The smoking gun NASA a Fraud Proof Of Life On Moon

Philbert · 12-22-2009, 05:41 AM

This is real footage from Apollo 11

Learn about the true nature of N.A.S.A. Nasa had discovered that the Earths Moon was inhabited when they viewed the first images sent back from Ranger 7 in 1964. Ranger 7 sent back over 4000 images showing life on the Moon. Nasa is a branch of the United States Military Air Force. Going to the moon in 1969 was not to land on the Moon. It was for Military observation, documentation and study of the highly advanced intelligence that resides on the Moon. The Apollo Program was created to pacify public interest in the Moon and the solar system and take their mind off the current phenomenon of that time.

This presentation breaks the debunkers back.
The information in these videos shows undeniable proof that N.A.S.A and the United States Military as well as some other countries have knowledge that the Moon is inhabited. This is why they have never been back.

This video will also provide reasonable understanding that the recent Lunar Crater Observation and Sensing Satellite (LCROSS) was another hoax only to cover the endless lies that Nasa has been feeding the public since their birth.

The Lunar Crater Observation and Sensing Satellite (LCROSS) supposed live footage had defects in the footage #1 It appeared as though it was an image of craters loaded into photo shop and zoomed in.
#2. Viewers did not see rocket/bomb in front of the satellite camera.
#3. There was no obvious explosion or impact on the supposed camera that followed the explosive tool.
#4. Nasa told the public prior to the impact, that the plume could be observed through telescopes.
#5. Fact not one observatory recorded the impact plume.
Nasa has always operated with this type of trickery.
See the truth in these 3-4 presentations then I dare anyone who don't want to believe what is being told here to download the original and do the research. These presentations show that the Apollo missions encountered many Ufos. They also show the evidence that Nasa uses Hollywood style movie tricks.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yQKRQO3CfFw

Part 2 the Nasa Deception - Evidence of Life On The Moon Breaking the Skeptics Backs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d2NQl42261U
Just some things I have found in my research of the original released footage by Nasa.
Super imposing astronauts or equipment into real footage or an image of the Moon.
They have been using “green screens” before Hollywood began using them for special effects.
Nasa Jpl started using it for super imposing Astronauts into actual film footage of the Moon,
the color used when faking the footage was closer to yellow or off white.
I have found that much of the film footage of the astronauts walking on the moon is actually live film footage with the astronauts super imposed over it.
You can find this out in most cases by obtaining the best quality footage first.
Then open it into a video enhancement program.
Slow the section down that is suspected to be faked.
By slowing the footage down between 200% and 400% you are able to see many ufos.

Nasa Techniques
used in concealing
the truth

-Trick photography
-Lenses with
-more curve
(fish Eye lens)
-Cutting off horizons
-False colors
-Low contrast
-High white light

I will be posting more of my research when I get it compiled.

If you don’t want to do the school work, why go to school. Many will not want to accept what they see with their own eyes, only because they believe the lie and are in denial. The evidence is undeniable.

mntruthseeker · 12-22-2009, 06:01 AM

Thanks for sharing these tapes..............I love the way its slowed down and we can see what is being described.

Orion11 · 12-22-2009, 06:19 AM

looks decent so far!, Nice,
thanks, and Welcome here.

Ill go through all this thoroughly once Sol rises again.
for now... to Dreamworld.. lol

now i am subscribed though.

Blessings, Nice to have you!

TRANCOSO · 12-22-2009, 11:32 AM

Bulls eye, Philbert!
Your first post & already you have one outspoken fan!
Although this can radically change with your next post, because - as we say in TV Land - You're As Good As Your Last Show!, or Post, in this case.

Anyway, cool stuff!

TruthWillSetUFree · 12-22-2009, 12:05 PM

That was amazing footage WOW Thank you for sharing.

I believe NASA/military are also using chemtrails to hide what they are doing in space.

One morning just a few months ago I woke up around 4 AM, I remember it was windy.

I thought to myself how loud it seemed outside and couldn't believe it would be from the wind, so I opened even though it was pretty cold.

The noise above the heavy cloud cover was unlike anything I have ever heard

I can only liken it to maybe a hundred or so helicopters, but even stranger than that. It lasted far longer than it would take for say a few helicopters to go overhead. I remember it lasting for a good 10 minutes or so. All the time I kept wondering, what is that and what are they doing up there?

I had a strong sense that whatever it was they did not want it seen by anyone.

Donny · 12-22-2009, 12:15 PM

Nice information Philbert, thankyou for shareing.

Reader · 12-22-2009, 04:08 PM

Hey Philbert, nice work. Any ideas as to who these et's are ?

Peace of mind · 12-30-2009, 09:09 PM

cool...thanks

here's Fox news discussing disclosure,
yes, a very unlikely source...imo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iQgF4zzfQKQ

Peace

Majorion · 12-30-2009, 10:45 PM

It goes way beyond just the Moon.

