Good luck Mr. Gorsky
The first decade of the new century gave birth to what was figuratively called the "Asian Space Race", in memory of the glorious days of the 60s of the last century. At that time, progress in space exploration was so rapid that it seemed a little more, and there would be permanent bases on the moon, and a person would walk on Mars, marking out plots for apple orchards. The reality turned out to be completely different. Both space powers retreated and limited themselves to the development of near-Earth space. The retreat of the USSR from the moon was more like a stampede. In rearguard battles, heavy space technology was thrown. A fully equipped and ready-to-fly space tank of the 3rd modification - Lunokhod-3 was never sent to the moon.
Almost 40 years have passed since then. During this time, the USSR and later Russia did not send anything to the moon! Today, scientists say: “The moon has become interesting to us again.” I do not remember the period when the moon would not be interesting to Earth scientists. As it turned out, there are so many new and unexpected things on the moon that, it seems, 40 years ago it was a completely different planet. For example, who would have thought that there was a lot of water on the Moon, just a sea of icy water !? Are there amazing discoveries and unexpected revelations awaiting us on the moon, even larger than we might expect?
Following the general trend of "revitalizing interest in the lunar topic", I propose to read the translation of the article by Clyde Lewis, which was written and published on the 30th anniversary of the first moon landing. The author, Clyde Lewis, is an actor, creator and host of the Ground Zero radio show on paranormal and political topics.
Thirty years ago, people gathered around their televisions to witness one of the most remarkable feats of the millennium. While Walter Cronkite 1 held back tears, the nation found out that man had landed on the moon. They knew it because they saw it. They knew this because the government said it happened. They knew this because ... just because. That's all the evidence they required. Now is 1999, and where is the evidence?
History buffs will recall that Neil Armstrong, the first astronaut to set foot on the moon, made a mistake when he made his famous talk about "one small step." He had to say: "One small step for man, but a giant leap for all mankind." These words went down in history, but the words he said after that were cut out. You probably will never hear or see them in movie clips and practical jokes, but the story goes that he made a few comments after both of his legs touched the moon sand. NASA legend says that Armstrong said: "Good luck, Mr. Gorsky."
Many at NASA decided this was a random remark about Russia. That, perhaps, some astronaut named Gorsky was Armstrong's rival, and that it was a blow from below the belt to Russia’s unsuccessful attempt to land on the moon. However, after the audit, it turned out that Gorsky was neither in the Russian nor in the American space programs. Who is this Gorsky? Whenever people asked Armstrong about Gorsky, Neil blushed and smiled, but never spoke about it.
Recently, at a press conference in Florida, a reporter spoke to Armstrong about the mysterious Gorsky. He asked a question that many journalists tried to ask and never received an answer: “Who the hell is this Gorsky guy you talked about on the moon?” For 26 years, he avoided this question because he did not want to embarrass Mr. Gorsky . But this time it was a journalist's happy day, and Armstrong finally answered. Mr. Gorsky died, and Neal felt that answering a question would not hurt anyone.
Armstrong told the story that when he was a child, he played baseball with a friend. Armstrong filed, and his friend hit the rally on the ball, which landed in front of the bedroom window of the neighboring house. Mr. and Mrs. Gorsky lived in the neighborhood. Neil ran after the ball, and when he bent down to pick it up, he accidentally heard Mrs. Gorsky screaming at Mr. Gorsky. She screamed with all her urine: “Oral sex! Do you want oral sex? You will receive it when a neighbor's child walks on the moon! ”
Isn't this a wonderful story? This was not - one of the urban legends that everyone loves to tell.
Professor Jan Harold Brunvand once said: "Truth should never interfere with a good story." No matter how many times this story is told, it always sounds believable, because it is such a wonderful story. She got into the newspapers and, who knows, one day can accept the status of a genuine event, even if it is a white lie.
There is also an old saying: “The greater the lie, the easier it is to convince others that this is the truth.”
July 20, 1969 man landed on the moon. A remarkable achievement, given that it was a direct hit on the first try. And the entire space program went practically without a hitch, and not a single person was killed on the moon. We had problems and setbacks before the moon starts, but, miraculously, not a single death during the Big Show. It was a miracle that we flew through radiation belts. Oh yes, when the rocket launched, we forgot about James Van Allen. Perhaps you heard about him, he was the guy who discovered the dangerous radiation belts that surround the Earth to heights of 40-60 thousand km.
