Thursday, January 19, 2012

Jack White's Apollo Hoax Evidence

They've now deleted the only copy left of Jack White's Apollo Hoax book on Here is a link to all of Jack White's Apollo Hoax Evidence and below are a few examples of his work:

This is NASA image AS11-40-5922 of the lunar lander supposedly taken on the moon. Is that construction paper, tape, and foil!? Can anybody tell me with a straight face that this is a multi-million dollar space craft?

There is no burn print under the lunar lander's 10,000 pound thrusters, nor a speck of dust/dirt on the landing pods (as though it was just set down in place), even though NASA scientists in their own documents were worried about the lander falling into it's massive burn radius.

In these images of Buzz Aldrin we can see his boots and gloves changing colors and shapes. If he was really on the moon then this would mean de-pressurizing his suit time and again for fashion's sake.

In the top image there are footprints all around but the moon rover has no tracks in front or behind it. In the bottom image there are rover tracks in the foreground but the rover has clearly yet to be unpacked. What gives?

These pictures of the "sun" look and act nothing like the sun but rather like a large studio spotlight.

Remember, the astronauts brought no extra lighting to the moon. The only source of light should be the sun. Does that helmet reflection look like the sun to you? It looks like a spotlight to me.

There is studio lighting reflecting off a black background in the top picture. Subtraction of the yellow and blue from the chroma scale shows this clearly. If that was really the blackness of space, then there would be nothing to refract the light. The bottom picture also shows a similar effect from the lander's shadow against the studio ceiling.

These pictures all suggest that NASA has taken the liberty of retouching the perfect blackness of "space" and photoshopped a rectangular Earth image into the composites.

Since they did not bring any extra lighting on the lunar lander, the sun was the only light source, so all shadows should be cast in the same direction like the this:

But in dozens of NASA photos there are shadows being cast in up to 3 directions simultaneously, often at almost 90 degree angles. This can only be the result of multiple light sources not available on the moon.

Last but not least, these Apollo 15-17 photographs prove that the same studio backgrounds were being re-used over and over again even though the astronauts were supposedly moving around to completely different locations on the moon. What do people think of all these photographic anomalies? Does anyone still think NASA's been to the moon? Still trust anything they have to say?


muzuzuzus said...

WHo deleted it? Do you know who to contact to ask why they deleted it?

Eric Dubay said...

I saw the user who posted it was called "Card House Failure" so I thought to contact him as well... but now when I search for him, he's nowhere to be found. I think his whole account was deleted.

ahrcanum said...

Things that make say mmmm?

Anonymous said...

I believe we did go to the moon but were warned off it somehow by ET's and that's why they had to make fake photos b/c the real ones would expose earths quarantine...We have never gone back? We will not be allowed to bring our bombs into space.

Eric Dubay said...

That's what they want you to think. That's why these Masonic astronauts are now "coming out" and saying they saw UFOs and Aliens on the moon. That's why "ex"NASA employees like Richard Hoagland are "exposing" supposed alien structures on the moon and mars. The Masonic magicians have been carrying out a long-term propaganda campaign to get you to believe in ETs and are doing a wonderful job. Read this: The Masonic Truth Behind Aliens/UFOs

Anonymous said...

Yes. I agree that a false alien invasion is on the drawing board but that doesn't mean space is empty. It's most likely teaming with life. There are divisions among majestic and so everything that comes out is total disinfo... You are a great researcher. I was wondering if you ever followed up on the 2012 London olympics stuff that Clay uncovered. Also, a free energy demo was supposed to have taken place on Aug 7th but I haven't heard anything...Hmmm seems like it would have been big news?

Alex said...

I’ve just finished analyzing more than 500 NASA Apollo images by Adobe Photoshop CS4.
I enhanced the sky portion of the images.
See for detail:
To my surprise I found the Moon in the sky of several images, I found shooting stars, two landing modules (in the same image) and the stars in position as seen from the Earth. And not a shred of evidence that any Man has ever been on the Moon.
So I conclude that the images were faked by NASA. Then come the Europeans and the Japanese, and they can not see landing sites. Then comes NASA and they produce a black square and say this is the lunar rover. Would u believe yourself that to be true? I doubt it.
Just the simple fact that 40 years ago, with very basic electronic end instrumentation technology they could land on the Moon, but it takes 40 years with very sophisticated technology and we still do not have clear images of the landing sites, proves to me that such landings never took place.

With Respect

AverageFrench said...


AverageFrench said...

