The moon, as the closest to the Earth astronomical body, which has always attracted the attention of the people. With the beginning of space age she became immediate goal. The pioneers of space-Russians - in terms of the conquest of the moon ahead of the Americans landed on the Earth's satellite.



And immediately went talks were not Americans on the moon, movie all this, Stanley Kubrick, the Director "Space Odyssey-2001", took "landing" on a secret nuclear test site (the so-called "plot №51") in the desert of Nevada. The lifeless landscape was very similar to the surface of the moon. A year before the flight "Apollo 11" Kubrick got his only Oscar. And for what? For special effects! There filmmakers because remained scenery and props "Odyssey", as well as decorations made by numerous photographs, accumulated during the operation of unmanned lunar modules.

One of the first began to doubt the writer Gernot the Guys. In the night of 20 to 21 July 1969 the Guys, like millions of other people around the world, was sitting at the TV. When you showed the astronauts Armstrong and Aldrin, photographed them directly from the screen. Captured, so to say, a historical event. After some time, considering the pictures began to notice inconsistencies. First, the shots for some reason you don't see the stars. And should be - after all the open space. Secondly, stuck in the ground American flag frankly swayed. What is this wind? Why should the wind where there is no atmosphere? On the ground about the lunar module clearly visible in the dust, traces of the astronauts. But how can it be dust if the exhaust jet rocket engine would have to break up? And funnel under the module is there, although that's exactly had to be formed. As there is no flame, which in theory would be to escape from the nozzle at take-off module with the lunar surface. But there are lots of shadows, and all in different directions. Hence, the light source was not alone. The conclusion is one: was shot in the pavilion, and the layout of the lunar module just raised up on a special, invisible to the viewer cables. It is easy to do, especially a master like Kubrick. And a closer look at the mirror glass helmets astronauts visible reflection of spotlights placed on the set. So for Hollywood masters of illusion remove "landing on the moon" - time to spit, and not the shot. Studio Walt Disney in 1955 took the popular television series "Man in space". Interestingly, the consultant was the designer of the future rocket "Saturn-5" Werner von Braun.

Doubted, by the way, not one of the Guys. Main "skeptic" was bill Kaysing. In 1974 he released a book called "We have never traveled to the moon. American fraud worth 30 billion dollars". Casing took the idea of the book is not the ceiling - he worked as the head of the Department of technical information at Rockwell International, that in the 60's. participated in the moon NASA.

Casing wrote that astronauts honestly got up on the ship, but after a while they quietly dropped back. The launch, which was watched by viewers all over the world, actually took place from Baikonur Canaveral, but not in space. Saturn" drew an arc in the lower atmosphere, and, unseen, fell into the ocean somewhere near Antarctica, while on TV played the tape that Armstrong and Aldrin astronaut on time turn into actors. Then they were taken to the air force base USA in the state of Nevada, was placed in descent vehicle what is used capsule spacecraft and safely dropped from a helicopter into the Pacific ocean from where it is just as well fished. Also Causing notes that all the stars have gone through the procedure hypnotic zombie. Techniques such indoctrination known for a long time, and it doesn't surprise anyone. Some astronauts still believe in the reality of its lunar flight.

That the whole project is a giant fraud and hoax, said shortly after "flight" in the Commission of the U.S. Congress and one of the technicians who worked on the project. Characteristically, four days later the man died in mysterious circumstances. Causing absolutely sure that troublemaker simply eliminated.

At first book of Kazinga remained unnoticed. Bestseller she became after the space theme sounded in which attracted a huge audience movies "Alien" and "Star wars". In the end, one in five Americans have no doubt that the man on the moon - fiction.

What NASA? Her reaction only adds to these suspicions. Instead refute the above arguments, the space Agency of the USA stores proud silence, only occasionally letting go at the counterpart sarcastic remarks. Instead, NASA, contrary to the arguments of the skeptics, is Philip plate, its former employee. Stars are not visible? It is their light drowns out the light of the Sun and Earth. Shadows in different directions? From the roughness of the ground, it was this effect that knows even an Amateur photographer. Flag waving? Yes it's just a pole stuck in the ground, ranges, that's flag and "shakes". There are signs, there are dust, but no crater and fiery tail at launch? Yes it's just the engine module before landing worked at low rpm.

Here, however, there is another set of issues. For example, why the Russians did not pay attention to outright fake, and if paid, why didn't answer?