Van Allen’s belt spews enough lethal radiation to kill a man who ventured into it unprotected. Scientific experiments conducted by Van Allen and the military have proven that the belt is so deadly that no man could survive in it. The capsule should be lined with 4 feet of lead to protect astronauts. It was protected by aluminum.
We forgot about it. Because it was shown on TV. We were kids. We dreamed and believed in dreams.
Television broadcast blurry images from the moon, and we were amazed. We were so surprised that we forgot to look at the stars in the sky above the lunar landscape. But do not worry, they were not there. It seemed strange to a place where there is no atmosphere, and there is nothing blocking the light of stars. And one could see a myriad of bright lights. None have been seen.
And that also means that daylight will be dazzling. Not soft. How can there be diffused light on the moon? Diffuse lighting is used in television studios and film pavilions. Maybe this explains the pictures adorning our history books. Why they were so exciting. Wait a minute! The television images were blurry, the photos soft and well-arranged so that they looked fascinating in the stereo glasses of Viewmaster. The moon landings were then so amazing that they also thought about the light manifesting itself in the same way without the atmosphere, as it happens in the atmosphere. And that these breathtaking photographs can be taken at 120 degrees Celsius, when most films melt at 65 degrees. John Carter from Mars had a beam gun,
We saw footprints in the moonlit sand. Traces left in a dry moonlit pile. It reminded me of when I was on the beaches of the Great Salt Lake, and how the sand could not even keep my tracks unchanged. Later I realized that there must be moisture in the soil to maintain a trace. That's why when the water receded, I saw footprints in the sand. At school, I found out that there is no water on the moon. In addition, I bet that in that heat it would be hard to keep things wet, even if there was a little moisture on the moon.
This made you proud that you were American when the small steps of a person left an even deeper imprint than the 1400-kilogram lunar lander. It was great to see that the rocket propulsion did not dig a crater in what Armstrong described as a surface similar to loose powder. It was so nice to see a clean landing module, without dust on it, and you were proud of tidy astronauts. I mean, in zero gravity, perhaps some of this fine dust will be raised in the vicinity of the lunar module support, not to mention the possibility of statics or magnetization. When we were children, we believed everything.
I am no longer a child.
The very idea of doubting the moon landings is heresy. I can understand if you think I'm crazy. I'm not alone. The number of those who begin to doubt is growing every day. You see, people do not understand that there are no independent witnesses to the events themselves taking place on the moon.
We take for granted that the evidence is in fact genuine, honestly shown and responsibly reported. In fact, humanity has no evidence at all that we have ever set foot on the moon, other than the photographs that NASA has chosen for publication.
As you can tell, there are many things that sound so strange and stupid that it’s hard to believe how we could get onto all this. The power of television has kept a fiery dream, and the threat of war and the challenge posed by a young and energetic leader, killed in his prime, have kept us from cynicism for some time. This united us for a moment before we realized that yes, there was a disgusting war, and perhaps our former leader fell victim to a government coup.
We needed heroes. It took $ 30 billion to create them. The heroes fighting in Vietnam were not enough. We needed glamorous boys jumping up and down in the movie pavilion. Anything to show our superiority.
People forgot who was ahead of us in the space race. Malicious Russians. Yes, then they were malicious. However, without a doubt, they knew how to organize a space program. At the initial stage of the space race, the USSR had an advantage over the United States because of the Vostok and Voskhod spacecraft, which technologically surpassed the American spacecraft of that time. The Russians were the first to send an animal and a man into space. And then, one fine day, they wake up and hear that we landed on the moon. And they throw a towel away. Why did they give up? They could surpass us by landing on the moon a ship capable of building a space station. 30 years have passed since we landed on the moon. 30 years ago, we penetrated 400 thousand km into deep space. In that space program, launches to the moon went almost flawlessly. Even during a tragedy such as Apollo 13, the astronauts returned and everything happily ended. After flying to the moon, 30 years have passed.
We are launching the shuttles. Shuttles that rise into space for only 400 km. We are building orbiting space stations, and we lost seven astronauts in the Challenger crash. Is this progress? Why don't we fly shuttles to the moon? Why don't we build space stations and rest houses on the moon? Why are we sending robots to the moon to study ice formations? And finally, why didn’t we send a couple of astronauts to the moon because of nostalgia to refresh the experience?
Everything is very simple. We have never been there.
