From my considerable first hand photographic expertise, as with owning several 5X7 70mm format cameras, of accomplishing film developing and personally enlarging/printing those images of nearly everything from A to Z, there's simply no way in hell those lunar surfaces were as depicted by those Apollo missions.

Unfortunately, this lunar exploration subject is so entirely grand, and as such being so perverted by the powers that be, that there's no one page nor chapter nor any simple volume of books that's going to achieve nor accomplish justice. Basically folks, over the past 3+ decades, you and I have been snookered out of trillions of bucks, as we've been continually lied to and subsequently nearly every fiber of associated history has been skewed into the nearest space toilet, along with science and even those laws of physics being used as toilet paper.

1) The surface reflective index, as so easily compared to those white moon-suits (among many other artifacts that were man made), was nowhere sufficiently dark as to be representing any 11% average reflection. Nowhere in any of the Apollo images was there ever an area that matched "new asphalt" as would have been necessary as for representing the 11% factor. In fact, the vast majority of lunar surface was depicted as more like being illuminated near to or above 50%, and of other dark areas were indicating well above 25%. If necessary, I can deliver another solid chapter, just on illumination factors alone, though fortunately there's the likes of KECK-II and even Hubble observations among dozens if not hundreds of other observatory that'll clearly stipulate upon the lunar reflective index.

2) As space/planetary exploration survey missions go, there's no good reason nor lack of opportunity why careful attention wasn't given as to obtaining sufficient exposures, as for providing quality B/W survey imaging instead of the crapy color transparencies that would have easily included a large number of those essentially vibrant stars above the dark (11% reflective) lunar landscape/horizon. If in fact the average basalt lunar soil was 11% reflective, at F2 we're talking about an exposure of perhaps 1 second, that which would have been more then sufficient as to subsequently have the printing reduce the overly exposed surface and/or having burned in those vibrant stars, from which any competent astronomy buff (having the exposure date and time at hand) could have easily determined the nearly exact location and orientation of that camera, as situated on the moon or wherever (area 51 for example). Even from those supposedly original exposures of 1/60th and perhaps as tight as F16 (or 125th and F8), as even those original under-exposed negatives could have been reprinted with sufficient (nondestructive) management so that a good number of stars would present themselves (folks! it's been decades, so that's never going to happen because, there's no such evidence of stars, at least not of the correct stars). In addition, we all know that those star spangled images would have made for the most exceptionally extraordinary PR, of which the likes of NASA has never seen, thus building public support up the kazoo. Unfortunately, the entire body of what those images contain or not can't possibly be covered in any paragraph nor from just a few chapters, as there's more like volumes of books worth of those photographic issues.

3) As solar radiation goes, humans can absorb (short term) a rather considerable degree of such, however, not without fairly simple and even somewhat visual examination detection of such and, certainly that roll film had to have been impacted, not just by the 0.1 to 1.0 Sv's (100 rads) but also by the +/-250º thermal shock, by which all Earthly attempts at utilizing such specified film under similar conditions was first and foremost heavily radiation fogged and, otherwise cracked by such extreme cold and/or melt/distorted by nearly any exposures even approaching boiling, let alone +250º. So, our astronauts returned with absolutely showed no adverse impact whatsoever nor as for having short term nor long term exposure issues, in fact, they're nearly all healthier for their age then you or I (just totally unwilling as to say much of anything about anything (unless it was officially moderated), so perhaps it was their memories that were about the only biological or neurological damage they actually incurred).

Perhaps our occupational safety standards should thereby be revised as to allowing additional workplace 0.1 Sv's per year, as that's only a couple hundred times greater radiation career exposure limits (2000s times greater than a typical annual workplace background limit as it stands), and as such, that's cutting employment risk as well as those disability claims by that same degree, by which that ought to be worth saving several hundred millions per year and, best of all, such TBI folks (according to our Apollo astronauts) are no worse for wear, which further represents that globally thousands of radiation exposure claims can be retroactively recovered and, that alone has to be worth hundreds of billions if not trillion if you include all those industry faults that leaked so as to having to evacuate townships.

I should mean, if one miserly rad of additional exposure can be detected as affecting workers like yourself, and otherwise detected as adversely affecting those otherwise associated with radioactive site contaminations, then surely those Apollo astronauts having received 10 fold to 100+ fold more dosage within a two week span as for exceeding an annual industry exposure limit by 100+ fold should have been quite something. Although obtaining 5+ rads per two week lunar adventure that included 36 hours of nearly raw surface exposure is a rather neat trick, especially considering the limitations on mission weight, which meant that significant portions of their craft simply weren't all that dense.

4) As this degree of ruse/sting management goes, especially having anything to do with those cold-war "nondisclosure" NSA/DoD hidden agendas, besides there being NO rules of such war (other than the one about not getting caught), there's absolutely no limits nor even cost restraint barriers and, since absolutely all information and supposedly all of that lunar sample stuff was filtered through the "NASA old guard", there's no way of ever determining a damn thing on behalf of NASA's Apollo program. Their efforts at skewing the public into believing that no matter what imaging technology is applied, that oddly we can't possibly identify those significantly scared lander debris fields and even some of the rather sizable equipment left behind is becoming another embarrassment but, perhaps becoming not nearly as embarrassing as our not being able to see Venus nor recognize what's so artificial as opposed to being natural. Exactly how dumbfounded do those NASA/NSA/DoD gate keepers think the rest of us village idiots are?