The guys with like-minded answers these questions. Russians are not stupid, notice all, not reacted and said nothing because their military-industrial complex was beneficial to hide the truth about the project "Apollo". "Success" Americans allowed to demand more cash injections in the space industry - in order to keep pace. But most importantly, the Russians were silent because the political agreement between the governments of the USSR and the USA. The USSR has gone on this conspiracy, because the U.S. had a counter political dirt on the leadership of the USSR, accumulated since the Caribbean crisis. Under the terms of the collusion of the USSR in exchange for his silence had also received economic concessions and privileges, for example, access to the West European oil market. Until 1970, the U.S. pursued a tough policy on the blockade of oil deliveries from the USSR to the West: Europe rigid pressure, if they tried to cooperate with the Soviets. But since 1970 (the most likely date of collusion) of the USSR began its deliveries, i.e. the energy crisis of 1973, Open, by the way, statistics oil exports in those years confirm this.

No doubt the fact that after the collapse of the USSR "lunar conspiracy" was prolonged sales of the Yeltsin regime. Extension of collusion was assigned a new interstate docking in orbit, which repeated the docking of the Soyuz-Apollo project of the international space station. To work together with the Americans under the ISS was podtyanulis and Russian space luminaries, it has already become not from a hand to expose the partner-investor in the falsification of the flight to the moon...

There is an opinion that it is this conspiracy that have cut the USSR, which ultimately led to the notorious restructuring. To start incompetent Brezhnev, the government changed the priceless diamond (priority in the space race and world leadership) cheap fake (current economic and political interests. Next was even worse - in the moral aspect: the recognition of a foreign lie deprives the nation's independence and enslaves. If until 1968, the USSR was in the lead in the space race, the recognition hoax threw it and then Russia to a secondary role and reoriented the brains of the nation on the Western pseudo-leader, depriving the country of inner support and belief in our power. The best Russian specialists were blinded and demoralized clever reception of the information war with the United States. This information weapons and now continues to work against Russia, not allowing her to rise from her knees. In the space industry of the Russian science has turned into a cab, exporting foreign satellites at bargain prices.

Second question: how Americans are forced to remain silent immediately 400 thousand participants of the project "Apollo"? First, almost all the constructive elements of the lunar program was actually completed: made rocket "Saturn-5", the ships "Apollo". Secondly, the number of people initiated into all the details of falsification was extremely limited. Even many experts MCC, getting a picture with "the moon", had no idea that watching captured in the pavilion. Those who knew forced to be silent... ordinary fear. All understood too well what will happen to those who will open his mouth. Isn't it strange that for more than thirty years, Armstrong did not give any detailed interview? Even assuming that the zombies didn't work. And what he said was a chain of contradictions and misunderstandings.

For example: "And looking at the dark sky without stars, we thought we were on strewn with sand Playground at night, under the dazzling rays of a searchlight" (1970). Okay, let's say, photographic equipment, especially not the most perfect, stars actually could not fix. While the human eye? But still if you turn to the sun back? By the way, earlier his speeches, he generally avoided a direct answer, saying that just does not remember whether you can see the stars in the sky the moon. 't seen it stars even through the top of the viewing window from inside the lunar module, and could observe the Earth.

Later NASA adjusted performance of other astronauts, "visited" the moon, and unfortunate oversight RegisSerov Directors "landing". So, Alan Bean with "Apollo 12" already watched the stars, and the Earth from the top hatch of the lunar module. However, stars at the exit on the moon and he could not see. And despite the fact that the number of competitors is provided by the side stub, allowing to adjust the viewing crack and lighting, using also the filters. It would seem, what could be simpler: put yourself narrow viewing crack, raise your head inside the helmet and watch't even separate stars, as it is declared mentioned by the participants of the script, but a whole section of the sky filled with stars. By the way, there are contradictions with the "testimony" Soviet cosmonauts who say the stars in space visible, and vividly describe black starry sky. "The ship slowly rotating, basking in the sun thread. The stars were everywhere: on the top, bottom, left and right..." (Memories of Alexei Leonov)

Correction in the issue of observability of the stars from the moon to be paid later: Eugene Cernan, watching the sky from the shadow of the lunar module "Apollo 17", "could"to see individual stars.

By the way, the Cernan in 2003, he arrived in Moscow and was proven that was on the moon. The main argument was -- that's here, dear readers, just don't laugh too loud... wristwatch! "I was on the moon! Look, here they are! They are witnesses!" Instructors who sent him to Moscow to settle the beginning of a wave of revelations in the Russian media, with the clock clearly overdone, placing the Cernan in a stupid position.

Yet what was later brought to the attention of the skeptics is on high jumps. At low lunar gravity weight astronaut in a space suit on the moon will amount to 27 kg (weight 160 kg on Earth). The jumps should get just a feast for the eyes! And jumping safe - anyone who landed on the moon would just could not deny myself the pleasure of this. What do we see? Sluggish prygocki height 25-45 see Such it is quite achievable in conditions of earth's gravity. Note that the regulations jumps volleyball players in training in height with space - 57,63 see More of the same high jumping on the moon, so-called free moon jumping, had been removed so that the legs jumping is not visible. Ordinary SINOTRUK. Especially were funny jumping from one level of the lunar module, when astronaut holding onto the handrail.