You can argue that the secret should be known to approximately 35 thousand NASA employees and about 200 thousand people contracting organizations that worked on the Apollo project. Then, are you ready to claim that in your office, regardless of where you work, each department knows what they are doing in other departments?
And here the art of fragmentation is used to its fullest. This happened with the Manhattan Project and a number of other projects. Secrets can be kept. Money and the threat of death are the main levers of secrecy. Patriotism is also a factor. The very fact of the assumption that we did not fly to the moon in some circles portrays me as an extremely strange eccentric. Imagine now what happens if someone opens their mouths.
People also claim that there was no technology available to falsify such a mission. An imitation of one sixth of Earth's gravity would be simple with the help of movie magic. Hydraulics, wire and shooting some scenes underwater in an aquarium. No one knows for sure. According to the claims, technologies are being developed 20 years before they enter the market, which will give more confidence to the possibility that in 1969 both battlefield simulation programs and planetary landscaping programs could be used with the help of something simple such as a blue rier -screen.
We saw a crude version in Stanley Kubrick's 2001 Space Odyssey. It was even suggested that Kubrick was chosen as the director (a la "The tail wags the dog") landing on the moon. And he will never receive a well-deserved recognition for his direction. C. Powers wrote:
It is said that at the beginning of 1968, NASA employees secretly talked to Kubrick, who made him a lucrative offer to “direct” the first three moon landings.
At first, Kubrick refused, because at that time the Space Odyssey 2001 was on the assembly table, but NASA threatened to make public the greater involvement of Stanley's younger brother Raul in the activities of the American Communist Party. This would be an unbearable shame for Mr. Kubrick, especially after the release of "Doctor Strangelove." Kubrick finally relented, and for sixteen months he and the special effects team led by Douglas Trumbull worked in a purpose-built movie pavilion in Huntsville, Alabama, “creating” the first and second moon landings. These efforts led to hundreds of hours of 35 mm film and video of the “material” of flights to the Moon of Apollo 11 and -12.
The dummy mission of Apollo 11 was expertly set in July 1969. The Saturn 5 rocket, with astronauts Armstrong, Aldrin, and Collins, was launched into low Earth orbit while remaining there, while NASA cautiously released Kubrick studio shots for the press. After an impressive "moon landing" and "return to Earth" astronauts returned to the Earth’s atmosphere and made perfect splashdown in the Pacific Ocean, exactly on schedule. A few months later, the Apollo 12 mission was successfully falsified in a similar manner.
However, Mr. Kubrick refused to direct the Apollo 13 mission, since NASA rejected his scenario in which the flight of Apollo 13 fails. Kubrick insisted that the dramatic unsuccessful mission from which astronauts had safely returned to Earth would ultimately prove to be NASA's finest hour.
NASA was of the opinion that an unsuccessful mission would unreasonably jeopardize the image of the agency, so Kubrick left the project. Ironically, NASA later decided to use the script of the failed mission, for directing which the little-known but highly respected British director Randall Cunningham was recruited.
Kubrick's relentless perfectionism is evident throughout the filming of Apollo, starting with the chilling “exception 1201” during the last seconds of the “Eagle” descent to the lunar surface, and up to the moon dust covering the astronaut's spacesuit.
All this seems a little hypothetical ... or not? Powers also claims:
Some claim that at times rare NASA photographs flash where you see astronauts posing in front of a blue screen, and didn’t James Bond jump in front of the astronauts in the movie pavilion in the movie “Diamonds Forever”? Before shouting out the obvious - Capricorn 1 movie with O. Jay Simpson, did anyone notice the hero Dan Aykroyd in the movie Sneakers? He plays an eccentric mechanic who leads fact after fact, including the so-called fact about a certain device that they use: “This LTX71 low-noise microphone was used in the same system that NASA used when they faked the Apollo moon landings.” Are not allusions to a lunar conspiracy scattered everywhere in Hollywood?
You see, people come up with stories hinting that perhaps not everything is in order in the Sea of Tranquility.
If you feel confused, you are not alone. The bottom line is that there are two obvious scenarios. First: we never flew to the moon, and we have been deceived for 30 years. Or the photographs and the film were for propaganda purposes, and the shots were shot in the studio. Three astronauts participated in the landing on the moon, and I find it strange that we were able to shoot the landing itself without a large film crew and technical director, so that everything would look great on the TV screen.
How hard is it to understand the feasibility of a three-day orbital flight and splashdown with fake astronauts playing in a makeshift sandbox in the movie pavilion? Simple, right? This is uncomfortable, but one can easily imagine.
