Causa Měsíc


Little John

(z mé korespondence s Vojtěchem, ohlas na článek Už to nejsou jen řeči ufologů)

(Vojtěchovi:)

Dobrý den, ptáte se, zda se dá někde vidět filmový záznam s třepetající se vlajkou na povrchu. Zkuste:

http://www.erols.com/imageinn/Apollo_C.html Na konci dopisu posílám několik článků a v posledních dvou se dozvíte, že film lze sehnat od Ralpha Reneho, autora knihy NASA Mooned America. Také jsou tam nějaké adresy, jak si objednat videa. Pokud neuspějete, zkuste si dát do vyhledávače kombinace slov jako Moon hoax conspiracy flag UFO atd, přinejmenším najdete fotky.

Pokud vážně chcete poznat pravdu, nejlepší bude zkoumat celou věc nezaujatě a důsledně. Já vám nemohu potvrdit nebo vyvrátit všechny detaily toho článku. Beru ale vážně mnoho informací z Véd (v sanskrtu psaná díla o materiálních i nemateriálních vesmírech a jevech vůbec), které jsem překládal a které popisují, že na všech planetách existuje život. I u nás na Zemi vědci našli život ve vřících zřídlech, v nerostech, v těch nejnemožnějších místech, prostě všude. Proto jsem si jistý, že na jiných planetách existuje také, třebaže ho nemusíme svými hrubohmotnými smysly vnímat. Účel těch planet je právě poskytnout útociště živým bytostem. Nic tady není náhodou. Tak jako tady na Zemi je za každým naším výtvorem lidská inteligence, i ve vesmíru za vším stojí vyšší, vesmírná inteligence. Další info najdete v knihách Bhagavad-gíta, Íšopanišad, Šrímad Bhágavatam, Vědecké poznání duše a mnoho jiných, od různých překladatelů.

Ptáte se také: "Dají se získat někde ješte další dostupné informace vyjma uvedených těžko sehnatelných knižních publikací?"

Další články s fotografiemi z Měsíce vyšly např. v magazínu Fakta X, čísla 2/98 a 3/98, a v Magazínu 2000, číslo 12/98. Ve Fantastických Faktech 1/98 vyšel také článek, jak Aldrin s Armstrongem mluvili do nesnímaného mikrofonového kanálu o tom, že vidí na povrchu Měsíce jiné vesmírné lodě.

Stránky o možném životě pod povrchem různých planet jsou:

www.hollowplanets.com http://skyboom.com/hollowearthpuranas/index12.html

Ve Švédsku jsem také viděl knihu Billa Kaysinga "We Never Went to the Moon". Ten pro změnu tvrdí, ze astronauté na Měsíci vůbec nebyli a vše se filmovalo v arizonské poušti. Celý magazín o této knize najdete na:

http://www.weirdvideos.com/kaysing2.html

Připojuji ješte další články s různými názory. Na Internetu určitě najdete mnoho dalších informací. Doufám, že se oba jednou dopátráme pravdy, jak to s Měsícem bylo. S pozdravem

====================================================================

Government Is Covering Up UFO Evidence, Group Says

By Julia Duin The Washington Times http://www.washtimes.com/national/20010510-19816390.htm 5-12-1

Apollo astronauts, she said, had spotted UFOs, but they "are told to keep this quiet and not to talk about it," she said. One of them, Edgar Mitchell, who walked on the moon as part of the Apollo 14 team, is a witness for Project Disclosure.

Karl Wolf, an Air Force sergeant who was assigned to the National Security Agency, said that mysterious structures were discovered on the far side of the moon when the United States was mapping its surface before the 1969 lunar landing. Those photos too were culled out of the public record.

(JS: Important allegation.)

The Pentagon does not comment on UFOs, except to say they do not exist and that such objects really are high altitude balloons, swamp gas or military aircraft.

=====================================================================

Former Government Employees Say It's Time to Reveal UFO Evidence

5-10-1

ABCNews.com - That's according to a group of about 20 former government workers, many of them military and security officials, who stepped forward on Wednesday to say they had witnessed evidence of aliens and unidentified flying objects and called for congressional hearings about such sightings. In another statement Wednesday, Donna Hare, a former NASA contract employee, said that Apollo astronauts saw an alien craft when they landed on the moon, but were told not to reveal it. Hare's source was a man who had been quarantined with the astronauts.

=====================================================================

Let's consider the moon shot, for example, since an hourlong expose of the moon hoax was broadcast last week. Many experts were interviewed who presented their evidence that it was a hoax, including the European inventor of the moon camera (from Hasselblad) that took all the photos. These people were juxtaposed against the NASA spokesperson who tried to deny their findings, and assure us that it actually happened.

