Source / Извор: IMDB.com
I was one of those enthusiastic children who, in July 1969, watching with wide-open eyes at a blurry picture ‘from the Moon’, believing that a human foot had set foot there. And for the most of my life, I’ve brushed off the hoax stories. Until I saw the BBC documentary What Happened on the Moon?…
I fell in love with photography as soon as I first came into contact with it. When I was growing up, I regularly visited technical fairs in Belgrade, primarily following the development of photo technology. At the Pentax stand, engineer Milivoy Yugin, the man who was regularly commenting broadcasts of the ‘Moon landings’, often appeared. At the time he was carrying two bodies (Pentax MX and ME) and four lenses that he said were no worse than Nikon lenses, but all together lighter than a single Nikon body with two lenses. He also answered questions about the ‘Moon landings’: “If they hadn’t landed, the Soviets would have announced it!” I believed that sentence for a long time. Then came the Internet.
Of course I was interested in how Hasselblad made the cameras for the Moon, what film was used and what kind of protection the film had. And so I found the first information about the cameras on the Hasselblad website (silver Hasselblad Data Camera (HDC) fitted with a Zeiss Biogon 60mm ƒ/5.6 lens and 70mm film magazine which had never actually been tested in space before). You can imagine my surprise when I found out that there was no special protection against extreme temperatures or radiation. Then I’ve found the first part of the BBC documentary film from the year 2000, ‘What Happened on the Moon?’
It is enough to look at it once and with a grain of critical thought you simply have to question the fairy tale about the 'Moon landing'. The entire film, which is regularly and thoroughly removed from YouTube, has been uploaded to a blockchain platform where it will be safe and accessible for at least some time. You can watch it at the links below:
Био сам једно од оне одушевљене деце које су у јулу 1969. широм отворених очију гледали мутну слику ‘са Месеца’ верујући да је тамо крочила људска нога. И већи део живота одбацивао сам приче о превари. Док нисам видео документарни филм Шта се десило на Месецу?…
Фотографију сам заволео чим сам први пут дошао у контакт с њом. Док сам одрастао, редовно сам посећивао сајмове технике у Београду, пре свега пратећи развој фото-технике. На штанду Пентакса често се појављивао инжењер Миливој Југин који је преносио ‘слетање на Месец’. У то време он је носио са собом два тела (Пентаксе МX и МЕ) и четири објектива за које је говорио да нису ништа лошији од Никонових објектива, али су све заједно лакши од једног Никоновог тела са два објектива. На питања о ‘слетању на Месец’ одговарао је: „Да нису слетели, Совјети би то објавили!“ Дуго сам веровао због те реченице. Онда је дошао Интернет.
Наравно да ме је занимало како је Хаселблад направио камере за Месец, који је филм коришћен и какву је заштиту имао филм. И тако сам нашао прве податке о камерама на сајту Хаселблада (сребрни Хаселблад дата камера (ХДЦ) опремљен Цајс Биогон 60мм ƒ/5.6 објективом и 70мм филмским магазином који никад пре није био тестиран у свемиру). Можете мислити моје изненађење кад сам сазнао да никаквих посебних заштита од екстремних температура или зрачења није било. Онда сам нашао први део документарног филма из 2000. ‘Шта се десило на Месецу?’
Довољно је да га једном погледате и са труном критичке мисли једноставно морате довести у питање бајку о ‘слетању на Месец’. Читав филм, који се редовно и темељно уклања са Јутјуба, постављен је на блокчеин платформу на којој ће бар извесно време бити безбедан и доступан. Можете га погледати на доњим линковима:
What Happened on the Moon? at Bitchute.
Duration / Трајање: 3:41:18 (енглески)
What Happened on the Moon? at Bastyon.
Duration / Трајање: 3:39:48 (енглески)
[0:06:42] Part I: Lunar Photography
[0:18:00] Kodak Ektachrome X 64 ISO and 160 ISO
[0:20:00] Hasselblad
[1:12:45] Sound: Bob Sleigh and Lunar Module
[1:26:28] Apollo 13 inconsistency & ‘accident’
[1:38:00] Faking the record
[1:40:30] Mountain backdrops
[1:56:00] Rover
[2:06:42] Capricorn One (1978)
[2:10:20] Part II: Environmental dangers – Radiation
[2:19:40] Shielding
[2:26:20] Solar radiation and images
[2:28:45] Hasselblad – painted silver and nothing more!
