APOLLO MOON
FLIGHTS: NASA HOAX -- OR ALIEN TECHNOLOGY!
by Der Voron, guest columnist.
[January 16, 2003]
[WeeklyUniverse.com] It
may be that both Americans and Russians never flew to the Moon, because
of
a very simple thing: Take-off after landing on the Moon (to return
to Earth).
To take
off, a spacecraft, both modern and of that time (1960-70s), needs a carrier
rocket weighing many hundreds of tons, hundreds of tons of fuel for it,
and a powerful space-vehicle launching site.
How to take
all this with a spacecraft to be able to take off from the Moon after landing
on it?
The mid-rank
carrier rocket Ariane-5, for example, weighs 750 tons (the rocket itself
and the fuel), and the "lite" carrier rocket Dnepr-1 (created based on
the strategic intercontinental ballistic missile SS-18 Satan) weighs 211
tons. They develop the power of about 10-20mn KWt.
A rocket
able to launch a spacecraft from the Moon should have the power of about
6 times less than here on the Earth (as Moon gravitation is 6 times smaller),
but even in this case the rocket would weigh about 750/6, i.e. about 125
tons minimum (the rocket and the fuel), plus the weight of details for
deploying a temporary launching site.
Even if
the weight of these details equals to the minimum possible weight of about
50 tons, then the spacecraft should be able to take with itself a minimum
weight of ~175 tons. No such spacecraft were developed before the
flight to the Moon, none even close to that; today's most powerful spacecraft's
weight carrying capabilities couldn't approach even the numbers thrice
smaller than this. (For example, one of the most modern Russian carrier
rockets, Titan-4, which is approximately equal to the Space Shuttle carrier
rocket by its parameters, is able to carry only about 17.5 tons of weight.)
The official
story of American flights to the Moon says that the larger command module
rocket "Columbia" remained in lunar orbit while the lunar module "Eagle"
separated and descended with firing retro rockets to the lunar surface.
The astronauts exited "Eagle" to take pictures and recover lunar material
from the surface. They then returned to the lunar lander module to
return back to the "Columbia" command module. The "Columbia" broke
out of lunar orbit to go back to Earth and splash down with parachutes.
"Eagle"
weighed about 16 tons, or about 5,500 pounds if we mean lunar gravity. To launch satellite of such a mass, at least an Ariane-5 class rocket is
needed. But if even it is a Dnepr-1 class rocket, then the mass of
rocket for launching 5,500 pound "Eagle" from the Moon would be about 35
tons (211/6). Before launching "Eagle" from the Moon, a 35-ton rocket
itself needs to be delivered to the Moon. (See above for delivering
capacities
even of modern spacecraft.)
Plus,
launching satellites even of this mass requires deploying a launching site. How was such a site deployed on the Moon?
If even
we suppose that several carrier rockets like "Columbia" could deliver all
this to the Moon in several lunar module "Eagles" (seems this should have
been a very hard task for such modules to land on the Moon since the Moon
has no atmosphere, which diminishes the speed of similar modules when these
land on the Earth), then how was, for example, the Lunar launching site
deployed? On-site by astronauts in spacesuits?
And why
was all this praiseworthy process not shown on the photos or videos?
Where are photographs of such a praiseworthy achievement like the Lunar
launching site?
And if
somehow no launching site construction was required to take off from the
Moon, why are there no photographs or videos of the spacecraft taking off
from it? Wasn't it possible to take photos or videos of the spacecraft
taking off from the Moon, from the "Columbia" rocket?
And if this
was a hard technical task in those times, then why weren't at least preparations
for this takeoff photographed or videotaped by astronauts on-site? Did the NASA astronauts return to "Columbia", "which remained in lunar
orbit", using the rope that was hanging out of it?
And where
are the Russian photographs and videos dedicated to their "Lunar takeoff"
preparations?
Unless
we assume that by 1969 NASA could build an antigravitation craft (aka antigrav,
starcraft, starship, and flying saucer), for which all the described obstacles
don't exist. (Such a device is not necessarily able to fly to stars;
intersteller travel depends on the device's capacities, i.e. it is the
starcraft's construction that determines whether it will be able to fly
to stars, or only to the Sun system's planets and planet satellites.
Antigrav
only means that the device uses antigravitation for flying (i.e., not wings,
rotors, etc). Its velocity can vary from 10 meters per second to
overlight speeds, depending on its capabilities.
This seems
more plausible, taking into account that the American flag, and a plaque
with inscriptions on it next to the flag, are reported, by many persons
who visit observatories, to be clearly seen on the Moon surface. But this means NASA already had antigravs in the 1960s, and that it has
them now...
Or did
NASA borrow antigravs from an extraterrestrial civilization (Zetas Reticuli,
hominoids from Orion, or maybe those who mutilate cattle)?
One detail
suggests this might have occurred: one of the astronauts, during the first
flight to be transmitted by television, said on air that he was seeing
giant artificial objects.
Perhaps
the aliens imposed this as a condition for NASA's lease of their craft:
to have NASA astronauts say something on TV that would prove to viewers
that the astronauts had met craft from another civilization?
This may
be confirmed by the following fact: several years after the moon landing,
the American Congress acknowledged the existence of extraterrestrials in
a special report.
 The NASA
photo (see right), with its absolutely impossible (for the lunar landscape)
shadows -- looking as if they were created with the use of multiple projectors
shining at different angles -- is additional proof for a faked moon landing. Perhaps NASA, let's say, "feels ashamed" for the mystification, and therefore
provided such photos as hidden hints?
Or, more
probably, NASA provided contradictory materials to entangle all this more
and more?
Or maybe
NASA astronauts did visit the Moon (in the antigrav) and recorded all that
which is claimed to be lunar photos and videos, but they were of such a
poor quality due to some details of lunar atmosphere and climate that NASA
decided to order new "better looking" photos/videos from Hollywood? Then we may understand why there are such errors in them...
I think
Russians, shocked by such a "challenge" from NASA, in turn invented their
own "success story" about "flying to the Moon" and "taking samples of lunar
rocks" by their "unmanned" "Lunohods".
Or did
Russians also create antigravs -- or receive them from another civilization?
Copyright 2003 by Der Voron.
Photos courtesy Der Voron.
Readers
may also enjoy Bill Kaysing's We
Never Went to the Moon. Published in 1981, Kaysing's book was
the first to expose the whole "moon landing hoax" conspiracy! |
|