Is it difficult to imagine monetary rewards and veiled threats, so that those who know what really happened during the landing on the moon keep their mouths shut? Is it any wonder that Neil Armstrong keeps silent about the first landing on the moon? And that he rarely communicates with the press? It is equally embarrassing that while we extol John Glenn for his nostalgic shuttle flight in memory of his orbital flight to Friendship 7, we recalled the landing on the moon when we were recalled.
All this event took place 30 years ago, and to this day the landing on the moon seems deliberate and carefully guarded. The moon landing itself seems so indifferent and devoid of emotion. The dialogue was like a carefully written script read without emotion. What emotions would you experience if you knew you were stepping on extraterrestrial ground? There seemed to be no tears or fear. Just an ordinary giant leap for all mankind.
The moon landings were my kindergarten memories. Was it just a paper moon hanging on a cardboard stage? If there was a good time to fake such an enterprise, then 1969 was the time. We lived in the misery of the Cold War. In order to drown out fears about the superiority of Russians in space, we could easily develop a plan to use lunar propaganda to engage the Soviets in wasting valuable resources in the “space race”, while we spent relatively little money on fabricating our achievements in this competition. Do you remember? They were far ahead of us and surrendered as soon as the Eagle landed.
We sold our soul to the Lunar Conspiracy - those involved can hardly retreat. Just think about the scandal that will result in the public discovering the fact of abuse of taxpayer money! We are doomed to continue to lie. Money bought silence. Fear keeps astronauts in check. You may ask yourself: “Fear of what?” According to Bill Kaysing, who previously participated in the program on “Ground Zero”, fear for his life.
Casing claims that some astronauts were ready to sound the alarm about the poor state of the space program. He claimed that Tom Baron complained to Congress about Apollo’s flight insecurity after he carefully studied the aerospace program. He was killed 4 days after testifying. And, of course, Gus Grissom died on the launch pad in 1967, when a fire swept through his capsule after he openly expressed his disagreement over Apollo’s security concerns. This incident was used to demonstrate that anyone who wants to open their mouths on the Moon conspiracy will meet the same end.
If landing on the moon was a hoax, then this is only part of the lie. It has already been said that it was our high point, the crown of achievement for NASA. But we never returned.
Many uneducated people believe that the space shuttle is a wonderful invention. Remarkable only because we admire his mediocrity.
We were on the moon! At least that's what NASA tells you. We delivered a large payload to the moon, at a distance of 400 thousand km, and not a single astronaut was killed. However, our Space Shuttles fly only 400 km above the Earth. Seven astronauts died trying to go through only a small part of what Apollo astronauts achieved without much effort.
Thirty years after landing on the moon, I can’t even get Windows 98 to work without failures, and we can easily send a person to the moon and bring him back. I can’t even talk to Juneau in Alaska from Portland to Oregon without a 2-second delay, but in 1969, astronauts could respond without problems very quickly from a distance of 400 thousand km. Not to mention the clarity of the voices of astronauts in 1969. Thirty years later, you end up in a blind spot and your cell phone dies at rush hour.
Can you still believe in moon landings when they say that the computers used in the missions were no more complicated than the computer in the microwave toaster? I know that many people laugh at the fact that someone says that we did not land on the moon. People will always say: “Look how far we have come.”
After landing on the moon, the sea was knee-deep. At least we thought so. Now we are limited to orbiting space stations and shuttles, which regularly take off and orbit for 400 km.
We decided to go to the moon, we decided to go to the moon 30 years ago. We decided that because the dream was alive. The dream was about a civilization that would resolve the odds on the moon. But the latent thought was about superiority. If we took possession of the moon, we could impose our will on governments and people. It is still a dream.
When the moon landed in 1969, a 5-year-old child watched it and dreamed that one day he would live on the moon.
He dreamed that he would pack his things and buy a ticket for this trip, which would lift him above the Earth.
How did I know that even the tickets of the first astronauts were fake?
I would like to believe that we landed on the moon. So I'm still thinking about it, smiling prudently, and I hope no one realized that I had lost faith.
This is the same cautious smile for Christmas when a child opens a gift from Santa Claus. In the end, truth should never interfere with a good story.
A moon landing will always be a good story, eh, Mr. Gorsky?
1 Walter Leland Cronkite Jr. (1916 - 2009) - the legendary American television journalist and television host CBS. He informed the Americans about the Apollo flights.
