X-Files: 365 Days A Year Fake Space Program


Space programs are supposed to be designed primarily to produce visuals of objects in outer space. Such as moons, planets, stars, nebulae, galaxies, etc etc. Why is it that images produced by ground based telescopes are as good as images produced by alleged space craft such as space telescopes, flyby probes, rovers, etc etc? Of course some alleged “space images” excel in quality, but they are all photoshopped. Planet Earth image has been exactly the same for decades in our books, just one image, and it was proven to be photoshopped. Videos “from outer space” show planet Earth clearly in CGI modus. Fake. And why do we need aircraft with telescopes onboard for space photography if we have “real space-telescopes in orbit”?

All alleged “close range” photos from the Moon, Mars, rings of Saturn, all planets, etc etc are FAKE. The HST photos are FAKE, because the HST has never been in space. Just in a swimming-pool. The Mercury, Apollo, Soyuz, ISS etc etc not any different. All FAKE. And alien UFO YouTube gurus use those images for their video shows. Those “professors” are FAKE. Pathetic.

YES ALL SPACE PROGRAMS ARE FAKE. For those who want to debunk this, or ask proof of some sort, my question is simple: HAVE YOU PHYSICALLY SEEN IT IN SPACE BY YOURSELF WITH YOUR OWN EYES rather than consulting and believing some MacDonald napkins downloads from the agencies and youtubees?

To produce news, movies, or documentaries, exactly the same videographic technologies are used in exactly the same type of camera studios. These places have full size mockups and realistic actors of whatever must be filmed. Moreover, all major journalists are paid and commanded by intelligence agencies to lie at all media for all news companies, i.e. all news is dictated by intel.

News channel show videos of “terrorists” who chop off heads, and next day they show videos of astonauts in outer space, or an MH airplane crash, and so on. All faked. The public does not see the difference between fake and real. Only a few spotters with IQ do.

“Reality” is being manufactured artificially, and all that we see we think it is real. That includes all kinds of disasters, terrorist acts, assassinations and executions of presidents, scientific presentations, historical events, space programs, etc etc etc. Even when the president of whatever nations speaks on TV, in most cases it is heavily manipulated footage. Recent analysis has proven that Obama often does not speak for TV in the White House, but in a chromacolor studio.

Are you only relying on what the virtual world and entertainment channels are telling you? Do you really believe the YouTube PhDs? Are you actually buying into the countless conventions, conferences, speeches, interviews? Do you trust, copy/paste, or even worship the alien ufo artefact investigators, celeb web speakers, astronauts, geniuses, doomsdayers, naysayers, professors, and what have you?

Do you really believe the government? Any government? Of any nation? Did you check them for real?


The socalled alien ufo artefact investigators who claim to “know” about extra terrestrial structures on the moon and other planets, just on the basis of information materials from “credible sources” are using fake data. They have no idea.

When I tell them about the fake side, I receive only arrogant replies from those blind desktop YouYube gurus like “who are you to … etc”. That has really happened…

Well dear YouTube University Lecturers, my “who are you” is undisclosed because you obviously cannot handle superiority. They ask me to come with proofs, even though it is their job. But the YouTube gurus do not want to remove the layers that protect the truth. Neil Armstrong who wanted the public know about truth protected layers, got murdered by the NASA short after. Other astronauts got assassinated as well. That means nothing to the desktop pensuck gurus who keep on youtubing about images supplied by NASA photo/video-manipulators. And of course, the space agencies are well served by the socalled “whistleblowers” and “investigators” who spread disinfo on disinfo on disinfo. Layers of them.

They know nothing, those YouTube preachers. They believe news channels. They believe the pics by the space agencies are real. I tell you once more: all space agency supplied pics are FAKE! They are all CGI edited. All news and all fiction production is done by the same entities.

You want proof, YouTube speakers? You will dismiss it anyway. Why because the moment you recognize the fakery, all your work up to now will be proven total disinfo garbage. And you don’t want to lose your face against your followers and disciples. Your ego will always be greater than the real truth. I pity you, no matter how well known “truth seeker guru” you may be.

But here are a couple of things for you to consider:

First of all, wikipedia is full of lies about each and every aspect related with cosmology, astrophyics, space travel and astronomy, amongst other scientific endeavors. DO NOT CONSULT WIKIPEDIA, EVER! Wikipedia is one of the greatest disinformation sources on planet Earth. Anyone believing wikipedia: go think or stay ignorant sheeple!

The Entire Space Program World Wide Is Fake And Hoax.

One small pic for (a) man, one giant scam for mankind. That goes with each and every image that you can get at through public domain.

Commander 2015 Terry Virts (USAF) NASA astronaut said in 2015 that “right now we can only fly in [low] Earth orbit” and he clearly pointed out that the Orion project will hopefully overcome the problems related with the Van Allen Belt so that space travel could be possible. “Could be” … so, the Apollo obviously could not …

Neil Armstrong was assassinated by NASA short after his speech about “removal of truth protected layers” … Here is why:

ALL space agencies on planet Earth are working together – read: conspiring – as to keep mankind believing that we have activities in (outer) space. And to put some more ketchup on the fakeries, some space agencies publicly accuse other space agencies of … fakery. Example: CNSA China National Space Administration demands proof by NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration of the Apollo landing on the Moon. Just to lead the public astray even more with this kind of game to pretend that China’s Moon operations are real.


A rocket cannot cause any form of propulsion in the vacuum of space. This is because for the action-reaction push caused by expanded gases upon combustion in the rocket engine there is always something needed for the gases to push against. Such as the atmosphere, a planetary surface, etc. but not a vacuum.

In other words: action-reaction based propulsion methods do not work in outer space. That’s why rockets can never go higher than the upper layers of Earth’s atmosphere.

Moreover, if steering rockets do not work, then no space craft can change heading in outer space. Therefore no course corrections can be executed the way it is suggested by the space probe projects.

For further propulsion nearby a planet, a gravity push propulsion method is needed, to push against the gravity field. But not a newtonian blower that pushes against that in a vacuum. So up to including the stratosphere the action-reaction propulsion may work, but not beyond that layer.

Many comets expel gas. But that expelled gas does not push the comets in another trajectory. Even better yet, the expelled gas – read: tail – usually points TOWARD the heading of the comet away from the Sun without altering the comet’s trajectory.

The aforesaid was very clearly demonstrated with Space Ship One, a private company operation to air-lift and air-launch a spacecraft up to the 100 km / 62 miles range. The onboard camera clearly recorded the full rocket exhaust near that altitude while the craft did not get propulsed anymore. No one said any word about that phenomenon because everybody was just focusing on that 100 km 62 miles barrier. Already at that altitude there is not enough air density for newtonian action-reaction type of propulsion.

Also the astronauts cannot use compressed air units for moving around EVA. Air exhaust has no effect in the (near) vacuum of space.

The exhaust velocity of a rocket engine is between 3800 mph and 6500 mph, depening on the type of rocket. Even a second stage rocket will not add-up its own speed to that of the first stage, simply because the action-reaction cushion of the first stage won’t be there the next second and its push-off surface is way to small. The newtonian law of action-reaction won’t hold because after the first stage burn-out there is almost no air anymore to push against. Thus any next rocket stage will never exceed 6500 mph minus the lost speed due to payload and environment. Thus, the alleged speeds of 17,000 mph orbits cannot be true, even if the second stage adds-up completely where the total speed would be only 13,000 mph minus loss by resistance. Thus “gravity escape speeds” of 17k+ mph cannot be achieved by conventional rocket technology.