The jump on the moon must be at least three metres - all because of the same gravity, and make them not less easily than the high jump. However, nothing of the kind: "priloisec" astronauts jump less than half a meter, and it is not clear parallel to the frame, and deep into the frame, body turned sideways to the direction of traffic when the length cannot be measured. Typical cinematic reception, Hollywood - master of illusion.

Defenders version that Americans on the moon were talking about advanced "slipperiness" moon dust, they say, it rocks are not oxidized, here dust and slides. And this, they say, would not allow them high and far jump and explained - at the same time - and the presence of traces.

By the way, about the moon jumps. These jumps were not mandatory in six lunar missions Americans, they were made specifically in front of the camera to prove that we are on the moon WERE! I.e. Directors understood - it is necessary to jump it! Otherwise no one would believe. Because only one option in the jump - its height is able to prove his lennosti. And the question is: the person who really gets, say, in the mouth of the volcano will specifically on camera to show what lava hot and how she burns? Yes he didn't come to prove the obvious! And here we thought... that's just jumped low. Maybe they were just lazy? So, maybe, and the moon to fly lazy? (I mean a smiley with a smile.)

The argument that not jumping high and far because he was afraid to fall and damage suits funny. Spacesuits provides protection even against micrometeorites that fly with the speed up to 20 km/sec and, like a bullet, can flash conventional materials, so what to speak about any impact of the fall?

Another funny thing found sceptics, looking at themselves suits. Are noticeably... thin leg to the ankle. And this is assuming that the layers in that suit Nemer - 25 - and they are thick enough to hide the contours of your feet. The footage preflight training, i.e. when the astronaut is cleared in the PRESENT suit, not in that in which you have to jump in front of the camera, legs look as they should be - straight thick pillars, without any hint of a curve or a reduction in the thickness to the ankle.

With sleeves - too funny. Arms at the elbow astronaut on "the moon" bends as if it's not a suit and jacket. Is it possible this ease of folding, if the astronaut was really multilayer armor? In the area of the elbow joint in this spacesuit used ruffled sleeves of highly durable rubber, allowing to make the fold, but under very obtuse angle and very slowly. Thus, the ease fold hands and sharp corner that we see on the set allegedly from the moon, and the degree of fit feet astronaut leg clearly indicate: jump is performed in a light suit, imitating the spacesuit. Ghazi in his book "Big lie of the century. Lunar flight "Apollo"below dozens of photos astronauts with "the moon" and - for comparison - photo astronauts working on "Shuttle", in the open space. The author notes that suits with "the moon" is not inflated, have a characteristic large folds of matter and curves, which are not available on the costumes astronauts "Shuttle", because the latter are inflated inside the differential pressure in a 0.35 - 0.4 MPa.

As an indirect proof that Americans on the moon were not, says a strange difference in the quality photo - and video shootings. Video - fuzzy / photo, normal quality. To assume that NASA no quality video cameras? Well, don't tell! What's the matter? For that, imagine how was achieved imitation ordinary movements (not only jumps) in lunar gravity. It was performed by slowing down 2.5 times the playback speed of video frames (by the time the Americans had already mastered the technology of recording to tape). In the same way reproduced movement of the Rover on the moon: it drove at a speed of 30-40 km/h on sandy ground polygon, which created a sufficient height dust, and then the video has been slowed down in the same 2.5 times. Thus dust smoothly and highly "jumped up". But again: anywhere, no one frame, moon dust from the kick is not higher than 1 m, and should rise by 6 m and above.

But why photos Directors, Directors allowed to be more clear? This is easily understandable, given that for shootings soil was simulated by fine dust (dust powder), while for the videos need coarse sand, easy settling in air atmosphere of the pavilion (fine dust has revealed that there would be no vacuum is due to hang in the air). Decrease the sharpness on the videos are allowed to throw sand over the small dust - lunar regolith (the same one terribly slippery. Well pure ice!)

Other indirect proof of this is fact. In October 2002, it became known that NASA had hired his former engineer, and currently one of the most authoritative experts on the history of space research of James Oberg to it for consideration of $ 15000. in writing denied "fabrications all those who proves that the moon Saga - the only well-executed falsification". From Oberg was required "to describe the mission "Apollo" step by step, refuting all insinuations on items". Clearly laudable intention. However, in November NASA through the media announced its refusal from this intention.

But now we have a bunch of unofficial sites that foam at the mouth was proved that the Americans on the moon were. (NASA does the job by someone else - so it is more convenient. And more accurately.) On the other site (a very smart move!) on the contrary is proved, that the Americans on the moon were not. But proved especially stupid, rude and absurd. For the reader accustomed to idiocy and on the wave didn't react to these revelations.

