Godlike Productions - Discussion Forum
Users Online Now: 2,110 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 766,535
Pageviews Today: 1,352,665Threads Today: 574Posts Today: 9,919
03:47 PM


Back to Forum
Back to Forum
Back to Thread
Back to Thread
REPLY TO THREAD
Subject MOON HOAX ~And the smoking gun is the same technology GOOGLE EARTH uses!!!
User Name
 
 
Font color:  Font:








In accordance with industry accepted best practices we ask that users limit their copy / paste of copyrighted material to the relevant portions of the article you wish to discuss and no more than 50% of the source material, provide a link back to the original article and provide your original comments / criticism in your post with the article.
Original Message MOON LANDING HOAX?

Folks ignore the pro-NASA shrills who get their thrills keeping you in the dark.

Are you worried about what Ed Snowden can reveal about the NSA?
Ever hear of the NRO?
Watch the video.
Ask yourself the obvious questions?

To the reader, this video clearly explains that in the 1960s we had magnification technology that could take a HI-RES image right down to 3 inches from 100 miles up.

That fact is mentioned FOUR times in this video.
[link to www.youtube.com (secure)]

3"
YES 3 INCH resolution from 100 miles is mentioned @26:43, @37:31, @42:20-7, and @ 51:07


3" resolution in the 1960s and fuzzy images in 2014?

The fact that the spy agency NRO has placed dozens of these UNMANNED SMALL SATELLITES in orbit around the earth suggests they have at least ONE orbiting the moon as we speak.
You would think at least one?

And the fact that they should be able to share with you and me HI-RES images taken from 100 miles up yielding up to a 3" resolution on the moon where are no clouds or atmosphere too, begs the question ... why don't they?
... why is NASA feeding 'we the sheeple' lousy lo-res images of Apollo landing sites, still in 2014?

Why do we get WOW incredible amazing HI-RES images from MARS and really lousy images from the former glory, i.e the six Apollo landing sites, especially Apollo 11, the first time we ever landed on the moon deserves a low orbit flyby using one of these satellite/cameras.

Now compare RED MARS with the BLUE MOON.
MARS WOW [link to blogs.voanews.com]

MOON Apollo landing sites ~ these images are shit when you realize what could be done in the 1960s and 70s.
[link to www.nasa.gov]

Yes I realize the camera on MARS is a land based camera.

Imagine a robot creeping around the former Apollo landing sites taking 'we the sheeple' for a ride down memory lane, reliving the former glory, up close and personal.
But none of that really matters.

The other image I posted purporting to be Apollo landing sites really really suck when compared to the technology the Americans and Russians had in the 1960s.
WHY WHY WHY do they feed us shitty images of the Apollo landing sites in 2014?

WHY?
It is illogical.
This image would have been taken from space using Soviet technology.
[link to i.imgur.com] <compare> [link to www.nasa.gov]

Compare the images of the Soviet technology available in the 1970s to the NASA image of the Apollo landing sites today in 2014 that I linked to earlier.

Some folks trust NASA and the NSA.
Others only place their trust in God/Jesus

Did the SON of GOD Jesus walk on the earth and water?
bsflag
Did mortal man the SON of a BITCH take an oath and walk on the moon?
bsflag

For a demonstration of the technology available in the 1960s, which did not change much until GOOGLE EARTH applied it, after the spy agenices used it for 40 years...

Watch this, takes less than one minute for the demo.
[link to www.youtube.com (secure)]

So clearly 'we the sheeple' are being duped in a big way.
In addition to what religion puts on the table.
Pictures (click to insert)
5ahidingiamwithranttomatowtf
bsflagIdol1hfbumpyodayeahsure
banana2burnitafros226rockonredface
pigchefabductwhateverpeacecool2tounge
 | Next Page >>





GLP