Tag Archives: fake moon landings

I Saw This Book at the Library Yesterday…

Howdy. Once again, long-time no-write, but, things have been busier than ever. Saw this last night, “How to Fake a Moon Landing”, prominently displayed on the top of the shelf at my local library, in the children’s section, right next to all the books on the solar system. Had to throw this up on the ol’ blog. I mean, what does this say about the overall state of affairs, when children’s authors can get a book like this published? It means yes, you and I live in a world where more and more people are indeed questioning the veracity of the Apollo Moon missions. This book aims to catch kids young, and (using comic strip explanations) debunk those “crazy conspiracy theories about the faked moon landings” before they get a little older and find themselves watching entertaining videos on youtube of the astro-nots bouncing up and down on their cables, set to polka music.

This really does just crack me up. Damage-control mode, is what it is… “Watch out for those kooky ‘science-deniers’ kids… They’re crazy and they’ll brainwash you into becoming a backwards, science-denying hater of the government and all scientific progress!!”

Check out these pages from the book:


Zero G Fakery: More Plausible Than You Thought….

This is a really great video, speculative to be sure, but speculative within the bounds of lots of corroborating perpendicular evidence. I really DO believe the I.S.S. is being faked, one way or another, and honestly when we consider what can be constructed in terms of things like CERN and so many other places, building a mock space station on Earth and employing fake zero gravity would be comparatively small potatoes. (I do think they use wires in some of the older ISS footage, however…)

Next You’ll Be Saying There’s No Such Thing As Gravity…

Oh, it never ends, does it… But indeed, it is hard at this point to deny the massive amount of material I have now come across which casts serious doubt on this theory which is so foundational to so much of our assumed modern scientific knowledge and technology. When I first heard Anthony Patch mentioning the electric model of the universe, vs. the gravitational model, when speaking about CERN, I was intrigued, but at the time was too busy processing so much of the other information that looking into the “electric universe” thing more or less got put on the back burner. But now that I’ve been neck-deep in looking into the matter of a globe vs. a flat earth, I’ve been inundated with eye-brow raising questions about the entire Newtonian/Einstein(ian?) paradigm itself.

Basically, what you begin to realize is that when it comes to guys like Einstein, sure he was a brilliant mathematician, but, that’s just the thing, he was a brilliant, mathematician

Right along with a ball earth and Evolution from a “big bang”, gravity is something we are taught is unquestionable from the time we first start learning ABC’s and 123’s. We learn about Newton getting hit on the head with an apple, and then “discovering” gravity, and as elementary-age children we think to ourselves, “Wow, isn’t that kind of a ridiculously obvious thing to discover? Even us little kids know about that!” And funnily enough, the vast majority of us never give much thought to it after that as we move on into adulthood. Gravity is as obvious to all of us needing air to breathe, and if you’re going to question that, you might as well be questioning the reality of reality itself.

But of course, gravity is about so much more than what causes apples to hit the ground, or raindrops to fall. The entire Copernican, heliocentric model of the universe hinges upon it, needing an explanation for how a spheroidal planet could hold itself together, and how people and objects on all sides of it’s surface don’t just fall off or float away into space. You see, before pushing the concept of a vaccumous, infinite universe full of exploding stars and round planetary objects and orbital paths, “gravity” was simply the concept of “what goes up must come down”. “Up” and “down” were both true, absolute, universal directions, and for whatever reason, there is some force at work which is constantly pulling everything toward the latter. But Newton and Einstein weren’t just trying to explain that, they were trying to explain a universe in which nothing was fixed, (as in the arcane geo-centric model…), but rather where the earth, sun, moon and all the heavenly bodies were constantly spinning, moving, orbiting each other, yet all holding their relative trajectories and galactic relationships with one another in a staggeringly precise balance.

So, this is the assumed cosmological scenario to which a guy like Einstein is then essentially handed a piece of chalk and challenged to “make it make sense”. Explain how all this actually works, not by using the traditional scientific method of creating hypotheses, testing hypotheses, etc., (which we also learned about in school) but instead by basically building a “model” of various aspects of the universe using mathematics, and then you tinker with that model by playing around with different equations (equations that 99.999% of the world’s population couldn’t do themselves, no less). And if/when the really smart theoretical physicist is able to tinker with the model to where he manages to get the math to work? Then Eureka! Science has triumphed and now we understand how the universe works!


