



from:

-- Gerhard Wisnewski: Lügen im Weltraum [Lies In Space]; Knaur 2005

-- websites

-- books





The numeration of the photos

The photos of the "moon landings" on Earth within the Apollo program have the official code "AS" which stands for "Apollo Saturn" (project "Apollo" with booster rocket "Saturn"). By this "AS-11" means "Apollo Saturn 11".



But first there must be explained other circumstances.



Suspicious secrecy

The original films of the "moon photos" i Johnson Space Center 22 miles South East from Houston (Wisnewski, p.183) are secret and are not shown to "normal" media people. This seems very suspicious (Wisnewski, p.184).



[By this the many photo compositions would be even known really].



The handling of a camera Hasselblad 500 EL without automatic device in an astronaut suit



The family business "Hasselblad"



Logo of the Swedish company Hasselblad with seat at Gothenburg, producer of photo cameras.



Victor Hasselblad with camera, Gothenburg 1957.





The camera Hasselblad 500 EL



Hasselblad camera 500-EL in black, lateral view



Hasselblad camera 500-EL in silver, lateral view



Hasselblad camera 500 EL with opened seeker



Hasselblad camera fixed on the chest, example training photo with Jim Lovell for Apollo 13, photo no. 70-HC-74.



The camera Hasselblad 500 EL is a traditional camera of the 1960ies and has to be handled by hand. Between film and lens is a net panel with 25 black crosses, fiver crosses in five rows one below the other, and every cross has to be visible on every "moon photo" (Wisnewski, p.154). [So, with this camera "crossed photos" are produced].



The camera Hasselblad 500 EL is fixed on the chest of the astronaut suit. By this a controlled handling of the camera is impossible:



-- the astronauts cannot look through the seeker because it's not possible to look downwards with the helmet



-- the mirror of the camera is removed so the astronauts cannot see the object in the seeker



-- the cameras are fixed on the chest so the perspective is absolutely restricted for any photo



-- the cameras have no automatic device, all has to be adjusted by hand: illumination, shutter, sharpness, but it's not possible to look into the seeker where is an illumination measuring device installed (Wisnewski, p.153).



The only thing which facilitates the photo work is a wide angle with 60 mm focal distance, but all other factors are absolutely negative that the wide angle cannot solve all problems (Wisnewski, p.165).



Some more factors which speak against a Hasselblad during the "moon landings" on Earth are:



Heat protection: Any heat protection for the camera is missing for temperatures on the moon of plus 100 and minus 100 degrees C. The cameras are only painted in silver for that. Add to this there is missing any radiation protection for the cameras (Wisnewski, p.154).



Education: The astronauts have no photographic education. They have no idea how to handle a manual camera with exposure time, shutter and sharpness. The astronauts would not be able to make perfect photos with a Hasselblad 500 EL even on Earth (Wisnewski, p.153).



[How shall this have happened "on the moon"? Not possible].



3 cameras: For every "moon landing" are said to be three Hasselblads 500 EL "on the moon", for every astronaut one, though on a "moon trip" every gram is important and any luggage too much was rejected (Wisnewski, p.154).



Weight: The Hasselblad 500 EL with attachments (80 mm lenses, A12-back, lens protection and batteries) has a weight of 2,130 kg.

(http://www.3106.net/photo/cam1025.htm)



So why should have been three of these operators "on the moon"?



Factor time: All in all a Hasselblad 500 EL is absolutely unsuitable for photos under pressure of time because with a Hasselblad 500 EL much consideration and time is needed for a good photo, but a "moon walk" lasts only some hours (Wisnewski, p.155).









Kodak film 200 ASA.





Factor film: The used ectachrone filmstrip of Kodak has 160 ASA and is hardly suitable for unknown illumination situations. 160 ASA have only little tolerance concerning mistakes and are very sensitive for the light circumstances "on the moon", so it seems the danger of an over illumination on the moon without an atmosphere seems over actual (Wisnewski, p.155).



Radioactivity: The radioactive radiation has a smog effect on the Kodak films and decreasing contrasts which can nowhere be found on the "moon photos" (Wisnewski, p.157).



The photo equipment rather seems to be right for an experienced photographer of the 1960ies and 1970ies on Earth who add to this has got much time which is decisive for the illumination and the experience. By contrast the astronauts have no long experience making photos (Wisnewski, p.156).



With a Hasselblad 500 EL one has to handle all by hand and along the "experience". So a good photographer mostly makes several photos from an object to choose then the best one (Wisnewski, p.154), this means the so called variated photography (Wisnewski, p.156). But the alleged films of the astronauts never show such variants but always perfect photos with an error rate of 0 % (Wisnewski, p.158).



