The expert explains on TV how Odysseus landed on the moon with a vertical speed of 6 km/h and a horizontal speed of 2 km/h. During this horizontal movement, he apparently "stumbled" over a rock and then tipped over. The following is astonishing:

- Why don't you bring the horizontal speed to 0 before you get to the surface of the moon? The landing site is clearly visible from above and the ability to land could be assessed from a greater distance. The smaller rocks always pose a risk during a horizontal movement. This would not actually be necessary near the surface.

- Why is the tilted position of the lander only recognized around 24 hours after landing? If the power supply and the cameras and communication systems are working, image transmission should be possible quite quickly. This would immediately show the banked position.

- Why aren't better images available?

Video Mazzucco

[B12] Untouched waving flag (6.1)
Waving flag by air blast, cannot exist on the moon. (Physics: Bernoulli effect)

Apollo-11 landing site

No rocket engine brakes here. No craters, no scratches, not even sand swirls. But at least 1 paper picture laying on the landing foot, makes no sense.

Lunar module crash 5/6/1968. Neil Armstrong ejected to safety.

Video Wisnewski

Nobody saw the lunar module work! This was NASA's own handicraft construction, which for various technical reasons could not be controlled at all. You can see that in how working rocket engines are built today.

Aldrin, Armstrong, Collins 1969

Video NASA

1. Press conference after landing: No euphoria! With their body language, they seemed like rascals who had been caught who had discussed their prank, like good actors who followed the script exactly, or like the military (“Mission accomplished: What else do you want?”).

View from Apollo Capsule

This is where the astronauts should control the docking on the return launch? Without powerful computers on board? Without beacons? In less than 4 hours? It took over 30 hours for Gemini!

"Many achievements are possible for those who can break down layers obscuring the truth".

Video NASA

Again, body language says more than words. He says it like a penitent - eyes helplessly searching for understanding - in front of the public and the President. It seems obvious: it would be important to him that the slate should finally be wiped clean. He can't say it any clearer than that!

Video Mazzucco Beweis

Armstrong refused any interviews for years! He never swore on the Bible that he was on the moon. For Americans, this would have been proof that it was true. But he was a man of honor! He swears no perjury.

Designated

Thomas O.Paine

NASA Director 1969-70

How could he convince the astronauts ?

Webb would not have missed his triumph in 1969 if the project had been on the right track. Nixon wouldn't have fired him in that case either, and would have looked for a new one. T.O.Paine was evidently a Johnson-loyal executor of the project who, miraculously, had to vacate his post shortly after the first Apollo missions, allegedly because he "wanted too much". He was hardly ever noticed in public. Maybe he just didn't want to keep lying...

James Webb

NASA Director 1961-68

(Video Mazzucco)

James E.Webb, the scientist, knew that the radiation and lunar module problems were not solved. He therefore resigned as soon as the time was opportune, 1 year before the "Event of the Century".

Apollo 11 landing site

Probably took place in a large hangar. Moonscape too small. If it's a hill, that wouldn't be a landing pad. Danger of tipping! But here in the "Sea of Tranquility" it should be flat anyway! Where is the horizon? (Video Wisnewski)

Apollo 11 landing site

Lamp flare too generous. It couldn't be so well lit on the moon! Reflections visible in the shadow of the moon by artificial lighting (Video Norman Investigative).

No stars to be seen. Even Collins in the pod "can't remember".

Aber so stellt man sich auch in Animationen bei der NASA den Mond vor:
Klick

"Yes because of the contrast with the bright landscapes". Yes of course! However, it would have been possible to record the wonderful moon-star sky (possibly with earth!) without bright landscapes, if one had wanted to. It doesn't make any sense at all that one could not have wanted this.

"Re-ascending" an airpropeller-controlled dummy?

Video Wisnewski/NASA, Apollo-14

No flare visible on re-ascent. Acceleration reason not recognizable. Take off explosively. Sand stays in the air instead of falling back.

Hasselblad Camera on the moon

Frühere Warnung an den Flughäfen

Of all the materials, Kodak film is the most sensitive to heat. Temperature above 100° C in the moon sun. No discoloration on the photos? Not possible! (Physics: Temperature calculable through radiation compensation)

LEM "Lunar Excursion Module, Apollo-16"

No lanes from the lunar module to here? There's sand everywhere. You can see that in the footprints of the astronauts.

Video NASA, Apollo-16

Not only are the movements slower on the moon. This could be filmed well recreate. But the jump height would have to be much higher than on Earth. Jump height only 40 cm?

Comparison with real moon photo.
Apollo-14

Is that supposed to be the Hadley groove? (Video Taranda) Real lunar landscapes are rugged, have many craters, ridges, boulders and canyons. The Apollo images show slightly hilly, washed-out, round shapes with lots of sand.

Original sound document.

No engine noise on takeoff and landing? Not possible! The engine was physically connected to the astronauts.(Physics: solid-state acoustic transmission)

Michel D. Griffin

NASA Director 2005-2009

Video Mazzucco

2006: 2006: Missing Original Recording Tapes and Apollo Artifacts. NASA Director Griffin searched for a year. Someone before his time secretly cleared them away. Telemetric data was also stored there [B16], which can prove that the distances in radio communication with the moon were too short. During the technical update there was an opportunity to correct this data and so the pitches in the data that is now publicly available are correct. (However, the DVDs from Spaceraft are still provided with the original data.)