But of course, we don’t… We still don’t even know what gravity is, or how it actually works, apparently, but hey, we do have these really impressive looking equations on a black board for you to look at. Here, we printed them in a million text books for you. That should settle it. What? You’re still doubting? My, you’re an idiot… Well, how can you question our understanding of gravity when we had to use our vast understanding of it in order to send all those men to the moon and back? (oh, wait…) 😉

So, yeah…. That’s more or less the spot I’m standing in right now. Learning about how wonky all this gravity business really is, learning about how a guy like Tesla said he thought Einstein’s theories were nonsense, while busily setting out to invent practically half of the technological innovations we are all now using today on a daily basis. Interesting, don’t you think, that Tesla wound up destitute, his lab destroyed by arson, all his surviving files and experiments scooped up and locked away by rich, powerful folks and kept from the public for decades while Tesla was all but forgotten, meanwhile Einstein is Time magazine’s “Person of the Century” and gets a Nobel prize. Hmmmm… (I know, I know, supposedly Einstein didn’t win the Nobel for his theory of relativity, but whatever. It was mainly for his work in “photo-electrics”, interesting…) But you get the point.

It all just goes to make you wonder, when you start to learn just how interconnected and interdependent all these different streams of information that we’ve been “educated” with since childhood really are, and then start holding it up against the fake moon landings, and “bubbles” outside the ISS, and the air-brushed “photos” of earth, etc… Right now it’s sure making ME wonder, and making me think this whole “electric universe” idea might be well worth looking into much more…

And here is a great flat earth vs. globe earth vid I found today which has a really interesting segment talking about gravity (8:14-11:00), and the issues with the idea that the spin of the earth and gravity offset each other to keep everything/one in place, when of course, the earth is spinning exceedingly slower at the poles than it is on the equator, yet the gravitational pull is the same everywhere on Earth…

Ah…. CRAP. Just when I thought I was getting used to a certain level of “crazy”…

So I wrote about this topic a little while back once before, after hearing the Mark Seargent interview on Canary Cry Radio, and well, after that I really didn’t continue looking into it much. There are plenty of other crazy things going on in the world to occupy one’s attention after all. But then yesterday, after posting a bit on the blog in the morning, later in the afternoon I sort of found myself looking for something to listen to, and ended up on YT and came across interview with Rob Skiba and Josh Peck, talking about Flat Earth… (which I thought was interesting, since I had actually mentioned Peck in my first post as I did a little speculating about the Flat Earth idea and possible connection to the whole multi-dimensional universe stuff…)

flatearthAnyways, I listened to it all, and, yeah… I guess the “bug” has now officially been planted, to where I am seriously unable to stop thinking about a number of very pesky questions… It’s a place I’ve been before, but not for some time, just kind of weird. Grrr.. Let me just tell you right now, I really, truly WANT to debunk this. I so do. That is of course how I first set out learning about many other things before, such as “crazy” theories on 9/11 and such, so, I do know how efforts to “debunk” something can wind up biting you in the butt, leaving you walking in circles trying to wrap your brain around the information that you are now staring face to face…

I’ve already kind of had that sort of moment this morning, after watching the video above. I like this one probably better than any of the others I’ve seen so far. (Mark Sargeant’s “Flat Earth Clues” are okay I’d say, but really not that great) The more I am learning about all these simple arguments/experiments dealing with the curvature of the earth and line of sight etc., the more compelling I am finding them. Then, in the video he mentions one other bit of info that really threw me, and it’s what I wanted to leave any reader here with, cuz honestly, it’s really baking my noodle right now! Even though, it’s also super simple. Almost too simple, because you go, how do we not all stop and think about that??

So, okay friends… Please, don’t call me a “Flat-Earther” yet, cuz honestly I haven’t crossed that bridge yet. But let’s just stop, and think about this one here…


We all believe that the earth rotates around the sun, one full rotation every year, or precisely, every 365 1/4 days. What’s more, we believe that the earth itself is constantly rotating, completing one full rotation every 24 hours. Now, if this is the case, then after six months of orbiting around the sun, then “day” would logically occur on the other side of the rotating globe. In essence, this would mean that over a six month period, day would turn to night, and night to day. After six months, the noonday sun would be shining at what the clock said was midnight, and vice versa. (make sense?) The only way to avoid this, would be if the 24-hour “full rotation” of the earth, wasn’t in fact a true, 360 degree rotation, but instead either slightly over or under (I’m not exactly sure which at this point) in order to compensate for the orbiting of the sun, and keep the “noon side” pointed at the sun at all times of the year. If I remember correctly was I was taught back in school though, the earth supposedly just rotates one full time around in a day.

The video also mentions the issue of the moon, and how it’s cycles seem to operate completely independent of the position of the earth, sun, and itself, which is another aspect I must say is really bizarre when you stop and think about it, but I’ll leave that whole matter to another I suppose. I need more coffee right now…

(How does it make sense that we can see full moon, in the middle of the daytime, anyhow....?)
(How does it make sense that we can see full moon, in the middle of the daytime, anyhow….?)