Conclusion: All rockets in space beyond the stratosphere are fake.


The Plasma belt around the Earth at approx 7,000 miles altitude does not allow passage of radio waves but absorbs them. Even if some radio waves do pass, then these will be heavily distorted, so any transmitted data will be completely corrupted. Thus no radio communication is possible between the surface of planet Earth and any object higher up than approx 7,000 miles.

Conclusion: Radio communication between a craft in space and planet Earth surface is impossible. Only low orbit crafts can have radio comms with the ground.

Conclusion: All space probes and rovers etc cannot radio communicate with planet Earth. If at all they exist for real.


First of all, the alleged solar panels of the alleged satellites and space junks are way too small to provide sufficient power for the electrical systems. In the thermosphere, any solar panel would fail completely, if not burned up completely, due to excessive heat.

Furthermore, even is the occupied space layer would have suitable temperature, then why using such inefficient solar panels? To be environment friendly space junk? Besides, if a satellite finds itself at the dark side of the Earth, there is no way to use any battery system simply because batteries are way to heavy to lift into space! Even a simple electrical minicar on the road has range problems and has to carry hundreds of kilograms of batteries. Even if satellites have battery backup, these batteries need to be replaced regularly, just like with cars. And no battery can survive the thermosphere temperatures.

Conclusion: All solar panels in space are useless.


Space agencies claim that they have sent out probes and rovers to moons and planets, and they publish the most stunning CGI composite images.

None of the alleged spacecraft, space telescopes or even ordinary satellite has ever produced a PHOTO of planet Earth, such as a Moon eclipse on planet Earth, or planet Earth in front of stars or even our own Sun.

Show me just ONE photo of planet Earth with stars and nebulae or galaxies on the background! There is not one single such photo! Any search engine will come up with only drawings, CGI composites, image edits, CGI videos, low res high ISO noise pics, and so forth.

ALL “photos” – and “videos” – of and from outer space are FAKE!

If we can “photograph” asteroids of millions miles away then why not the Apollo lander at only 200,000 miles away? The HST cannot photograph the Apollo lander because the resolution compared to the arc of view is scientifically proven insufficient. So any “photo” by the HST showing some pixels of the Apollo is fake.

Why does NASA publish “high quality photos” of Pluto but not of the Moon? NASA knows damn well that no-one can verify Pluto, but maybe some could verify the Moon. So China, Japan, Russia, Europe, and all the other dog ass space fake fuckers have come to the agreement – read: conspiracy – to fake whatever can be faked. And so the other space agencies pretend to probe the Moon and Mars and so on, producing the same copy/paste crap.

All of a sudden we see the most detailed pics of Charon, Titan, Ceres, some more moons etc, but none of our own Moon. It has not to do with Moon cover-up but with the fact that not one single probe ever made it that far out. We only see mockumentaries!

Yes, all the Pioneer, Voyager, Gallileo, Cassini, Juno, New Horizons etc etc type of probes are fake! These projects are fake! It is just one gigantic holowood show! Including the Pluto project, all are just simulators, complete software mock-ups.

All those alleged satellite shoots of planet Earth look too much alike. Bad photoshopping easy to detect by the trained photographer like me.

Conclusion: There are a lot more space program hoaxes. Here goes:


Over half a trillion USD – i.e. 520 billion – was the budget for the ISS fakery up to this day. That’s a lot of Hollywood labor.

All we get to see on public domain is some childish zero gravity “experiments” that are absolutely useless for any department of life whatsoever. We do not need to spend half a trillion bucks to imagine that in zero gravity things tend to float. And how come that even fresh fruit came onboard as part of the zero-G games? Oh I forgot, from the store next door the chromakey studio in Star City, Russia.

How easy it is to fake zero gravity and space craft is proven by various movies, such as the title “Gravity” where George Clooney got briefly featured. Already in the 1960’s there was already a high standard of “simulating” zero gravity in outer space, such as the title “A Space Odyssey 2001”. Half a century of evolution of fakery technology has now culminated in super realistic productions.

From an engineering & design viewpoint, any decent stress analysis done on the ISS proves that the tube structure as shown is completely subject to structural failure. Because of the elongated structure with solar panels on both ends and without solid center of gravity, any re-orientation of the ISS will cause major stress on the joints. There is not even one single external supporting truss. Unless the ISS hull is built to triple milspec, i.e. like a Russian tank or a steel bridge, it will be ripped apart in terms of structural stress. But then it would be impossible to get that bulky heavy mass into space.

Moreover, if I would design-engineer the ISS, I would make damn sure it be built multiple times spec, i.e. much stronger than the bleuprints specs. It is supposed to hold human life in an extremely hostile environment, space, and the slightest defect or rupture can cause immediate death. There is no way to survive any strucural damage. A space station should be even more beyond mil spec than a submarine!

The overall structure better be either compact disk, ring or sphere shaped rather than an elongated straight pipe. The old sci-fi space station designs, consistently showing ring, disk or wheel structures would be highly stable and efficient. Sci-fi moviemakers had obviously a lot higher design & engineering IQ than NASA PhD mules.

The ISS is reported to orbit around planet Earth at an altitude of approx 260 miles. And at a speed of approx 17140 mph, about the same speed as the HST or any orbiting object such as a satellite would do.

Not to mention the thermosphere that starts at approx 90 miles up with temperatures over 2000 C. No metal vehicle can go beyond 90 miles up without getting overheated, ripped apart, molten. That’s why nuke tipped ICBMs would never work, unless in lower orbit, but then they would incinerate upon re-entry. Moreover, rockets are absolutely useless in space.

Even if the ISS body would survive the thermosphere, then there is no way that the solar panels would be able to enough electricity to power the air conditioning system onboard. No air ducts are seen in any of the NASA videos. No mention about HVAC – heating ventilation air conditiong – technology in any of the NASA videos.

The countless NASA videos of ISS operations are done in a swimming pool based ISS simulator. All zero gravity effects are done by computer generated imagery CGI technology. This is proven beyond any doubt by numerous investigators around the globe.

In addition, even if there were a space station in orbit, it could not be manned because there is now way to survive in such badly designed heap of scrap. The structure has nothing to do with keeping in mind the survival and comfort of any astronaut. There are no safety provisions, no escape possibility, no airlock doors between the sections, no working toilet and sewage, no procedures for hygiene, etc etc.

Not one public mention about the HVAC system, which would by itself already consume all of the electricity generated by the 20 years old inefficient solar panels that have never been replaced by modern cells. And then we haven’t yet talked about electricity consumption for the sewage and purif system, scientific instruments and computers, nav and calibration systems, the kitchen yes, and lots of other necessities.

There is not even a double airlock on the docking area. Videos only show single airlock doors, which is very weird because every module was supposed to be self contained prior to being assembled to the ISS. Unless the doors are trashed into space. Doesn’t make sense.