5) Besides all the highly questionable photographic and image content issues, there's a bloody host of technological issues, including those supposed 1/6th gravity lunar lander test flights, of which the only recorded examples are those of "what not to do", as they all failed big time as not even under any realistic down-ranging and/or practical landing situation at that. As of today, we (NASA) have no purely rocket powered decent capable manned or even robotic capable machine, at least not as recorded upon one foot of film as depicting anything that actually flew (especially more so as anything pre-fly by wire) and landed itself safely (I believe Russia has since mastered such achievements but, not as such for anything the US has to offer). So, tell me (disregarding massive radiation and even those pesky micrometeorite issues), how the hell anything of the sort ever happened without a fully functional lunar lander.

6) The degree of official "spin" and "damage control", as such thrown at counteracting the mounting anti-Apollo flak, this is truly considerable and very upscale, as carefully packaged for the benefit of our absolutely "dumb as a door nail" and/or dumbfounded public and, for the most part achieved through considerable infomercials from which the greater public bought and paid for all that disinformation, as in hook line and sinker (like what other choice did we have, as how pathetically embarrassing otherwise)...

7) Of those that apparently had to die, just so that this NSA/DoD cold-war ruse/sting could succeed, those deaths must include the far greater impact upon other nations, especially upon the USSR that was actually trying to honestly get their team to the moon (more recently trying to get those Taliban out of town) and, the greater long term global impact is yet another costly "cost plus" adventure that's yet to being fully played out. As skewed history, skewed science and skewed truths go, there's simply no easy way or less damaging alternative then telling the truth and setting the record straight. The longer we wait, the more lethal damage and subsequent global cost impact occurs (9/11) and, that impact certainly includes moral issues and all of this accumulates (sort of compounding itself upon every subsequent ruse layer, then year by year impacting against whatever's left of faith and goodwill), though certainly for some being entirely too late and for others there's no sufficient resolve that will ever set this thoroughly skewed record straight.

8) Now that we've wasted another good half century upon totally perpetrated cold-wars that have drained ours as well as the global economy, damn near gotten us nuked and/or biologically eliminated;   On the surface, at least the pretense to the degree by which we played "Russian Roulette", was supposedly far more damaging to others, however, the likes of 9/11 is just one of many examples where our NSA/DoD simply went too far at their playing God by pushing other peoples buttons and, subsequently because we were so busy at doing such button pushing, seems our front doors were left wide open for a little pay-back and, we still haven't secured those side nor back doors. So, it's welcome to the Israeli way of life, absolute fear at every corner and, of no more sleeping at night, unless you don't mind having one of those WMD donkey-carts parked in your driveway come morning.

Unfortunately, it'll take at least another half century just to fix everything, which means we've wasted a bloody century over damn near nothing, and we have so little to show for it, other than population control via cold-war collateral damage and carnage. Because history, science and truth have been so badly skewed, we can't even avoid making some of those same mistakes over. Of course we'll never recover those hundreds of billions, actually it's trillions involved, let alone all those lives and talents lost forever. Unfortunately, this has become the world's most costly as well as most lethal game of all and, as far as I can tell, it's still going strong, though from here out it's over energy resources and/or the profits from such.

I'm hoping (perhaps wishful thinking) that a discovery of "other life on Venus" is going to somehow become worth the belated wait, becoming sufficiently profitable enough to humanity so as to start compensating for our past errors and blunders, sufficiently focused as towards getting humanly back on track towards obtainable goals that should have only positive impacts upon Earth and lizardkind alike. How and/or why others appose such a notion is simply further "extraordinary proof" that I've been more than sufficiently right all along, which isn't stipulating that I haven't made my fair share of mistakes, like the first mistake(s) being my stupid notion of ever informing the likes of NASA about squat, as that alone was so pathetic of myself that it sort of makes what the Pope did to those nice Cathars into a minor traffic offence.

So, here we go folks;  If my opposition (official and otherwise) elects to abstain from the truth at all cost, elects as to keeping our world flat as a pancake, then so be it. As the Senate appropriations rejects upon NASA's future funding, as legal and financial "class actions" over everything from our past cold-wars and current situation arise, all that I'll be able to do is restate the rather obvious "I told you so" and perhaps offer my "sorry about that". At least I'm not the one having to impose the "so what's the difference" policy like a certain warlord that flat-out made up WMD and proceeded to fib and distort about nearly everything otherwise, in order to justify our taking of so many lives.

This page has been a somewhat delayed/summarized update upon my admittedly very poor syntax and otherwise disorganized "moon-02.htm" page. Since there's so much to say, as that effort alone well take chapters and books if not volumes, somewhat like my continuing efforts of focusing nice and honest folks upon the positive issues related to our moon, and as more likely of the better capabilities of others willing and worthy of exploiting the outfall/downfall from everything Apollo/cold-war related (with the time-line as starting pre JFK, through today and perhaps into tomorrow as well).

As I've stated before; Apollo was no conspiracy, as it was exactly the sort of happenstance of what the misinformed and dumbfounded public wanted, and more likely we (including myself at the time) couldn't seem to get enough going against all those "dirty rotten communist". OOPS; I guess they turned out as not being so dirty, nor rotten after all. So, perhaps that's what the actual conspiracy was, where Apollo simply became a darn good means to an end, unfortunately it's been turning out as being our end (especially if you worked in tall buildings), but what the hey and "so what's the difference", especially since you can't officially have those nifty wars and subsequent carnage without qualified enemies, so apparently even phony ones will have to due (like Iraq, Cuba, and don't forget those nasty North Korean's and China and so on, come to think of it, I never much cared for those pretentious folks of Monaco, nor of those do-gooder Canadians, and perhaps we should never discount nuking those French while we're at it)....