The video above shows some interesting information, and alleges fake NASA activity in Devon Island, Nunavut, Canada.
Saturday, January 14, 2017
Mars Hoax
The video above shows some interesting information, and alleges fake NASA activity in Devon Island, Nunavut, Canada.
Hubble - Fake Mars
That's an image of Mars from Hubble. Notice the snow. Mars apparently has a permanent carbon dioxide cap on the south pole. Whatever that looks like.
Of course I don't see much of a cap on this image from Hubble.
Yeah, apparently Mars has a massive crater on the northern pole, called Planum Boreum. You wouldn't know it from looking at some images.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planum_Boreum
Last I checked rock and sand couldn't create precipitation for snow.
I have this feeling EVERY Mars image on the Hubble website is 3D.
A giant telescope can't take one real image?
http://hubblesite.org/images/news/62
Friday, January 13, 2017
Rockets In Space
Will rockets work in space? That is the question.
Many people have been trying to prove that rockets will not work in space. The argument is back and forth, on the premise of whether or not rocket engines need atmosphere to create the needed thrust.
The video above shows us that helicopters will most certainly not work in space. Since there is no air, there can be no lift.
Although rocket engines are said to work differently, the video above suggests atmosphere is still needed.
Argument: The engine combustion pushes on the inside of the engine, pushing the rocket forward, no atmosphere needed.
The problem is. When you put a vacuum cleaner at the end of the straw, and take away the air, and out flowing energy, there is little to no movement. Also the paper taped on back causes problems.
If space sucks up the energy and out flowing thrust in all directions, and acts like a massive paper taped to the end of the rocket, will rockets fail in space?
Wednesday, January 11, 2017
Dinosaur Installation
One of the best alleged dinosaur fake videos yet. Check out one company responsible for installing dinosaur bones.
Fake Moon Landing - Waving Flag
The video above is being posted as alleged proof for a fake moon landing. An easily spotted discrepancy will come just after an astronaut jogs by the flag from the left side of the screen. The flag will wave back and forth, slightly. This may seem normal at first, but you have to realize for the flag to react to someone moving passed it, there has to be air to displace. The moon has no atmosphere, and no wind. Also the vacuum of space has no air.
Proof that wind will not cause reaction in a vacuum can be found in the video below.
The video above shows wind from a computer fan. Once the jar reaches vacuum the ribbon will stop blowing. Also proof that no fan will ever cool a computer on a probe, lander, or any other vehicle.
Edit - Previous version of this blog article did not account for gravity. Please disregard comment about laws of motion. The rest remains as possible evidence.
Tuesday, January 10, 2017
ISS - Eating and Drinking
The packaged answer: muscles constrict the food, pushing it down to the stomach.
This process must be awfully slow. What are the chances a given bite of food will actually make it to the stomach? Now imagine a drink of water. The risk of water not stopping in the throat, back of the mouth, or at a lung opening would be very high.
Last, but not least, we consider the laws of motion. A body in motion, stays in motion, unless acted upon with an equal, or opposite force.
If anyone sneezed, burped, jolted, jarred, got bumped, raised upward, or got caught in any motion when the food started down their throat, they would be doomed to die. Food slowly passing down the chest cavity would start back up again, and a simple bump as strong as the force at which the spasms were working the food down, would nullify the muscle spasm starting it, and the food, into a reverse motion.
I am alleging that eating in space is impossible.
Monday, January 9, 2017
Google Earth - Geocentric
Note: This thread has been debunked. The same illusion is caused by the camera following the earth during its rotation and orbit.
This post will be reconstructed. I noticed that moving the time-of-day scrub seemed to rotate the universe. This provided evidence that Google Earth operated on a geocentric modal. Others suggested this same effect will happen when the camera follows the earth in orbit at the same speed. This is true to some extent, but only nullifies the evidence if it is the case. For that reason, I'll leave this info here.
Above we see Africa Jan 9th, 5:28pm, 2017.
Africa Jan 10th, 5:28am, 2017.
We see from night to day in Africa the sun seeming rotated to the other side.