It is very unreal that not one section is airlocked during docked transfer. So how does the crew manage the air pressure? NASA shows nothing on this one either. The public videos do show single doors that are locked manually by an ordinary wallmart lever instead of a multi locking system like in airliners. Not one single video showing airlocking during the dock/undock procedure. Even sci-fi movies show that.

Also, when undocking, not one single NASA video has shown how the push-back is accomplished. The re-entry vehicle, be it the Shuttle or the Soyuz does not use any push-back mechanism, neither does the ISS. The official NASA videos just show vehicle separation as though it just goes by itself.

Never any mention how NASA manages to keep the internal ISS environment, habitat, panels, switches, equipment, etc etc still after 20 years so clean, i.e. dust free, CO2 balanced, moist balanced, O2 supply, bacteria & fungus control, not a single stain or speck of dust, moist, hair, waste, etc anywhere in the ISS. No cleaning and garbage facility was ever shown on NASA videos. Never any footage in 20 years of any astronaut cleaning even a window. Why? Isn’t it important for mankind to know how primary survival and housekeeping would happen in outer space?

Important factor is the water and food supply. On the surface of planet Earth, in Europe for example, the minimum amount of yearly water supply needed for only one individual is approx 50 cubic meters, or 50,000 liters, i.e. 50 tonnes (50 tons) Which by the way is a lot less than the average American citizen ;-) So for a crew of 10 actonauts (whoops new word) we speak about a minimum of 500 tonnes of water supply each year! That is more than the total mass of a fully overloaded 747 Jumbo Jet… So how does NASA or RFSA get each year 500 tonnes of water (or a 747 fatboy) in space, and … how does the ISS store the water at the right temperature requiring lots of energy resources? No water tank is ever shown in any of the public NASA videos. We have never seen any shuttle or rocket being launched to bring water to the ISS. Never any mention of it. Oh whoops, I forgot about the food tonnage… Yeah once a year a rocket is supposed to get to the ISS, with a maximum of 4 tonnes of supply consisting of food & nonn-food, etc. That is inconsistent with the crew’s consumption. And the crew is getting fatter and fatter all the same, despite of their alleged workouts of 2 hours a day – do they really?

I have seen NASA videos where the astronots were showing an undersized compartment where some herbs or veggies were supposed to grow. In another video an astronot played with fresh fruit, apples, oranges etc. No mention where that fresh fruit came from. And the veggie-room is ridiculously small, not even a rabbit or a tortoise could survive with the production.

NASA videos never showed any oxygen tank or water tank. Nether do they show a sewage system, a water purification system, or even an ordinary shower. These things would be amongst the most important survival supporting objects and any serious space agency would show these with pride, and .. explain to the public how the ISS tanks are replenished or replaced / disposed … and how ths ISS works as a life sustaining environment.

No sewage, again, so all that piss, waste water, and shit, where does that go to. Each crew member generates at least 12 kilo waste – water, piss, shit, garbage, etc – per day. That is 400 kilos per years. That times 10 crew equals 4 tonnes of waste per full ISS occupancy per year.

Astronots say that they dispose of it by ejecting trashcans toward Earth. But never any video recording of such Star Trek dead Spock torpedo. Truth is there is no such torpedo system whatsoever on the ISS. And to use a Russian re-entry capsule just to dump shit into the atmosphere would be a very expensive feature for which there has never been any known or black budget.

The amount of oxygen needed to stay for a crew of 10 at the ISS far exceeds the capacity of any kind of supplying logistics. A nuclear device to generate oxygen and power is absent. Solar energy is insufficient to for generating oxygen. There is no way to have enough O2 onboard the ISS at any given time. No CO2 filters either. No thermal protected O2 tanks are ever shown.

Obviously there is no complete self contained recycling system for urine, faeces, dust, waste, etc. That would require a major power source – solar energy would never suffice – and lots of pipes, pumps, valves and tanks. Nothing of this is ever shown on any public NASA video.

The ISS crew always wear an expressionless default Prozac smile, and they look so clean and trimmed. The females who stay there for months do not show one hair on their legs. The males show no beard in their face. So how do they do that if they cannot shower. Oh I forgot, electric shaving. Sure, and no one showed anything like that.

And nothing said on the public channels about how the crew keep sex-drive under control. Do they really not masturbate or fuck? Oh I forgot, they do have sex, in next door hotel on the Star City premises.

Moreover, astronots perform nice zero gravity tricks such as playing ping pong with water balls that do not wetten the bats. So if the bats can’t get wet, then how can an astronot wash the body if the water cannot attach to the body? So these bat plays contradict their ISS hygiene. Since when has H2O no adhesion in zero gravity? Adhesion has nothing to do with gravity in the first place!

Other plays with water are absolutely unacceptable with so many electrical systems around. No serious space station procedure would allow such irresponsible play. In fact, none of the hundreds of project works are ever shown at any video time. Just stupid floating crap play during parabolic flight and chromakey screen effects.

NASA videos show wonderful night footages where all lights on the surface of planet Earth are visible as the ISS orbits around. The strange thing with these time-lapse footages is that not one single real-time ON-OFF is visible anywhere there is artificial light – as normally expected from all those cities below – as though the background view of Earth is a static still that’s being rotated against the foreground. That is the only way to simulate orbit.

Why having a dozen laptops inside the ISS? Is not one or two general purpose PC secured in the wall enough? Oh I forgot, the hundreds of experiments. Well, in my line of work I am doing hundreds kinds of processes with my desktop computer. There is no need to have a dedicated computer for each and every “experiment”.

There is no clear indication what exactly the ISS crew is doing all day long, except bouncing a bit in front of the chromakey screen. They always bounce up & down relative to the fixed camera, never left & right for example. So why the bounce at all?

Not one second is spend on aiming a camera through the window to film planet Earth. This is very interesting because one of the main reasons to have a space station is to keep an eye on the planet’s surface, such as for espionage, weather, war, traffic, airliners, ships, and all the other hundreds of excellent reasons. But with the ISS: none.

There are portholes and cameras, so there is no good reason why not aiming one of those cameras at one of the portholes to make a shoot of planet Earth. After all, one of the purposes of space operations is to monitor planet Earth!

Every kilogram of supplies costs an enormous amount of money to get into space. But it seems there is an excessive abundance of hardware inside the ISS, that no astronot seems to use at any given video time. The news is that all supplies are next door the ground facilities where the ISS is staged.

If indeed most of ISS astronauts time is taken by performing scientific experiments, a whopping 400 of them, as reported by the astronots, then why is none of these shown for even one second? They even say they grow crops onboard the ISS. Nothing is shown, though. Not one single footage of any scientific experiment. They don’t even show how they eat meals. Of course they eat at the restaurant next door in Star City, Russia…

All they do is some kid splay with floating water drops and puppets, even a gorilla party suit that alone would cost a fortune on payload transportation resources. There is no other significance with those zero gravity toys than giving the impression to the public that astronauts are actually in space doing important work in the name of mankind. Small steps and no leaps other than air-bubbles in a swimmingpool.

Not even cleaning the dust. Because it is done daily by the Russian maids next door. Those astronots eat, bath, fuck and sleep in a condo or hotel next door the simulator.

Nothing but childish plays with water, dolls, mikes and flasks in front of the camera. And why not making photo shoots of planet Earth out of the window? There are various professional FF DSLRs with expensive lenses hanging at the wall in the ISS. No real photo is ever shown.

