Apollo Questions/Answers as a starter


1	You must know the historical events and connections in the 1960s and recognize the importance of this mission.
2	There are a large number of inconsistencies that have to be studied individually in order to classify them according to relevance and then appreciate them in their entirety. This requires a lot of time and attention.
3	You must critically analyze these technical, physical and behavioral inconsistencies and not be too quickly satisfied with supposed explanations. Always study the counter-theses too!
4	You have to get rid of the idea that the moon landing was primarily about scientific findings.
5	You must understand that NASA is a strategic organization reporting directly to the President.
6	You must note that the astronauts always work on behalf of NASA.
7	They must break away from the idea that governments would put the truth before reason of state.

Before we delve into the individual clues behind the hoax, let's dissect the widely accepted 'evidence' for the moon landing provided by NASA.

;

Answer 6

Explanations for certain clues are usually distributed in videos by unknown so-called scientific media professionals who want to sell the spectacle of the moon landing. Doubts about this would immediately and permanently destroy the attention to it. And that but it is not in their interest. They are usually poorly researched and in the end it is the astronaut's word that counts, reflecting the NASA narrative.

The original stories undoubtedly come from NASA. They provided their appropriate narratives. Critical scientists are not asked. It's better to dispose of them in the conspiracy theorists' big bag and do studies on them.

This mainstream opinion is establishing itself on wikipedia and all media professionals copy it there and feel confirmed in their preconceived and copied opinion. This creates a huge wealth of information that give the impression that everyone in the world has the same opinion, which must then be correct.

In fact, many of these statements are complete nonsense and show incompetence and gullibility. The declarations about the harmlessness of VanAllen radiation intensity are untenable even among NASA scientists. The explanations for the invisibility of the burning gas emissions and for the silence of the engine noise during landing and restart are a mockery to those familiar with physics. Explanations of inconsistencies in images and film material can be refuted by any film director. Frivolous, simplistic explanations for the inexplicable losses of humanity's most important artifacts are accepted as necessities of efficiency.

As a result, the nonsensical theory that the Apollo moon landings actually happened may be kept alive by the masses of people who want to believe it.

Investigative journalists rarely manage ¬to attract attention for their contrary findings. But they are also taken care of in a big bag. The uncertainty would be too great if you suddenly had to agree with these people.

Andreas Märki.... Gerhard Wisnewski.... . Gernot Geise ... _ Massimo Mazzuco.... Bill Wood

More detailed text here

Reason of State and Motivation, Question (1/5)
open questions

Media and Communication, Question (6/9)
open questions

Question 6:
Where do all the explanations for the inconsistencies come from?

Question 7: response
Why does all the media retell the lie?

Question 8: response
What does Swiss science say about this?

Question 9: response
Why is the lie not recognized despite the huge number of clues?

Laws of Physics, Question (10/13)
open questions

Organization, Question (14/18)
open questions