This post will be reconstructed. I noticed that moving the time-of-day scrub seemed to rotate the universe. This provided evidence that Google Earth operated on a geocentric modal. Others suggested this same effect will happen when the camera follows the earth in orbit at the same speed. This is true to some extent, but only nullifies the evidence if it is the case. For that reason, I'll leave this info here.
Above we see Africa Jan 9th, 5:28pm, 2017.
Africa Jan 10th, 5:28am, 2017.
We see from night to day in Africa the sun seeming rotated to the other side.
Mercury and Venus Visibility Impossible
The documentary above makes the claim that Mercury and Venus would never be visible in the Heliocentric modal. It may, or may not be, the voice of Eric Dubay. I've done a little research and found this claim invalid. I did come across something interesting, and that's what I'd like to share.
We'll use Pretoria Africa as our starting point. I love Africa, because it's near the center of the globe face, and if any place could break a modal, it's Africa. It's great for this kind of scientific assessment.
Sunset: 7:04PM
https://www.timeanddate.com/sun/south-africa/pretoria
Venus Set Time: 9:46PM
https://www.timeanddate.com/astronomy/night/south-africa/pretoria
We'll use the time 8:20PM-8:40PM. This is just after sunset, and about an hour before Venus sets.
The following image is a diagram of Africa, containing a red line for field of view, and a red line to the planet. It's all crude estimates, but we're pretty close for the time.
As we can see the claim has been totally debunked, but an interesting question arises. Are they seeing the full planet, or a half lit planet? Considering the angle, only a small portion of the planet should be lit. Pretoria South Africa should pretty well be looking near the dark side of Venus on January 9th, 2017.
Note: Venus and other planets have phases, so the claim may be totally debunked.
Live Chart Of Solar System:
http://www.theplanetstoday.com/
Sunday, January 8, 2017
Nuclear Hoax
This video makes it into the conspiracy section of the blog, as there is a lot that needs to be verified. I would never suggest Hiroshima and Nagasaki were carpet bombed without hard evidence. I will share this, though, for entertainment value, and to clarify some possible dissinfo coming out of the establishments.
NASA - Hid Faked Image
The above image from NASA is very interesting. Take a look at the bottom left corner. Wait, there is no bottom left corner. Interestingly enough the entire image has been removed from the archive. We'll never know what the caption said, although I thought that was the point of an archive. What does NASA have to hide?
Archive here:
https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/archivepix.html
Search "iss_sts122_big":
Saturday, January 7, 2017
Stonehenge - Ancient Ritual Site or Tourism Hoax
Stonehenge is said to be an ancient monolithic structure built anywhere from 3000 to 30,000 years ago. Is it a site of ancient rituals, worship of the druids, or an elaborate hoax to kickstart an economy? Okay, so that last bit is a joke, but the idea was certainly spawned by real research.
Jeranism made a video, but he swears a lot, so I'll show a similar video.
Jeranism's video is very similar, except he goes as far as to say Stonehenge was built in the 50's, during the "restoration." He claims something similar about the pyramids, ignoring all ancient texts, including the old testament. Right, there's no mummies, and no literature. Fair warning.
This video shows old photos, allegedly proving it's not fake.
Wikipedia
Above, Merlin crafts the monument with his own hands. This is explained in our earliest known writing of Stonehenge, by Geoffrey of Monmouth, in his book ‘History of the Kings of Britain’ from 1136.
http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/visit/places/stonehenge/history/
It's admitted Roman discoveries were made around the area, as Roman empire was in Britannia as early as 55AD.
.jpg)
The map above shows tribes already in the area during Roman occupation.
We have a 2nd century Ptolemy map, but no mentions of Stonehenge until after the dark ages?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ptolemy
We really have to wonder: Why was Stonehenge not mentioned until after the collapse of a major economy? It remains a tourist attraction to this day. Was that always its purpose?
ISS - Cupola Module
Each window is no more than a few feet wide.
Here's a picture of ISS above the earth:
One can imagine how little earth you should be able to see in a few small windows.
Above is a normal lens shot.