[2:33:33] Part III: The Trouble with Rockets (Fritz Lang and Wernher von Braun)
[2:49:35] Sergey Korolev, Sputnik
[2:52:30] First Man in Space (Soviet Hoax)
[3:01:50] Dark Cloud
[3:09:45] Lunar Module
[3:14:30] Faking the record – Moon rocks – unbelievably similar to Earth stones
[3:17:50] Saturn V and Shuttle
[3:29:00] Avoiding embarrassment
[3:35:35] Conclusion: The Way Forward – 86% vs. 28%
Yes, this movie was compiled by David S. Percy in 2000. In the meantime, new interesting details appeared, which were nicely presented by ‘TabooConspiracy’:
Да, овај филм је саставио Дејвид С. Перси 2000. године. У међувремену појавили су се нови занимљиви детаљи које је лепо изложио ‘Табу Завере’:
Taboo Conspiracy at Odysee.Duration / Трајање: 39:59 (енглески)
Oh, and let me not forget Yugin’s famous argument at the end: “If they hadn’t landed, the Soviets would have announced it!” The Soviets may not have, but the Russians did in 2013.
О, да не заборавим на крају чувени Југинов аргумент: „Да нису слетели, Совјети би то објавили!“ Совјети можда нису, али јесу Руси 2013. године.
Every hoax has an expiration date, and this hoax has expired a long time ago…
Свака превара има рок трајања, а овој превари рок је давно истекао…
* * *
Related posts:
Space Race and Hunger Games [eng/срп] Свемирска трка и игре глади
July 12th, 2021
Bezos in Space! [eng/срп] Безос у свемиру!
June 19th, 2021
BREAKING: SpaceX – Dragon Crew Launch, Second Attempt
May 30th, 2020
MOVIES: Operation Avalanche
Jan. 29th, 2020
Elon Musk — A “Visionary”
Nov. 23rd, 2019
Musk’s Fireworks and Heaven Pollution
Nov. 21st, 2019
Rudolph Beats Elon Musk!
Dec. 26th, 2018
Waiting For Elon’s Journalism Ranking Site
Jul. 8th, 2018
Planet Apple
Apr. 30th, 2018
Don't Panic! It's Just Another Space Hoax!
Apr. 20th, 2018
Moth in Space and other NASA bloopers
Mar. 27th, 2018
Fake Moon Landing
Nov. 23rd, 2017
* * *
Movies:
Atropa (2021)
THE WAR: History of Fascism [eng/срп] РАТ: Историја фашизма
The Social Dilemma & The Creepy Line
Plandemic “InDoctorNation”
Stalker (1979)
MOVIES: Operation Avalanche
Q27 — Name Two Movies That Really Changed Your Life (Hopefully For The Better)
The Long Road to War [eng/срп] Дуго путовање у рат
Access Hive through Ecency
Приступите Хајву кроз Ecency
Access Hive through Ecency
Приступите Хајву кроз Ecency
Access Hive through On Board
Приступите Хајву кроз On Board
Access Hive through On Board
Приступите Хајву кроз On Board
Bastyon.com
Bastyon.com
Google detox starts here!
Google detox starts here!
Universal Basic Income
Universal Basic Income
Check out ABRA and easily invest in 28 cryptocurrencies or BIT10, an index of the top cryptos. Use this link to sign up and get $25 in free bitcoin after your first Bank/Amex deposit, or 1.5% cash back when you exchange cryptos
1GZQG69sEKiMXKgGw9TcGcUCBoC4sC1ZYp
I have been very dubious of moon landing hoax theories, despite I agree that some pics (at least) are faked. I think NASA are hiding things that are on the moon, evidence that people have been there before.
Because it is you that posted it, I will watch this with an open mind.
Thanks!
This is not a theory @valued-customer. These are evidence and testimonies.