The entire ISS that we see is a simulator. The simulator consists of different sections, such as a large plane for occasional zero-G parabolic flight maneuvers, a large swimmingpool for space walks, and a blue / green screen movie studio for all the rest of the daily ISS simulation.

All camera positions inside the ISS are perfectly level, and no astronaut is standing upside down, not even with the feet locked into the blue handle bars. In a true weightless zero gravity environment, there is no straight level at all, so everything and everyone should be in different positions. The only reason why all keeps reference to the same horizontal level is the presence of full gravity exactly as is at ground level on planet Earth. Those astronots keep bouncing up & down, but why not left-right or front-rear? This is completely illogical when it comes to movement in zero-gravity in a space station.

Moreover, in zero gravity, any astronaut would float completely still and not bounce around unless pushed by self or by another. So here the fakery is done very badly.

No “camera” is moved toward any window as to show the public what kinda view the astronots would have. They of course have not and so there is nothing to point the camera at. The cameras cannot focus on the TFT screens behind the “windows”.

Over the years, NASA has perfected the blue / green chroma keying screen projection technology that is often used in any modern Hollywood film production. Background of videos is CGI’d, easy to see how nothing in the background and on the walls is moving, such as cables, loose objects, flag, papers, cameras, laptops, etc while on the foreground the astronaut keeps wobbling. This is inconsistent with movements in zero gravity.

No explanation whatsoever why all astronots are wearing wristwatches in a space station. In such confined space it is easy to see for everyone a central clock or simply to ask Houston. Moreover, wristwatches pose a risk when moving around in the ISS with all those loose cables, switches, instruments and what have you.

In addition, all astronots are always dressed in super clean well ironed clothes, and every video shows different clothing. No one can explain how all those suitcases went along the shuttle. Any traveller knows how heavy just a one person suitcase with clothes for a month can be, not to mention suitcases needed for half a year in space. No airliner would accept such luggage, so why would the space shuttle? And no dirty clothes are ever shown in any video. Oh yeah, some astronot said on TV that they dump the dirty clothing out of the window so it gets incinerated in the atmosphere. Oh really? They never recorded one second of video. For sure they’re being cleaned next door on the ground facility – read: hotel – where the fake astronots have their vacation.

The same for their body hygiene. They all look each day so clean, trimmed, perfect hair, etc. Also it is kinda weird that long hair is allowed in a space station, where life is under continuous risk.

All hair demonstrations are fake. Long hair is being perm’d as to make it seem the hairs are stretched out. But all videos show the flaws easily, except those recorded during parabolic flight. The ladies long hair stays like an electrostatic haystack regardless of their position, which is impossible in zero gravity.

I find it very amateuristic to allow long loose hair in a conplex laboratory, where normally hair is tied into a ponytail. That is standard practice all over the world, also in hospitals and countless companies. So why not in the ISS? Very strange and unprofessional.

Besides, long hair in a space helmet is dangerous. But no word about ISS rules for such things. The ISS is like a hippie hut where no strict rules are in effect. Those folks play with water in zero gravity, and they completely ignore all the electronics around them. No rules … for a space station. The ISS is more of an attraction fun park. Doesn’t make any sense at all.

Many public videos show how the ISS is being simulated in a swimming pool. That’s exactly what’s being filmed and broadcasted as “real” space ops.

Soon the ISS model will be discarded, to “burn up in the atmosphere” to save a lot of hoax money by all space agencies. New “real” space stuff will be CGI’d and published, such as moons, dwarf planets, galaxies, nebulae, asteroids and alien crap.

The low orbit – read: high flying – HOLOGRAPHIC model – read: drone with holo projector – that is up there for show does not house any living being of course. It is just for the media who seek “proof of existence”.

Any of the live zero-G videos have an audio track full of jet engines noise, exactly the same noise as in a large airliner. The lower frequencies can easily be isolated in an audio wave editor and then it becomes very clear that the lower frequencies are forom jet turbines. This is consistent with the parabolic zero-G flights that are performed to make astronots float.

A recent video about Expedition 46 showing the alleged departure of the 3 astronuts and their landing in Russia clearly showed a couple of weird anomalies: No showing of capsule re-entry & landing but just a brief parachute clip, left-out footage of touch down & recovery, no quarantaine procedure for astronuts leaving the capsule, astronuts look extremely fit and well trimmed, one of the astronuts making a phonecall with his iphone right after he was put in an armchair next to the capsule, all in all, amateuristic mock-ups.

The Chinese made similar mock-ups, making amateurisic errors in their fakery, such as inconsistent Sun positions, Earth rotations, and even air bubbles and more onboard voices than the number of astronauts on station.

But the greatest flaw of NASA is the video of the astronots team that left the ISS WITHOUT SPACE SUIT and passed the airlock hatch to enter the docked Soyuz re-entry landing vehicle in order to return to the surface of planet Earth. After touch down of the Soyus capsule, the video showed the astronots IN A SPACE SUIT. Now how can anyone put on a space suit in a tiny re-entry capsule? HOW? Let alone three guys in that capsule.

Conclusion: All ISS operations are complete fraud, bogus, fake. There is no manned space station in space at all.


NASA shuttle launch flight videos consistently show the crew interior – erm cockpit or command whatever – how the chairs are largely under-spec, i.e. insufficient head support, wobbling on the frame, and el-cheapo airliner economy class rating construct. Asstronaut chairs are not supposed to be beach fold chair spec. They are supposed to withstand G-forces during acceleration / deceleration in a speed range of 17,000 mph.

The shuttle booster rockets that account for lifting the craft into the sky are reported to fall into the ocean and then recovered by divers as to reuse them for the next launch.

From a structural engineering point of view, the amount of stress on such booster that hits the water at a speed of hundreds of miles an hour is similar as a high speed train bumping into a rock. The structure will not survive the impact.

It is a total misconception that the tubular structure of the boosters would be strong enough to withstand the hit. the boosters are made of lightweight materials and in no way comparable with ground-based oil-pipes.

Each and every space shuttle is reported to “fly” at least a few hundred kilometers above the surface of planet Earth. So the space shuttles are in the thermosphere. Therefore these crafts should be molten metal, nothing more than that.

Yes it is true that space shuttles have been launched the way we saw it on TV, but these crafts never went higher than 27 kilometers or 80,000 feet above ground level AGL. Combustion exhaust engines cannot push any higher.

The re-entry of the shuttle is interesting physics. It decelerates from 17,000 mph to 500 mph in a few minutes time. Not one astronaut would survive these G-forces. Moreover, the rear exhaust nozzles are highly un-aerodynamic in terms of air flow at the rear section. At a hyper-sonic speed, that structure would be easily ripped apart in the Earth atmosphere because of its own generated drag.

Yes it is true that space shuttles performed perfect landings, but not by only gliding. Each space shuttle has two jet engines that are used to perform landings. The shape of the space shuttles is aerodynamically such that it is impossible for them to glide, even at steep angles. Without additional thrust they would fall down like any other – even more aerodynamic – short winged jet plane. Additional thrust is needed to produce lift. Countless military jets have crashed due to inoperative engines in combination with short fixed wings. And especially non-canard configurations have the highest stall speed.