And all this is not possible.



This is no conspiracy theory, stupid Wikipedia, but these are facts.





The perfect photos "on the moon" are impossible



Under the circumstances



-- with a camera fixed on the chest

-- in an astronaut suit where it's not possible through the seeker

-- without the mirror in the seeker (Wisnewski, p.157)

-- with "moon astronauts" without long experience in making photos (Wisnewski, p.153)

-- with radioactive radiation which has a negative influence on the films (Wisnewski, p.157)



perfect, sharp "moon photos" with partly perfect arranged sceneries are not possible (Wisnewski, p.157).



This is NO conspiracy theory, stupid Wikipedia, but these are facts.



The "moon photos" are almost all absolutely sharp an illuminated tricky (Wisnewski, p.153). On the first film of Apollo 11 all photos are said to be perfect, with 0 % error rate (Wisnewski, p.158). All "moon photos" are perfect at the first time, there is no second or third picture as every photographer would do it with a Hasselblad 500 EL for safety (Wisnewski, p.160). The "moon astronauts" are said having taken the photos all perfectly at the first time [so are indicating the authorities of the Stupid States].



Wisnewski:



"He came, saw and took it."



(orig.: "Er kam, sah und knipste" (Wisnewski, p.159).



"Humans who are not even able to look through the seeker are shooting series of master photos without one mistake", an "abnormity" which is only possible "on the moon".



(orig.: "Menschen, die nicht einmal durch die Sucher ihrer Kameras blicken können, schiessen lückenlose Serien von Meisterphotos", eine "Anomalie", die nur "auf dem Mond" möglich ist (Wisnewski, S.176).



By this all indications show that the "moon photos" are made by an experienced photographer in a film studio with sceneries (Wisnewski, p.158).



There has never been reported that photographs would have "flown along". A big part of the photos are photo compositions which can be seen because of impossibilities because of flags without shadows, moon car without tracks etc.

(Conclusion Palomino)





Photos of Apollo 11



Astronaut Armstrong is said having taken photos from his friend Aldrin "on the moon" several times. It's strange that Armstrong is never producing a unusable photo (Wisnewski, p.165).



By this Armstrong is the first perfect blind photographer.

(Conclusion Palomino)



Allegedly there are many unintentional photos, but the intentional photos are all perfect at the first time (Wisnewski, p.166).





The first photo

Without seeker the landing foot should be precisely in the middle of the photo, and without seeker the inscription "United States" shall have been positioned precisely on the border of the photo, an impossibility (Wisnewski, p.159).



Add to this the inscription "United States" is installed for propaganda purpose and is visible in the back light [which is only possible with an additional light],

AS-11-40-5850 (Wisnewski, p.158).

Apollo 11 photo no. AS 11-40-5850: The foot of the Lunar Module is precisely in the middle of the photo, and the inscription "United States" is precisely on the border. Without seeker this arrangement is impossible.



The second photo

photo of the "moon soil" AS-11-40-5851 (Wisnewski, S.158) Apollo 11 photo no. AS-11-40-5851: photo with a "moon soil" with a flat horizon.

The third photo

The third photo is a photo with a "moon panorama" (Wisnewski, p.158), AS 11-40-5852 (Wisnewski, p.227). According to records the "moon panorama" photo is not real, because Apollo 11 is said having landed in a plain with mountains around the plain. But on the photos cannot be seen any mountain (Wisnewski, S.227).

Apollo 11: photo no. AS-11-40-5852: "Moon panorama" with a flat horizon though Apollo 11 has allegedly landed in a plain with mountains around the plain.

The fourth photo

The photo shows Buzz Aldrin coming out of the Lunar Module in the back light, and despite of the back light he is well visible [which is only possible with an additional spot light].



AS-11-40-5863 (Wisnewski, S.159). Apollo 11, photo no. AS11-40-5863: Aldrin coming out of the "Lunar Module" in the back light well visible.







Photo from the landing engine without crater









Apollo 11 photo no. AS11-40-5864: Landing engine of the "Lunar Module" without landing crater, an impossibility.



There follows a photo of the landing engine without crater, with the inscription "United States" in the shadow [only possible with additional spot illumination]: AS11-40-5864 (Wisnewski, p.160).



According to the NASA technicians an Wernher von Braun the crater is compulsory,



(In: Wernher von Braun: Erste Fahrt zum Mond; 1961,p.148; Wisnewski, p.161).



because the engine has a push of up to 5 tons (Wisnewski, p.162).



