Moon Landings: Did They Happen or Not?

[taratai]

If you look at a light source that is strong enough, then weaker lights behind it won't be visible. You could actually try it yourself during the night and look at a street lamp.
And the further away you look from the light source, the more visible weaker lights will become.

Then there is also quality of the pictures and sensitivity of the camera that takes it - it might simply be too weak to pick up weaker light sources like stars.

Thus, i'd say that it's hard to tell whether (and which) moonlanding pictures were faked without ourselves going into space to witness it ourselves.

(and to illustrate it, below are modern pictures from a space station)

 

[Niall]

The Cs did say this about the Apollo missions:

Session 9 September 2000

Q: (L) Okay, moving right along here. We have here a guy who has written a paper that says: "To make interstellar travel believable, NASA was created. The Apollo space program foisted the idea that man could travel to and walk upon the moon. Every Apollo mission was carefully rehearsed and then filmed in the large sound stages at the Atomic Energy Commission's Top Secret test site in the Nevada Desert and in the secured and guarded sound stage at the Walt Disney studios within which was a huge, full scale mock-up of the Moon." Is it true that the Apollo missions were films as described here?

A: No.

Q: (L) Did the Apollo missions actually go into space as we think they did?

A: Yes.

Q: (L) This guy further writes that "All names, missions, landing sites and events in the Apollo space program echo the occult metaphors, rituals and symbology of the Illuminati secret religion. The most transparent was the fakes explosion on the spacecraft Apollo 13 named 'Aquarius' at 1:13 on April 13, 1970, which was a metaphor for the initiation ceremony involving the death, placement of the coffin, communion with the spiritual world, and the imparting of esoteric knowledge to the candidate, rebirth of the initiate, and the raising up of Phoenix, the new age of Aquarius by the group of the Lion's Paw..." and so on and on. Was this occult significance applied to these events, either deliberately or accidentally?

A: Maybe coincidentally.

Q: (L) If there was any coincidence of application of these principles, did it bespeak an underlying synchronous or nonlocal reality of oneness?

A: These ideas being put forth this evening are entertaining if nothing else!

So, the Cs put this one to bed... 26 years ago?!

Anyway, the questions keep coming, so here's the most recent attempt to get the Cs to say what really happened in them lunar launches:

Session 24 January 2026​

(Brewer) Did they accomplish the moon landing mission as described, using a single rocket?

A: Yes

Q: (Brewer) Did they transport the necessary equipment to LEO using multiple launches before travelling to the moon?

A: No

Q: (L) What's LEO?

(Niall) Lower Earth Orbit.

(L) Oh. Well, I'm just not on top of these things.

(Niall) "The moon landing was a hoax." People are convinced that the physics of how they could do it in 1969 were not possible. So they're trying to come up with ways to make it fit. But the Cs answers keep saying, no, they did it. They did it as described.

(L) They did it, they just didn't do it again.

(Niall) Yes, because of something they saw there.

(Brewer) Did Apollo's missions 12 through 17 happen as described?

A: Close.

Q: (Brewer) What is meant by "altered reality" on the moon?

(L) Who said there was an altered reality on the moon?

(Joe & Gaby) In the last session.

A: Heavy 4D vibrations.

Q: (Brewer) Is it a "high strangeness" type?

A: Yes

Q: (Joe) Is that a permanent status on the moon?

A: No

Q: (Brewer) Is there altered perception also?

A: Yes

Q: (Brewer) What percentage of space imagery and video is faked?

A: 30.

Q: (L) 30 percent.

(Brewer) Did NASA know of "aliens" and other high strangeness before the missions?

A: Yes

Q: (Nienna) Many say that humans cannot survive radiation from the Van Allen belt. If we did go to the moon, and man has walked on it, how did they survive the radiation of the Van Allen belt?

A: Trajectory, speed, and shielding.

Q: (Joe) Physics, science!

(L) So in other words, they had special trajectories.

(Joe) They used trigonometry. [laughter]

(L) They were passing through very fast. And they used shielding.

(Joe) And they used insulation. [laughter]

(Niall) This is the result of all the other shenanigans. People no longer... They just doubt everything. "It was all fake the whole time!" It's a shame.

(L) Well, you get to the point where you think everything they say is a lie!

(Niall) Nowadays especially. But it's a shame because some of the actual achievements, they don't believe in them anymore. And it causes loss of morale and depression.

(Chu) Yeah, but when you have 30% fake images, it gives you cause to doubt.

(Niall) Yes. Reason to doubt, but not to go, "Oh, the Earth is flat as a result!" But that's where they go.

 

[Macrocosm]

I used to be more invested in the moon landings when I was younger, but haven't touched that subject in many years (I was squarely on the side of it being fake).

Years later, I visited the National Air and Space Museum in DC where they had fragments of the rockets and shielding on display. The shielding didn't look much thicker than aluminum foil to me. That made me more convinced it wasn't real.

A while later, I came across a video by S G Collins saying it was impossible to have faked the filming. The original video is not available anymore, so here is a repost from another channel.

I don't have a stance now for or against, but I still have doubts about why it's taking so darn long to go back (the counterarguments center around the lack of budget, the phasing out of old infrastructure and the need to rebuild the entire supply chain), or why hasn't anyone else done it?