@@platypuss619 The politicians trying to "take care" of people using tax dollars and government programs are keeping people in poverty. The goal for them is not to help. It's to keep people down so the politicians can buy their votes later.
Charlotte Iserbyt, whistle blower, author of “The Dumbing Down of America...,” senior policy advisor of Reagan’s BOE, stated that, “If you want to know what goes on in those “meetings” watch “Eyes Wide Shut.”
@@jamestown4867 And I can't remember which Kubrick movie it was, but they removed lots of parts that were to revealing either without his approval or after his death.
Thats right, like 98% of people will think im crazy if i told them hollywood and the music industry and the news is casting spells on you to keep you asleep. Keep your eyes closed.
The young boy with the apollo sweater on, my mother designed that sweater in 1969 and it was sent to Dr Gilruth who passed it onto Neil Armstrong. My mother was the fastest knitter in the world at the time, Gwen Matthewman. The sweater now resides in the history museum in Ohio US. The pattern for the sweater was released in late 1969 by Lister and that's how a copy ended up in the movie.
kubrick hated hollywood, he hated the film company executives so much he would do anything to avoid having to work with them which is why he made most of his movies in the uk.
That’s why he made “eyes wide shut” exposing the Hollywood elites. And he died a mysterious death like a week after filming, and supposedly a whole lot of the film was cut out and lost forever to no choice of his own
@@dr.penguin9412 His constant reference to Rainbows in eyes wide shut Interesting, the founder of NXIVM had schools called Rainbow Cultural Garden Even more Interesting. The term where the rainbow ends, comes from the Ancient Occult belief, that, if you offered a child up to Moloch, you got to keep any gold or jewels that was found at the end of the rainbow. Of course in ancient times, they actually believed there was gold under the rainbow. Today, we know, its a trick of the light.
...New world order led by obama and pope francis is coming. Jesus christ is coming back for the rapture. Get ready. Dont believe the coming ufo alien abduction narrative
Been onto these scammers since the 50's and 60's Did the Germans really start WW2? Try why did some outfit declare war on the Germans in Mar 1933! That's why Hitler had a certain crew locked up, just as the US locked up 100's of 1000's of the Japanese community after Pearl Harbor History is the Greatest lesson in life, never forget it
@@davelebowski2859 You obviously have never seen him with a full panel asking him questions. Biden was there before in the 80's with him, making no sense (Biden). What you have said is not true or fact, only what you feel, which is worthless. You make up things to say so you feel better. Pathetic.
4:41 Rogan cracks me up when his guest tries to detour from the conversation Rogan wants to have. "Nixon bombed Cambodia!" "Yeah," then goes back to his train of thought.
Fifty three years ago we went to the moon but cannot do it today? This is a disconnect in logic. The press conference is unbelievably depressing when it should be a celebration.
@@seanpratt4704 And totally PROVES Rogan is Controlled opposition. ...the young, hip, cool, "happening" dude, that everyone "loves", ...to sell us a MOUNTAINOUS AVALANCHE OF HORSESH!T! Same with Russell Brand! Theyre both PUPPETS of the satanic globalists!
@@LiGhTfOoT_ Its one of those movies especially in the space sequences that make you feel like you're high on drugs its a hypnotic ambient experience that you'll never forget.
2001 blew a lot of minds back then, including mine. The special effects compared to everything else at the time was literal witchcraft. '69 was also the last year for Star Trek. Coincidence?👀🤣
2001 was released before the first Apollo landing and Kubrick's depiction of the Moon's surface differs greatly from its appearance in the Apollo footage. The movement of characters on the Moon in 2001 differs from that of the filmed movement of Apollo astronauts, and does not resemble an environment with 1/6 the gravity of Earth.
On the set of dr. Strangelove Kubrick had so accurately depicted the cockpit of the B-52 he actually got a visit from the government because the specs hadn't yet been declassified.
@@emperortrevornorton3119 Kubrick basically recreated the cockpit from a small snippet of a magazine photograph that showed a small section of the guages, etc. Kubrick, with the help of aviators and experts, then filled out the rest of the cockpit how they believed it would look. They were basically spot on.
Hey ... where's major Kong?! The Apollo missions should have brought a state of the art 35 mm or 70 mm motion picture production camera. And ... the starscape would have appeared even better than those on top of Mount Everest at Night; except that such starscapes would have been visible in daylight on the moon because there is no atmosphere scattering of sunlight. The moon has no atmosphere. Why were no photographs taken of starscapes directly overhead using a shaded lens to block sunlight reflected off the regolith, and in the shade of the LEM, on a tracking tripod, with a long shutter exposure? Answer: That would be even harder to fake with enough precision to fool even an amateur astronomer; let alone thousands of them. And yes, the Earth and moon are spherical, space is a hard vacuum, and rockets are able to work in space by following Newton's Laws of conservation of momentum ... unlike a certain magic bullet I can still recall. We need to all live longer to grow wise to all the b.s. propaganda myths we are spoon fed from birth. Telomerase, Cannabis, and Iv3rm3ctin For All! Worldwide General Strike and Cease Fire! Hey RU-vid! Don't ...