Yes it could be possible to just glide with engines shut-down, but then the approach will be very steep, and levelling off near final is impossible with these short wings as suggested by space shuttle cockpit landing videos, and the landing speed will exceed all limits, causing major damage to the landing gear and to the fuselage. Final approach minimums is not attainable due to the ineffective air flow.

So how come the space shuttles did not … because their jet engines were operable. Each and every space shuttle has clearly visible jet engine intake openings. These jet engines are as bulky as with fighter jets or business jets. Such intake structure would never hold at the alleged hypersonic re-entry maneuvers. Besides, hypersonic flight is aerodynamically not possible with the brick structure of the shuttles. The fuselage should have the shape of a needle, as is proven by experimental supersonic jets. A fuselage that is more brick than an ordinary 737 can never go supersonic and certainly not survive hypersonic re-entry. Why else would the SR-71 Blackbird have be so sleek even only at mach 3, and the F-104 and the Concorde like a needle only at mach 2 ? Why not using a more aerodynamic modded Learjet or Falcon as a shuttle?

Moreover, the break parachute is way too small to slow down the shuttle after touch down. The chute is not needed because the reveres thrusters of the jet engines do the breaking, and the final approach is not faster than that of a regular jet. Each shuttle landing is noisy. Gliders do not make noise.

And, all air inflated rubber tyres are fully intact upon touch-down. Very strange, as the doors of the landing gear would account for an operational temperature of at least 400 C during re-entry which would cause the tyres to explode and to melt. This 400 C is computed from the alleged re-entry temperature of 4000 F, which is highly plausible as the doors will never be as strong as the rest of the fuselage in terms of heat shielding.

And finally, several official NASA videos show the Space Shuttle landing, the shuttle having passenger windows on the side along the entire length of the fuselage … and jet engine intakes on both tail sides … In other words, it is a dummy shuttle. Just an empty jet for show.

Conclusion: The Space Shuttle crafts never went in space. Not even in low orbit. Max 80,000 feet like the SR-71, far below the thermosphere. Remember the melting point of titanium 1660 C, aluminium 660 C, steel 1510 C and gold 1060 C, and the thermosphere temperature range up to 2000 C. Every space shuttle would have molten out there.

And nowadays the American astronauts no longer go up by space shuttle but take a lift with Russian rockets. Yeah sure, just shifting to another hoax. So NASA is economizing on hoax money, and the Russians keep up the hoax and get well paid for that Hollywodski crap.

And I will not get into further detail about the FAKE Challenger disaster! All crew is still alive and well, some kept the name names, others changed the names slightly. They usually have a job as a teacher. Their identities/faces have been made public. Bad entertainment.

Conclusion: Space shuttles never made it in space.


Fuelling in the air occurs at speeds, say, around the 170-300 mph mark. Certainly not supersonic. It is very difficult to control positioning of the connectors within a margin of a tenth of an inch.

Well, when we talk about orbital speeds exceeding 17.000 mph, i.e. a hundred times faster than an airplane, when space docking tolerates a margin less than a hundredth of an inch, the level of required accuracy is at least a thousand times compared to fuelling in the air.

What an extra ordinary level of technology. We see those wonderful YouTube videos showing us in sci-fi style the most perfect docking operations every time again, where Kirk and Spock would abandon their Star Trek Enterprise for. And mankind takes those shows for real and true.

Well, now you tell me how a space craft, equipped with some vector rockets, can navigate with millimeter precision at 17.000 mph within speed margins of one half inch per second, and approach the other craft straight in at exactly zero degrees zero minutes zero seconds precision.

Not even sci-fi movies hit that mark. And F jets trying to catch a boom at only 1/100th of that speed often fail at first contact attempt. Yet all space craft never fail at first contact attempt. Oh yeah, I forgot, it is computer controlled for space crafts but not for air crafts. No one explained why.

And every sheeple on Earth believes that rockets full automatically dock in space to deliver the bi-annual shoppings for the ISS crew. No one ever questions any bit of it. No video has ever clearly shown how the goods get transferred between the shop-rockets and the space station.

Conclusion: Space docking is a fiction.


An astronaut is supposed to be able to survive in a vacuum where temperature variations are extreme. If we would only take into account the air for the astronaut needed to breath, there are some weird design engineering anomalies.

The textile layers are stitched rather than glued. In other words, they do not form an absolute airproof container like with a deep sea diving suit.

The air pressure inside a space suit must be at least the same as somewhere high up on the well-known mountains on Earth. If indeed maintaining the internal pressure, the space suit would have to be inflated and as a result would be very stiff. Just like a deep sea diving suit.

In fact, a space suit IS a diving suit, to isolate the astronaut completely and independently from the environment. Diving suits are not stitched together for reasons of air-tightness and waterproofing. Space suits must have similar specs. Moreover, a spacesuit must be completely resistant against nano meteorites of impact of high velocity space dust.

A stiff inflated suit would inhibit the astronaut from moving, and certainly keep the hands from moving the fingers at millimeter precision.

Parts of the space suits are zipped, other parts are tied with strings, and some are connected with metal rings. Zippers and strings do not hold air-tight.

The EVA backpack containing the alleged cooling system is supposed to hold a pump system to circulate water through the tubes in the skin of the space suit. There is no convection system to control the actual cooling of the water that would heat up to boiling point in outer space. Convection requires air circulation, which is not actually present in the cooling unit of the EVA space suits.

The EVA backpack is supposed to hold not only the temparature control system, also the oxygen, the carbon oxyde filtration system, the batteries for the electrical system, the comm radio, the regulators for the climate inside of the space suit, liquid consumables, etc., accounting for a lot more than the available backpack volume.

Because of the “drowning” risk, the astronauts are supposed to have “snorkels” in their suit. The “drowning” would involve the swallowing of water, H2O, which proves that H2O is used as a cooling liquid. Why for example not the much more efficient freon is used like in fridges is undisclosed.

Conclusion: Spaces suits are unsuitable for outer space.


Firt of all, it is absolutely stupid to use satellites for telecom. It is proven that landlines and (ultra)short (radio)waves are perfectly efficient, economic and reliable for telecom. Telecom satellites would be unmaintainable, way too expensive and technically inferior in delivering telecom loads.

WTF Satellites? All 20,000+ satellites are reported to orbit at altitudes in the thermosphere. The thermosphere the thermosphere begins about 85 kilometres (53 miles) altitude. Thermosphere temperatures increase with altitude due to absorption of highly energetic solar radiation. Temperatures are highly dependent on solar activity, and can rise to 2,000 °C (3,630 °F). Radiation causes the atmosphere particles in this layer to become electrically charged.

In other words, metals used to construct satellites, such as titanium, gold, aluminium, etc. would be liquid – read: molten – at such temperatures. Moreover, the radiation and electrical charge would make it impossible for the satellites to communicate through radio waves of any kind.

Each and every satellite – read: orbiting object – has at least on rocket engine for reasons of adjustment of orbital parameters. So, 20,000+ satellites, many of them for over a decade in space … and still not one running out of gas. No way. And how can rocket fuel tanks stay cool in the thermospheric temperature range? Already on Earth all fuel tanks need to be cooled by external coolers even before take-off. And on the surface of planet Earth it is already cold compared to the thermosphere.