Life exists everywhere in the Solar System, everywhere in the Universe.

How this is covered up? .. ridicule, suppression, lies, discrediting the most prominent figures associated with exposing this cover up.

Philbert · 12-31-2009, 05:00 PM

I agree 1000% with this Majorion, I have investigated many satellite images of mars, venis, jupiters moon and have found signs of inhabitants. Structures and buildings.
Please feel free to look over the images I have posted at this webpage below. You will find images from Nasa satellites that show the evidence of life on mars, humans, vehicles, animals, housing, structures.

http://oursolarsystemthetruthishere.webs.com/

THE eXchanger · 12-31-2009, 05:02 PM

doesn't John Leer get into that ???
if so, http://www.projectavalon.net/forum/s...ad.php?t=16128
i'll put a link to this thread, also, from that thread too

Ravens and Doves · 12-31-2009, 02:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reader

Hey Philbert, nice work. Any ideas as to who these et's are ?

Personally, and it pains me to say this, but compared to some older space shuttle smoking guns, those moon shots are the weakest eveidence I've seen so far on Avelon. I used to work with celluloid and all kinds of specks would appear from one (piec of dust mangified) to several frames (fiber or human hair or?) until it's knocked away by air movement cause by the flickering shutter or other disturbace. The was true for vide tape in those days, too.

Ket's just cut to the case. I've seen day light disc with my own two, sober lying eyes (along with countless witnesses - read "UFOs Over Topanga Canyon" by Preston Dennet - Topanga is near Santa Monica... it's just half of went on above the L.A. skies).

Now THIS is a smoking gun!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZH9eZ...03CE3&index=40

One two-bit debunker says "there's no movement in the trees." Right now, I look out my window and the branches are saying, does that mean I have fake trees? Ohters have ointed out the causual reaction of the woman. In 1994 some of us were so desensitized by all the sighting that the reaction was not "OH MY GOD! IT'S A FLYING SAUCER!!!! HELP!!!" (I know of one fellow who did loose it) but more like "Cool! That's a beutiful one!"

Got to go.

Paul

Philbert · 12-31-2009, 06:48 AM

[QUOTE=Ravens and Doves;213057]Personally, and it pains me to say this, but compared to some older space shuttle smoking guns, those moon shots are the weakest eveidence I've seen so far o

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ravens and Doves

Personally, and it pains me to say this, but compared to some older space shuttle smoking guns, those moon shots are the weakest evidence I've seen so far on Avalon.

In reply to your statement the direct significance of this particular sequence of footage is to document the historical implications. This is just a piece of the entire picture, but a large piece.

In fact anyone who will take time to seriously ponder the footage using some reasoning can analyze the objects and see they are clearly coming from the moon. Clearly enough to anyone applying simple reasoning can see that these are not dust or hairs on the film. These are objects that where with out a single doubt in my mind filmed while near the moon. I mean come on I understand that some of the zoom are not very clear, but a single square pixel that is going to move across the footage, come up from the moon and lands on the Command Module is not a defect in the film or hair or scratch.
Also defects in film will not constantly through 300 frames, depict structures on the surface, obvious flying objects, objects that clearly get larger as they come closer to view and smaller as they go away or fade because they are moving so fast.
If we do the math, we have many very unusual things going on in the film.
#1. Objects that appear to be real moving up to and around the command module,
#2. Objects that appear to be structures and buildings on the surface of the moon.
#3. Objects that appear to come up and land on the command module it two sections of this footage.
#4.Evidence of a manufactured fake horizon,
#5. Evidence of too little contrast in the released footage from NASA.
Putting these all together and with a little study and homework they add up to a huge cover up.
Yes many other evidences are out there that also are beginning to weigh in heavy on the big picture.

Many false presentations are out also. I did watch the video link you had posted here, and as much as this is going to hurt it has to be said. Many false video of U.F.Os have been created using cgi.
Another thing is that the video you posted shows a definite phenomenon in the footage that can not be identified. But the sad thing is that it has no credibility. It is a video shot by citizen here on earth.
That could be a government experiment or technology that was caught on the film in your link.

Remember false flags are used here on the people to confuse.

As far as a smoking gun I can see no smoke. The smoke on the other hand seen in the NASA deception footage can be traced back to a source that is real - NASA.
The way I see it, Nasa has shot themselves in the leg, and soon to shoot their other limbs off as soon as more people put the undeniable evidence together from Nasas own footage.

Trust me there is plenty to put together, just not many people can work with the film archives.

Another thing I would like to say is that I did not compile and post this footage of the nasa deception series for fame or fortune or popularity, I am doing this because these things are important for everyone to hear, even if they don’t believe in them.

