2017-02-12T17:20:00-08:00
Why is landing on the moon an American lie? I know that this idea is popular with many religious extremists and conspiracy theorists. The first is from religious standpoints of the impossibility of exiting from the sky, etc., and the second is from the standpoint of love of conspiracy, but I will never speak from this standpoint. I will speak. From a completely other angle. We do not deny the ability of man to reach the surface of the moon so that our talk does not become a subject of ridicule, and that it is a talk that comes from an individual who lives in a very backward third world and has not learned or known the capabilities of science and still lives in superstitious societies that only believe in simple limits of reason and imagination. . When did I begin to become scientifically convinced of this idea? The truth is that I was like everyone else, convinced of the idea of landing on the moon. We studied it in schools, and I ridiculed those who denied the process of landing on the moon, while presenting me with arguments from religious texts. I also ridiculed lovers of strange things and conspiracy makers. They present scientific arguments that debunk images taken from the surface of the moon. My conviction was based on strong rules, but they were not scientific or logical at all. Rather, they were rules created by two things: the mentality of the group and the belief in the morals and credibility of the West. The basis of those rules was the scientific honesty of those who said about landing on the moon and the conviction of the large public. My conviction changed, when it fell. The first rule, specifically after the September events in America, I learned how the regime in America does not hesitate to do anything for political gain, even at the expense of its division. It is creative in making cinematic films to persuade the masses to rally around it. It is creative in arousal, suspense, and victim-making. His films, even if he had to make a moral loss, what is important to him is that his films attract billions of viewers to achieve political goals. It is true that the Internet is filled with a huge amount of topics that talk about 9/11 in America and ask hundreds of logical questions and real things and a huge amount of pictures and videos that lie. America’s narrative about the incident, but in fact I did not start from that evidence about the September events in order to understand that it was an American play, even though it is very, very logical. I went to another logic that combines that evidence in one framework, which is, it is impossible for a strong security system to be penetrated. Extremely four times at the same time by people who came from Afghanistan, except in three cases: that the owner of the system intentionally opened loopholes for outside infiltration, or that there was a stronger security system than him that hacked, or that the owner of the system created a fake hack (inside work). The system). The third possibility was the strongest. The important thing is that we return to our conversation about landing on the moon. After the fake events of September, the illusion of morality in the West fell, and this is what made me think seriously about the issue of landing on the moon. I found that it was a very clear lie, but I was not watching it. It was as if my eyes were clouded and preventing my mind from thinking correctly. Why is the decline a lie? We know very well that the Russians are the pioneers of the space age, the pioneers of the rocket industry, and they achieved a head start in space ascension. They were the first to ascend into space, the first to launch a satellite, the first man to ascend into space, the first woman to ascend into space, and the first An animal ascended into space, and for those who do not know, whoever wants to become an astronaut must learn the Russian language because it is the language of space. Most of the terms in space science are Russian. That period was the Cold War… America went crazy with the Russians’ superiority in space, and was forced to… US President Kennedy made the space project among his priorities and interests and announced the moon landing project. Only 10 years after the Russians ascended into space, who were the true pioneers in space science, America broadcast television scenes that were watched by nearly half a billion people of the landing of an American astronaut. On the surface of the moon, there was a great uproar and the sight of the American flag being installed on the surface of the moon. It is a very, very big historical event, since the birth of man on the planet Earth. It dates to a defining moment in human civilization, and Neil Armstrong became one of the most famous names in human history, the first A person steps on the surface of the earth. As he expressed it: A simple step, but a major civilizational leap. Of course, after several years, doubts began to arise that refuted the landing process, through those images that NASA presented, and the doubts increased with the increase in scientific arguments that disproved those images, including the fluttering of the flag, and the difference between The shadows, the non-appearance of the stars, the movement of the astronauts, the cleanliness of the spacecraft after landing… despite the logic of these arguments based on scientific foundations, there are those who tried to refute them with scientific arguments despite their weakness, but in reality I looked at the matter from the same angle as I do. For the events of September, from the general framework that brings together