=====================================================================

From: http://www.kksamurai.com/moon/pyramid3.html

Photo culled by www.tuvpo.com

Glare on the Moon

This Apollo photograph shows glare on the surface of the Moon. This obviously doesn't correspond with the description of the Moon we have been given. Various conclusions can be postulated: That the Moon really has an atmosphere and that Apollo went there, that the Moon doesn't really have an atmosphere and that the photo was taken in a studio, or that the Moon has an atmosphere, but that NASA didn't really go there anyway, at least not in that Apollo contraption.

One ironclad conclusion, however, has to do with NASA's credibility, and it's not a very positive conclusion.

Here are some comments from chapter One of Joseph H. Cater's book The Ultimate Reality:

There was an interesting slip-up by NASA in the photo department. All the photos taken by the Moon orbiter, except one, showed an ansence of any atmospheric fringe on the moon's horizon. The exception looked like a picture taken from an Earth satellite. A blue atmospheric fringe was very apparent along the far edge of the Moon!

Perhaps the most obvious indication of a dense Moon atmosphere is the soil and deep layers of loose dust on the Moon's surface. Such conditions cannot exist in a vacuum or near vacuum. Air molecules tend to adhere to surfaces. This layer of air tends to counteract cohesive forces, and prevents solid surfaces from adhering together or becoming "sticky". This, of course, prevents dust particles from coalescing and forming a solid, rocklike mass. This principle has been demonstrated on numerous occasions by placing soil or dust in a chamber and evacuating it to produce a near vacuum inside.

The evidence of a Moon atmosphere has by no means been exhausted. Much of it obtruded on the scientific world long before the space program. Considerable light refraction by stars being occulted by the Moon has been observed on many occasions. Meteors have been seen disintegrating in the Moon's upper atmosphere. In fact, evidence shows that the Moon's surface has better protection from meteorites than the Earth. At this stage, it is interesting to refer to an article entitled, " How Dead is the Moon " that appeared in Natural History Magazine for February, 1950 .... It is extremely significant from several standpoints. There was a reference made concerning a scientist, Dr. Lincoln La Paz, in the 1930's, calculated that meteors weighing tens pounds or more falling on the dark side of the Moon should disintegrate in a flash bright enough to be seen with the naked eye. This is, of course, assuming the Moon has no atmosphere. Over 100 should occur every year, yet, only two or three such flashes have been seen in all human history. The conclusion was that the Moon seems to be better protected from meteors than the Earth.

In 1941, an astronomer, Walter Haas, and associates searched the, dark side of the Moon for 170 hours with a telescope in an attempt to detect meteors burning up in a Moon atmosphere. During that time twelve bright moving specks which began and ended at points on the Moon were visible under their telescope. During these observations, four or five of our own meteors crossed the telescope field. One or two of the lunar flashes may have been extremely faint earthbound meteors coming along directly toward the observer, but the laws of probability show most of them occurred on the Moon. According to the author of this article, it was assumed the density ofthe atmosphere at the Moon's surface was 1/10,000 th as dense as the Earth's. On this basis and the belief that the Moon had one-sixth Earth gravity, scientists calculated that above 43 to 55 miles above the Moon's surface, the atmosphere was denser than that of the Earth is at similar altitudes. This was supposed to account for the great protection the Moon's atmosphere provides the surface from meteor impact. It seems scientific reasoning in those days was as infantile as it is now.

It is obvious, or at least should be, the amount of protection an atmosphere gives a planetary surface is dependent upon the quantity of atmosphere existing above a unit area of the surface, not just its depth. In other words, it is the number of air molecules the meteor encounters, not the distribution that is the governing factor. On the basis of one﷓sixth Earth gravity and a density at the surface of l/10,000th that experienced at the Earth's surface, the Moon has only 6/10,000th as much atmosphere per unit areas as the Earth.

This conclusion is based on the fact that the volurne of a gas is directly proportional to the pressure exerted on it. The gravitational field of a planet compresses the atmosphere and the amount of compression is almost directly proportional to the surface gravity. There will be a slight deviation because of the finite size of a planet. According to the above figures, our Earth would have about 1,666 times the atmosphere protecting its surface as does the Moon. This means that a meteor would encounter 1,666 times as many gas molecules before it reaches the Earth's surface than it would if it were to strike the Moon, yet, the evidence indicates that the Moon's surface has better protection than the Earth's.

To make matters worse, a given amount of atmosphere compressed to a thinner layer under high gravity would actually give better protection from meteors than would the same atmosphere subjected to a lower gravity and thus be distributed over a greater depth. In passing through the deeper atmosphere, the meteor would encounter fewer gas molecules per unit time and would have more time to dissipate the heat built up by friction. By passing through the same number of molecules in a shorter time, it would get hotter. 1'he time interval, being several times greater m the former cast, would more than offset the fact that heat is dissipated more rapidly at higher temperatures.