Sorry your posted video link is just not a smoking gun to me there just is no smoke to follow.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ravens and Doves

I used to work with celluloid and all kinds of specks would appear from one (piece of dust magnified) to several frames (fiber or human hair or?) until it's knocked away by air movement cause by the flickering shutter or other disturbance. The was true for video tape in those days, too.

Sorry but I need to address this also. The characteristics you explain do not hold any water with at least 6-10 anomalies that appear in the Apollo footage that seem to defy this explanation you have given. Things such as I stated before, that are flying outside around the Command Module and then landing on it or stopping next to it and them returning to the moon surface. Again these defects you talk about, specks dust, fibers, hair will not appear continually like flying objects or structures on the moon either. Unless you have some really contaminated film footage that these things could build up and create look alikes. But then I still doubt that specs, dust, fibers and hair even if they had a chance to build up in an area of the footage, would precisely track along with known real object in the footage, as though they are real objects captured in the film footage themselves.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ravens and Doves

Ket's just cut to the case. I've seen day light disc with my own two, sober lying eyes (along with countless witnesses - read "UFOs Over Topanga Canyon" by Preston Dennet - Topanga is near Santa Monica... it's just half of went on above the L.A. skies).

Again the things you claim to have seen could be of government projects.

The NASA film Archives are important evidences that open up a totally different story than what tradition has told us.

We can look at footage of U.F.Os from all across the world, but the question remains in this day who is the intelligence operating the craft, off planet beings or government.

I believe strongly that the important answers are hidden in the NASAs own Work, displayed for everyone to investigate for themselves. Giving the assurance of their source also.

That is why I am going to post footage I recently compiled again from Nasa own files.

Oh by the way Jaxa is Japans Space agency, But in fact they are in bed with NASA. You can check out some of the images from jaxa website and find that they also display the Nasa Logo in images and on their uniforms.

Here are the latest smoking guns.

Jaxa Japans space agency deceptions proof of life on the Moon Released today World News Now
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yOQXWXTPsFU

Breaking News Japan Space Agency Announces The Proof Of Civilization On Earths Moon
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vVBYUE-1Npc

Real Alien encounters Apollo 11 Crew Must see Undeniable Proof Of Life On The Moon
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f5HExSkAzR8

Ravens and Doves · 01-01-2010, 11:26 PM

[QUOTE=Philbert;213215pixel that is going to move across the footage, come up from the moon and lands on the Command Module is not a defect in the film or hair or scratch.
Also defects in film will not constantly through 300 frames,

Philbert and Friends,

It's good that we have this dialogue and agree to disagree on certian points without any personal attacks. Actually, we're on the same page regarding moon and planetary scrutuers. Other clips you have posted are better, In my opinion.

A few things I'd like to clear up. I said "a few frames" not 300 and I used the "human hair" term only as an example of the many difficulties that arise in making (especialy celluloid) copies of motion pictures. Also, pixels never move - but specks do.

If you've ever seen at the very end of a Hollywwod flick "Color by Delux." Delux was/is essentially Twentieth Century Fox's film processing lab - full post production facillity and archives. My brother was their chief engineer for many years before he went to Lazer Pacific when Kodak bought Lazer to be tech ready for the now unfolding, global, ULTRA high def digital broadcast AND theater output. Now, due to the economy thing, he's temping with ABC, NBC or whoever beeps his phone. I saw first hand a painstaking process:

Even through the processing and editing rooms are highly temp and humidity controlled, the back side of film is like an a vinyl record - in the cleanest of rooms, movement generates a static charge that can pull clothing fibers off a tech's shirt and unless the editing or other hardware is sophisticated enough to have a back-up, self film cleaning unit, tiny little dots appear and disapper.
I'm not saying that that is what is in the first NASA clip you posted, I'm just saying "camera artifacts" are something to consider regard SOME anomalies.

#4.Evidence of a manufactured fake horizon,

I have no clue as to why they would bother using a fake horizon when simpley leaving the real one in place would be easier and give the shots more credibility. Could the film have been shot through the NASA craft window? (the round portal frame getting in the way?)

*****

Many false presentations are out also. I did watch the video link you had posted here, and as much as this is going to hurt it has to be said. Many false video of U.F.Os have been created using cgi.
Another thing is that the video you posted shows a definite phenomenon in the footage that can not be identified. But the sad thing is that it has no credibility. It is a video shot by citizen here on earth.

*****

"...a video shot by citizen here on earth."

Ahem... ever heard of Project Camelot? It contains videos shot by citizens here on plenet Earth. I'm afraid it's the best we can do, for now.

The Santa Monica clip has already be studied for CGI and no evidence of that was found. Unfortunatly that analytical clip was taken off U-Toob or is very hard to find, but it does exist.

*****

That could be a government experiment or technology that was caught on the film in your link.