I have fully analyzed the full apollo journal, and I don't have the least doubt: Not only the photos are faked, but those who did the faking didn't care about making them credible; much to the contrary, thay took the whole thing as a big farce, and they completely bugged the photos, apparently they took much pleasure in doing it; there are plenty of gags in the photos.

Check these gifs made from autentic Apollo photos:

Weird, isn't it?

AverageFrench said...

Sorry, but the links didn't seem to work!

Alex said...

NASA images: AS15-87-11695, AS15-87-11696, AS15-87-11697, AS15-87-11698, AS15-87-11699

These images show the CSM (Command Service Module) of Apollo 15. The photos were taken from the LEM (Landing Module or Lunar Excursion Module). The images show the Moon surface in the background.
This could have happened only if the CSM was to land instead of the LEM.
My God, what a mistake!
What we should see is the LEM going toward the surface as on the image:
These images also prove that the fake Apollo images were created by a small group of experts with only a few scientists and engineers checking the images, therefore some mistakes were bound to happen.

Eric Dubay said...

Great job, thanks for the links Alex. Peace

Anonymous said...

"This could have happened only if the CSM was to land instead of the LEM."

Or if the Lunar Module happened to be on the side away from the Moon when it disconnected.

Alex said...

Sorry guys, I made a big mistake relating to Apollo 15 images (previous post).
I did not calculate the distance between the LM and the CM, now I ‘v done the calculation: ~100 meters. This is not so big deal, therefore again sorry guys. I consider it very important we admit when we make a mistake.

The best evidence would be to analyze the Lunar Module Lift-Off videos from the Moon surface. They show no acceleration, instead a start with a sudden velocity, something that is impossible considering Newton’s laws. It should be easy to calculate the acceleration of the LM, and make a twinning of it with Adobe Flash and put them side by side for comparison.
Would be great if somebody had the time to do it. If u need any calculation for this project I might be able to do so.

Jim said...

Hey Eric, long time no comment but I've been on your site regularly and I've linked you as promised now. The moon landing is a whole new can of worms for me and these photos are incredible...This is gonna keep me busy!
I've seen you link to NWO themed hip hop tracks in the past so I think you'll appreciate this one

Anonymous said...

When someone driving a car pulls into a parking spot,do they do it at 100 kilometers per hour? Of course not. They slow down first,easing off the accelerator. The astronauts did the same thing. Sure,the rocket on the lander was capable of 10,000 pounds of thrust,but they had a throttle. They fired the rocket hard to deorbit and slow enough to land on the Moon,but they didn't need to thrust that hard as they approached the lunar surface; they throttled down to about 3000 pounds of thrust.

Now here comes a little bit of math: the engine nozzle was about 54 inches across (from the Encyclopaedia Astronautica),which means it had an area of 2300 square inches. That in turn means that the thrust generated a pressure of only about 1.5 pounds per square inch! That's not a lot of pressure. Moreover,in a vacuum,the exhaust from a rocket spreads out very rapidly. On Earth,the air in our atmosphere constrains the thrust of a rocket into a narrow column,which is why you get long flames and columns of smoke from the back of a rocket. In a vacuum,no air means the exhaust spreads out even more,lowering the pressure. That's why there's no blast crater! Three thousand pounds of thrust sounds like a lot,but it was so spread out it was actually rather gentle.

Eric Dubay said...

Why write a long-winded explanation of 1 anomaly and pretend like the dozens of others don't exist? Do you have similar explanations for all the other photos? How about for this extensive list I compiled?:

Huge List of Moon Landing Hoax Evidence

Eric Dubay said...

Thanks for the comment Jim, great MV too.

Anonymous said...

Holey Mother of Earth!

Anonymous said...

When you spin, you centrifuge, and guess what's in the middle:

Anonymous said...

The Bird is the Word:

Anonymous said...

Was Steve Currey "suicided"???

Illuminati Agenda said...

I must admit I've never properly looked into the moon landing conspiracy but whenever I see bits and bobs such as the images above I do sway towards hoaxville. I know it was some time ago but every image I see of the landings just screams studio set up to me. One thing I do remember reading was that Stanley Kubrick was possibly involved in its implementation...

Anonymous said...

We are under the Microscope:

Anonymous said...

Who ever faked the picture with the Earth pasted in is obviously so used to looking at the Moon from Earth that they completely forgot that the Earth is six times bigger than the Moon and would appear much larger

Eric Dubay said...

Great point.

Anonymous said...

"Who ever faked the picture with the Earth pasted in is obviously so used to looking at the Moon from Earth that they completely forgot that the Earth is six times bigger than the Moon and would appear much larger"

And it means that the Earth looks six times bigger than the sun, when from the Earth sun and moon look the same apparent size.