When the process forming an atmosphere is considered, it follows that the Moon should have as much atmosphere per unit area as the Earth. An atmosphere comes from gases discharged from material in the crust. Matter below a certain depth cannot contribute to an atmosphere. This is independent of the size of a planet but is dependent on the kind of material in the crust. The Earth and Moon have a similar composition.

Large areas of the Moon facing us are considerably lower than the average elevation of the Moon's surface. The mares on this side of the Moon make up a high percentage of the area and it is apparent they were once ocean bottoms. If we were to lose our oceans, most of the atmosphere would settle in the deeper ocean beds. As a result, such areas would experience great air pressures. A deeper and more dense atmosphere in such areas would, indeed, provide better protection from meteors than other places.

The dense Moon atmosphere is not as evident to viewers from Earth for several reasons. The long days and nights, coupled with lack of any very large bodies of water, mitigate the weather to the extent that strong winds and large cloud formations never occur. However, small clouds are seen occasionally drifting across the surface. Light diffusion is caused largely by suspended particles in the atmosphere. Due to the type of weather that exists on the Moon, there is a paucity of dust particles in its atmosphere as compared to the Earth's. Therefore, the Moon's atmosphere, although as dense on the average as the Earth's, will not diffuse light to the extent experienced on the Earth. Consequently, the scientific community has been able to fool people with their claims of a practically nonexistent Moon atmosphere. This is certainly amazing in view of the fact that eclipses of the Sun do show a substantial Moon atmosphere despite its modest ability to diffuse light. An atmospheric fringe is clearly seen around the Moon's periphery. To squelch any claims that this fringe is part of the Sun's corona, it should be noted that this fringe also shows up in some photos of a partial eclipse where the outline of the Moon is overlapped by the Sun. It is entirely possible the Moon has even a denser atmosphere on the average than the Earth. This possibility will be discussed in Part 111 [ of The Ultimate Reality ].

Other powerful evidence of a dense Moon atmosphere came from statements made by astronauts during Apollo missions. The following case is a typical example. Prior to the publicized excursions to the Moon, early astronauts had stated that the stars were not visible above the atmosphere. This is to be expected. There is little or no diffusion of light in outer space and therefore, the only stars that could be seen would be those whose discs could be resolved. This could only be done with powerful telescopes. An atmosphere functions in a manner analogous to a lens. The light from a distant star is diffused and spread out. Consequently, stars are visible because of a greatly enlarged and distorted image of the disc caused by the atmosphere.

On the Apollo 1 1 mission shortly before reaching the Moon, Armstrong stated that he could see the crater Tycho clearly and that he could see the sky all around the Moon, even on the rim of it where there is no earthshine or sunshine. Collins then stated, "Now we're able to see stars again and recognize constellations for the first time on the trip .... The sky's full of stars ... it looks like its night side on Earth." This means that after leaving the Earth the astronauts could not see any stars until they got close enough to the Moon to view them through the Moon's atmosphere! ( The pronounced yellow color of the Moon has never been explained and apparently the question as to why has never been asked. As will be shown later, this is additional proof the Moon has more atmosphere per unit area than does the Earth. It is interesting to note the Earth has a bluish color when seen from outer space ).

An extensive Moon atmosphere means the Moon has a high gravity. Since the Moon is supposedly a relatively small planet, a gravity as weak as that attributed to it would be unable to hold an atmosphere of any significance. It is not difficult to see why the evidence of a substantial Moon atmosphere has been cheerfully ignored by scientists past and present. A strong Moon gravity, of course, is not compatible with orthodox physics.

=====================================================================

Subject: Did man really walk on the Moon ???

* Cover Story Did man really walk on the Moon or was it the ultimate camera trick, asks David Milne? The greater lunar lie In the early hours of May 16, 1990, after a week spent watching old video footage of man on the Moon, a thought was turning into an obsession in the mind of Ralph Rene.

"How can the flag be fluttering," the 47 year old American kept asking himself, "when there's no wind on the atmosphere free Moon?" That moment was to be the beginning of an incredible Space odyssey for the self- taught engineer from New Jersey. He started investigating the Apollo Moon landings, scouring every NASA film, photo and report with a growing sense of wonder, until finally reaching an awesome conclusion: America had never put a man on the Moon. The giant leap for mankind was fake.

It is of course the conspiracy theory to end all conspiracy theories. But Rene has now put all his findings into a startling book entitled NASA Mooned America. Published by himself, it's being sold by mail order - and is a compelling read. The story lifts off in 1961 with Russia firing Yuri Gagarin into space, leaving a panicked America trailing in the space race.