Hmm... China, USA, India, Isreal, Japan, Europe, have all sent multiple missions to the moon since 2005. China successfully landed (unmaned) missions on the moon in 2013, 2018 & again in 2020 and now have a couple of kilos of moon rock back their Earth labs from the 2020 mission. India & Isreal missions crashed landed on the Moon in 2019 (lander missions failed) USA (one with South Korea) have 3 separate moon orbit missions happening right now. There are 20+ more known missions including multiple landings planned by all the above and others like Australia, Canada, UAE, Turkey, Ukraine, UK, Mexico, Netherlands, Europe and more in the next couple of years.
It doesn't surprise me at all. It cost a lot of money, they won the cold war, people were losing interest. There's only renewed interest coz the us is falling behind china
@@rfgson im not gunna let you get away with that comment are you hoping no one will fact check you, the us have a problem with there rocket so no they havnt gone anywhere they apparently want to send an unmanned rocket to the moon to make way for another one later on with astronauts. If they have been there whats the need for that. No one ever has landed and will never land on the moon
@dont tripbot It's because of Neuschwabenland. The Nazis supposedly built a base in Antarctica that was rumored to have a tropical climate. Theories about this range from Nazis discovered the hollow earth to Nazis used the base to build the UFO like bell crafts and then escaped to the moon.
Chris, Kubrick died on March 7th,1999. Eye's Wide Shut release date (July 16th, 1999). As for July 16th, that was the 30th anniversary of the Apollo 11 Launch, (July 16th, 1969.) As for Kubrick, his death, (March 7th), was 666 days before January 1st, 2001.... At any rate, we have Kubrick, Apollo 11, Eye's Wide Shut, & 1-1-2001 ( The 666 days.) Back to ''The Shining'', (which is also about Elites.) In a scene showing an overhead view of the Maze, if you look hard at it a certain way, you can see what looks like the numbers ''444'', right in the center of the Maze. As for the movie, The Box Office Sales for The Shining came in at $44.4 Million, (444.) Between Kubrick helping NASA, we have the Elites, Child Sexual Abuse, (In both The Shining & Eye's Wide Shut.) And also a lot of Numerology, all tied together...
How about the guy who was doing a house clean out for someone and found all the copies of NASA Footage in a basement along with NASA electronic equipment. And the fucking dummy called NASA and they immediately picked it all up, and told him he could keep the old equipment, and never spoke of what was on all those reels, many claim it was all original unedited footage of moon landings, alien edits, et artifact edits, god only knows. We get a chance and anyone of us would upload it all online but this scared “do Gooder” fucked it up. Nobody knows where or how all those shelves of original footage ever ended up in that old basement and til this day NASA hasn’t said a peep about what they recovered.
Yeah, the calculations are no longer there because they deleted or destroyed all of that information? A woman Katherine Johnson who was apparently brilliant did all the math. Don Pettit literally says we can't go back because we don't have the technology. Search him on here. Is so strange that we go backwards with this specific technology with the stupidest explanations as to why.
The world has lost a ton of data and historical TV, because magnetic tapes were so expensive they were constantly reused.. But I guess we also lose a lot with hard drives, that we also rewrite over these days.. :)
The funny thing is that everyone says this, but it's not quite accurate. He would be the guy you would want to put it all together - well, except that you would have some very intense moments with astronauts gripping the side of their seats and their eyes rolling back in their heads. But all joking aside, the guy you would want would be DOUG TRUMBALL. He is the ONLY one who could have pulled it off. But even with Trumball's genius, the effects would suffer the same fate as all FX of the time - the fact that they don't age well. As much as people may argue, this simply hasn't happened with the moon footage. Otherwise, we would have movies at that time with that level of "FX" in them. We don't.
Oh it's more than idle speculation. The story I heard is that when he was making Dr Strangelove....he needed to recreate the bomber/cockpit for filming. He went to the G and asked for access. DENIED! He then proceeded to scrounge up every photograph in LIFE and LOOK mags and any source he could locate with any partial pictures and perfectly recreated the plane on his own. This is what put him on their radar.
@@dvnobles Kubrick got himself on their radar when he reconstructed a bomber perfectly for making Dr Strangelove. Later NASA gave him a one-off lens to film Barry Lyndon in candlelight. BTW - have you seen i pic of the lunar module lately? That "tech" didn't age well. It looks like it was made from a child's Erector Set and a roll of tinfoil.
Apollo Flight Director Gene Kranz recounts these simulations in his book, Failure is not an Option: 'In the late 1960s our simulation technology had progressed to the point where it became virtually impossible to separate the training from actual missions. The simulations became full dress rehearsals for the missions down to the smallest detail. The simulation tested out the crews and controllers responses to normal and emergency conditions. It checked out the exact flight plan, mission rules, and procedures that the crew and controllers would use for a later flight.' In 2003 History Channel documentary of the same name: Kranz said: The simulations were so real that no controller could discern the difference between the training and the real mission.
