Why the US Moon Landing Was Not Faked

By Staff Report

      moon hoax not     https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGXTF6bs1IU&feature=player_embedded

 

Collins is not sure if men went to the moon. But he is sure they could not have faked it. –YouTube
Dominant Social Theme: Here's a good video for all you scientific and cinematic illiterates.
Free-Market Analysis: S.G. Collins – whoever he is – made a legitimate splash with his recently posted "Moon Hoax Not." In this video, Mr. Collins explains that it was impossible for the US moon landings to be faked back in the 1960s because the technology of the time was not sufficient to fake the astronauts' slow-motion movement.
Mr. Collins, based on his other uploaded videos, is a very intelligent man with some libertarian leanings. What is interesting is that with the exception of a very few videos, his preoccupations don't seem especially political. He's been posting videos for more than a year but the moon landing hoax video seems to be one of his first forays into the kind of debunkery that Penn and Teller are so good at.
Does the world need more such? Some would say emphatically, "Yes." But once one has learned that Wall Street funded Lenin's Revolution and the Bush family funded Hitler's Germany, the larger historical paradigm on which most of us were raised begins to fall apart.
If one has the time and sufficient inclination, one can begin to test other historical facts via that most indispensable of tools ... the Internet. In almost every instance, the mainstream narrative turns out to be either demonstrably false or at least questionable. In aggregate, we call this emergent evidence the Internet Reformation.
Collins, however, wants us to believe that when it comes to the moon landings, things were what they seemed to be. In this instance NASA was an efficient bureaucracy, the deranged press conference that occurred after the astronauts returned home was simply the result of Neil Armstrong's pathological shyness, the same people that brought us the Wonder Bra were capable of manufacturing a successful spacesuit, etc.
Collins's presumption is that people are not film-literate if they believe in a moon-landing hoax. Additionally, he believes that to focus on a potential moon hoax is to acquiesce to a certain level of misdirection apparently provided by the same elites that are draining away US freedom via the Patriot Act and other legislation. It's a bait-and-switch, in other words.
Collins's point is that the moon landing debate – in addition to being a proverbial red herring – is unimportant compared to various freedom-sapping programs and recent destructive wars that the top elites have put in place.
This may be true and yet ... we would argue that whether or not the US military was able to land on the moon is actually a kind of cultural totem around which much of the narrative of what we call directed history revolves.
We've spent much of the past decade verifying for ourselves whether modern historical narratives are true or not, and our analysis is available for anyone to see via Daily Bell staff reports. We can say without much equivocation that most if not all of modern Western scientific and historical "facts" – along with art, education and culture – have been either created or reconfigured to (in some sense) promote world government.
Modern wars seem mostly phony. The enemies are not real or at least are manipulated. Economics are controlled via central banking and pseudo economists like Keynes are promoted instead of real ones like von Mises. Obviously, false global promotions like "global warming" are propounded no matter how many times they are debunked. A tiny, arrogant, super-elite has apparently used central banking money to create a worldwide chokehold on the truth and substituted a matrix of promotional falsehoods.
The Internet has given a methodology whereby we believe we can test "truth" for ourselves. Interestingly, the methodology that has emerged has little to do with individual "facts" and much to do with larger patterns. Facts can always be argued about. Patterns may tell a more damning story.
Regarding the moon landings, the facts are obviously in dispute. On the one side are the debunkers who claim to see glinting wires in the moon landing videos, and question whether astronauts could have survived the savage space radiation that they would have been exposed to. The argument is that only a handful of people knew about the actual hoax and that the astronauts who knew were intimidated by various "accidents" that killed certain colleagues and made it clear that talking out of turn would be tantamount to a death sentence.
The rockets went up, circled the Earth for a few days and returned. In the meantime, a pre-made film was broadcast and narrated that purported to show what people expected to see. Most employees of NASA believed it as well. They weren't in on the hoax.
NASA and many others dispute this viewpoint with vicious mockery and massive resources. Those who insist on the mainstream perspective have evidently spent an astonishing amount of time and money fighting back against this sort of "conspiratorial" history. In fact, when we type "moon hoax" into a 'Net search engine we find close to 600,000 direct cites. Neil Armstrong garners 12 million. The moon landing was a big deal; so are the arguments surrounding it.
While historical patterns might lead some to be suspicious of the mainstream moon-landing narrative, it is true that NASA has taken pains to insure that the evidence is properly available. After "losing" (erasing, by mistake) the historic film footage of the landing, for instance, NASA announced with aggregate relief that it had found additional missing footage many months later and – going even further! – proudly announced it had been "retouched" to enhance historical accuracy. When a piece of petrified wood was found in a moon rock collection, the US government promptly investigated and discovered the improbable chain of events that had led to the incident. The strange saga of Mr. Petrified Wood is posted prominently on Wikipedia.
Conclusion: We recommend that people take a look at S.G. Collins's debunkery. It explains, yet again, and in different terms, why those who believe the US government could have faked the moon landings are simply illiterate when it comes to the technology employed and its limitations.
(Video from sgcollins's YouTube user channel.)