As you've argued, NASA landed people on the moon, but they've also released
questionable photos. Here's the photo mentioned earlier of the trackless lunar
rover:

http://www.aulis.com/jackstudies_1.html



> > -------- Original Message --------
> > Subject: [Starship_Forum] Re: Did NASA land anybody on the moon?
> > Date: Fri, 05 Jun 2009 15:56:23 -0600
> > From: John Frazer <johnf4303@...>
> > Reply-To: Starship_Forum@yahoogroups.com
> > To: starship_forum@yahoogroups.com
>
> > So what's the point of revealing that it was hoaxed? Should we
> be
> > ashamed that we didn't have technology to go? Should we feel
> > abashed
> > that we've been spoon-fed a bunch of lies?
> >
> > by: monart pon Jun 4, 2009
> > > Your reasons support the reality of the moon landings, but
> > that's not
> > to say that NASA was always truthful about what they released to
> > the public.
> > >
> > > Some of the skeptics of the moon landings were questioning the
> > anomalies revealed in many of the photos of the landings and
> > excursions.
> > For example, one photo, if it were authentic, need an
> explanation:
> > it
> > shows the lunar rover sitting some distance away from the lunar
> > module,
> > amidst numerous boot tracks, yet no wheel tracks at all are
> > visible, not
> > even tracks adjacent to the wheels. So how did the rover travel
> to
> > that
> > distance from the lunar module without making any tracks?
> >
> >
> >
> > (Maybe it went the long way around? It went elsewhere, and came
> > around
> > to where they took the photo from. Maybe the tracks which might
> > have
> > been in the frame were hidden by terrain?)
> >
> > The other explanation is that they kludged this one up; placed
> the
> > rover
> > there on the studio stage without thinking that it should have
> > left
> > tracks getting there. They screwed this one up, along with all
> the
> > others they messed up by leaving extra lights on, using the same
> > backdrop repeatedly in supposedly different locations, left air
> > vents on
> > to ripple the flags and composited elements in obviously fake ways.
> > They made all these obvious amateurish mistakes and let slip
> > through
> > faked photos which "whistleblowers" left clues in.
> >
> > All these stupid mistakes, while choreographing the staggeringly
> > immense
> > "real-space opera" of multiple rovers, orbiters and landers
> > relaying the
> > faked TV signals and all the telemetry from all over cis-Lunar
> > space.
> > All of it in precise sequence with the images relayed from the
> > soundstage (where they so imperfectly filmed the landings).
> > All of this space choreography was a much bigger task and a
> harder
> > technical challenge than sending people there.
> >
> > The only solid evidence of fakery is the kludged photos. Nothing
> > in the
> > radio telemetry to clue the USSR or anybody else with a radio
> > telescope.
> > Amateur astronomers with backyard telescopes took shots of the
> > ships
> > orbiting the Moon and emerging from shadow and stages separating
> > in
> > space. Before NASA let it be known that 13 was in trouble, an
> > astronomer
> > had taken photos of the escaping cloud of O2.
> >
> > So even if they made lots of mistakes in the photos, they still
> > accomplished the most astounding technical feat in history -one
> > which we
> > can't reproduce today.
> > They proved without a doubt who had the biggest cojones on the
> > planet or
> > off of it, and beat the Reds soundly in the race to dominate space.
> > Kudos to the US for faking the Apollo program! Congrats for the
> > most
> > amazing technical feat ever!
> >
> > On top of this, the US soundly beat the USSR at its own game of
> > force
> > and intimidation and secrecy over the years so that none of the
> > whistleblowers who left clues in the photos has come forward.
> None
> > of
> > the hundreds of thousands of people who worked on the secret
> > robotic
> > program with which they faked it have come forward. Nothing but
> > photos?
> > (All of which can be and have been adequately explained away
> with
> > experiment and testing, BTW)
> > Again, an immense task and they've pulled it off flawlessly.
> >
> > Seriously, if it was faked, I'm in awe at how well they did it.
> > They
> > deserved to win the cold war.
> >
> >
> > > Of course, from this, or any other number of questionable NASA
> > photos
> > or reports, one shouldn't jump to the conclusion that all the
> moon
> > landings were faked. On the other hand, one shouldn't assume
> that
> > NASA
> > always told the truth or the whole truth, either.
> >
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------
> --