That is actually what I have said and thought about Apollo 11. Once I saw a picture of the training facility and you couldn't tell the difference. I also am aware that many false flag events happen with simulation training so the others can't tell the difference of what is real or not such as 9/11 and the London train bombings.
Stanley Kubrick was arguably the best Director ever known to Hollywood Cinema, but the man was absolutely insane. He was talking to the key grip of one of his moves while driving. He crashed his car into a ditch mid conversation and didn’t even react. He just kept talking about the movie
@@IsaacTheSalsaShark Lol it could be, because a "crash" doesn't mean cars flipping and engines exploding. It could have easily been a nick off of a pole.
2001: A Space Odyssey is a decent indication of what Hollywood special effects could do at the time - and it’s extremely shonky. It genuinely was simpler to film on location.
I am not sure Joe has ever done 5meo, he talks about DMT a lot, but usually NN DMT. That does not come from the toad, they are two totally different things.
I like this type of conversation that Joe was talking about. It's fascinating. If only Stanley talked about why he did that. Did anyone ever interview him about it?
Nobody ever did because Stanley did not and COULD NOT possibly have faked Apolo. Al you have to do is watch his movie"2001"; His rendering of zero-g, and of the Moon do not look like the real thing. NoboDy had either the technology or the knowledge to fake Apollo; NOTE THAT TO THIS DAY, NO CONVINCING SIMULATION OF THE APOLLO LUNAR SURFACE EVA'S HAS EVER BEEN MADE.
@@1carpentrys No. I think Kubrick did the best he could with the technology and information he had, and he succeeded in making one of THE best movies ever made. I also think it is perfectly obvious, for reasons too numerous to even list, that Apollo was not faked, and certainly not faked by Kubrick.
Kubrick was an absolute perfectionist and demanded no restrictions on the process and the content of his movies. Some claim he ran into some G intemperance when making Dr Strangelove and 2001. Some say he made a deal with the G to produce something in exchange for free reign.(Later NASA gave him a unique lens to film Barry Lyndon). It was a deal he forever regretted which why he put all kinds of hidden clues in The Shinning...Danny's Apollo 11 sweater, Tang on the storage shelves, A11 work and no play etc. Some say it's why he made Eyes Wide Shut as an expose (we didn't get to see Kubricks intended/uncut version as he died suddenly right before it was released).
The guy who stayed in the craft Would have seen the best stars of anybody When he went around to the dark side of the moon The sunlight would have been completely gone The stars would have been amazing
Yup, Michael Collins saw them just fine. The question landing deniers cut out of their cherry picked clip was if they could see the stars through the corona of the sun. Try doing your research.
@@UpperDarbyDetailing Um Yeah it would have been A 2 or 3 hour clip This is just a snippet And I am talking about what they talked about in the snippet They actually talked about a lot of stuff So what I said is spot on You are talking about something that's not in the snippet🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️
@@oldcountryboy yes… my point that flew over your head is that that snippet was deliberately cut to make it look like Michael Collins said he didn’t see any stars. Like I already said, do your own research.
The difference in moon walking "quality" between missions could be, yes the 1/6 gravity, but NASA even had a training program on how to walk on the moon. Astronauts reported how difficult it is, how center of mass can not be controlled, so a training program on how to actually walk on moon was started since first mission. Perhaps learning different body mechanics, not even natural at first, led to improvements(?) So the later missions do look more fluid.
Yeah you watched them fly a tin can with 1/,1,000,000 of our current computing power. On your black and white TV with rabbit ears antenna. On the first attempt. Grow up.
They never landed on the moon . Have you people never experienced listening to a person relate the most intense strange experience ever in their life . They gush with excitement and can't hold themselves back from relating every little detail .....
@@cecildennis-o9l sure, ever see someone do that a month later while exhausted? Watch the WHOLE press conference after Apollo 11. It matches perfectly, Also, faking it IS. NOT. POSSIBLE. If I stood in directly in front of you, would it be possible for me to convince you that I walked ten feet away and then walked back if you don’t look away? That would be just as difficult as faking going to the moon.
"Imagine looking up at the moon and believing that some boomers went up there, drove a golf cart, and then nasa “lost the technology.” Or even just imagine believing the government tells the truth." - Some YT Comment
“Lost the technology” was a poorly worded interview answer given by someone who worked with NASA. After Apollo 17 in 1972 the government cut their funding and manufacturers of the SaturnV rocket (rocket used for the 6 Apollo landings) were forced to shut down. Therefore that technology becoming obsolete. Hence “lost the technology” meanings they no longer had access to it. Imagine what NASA could’ve been done by now if they had the funding of the US military😱 that would be the day
@@jalvarez9043 If you look up NASA's Don Pettit's interview (RU-vid etc.), you will find him saying that they "destroyed the technology and it's a painful process to build it back again." Why would I believe that NASA has trouble rebuilding the technology that took us to the Moon in the 60's? And they want us to believe that we can't go back to the Moon in 50 years but we are about to send people to Mars? Compare the distance from the Earth to the moon against the Earth to Mars.