Remember false flags are used here on the people to confuse.

*****

I agree, but ANYTHING can be a government experiment at this point.

*****
Trust me there is plenty to put together, just not many people can work with the film archives.

*****

My bro and a woman I breifly dated and who is on my facebook worked with the raw footage of the Discovery Channel, Nat. Geo. and about one quarter of the entire A-list film and TV product (in one respect or another) in the Engish speaking world (that's one reason they got five Emmy's in a row). As Kerry Kassidy can tell you, post-production is highly problem intensive until that precious "final cut" is "in the can" (for the producer and distributors) and the negetives with a master positive go to archives.

******

Sorry your posted video link is just not a smoking gun to me there just is no smoke to follow.

[/COLOR]

There is a small luminous orb that dashes benieth the main object from left to right. These have also dashed undernieth the Space Shuttle just befor or after very convincing ET caft sightings that have baffled the crew... then the video is just down by Houston, NRO, NSA or?

[COLOR="Yellow"]
Again the things you claim to have seen could be of government projects.

******

Nope. I have seen BOTH. My main sighting WAS NOT government... the military intels would show up AFTER the events, stumbling over themselves, nearly crashing their unmarked choppers together. Years later I had tall blonde contact similiar as to what Miriam Delecado experienced, but I was not aboard a craft (others saw orange discs nearby... I saw flashes of light... then proceeded to have my mind blown... ultimatly for the better. I just finished a 300+ page book about it all and need to edit it down for publishing)

I need to close as I just got home after a very eventful (almost TOO eventful... threre's a party in the hills that is STILL going on!) New Years wing-ding.

Thank you for stimulating these trembling, post-temporal lobe siezure hands to work. Re; the brain thing. I WAS NOT having one at the time of my sightings or contact. To me, if that is suggested, it would be as offensive and redundant as the old "weather balloon/swamp gas/sleep paralysis" cop out.

Actually, I could use some good sleep paralysis (with the fear factor) right now.

May 2010 be a better year for us all,

Paul

PS. For those who have acess, go to my profile to see the kind of patch my uncle used to wear in the spookyland of western Nevada. I had my first off-the-consensual-radar experience there when I was about 10 years old.

PS.2. The Adams Family from Outer Space had a very difficult holiday season. The silence is DEAFENING.

Ravens and Doves · 01-01-2010, 11:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ravens and Doves;
*****

[COLOR="Yellow"

Actually, I could use some good sleep paralysis (with the fear factor) right now.

May 2010 be a better year for us all,

Paul

PS. For those who have acess, go to my profile to see the kind of patch my uncle used to wear in the spookyland of western Nevada. I had my first off-the-consensual-radar experience there when I was about 10 years old.

PS.2. The Adams Family from Outer Space had a very difficult holiday season. The silence is DEAFENING.

Oops, I meant to say WITHOUT the fear factor.

Last night I was breifly surrounded by US fan club of the UK women's equvelent of Manchester United... all tall, buff women who wanted to make sure I was treating the British lady of soccer with respect and not dissing her palzy walzy Mr. Beckham. So I took of my hat, toasted Mancester U, said good-night and left the club with life and limb intact.

Another lesson learned without the need for violence.

Majorion · 01-02-2010, 12:34 AM

Recently released JAXA image, discovery of hole/tunnel on the Moon.

Lava tubes?

Nah, leads to the underworld

Dantheman62 · 01-02-2010, 03:32 AM

I love the hole pictures!

A new image reveals a wall on this dark feature, suggesting it is a pit at least 78 metres deep

Dantheman62 · 12-31-2009, 05:54 PM

[QUOTE=Ravens and Doves;213057]Personally, and it pains me to say this, but compared to some older space shuttle smoking guns, those moon shots are the weakest eveidence I've seen so far on Avelon.

I agree with Ravens and Doves, kind of, I would say that it's not the weakest evidence I've seen, but it's definitly not the "smoking gun" LOL

I don't think as of yet that JAXA has admitted to the so called proof.

And yes eXchanger, John Lear is into it, but it's like following Richard Hoagland, or as I call him, "Richard Hoaxland", where Hoaxland says "see that bump over there next to that other bump?, it's a bridge, and it's 10 miles long!" LOL

Next!

Majorion · 12-31-2009, 06:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dantheman62

but it's like following Richard Hoagland, or as I call him, "Richard Hoaxland", where Hoaxland says "see that bump over there next to that other bump?, it's a bridge, and it's 10 miles long!" LOL

Hey buddy, I was under the impression this wasn't a debunker website.

I've seen hundreds of artists like yourself call Richard a hoaxer, and while his views are undoubtedly controversial and open to discussion, I've never seen him hoax anyone with anything.

If it weren't for Richard, people would never have looked into this in the first place.

Unless you have something more substantial to offer, I suggest you keep your ignorant comments to yourself.