Braun was also predicting a huge cloud of dust. And the commented radio protocol of Armstrong is mentioning the dust like a "transparent shield".



(In: Wernher von Braun: Erste Fahrt zum Mond; 1961; Jones, Eric M.: Apollo Lunar Surface Journal, last modified: 3 April 2005; www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/main.html; Wisnewski, p.161)



Vertical take-off aircrafts with jet propulsion can provoke the dashing of concrete pieces and concrete panels from the ground and this can be very dangerous for the engines and for the cabin.



(In: Hafer, X. / Sachs, G.: Senkrechtstarttechnik; Berlin, Heidelberg, N.Y. 1982; Wisnewski, p.163).



With a gravitation of only 1/6 of the Earth's gravitation a vertical landing with an engine would be obliged to produce an absolutely huge cloud of dust with stones in it, and all this should be visible on the "moon photos" (Wisnewski, p.163).





But look what's coming now:



photos with landing feet without dust on it









Apollo 11, photo no. AS11-40-5918:

Landing foot of the "Lunar Module" without moon dust on the foot, but with much moon dust around the foot.



photo of the landing foot without dust: AS 11-40-5918.



[But there is much dust (propaganda says: "moon dust") around the foot].



After a landing with a rocket engine this arrangement of the dust is impossible, because after a big cloud of dust the dust also had to fall on the landing foot.



So, because of the contradictions there is the urgent suspicion that the Lunar Module has landed with a crane on the fresh arranged studio soil (Wisnewski, p.162),



[whereas there was forgotten to make preparations for the landing feet with "moon dust"].



Fans of the moon landings and "astronomers" like Philip Plait maintain that the Lunar Module had not landed vertically (Wisnewski, p.162). The Lunar Module "left a little track of dust blown away and landed very quickly."



(orig.: "hinterliess eine schmale Spur von weggeblasenem Staub und landete sehr schnell." (Wisnewski, p.162-163)



But according to the radio transmission protocols of Apollo 11 the engine of the Lunar Module was working until the landing was finished.



(In: Jones, Eric M.: Apollo Lunar Surface Journal, last modified: 3 April 2005; www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/main.html; Wisnewski, S.161)





The photos of Aldrin's footprints with a partly blurred "moon soil" are impossible



The photo of the footprint which is taken from above is impossible. A photo from above with a fixed camera on the chest is not possible: AS 11-40-5877, 78, 79, 80 (Wisnewski, S.164). One of the photos (AS 11-40-5877) has no depth of focus in the upper half. But the Hasselblad 500 EL had a wide angle "on the moon" with a focal distance of 60 mm, and this makes a perfect depth of focus. By this the photo has to be a manipulation (Wisnewski, p.165).



Even two photos (AS 11-40-5877 and 78) are without depth of focus. So the photos seem to be photo compositions.

(Conclusion Palomino)





"Moon footprints" in a "moon soil" without depth of focus and with strange shoes



Apollo 11, photo no. AS11-40-5877: Impossible footprint in the "moon soil" taken from above without depth of focus, probably a photo composition.







Apollo 11, photo no. AS11-40-5878: Impossible footprint in the "moon soil" taken from above without depth of focus, probably a photo composition.

Apollo 11, photo no. AS11-40-5879: Moon footprint with an astronaut's boot of the astronaut who takes the photo. This is impossible with a camera which is fixed on the chest.





Apollo 11, photo no. AS11-40-5880: Moon footprint with an astronaut's boot of the astronaut who takes the photo. This is impossible with a camera which is fixed on the chest.



Perfect, impossible scenery photos from the "moon"



The further photos are all photographically perfectly arranged, but they seem to be unreal perfect concerning the conditions for the "moon astronauts" who even cannot see through the seeker:





Perfect arranged photos of Apollo 11

-- Photo with a flag on the left edge and the Lunar Module on the right edge: The section is absolutely perfect, but when you cannot see through the lens so the photo is impossible: AS 11-40-5886.



Add to this the shadow of the flag is missing. It's a photo composition.



Apollo 11, photo no. AS 11-40-5886: Flag without shadow left, Lunar Module with Aldrin right. That's a perfect photo, which is not possible when the camera is fixed on the chest. It's a photo composition.

-- Aldrin and landing foot, without seeker impossible: AS 11-40-5902.



Add to this the shadow of Aldrin is wrong.

Apollo 11, photo no. AS11-40-5902: Aldrin left, the shadow is wrong, Lunar Module right. The photo should be arrenged perfectly which is not possible when the camera is fixed on the chest. And with wrong shadows the photo is impossible.

-- Aldrin taken from above, with a fixed camera on the chest impossible: AS 11-40-5903.