Joe "I really like that hat!" Fitzdog "Yeah, I found it in a garbage can outside The Comedy Store, the day after the 2016 election. I had to wash it because it smelled like elk and weed.""
A year after watching the Shining I get dropped off at a fly-in remote lodge on Lake Clark Alaska in the winter. Closest community of 12 people is a 10 mile walk across a frozen lake. The guy helping me drop my stuff off asked me if I was afraid of ghosts because the lodge was built on an old Indian graveyard and there had been caretakers there who claimed to see their ghosts as well as the ghost of a woman who tripped on float plane dock and got decapitated. I must admit my mind strayed to the movie a few times in the months I spent there and wished I hadn't seen the movie.
Haha i was working in Ireland and the job took longer, sowe booked into a local hotel we found online, The Montague.. sounded cool. We arrived, looked a nice place, once inside, still looked cool.. once we were booked in and being shown to our rooms, the long very dated corridors, gave me an overwhelming feeling almost complete dankness. Exactly like the shining, once in the room, the door was flimsy like it had been kicked in, there was glass on the mattress under the sheet, I refused to stay, something didn't feel right, and I trust my gut... We left and booked into one down the road , few days later on a job, radio said the Montague had now been closed and was to be used for immigrants to Ireland, shootings and crazy shit happened there that's why was shut down . Really weird place, still get shudders thinking bout it..
Kubrick...one of a kind. Never be another. I have his taschen Napoleon book...its massive. I flipped through it several times and read the script. It would have been badass. Same with A.I. but he gave it to Spielberg.
Calumet means peace pipe. One of the sub themes of The Shining was about the slaughter of the American Indians. Remember, the Overlook hotel was built on an Indian burial ground.
There is one piece of evidence that proves what we saw televised and in photos was not filmed on the moon, and it is irrefutable. The lunar lander had a rocket engine pointing straight down in the center underneath the craft with 80,000 lbs of thrust they had to use to set down. It would have made a crater bigger than the lander itself and would have thrown up so much dust it would have been everywhere. Yet, the dust under the lander is undisturbed, no crater, no dust, even the gold foil on the feet of the lander are shiny and clean. They may have gone to the moon, but they didn't do it in that ship or in those photos.
The thrust of the vessel is not turned up to 80k lbs the entire descent. As the lander descends, the thrust starts at a full burn to reduce the speed of the lander and take it out of orbit. The lander then slows its speed down gradually, both vertical speed AND its horizontal speed (it just left an orbital velocity of ~2,040 miles per hour). As the lander uses up fuel (which is heavy and a significant majority of the vehicles total mass) the lander also becomes significantly lighter, as the entire vessel is designed form the get to to have utilized almost all of its fuel before landing so it weighs less and then requires less fuel expenditure for the finer adjustments in the final descent (hence there is a "point of no return" window during initial descent). As the landers speed becomes slower, it requires less and less thrust to maintain that speed. By the time the lander has began its final descent window, the lander is only moving at 1.12 miles per hour (0.5m/s) and given its current mass at the time of touchdown only required a little bit over 1000lbs of thrust to maintain the ~0.5m/s speed for a safe landing. When you consider that the landing module had a max thrust output of 45000N and 1000lbs thrust is roughly equivalent to 4,448.22N, the engine was firing at only 10% of its power. In addition to all of this and you can visually observe exactly where the minor amount of rocks/dust were displaced in a line along the path of its last few feet of landing (the lander was still moving horizontally before touchdown) in many of the photos of the landing site (i can link you the one you can see it the clearest on if you would like) (and some math too) Apollo stack, LM + CSM = 46 tons, only the LM landed on the moon. LM had two stages, ascent (get crew back to command module) and descent (the thing you said needed 80k lbs of thrust). Ascent stage had a mass of 4.7 tons fully fueled Descent stage had an empty mass (fuel used up) of 2.0 tons Total landed mass of the LM was 6.7 tons. It had a mass of 6.7 tons on landing, and since lunar gravity is 1/6th of Earth, only ~1.1 tons of thrust was needed the last 50 meters before landing
That was definitely faked nasa is pretty much one of the biggest scams that ever happened the reason they never go back or plan too is now they understand with the type of cameras that exist now you can see everything too perfectly clear it's easy too fool a bunch of people with blurry images now that we can really see what's going on they domt dare take images of the moon with these modern cameras right but people are still stupid enough to believe this happened
@@marettmrc I think most understand there was a throttle. The spirit of his assertion still stands. There is so much more to that piece of footage as well. All of it, everywhere has problems and the footage of the trip is one of the biggest challenges to NASA's credibility. Pivot points of men in 'space suits' lining up exactly where cables would be used in their training, some footage slowed down for effect and the jump heights are no different than a person on Earth, other times they are jumping higher. People literally receiving help from cables getting up after having fallen over, There's bullshit everywhere, even the 'Moon' rock that Neil Armstrong gave to Amsterdam was fake. It was petrified wood.