At an emergency meeting of Congress, President Kennedy proposed the ultimate face saver, put a man on the Moon. With an impassioned speech he secured the plan an unbelievable 40 billion dollars. And so, says Rene (and a growing number of astro-physicists are beginning to agree with him), the great Moon hoax was born. Between1969 and 1972, seven Apollo ships headed to the Moon. Six claim to have made it, with the ill fated Apollo 13 - whose oxygen tanks apparently exploded halfway - being the only casualties.

But with the exception of the known rocks, which could have been easily mocked up in a lab, the photographs and film footage are the only proof that the Eagle ever landed. And Rene believes they're fake. For a start, he says, the TV footage was hopeless. The world tuned in to watch what looked like two blurred white ghosts gambol threw rocks and dust. Part of the reason for the low quality was that, strangely, NASA provided no direct link up. So networks actually had to film "man's greatest achievement" from a TV screen in Houston -a deliberate ploy, says Rene, so that nobody could properly examine it.

By contrast, the still photos were stunning. Yet that's just the problem. The astronauts took thousands of pictures, each one perfectly exposed and sharply focused. Not one was badly composed or even blurred. As Rene points out, that's not all:

*The cameras had no white meters or view ponders. So the astronauts achieved this feet without being able to see what they were doing.
*There film stock was unaffected by the intense peaks and powerful cosmic radiation on the Moon, conditions that should have made it useless. McGrath
*They managed to adjust their cameras, change film and swap filters in pressurized clubs. It should have been almost impossible to end their fingers.

Award winning British photographer David passer is convinced the pictures are fake. His astonishing findings are explained alongside the pictures on these pages, but the basic points are as follows:

*The shadows could only have been created with multiple light sources and, in particular, powerful spotlights. But the only light source on the Moon was the sun.
*The American flag and the words "United States" are always brightly lit, even when everything around is in shadow.
*Not one still picture matches the film footage, yet NASA claims both were shot at the same time.
*The pictures are so perfect, each one would have taken a slick advertising agency hours to put them together. But the astronauts managed it repeatedly.

David Persey believes the mistakes were deliberate, left there by "whistle blowers", who were keen for the truth to one day get out. If Persey is right and the pictures are fake, then we've only NASA's word that man ever went to the Moon. And, asks Rene, why would anyone fake pictures of an event that actually happened? The questions don't stop there. Outer space is awash with deadly radiation that emanates from solar flares firing out from the sun. Standard astronauts orbiting earth in near space, like those who recently fixed the Hubble telescope, are protected by the earth's Van Allen belt. But the Moon is to 240,000 miles distant, way outside this safe band. And, during the Apollo flights, astronomical data shows there were no less than 1,485 such flares.

John Mauldin, a physicist who works for NASA, once said shielding at least two meters thick would be needed. Yet the walls of the Lunar Landers which took astronauts from the spaceship to the moons surface were, said NASA, "about the thickness of heavy duty aluminum foil". How could that stop this deadly radiation? And if the astronauts were protected by their space suits, why didn't rescue workers use such protective gear at the Chernobyl meltdown, which released only a fraction of the dose astronauts would encounter? Not one Apollo astronaut ever contracted cancer - not even the Apollo 16 crew who were on their way to the Moon when a big flare started.

"They should have been fried," says Rene. Furthermore, every Apollo mission before number 11 (the first to the Moon) was plagued with around 20,000 defects a-piece. Yet, with the exception of Apollo 13, NASA claims there wasn't one major technical problem on any of their Moon missions. Just one effect could have blown the whole thing. "The odds against these are so unlikely that God must have been the co-pilot," says Rene. Several years after NASA claimed its first Moon landing, Buzz Aldrin "the second man on the Moon" - was asked at a banquet what it felt like to step on to the lunar surface.

Aldrin staggered to his feet and left the room crying uncontrollably. It would not be the last time he did this. "It strikes me he's suffering from trying to live out a very big lie," says Rene. Aldrin may also fear for his life. Virgil Grissom, a NASA astronaut who baited the Apollo program, was due to pilot Apollo 1 as part of the landings build up. In January 1967, he hung a lemon on his Apollo capsule (in the US, unroadworthy cars are called lemons) and told his wife Betty: "if there is ever a serious accident in the space program, it's likely to be me."

Nobody knows what fuelled his fears, but by the end of the month he and his two co- pilots were dead, burnt to death during a test run when their capsule, pumped full of high pressure pure oxygen, exploded. Scientists couldn't believe NASA's carelessness - even a chemistry student in high school knows high pressure oxygen is extremely explosive. In fact, before the first manned Apollo fight even cleared the launch pad, a total of 11 would be astronauts were dead. Apart from the three who were incinerated, seven died in plane crashes and one in a car smash. Now this is a spectacular accident rate.