Defenders act "" the presence of Americans on the moon (or on behalf of the same NASA, or from "hidden sources") in a mysterious whisper share tantalizing version: say, Americans on the moon were, but they saw and filmed there Taco-Oh-e (alluding to the lunar city on the reverse side, the database of aliens, UFOs)that if this was to demonstrate to the public will begin again Taco-Oh-e that it is better to make a mock - so as not to disturb unprepared for space expansion green men earthlings. This version is for romantic and mystically minded people. For sane - another version. Yes, Kubrick, Yes, dramatization. But only because the shooting turned out to be of poor quality, marriage, in other words, here and just had to repeat everything I saw - but on Earth. A sort of caring about the audience - well, that they are better seen. So it was, on what to watch. They say, such and in the USSR was practiced. Typical victim of this form of deception is an astronaut G.grechko that, justifying version of NASA, at the same time not once expressed in TV and radio broadcasts that indeed, part of the materials NASA shot in the pavilions and this fact gave rise to a wave of denials version of the landing of the Americans to the moon.

By the way, another Russian cosmonaut Valery Polyakov, Deputy Director of the Institute of biomedical problems - wrote in tantalizing article in "Capital evening paper"that oscillations of the flag is explained quite natural physiological aspects. They say, in weightlessness hand-foot range - from the aftershocks of the heart. This is normal. "And when astronaut reaches out to the flagpole of the flag - wrote the Poles, these rhythmic fluctuations flag causes the same effect was adopted for veTer". As we see, the Deputy Director of IMBP explains the fluctuations of the flag blows pulse astronaut. More ludicrous and absurd way of wykorzystania American lie it's hard to imagine! What made Polyakova to embark on such a stupid lie? The money? Or policy? Who knows...

On other sites ask with a share of well-designed offence: you say is fraud, and how the negotiations with the astronauts? They say that the Earth was talking to the Moon? Oh, well, again, do not tell! The most basic way is simply to pre-record all conversations, and then run them on the air. The child can. The second way - by giving the image a little more difficult: to apply the relay. The drone is on the moon delivered a repeater and offers the following scheme of the radio: MCC - terrestrial point of reception and transmission of information - moon relay - MCC. While reading the transferred videos astronauts made in connection with the MCC either in real time or videos announced in advance.

Or even easier: VCR with a pre-recorded program radiomen installed on Board honesty.

By the way, a similar scheme was applied on the "Tip-4" (unmanned variant of the Soviet spacecraft designed to fly around the moon two astronauts). During the flight "Probe-4" Popovich and Sevastyanov was in Evpatoria, in a special isolated hopper, and for six days negotiated with the MCC through a repeater "Probe-4", thereby simulating a flight to the moon and back. Pulling information from the Board of "Probe-4", NASA first time decided that Soviet astronauts flying to the moon, then they explained that it was working on the simulator.

As for video shooting inside "Apollo", which regularly fed the audience, it's all the basics of cinema. First, there are trainers, which train astronauts on earth. They completely mimic and the inside of the ship, and weightlessness. What prevented remove astronauts (or rather, seminarov) at the gym? Nothing!

But here comes the most important question: what led Americans to go to such powerful falsification? Yes all is very simple: it was a political project. Went "cold war", in 1964, the USSR started the development of a similar project - booster N-1. Yes, after four major accidents that occurred in 1969-1972, the program turned, but he could and back to deploy. America simply could not afford "stop" such a grandiose project, it was very important to be the first, it was the blood from the nose to overtake the Russians. But the Russians were in the course will object attentive reader. Well, first of all, not all but just the tip, common people did not know and was not supposed to know, for them that America is the enemy. Suddenly, the enemy - Yes ahead. So, he may, this enemy, lives more right than we are here with his vaunted socialism? How could the tip to prevent the occurrence of such opinion? Will reply cynically: Yes no all if she was? When entering this oil market! Secondly, learned something not immediately then, after "landing". Tried to say something, but the US threw "oil bone" - and his mouth was closed. So before the top of the USSR was not "off". But to prove to the world and ordinary Soviet citizens, who in the house the owner is very important.

Proved. However, there is another question: Americans don't understand that their staging is done roughly and carelessly? Did NASA could not better, do no specialists who are able to notice and to eliminate all inconsistencies? Failed - that is the law of the universe, any system, even the most reliable, always fails to take into account all just unreal, because the volume of work is huge, punctures and misunderstandings are inevitable. In a philosophical sense a lie is always a lie, as if qualitatively it was concocted. If you can account for all but a lie is the truth and distinguish them would be impossible. And weakness lies is that while it is not widely presented information, it is enough to specify at least one discrepancy - and the lie is revealed. Any conflict is proof of the hypocrisy, and if there is at least one (!) a contradiction, you can safely say that all (!) the material is fake, and the number of presented information there is nothing changes.

ABALAKOVA