That is what they claim happens when a fish eye lens is placed on the Cupola. Fish eye pulls the outside towards the center. Apparently, their magic fish eye, has the ability to pull the entire land mass into a uniform globe.
Yet, here is another fish eye lens image:
Which is totally different, including altitude.
Not sure what to think of this, but having hard time agreeing with plausibility.
Celebrate Truth - Scientism Exposed (Documentary)
The above documentary is one of the best I've seen this year. It explores the topic of geocentrism, and goes head to head with the fallacy of scientism. They explore topics from the heliocentric model to evolution.
I'm not sure about flat earth, but geocentric is awesome. I'm weary of certain people in this movement, for obvious reasons, but it's worth a listen. There is certainly some truth in here.
Friday, January 6, 2017
ISS - Star Psyop Exposed
The above image is a typical day photo from the ISS. Notice the number of stars. None. Sure it makes sense for the day, but their night photos were no different.
Night photos looked like above. Hardly a star in the sky.
The star issue gave truthers and theorists some leverage. We used to argue the moon photos were fake, there were never any stars.
Above we see one Apollo image, but if anyone cares to browse them all, there will be no stars.
This claim of ours was allegedly debunked long ago, likely before I was here, but even I held this argument. Our opponent's theory? Something to do with exposure. That's why there are no stars.
To show our readers, here are some results on Google.
No Stars Google Search
Not only did NASA, after 30 years, and 10 years of the ISS without stars, decide they were going to turn on the stars, they put the whole Milky Way up there!
That outta shut us up, eh NASA?
Maybe if you didn't release a semi-recent Instagram post, of an obvious 3D video, of something played off as a real time-lapse, I would have believed them. *Snickers* Probably not.
https://www.instagram.com/p/BD1TYZiNPh5/
Thursday, January 5, 2017
NASA - Vanguard Satellite Series
Vanguard, a series of satellites tried by the United State of America. Launching started in the late 1950's. After a few years in orbit contact with the surviving Vanguard satellite was lost. Last contact: 1964.
The first Vanguard launch ended in failure, when the rocket plummeted back to earth, from only several yards in the air.
Exact cause of launch failure: Classified.
Bell was involved with the construction of Vanguard series. Strangely, there were six vanguard satellites constructed, but we can only find fragments of information.
The image above shows one of the Vanguards being stored on display. Click the link to enlarge, and zoom to read the plaque. It states this is meant to be the first, but couldn't due to launch failure. The plaque creates some confusing information. Is the vanguard above meant to be the Vanguard that survived the explosion?
The image above is T3, which allegedly survived our explosion. Is this the same Vanguard showed above? This survived the explosion of video one? Almost as convenient as terrorist passports floating down from the twin towers.
Can you believe, as Wiki states, that after explosion, this thing was emitting its signal?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vanguard_TV3
"The Vanguard satellite was thrown clear and landed on the ground a short distance away with its transmitters still sending out a beacon signal."
The above video is interesting. At the end it makes a claim of Van Allen Belt destruction, but there's no good way to indicate which satellite, if any in the Vanguard series, he is talking about, due to the nature of editing. Also notice the noise maker he turns on. I wish we could have that analyzed by a specialist to see if it is anything more than a noise maker.
I'm going to call complete diss-info on some of the footage in the video above. Our friend here claims to be able to track the Vanguard satellite, despite the US government not being able to track our 6" friend. Notice at several points in the video the "satellite" stands still. At 2:06 it turns into a shooting star!
False Alien Disclosure
The following video shares footage which only touches the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the false alien disclosures in the government. This video contains the audio of controlled agents. David Ike, and I am highly suspect of Cathy O'brien, due to the behavior of "Miller Family." I do believe their words though in this video, as controlled agents often mix truth with their messages.
Wednesday, January 4, 2017
Geocentric Lecture
The lecture above goes over experiments and theories during the battle of geocentrims and the invention of heliocentrism. It's quite entertaining, and lines up well with scripture. It's interesting to hear about the buried debate. There are many experiments that found Einsteins theories and other heliocentric theories to be faulty.