Dantheman62 · 12-31-2009, 06:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Majorion

Hey buddy, I was under the impression this wasn't a debunker website.

I've seen hundreds of artists like yourself call Richard a hoaxer, and while his views are undoubtedly controversial and open to discussion, I've never seen him hoax anyone with anything.

If it weren't for Richard, people would never have looked into this in the first place.

Unless you have something more substantial to offer, I suggest you keep your ignorant comments to yourself.

OK, actually you're right about Hoagland, he's not a hoaxer and is an extremely intelligent person, but he's got an imagination that's running rampant!
I shouldn't have used the "Hoaxland" comment because it's really not true and is an inside joke anyway. So I retract that!
Oh, and I'm not your buddy, I'm not an artist, and I'm not ignorant, just very well grounded and very tired of looking at blurry/fuzzy pictures that people are calling proof!

Majorion · 12-31-2009, 09:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dantheman62

Oh, and I'm not your buddy, I'm not an artist, and I'm not ignorant, just very well grounded and very tired of looking at blurry/fuzzy pictures that people are calling proof!

Since apparently you've appointed yourself the evaluator of evidence here, why don't you first demonstrate your standards of proof before evaluating others? Only fair wouldn't you agree? bring about your own evidence first, then you can speak of standards.

Interesting the hypocrisy here, first you condemn the man, then retract the statement, when Hoagland had nothing to do with this topic anyway, there was no mention of him in the first place.

Dantheman62 · 12-31-2009, 09:46 PM

hmmm, no thanks! I'm not playing the "who's evidence is better" game. Have I got pictures? sure, are they better than those blurry videos that are supposedly "proof of life on the moon" sure.

Standards? It really doesn't take much to see what's what in a picture or video, just open eyes.

I retracted the statement because it's true that he's not a hoaxer!
Like I said, it's an inside joke, and it doesn't matter here (for those that are Hoagland followers).

I mentioned him because it 'does' have something to do with this thread as far as "proof of life on the moon", as Hoagland is claiming similar things!

Smile Majorion!

Majorion · 12-31-2009, 10:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dantheman62

hmmm, no thanks! I'm not playing the "who's evidence is better" game. Have I got pictures? sure, are they better than those blurry videos that are supposedly "proof of life on the moon" sure.

Thank you for establishing you haven't a shred of credibility on this matter.

Ironic you get all uncomfortable. Scrutiny works both ways.

Dantheman62 · 12-31-2009, 10:46 PM

Uncomfortable? Where do you get that?
You don't know me, I'm far from uncomfortable, LOL
In fact I'm very comfortable knowing that I'm not a Hoagland follower, or that I'm not following these videos as proof of life on the moon! LOL
We all know NASA's a fraud, (or should know by now), but these videos aren't proof of anything except that some people will bite down hard on this ****!
hmmm, seems I might know you though, as you sound very familiar to someone who used to be on this forum, hmmm
That's ok, keep being a follower, I hope they lead you in the right direction, LOL

taomation · 12-31-2009, 11:27 PM

I must agree with Ravens and Doves. I have also done a fair amount of film restoration and these could easily be dirt specs. If there were life on the moon (and I am not saying that there isn't) I doubt they would send up twenty ships up to do recon and if they did, they would probably hover for a while to check things out. The ships may be fast, but unless they are insect people there reaction time wouldn't be much different than ours.

But I also feel that the "smoking gun" that Ravens and Doves gives could easily be those man made laterns. I have never heard of or seen evidence of this type of craft.

The "smoking gun" is a ship for all to see or your own experience. Mexico has had much better evidence than either of these examples.

I am not trying to put anyone down, but we have to rise to a higher standard. Film is a deceptive medium and if it is a film or video medium the example must be obvious and be able to hold up under scientific scrutiny...

12-22-2009, 12:15 PM	#6
Donny Avalon Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Posts: 1	Re: The smoking gun NASA a Fraud Proof Of Life On Moon Nice information Philbert, thankyou for shareing.

12-22-2009, 04:08 PM	#7
Reader Avalon Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Raleigh, North Carolina Posts: 186	Re: The smoking gun NASA a Fraud Proof Of Life On Moon Hey Philbert, nice work. Any ideas as to who these et's are ?

12-30-2009, 09:09 PM	#8
Peace of mind Avalon Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: The uncharted consciousness Posts: 311	Re: The smoking gun NASA a Fraud Proof Of Life On Moon cool...thanks here's Fox news discussing disclosure, yes, a very unlikely source...imo http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iQgF4zzfQKQ Peace

12-30-2009, 10:45 PM	#9
Majorion Avalon Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: ∞ Posts: 654	Re: The smoking gun NASA a Fraud Proof Of Life On Moon It goes way beyond just the Moon. Life exists everywhere in the Solar System, everywhere in the Universe. How this is covered up? .. ridicule, suppression, lies, discrediting the most prominent figures associated with exposing this cover up.

