When did the moon first accompany our earth? Perhaps it has been looking at the earth long before human beings appeared on earth.Twenty-six years have passed since the first moon landing by the American astronauts from the Apollo 11 mission to the moon on July 19, 1969, yet human beings are no wiser than before about the moon. On the contrary, scientists are now perplexed by the data gathered by the instruments left on the moon. When we look at the moon at night, we a have familiar yet strange feeling. We can't help but ask, 'Dear moon, could you tell us a bit more about yourself? Where did you come from, for instance?' At present, there are three theories to explain how the moon originated. The first one is that the dust and gaseous clouds from the universe formed the moon, just like our earth, 4.6 billion years ago. The second theory is that the moon was thrown off from the earth from somewhere under the Pacific Ocean.

The third theory holds that the moon was an independent planet that was captured by the earth's gravitational force when passing by, and it has been revolving around the earth ever since. Most scientists initially believed in the first theory, although some favored the second one. Yet, analysis of the moon soil samples brought back by astronauts indicates that the composition of the moon is different from that of the earth. The earth has more iron and less silicon deposited in it, while the moon is just the opposite. In addition, the earth has very few titanium ores, whereas the moon has many. These findings show that the moon was not separated from the earth. By the same token, the first hypothesis is also shaky. If the moon and earth were formed through the same process, at around the same time, then why are they so different in their composition? Scientists have abandoned the first theory, which leaves only the last theory. If the moon entered the solar system from outer space, it should have flown towards the Sun instead of being held by the earth, because of the sun's much stronger gravitational pull...

Copyright © 2000 CarpeNoctem

On July 20, 1969, Neil Armstrong planted his left foot in the lunar dust and became the first human to walk on the moon. Unfortunately, that stellar moment in history may have been marred by one not-insignificant detail: If inquiring author Bill Kaysing has it right, Amstrong made his giant leap for mankind not 240,000 miles above the Earth in the barren Sea of Tranquillity, but a mere 90 miles north of lusty Las Vegas on a top-secret movie soundstage. Yes, as Kaysing tells it, the nation was gulled into believe that Armstrong and Edwin E. "Buzz" Aldrin, Jr., were gamboling through a bona fide lunar landscape, when in fact the two "actors" were hamming it up in a sinister government production that qualifies as the greatest hoax of all time.

Sheer lunacy, you say? Not according to the millions of skeptics who watched the spectacle of men walking on the moon in disbelief. And not according to Kaysing, who outlined his highly evolved theory in a self-published expose, We Never Went to the Moon. A former technical writer for Rockwell International (which contributed to the alleged "moon missions"), Kaysing claims no direct knowledge of NASA's shenanigans. Rather, his certainty derives from the epistemological alignment of a "hunch," photographic "proof," and a gnawing feeling that "the government is a specialist in hoaxing the public."

If his thesis is, well, somewhat weightless in the hard evidence department, Kaysing more than compensates with copious enthusiasm. "America's 30 Billion Dollar Swindle!" he declares, played itself out over the course of five more sham moon landings and involved "well-faked photographs," phony moon rocks, and "programmed astronauts" - not to mention "the help of father-figure [Walter] Cronkite as the journalistic goat." First and foremost, Kaysing has questions - questions that NASA and the former astronauts evade like a grifter dodges the "heat"; In photographs of the lunar sky, why are no stars visible, and why are the astronauts "extremely evasive regarding stars"? With no blocking atmosphere, the celestial tableau would have been "the most magnificent available to mortal man," Kaysing writes. The answer, he posits, is that NASA's set decorators knew they couldn't dupe professional astronomers with an ersatz starry backdrop...

  © Dave Cosnette 2001

The following are excerpts of conversations from Apollo Astronauts on the Moon to Mission Control - which show that the Astronauts came across some strange and hard-to-explain structures and unusual sightings of unidentified craft - whilst on the surface of the Moon.  In the photo to the left, you can see an Apollo astronaut on the Moon. In the background, space, the final frontier. Or is it a Hollywood backdrop, the ultimate deception?  Many people feel we have not been told the complete truth regarding NASA's space program, in particular the Apollo Missions of the late 60's and early 70's. Recent research has shown that conditions on the Moon could be very different from the 'official-line' which NASA would lead us to believe.  Dr Farouk El Baz, one of NASA's foremost scientists, confirmed public suspicions when he stated 'not every discovery has been announced to the public'.

Is this the understatement of the millennium? Why is it that relatively few people have been allowed total access to the massive NASA archives (photographs which are supposedly in the public domain). Instead we have to make do with the two or three dozen 'reproductions' that appear in the 'official' textbooks, despite literally millions of photographic images obtained by NASA. Something is seriously amiss. Also the original photographs are huge (32"x24") so by the time they have been reduced to fit the pages of a regular book the clarity and quality reduced by the copying process make most of the images pretty meaningless.  In many cases, researchers are left with little more than 'smudges' and 'blurs'.