"One wonders if these 'accidents' weren't NASA's way of correcting mistakes," says Rene. "Of saying that some of these men didn't have the sort of 'right stuff' they were looking for." NASA won't respond to any of these claims, their press office will only say that the Moon landings happened and the pictures are real. But a NASA public affairs officer called Julian Scheer once delighted 200 guests at a private party with footage of astronauts apparently on a landscape. It had been made on a mission film set and was identical to what NASA claimed was they real lunar landscape.

"The purpose of this film," Scheer told the enthralled group, "is to indicate that you really can fake things on the ground, almost to the point of deception." He then invited his audience to "come to your own decision about whether or not man actually did walk on the Moon". A sudden attack of honesty? You bet, says Rene, who claims the only real thing about the Apollo missions were the lift offs. The astronauts simply have to be on board, he says, in case the rocket exploded. "It was the easiest way to ensure NASA wasn't left with three astronauts who ought to be dead," he claims, adding that they came down a day or so later, out of the public eye (global surveillance wasn't what it is now) and into the safe hands of NASA officials, who whisked them off to prepare for the big day a week later.

And now NASA is planning another giant step - project Outreach, a 1 trillion dollar manned mission to Mars. "Think what they'll be able to mock up with today's computer graphics," says Rene Chillingly. "Special effects was in its infancy in the 60s. This time round will have no way of determining the truth." Space oddities *Apollo 14 astronaut Allen Shepard played golf on the Moon. In front of a worldwide TV audience, Mission Control teased him about slicing the ball to the right. Yet a slice is caused by uneven air flow over the ball. The Moon has no atmosphere and no air. * A camera panned upwards to catch Apollo 16's Lunar Lander liftingoff the Moon. Who did the filming? * One NASA picture from Apollo 11 is looking up at Neil Armstrong about to take his giant step for mankind. The photographer must have been lying on the planet surface. If Armstrong was the first man on the Moon, then who took the shot?

* The pressure inside a space suit was greater than inside a football. The astronauts should have been puffed out like the Michelin Man, but were seen freely bending their joints. *The Moon landings took place during the Cold War. Why didn't America make a signal on the move that could be seen from earth? The PR would have been phenomenal and it could have been easily done with magnesium flares. Text from pictures in the article show Only two men walked on the Moon during the Apollo 12 mission. Yet the astronaut reflected in the visor has no camera. Who took the shot? The flags shadow goes behind the rock so doesn't match the dark line in the oreground, which looks like a line cord. So the shadow to the lower right of the spaceman must be the flag. Where is his shadow? And why is the flag fluttering? How can the flag be brightly lit when its not facing any light ? And where, in all of these shots, are the stars?

The Lander weighed 17 tons yet the astronauts feet seem to have made a bigger dent in the dust. The powerful booster rocket at the base of the Lunar Lander was fired to slow descent to the moons service. Yet it has left no traces of blasting on the dust underneath. It should have created a small crater, yet the booster looks like it's never been fired.

====================================================================

I found one tape with an elderly American explaining how NASA had faked the moon landing. The half hour report was heavily dubbed with Russian translations. But there was a title which showed the man's name. His name was Rene. And he wrote a book about the moon landing.

I checked the internet and quickly found the man's address. I called him up and asked him to send me all the material he had, especially the undubbed video. I was planning to put something about the moon landing hoax on the Mathuresh CD. Rene gave me the rights to do that, and he also sent tons of material. Great material!

I can hardly wait to put the stuff on that Mathuresh CD. The video turned out to be in Russian. It was a Russian film crew which recorded Rene in New Jersey, and they prepared the show for TV 6, some TV channel in Russia. The original tapes must be with that film crew, but who cares. The pictures speak for themselves.

There's one wonderful clip of original NASA moon landing footage which shows one of the astronauts from Apollo 11 putting up the American flag. There was just one problem. The flag would not remain still. It waved in the wind. The astronaut, realizing that problem, went to the camera to cover the lens. It looks really funny.

There are lots of still pictures which don't make any sense. A missing shadow here, and a masking mistake there. It's so obvious that these pictures have all been fabricated in NASA's darkrooms.

There's a wonderful picture from the Apollo 16 'mission': The picture is AS16-107-17446. NASA titled the photo "Apollo XVI on the Moon." On that picture is astronaut Charles Duke and a little moon vehicle, the Rover. The cameras used by NASA automatically place range finding cross-hairs on the photos. However, on this particular photo, the antenna of the Rover is *on top* of one of the cross-hairs. How is this possible? There is only one explanation: The top of the Rover's antenna was super-imposed over the second cross from the top left. If NASA landed men on the Moon, why were the photos faked?

The there is the famous footage of the astronauts walking on the moon. Looks good. Until you see the footage Rene shot in New Jersey last year, where the Russian producer of the video jumps through the snow. Recorded in slow motion. When you play it back, it looks *exactly* like the footage which NASA claims was shot on the Moon. The thing which astounds me is with how little effort NASA got away with all this.