Source: http://www.groundzeromedia.org/archives/dis/gorsky/gorsky.html
Almost 40 years have passed since then. During this time, the USSR and later Russia did not send anything to the moon! Today, scientists say: “The moon has become interesting to us again.” I do not remember the period when the moon would not be interesting to Earth scientists. As it turned out, there are so many new and unexpected things on the moon that, it seems, 40 years ago it was a completely different planet. For example, who would have thought that there was a lot of water on the Moon, just a sea of icy water !? Are there amazing discoveries and unexpected revelations awaiting us on the moon, even larger than we might expect?
Following the general trend of "revitalizing interest in the lunar topic", I propose to read the translation of the article by Clyde Lewis, which was written and published on the 30th anniversary of the first moon landing. The author, Clyde Lewis, is an actor, creator and host of the Ground Zero radio show on paranormal and political topics.
Good luck Mr. Gorsky
and other lies about the moon
Clyde Lewis
Thirty years ago, people gathered around their televisions to witness one of the most remarkable feats of the millennium. While Walter Cronkite 1 held back tears, the nation found out that man had landed on the moon. They knew it because they saw it. They knew this because the government said it happened. They knew this because ... just because. That's all the evidence they required. Now is 1999, and where is the evidence?
History buffs will recall that Neil Armstrong, the first astronaut to set foot on the moon, made a mistake when he made his famous talk about "one small step." He had to say: "One small step for man, but a giant leap for all mankind." These words went down in history, but the words he said after that were cut out. You probably will never hear or see them in movie clips and practical jokes, but the story goes that he made a few comments after both of his legs touched the moon sand. NASA legend says that Armstrong said: "Good luck, Mr. Gorsky."
Many at NASA decided this was a random remark about Russia. That, perhaps, some astronaut named Gorsky was Armstrong's rival, and that it was a blow from below the belt to Russia’s unsuccessful attempt to land on the moon. However, after the audit, it turned out that Gorsky was neither in the Russian nor in the American space programs. Who is this Gorsky? Whenever people asked Armstrong about Gorsky, Neil blushed and smiled, but never spoke about it.
Recently, at a press conference in Florida, a reporter spoke to Armstrong about the mysterious Gorsky. He asked a question that many journalists tried to ask and never received an answer: “Who the hell is this Gorsky guy you talked about on the moon?” For 26 years, he avoided this question because he did not want to embarrass Mr. Gorsky . But this time it was a journalist's happy day, and Armstrong finally answered. Mr. Gorsky died, and Neal felt that answering a question would not hurt anyone.
Armstrong told the story that when he was a child, he played baseball with a friend. Armstrong filed, and his friend hit the rally on the ball, which landed in front of the bedroom window of the neighboring house. Mr. and Mrs. Gorsky lived in the neighborhood. Neil ran after the ball, and when he bent down to pick it up, he accidentally heard Mrs. Gorsky screaming at Mr. Gorsky. She screamed with all her urine: “Oral sex! Do you want oral sex? You will receive it when a neighbor's child walks on the moon! ”
Isn't this a wonderful story? This was not - one of the urban legends that everyone loves to tell.
Professor Jan Harold Brunvand once said: "Truth should never interfere with a good story." No matter how many times this story is told, it always sounds believable, because it is such a wonderful story. She got into the newspapers and, who knows, one day can accept the status of a genuine event, even if it is a white lie.
There is also an old saying: “The greater the lie, the easier it is to convince others that this is the truth.”
July 20, 1969 man landed on the moon. A remarkable achievement, given that it was a direct hit on the first try. And the entire space program went practically without a hitch, and not a single person was killed on the moon. We had problems and setbacks before the moon starts, but, miraculously, not a single death during the Big Show. It was a miracle that we flew through radiation belts. Oh yes, when the rocket launched, we forgot about James Van Allen. Perhaps you heard about him, he was the guy who discovered the dangerous radiation belts that surround the Earth to heights of 40-60 thousand km.
Van Allen’s belt spews enough lethal radiation to kill a man who ventured into it unprotected. Scientific experiments conducted by Van Allen and the military have proven that the belt is so deadly that no man could survive in it. The capsule should be lined with 4 feet of lead to protect astronauts. It was protected by aluminum.
We forgot about it. Because it was shown on TV. We were kids. We dreamed and believed in dreams.