The socalled high orbit satellites, in the range of roughly 10,000 – 20,000 miles up, are either in the Plasma belt or in the Van Allen belt, both layers that are extremely destructive to electronics, metals and composites. They can never survive these environmental conditions.

In between these inner and outer Van Allen belt layers, at approx 7000 miles altitude, there is an intermediate layer which is not a Van Allen belt.

This belt is “invisible” and reflects / filters electrons coming from solar flares by dispersing these horizontally. In a way it is a protective layer over the Earth. There is no spec available how that layer behaves the other way around, i.e. if a body leaves the Earth and travels through that layer outward. Because of the filter / reflector capability, it is expected that electronic circuits will stop functioning when passing through this layer. Conventional scientists have no explanation for its existence.

Fact: There is not one single photo picture or video of any of the 20,000+ reported satellites in space. All images of satellites on the internet are drawings, CGI, or dinky toy models.

Of course no photo of any satellite is taken by any of the ISS astronauts ;-)

Fact: There is not one single satellite that has produced and transmitted at least one photo picture of planet Earth. Some high altitude shoots got made, but only by cameras attached to stratosphere balloons and spy planes.

Conclusion: Operational satellites do not physically exist in space. Perhaps only a few billion bucks.


Exactly the same for TV satellites as stated above.

You should ask yourself the question why must ALL satellite dishes be directed towards the horizon rather than upward toward space, no matter your location on planet Earth? Show me one sat TV dish that points straight up, unless it’s purpose is to catch rain water.

The answer is simple: there is not one TV satellite overhead anywhere near our planet Earth. You could as well use your regular old analog antenna to receive digital signals and still get HD quality TV imagery, because all TV signals travel horizontally the same way since the invention of the TV and radio.

Our lands are crammed with towers holding antennas for GPS, cellphones, radio, TV and so forth. All ground based antennas. In very remote areas, no cellphone and no GPS and no sat TV will work, simply because there is no ground based coverage. In the midst Siberia it should be possible to use GPS, sat TV and satPhone, right? Well, nothing works there. Why, because there is no satellite – not one of the 20,000+ reported satellites – that would do the job.

Conclusion: There is not one TV satellite and all TV sat dishes are money scams.


GPS is NOT done through satellites but simply through towers, just like the cellphones do. As you read before, satellites cannot exist in the thermosphere.

Why having moving GPS satellites in space if ground based immovable towers can do the GPS job much better and much cheaper? How are GPS satellites refueled because of the course correction rockets. Oh, I forgot, these course correctors are solar powered, yeah sure, and that electrical power drives propellors in the vacuum of space, no shit.

Besides, the ground based signals are a lot more efficient, economic, and precise compared to what any space based source could deliver or handle. At the reported average altitude of 20,200 km (12,550 miles) the GSP satellites would be in the exosphere, far beyond the thermosphere, however, the electrical charge and radiation below in the thermosphere would heavily scramble the GPS signals to Earth.

Moreover, to expose a rocket to the thermosphere to travel through temperatures over 2000 C would cause the fuel tanks explode within a minute. In other words, no fossile fuel based rocket can pass the thermosphere in one piece.

Even if the rocket can withstand the temperatures, the onboard satellite electronics cannot withstand the radiation and electrical charge. And any cooling system will fail in a 2000 Deg C environment.

Tests in remote areas such as Kyrgyzstan proved that there is no signal available for both satellite phone and GPS. In such areas there are no towers. Of course. If these sat systems were truly satellite based then also remote areas should have full coverage just like the rest of the world. This is not at all the case.

Conclusion: There are no GPS satellites in space.


The Hubble Space Telescope is reported to orbit at altitudes in the thermosphere. Low Earth Orbit: Altitude of 340 miles (295 nautical miles, or 547 km), inclined 28.5 degrees to the equator. Time to Complete One Orbit: 95 minutes at a speed of 17,000 mph (27,300 kph).

Thermosphere temperatures would account for having the HST molten completely. In other words, metals used to construct satellites, such as titanium, gold, aluminium, etc. would be liquid – read: molten – at such temperatures. Moreover, the radiation and electrical charge would make it impossible for the HST to communicate up & down links of any kind.

Conclusion: The Hubble Space Telescope does not physically exist in space. Only in a swimming pool to produce some “space walk” footages.

PS: There is a project concerning a space telescope that’s supposed to orbit the Earth further than the Moon. Well, the layers of the atmosphere and radiation belts make radio communication impossible, so, no data can be transmitted by radio waves. Moreover, there is no conventional technology available to get anything in orbit beyond the Moon.


Even if the Pioneer, Voyager, Gallileo, Cassini, Juno, New Horizons etc etc type of probes would be real – and survived the thermosphere and the Van Allen belt – then still it is impossible for them to accelerate in outer space by means of “gravity assist”.

“Gravity assist” is defined as a means to use the gravity of a planet to get a slingshot effect when passing the planet and thus getting additional speed.

Well, a planet’s gravity causes any external object to be attracted to the planet, not being repulsed / repelled. Rocket engines onboard such probes have no effect whatsoever at whatever speed. In a near vacuum there is nearly nothing to push against, so an action-reaction based fossil fuel engine cannot add any form of propulsion in outer space. Therefore no course corrections against high gravity fields can be made.

Moreover, Earth space command has to instruct the space probe by radio signal, which is an impossibility because of the plasma layer around our planet.

Thus gravity assisted slingshots in outer space is an impossibility.

Conclusion: No space probe is on the way.


The only Earth pic we ever saw was that fake wide angle Apollo video shoot taken from either a spy plane or a weather balloon. The highest theoretical orbit possible is below 90 miles of altitude ASL where the thermosphere begins.

It has already been established that there is no space probe on the way.

In addition, all photos on public domain are proven to be photoshopped or generated by CGI, i.e. completely mocked-up and fake. We have no one single real fly-by photo of any planet or moon, not even our own.

The latest fraud is the Pluto fly-by by NASA. No artificial object from planet Earth made it to planet Pluto, and therefore no real photo could have been made. The alleged photos of Pluto are ALL mocked-up and therefore false and fake.

The same is true for ALL other planets and ALL their rings or moons. ALL images of ALL moons, planets, deep space, are FAKE.

Conclusion: All fly-by photos are fake.


The most famous artefact is “The Face” on planet Mars. This object has been completely mocked-up by computer graphics imagery, and is deliberately kept vague as to increase mystery.

Same as ALL artefacts on the Moon, such as “The Tower”, “The Spaceship”, and any other “artificial structure”. they all have been “airbrushed out” to give the illusion that something real alien was there and should be hidden from the public.

Not one single piece of artefact, alien or terran, has ever been photographed by any spacemission of any kind. ALL detail close-ups of the Moon are fake, because no camera has ever been there on the ground or in orbit.

Due to the Earth’s Thermosphere and Van Allen belt, any craft would be completely destroyed within a few thousand miles from the Earth, caused by heat and radiation.

Conclusion: No alien artefacts have ever been photographed.


First of all, let me reiterate: Space programs are in the first place to visually show what’s out there beyond planet Earth. It is all about visuals, imagery of any kind, such as video, photo, radar, scan, etc etc … the bottom-line was, is and will be: SHOW IT!

Then why have the cameras not been pointed to both Earth and the Moon throughout the voyage? Why economizing on imagery during such expensive trips, merely showing how astronots have fun in confined quarters?