Add to this the scenery shown in the helmet is not possible in the extreme back light, and Aldrin is much too bright in the extreme backlight.



Apollo 11, photo no. AS-11-40-5903: Aldrin taken from above, with a camera fixed on the chest impossible.

-- flag in the center of the picture, without seeker impossible: AS 11-40-5905. Apollo 11, photo no. AS11-40-5905: The flag is in the middle of the photo. This perfect photo without looking through the seeker is impossible.





Apollo 11, photo no. AS11-40-5875. Aldrin is said to be on the moon here next to a flag which has no shadow. So, this picture is not possible.





Photos from Apollo 15



Since Apollo 15 the photos of the "moon landings" have a variate background. But now the same background is coming several times during several missions on different landing places... (Wisnewski, p.227).





Photos from Apollo 16



Photo composition: Astronaut John Young makes a jump without jumping position

The photo AS16-113-18339 is said showing John Young with a "jump" on the moon. But the shady side of the astronaut is much too bright again and this is not a jumping position at all (e.g. with two spread arms). So, also this photo is a bad photo composition.



(Observation Palomino) Apollo 16 photo no. AS16-113-18339: Jump by Young without jumping position: Photo composition.





The impossible family photo of astronaut Charlie Duke



Astronaut Charles Duke is said having left a family photo "on the moon" shrink-wrapped in plastic. This shall document a "family story" on the photo AS 16-117-18841 (Wisnewski, S.167).



Contradictions:

-- without atmosphere the shrink-wrapping would swell and burst

-- during the strong sun on the moon the photo would bleach soon

-- with a minimum of 100°C on the moon the photo would convolve immediately (experiment oven).



Apollo 16, photo no. AS16-117-18841: A family photo from Charles Duke, shrink-wrapped in plastic, shall be left "on the moon", which is impossible, because the photo would convolve immediately.





So, also a message on the backside of the photo to the children of the astronaut is not useful. The photo is a legend for naive people who like to romanticize the "moon landing" as photos are proofs for mountaineering. But also photos in mountaineering can be a fake.



(In: Häussler, Oliver: Dreifache Verhandelbarkeit von Authentizität im alpinistischen Diskurs; Wisnewski, p.168).



Big damage on the Lunar Module of Apollo 16



On the photos of the Lunar Module of Apollo 16 can be seen big damages on the side. A whole side is dented and teared open. A return "from the moon" with this vehicle seems doubtful. But the "return" is performed also without repair, absolutely unreal. The accident of Apollo 16 is never mentioned in written. There had to be an explosion. NASA refuses to put big photos of the defect Lunar Module of Apollo 16 into Internet with a high resolution (Wisnewski, p.184-185).





Photos of the Lunar Module of Apollo 16 which must have been damaged "on the moon"

-- intact Lunar Module?

AS 16-113-18332 Apollo 16 photo no. AS16-113-18332: Lunar Module. The ascent stage (the bottom part) seems to be really done by handicraft.

-- defect ascent stage: AS 16-122-19533



and during the flight "over the moon" any engine flame is missing. So, this is also a bad photo composition.



Apollo 16, photo no. AS16-122-19533: Broken Lunar Module: The defect ascent stage is said flying over the moon without engine flame. The photo seems to be a photo composition with the moon from the planetarium LOLA at Langley.

-- defect flying ascent stage, close-up: AS 16-122-19535. (Wisnewski, S.185).



There is no engine flame at all, so, it is a bad photo composition



Apollo 16 photo no. AS16-122-19535: Defect ascent stage flying "over the moon", photo no. AS16-122-19535:

The defect ascent stage has no engine flame. So, the photo seems to be a bad photo composition with the moon model of the planetarium LOLA at Langley.







Covered reticules





Some objects covering the reticules of the net panel

Incomplete reticule with Apollo 12 at the arm of the "astronaut", NASA photo no. AS12-47-6897



Incomplete reticule with Apollo 12 at the flagpole, NASA photo no. Nr. AS12-47-6897

-- moon car of Apollo 16, photo no. AS 16-107-17446 (Wisnewski, S.179) Apollo 16, photo AS16-107-17446: Incomplete reticule at the Lunar Vehicle.



- at Astronaut Harrison Schmitt (Apollo 17)

AS 17-137-21011 Incomplete reticule at the moon car of Apollo 17 with Astronaut Schmitt, photo no. AS17-137-21011. -- Astronaut Harrison Schmitt near a moon rock, close-up of the reticule (Apollo 17)

AS 17-140-21496 Incomplete reticule on a "moon rock", Apollo 17, photo no. AS17-140-21496.