Even so, despite all these obstacles, there is still hard evidence when these photographs are scrutinized under the proverbial - and literal - microscope, that points to the fact that virtually everything NASA has told us about the moon is a lie. The REAL NASA MOON PHOTOS, for example show all kinds of structures, seemingly both old and new, such as domes, pipelines, and even pyramids. So why aren't these photos in the public domain? ...

By Jim Ostrowski

Evidence from the early space probes that Lunar gravitational gradient calculations were possibly flawed: The United States and the Soviet Union started to send probes to the Moon in the late fifties. Most of these initial probes met with miserable failure. It is posited here that the reason for these early failures were due to a miscalculation of the lunar gravitational gradient. While is would appear that the calculated mass of the moon was accurate enough to determine the surface gravity (1/6 of Earth's gravity) this is not sufficient data required to properly calculate landing or impact velocities if the moon were assumed to be a hollow spheroid instead of a homogenous mass of rock throughout it's volume.

This is because in the case of a hollow spheroid the center of mass is much closer to the surface of the moon if in fact the moon is hollow than if it really were a homogenous mass of rock. The location of the center of mass of any celestial object is critical in determining it's gravitational gradient, hence the final velocity of any object required to soft-land or otherwise come in contact with the moon would not be known unless the location of the center of mass is somehow determined. The first of three early successful probes, Luna 1, was launched by the Russians on January 2, 1959, was not required to land, but rather "Flyby" the moon at a distance of about 4600 miles. This is a sufficient distance from the surface where exact knowledge of the location of the center of mass is not critical to success. Luna 2 became the first manmade object to hit the moon. Here though, the probe was allegedly not designed to withstand impact, so no conclusions were drawn about the fact that it ceased to function thereafter. Luna 3 circled the far side of the moon, took some pictures, and sent them back to the earth. Strangely, Russian moon exploration came to a four year stop after these initial successes. The Russians were characteristically secretive about the data they collected. The American efforts were almost laughable at first. The Ranger space probes were designed to hard land on the moon...

It should be emphasized that there are many people who perceive this only as a hypothesis. A computer analysis is not convincing to everyone. It is surprising, but the Moon’s past recreated by computer coincides with a lot of facts that were written in ancient sources. It stands to reason that coincidences are rarely incidental.

As it turns out, a lot of myths, legends, and tales say that there used to be no Moon in the sky. The Moon appeared after the Great Flood. This was noticed by the people who lived in the south of Greece, as well as by African tribes and others. However, there were a lot of ebb and flow traces found in many ancient cities. As is well known, it's is the Moon that causes ebbs and flows. This does not coincide with the no-Moon theory before the Flood. However, if there was no Moon, then maybe there was another celestial body to fulfil its functions? Other sources say that there used to be two or even several moons shining in the sky. It is not ruled out that those other Earth satellites were “in charge” of ebbs and flows. The people from the Mayan civilization left reports, in which they said that it was not the Moon, but Venus shining above them in the sky at night. Maybe, Venus was absolutely different back in those years? There was an ancient Roman historian who believed that the Great Flood was caused by the change of Venus’ color, size, shape, and orbit. Many myths and legends say that the Moon rose in the sky after the after-Flood darkness cleared up. Did the Moon cause the Flood?

Some scientists believe that the Moon was not always the Earth’s satellite. German astronomer Gesterkorn thinks that the Moon’s age is approximately equal to one half of the Earth’s age. In his opinion, after the Moon was created, it orbited far away from the Earth. A space object flew near the Moon, which caused the moon to change its orbit. The Moon moved closer to the Earth and became “imprisoned” by the Earth’s gravity. Then, the Moon became the master of Earth’s waters. The Moon’s approach resulted in immense tides, volcano eruptions, and earthquakes. Waves were the height of mountains, volcanoes were erupting, and water was boiling. Probably, the new satellite was the reason for the Great Flood.

There are many other theories to explain from where the Moon actually came. One of them even says that the Moon was created by aliens. According to this theory, its a place where aliens have their bases, space centers, and so on. Some people think that the Moon is a giant UFO, which has been disguised as a cold planet. The danger meteorites has become rather topical nowadays. There are movies, articles, research works, and news reports about the Earth’s possible collision with a meteorite. Meteorites are small in comparison with planets, but there can be hundreds of such meteorites or a couple of very large ones. They could be enough to destroy life on our planet. It is logical to suppose that small celestial bodies are fragments of larger ones. Therefore, it is possible that meteorites might be parts of other planets. Scientist Anatoly Chernyaeyv believes that this is exactly what happened with the Tunguska meteorite. According to his theory, a vast part of the Earth tore itself away from the planet and went upwards. It was unable to travel far away from the Earth and fell down on the planet again. It is not possible to prove such a theory, of course. If there were people who saw it, they died long ago. In this connection, the Moon might be a piece of the Earth, and it did not manage to break away from the Earth’s gravity...