Television broadcast blurry images from the moon, and we were amazed. We were so surprised that we forgot to look at the stars in the sky above the lunar landscape. But do not worry, they were not there. It seemed strange to a place where there is no atmosphere, and there is nothing blocking the light of stars. And one could see a myriad of bright lights. None have been seen.
And that also means that daylight will be dazzling. Not soft. How can there be diffused light on the moon? Diffuse lighting is used in television studios and film pavilions. Maybe this explains the pictures adorning our history books. Why they were so exciting. Wait a minute! The television images were blurry, the photos soft and well-arranged so that they looked fascinating in the stereo glasses of Viewmaster. The moon landings were then so amazing that they also thought about the light manifesting itself in the same way without the atmosphere, as it happens in the atmosphere. And that these breathtaking photographs can be taken at 120 degrees Celsius, when most films melt at 65 degrees. John Carter from Mars had a beam gun,
We saw footprints in the moonlit sand. Traces left in a dry moonlit pile. It reminded me of when I was on the beaches of the Great Salt Lake, and how the sand could not even keep my tracks unchanged. Later I realized that there must be moisture in the soil to maintain a trace. That's why when the water receded, I saw footprints in the sand. At school, I found out that there is no water on the moon. In addition, I bet that in that heat it would be hard to keep things wet, even if there was a little moisture on the moon.
This made you proud that you were American when the small steps of a person left an even deeper imprint than the 1400-kilogram lunar lander. It was great to see that the rocket propulsion did not dig a crater in what Armstrong described as a surface similar to loose powder. It was so nice to see a clean landing module, without dust on it, and you were proud of tidy astronauts. I mean, in zero gravity, perhaps some of this fine dust will be raised in the vicinity of the lunar module support, not to mention the possibility of statics or magnetization. When we were children, we believed everything.
I am no longer a child.
The very idea of doubting the moon landings is heresy. I can understand if you think I'm crazy. I'm not alone. The number of those who begin to doubt is growing every day. You see, people do not understand that there are no independent witnesses to the events themselves taking place on the moon.
We take for granted that the evidence is in fact genuine, honestly shown and responsibly reported. In fact, humanity has no evidence at all that we have ever set foot on the moon, other than the photographs that NASA has chosen for publication.
As you can tell, there are many things that sound so strange and stupid that it’s hard to believe how we could get onto all this. The power of television has kept a fiery dream, and the threat of war and the challenge posed by a young and energetic leader, killed in his prime, have kept us from cynicism for some time. This united us for a moment before we realized that yes, there was a disgusting war, and perhaps our former leader fell victim to a government coup.
We needed heroes. It took $ 30 billion to create them. The heroes fighting in Vietnam were not enough. We needed glamorous boys jumping up and down in the movie pavilion. Anything to show our superiority.
People forgot who was ahead of us in the space race. Malicious Russians. Yes, then they were malicious. However, without a doubt, they knew how to organize a space program. At the initial stage of the space race, the USSR had an advantage over the United States because of the Vostok and Voskhod spacecraft, which technologically surpassed the American spacecraft of that time. The Russians were the first to send an animal and a man into space. And then, one fine day, they wake up and hear that we landed on the moon. And they throw a towel away. Why did they give up? They could surpass us by landing on the moon a ship capable of building a space station. 30 years have passed since we landed on the moon. 30 years ago, we penetrated 400 thousand km into deep space. In that space program, launches to the moon went almost flawlessly. Even during a tragedy such as Apollo 13, the astronauts returned and everything happily ended. After flying to the moon, 30 years have passed.
We are launching the shuttles. Shuttles that rise into space for only 400 km. We are building orbiting space stations, and we lost seven astronauts in the Challenger crash. Is this progress? Why don't we fly shuttles to the moon? Why don't we build space stations and rest houses on the moon? Why are we sending robots to the moon to study ice formations? And finally, why didn’t we send a couple of astronauts to the moon because of nostalgia to refresh the experience?
Everything is very simple. We have never been there.
You can argue that the secret should be known to approximately 35 thousand NASA employees and about 200 thousand people contracting organizations that worked on the Apollo project. Then, are you ready to claim that in your office, regardless of where you work, each department knows what they are doing in other departments?
And here the art of fragmentation is used to its fullest. This happened with the Manhattan Project and a number of other projects. Secrets can be kept. Money and the threat of death are the main levers of secrecy. Patriotism is also a factor. The very fact of the assumption that we did not fly to the moon in some circles portrays me as an extremely strange eccentric. Imagine now what happens if someone opens their mouths.