12-31-2009, 05:00 PM	#10
Philbert Avalon Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Posts: 12	Re: The smoking gun NASA a Fraud Proof Of Life On Moon I agree 1000% with this Majorion, I have investigated many satellite images of mars, venis, jupiters moon and have found signs of inhabitants. Structures and buildings. Please feel free to look over the images I have posted at this webpage below. You will find images from Nasa satellites that show the evidence of life on mars, humans, vehicles, animals, housing, structures. http://oursolarsystemthetruthishere.webs.com/

12-22-2009, 05:41 AM	#1
Philbert Avalon Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Posts: 12	The smoking gun NASA a Fraud Proof Of Life On Moon This is real footage from Apollo 11 Learn about the true nature of N.A.S.A. Nasa had discovered that the Earths Moon was inhabited when they viewed the first images sent back from Ranger 7 in 1964. Ranger 7 sent back over 4000 images showing life on the Moon. Nasa is a branch of the United States Military Air Force. Going to the moon in 1969 was not to land on the Moon. It was for Military observation, documentation and study of the highly advanced intelligence that resides on the Moon. The Apollo Program was created to pacify public interest in the Moon and the solar system and take their mind off the current phenomenon of that time. This presentation breaks the debunkers back. The information in these videos shows undeniable proof that N.A.S.A and the United States Military as well as some other countries have knowledge that the Moon is inhabited. This is why they have never been back. This video will also provide reasonable understanding that the recent Lunar Crater Observation and Sensing Satellite (LCROSS) was another hoax only to cover the endless lies that Nasa has been feeding the public since their birth. The Lunar Crater Observation and Sensing Satellite (LCROSS) supposed live footage had defects in the footage #1 It appeared as though it was an image of craters loaded into photo shop and zoomed in. #2. Viewers did not see rocket/bomb in front of the satellite camera. #3. There was no obvious explosion or impact on the supposed camera that followed the explosive tool. #4. Nasa told the public prior to the impact, that the plume could be observed through telescopes. #5. Fact not one observatory recorded the impact plume. Nasa has always operated with this type of trickery. See the truth in these 3-4 presentations then I dare anyone who don't want to believe what is being told here to download the original and do the research. These presentations show that the Apollo missions encountered many Ufos. They also show the evidence that Nasa uses Hollywood style movie tricks. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yQKRQO3CfFw Part 2 the Nasa Deception - Evidence of Life On The Moon Breaking the Skeptics Backs http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d2NQl42261U Just some things I have found in my research of the original released footage by Nasa. Super imposing astronauts or equipment into real footage or an image of the Moon. They have been using “green screens” before Hollywood began using them for special effects. Nasa Jpl started using it for super imposing Astronauts into actual film footage of the Moon, the color used when faking the footage was closer to yellow or off white. I have found that much of the film footage of the astronauts walking on the moon is actually live film footage with the astronauts super imposed over it. You can find this out in most cases by obtaining the best quality footage first. Then open it into a video enhancement program. Slow the section down that is suspected to be faked. By slowing the footage down between 200% and 400% you are able to see many ufos. Nasa Techniques used in concealing the truth -Trick photography -Lenses with -more curve (fish Eye lens) -Cutting off horizons -False colors -Low contrast -High white light I will be posting more of my research when I get it compiled. If you don’t want to do the school work, why go to school. Many will not want to accept what they see with their own eyes, only because they believe the lie and are in denial. The evidence is undeniable.

12-22-2009, 06:01 AM	#2
mntruthseeker Avalon Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Minnesota Posts: 2,482	Re: The smoking gun NASA a Fraud Proof Of Life On Moon Thanks for sharing these tapes..............I love the way its slowed down and we can see what is being described.

12-22-2009, 06:19 AM	#3
Orion11 Avalon Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 1,098	Re: The smoking gun NASA a Fraud Proof Of Life On Moon looks decent so far!, Nice, thanks, and Welcome here. Ill go through all this thoroughly once Sol rises again. for now... to Dreamworld.. lol now i am subscribed though. Blessings, Nice to have you!

12-22-2009, 11:32 AM	#4
TRANCOSO Avalon Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Amsterdam Posts: 964	Re: The smoking gun NASA a Fraud Proof Of Life On Moon Bulls eye, Philbert! Your first post & already you have one outspoken fan! Although this can radically change with your next post, because - as we say in TV Land - You're As Good As Your Last Show!, or Post, in this case. Anyway, cool stuff!

