To this day, NASA and related agencies are perpetrating the moon landing fraud and countries around the world are participating in the fake ISS space station fraud which Simon Shack's forums reveal all kinds of problems with. The flow of money has to continue however-- and the way it occurs is to create a believable mission-- for whatever era you're in. These days, it's not credible to land a man on the moon, even though we already supposedly did it. It IS believable however that a robot can land on Mars with a silly contraption like a sky hook crane with rockets on 4 corners. It's all cartoon physics however. Presumably, the Mars Curiosity released a parachute at over 600 mph. It slowed from 19,000 mph to 600 in a minute, like braking a car from 60 to 0 in 0.01 seconds. That's cartoon physics.
This is rediculous. Mars has winds. With these rockets on the four corners of this platform, how did they know it would "float" easy. Why isn't the wind blowing it around? And what sort of fuel do they need for that operation? Why have wee never seen a test of this lander on Earth? Here's a test of similar lander.
[4 min video]
[Another lander-- look at the size of the fuel tanks. 36DD?
[Niel Armstrong is test lander] was a second awa from being killed in this thing.
Here are youtubes of the "curiosity lander test"'s... [+]
This robotic lander test by NASA seems fake with fake applause by an unseen audience. This is worse than than that fake chinese space capsule landing a few months ago. [Fake NASA lander test]
Here are more lander tests from a few years ago. [+] These contraptions, remember, are being tested more than 40 years after the Apollo landers did perfect landings on the moon... with little cars loaded... and live crew! It looks like we've gone backwards doesn't it?
Here's the test of the lander that Armstrong used again. [+]
FOX played the question about man landing on the moon in 2001. [+] I had cable tv at the time but I missed this.
Here is the NASA video just published on Youtbue of the blueshirted guys pretending to land a vehicle on Mars. [+] They're congratulating each other but there's no indication of anything going on on Mars. There are big screens. They refer to "the other side". This was posted to UStream. They broke open a jar of peanuts.
The Mars Car is powered with plutonium....
This robotic laboratory's power source is just like the Galileo, Pioneer and Voyager spacecraft and like the successful Viking 1 and Viking 2 Mars landers in 1976: The robot has a tiny nuclear reactor quarantined in a separate thermoelectric generator inside the vehicle, a radioisotope thermoelectric generator (RTG). Since Plutonium has a half-life of ~24,400 years, this robot will be probably still operational when the first humans arrive on Mars. The rover's Plutonium battery contains 4.8 kg (11 lb) of plutonium-238 dioxide supplied by the U.S. Department of Energy, packed in 32 pellets each about the size and shape of a marshmallow. unquote
Why can't we build more of those? Why can't I have a car with that power source? (recall that this power source is likely real but the landing is fake).
Why are they all at their terminals? what are they doing? They're eating peanuts. They're chatting. They all have headphones on. They're sitting back and looking around. I don't see the screens they're looking at. Are they watching TV? Why peanuts and not popcorn? why don't they have pocket protectors? Is this the latest version of what we expect a mission control to look like? I don't get it. It's fairly bizarre.
[DISCUSSION and notes]