"Apollo Program" Producer: Walt Disney deceased at that time. Co-producer: Wernher Von Braun. Director: Stanley Kubrick Art Director: John Hoesli. Writer: Arthur C Clarke. Photographer: Geoffrey Unsworth. Total cost = 169.51 billion current dollars.
The thing abt Kubrick is that his movies are “tome poems” George Lucas talks about them. They’re movies that force the actors and dialogue to take the back seat and let the other elements tell the story
It wasn't just with Full Metal Jacket, Eyes Wide Shut was also completely shot in England. Kubrick didn't want to (and at that point probably couldn't) go to New York so he sent people there to take photographs of a couple streets and had them entirely rebuild as sets, lol. That movie's budget was $65m where like $12m went to Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman and rest went to building entire streets of New York. Some scenes where Tom Cruise walks through the streets aren't even him on the set but a rear projection. I wonder who OK'd such a high budget for a movie where a couple people at a time talk to each other in a room and didn't question for what exactly do they need the extra 50 million, haha.
@@ETAisNOW yes free rein in hollyweird but after eyes wide shut they cut an hour out of the film. 5 days b4 the release he was killed. Space mite be the final frontier but its filmed in a Hollywood basement.
When you're a famous director you do what you want or you don't make the movie. Isnt it interesting how making entertainment pays better than doing things that people need to be done- aka essential work. Its not their fault. It's literally our fault. We endorse it. We don't want to pay teachers better but we'll absolutely pay to see the next Marvel film. 🤷♂️ Imagine a world where teachers dictate the terms of how they teach. Crazy.
I watched full metal jacket being filmed. It was shot at Beckton gas works in East London just around the corner from where I lived. It's also where the famous Jean Michel Jarre concert "destination docklands" was held in 1989. I sung in the choir that night along with a couple hundred other kids from poor East London schools (the famous fashion designer Lee Alexander McQueen was standing next to me as we went to school together). There's videos on here where I can watch myself aged 13 singing by Jean on a floating stage lol. One amazing night I'll never forget. We had a pretty awesome childhood for poor East London kids.
@@daveelson213 haha good times 🤭 the part where I'm on camera is when they walked 300 of us kids onto stage with our red life jackets which we all hated cos they smelt horrible and sweaty. I had bushy curly hair back then and was standing next to Alexander and a massive black lad that I remember being bigger than my dad 🤣 to this day I still see lazers and fireworks when I close my eyes and I'm sure my crap hearing is to do with that amazing night 😆
in regards to the book describing how awesome the stars looked vs no memory of them in person, its easy to imagine a publisher telling them to add some color to the story telling
No… it’s just two different questions being answered. The ACTUAL question was asking if they could see stars through the sun’s corona. Which was just one of the experiments. This stuff all gets a little easier to explain when “truthers” aren’t lying their asses off.
The man in charge of risk assessment for the entire Apollo program was Joseph Shea, a Ph.D level Engineer from New York. He was hired by NASA around 1963. In 1967, his team of mathematicians, engineers, rocket scientists, medical doctors and meteorologists, nearly 30 professionals, made a determination of the chances for a successful Apollo moon mission. Keep in mind, the NASA administrators required a 99.75% chance of success, before they would green light a launch. Along those lines, NASA cancelled the Space Shuttle program when they recalculated the risk assessment. Prior to 1986, NASA calculated the risk of catastrophic mission failure was 1 in 100,000. After 2 Shuttles mission failures, they determined the risk was 1 in 100 or 1%. And that was too high. Joseph Shea concluded in 1967, the chance of failure ( death of the entire Apollo crew) would be 95% per each launch. At least 10 crews, he concluded, would die before 1 landed on the moon. That was bad news for NASA. They had already spent more than $25 billion of taxpayers money into what was clearly a lost cause. By 1968, the clock was ticking. In April 1968, Stanley Kubrick released 2001 A Space Odyssey. As luck would have it, the high IQ genius who had helped Kubrick over the past 4 years, to make that movie, was Arthur C Clarke. Clarke was a key advisor to NASA and friends with the very top NASA people in the Apollo program. He is seen in photos with top NASA administrators in the mid 1960's in London. According to the film producer, Bart Sibrel, ( hated by NASA and trolls on all message boards ) he was leaked information that a staged moon landing was done in New Mexico at an Air Force base, under the eye of LBJ and other top military and gov officials. It appears the editing of the film took a long time and might not have been completed until mid 1969. What is important to note about Stanley Kubrick is that he had invented the Front Screen Projection film technique of backdrops, and it is obvious NASA folks used that film technique, to make black backgrounds in the scenes. Today, it looks very fake but NASA had no other option at the time and never guessed the film would be viewed millions of times by independent researchers. The Bart Sibrel film - " A funny thing happened on the way to the Moon "offers proof after proof of the hoax. It can still be seen on YT. One question folks will often ask, after seeing the Bart Sibrel film is, " If NASA faked the moon landing, wouldn't Russia would tell the world ". That is a good question. Consider what Russia would get from that worldwide statement. Nothing. Russia is smart. After all, they were 4-5 years ahead of NASA when they ended the moon mission program, after realizing the radiation barriers were IMPOSSIBLE to penetrate. Russia was way too smart than to yell, " America is lying." They blackmailed Nixon. Some of the blackmail payoffs are known because they were too big and too obvious to hide from anyone. However, there is a good chance a lot of the blackmail package remains secret, and perhaps 90% of it remains unknown. But that is why Russia kept quiet in my view.