12-22-2009, 12:05 PM	#5
TruthWillSetUFree Avalon Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Illinois Posts: 673	Re: The smoking gun NASA a Fraud Proof Of Life On Moon That was amazing footage WOW Thank you for sharing. I believe NASA/military are also using chemtrails to hide what they are doing in space. One morning just a few months ago I woke up around 4 AM, I remember it was windy. I thought to myself how loud it seemed outside and couldn't believe it would be from the wind, so I opened even though it was pretty cold. The noise above the heavy cloud cover was unlike anything I have ever heard I can only liken it to maybe a hundred or so helicopters, but even stranger than that. It lasted far longer than it would take for say a few helicopters to go overhead. I remember it lasting for a good 10 minutes or so. All the time I kept wondering, what is that and what are they doing up there? I had a strong sense that whatever it was they did not want it seen by anyone.

12-31-2009, 05:02 PM	#11
THE eXchanger Avalon Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Spiritual eXplorer-Canada Posts: 4,915	Re: The smoking gun NASA a Fraud Proof Of Life On Moon doesn't John Leer get into that ??? if so, http://www.projectavalon.net/forum/s...ad.php?t=16128 i'll put a link to this thread, also, from that thread too

01-01-2010, 11:26 PM	#14
Ravens and Doves Avalon Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: North Hollywood, California Posts: 218	Re: The smoking gun NASA a Fraud Proof Of Life On Moon [QUOTE=Philbert;213215pixel that is going to move across the footage, come up from the moon and lands on the Command Module is not a defect in the film or hair or scratch. Also defects in film will not constantly through 300 frames, Philbert and Friends, It's good that we have this dialogue and agree to disagree on certian points without any personal attacks. Actually, we're on the same page regarding moon and planetary scrutuers. Other clips you have posted are better, In my opinion. A few things I'd like to clear up. I said "a few frames" not 300 and I used the "human hair" term only as an example of the many difficulties that arise in making (especialy celluloid) copies of motion pictures. Also, pixels never move - but specks do. If you've ever seen at the very end of a Hollywwod flick "Color by Delux." Delux was/is essentially Twentieth Century Fox's film processing lab - full post production facillity and archives. My brother was their chief engineer for many years before he went to Lazer Pacific when Kodak bought Lazer to be tech ready for the now unfolding, global, ULTRA high def digital broadcast AND theater output. Now, due to the economy thing, he's temping with ABC, NBC or whoever beeps his phone. I saw first hand a painstaking process: Even through the processing and editing rooms are highly temp and humidity controlled, the back side of film is like an a vinyl record - in the cleanest of rooms, movement generates a static charge that can pull clothing fibers off a tech's shirt and unless the editing or other hardware is sophisticated enough to have a back-up, self film cleaning unit, tiny little dots appear and disapper. I'm not saying that that is what is in the first NASA clip you posted, I'm just saying "camera artifacts" are something to consider regard SOME anomalies. #4.Evidence of a manufactured fake horizon, I have no clue as to why they would bother using a fake horizon when simpley leaving the real one in place would be easier and give the shots more credibility. Could the film have been shot through the NASA craft window? (the round portal frame getting in the way?) *** Many false presentations are out also. I did watch the video link you had posted here, and as much as this is going to hurt it has to be said. Many false video of U.F.Os have been created using cgi. Another thing is that the video you posted shows a definite phenomenon in the footage that can not be identified. But the sad thing is that it has no credibility. It is a video shot by citizen here on earth. * "...a video shot by citizen here on earth." Ahem... ever heard of Project Camelot? It contains videos shot by citizens here on plenet Earth. I'm afraid it's the best we can do, for now. The Santa Monica clip has already be studied for CGI and no evidence of that was found. Unfortunatly that analytical clip was taken off U-Toob or is very hard to find, but it does exist. * That could be a government experiment or technology that was caught on the film in your link. Remember false flags are used here on the people to confuse. * I agree, but ANYTHING can be a government experiment at this point. * Trust me there is plenty to put together, just not many people can work with the film archives. * My bro and a woman I breifly dated and who is on my facebook worked with the raw footage of the Discovery Channel, Nat. Geo. and about one quarter of the entire A-list film and TV product (in one respect or another) in the Engish speaking world (that's one reason they got five Emmy's in a row). As Kerry Kassidy can tell you, post-production is highly problem intensive until that precious "final cut" is "in the can" (for the producer and distributors) and the negetives with a master positive go to archives. ** Sorry your posted video link is just not a smoking gun to me there just is no smoke to follow. [/COLOR] There is a small luminous orb that dashes benieth the main object from left to right. These have also dashed undernieth the Space Shuttle just befor or after very convincing ET caft sightings that have baffled the crew... then the video is just down by Houston, NRO, NSA or? [COLOR="Yellow"] Again the things you claim to have seen could be of government projects. **** Nope. I have seen BOTH. My main sighting WAS NOT government... the military intels would show up AFTER the events, stumbling over themselves, nearly crashing their unmarked choppers together. Years later I had tall blonde contact similiar as to what Miriam Delecado experienced, but I was not aboard a craft (others saw orange discs nearby... I saw flashes of light... then proceeded to have my mind blown... ultimatly for the better. I just finished a 300+ page book about it all and need to edit it down for publishing) I need to close as I just got home after a very eventful (almost TOO eventful... threre's a party in the hills that is STILL going on!) New Years wing-ding. Thank you for stimulating these trembling, post-temporal lobe siezure hands to work. Re; the brain thing. I WAS NOT having one at the time of my sightings or contact. To me, if that is suggested, it would be as offensive and redundant as the old "weather balloon/swamp gas/sleep paralysis" cop out. Actually, I could use some good sleep paralysis (with the fear factor) right now. May 2010 be a better year for us all, Paul PS. For those who have acess, go to my profile to see the kind of patch my uncle used to wear in the spookyland of western Nevada. I had my first off-the-consensual-radar experience there when I was about 10 years old. PS.2. The Adams Family from Outer Space had a very difficult holiday season. The silence is DEAFENING.