Tuesday, January 3, 2017
Galileo and Pioneer 10 - Satellite or Hoax
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_(spacecraft)
Galileo was one of the first unmanned satellites to be sent out into deep space. This bad boy was said to have travelled through an asteroid belt (Where asteroids are allegedly far apart), to the planet Jupiter. During its life it travelled a total of 4,631,778,000 km, reaching speeds in the excess of 80,000 m/h.
"It was designed to use the gravitational force of the moons to bend the path of flight."
Sure, good job on your calculations.
The satellite's parachute probe will descend into Jupiter's atmosphere and send data back to the probe.
Lets see how this happened.
"NASA decided they could do one more mission."
Right, go ahead and talk like they came back for a probe to drop. Just stick with the program guys.
Look at how they depict the probe:
The actual probe:
Back to Galileo. What happened to our good friend? Well, it started losing itself to radiation problems, mechanical problems, and was running low on fuel, so our good friends at NASA decided to send it down to the same fate as the poor probe.
Reason? They didn't want to crash land on Europa, due to having found strong evidence of an ocean under the moon's icy surface. Right. I don't even want to get into the ridiculous notion of taking on ISS, Mars missions, and several solar missions, over the idea of going back to see if there's a fish in that sea.
https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/galileo/
Meet the great grand daddy. Above we see Pioneer 10! Okay, this is where things get really funny.
Mission launch? March 2, 1972. Duration of the mission? 30 years, and still going!
That's right Galileo, newer, better materials, built more efficiently, ran out of fuel, and suffered wear, so they crashed it. But a 30 year old hunk of junk, with dated equipment, is still going to be sending data back. After 10 BILLION Kms, carrying 70s gear, through -200 degree temperatures, or more, it's still going to send data back through its dish?
Lets just get a little history on the internet, shall we?
In the 70's internet hardly existed. They were not using wireless in the beginning, they were sending data through phone lines. Later this would become known to the public as dial-up.
Later they started developing a system called ALOHAnet, which is really the first wireless connections, which used high frequency. It also only connected some Hawaiian islands. Kind of brings into question how the internet really works, even today. After all, the boxes are connected to wires. The only part we know for sure, that is sending a wireless signal is the box transmitter, which is ALWAYS in close proximity. We'll save that for another post.
From WIKI on Wi-Fi:
In 1971, ALOHAnet connected the Hawaiian Islands with a UHF wireless packet network. ALOHAnet and the ALOHA protocol were early forerunners to Ethernet, and later the IEEE 802.11 protocols, respectively.
- First high frequency tests of wireless internet.
A 1985 ruling by the U.S. Federal Communications Commission released the ISM band for unlicensed use.[3] These frequency bands are the same ones used by equipment such as microwave ovens and are subject to interference.
- AFTER the launch of Pioneer 10, our wonder satellite of 10 billion km data, they finally release ISM.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISM_band
Basically microwave oven frequencies, that would later be adapted to the first LOW range equipment, such as blue tooth, and cell phones.
Wi-fi Wiki:
In 1991, NCR Corporation with AT&T Corporation invented the precursor to 802.11, intended for use in cashier systems.
Pioneer 10, in the era of dial-up, when they were birthing wireless cash-register technology, was beaming data back from millions of kilometers away. All from far away planets, in an era before we were trying to figure out if our cell would get a signal over that hill! Not only that, it's STILL sending data back.
I have a problem with believing this.
Sphere Globe Considered - No More Directional Logic
We contemplated the Nile running north on a sphere globe. I wondered how this could be. What force is pulling it up? I bumped into the same answer, and no real reason why. Just acceptance of common logic.
The answer is always the same:
https://www.quora.com/Are-people-near-the-South-Pole-standing-upside-down-since-Earth-is-spheroidal-in-shape-and-we-stand-vertically
To put it bluntly "There is no up. There are no sides. North, south, east, and west are only conventions. Maybe gravity has something to do with it."
Literally people are accepting the common answer, and not questioning it. When the common answer is "Just because." I tend to have a problem with it, and want to test it.