Unfortunately, Rene is out of money and cannot reprint his book. I received one of the last copies of the last print run. If you ever come to Sweden, come to my office and I'll show you the pictures and the film footage.

Or wait until Mathuresh's next CD, called "Metaphor", will be released.

All in all, the Apollo hoax is not something terribly spectacular or surprising. As Rene writes in his book "NASA Mooned America," "Since I published certain of my readers have gone to great trouble and expense to teach me about the Federal Reserve hoax and the hidden controllers of the world's economy, money and power. I must now admit that the Apollo hoax is to the Federal Reserve hoax as a firecracker is to an A-bomb." (Text 538730)

===================================================================

INTERNET\WWWSITE\www\moon\moon.htm 90 min video / vhs SEE STORY BELOW SEE Video Sample Click HERE or on picture below. File provided by WBUZZ.COM

NOTE: our video on the web requires Microsoft Media Player which you can download from www.wbuzz.com where other Grade-A Videos and other topics are available.

24 NASA IMAGES that compare side by side photos within the same missions. I've found more questions than answers. Inspired by: R. Rene "NASA Mooned America"--MD -

http://www.erols.com/imageinn/Apollo_C.html

from our email entries (forum)

Center for The Study of Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence You can own the blockbuster information in this video. Show your friends all the questions that exist and let them decide just how far NASA went . Was NASA forced to cross the line from possibility to fantasy? Read the article below.... taken from Media Bypass Magazine or the article on the Van Allen Enigma. Also read the article about James Lovell's libel suit. KAYSING LOOKS FORWARD TO HIS DAY IN COURT

VIDEO OFFER

For only $19.95 (S&H add $5.00 in USA) NOTE: .. shipping FREE if you order from our web store ... see button below USA only. All other countries add $10 for surface mail and and additional $10 for PAL versions.

TO ORDER CALL 973-729-1836 (or use our store below) mc/visa/discover For questions, mail orders or inquiries see below Send $19.95 in USA only. (shipping and handling $5 in USA but FREE if you order via our web store ) all other countries include $10 PAL purchase if desired in PAL & $10 shipping purchase

Or .. Order by Mail Grade-A Productions 270 Sparta Ave 104-234 Sparta, NJ 07871 Send your order in TODAY! QUESTIONS? e-mail moon@grade-a.com

THIS TAPE WILL CHANGE THE WAY YOU LOOK AT THE MOON AND AT OUR GOVERNMENT

Did America really go to the Moon. . .or were taxpayers just taken for a ride? This 90 minute investigative report by James Collier, author of "VOTESCAM": The Stealing of America" includes new evidence video taped in the Johnson Space Center in Houston -- and questions whether NASA was guilty of spending billions of taxpayer money -- to stage the greatest theatrical hoax of all time. This video demands answers from the U.S. Government before we go to Mars.
1) Was the hatch between the Command Module & the Lunar Module too small for the space-suited astronauts to pass through no matter what contortions they could go through to try?
2) Did the front hatch of the Lunar Module open inward making it impossible for the astronauts to exit the cramped LM?
3) Was there actually no NASA manual instructing the astronauts how to get out of the LM, leaving it up to each individual to figure that out for himself? (As told on camera to Collier by Frank Hughes, Chief of Astronaut Training at NASA)
4) Was the 10-foot Rover too long to fit into the 5-foot side of the LM?
Collier challenges NASA to disprove the above in a public demonstration to American taxpayers! This investigation and that of others, including investigator Bill Kaysing, who is now suing Astronaut James Lovell for slander (jury trial, Santa Cruz, Ca., Oct. 7th), cannot be ignored.

"Was It Only A Paper Moon?" -- $19.95 + $5 shipping (Shipping FREE in USA if ordered from our web store at www.itsemall.com (search "moon") X-USA orders add $10 shipping and $10 if needed for PAL versions. Use address below to order by mail.

Grade-A Productions 270 Sparta Ave 104-234 Sparta, NJ 07871Send us mail! ARTICLE THAT APPEARED IN MEDIA BYPASS MAGAZINE AUGUST, 1997

INVESTIGATOR CHALLENGING NASA

By James M. Collier IN 1994, Victoria House Press in New York received a manuscript titled 'A Funny Thing Happened On Our Way to the Moon.'" Its author, Ralph Rene, a brilliant lay physicist who had studied Bill Kaysing's thesis (see July issue) that NASA faked seven Apollo moon shots, wanted it published. Since I had written the investigative report "Votescam: The Stealing of America," (Victoria House Press) they asked me to investigate Rene and his manuscript to determine the credibility of both. "I read Kaysing's book 'We Never Went to the Moon'", Rene told me, "and although it was compelling, it lacked technical details, a grounding in physics that would convince scientists, beyond a doubt, that America never went to the moon." Rene was positive that NASA had pulled off the hoax of the century. "NASA didn't have the technical problems solved by l969 when they launched the first moon shot," he insisted, "but I believe they couldn't admit it or they'd lose thirty billion dollars in taxpayer-money."