01-02-2010, 12:34 AM	#16
Majorion Avalon Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: ∞ Posts: 654	Re: The smoking gun NASA a Fraud Proof Of Life On Moon Recently released JAXA image, discovery of hole/tunnel on the Moon. Lava tubes? Nah, leads to the underworld

01-02-2010, 03:32 AM	#17
Dantheman62 Avalon Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: So. Cal. U.S. Posts: 4,205	Re: The smoking gun NASA a Fraud Proof Of Life On Moon I love the hole pictures! A new image reveals a wall on this dark feature, suggesting it is a pit at least 78 metres deep

12-31-2009, 05:54 PM	#18
Dantheman62 Avalon Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: So. Cal. U.S. Posts: 4,205	Re: The smoking gun NASA a Fraud Proof Of Life On Moon [QUOTE=Ravens and Doves;213057]Personally, and it pains me to say this, but compared to some older space shuttle smoking guns, those moon shots are the weakest eveidence I've seen so far on Avelon. I agree with Ravens and Doves, kind of, I would say that it's not the weakest evidence I've seen, but it's definitly not the "smoking gun" LOL I don't think as of yet that JAXA has admitted to the so called proof. And yes eXchanger, John Lear is into it, but it's like following Richard Hoagland, or as I call him, "Richard Hoaxland", where Hoaxland says "see that bump over there next to that other bump?, it's a bridge, and it's 10 miles long!" LOL Next!

12-31-2009, 09:46 PM	#22
Dantheman62 Avalon Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: So. Cal. U.S. Posts: 4,205	Re: The smoking gun NASA a Fraud Proof Of Life On Moon hmmm, no thanks! I'm not playing the "who's evidence is better" game. Have I got pictures? sure, are they better than those blurry videos that are supposedly "proof of life on the moon" sure. Standards? It really doesn't take much to see what's what in a picture or video, just open eyes. I retracted the statement because it's true that he's not a hoaxer! Like I said, it's an inside joke, and it doesn't matter here (for those that are Hoagland followers). I mentioned him because it 'does' have something to do with this thread as far as "proof of life on the moon", as Hoagland is claiming similar things! Smile Majorion!

12-31-2009, 10:46 PM	#24
Dantheman62 Avalon Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: So. Cal. U.S. Posts: 4,205	Re: The smoking gun NASA a Fraud Proof Of Life On Moon Uncomfortable? Where do you get that? You don't know me, I'm far from uncomfortable, LOL In fact I'm very comfortable knowing that I'm not a Hoagland follower, or that I'm not following these videos as proof of life on the moon! LOL We all know NASA's a fraud, (or should know by now), but these videos aren't proof of anything except that some people will bite down hard on this ****! hmmm, seems I might know you though, as you sound very familiar to someone who used to be on this forum, hmmm That's ok, keep being a follower, I hope they lead you in the right direction, LOL

12-31-2009, 11:27 PM	#25
taomation Avalon Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Posts: 97	Re: The smoking gun NASA a Fraud Proof Of Life On Moon I must agree with Ravens and Doves. I have also done a fair amount of film restoration and these could easily be dirt specs. If there were life on the moon (and I am not saying that there isn't) I doubt they would send up twenty ships up to do recon and if they did, they would probably hover for a while to check things out. The ships may be fast, but unless they are insect people there reaction time wouldn't be much different than ours. But I also feel that the "smoking gun" that Ravens and Doves gives could easily be those man made laterns. I have never heard of or seen evidence of this type of craft. The "smoking gun" is a ship for all to see or your own experience. Mexico has had much better evidence than either of these examples. I am not trying to put anyone down, but we have to rise to a higher standard. Film is a deceptive medium and if it is a film or video medium the example must be obvious and be able to hold up under scientific scrutiny...