all these arguments. We reject the story of a man landing on the moon, for several reasons: ■ We are not the only ones who say this, there are those who said it as well. There is an American professor, who is the current US President Trump’s science advisor, who says: The landing of American astronauts on the moon is the biggest hoax in human history. You can search the internet for his statements if you do not believe him. In addition to the speech of the US President’s advisor, there is a statement by a senior NASA employee, which you can find on YouTube, in which he says explicitly that America cannot send humans to the moon again because America destroyed that technology and that the issue of sending humans to the moon requires cooperation. It is shared between countries in order to carry out this mission…. Is it reasonable that a country like America or any backward country would destroy a strategic technology on which huge sums of money were spent, and which is considered a national wealth that cannot be valued at any price? Is it reasonable that it would destroy that national wealth in order to get out? Such a statement that belittles people’s minds?! . ■ Imagine the size, magnitude, and complexity required by the process of launching a vehicle from Earth, then imagine that you would certainly need tens of times that complexity, magnitude, and size if you wanted to do it on the surface of the moon to return to Earth. Imagine you, ten years after the beginning of the space age, It was impossible at that time for America to achieve the technology that would enable it to organize that trip that would carry humans to the moon and return them to Earth. Taking off from the surface of the Earth requires huge technology, and there is another technology, which is the technology of taking off again from the surface of another planet and returning. to ground . It is not an easy technology, especially 10 years after the beginning of the space age. It was not available at that time even to the Russian astronauts, and it is not even available today. When spacecraft are sent to other planets, they never return. Have you asked yourself why the small vehicle that landed on Mars was equipped with inspection, analysis and laboratory equipment? Why was it designed to carry out these numerous and precise tasks? NASA could have dispensed with these tasks and tasks on Earth when the vehicle returned to Earth? The answer: Because the vehicle will not return to Earth, in other words… because there is not yet any technology to return vehicles to Earth. Otherwise, the missions of the vehicles would be quick and simple, and samples would be taken from the surface of the planets and returned to Earth. Now imagine that until now there is no technology to return small spacecraft from the surface of other planets, let alone a large spacecraft that carries human astronauts and lands them on the surface of a planet and then returns them to Earth again, and when? …Ten years after the beginning of the space age… Draw two lines under 10 years. Imagine that 10 years after the Russians ascended into space, and they are the true pioneers in space science, America sends humans to the moon. Imagine this. Space science is still at the beginning of its era, and it does not have the complex and precise technology. It is still the beginning. Did you get the idea?! ■ After the first rule fell, which was the honesty of America and the West and trust in them, the matter became really logical to me, and before that I had never thought of researching the matter well, and after that the second rule fell, the conviction of the large public. It should not be a standard for judging phenomena. Because I became convinced of that fact, I was certain that whoever participated in the false moon-rising drama would live an unnatural and disturbing life, when people look at him with admiration, and in reality he internally believes that he does not deserve it because he is a liar. He will be haunted by remorse of conscience and will be under surveillance for fear of the matter being revealed, because the exposure of the matter will shake the world’s confidence in America and make it weak and vulnerable to ridicule from its people and abroad. Indeed, after I reviewed Armstrong’s history and life and some of its details, she confirmed to me that it was a play, because Neil Armstrong was clearly suffering from remorse of conscience, and was trying to forget his lie, running away from himself, and it appears from his story that he was suffering from external pressures. It keeps him away from the limelight. In fact, he was under surveillance, although his story does not indicate that he confessed or spoke about the trip to the moon, but you know from the details of his life, his disappearance from the limelight, his drinking, and his early announcement of his retirement from space work. Has any of you asked yourself where is this hero, the one who made the biggest leap in human history, the one who took the first step that stepped on the surface of the moon, the step that separated human history for two periods, before the step and after the step? This man is supposed to be the biggest star on earth. His stardom exceeds the stardom of all scientists, actors, artists, and politicians. This man is supposed to be the biggest propaganda star for America everywhere. This man is supposed to wander everywhere telling the world about the moon. This man is supposed to An American ambassador anywhere to increase publicity for America’s intellectual, political and economic projects. But what is strange is that