People also claim that there was no technology available to falsify such a mission. An imitation of one sixth of Earth's gravity would be simple with the help of movie magic. Hydraulics, wire and shooting some scenes underwater in an aquarium. No one knows for sure. According to the claims, technologies are being developed 20 years before they enter the market, which will give more confidence to the possibility that in 1969 both battlefield simulation programs and planetary landscaping programs could be used with the help of something simple such as a blue rier -screen.
We saw a crude version in Stanley Kubrick's 2001 Space Odyssey. It was even suggested that Kubrick was chosen as the director (a la "The tail wags the dog") landing on the moon. And he will never receive a well-deserved recognition for his direction. C. Powers wrote:
It is said that at the beginning of 1968, NASA employees secretly talked to Kubrick, who made him a lucrative offer to “direct” the first three moon landings.
At first, Kubrick refused, because at that time the Space Odyssey 2001 was on the assembly table, but NASA threatened to make public the greater involvement of Stanley's younger brother Raul in the activities of the American Communist Party. This would be an unbearable shame for Mr. Kubrick, especially after the release of "Doctor Strangelove." Kubrick finally relented, and for sixteen months he and the special effects team led by Douglas Trumbull worked in a purpose-built movie pavilion in Huntsville, Alabama, “creating” the first and second moon landings. These efforts led to hundreds of hours of 35 mm film and video of the “material” of flights to the Moon of Apollo 11 and -12.
The dummy mission of Apollo 11 was expertly set in July 1969. The Saturn 5 rocket, with astronauts Armstrong, Aldrin, and Collins, was launched into low Earth orbit while remaining there, while NASA cautiously released Kubrick studio shots for the press. After an impressive "moon landing" and "return to Earth" astronauts returned to the Earth’s atmosphere and made perfect splashdown in the Pacific Ocean, exactly on schedule. A few months later, the Apollo 12 mission was successfully falsified in a similar manner.
However, Mr. Kubrick refused to direct the Apollo 13 mission, since NASA rejected his scenario in which the flight of Apollo 13 fails. Kubrick insisted that the dramatic unsuccessful mission from which astronauts had safely returned to Earth would ultimately prove to be NASA's finest hour.
NASA was of the opinion that an unsuccessful mission would unreasonably jeopardize the image of the agency, so Kubrick left the project. Ironically, NASA later decided to use the script of the failed mission, for directing which the little-known but highly respected British director Randall Cunningham was recruited.
Kubrick's relentless perfectionism is evident throughout the filming of Apollo, starting with the chilling “exception 1201” during the last seconds of the “Eagle” descent to the lunar surface, and up to the moon dust covering the astronaut's spacesuit.
All this seems a little hypothetical ... or not? Powers also claims:
- The lunar film set was built on the basis of Mercury, which was given the code name Copernicus.
- The film set was located in an underground cave.
- There were supplies for lighting, rails for a movie camera and equipment for special effects.
- All scenes of exits to the lunar surface were filmed on the set.
- "Missions" were controlled by a complex of computers IBM 370.
- There were radio channels with the main tracking stations in Australia, Spain, California and satellite transmission of a copy of the voice channel.
Some claim that at times rare NASA photographs flash where you see astronauts posing in front of a blue screen, and didn’t James Bond jump in front of the astronauts in the movie pavilion in the movie “Diamonds Forever”? Before shouting out the obvious - Capricorn 1 movie with O. Jay Simpson, did anyone notice the hero Dan Aykroyd in the movie Sneakers? He plays an eccentric mechanic who leads fact after fact, including the so-called fact about a certain device that they use: “This LTX71 low-noise microphone was used in the same system that NASA used when they faked the Apollo moon landings.” Are not allusions to a lunar conspiracy scattered everywhere in Hollywood?
You see, people come up with stories hinting that perhaps not everything is in order in the Sea of Tranquility.
If you feel confused, you are not alone. The bottom line is that there are two obvious scenarios. First: we never flew to the moon, and we have been deceived for 30 years. Or the photographs and the film were for propaganda purposes, and the shots were shot in the studio. Three astronauts participated in the landing on the moon, and I find it strange that we were able to shoot the landing itself without a large film crew and technical director, so that everything would look great on the TV screen.
How hard is it to understand the feasibility of a three-day orbital flight and splashdown with fake astronauts playing in a makeshift sandbox in the movie pavilion? Simple, right? This is uncomfortable, but one can easily imagine.