@@maxsmith695 A former military police man in his death bed , tells his son about the making of the 'moon landing film at Cannon. This son who is now on in his death bed , terminal sick , tell this on camera. At Cannon , 2 hangers became one big studio.During that time renovations were going on. The trucks with props like sand did not stand out. This MP was given a list with 15 names. These people only , han entry to the studio. Among them...: Emeneger , Armstrong , Van Allen , Von Braun... . Do you think this is legit?A hoax? By the way..English is not my first language.. . I am Belgian.
@@paolojoosten6353 moon landing is 100% a hoax. The confession is real. LBJ declared in May 1968, he was not running for President in Nov 1968 election. He would not be in office in jan 1969, so he was not too worried about the moon landing hoax. Nixon is likely the person who gave the permission of NASA to fake it. Nixon was very unpopular in the summer of 1969 for carrying on a war in Vietnam nobody could explain. I was in a campground the day it was made public, July 20, 1969. Many campers had a radio and listened. Afterwards, nobody bothered to even talk about it. Back then, most people, maybe 99% assumed it was real. By 1985, a growing voice was saying it was fake. After 1995, videos on RU-vid began showing all the fakery and professional photographers said it was fake. Those 12 men who say they walked on the moon were kept away from public audiences. Only Bart Sibrel and a few others were able to bring forth a lot of evidence that it was fake. Today in America 75% of adults call it fake.
I have never been able to reconcile the picture of the earth rising when they were on the moon how small it was -- more like what the moon looks like from Earth. It should have looked absolutely HUGE.
It looks small because there is nothing on the surface to create a true sense of scale . I try to enjoy the night sky at work . I notice the moon looking very small as I cross a huge flat parking lot , 20ft buildings visable at a great distance . During my first break , the moon will appear even smaller as I look out past the parking lot and lack of buildings . During lunch the moon has moved over our campus and looks much larger because other objects appear closer to the moon
You're correct, the moon is slightly larger than 1/4 the size of earth, .27% actually, so the earth is roughly 4 times the size of the moon and would appear as such viewed from the moon. I've argued this point for years, it's the same distance either way, but one object is 4 times the size as the other, and earth would appear to be 4 times the size of our moon if viewed from the moon. Imagine the harvest moons we see in the summer, it's a pretty big ball in the sky, and you can easily make out craters/features on the moon, now imagine if it were 4 times that size, it would be HUGE! Many photos/video taken of earth from the moon don't seem to show the earth that size, I've seen a few that get close, but you'd be able to see all continents easily, you'd easily be able to see the city lights, it would be such an awesome scene you know someone would of put a "web cam" on the moon so we could view the scene anytime we liked, but no one has ever done that, maybe there's other things they've never done.
Another thing that isn't correct to scale, is the dirt they kicked up running around on the moon with their toes and the rover. If the gravity of the moon is 1/6 that of earth, than dust kicked up by a toe would fly up 6 times higher on the moon than it does on earth, video of the astronauts running around kicking up dirt, shows that dirt doesn't get kicked up high at all and falls quickly back down, even dirt off the rovers tires falls quickly to the ground, "for every action there's is an equal and opposite reaction", well that "reaction" would be 6 times greater on the moon, if you're toe kicks up dirt a foot high on earth, it would be kicked up about 6 feet on the moon and it would take 6 times longer to fall back to the ground, and fine dust would be floating all over. They claim on the moon you could hit a golf ball miles cause of lack of gravity, how come the dirt/dust they kick up doesn't even go feet?
@@danthomas9077 sorry but I don’t get how the earth can look 4 times bigger than the moon when standing on the moon. It’s 250,000 miles away and distance makes things look smaller🤔 I’m no scientist but I would have expected the earth to look quite a bit smaller from 1/4 million miles away
@@DIVISIONINCISION in the movie, the way they knew everything Cruise's character was up to, makes me think they were an intelligence agency. Or had ties to. That movie was Kubrick telling the world that the world is run by a cabal of satinists
My favorite movie of Kubrick is the masterpiece "Barry Lyndon". The cinematography of that movie is nothing short of amazing given the time in which it was made and was filmed with all natural lighting of the period. No other movie I've seen captures the feeling of a time period quite like Barry Lyndon (with the lone exception being Ridley Scott's "The Duellists".)
There's something with a magazine that Jack Nicholson's character is reading before his job interview, I think it's a Playboy issue where they talk about pedophilia and stuff
they did know about them the belts were discovered in 1958. and in 2012 2 dedicated probes were sent out to study them. Their suits absolutely had radiation protection because the sun emits radiation. Solar winds affect the belts and i believe only in "space storms" can the belts be dangerous.