I read Rene's manuscript and although I understood basic physics, I couldn't immediately assure the publisher that Rene's assertions were scientifically accurate. Least of all, I couldn't assure them that we didn't go to the moon. I needed time. So what began as simple research turned into months at the New York Public Library, the Library of Congress in Washington and the United States Archives. Surpisingly, precious little had been written about the Apollo missions except standard "puff" pieces in the New York Times and the Washington Post. Then my research turned to Grumman Aircraft in Beth Page, New York. Grumman built the Lunar Module (LM), that unwieldy looking craft that never flew on Earth but supposedly landed safely on the moon six times. I asked for blueprints detailing the scientific thought behind its design. Did it run by computer? If so, who built the computer? What made Grumman engineers think it could fly? Grumman told me that all the paperwork was destroyed. I was stunned. The LM historical paperwork was destroyed!? Why!? They had no answers. I turned to Boeing Aircraft in Seattle. They built the Lunar Rover, the little car that NASA claims traversed the moon on Apollo missions15-16-17. NASA claims it was transported to the moon in a five-foot high by six-foot wide, triangular corner section of the LM. (The LM's bottom section was basically a tic-tac-toe design with nine sections. Five sections were squares with the four corners being triangles).

But my research indicated that the Rover was at least six feet too long to fit into that corner compartment, thus making it impossible to ever get to the moon. Next was the National Air and Space Museum in Washington and the Johnson Space Center in Houston where I video taped an actual LM. Here research indicated that the crew compartment and hatches were too small for the astronauts to actually enter and exit. After taking the video footage I challenged NASA to prove that two six-foot astronauts, in ballooned-out pressure suits (4-psi in a vacuum) could either get in or get out of a LM. Trying to understand how the moon aquired a ten-foot layer of top soil without wind, rain or water to erode the volcanic-crystaline surface, I spoke to a geologist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Boston. Much of my time was spent just trying to mentally picture the physics of light and shadows, jet propulsion and solar radiation, because most of what NASA was claiming about the moon shots -- and what was supposedly discovered on the moon -- appeared to be diametrically opposed to present text book physics.

* * *

Anyway, I was knee-deep in all this research, when Rene became impatient and decided to self-publish his book. He changed the title to "NASA Mooned America". I, however, had been hooked. But now there wasn't a book to research. I was left hanging, questions plaguing my mind. Questions that neither Kaysing nor Rene entertained. Their research had led me into a scientific wonderland, filled with possibilities. What was I going to do? I had been thrown out of a great movie and I'd never know how it ended. I decided to continue the research. I proposed a book to the publisher titled "Was it Only a Paper Moon?" and I promised it by 1998.

* * *

I started with the technical problems NASA faced in outer space. In fact, I discovered there are two separate zones out there, an inner space and anouter space, and that fact eventually became very significant in my research. It appears that humans are most likely operating in inner space (the space lab) but outer space, beyond the Van Allen radiation belt, the magnetosphere, 560 miles up, may be too deadly to enter due to solar radiation. If that data proves to be true, Earthmen could not have gone to the moon and returned without some signs of radiation poisoning, cell damage and DNA alteration, and most likely, death from cancer.

* * *

The first concern I faced when I started to write the book was my own public credibility. After all, I was the person who told the country (Votescam) that their votes were being rigged by a cartel of powerful elite, including the owners of major media in America. Now I found myself investigating the possibility that we didn't go to the moon. "You've got to be nuts," said my friends. "First you told them the vote is rigged and now you question whether we went to the moon!? They'll hang you Times Square!"

So I decided to test the waters with several talk-radio shows in the midwest. Most of the callers said they never believed we went to the moon in the first place. Others protested that I was doing the station and myself a disservice for even bringing up the subject. They argued that I shouldn't malign "those great American heroes, the astronauts." What could I say to these people? I wanted to explain that I not only sympathized with their point of view, but that at one time I had shared it.