Unless … unless … there were no such trips in reality at all …

If back in the 1960’s-1970’s the huge rockets with lunar orbiters and landers made it safely to and from the Moon – against a cost being a fraction compared to modern technology – then why did no one go to the Moon ever since, using the old technology?

One of the most logical things that NASA should have done is to put a camera on the Moon aimed at planet Earth to monitor the planet. What more stable and economic place would there be? Why did NASA not do that? NASA never could!

Yes, some astronauts – but not the ones who made it into the history books – did land on the Moon but not with the reported Apollo technology. Some mystery geeks claim that NASA used a “UFO” made on planet Earth, i.e. the forerunner of the Locust TR-3B Astra. And to this day of today, there are supposed to be Moon trips every week and Mars trips every month with this hidden technology, to colonize and militarize these worlds with Terran idiots. Nothings has been proven, shown, recorded, verified. BS sci-fi at best!

And then we haven’t yet spoken about the re-entry vehicles, those cone shaped capsules. These shapes are absolutely un-aerodynamic. They will keep rolling over and bump during re-entry, leaving no astronaut alive. There is now way to keep the heat-shield level relative to the trajectory. Steering rockets or compressed air will not work at high re-entry velocity to maintain balance. There is not even ample space for rocket engines and rocket fuel in those capsules.

The astronauts Command Module has no open connection to the Lunar Orbiter, even though all the consumables would be in that Service Module also referred to as the Orbiter. On none of the photos of the Command Module the heat shield shows any sign of hatch or connector of any kind. So how could the astronauts get their water, oxygen, food, etc from the orbiter? No way! In other words, the Command Module does not communicate with the Service Module at all.

The Rover, i.e. beach buggy, has – according to NASA’s own manual – an operating temperature tolerance way below the alleged mean temperature of the Lunar surface. So already this is a smoking gun, not to mention the countless anomalies of photographs.

Strangely, the more recent public videos shot inside the ISS do show hatches in between the modules. But, the hatches do not provide openings large enough for astronauts in their space suits. A space station that can be hit by high velocity objects is prone to leakage, so the crew must be able to move around in space suits in order to repair the holes. Not one single bit facilitating such emergency operation.

Moreover, the amount of cargo that should have gone with the space craft far exceeds the capacity in terms of volume and weight. There is no way to stash all the equipment shown on Moon videos along with the numerous life support systems, propulsion systems, nav sytems, power units, heating & cooling units, oxygen, water, food, rocket fuel, space suit accessories, moon boots, backpacks, large format cameras, drills, shovels, flag & pole, three huge parachutes, spares and tools, plus space to load hundreds of pounds of moon rock samples for back home, all that in such small space craft. No way.

And why having the cameras chest mounted, with now way to point the camera by means of a viewfinder? Even in sci-fi movies the cameras are always helm mounted, which is absolutely logical for correctly pointing / aiming the camera. Even though the helmet doesn’t move, an internal viewfinder would greatly assist camera pointing. Chest mounts inhibit the astronauts from even seeing the camera. So, the design is a flunk, apart from being a fake. It has been proven that lunar photos have been shot from head level, not from chest level, as scientific tests revealed. By computing focal length, view angle and lighting it was easy to find out the actual camera height which was consistently approx 6 feet head height and not 4 feet chest height.

And there is no laser reflector on the Moon. That is just bogus. Laser light reflects well from any surface.

The “official” Apollo astronauts did not go further than a movie studio. And had to shut up about it for the rest of their heavily controlled life. Quite a few whistleblowers and space center personnel died of “suicide” or “natural causes” (cancer to be most popular).

There is already an overwhelming amount of hard evidence that the Apollo program is a fake. No need to add anything to it in this article.

What I want to add is that the LEM, i.e. Moon lander, if indeed the Moon has no atmosphere, could ever slow down and land using rocket technology. See, rockets do not have any effect in the vacuum. So only at a hundred feet or so there may be some ground effect. But then it would be way too late to slow down and touch down within limits.

So either the LEM operation is a fiction, or the fact that the Moon has no atmosphere is a fiction. Whatever the choice may be, there is at least one major lie. Which puts the entire space program into the official swamp of doubt.

Neil Armstrong – and his mates – is guilty of “small film for man, giant lie for mankind“. He is considered – by many sheeple – as an “honorable man” because he was so religious and lived like a hermit. Well, he was honorable, but only to the Masonic Lodge where he was high up in the 33’s. He has never been honorable to anyone else outside of his club of Free Masons. “The Eagle Has Landed” is a Masonic ritual, as well as countless other “coincidental configurations on the Moon at the time of the landing. Plenty proofs to see on public domain. I have said enough.

Oh yeah, Neil Armstrong got killed by his Masonic priest buddies after he finally talked in public cryptic speech something about “the parrot that did not fly very well” and about “truth protected layers”. He was too late, way over-due, and only death could forgive him from the sin of hiding the truth. He may have been a Christian, but you tell me which hypocrite is not into religion or masonry?

The whole goddam world moans about his death, and how good a man he was blah blah blah. He was the worst of all astrodogs! He kept his role for decades and decades and kept the myth up to proportions beyond the sins defined by his bible. His role was to maintain the secret of the entire space program. He got paid for it. His family and friends got paid for it. He accepted money in exchange for his lies.

There is NO excuse for taking that role. Even if he’s forced, if he were truly an honorable man, then he would have done the only honorable thing: tell the TRUTH! He never did!

I never shed one tear for any faketonaut, actonaut, astronot, or whatever liar, regardless of their creed, status, religion, position, whatever. I despise them all. And that includes Neil Armstrong. May he burn in hell. Amen.

Conclusion: The entire Apollo program was a fake. And so was Neil.


The Command Module is a bit bigger than the one from the Apollo program, but the concept is much the same. And that includes the total absense of communicating openings between the Command Module and the Service Module. There is again a one-piece heat-shield.

The Orion Command Module is planned to be inhabited for a full month on the next mission. The living space is a lot less than that of a single room in the ISS. So moving around inside is not an option. Same as with the Apollo capsule.

The entire Orion program will be exactly the same concept as the Apollo program. And that will include just another number 13 as well.

We already have all the space travel data from the entire Apollo program, so why NASA is now doing again testing with Orion prototypes is just stupid because the technology is nearly exactly the same as half a century ago.

NASA has admitted that the Van Allen belt will harm all electronic systems.In addition, the re-entry module will never be more aerodynamic than the Apollo capsule. The shape is the same and the heat-shield will never stay pointed exactly into the re-entry direction. A total of 11 – eleven – parachutes will be onboard the capsule. Yeah sure, there is no space for these things in there at all. The design and engineering will never be functional in any aspect.

The Orion program will be “documented” with tons of CGI video effects and photoshopped images. That program will be entirely dome in a movies studio.

It cannot be otherwise. The physical implementation is way too small for habitat to live during the trip to the Moon or Mars. Moreover, there is a round hole in the floor of the Orion capsule. Surely meant to access the service module. The capsule’s heatshield will of course be destroyed by that hole upon re-entry no matter how well the hatch is closed.

Conclusion: The entire Orion program is even more fake than the Apollo program.


ALL rovers on whatever moon or planet are on Terran ground, i.e. on a remote location on the surface of planet Earth.