Fact: the real reason the room number was changed has nothing to do with Apollo. The hotel they used for some of the shots requested they use a fake room number because they were concerned about losing business if people saw the movie and refused to stay in the room.
Beckon Power Station in East London doubled up as the Citadel of Hue. Have been to both and can't see how anyone would think about making Hue in Beckton
Have you seen the video of the astronaut saying they recorded over the tapes of the original landing? And the reason they haven’t gone back is because they destroyed the equipment when they returned and it would be “too expensive and too much work to build again.” Yeah, even though our phones have more power and capability than the computer when they “landed on the moon.”
China just went to the dark side of the moon… the reason we never went back is ther is literally nothing there… only thing we learned is that our moon used to be apart of earth… therefore they have more solid evidence on the origins of the moon…
How do they explain no other country going to the moon since. If it was possible to do with 60's technology there would be rich people today doing their own private trips and every nation with a space agency would have a flag on the moon
I have to say those statements made me question. Also one of the Nasa astronouts also said wr cant go cause Van Allen belt and I was like but didnt you do through before, i dunno the whole thing is wierd.
@@goead Because there was more than enough footage of the original landing so they reused the tapes on other missions. For whatever reason, maybe they were cataloging missing stuff or something, they put out a request to see if anyone had them laying around which started a search through the archives and they concluded it was reused. It wasn't a big deal but people go "ermaghed they lost the tapes".
@@ChucksSEADnDEAD - “More than enough footage”. Who are you kidding? Probably the most important event in human history and they have too much footage of it? What a joke. I’ve heard the Library of Congress is an absolute disaster, and everything is misfiled and all over the place, so I could believe an American organisation screwed up, but not that they deleted it because they had too much footage.
I wonder if there is any connection between Kubrick filming Luna scenes here on Earth as a contingency plan, because the astronauts supposedly encountered alien ships on the moon observing them; which if true would render a lot of otherwise real footage immediately classified and off-limits for public release. It would be great if Joe could maybe look into this at some stage.
No and aliens on the moon is a myth. Even if aliens exist somewhere...they are so far away and trapped on their own planet as we are on ours that they may as well not exist as far as we are concerned. Human travel through outer space is IMPOSSIBLE.
the actual reason we haven't gone back to the moon is rather simple. though not simple to solve. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-0k9wIsKKgqo.html
I was eleven yrs old and I recall the commentator explaining as the flag was planted that it was a stiff or springy material so that it would appear to wave. Yet somehow that was missed by theorists who use the waving flag as another piece of evidence.
Joe advocated for lockdowns and masks, then he left CA to get away from it. He’s a simpleton and easily manipulated. He trusts those “officials” who get in his head because he’s too stupid to discern fact from fiction, and therefore is not in that camp. He would believe in leprechauns if an Irish scholar told him they exist. Remember Bigfoot? He’s an old man with the intellect of a child.
Years ago I saw a video of a guy with an old school video cam. He was cornering those who claim to have gone to the moon. It was brilliant I wish I could remember what it was called .
the weirdest thing was a nasa guy saying we have lost the technology to go to space. my phone has more processing speed than the entire nasa complex back in 1960
IDK. I’ve watched that clip, and IMO, I read his statement not as “we can’t ever go back” but as “we don’t physically have the technology and would have to re-engineer it all” which is true. Just my thoughts. There is plenty though to leave one wondering…
@@coderexe30 Yep. Dumb people like to take the words outta context. A few of the reasons we haven’t gone back is money. People can’t fathom we were in a stupid technology race with other parts of the word and there was a lot of manpower, time and and money dumped into the project. What that guy means and others when they say the technology can’t be replicated is; There wasn’t exact plans for plenty items as a lot of things were hand made and modified pretty much as they went. It’s not like there’s cad drawing of all the stuff. Most people would be able to comprehend the complexity of just the engines alone, it’s no wonder they can’t get a handle on the whole thing. Advanced technology has always baffled primitive men. People saying their phone has more computing power than the shuttles don’t know what they’re talking about just repeating what they heard, and there’s videos in b&w on yt from the national archives I believe showing all kinds of the technology and testing incoming which is only a fraction of the whole.
I think they say that because the technology was improvised by all the top tier scientists and mechanics and therefore not really a single plan was made. I dont know what to think of it but thats the explaination given
Missions to the Moon have been conducted by the following nations and entities (in chronological order): the Soviet Union, the United States, Japan, the European Space Agency, China, India, Luxembourg, and Israel. Russia has plans to go back this year apparently too. Thats a lot of lying to keep alive if you ask me.
NASA's transparency in disclosing the lost tapes lends more credence to the authenticity of Apollo, not less. After all, if the missions were all fake, then the telemetry tapes were faked too, if they even existed at all. Any subsequent drama about them being "lost" would therefore be moot.
Aeronautical Engineer/scientist, Albert Taylor, spent almost two decades evaluating satellite system designs & multiple government classified programs (including the Star Wars & the F-117A Stealth Fighter programs) at major aerospace companies in southern California. This lead him to be hired by NASA to work on the International Space Station Program. When he was asked by Art Bell about the moon landing, he replied: "When I saw the landing craft, there is no way I would ever get in that thing. It was way too flimsy."