It wasn't easy being the Cassandra of the airwaves, telling people that they definitely didn't want to hear. Half of me wanted to be proven wrong, but the other half had both hands on the tail of something that sure looked like a duck and quacked like a duck. The last time that happened, the duck turned out to be an expose of computer vote rigging in the United States. As an investigative reporter, I just couldn't let go of that damn duck. One enraged listener said that the eagle-feather and hammer that astronauts simultaneously dropped on the moon, was an experiment proving there was no atmosphere on the moon's surface. That person was definitely angry, convinced that I didn't understand basic physics. I explained that the experiment wasn't done to prove the absence of atmosphere, but to prove that an eagle feather and a hammer would both fall at the same rate of speed because the moon has gravity (1/6th a strong as Earth's). "On Earth," I said, "they would both fall at 32-feet per second-per second. The caller actually started to holler. "No, no, an eagle feather will float down on Earth and the hammer will fall faster. On the moon there is no air so they both fall at the same speed!" I told him to get an eagle feather and try it. It's Galileo's law: no matter what the weight of any two objects is, they will both fall at the exactly same speed. In the final analysis, I had tested the waters by doing radio and found that although they were hot, they wouldn't burn me alive. There were still scores of calls from listeners who encouraged me to continue the investigation.

* * *

Then, a funny thing happened on my way to writing that book. I was trying to use words to describe the strange visual phenomena that I saw in NASA photos and videos. Those provocative images are the first evidence that people investigating NASA use to draw you into the fray. "You won't believe this NASA picture," they say, and the tantilizing hunt for clues is forever on. It was then I realized you had to see it to believe it. Those NASA pictures were supposedly taken on the moon's surface, but the lighting from the only available sources, the sun and reflected Earth-light, seems all wrong. It is too soft, appearing more like a Disney studio photo; soft pastels and diffused light. How could there be diffused light on the moon? Earth's atmosphere takes light and bends it, spreading it around objects. Light reflects off air molecules and lights up the dark sides of objects. It is atmosphere, bending the sun's light, that makes the sky appear to be blue. However, on the moon there is no prism of atmosphere to diffuse or bend light so the sky is totally black.

On the moon, the sun's light should be blinding. In fact, the astronauts wear gold tinted face plates on their helmets to cut down 95-percent of the light from the sun. The dark side of objects in NASA photos should be pitch black, while the lit side should be hellishly bright. Yet, all NASA photos from the moon are softly lit, and they appear to be taken in Earth's atmosphere. Why?

If NASA film footage was actually taken on the moon, then it would be a tremendous scientific story. One would expect new physics books trumpeting an incredibly new physical reality: atmosphere has nothing to do with diffusing light! Therefore, and forever thereafter, a new scientific principle would be taught in schools: where there is no atmosphere, light will react exactly the same as light in atmosphere. What was wrong in the world of science? Why were the scientists silent about such an important discovery? Why was the major media mute on the subject? I called Kodak, in Rochester, N.Y., the company that supplied the film for the Hasselblad cameras the astronauts used on the moon. "At what temperature does film melt?" I asked. "One hundred and fifty degrees." But NASA video and film prove the astronauts to be on the moon's surface when the sun was at high noon; the temperature was +250 F. degrees. "The film, in the uncooled cameras would melt," Kodak said. So the duck was quacking.

* * *

When I realized that everything I was trying to describe with words was strongly visual, I decided to commit the research to a video tape instead of a book. "Was it Only a Paper Moon" video was released in Spring of this year. It contains a 90-minute unbroken chain of circumstantial evidence that, if not refuted by NASA, proves we could not have gone to the moon. I feel this evidence demands Congressional hearings. In following articles I will describe in detail all the astonishing evidence that is still seeking an answer: Did NASA indeed pull the hoax of the century?

Here are some nifty pictures from NASA (if you can believe it) Did NASA steal $30 Billion to Fake The Apollo Moon Landings?

This video is a product of Victoria House Press. It is marketed by Grade-A Productions. Jim Collier Died in 1998 of cancer. Jim also published a book about VOTE FRAUD IN FLORIDA which is very timely just now. He would probably be saying "I told you so!". "Vote Scam" is available at Amazon.com. Click the Amazon.com banner to go directly to his book!

=================================================================

(od Vojtěcha:) Dobry den! nebo Ahoj! (jak chcete)
Predem Vam chci podekovat za vycerpavajici odpoved a pripojene clanky, ke kterym jsem se zatim nedostal nejak hloubeji, take za spoustu kontaktu na netu. Ohledne internetu resim podobny problem jako vy, chodim do kavarny, ale urcite se na ne mrknu a pokud se mi podari zjistit nejake zajimave informace, urcite se ozvu. Nemene zajimave urcite budou i preklady ze sanskrtu, diky za tip. Samozrejme chapu ze se na problem existence mimozemskeho zivota neda divat jen z pohledu jedineho clanku a hledani pravdy bude v tomto pripade urcite zdlouhava prace. Pisete ze jste presvedcen o existenci zivota na jinych planetach ja jsem tehoz nazoru a vzdy rikam (je to prevzaty citat) "Podivejte se v noci na oblohu, to by bylo prece nehorazne plytvani prostorem, kdyby jsme tu byli, sami."
Jeste jednou dekuji za kontakty!
S pozdravem Vojtech

nahoru