NASA ADMITS WE NEVER WENT TO THE MOON

[Zook_e_Pi]

Here's a live feed from the ISS:



So the question of the existence of the ISS is answered. It exists. I don't think blue-screen technology can replicate what we are witnessing on live stream.

Next question is, how much of the interior is genuine? We already know manned spacecraft can exist in low Earth orbit indefinitely ... so it wouldn't surprise me in the least if a few individuals lived in the ISS at all times.

What raises my concern is stuff like this (from @55 to @2:25 minutes):


Forget that the video is produced by a (deluded) flat Earth buff. I'm interested in the blue-screen technology and implications therein.

Tim Peake may indeed have been inside the ISS at the time (or he may have been in a warehouse on Earth, who really knows?), but the blue-screen tech suggests only as part of a skeleton crew to keep the station operational. After all, MIR had to have a skeleton crew in relatively cramped quarters when it was operational. I think a lot of the other stuff is made up. Especially the stuff where you have astronauts apparently gliding around in wide open spaces inside the ISS on observable strings, doing all kinds of entertainment things and what not (not science things), and generally making it seem like indefinite outer space manned existence beyond simple spacecraft and skeleton crews is a reality. IOW, more circus than a commitment to outer space exploration potential. More subterfuge than a scale befitting the initial promise of a space station in the fashion of say, Space Odyssey 2001, that lured billions of public monies from different countries into the coffers of select chosen companies. That sorta thing.

My main issue is this: how much of the ISS is real, not is the ISS real? I accept that it is real. I also now understand that some of it is fabricated. How much is fabricated? And why?

Pax

[Ross]

What raises my concern is stuff like this (from @55 to @2:25 minutes):

Ok, I suggest you do some study Zook. The ISS crew perform all manner of experiments and Scientific studies and analysis, as you're aware. This also includes educational lesson to school children, (hell, anyone in general for that matter) often live, in real time and recorded in others.

You're not looking at a 'blue screen grid' for the purpose of faking... (Green screens are the most used for CGI backdrops, though blue is also used, green works better for certain applications)

You're looking at a 'measuring grid'. Newtonian physics is one of the many lesson taught. This is what Tim Peake is doing, standing in front of a pull down, blue grid screen to show motion of an object in weightlessness.

You can even see the slightly warped material in the grid lines as it hangs down, and being in a weightless environment, it'll be anchored and obviously not that taut. Yes, all things are weight restricted so the blue grids made of a light material.

Forget that the video is produced by a (deluded) flat Earth buff. I'm interested in the blue-screen technology and implications therein.

I disagree, strongly. Anyone promoting FE is an idiot, period. And by definition (an idiot) cannot be trusted in any capacity to deliver any kind of evidence to justify their 'proof'. And as I've given the correct facts in regards to the blue grid, it again clearly demonstrates the idiocy of these muppets...and Zook, you're smarter than that. You're being lazy...and I confess at times I wonder if you do it on purpose, because I know you're not stupid...so it's either you're damn lazy or you're playing games...I strongly lean towards lazy. Why? because that's the usual go-to default setting for most conspiracy research.

Ok, I'm off to the beach and bush in a little place called 'Kawhia' on the west coast of New Zealand...steeped in Maori history, it's a cool place to visit...see you in a few days.

[Zook_e_Pi]

Fair enough. Ross.

That blue screen appears to be a physical grid (with imperfect lines) as opposed to an electronic grid with perfect lines.

Definitely a trap for truthseekers, probably set up by NASA itself, which has agents doing the controlled opposition thing. I mean what person in the general population would notice the contents of the TV screen (while Bush Sr. was being wheeled through) or the implication of said contents, other than those who were planning to set up a trap to be exploited later?

Question begs asking: why would NASA want to trap truthseekers?

The answer is obvious to me if not to you. The raw footage of the Apollo 11 faked Moon mission cannot be explained away. Truthseekers have got NASA by the balls. The balls are being squeezed tight. Losing oxygen fast, NASA is fighting back against the truthseekers with controlled opposition and designed traps.

I've seen other videos showing the inside of the ISS ... and the use of CGI is clearly evident in those videos.


I remain agnostic about the nature of reality inside the ISS. Like I said, I accept that there is a space station in low Earth orbit. But the question as to whether it's manned or unmanned still remains unanswered for me. I've seen conjectures for both possibilities but nothing really conclusive.


Pax

[Ross]

That above video's a joke.

The video exposes nothing, essentially all he's saying is CGI exists and this is how it's done in the studio, so therefore this is what the ISS cooperative are doing, and offering zero proof to support his cliams.

Flat Earth in the title is another giveaway as to the idiocy of this dude.

[Zook_e_Pi]

That above video's a joke.

It's a joke if one uses it to claim that the ISS is indeed CGI. It's not a joke if one uses it to point out the possibility of CGI. If the Moon Landing scam has taught us one thing, it's that appearances are not what they seem. They genuinely launched a Saturn rocket with an Apollo crew on top of it back in 1969. No dispute there. They genuinely retrieved an Apollo crew and capsule from the ocean back in 1969. No dispute there. The interesting part and controversy arises with the stuff that is alleged to have happened in between launch and retrieval. Raw unedited NASA video footage from 1969 shows Neil Armstrong claiming to be 130,000 miles out in space when he was in fact fondling escape velocity in low Earth orbit. That singular monumental spot of deception by NASA et al then gives legitimacy to anyone who questions the authenticity of anything that NASA has ever represented.

Combined with phony video footage of the actual landing scene, e.g. astronauts held by suspension wires to simulate Moon gravity; stagehands caught in the background in some footage; impossible shadows; evidence of front screen projection; Apollo astronauts gone wild with rage when confronted with evidence of their deception, etc. etc. ... the Moon Landing legerdemain of years gone by should give us reason to pause today, before we accept the full veracity of the entire ISS mission.

I'm not here to deny that the ISS exists and orbits the Earth. I'm not here to deny that astronauts are taken to the ISS and returned from the ISS. I accept those two endpoints without issue. But there was a lot of bull between the endpoints of launch and retrieval in the summer of 1969; which then lends to natural skepticism of the interval between shuttles to and from the ISS (whether via Space Shuttle or via Soyuz).

The video exposes nothing, essentially all he's saying is CGI exists and this is how it's done in the studio, so therefore this is what the ISS cooperative are doing, and offering zero proof to support his cliams.

Flat Earth in the title is another giveaway as to the idiocy of this dude.

Well, I can't pretend to understand the motives of the video producer, Ross. My motive is what I control and it is singular: the truth. To me, the original video is beneficial in understanding the interval between trips to the ISS.


Pax