Hi Rogan I was wondering if you could go ahead and talk about hydrogen III and how it could be a clean nuclear energy and how a lot of countries in the world are partaking and going back to the moon so recently
Yea no chance it came from a lab funded by the NIH.... Title: *"2018: Fauci on resuming gain-of-function research funding. Its just as Rand Paul said"* ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-BXB-Nt5kV1U.html&ab_channel=SILVIEWmedia
A clockwork orange is one of the craziest movies I have ever watched, easily my favorite movie by kubrick. If any of you have not watched it I highly recommend!
The room number was changed at the behest of the Hotel owner, fearful that guests would want to stay in any room as long as it wasn't room 217. So, it got changed to 237 - a room number that doesn't exist in the Timberline Hotel. It has absolutely no hidden meaning. There's the number 42 that crops up - maybe that was because 2 x 3 x 7 comes to 42. Or maybe not. 237 is not the distance to the Moon, nor is 237000 other than for the short period as it draws closer to Earth and again as it moves away. The Moon is not 237000 miles from Earth far more often than it is.
Douglas Trumbull was the special effects mastermind behind 'the 2001' film. Douglas Trumbull also stated that he worked for NASA during the Apollo era. Also, you can clearly see the so-called 'Kubrick Horizontal' in nearly all Moon photos and videos. (Excluding Apollo 11, as Apollo 11 was the only mission not have any mountain backdrops, and they did not jump high into the air) And finally, in my humble opinion, the video of the LM orbiting the Moon looks laughably fake just by looking at it. It looks like 1950s Flash Gordon special effects. (This is probably why they never released this video footage until years after the Apollo era)
@BamJam Diggalam For the faked moon landing filming which took place in New MEXICO. Watch the show on RU-vid called " a funny thing happened on the way to the moon"
@@MX-CO 'A funny thing happened on the way to the Moon' has some errors in it, but overall it is correct. The biggest error is when Bart assumes the camera _must_ have been placed directly against the glass window, simply because they said something like, "the camera is taking up the entire window." Of course, that is irrelevant, because when they turn the cabin lights back on, you can clearly see the very close-by, bright Earth shining through the window, brightly filling the entire window. They were claiming to be filming the tiny, far-away Earth floating with the pitch-blackness of space surrounding it, but when the cabin lights go on, the Earth fills the entire window and is extremely bright, proving they only in Low Earth Orbit, _not_ half way to the Moon. (The jump cut editing is also painfully noticeable whenever they went to show the 'Earth')
Moon landings - first time in human history when a super successful engineering feat was followed by just stopping completely. Then they have the balls to say they want to go to Mars. LOL.
@@deafbyhiphop said, " There's was Wikileaks footage showing that the moon landing was shot in the Nevada desert. Not True "The film clip you're referring to was taken from the production of the 1978 movie Capricorn One, which tells the story of a badly faked human mission to Mars... WikiLeaks had no involvement whatsoever! and has no files on fake Moon landings. All the information leaked by people holding governments accountable, all admit to finding nothing about fake Moon landings. We landed on the Moon.
Loved the Ari clip. I also love the conspiracy stuff! I watched the shining when I was like 11 and I was alone and it scared me so bad that I refuse to go anywhere their is isolation and snow. It truly affected my life. I know I watched it at least 5 times. The black dude getting killed was so sad at the time. He was their only hope. Also the last shot where Jack was frozen in that maze. His expression was very scary.
So many wild and bizarre scenes in shining,I'll never understand the bear suit in the bedroom,and i really do believe that movie caused shelly Duvall downward spiral..or at least the exhausting filming of it..
Well Buzz Aldrin did say on Conan OBrian that he didn't watch him land live, that what he watched was an animation. Whether you believe we went there or not, that filmed portion was filmed right here on Urantia.
He's referring the model demonstrations that the networks played alongside the radio chatter because there was no camera outside to watch the ship land.
A 16mm colour movie camera was used from the cockpit of the lunar module, on descent and lift off, and for some footage of the moonwalks. Additionally on Apollo 15-17 the tv camera on the lunar rover was left running and pointed at the lunar module to film the lift off from outside.
@@chrisschwarz5569it wasnt a TV camera. It was a specially-made Westinghouse camera which was about 26 cm long. It consumed 6.5 watts of power at about 30 volts.
@@chrisschwarz5569Ever heard of something called batteries? When the crews of Apollo 15-17 were about to leave, they positioned the TV camera infront of the LM. Since the camera was running on batteries, it just kept running until the battery was empty. The direction of the camera could be controlled from earth (for example like a rovercamera on mars would), so thats why the camera could pan up when the LM launched. If you look carefully, the first time they did this the pan up doesnt work out. Since there is a radio delay from earth to moon, the engineers directing the camera basically have to pre move the camera to stay with the LM. No one actually standing behind a camera would make that mistake.