Is it difficult to imagine monetary rewards and veiled threats, so that those who know what really happened during the landing on the moon keep their mouths shut? Is it any wonder that Neil Armstrong keeps silent about the first landing on the moon? And that he rarely communicates with the press? It is equally embarrassing that while we extol John Glenn for his nostalgic shuttle flight in memory of his orbital flight to Friendship 7, we recalled the landing on the moon when we were recalled.
All this event took place 30 years ago, and to this day the landing on the moon seems deliberate and carefully guarded. The moon landing itself seems so indifferent and devoid of emotion. The dialogue was like a carefully written script read without emotion. What emotions would you experience if you knew you were stepping on extraterrestrial ground? There seemed to be no tears or fear. Just an ordinary giant leap for all mankind.
The moon landings were my kindergarten memories. Was it just a paper moon hanging on a cardboard stage? If there was a good time to fake such an enterprise, then 1969 was the time. We lived in the misery of the Cold War. In order to drown out fears about the superiority of Russians in space, we could easily develop a plan to use lunar propaganda to engage the Soviets in wasting valuable resources in the “space race”, while we spent relatively little money on fabricating our achievements in this competition. Do you remember? They were far ahead of us and surrendered as soon as the Eagle landed.
We sold our soul to the Lunar Conspiracy - those involved can hardly retreat. Just think about the scandal that will result in the public discovering the fact of abuse of taxpayer money! We are doomed to continue to lie. Money bought silence. Fear keeps astronauts in check. You may ask yourself: “Fear of what?” According to Bill Kaysing, who previously participated in the program on “Ground Zero”, fear for his life.
Casing claims that some astronauts were ready to sound the alarm about the poor state of the space program. He claimed that Tom Baron complained to Congress about Apollo’s flight insecurity after he carefully studied the aerospace program. He was killed 4 days after testifying. And, of course, Gus Grissom died on the launch pad in 1967, when a fire swept through his capsule after he openly expressed his disagreement over Apollo’s security concerns. This incident was used to demonstrate that anyone who wants to open their mouths on the Moon conspiracy will meet the same end.
If landing on the moon was a hoax, then this is only part of the lie. It has already been said that it was our high point, the crown of achievement for NASA. But we never returned.
Many uneducated people believe that the space shuttle is a wonderful invention. Remarkable only because we admire his mediocrity.
We were on the moon! At least that's what NASA tells you. We delivered a large payload to the moon, at a distance of 400 thousand km, and not a single astronaut was killed. However, our Space Shuttles fly only 400 km above the Earth. Seven astronauts died trying to go through only a small part of what Apollo astronauts achieved without much effort.
Thirty years after landing on the moon, I can’t even get Windows 98 to work without failures, and we can easily send a person to the moon and bring him back. I can’t even talk to Juneau in Alaska from Portland to Oregon without a 2-second delay, but in 1969, astronauts could respond without problems very quickly from a distance of 400 thousand km. Not to mention the clarity of the voices of astronauts in 1969. Thirty years later, you end up in a blind spot and your cell phone dies at rush hour.
Can you still believe in moon landings when they say that the computers used in the missions were no more complicated than the computer in the microwave toaster? I know that many people laugh at the fact that someone says that we did not land on the moon. People will always say: “Look how far we have come.”
After landing on the moon, the sea was knee-deep. At least we thought so. Now we are limited to orbiting space stations and shuttles, which regularly take off and orbit for 400 km.
We decided to go to the moon, we decided to go to the moon 30 years ago. We decided that because the dream was alive. The dream was about a civilization that would resolve the odds on the moon. But the latent thought was about superiority. If we took possession of the moon, we could impose our will on governments and people. It is still a dream.
When the moon landed in 1969, a 5-year-old child watched it and dreamed that one day he would live on the moon.
He dreamed that he would pack his things and buy a ticket for this trip, which would lift him above the Earth.
How did I know that even the tickets of the first astronauts were fake?
I would like to believe that we landed on the moon. So I'm still thinking about it, smiling prudently, and I hope no one realized that I had lost faith.
This is the same cautious smile for Christmas when a child opens a gift from Santa Claus. In the end, truth should never interfere with a good story.
A moon landing will always be a good story, eh, Mr. Gorsky?
1 Walter Leland Cronkite Jr. (1916 - 2009) - the legendary American television journalist and television host CBS. He informed the Americans about the Apollo flights.
Source: http://www.groundzeromedia.org/archives/dis/gorsky/gorsky.html