1. 10/31/2015 Nikola Djukanovic IIIv

2. 10/31/2015 Nikola Djukanovic IIIv Bill Kaysing was a librarian/writer of technical publications and advanced research at Rocketdyne Systems from 1956 to 1963. He states that it was estimated in 1959 that there was a.0014 chance of landing man on the Moon and returning him safely to Earth. This took into account the effects of radiation, solar flares and micro meteorites. He could not believe in 1959 that man could go to the Moon.

3. 10/31/2015 Nikola Djukanovic IIIv However, only 2 years later, American President John F. Kennedy set a goal in May 1961, when he made the following famous speech: 'I believe that this nation should commit itself. To achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on the Moon and returning him safely to the Earth. No single space project in this period will be more impressive to mankind or more important for the long range exploration of Space.' It was just eight years later in 1969, that man finally left Earth and set foot on the Moon...

4. 10/31/2015 Nikola Djukanovic IIIv The first anomalous piece of footage is from the 1972 Apollo 16 Mission. There is a major discrepancy between the still photograph taken with a Hasselblad 500 EL/70 camera and the TV coverage film which was shot from a stationary movie camera placed behind the astronauts. The movie sequence shows one of the astronauts making a jump salute whilst another astronaut takes a still photo with the Hasselblad camera. On the still photo we see a flap of triangular fabric that has come loose and flapped up behind the astronauts head. However the TV film which was shot from behind the astronaut doesn't show the flap? Why not?

5. 10/31/2015 Nikola Djukanovic IIIv Another example that appears to be faked is the footage of Earth taken from the Apollo 11 when it was 130,000 miles away. This is the very first view ever taken of Earth on the mission and it seems strange that Buzz Aldrin would film the Earth when he was stood far away from the window, why would he do that? Surely you would want to get close to the window to get the best picture and also to eliminate light reflections that are evident towards the end of this sequence? But no, we see the window frame come into view on the left of the shot. The camera isn't set to infinity either to get the closest shot. The window frame that comes into shot would have been out of focus if it was.

6. 10/31/2015 Nikola Djukanovic IIIv It must also be noted that the Apollo 11 at this point of the mission was supposedly half way to the Moon. The time elapsed was 34 hours and 16 minutes, but from the view of Earth in the right hand window, we can say that in fact they were not in deep space at all, but still in low Earth orbit! look at the blue sky outside. That would also explain why they would be filming an exposure of the Earth that was far away, to give the impression that they were in deep space. The exposure would be clipped to the window and the Sun's luminance would light it up, a technique that was used to read star charts to help with navigation and star reference.

7. 10/31/2015 Nikola Djukanovic IIIv Hasselblad were the manufacturer of the camera that took all of the photos on the Apollo missions. Jan Lundberg was the Manager Of Space Projects at Hasselblad from 1966 to 1975 and responsible for the production and building of the Hasselblad 500 EL/70 cameras that were used on the Apollo Missions. He says 'Originally NASA made all the alterations themselves, then they presented what they had done to us and asked if we could do the same, to which we replied yes we can, and we can do it better. We proceeded to make the alterations that were accepted by NASA.' Protective plates were added to the case and film magazine.

8. 10/31/2015 Nikola Djukanovic IIIv An important factor to take into consideration is the great variations in temperature that the film would have had to endure whilst on the lunar surface. The temperature during the Apollo missions were recorded as being between - 180F(-180 C) in the shade to an incredible +200F(94 C) in full Sunshine. How could the film emulsion have withstood such temperature differences? The astronauts can be seen to move between the shadows of the rocks and then into full sunlight in some shots. Surely the film would have perished under such conditions? If the film used during the Apollo missions had such qualities as to withstand such differences in temperature, why are Kodak not publicly selling them in today's market?

9. 10/31/2015 Nikola Djukanovic IIIv On all Apollo footage there should be cross hairs present on the film. These crosshairs were, according to NASA, placed on the film to help calculate distances on the Moon. The crosshairs were actually built into the camera and therefore should be visible on every single picture taken by the astronauts on the surface of the Moon. Incidentally, Jan Lundberg has stated that the only way that you could calculate the distance in the shot using the crosshairs would be if you had two cameras set up to take a stereo picture !

10. 10/31/2015 Nikola Djukanovic IIIv Take a look at the pictures presented here and you will see that parts of the crosshairs have disappeared from the film. This is impossible unless the film has been tampered with. The crosshairs should be completely visible in all shots and not hidden behind objects in the pictures. The only solution must be that NASA has gone to the trouble of either airbrushing out certain objects in the film, or added them over the crosshairs! Take a look at the pictures presented here and you will see that parts of the crosshairs have disappeared from the film. This is impossible unless the film has been tampered with. The crosshairs should be completely visible in all shots and not hidden behind objects in the pictures. The only solution must be that NASA has gone to the trouble of either airbrushing out certain objects in the film, or added them over the crosshairs!

11. 10/31/2015 Nikola Djukanovic IIIv Why does this rock have a letter 'C' on it? There is also a 'C' on the ground in front of the rock. The use of the letter C on film props is well known by the people in Hollywood and is used to show where the centre of the scene should be. Why does this rock have a letter 'C' on it? There is also a 'C' on the ground in front of the rock. The use of the letter C on film props is well known by the people in Hollywood and is used to show where the centre of the scene should be. One sceptic on the Bad astronomy sceptics web group has even said it is a hair??? on both the rock and ground? Now who's trying to cover things up? One sceptic on the Bad astronomy sceptics web group has even said it is a hair??? on both the rock and ground? Now who's trying to cover things up?

12. 10/31/2015 Nikola Djukanovic IIIv One of the biggest anomalies that appear on the Moon shots are the way in which shadows seem to be cast in totally different directions, even when the objects making the shadows are few feet apart? A classic example can be viewed on the video. If the guy on the left was near a vertical rise of ground (as has been suggested) his shadow would show a definite 'crease' where the land begins to rise. It doesn't! One of the biggest anomalies that appear on the Moon shots are the way in which shadows seem to be cast in totally different directions, even when the objects making the shadows are few feet apart? A classic example can be viewed on the video. If the guy on the left was near a vertical rise of ground (as has been suggested) his shadow would show a definite 'crease' where the land begins to rise. It doesn't! Question: How can an astronaut cast a shadow several feet taller than his colleague who is standing a few feet away from him? Question: How can an astronaut cast a shadow several feet taller than his colleague who is standing a few feet away from him? Answer: He is standing farther away from the arc light that is illuminating them both. I truly believe that this footage is taken on a film set, you cannot reproduce this strange shadow phenomenon with natural light, and that includes taking into consideration two natural light sources (the Earth and Sun) as many sceptics would have you believe. Answer: He is standing farther away from the arc light that is illuminating them both. I truly believe that this footage is taken on a film set, you cannot reproduce this strange shadow phenomenon with natural light, and that includes taking into consideration two natural light sources (the Earth and Sun) as many sceptics would have you believe.

13. 10/31/2015 Nikola Djukanovic IIIv propaganda