phtos of it Ive seen..not quite what it appears in them...

Im game, are you?

Cheers!

Waiting for the membership to increase....at the moment only about 5 members have expressed an interest in RVing...that's not enough.
In time as the membership swells we will probably get to a level of interest that makes a Moon session viable...until then I have delayed producing more of the RV manual as it needs to be approached in stages....members need to read and understand what is already there before moving on to greater detail...there is enough written to enable a simplified Viewing Session should anyone wish to do so....but until we have at least 10 players none of it can be verified by comparisons which is the only method we have regarding the Moon.

C..

[Amaterasu]

Well, Cosmic, now that I can be a regular again, count Me in.

John, spidy sense says Your version of the moon landings come closest to truth.  Not sure where or if they deviate, even.  But the NAZA story is bollux, by the same spidy sense.

[Pimander]

We need to be careful not to reveal when we run RV sessions.  Don't forget about some of the risk of remote influencing.

I have no problem sharing our results but it would be sensible to keep times and who to ourselves.  Even experienced folk may not know how to protect themselves.

[Amaterasu]

Good point, Pim.  We need a way to ensure integrity and privacy.  This means that We should no accept just anyOne asking to join...  They may have ulterior motives.

[Littleenki]

We need to be careful not to reveal when we run RV sessions.  Don't forget about some of the risk of remote influencing.

I have no problem sharing our results but it would be sensible to keep times and who to ourselves.  Even experienced folk may not know how to protect themselves.

Right on, Pimander, safety first especially with a tool as sharp as the mind!

Le

[deuem]

There is no flag on the moon. No Apollo mission ever went to the moon. No Apollo mission ever orbited the moon. It was a scam, a hoax using video fakery produced by Stanley Kubrick.

Dr. Van Allen with the information from Pioneer 1 and 3 in the late 50's found the radiation belt surrounding the earth would required about 3 feet of lead to protect any astronauts attempting to penetrate the belt.

Since that time NAZA has gone to extreme lengths to attempt to prove that the Van Allen belt is harmless. In fact, it is worse than when Pioneer 1 and 3 did the measurements and the reason is that NAZA tried to blow a hole in the belts by launching hydrogen bombs from Johnston Island in the early 60's.

If that is not enough, the gravity on the moon is 70% that of earths which would be far too much to get to the moon, land, then takeoff, reorbit, re-dock and come back with the amount of fuel that was avaialble to them. And not only that but NAZA could never get the Saturn V rocket to work. The rocket that you saw faking the Apollo missions were Saturn IV's dressed up to loook like Saturn V.

If that is not enough our entire scientific concept of Newtons Universal Law of Gravitation is based on the false concept that gravitational force is due to and is proportional to the quantity and density of matter. New ton proposed this theory but never assigned an equation to it. It was some years after Newton died that an unknown person added the G=m1m2/r2 equation which bases gravitational force of quantity and density of matter.
In fact, the true gravitational force of the moon is about 70% that of earth figured by Pari Spolter using the Bullialdus Law of Inverse Square worked as a 3 body problem, sun, moon and earth for the exact time of the alleged landing of Apollo 11.

Stanley Kubrick produced the fake moon walks for NAZA as outlined by Jay Weidner in his video about how Kubrick did it.

The purpose of faking the moon landings was for one:
Provide money for the U.S. Navy orbiting weapon system, and
Two: to give the U.S. a psychological morale boost.

But no. No Apollo spacecraft went to the moon, or orbited the moon.

In addition to all that I have a handwritten paper which a former Apollo technician wrote and handed to me about 4 months ago detailing how they faked all of the Apollo reliability tests.

Have a nice day.

Good evening John, Nice to read you on line again.

The last time we discussed this issue we left off at this point, the barycenter



I have seen since then that your friend Dr. Pari Spolter has also joined this forum.

Can you please ask her if she could explain the gravitation reason behind the bary center and by simply using this, can one determine the gravity of the moon? Going back to the Olimpic sport of the throw. Where they spin around with a ball on the end of a rope. The person in the center starts to wobble because of the other weight circling them. There must be a way of figuring out the 2 weights. Maybe not to an exact weight but a ratio should be found. Myself, I have no idea how they can determine the actual weights of the Earth. It has to be a guess.

Another thought to add. I don't understand why the gravity of the Earth would stop at that point talked about and the moon take over. Does not the moon always have to be in the gravity field of the Earth or it would just spin off. We are in the gravity field of the Sun, no? So would the moon not be affected by 3 fields, The Sun, Earth and itself. 3 gravity fields in all?

As far as the Van Allen belts.With all of the research I have done to date, I would still to this day consider them to be belts. Like the name says. They are not spheres of radiation. If that is true and they are belts as we are told, then I see no reason why one can not just fly up and over them to get out. Back in the Apollo days the magnetic north pole was located near Alaska, somewhere in Canada. If you use that as a start, then the belts were very low on the equator, far away from Florida. Add the Earths tilts and the idea of going up and over them is not too hard to believe. I would go that way. Why go through them if you don't have to.

There is a step by step flight path on line somewhere that I can't find, ( sorry ) but did years ago that showed the flight path for every minute or so and it showed the path going out over Canada and not through the belts. I find that most people are looking at the 2D pictures of the flight paths ( the ones in all the school books ) and taking that as the actual path someone would take. IMHO I would not go that way, why would anyone else. Ok, regardless if Apollo is real or fake this topic is as open for me as any.

Back to the shadows, Again I would state that rather Apollo was fake or real all of the shadows and lenghts from photo time to photo time, trip to trip were as correct as I could check. I would say they are perfect. If they were faked, then someone had to do a better job at the calculations then I did because I could not finad any problems. In other words, no smoking gun on the shadows. I was very impressed. You can look at that two ways. They were real or the lighting guy was very smart. Either way they are correct.

Deuem