Klick

Click on picture

Gus Grissom was an internal critic of the Lunar Module. He died in the Apollo 1 accident. The case of Gus Grissom seems extraordinarily improbable with natural causes. This has never happened before.

Click on picture for truth

Thomas Baron prepared a 55-page report on the Apollo abuses on behalf of the NAA. He had an accident just before he was about to present the report in the Senate. The case is extremely improbable with natural causes. The case should have been better investigated. One should have looked for his report.

Video Wisnewski

Original NASA Beschreibung: L(unar) O(rbit)&L(anding) A(pproach) Simulator, 63 as request, 65 functional.

The LOLA simulator, the black mats and the anti-aircraft spotlight as the sun were only commissioned to produce deceptively (real) images. These were found there in the archive.

"Before we send someone out there, we must first be sure that it is possible. Today we are not!"

Today's astronauts and scientists speak plainly about the facts about radiation outside the VanAllen belt. Alan Anderson, NASA chief scientist, also gives the Apollo fake in the context -Moon landing, but obviously doesn't want to be quoted for it.

Video Wisnewski

Moon sun is an anti-aircraft searchlight with a cone of light instead of uniform lighting. The suspension can also be seen somewhere.

From a certain point in 1969, technical questions were no longer answered at press conferences. To date, NASA has not made any statements and invokes "onus probandi".

At NASA, scientists do not believe that the problem of radiation exposure has been solved yet. "The earlier technology was destroyed and must be rebuilt" (NASA Astronaut quote) [R4]. Apparently, as a NASA scientist, this is the only way to continue working without destroying the myth of "Apollo".

...at all costs!

The strategic brains behind the US ideology of being the sole superpower was Zbignew Brzezinski, adviser to President Johnson. There is no better symbolism for this than being the only nation to land on the moon. Regardless of the technology.

(Of course, the book came out much later.)

Aldrin says to the moon landing broadcast today: "No, you didn't see us on TV. There was no TV there."

Is that a late liberation from the fabric of lies ?

You can only locate the radio if you are in the area of the radio beam. Directional radio is used for such long distances. The Russians didn't have a chance.

Also: The only Soviet space scientist of stature, Sergej Korolev, was already dead in 1969.

As long as wikipedia operates a virtual monopoly on information, scientific knowledge cannot advance.

Video Mazzucco

The sticky sand showed moisture, which cannot be found on the moon.

Video Mazzucco

Some movements on the moon can only be explained with hanging ropes in the film studio.

Video Mazzucco

The TV beam connection via the shaky LEM would have been lost immediately.

Video Mazzucco

The only way to silence all these doubts about the moon landing would have been to get independent institutions to do so spacecraft to photograph the Apollo artifacts left behind from close up. In 2007, Google made such a call, offering a $30 million prize for the company that builds a probe that can put a probe on the moon, the sends live images back to Earth over a terrain of over 500m. The second prize was 4 Millions of dollars are being offered to whoever is the first to photograph any Apollo landing site and sends to earth. 20 companies would have been willing to do this. NASA would actually have no reason NOT to have their mission confirmed by external insti­tutions. Only one is be­liev­able: the result would not be what they intended. But NASA wasn't happy with that and told participants in 2011 that they couldn't allowed to approach closer than 2 km to the Apollo landing sites: no-fly zone. "To preserve the Landing sites from contamination". But there are no credible images from that far.

Aus dem NASA Original Archiv gelöscht im Jan 2024: https://history.nasa.gov/alsj/a17/AS17-141-21608HR.jpg

The 2nd astronaut can be seen in the mirror image of the first. He has taken off his respirator (backpack). With that he couldn't exist on the moon.

Video Mazzucco

Telemetric data can prove that radio communications with the moon were too close. Such original tapes were found at the Spacekraft company that were demonstrably not edited.

Video Yoice (2022)

A little girl asks him: “Why hasn’t anyone been there for 50 years on the Moon?». He smiles and says: «That's not a question for a little girl. I ask this question. But I think, yes, I know why: because we didn't do it !». He couldn't be any clearer, but it's obviously important to him not to lie to the young girl. He couldn't have meant it any other way, that wouldn't make any sense.

Welt (2009)

The Apollo 11 moon rock, which was handed over to the Dutch government via the American government, has been examined contrary to expectations and cannot be from the moon because it contains fossils. But those who believe in the moon landing would rather question the operational management of the museum than the moon landing.

Video Haumann

The reflector left behind by an Apollo mission, which sends the laser beam back to Earth and allows the exact distance of the moon to be measured, is often used as "proof" of the moon landing. However, it has long been clear that the laser beam is reflected even without this reflector, since after 300,000 km the laser beam is spread out much wider (at least 2000 x 2000 m) than this eighth of a square meter of the reflector (approx. 30 x 40 cm). Incidentally, a fraction of the back radiation is enough to be able to measure the distance from Earth to the Moon precisely. And that was already done in 1966.

In the video with camera tracking

Video Wisnewski/NASA, Apollo-14

According to NASA, the camera is tracked from Earth, which is impossible: the operator designated by NASA would always have to regulate 2.6 seconds before he sees it.

Video Wisnewski/NASA, Apollo-14

From the number of images taken at Apollo, the films must have been changed a total of around 800 times. No astronaut has ever been seen to do that. You can't even imagine it with the thick gloves.

Video Mazzucco

Astronaut Alan Bean (Apollo-12) was later asked if they had had any problems with the VanAllen Belt. He had no idea about the problem: he says he thinks they wouldn't have flown that far out. He's probably right!