this man is far from the limelight and completely hidden from the world. Neil Armstrong…the first man to land on the moon. He retired from NASA two years after landing on the moon. How is it possible that this extraordinary man, who is a national symbol for America, would retire from work while he was at the peak of his glory, while his country needed him most? And how did America allow him to retire? The work no longer belongs to itself but belongs to the American people? Neil Armstrong moved away from the university and lived away from the limelight and in isolation. Why the isolation after such great stardom? Was America afraid of people asking him about the details of his trip and him being unable to answer? Was there a fear that contradictions would emerge between the event and his expressions? Was there a fear that people would feel that there was something suspicious when they saw him and talked to him? Was there Fear of Armstrong collapsing in front of people? Was there a fear that Armstrong would appear in a funny and bad light, as in some of the interviews he conducted…or a fear of what was worse and more ridiculous than these interviews? Try watching some interviews with Neil Armstrong on YouTube and you will laugh a lot… He is a completely abnormal man, and no recent incident indicates the veracity of his ascension to the moon. He takes a long time before answering questions about the details of the trip to the moon, especially precise scientific questions about the colors, shapes, and shadows of the moon. He focuses his gaze toward the sky when answering, covering his mouth with his hand when answering… His answers contain a feeling of distrust, a lot of He is mumbling, moody, and contradictory. He frequently wipes his face with his hand, showing signs of a person who does not expect such difficult questions. You will be completely certain after watching these videos that America did not go to the moon, and that it is one of the biggest historical lies, and that Neil Armstrong was not Except a Hollywood star. ■ Recently, in 2015, a video clip appeared on YouTube of a film director claiming that he was the director of the movie landing on the moon, which he recorded 15 years before his death. He asked his family to publish the video 15 years after his death, and in the video there is a clear admission of not landing on the moon’s surface. The moon, and in the film he talks about the complex of conscience and that everyone must know the truth, and he talks about his fear for his life and his family, etc. Why did America make that lie? It is part of the Cold War, to prove superiority. It is a propaganda soft power. It creates power for you in front of others without any loss. You win in front of everyone with the power of propaganda. You can fight the other only by the size of the illusions around you. The power of propaganda makes the other do a million for you. Account and may surrender to you. Perhaps America made the film and they believed that they would fall at another time. What was important at that time was victory over the Soviets and proving their superiority. Note: Many neo-secularists who believe in the role of politics in religious discourse and call for the separation of religion from politics find it difficult to convince Muslims. By not mixing religion and politics in managing the affairs of the state, these people have also not yet understood the idea that there is also trade in the name of science and there is a role for politics in scientific discourse. Science is similar to religion in its role and influence on the masses. Science is religion, and the strength of the argument of science is similar to The strength of the argument of religion… Indeed, science has become a belief today… From this standpoint, we only call for the necessity of separating science from politics, just as secularists call for the necessity of separating religion from politics. Because NASA is now a scientific institution subordinate to politics, just as the Vatican is a religious institution subordinate to politics. What is the importance of our conversation on this topic? The truth is that our discussion of these topics has nothing to do with the existence of an internal desire to prove the lie of the topic because it is linked to America, or we want it to be a topic that falls within a situation similar to those writings that like to raise things for the sake of excitement, but we loved to write about it. These days, because time has become very important, and we are facing this brutal Western attack on the region politically, militarily, and in the media, so that we know that Western policies do not hesitate to falsify the awareness of the entire world in order to achieve political gains, and that morals are not considered in the face of gain, Even science can be politically employed to serve their agendas and ambitions in the world. In the name of science, awareness can be falsified and destroyed completely, and it is made unconsciously enslaved to Western politics. Awareness is also falsified in the name of religion. The ruling gang in America, which carried out the events of September 11, killed its people, and laughed at its people with the story of Al-Qaeda, will not hesitate to do any immoral act, for there is no value other than the value of capitalism. Finally, the article must end with a situation that can be clearly observed when a person is deceived, and this situation is summarized by the saying of the writer Mark Twain: It is easier to deceive people than to convince them that they have been deceived. ..son of the sun