ALL rover images are fake and exclusively produced on a remote location – read: “analogue sites” – on the surface of planet Earth, Devon Island, Spitsbergen and Utah to be amongst the most popular, as clearly shown on various publicly available videos. Of course, NASA creates cover-ups by stating that their presence is for soil research. Interesting statements because there are no drilling towers.

Photography experts have analyzed the images and all concluded that the colors have been photoshopped, usually adjustments of hues into the reds, as to give the illusion that the Martian atmosphere is reddish. And the Moon hues are usually adjusted into the greys or monochrome style, as to give the illusion that the Moon is not colored.

The entry vehicles are operating in the Martian sky not quite conform the laws of physics. The socalled supersonic parachute just cannot work to break the supersonic speed to final approach speed the way it is shown in CGI animations.

The assumption that the Martian atmosphere is a hundred times thinner than that of planet Earth is not a proven fact, so it is false. If it were true, then a re-entry parachute would have to have a size of several square miles! So, another type descend technology would be needed for final approach configuration, and Newton won’t help either in thin air.

Moreover, the final lander in Apollo LEM style can never use rocket engine thrusters to get to a soft landing, neither with sky crane cables as suggested in “test” footages. No real camera onboard to film the event, of course. Mars gravity is higher than the Moon gravity, yet the same lander technology is used. That is inconsistent with the operation. The sky crane has never been live tested on Earth, not even simulated with a drone or a helicopter. The only “test” done was a one-time-only drop from an indoor tower of 10 feet high. It showed and proved exactly nothing.

In other words, the Curiosity touchdown of 2012 is complete fraud. Same as for all other Mars landers, such as the airbag touchdown. Why an airbag drop is used in an extremely thin atmosphere is completely illogical, because of the low counter pressure of the inflated bags.

And why must unmanned Mars rovers have 6 wheels if manned Moon rovers had 4 wheels?

Rovers wheel tracks in the soil are consistently darker which indicates a moist surface, but the space agencies keep on denying the presence of water. But what’s weirder is that the tracks are located such as though the rover is put on location by crane rather than by driving there, because of the lack of leading trails. Oh I forgot, the backyard of the Terran testing facility got moist last dewsday.

Electro motors for rovers are of very low capacity – model car toy – class due to their mass and power, and so they may operate well between -10 and +50 C, but at temperatures beyond these values they will commence failing. On the Moon the surface temp is well beyond that temperature range, so any such low class electric motor would fail.

It is impossible that their solar panels would stay absolutely clean and completely free of any dust, and that their solar panels would generate sufficient amounts of electrical power to keep the motors and instruments fully operational. Unless there is high pressure wind and rainfall. And a cleaning lady of course.

Solar panels always fail proportionally with the amount of dirt on them. In addition, the solar panels are ten years old technology and there’s never been any mention of upgrading, even though the power demand is only rising.

Moreover, taking into account the entire inner walls totally covered with electronic equipment, plus the HVAC and purification system and recycling system and the alleged greenhouse, the power consumption would be way too high compared to the output that the solar panels could ever deliver.

The huge solar panels have to be repositioned in order to track the Sun relative to the ISS orbit. That repositioning has never been really shown, i.e. video recorded from the window. No mention whatsoever about what it takes to keep the solar panels in the right position toward the Sun, e.g. rockets, electro motors, maintenance of bearings, emergency EVA if failure, etc etc etc.

On the surface of planet Earth there is not one single house or office that runs exclusively on the output of its solar panels on the roof. So there is no reason to believe that in outer space it is different.

As far as the landers is concerned, a moon-lander with a rover in it, is supposed to land using a reverse rocket thruster to control descend and touch-down speed. If the Moon has no atmosphere, then a rocket cannot produce newtonian thrust. Moreover, even with the best gyroscopic balancing system, the single rocket thruster will never be able to keep the entire lander level. Even when using secondary side thrusters, there is no air-resistance whatsoever to produce the necessary action-reaction effect. Only an electro-magnetic graviton engine could do the job in a vacuum around a moon.

The alleged photograph of the Apollo lander taken by the Hubble Space Telescope HST shows a pixelation inconsistent with the actual resolution of the HST at that distance. Moreover, the reflection of the alleged lander is inconsistent with the actual shape seen from top.

Conclusion: All rover projects are fake.


Fortunately, each space agency has personnel that is willing to anonymously whistleblow the lies. For example by introducing illogical details in imagary, videos, textual specs, etc for us to discover. They happily create layers that covers truth. These layers you have been reading in this article. And there are more.

ALL “facts” about any astronomical and astrophysical analysis or theory, including that of the speed of light, the galaxies, black holes, is FANTASY. The Hawking and Kaku info is nothing more than disinfo. ALL socalled alien related artefact, extra terrestrial intelligence, secret space program, and all the other “data” presented by YouTube nutty “professors” like Kaku, Hoagland and Icke is pure disinfo, because their analytics are only based on fake data. Sadly, they do not even want to know. And when I alert them, they even dare reply to me “who are you to gospel …”, those arrogant low IQ schoolboys.

The same amateur gurus believe that if someone’s spacesuit gets a leak during EVA that the astronaut freezes up. They obviously are biased by sci-fi entertainment. In reality, a spacesuit is a self contained HVAC system primarily to protect the astronaut from heat in outer space. So, if exposed with a ruptured space suit to outer space, for example if the visor is broken, the astronaut would not freeze up but would get cooked!

All those YouTube gurus are totally irresponsible by acting as “truth seekers”, but they are just pawns of a greater amnesia scheme that they do not even want to know about by themselves, which qualifies them as the same sheeple as the rest of the hard of science and meta physics believers. There we have the ignorant Hoagans, the Kakus, the Ickes, and all the countless others who do not know the difference between reality and fantasy entertainment, and who only care to mindurbate and ego-trip in front of the webcam.


I haven’t finished yet. The alleged “Secret Space Program” as promoted by countless YouTube professors, is FAKE! We are supposed to believe that there is a secret space program SSP and that we indeed have the ability to do any form of real space travel. Well, I have not so secret news for you: The SSP is sci-fi. There is no real space program other than mockups with the sole purpose to make sheeple believe that space ops is real.

Obviously, secrets cannot be proven nor disproven until secrets are no secrets anymore. That is exactly the same for sci-fi. It is exactly this game that is played by the “World Government” in support of global control through extensive mental amnesia programs.

Remember: News media and entertainment productions share exactly the same roots …

Agency (country/region) and their Budget (in millions of US $)

NASA (USA) 19,300
Roscosmos (Russia) 5,600
ESA (Europe) 5,510
CNES (France) 2,500
JAXA (Japan) 2,460
DLR (Germany) 2,000
ASI (Italy) 1,800
CNSA (China) 1,780
ISRO (India) 1,400
CSA (Canada) 488.7
UKSA (UK) 414
KARI (South Korea) 366
ASA (Algeria) 360
SSAU (Ukraine) 250
CoNAE (Argentina) 180
ISA and ISRC (Iran) 139
INTA (Spain) 135
NSO (Netherlands) 110
SNSB (Sweden) 100
SUPARCO (Pakistan) 82
SANSA (South Africa) 11.8
SSO (Switzerland) 10
AEM (Mexico) 8.34