Proof is not a scientific concept, my friend.
That sounds like you will rather hold tight to your believes despite the reality @valued-customer.
Insofar as I believe only what I am confident is factually correct, absent your representation that reality is different than what can be supported with empirical evidence, as I did when confronted with evidence that SARS2 was not a fatal plague, I will maintain my skepticism of all narratives.
I do not cling to beliefs that are contrary to verifiable evidence, as you have seen. Neither do I consider evidence to be proof. Science depends on falsifiability, not proof. Newton's cosmology was unfalsified for centuries, and many rational people accepted it had been proved - until Einstein's relativity disproved it.
That does not mean Einstein's theory is proved. Merely that it has not been falsified yet. This is what I mean when I say proof is not a scientific concept.
So, what are the evidence because of which you believe that NASA put the man on the Moon?
Oops. I replied to me rather than you on accident.
Sorry.
Sagan stated well the observation that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. There is voluminous evidence of the Apollo program. As you note, not all of the evidence supports every aspect of the official story. I am aware of none that falsifies the central thesis of the moon landing.
What I do believe is that evidence provides clues to events people did not personally participate in, and that's all we can form opinions on. I am confident that I am incapable of stating with certitude this or that thing I did not participate in personally did or did not happen in thus and such a way. However, despite that there is evidence that falsifies some claims made by NASA, there is no evidence that all claims made by NASA regarding the Apollo missions are false. While this does not prove we landed on the moon, neither does it disprove it, and the preponderance of evidence is that we did.
Sadly, almost all that evidence comes from NASA, which seems to me to be shown to be duplicitous, and their claims to be strongly deprecated as a result. Basically, if someone described human anatomy precisely but stated we had six toes and fingers on each appendage, I would only be able to discount that latter claim partially, and not dismiss the anatomical description entirely, and that for something of which I have very personal familiarity, unlike the Apollo missions.
Further, I have very little reason to care if we did or did not land on the moon. I am content to lay this issue to rest as unresolved as is, and find the evidence the CIA assassinated Kennedy of far more significance to me personally than whether NASA completely forged evidence of Apollo missions - which I am sure even you will grant is almost inconceivably impossible, given the almost 100% certainty that they did launch Saturn V's repeatedly, with people in them.
I hope this explains my reticence in declaring certitude regarding this matter.
You are basically saying that a massive false info is enough for you to believe that something impossible is actually possible.
And in this movie “What Happened on the Moon?” you have a fact that with the photo equipment and film presented, it was not possible to make a single quality photo on the Moon surface.
Even without a film you have a fact that NASA today is searching a way to go through the Van Allen Belt… And all the fantastic technology that made them doing it in 1969 is now destroyed?! Even blueprints for a ‘second ignition engine’, so Elon Musk must do everything from the scratch?
You have just found your limit, @valued-customer. Just as I did believing in that famous sentence “If they hadn’t landed, the Soviets would have announced it!”.
And then, I’ve start learning from my limitations. Will you be able too?
View or trade
BEER.Hey @lighteye, here is a little bit of
BEERfrom @pixresteemer for you. Enjoy it!Learn how to earn FREE BEER each day by staking your
BEER.It's a coincidence I came across both your post and this video by VideoFromSpace today:
This theory is not plausible for the simple fact that they did not have good enough video technology to fake it. Its defenders always miss this fact. Have you ever watched Star Trek?
This guy is a classic manipulator ‘debunking’ the hype of uneducated. Problem is that the BBC movie is not a hype, it explains the hoax in full scientific manner – which makes this guy a globalist clown. Watch his perverted logic: ‘They did not have video technology to put it on the Moon, so they did not fake the landing’. He even can’t see the massive evidence that they haven’t ever been there, so they fake it here – on the Earth, where they had all available video technology. He speaks rubbish. No logic, nor scientific support for any of his claims.
Please see the movie @eniolw. This is not a theory, it is an evidence – and the great number of evidence – of a hoax. By the experts, scientists and even people involved in the operation.
And also – if this clown was right, nobody would bother removing this movie from the YouTube in a regular fashion.