The eight ball above is a sphere. Also the same shape as the earth. It has a logical top, which anyone could point to. Most of us, if asked to point the top, by a pre-school teacher, would point at the logical top. We wouldn't point to a side, or the bottom.
The image above is a basketball. It is also a sphere, but slightly bigger than our eight ball. If our pre-school teacher dug it out, and said point to the top, most to of us would point to the logical top. Exactly as we did with the eight ball.
Our friend above is stuck to a wall. Imagine if that was a giant sphere. All the blood would rush to their head. You could build the sphere the size of New York. It wouldn't matter. The same logical occurrence would happen. The amount of energy you would need to walk from below the sphere's equator to the top is astronomical. So much so that it would be impossible. You would be walking sideways, as if up the side of a mountain. Only with suction cups could you do it.
So what is the force that sticks you to the earth's crust? Gravity. Gravity pulls us to the crust. However, logically speaking, Gravity ONLY pulls you towards the center. That's all, that's it. A pulling force to the center. It does not have some magical property that negates the shape, or behaviour of a sphere.
The image above shows little red arrows pointing to areas on the crust where gravity would be pulling towards. The large red arrow shows our logical up, also the flowing direction of the Nile.
Gravity would pull your feet to the equator, on Africa, as we would suspect. Now, what is the magical property of gravity that goes beyond this, and gives us reason to throw out all spherical logic, to go as far as to say we are not on the side of a sphere?
All the alleged spheres in our solar system have no top or bottom? That's as if to say space has no up or down. I like to assume space has a logical view. I'm not certain, but I assume if there was an upside down astronaut in space for too long, they would die.
You could use ISS footage of astronauts upside down to prove their is no up or down in space. I might then use an image of the tooth fairy to prove Santa.
Consider this earth spin from Galileo.
https://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/1375
That's okay. We don't care if the clouds hardly move for 5 hours, or that Australia is the only continent on earth, or if Antarctica is no longer on the south pole. Most will accept the mind control.
The following image is Australia from near the same angle in Google Earth.
Here is Google Earth overlapping Galileo's image:
We see that all the islands north, and Asia had been dropped completely.
Someone argued that distance mattered.
Yet from alleged earth moon shot there is land.
Plenty of land visible from ISS. Of course I don't believe this photo is real either, considering the ship in the top right, which I'll call allegedly photoshopped in.
As a closing note. I'm not even a flat earther. Most likely the earth is round, and science is wrong about forces at play, or I'm just wrong about space having no up or down. This is just a fun way to question science, and what they enforce as science, and the forces at play.
I am however, very weary of NASA, and fakery. Considering all the evidence I have seen.
Sunday, January 1, 2017
European Space Agency - Fraudulent Footage
While browsing for answers in this space dilemma, I was able to catch the European Space Agency in a lie. We'll cover the footage above for inconsistencies to prove space agencies are not afraid to present false footage, to convince people of lies. I'm just not sure what the lie is, or if we'll ever get to the bottom of it.
1:41 the left hand footage is above clouds. On the right side there isn't a single cloud in sight.
1:52 we are still very high above clouds, with no clouds on the right.
1:58 the left side footage jerks oddly, and resumes to a strange, uneven, speed of climb.
2:13 on the right we see the smoke creates a wave inconsistent of any activity on the left.
2:16 Interestingly the fuel tanks have already started jettisoning on the right. Not on the left.
2:18 pause. Fuel tanks on left facing rocket, but on the right they have fallen away, and are facing outward. Near this time, or only seconds before, you will see the sky change color on the right. This is when the sync problems really show.
3:18 tons of blue water and a few white clouds.
3:44 at alleged satellite launch we have a complete white out. Nothing but clouds.
Watch to where the rocket on the left is clearly in space. On the right it is not in space. You see it no higher than where an airplane might be. Sorry guys, but the footage does not line up, and that thing is not in space.
One last thing:
That satellite is clearly visible, yet the other 100, 000 alleged satellites are nowhere in sight. Neither a single piece of space debris?
What are they hiding? Is anything beyond low earth orbit possible?
The best part? They are launching a satellite! Of all footage to fake and create inconsistencies in
This too, is worth exploring.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)