MOON FAKERY-3
Report 192
August 22, 2010
This report is about the Apollo program manned landing missions to the Moon and the question of why some of the images of the Lunar Rovers do not show any tire tracks in the soil while traversing the Moon's fine powdery regolith terrain. Since there are so many other questions and issues relating to whether the Apollo manned landings were real or not that would take far too much evidence and reporting to cover, this report of necessity confines itself to just the rover tire track evidence ignoring other issues.

    http://spaceflight1.nasa.gov/gallery/images/apollo/apollo17/html/as17-147-22523.html
 The above 1st image is from the Apollo 
    17 mission data image number AS17-147-22523. 
    It shows a single astronaut driving the rover and all are in motion. He is 
    suppose to be testing the rover prior to loading it with equipment and that's 
    the reason the rover has a sort of stripped down clean look to it.
    
    Note that the rover underway in this manner would be at its lightest weight 
    with only one occupant and no loaded equipment and yet is still leaving a 
    very clear linear track in the soft, fine, powdery regolith soil as pointed 
    out by the two bracketing yellow arrows in the area behind by the left front 
    tire. Note that the tires are clearly raining down plenty of the fine powder 
    regolith soil as the rover moves forward and note that this is not covering 
    up the track behind the right front tire.
    
    A point I'm making here is that the vehicle in motion at its lightest weight 
    leaves a well defined track in the soil and a slightly more well defined track 
    could logically be expected from a rover loaded with equipment. Further, although 
    the right front tire with its metal mesh and strap covering is picking up 
    and raining down quite a bit of soil, it isn't enough to come even close to 
    covering up the tire tracks being left in the soil behind the right front 
    tire.
    
    So later in this reporting, don't get to thinking in terms of soil kicked 
    by the tires covering tracks. Further, it should also be noted that nice sharp 
    clear rover tracks otherwise left in the terrain in many of the Lunar mission 
    images (but not imaged here) defining rover passage should also negate such 
    an argument right away.

    http://spaceflight1.nasa.gov/gallery/images/apollo/apollo17/html/as17-147-22526.html 
  
The above 2nd image from AS17-147-22526 is another view of the rover stripped down before loading with equipment, at its lightest weight, and in motion. Note again the tracks left in the soil by the front tires as pointed out by the yellow arrows and note again that the visible tracks are well defined in the soil and not being covered up by the soil kicked up by and raining down from the passing tire.

    http://spaceflight1.nasa.gov/gallery/images/apollo/apollo15/html/as15-85-11471.html 
  

    http://spaceflight1.nasa.gov/gallery/images/apollo/apollo15/html/as15-85-11471.html 
  
On the other hand, the above 3rd and 4th 
    images taken from the Apollo 15 mission image AS15-85-11471 
    demonstrates a rover also in motion but now loaded with equipment and heavier 
    in weight relative to a stripped version. That logically means that the rover 
    should be leaving slightly deeper more pronounced tire tracks even in the 
    Moon's lower gravity. However, in this image note that the rover is leaving 
    absolutely no tracks at all either to the rear or front of the tires on the 
    right side of the vehicle.
    
    As you can see, this is a well known example of the "It can't be" 
    no tracks evidence. An obvious logical question that soon comes to mind, and 
    has been espoused by others, is whether this 3rd and 4th image scene is one 
    actually on the distant Moon or one here on Earth on some covert movie making 
    set where the rover was simply lowered down by a lift and placed in this position 
    without rolling forwards or backwards? Look closer in the image and note the 
    soil raining down on the rear end of both the front and rear tires indicating 
    the rover is in motion in this scene.
    
    Because the rover is clearly in motion kicking up soil, this type of evidence 
    negates the consideration that the rover was simply lowered into position 
    even though it does not actually answer the question of whether the scene 
    is on Earth or the Moon. One thing is absolutely certain here, since an equipment 
    loaded rover in motion but not leaving tire tracks on soft, fine, powdery 
    soil is quite impossible, then something is obviously very wrong here.
    
    Worse, what are we suppose to think of well educated scientists around the 
    world who cannot seem to recognize or admit to their selves must less you 
    and I in the public that visual material like this is a problem? Are they 
    dead between the ears? Even worse, what are we suppose to think of the people 
    and agencies responsible for presenting this kind of "impossible" 
    information and asking the public to believe in it and trust? In fact, what 
    kind of agency supposedly serving the public interest would even want their 
    public and audience to trust unquestioning in such "impossible" 
    material?
    
    Logically the vehicle is clearly in motion and we can assume it is laying 
    down tire tracks. So where are the tracks? The problem is that we just can't 
    see the tracks that must be there and so the question becomes why? In my opinion, 
    they are no longer visible because someone has not just sanitized them from 
    the scene, they've substituted a sandy gravely landscape texture in its place. 
    That is a very intentional act and it clearly defines the intent to obfuscate 
    and deceive.
    
    Now, I repeat, this does not conclusively reveal to us whether this scene 
    was on the Moon or on Earth and does not answer that question even as it does 
    reveal intentional deception. If taken at face value, in my mind this kind 
    of evidence tends to support it actually being on the Moon. On the other hand, 
    that Moon "regolith" looks an awful lot like and even behaves like 
    gray dry concrete ready mix in an environment where humidity is present to 
    me.

    http://spaceflight1.nasa.gov/gallery/images/apollo/apollo15/html/as15-88-11901.html 
  

    http://spaceflight1.nasa.gov/gallery/images/apollo/apollo15/html/as15-88-11901.html 
  

    http://spaceflight1.nasa.gov/gallery/images/apollo/apollo15/html/as15-88-11901.html 
  
In the above 5th, 6th and 7th images from 
    the Apollo 15 AS15-88-11901 strip, you see the 
    entire equipment loaded rover and its immediate surroundings. Here again there 
    are no tracks on either end of the rover left front and rear tires and this 
    evidence is used by those that argue the Apollo manned Moon were fakes made 
    on a movie set here on Earth. However, note in the background beyond the rover 
    and to its rear in some distant faintly seen linear lines evidence pointed 
    out with yellow arrows.
    
    Although I might be wrong, I strongly suspect this to be distantly seen rover 
    tracks crossing to our right and then behind the rover in the rover's original 
    earlier path and beginning to loop around to the rear of the rover going off 
    the right edge of the image strip and would have normally come up right behind 
    the rover. However, likely image tampering with the soil texture look has 
    removed the tire track evidence closer to the rover.
    
    Of course the impossibility of the missing tire tracks closer to the rover 
    fuels the debate over whether this evidence came about via a landing on the 
    Moon or at a movie set here on Earth. Again, this type of evidence can't conclusively 
    answer that question. Still, look carefully at the rover left rear wheel/hub 
    in the above 7th image and the considerable soil adhering to it. Sure looks 
    an awful like and even behaves like gray dry concrete ready mix in an environment 
    where differential temperature humidity is present on metal to me. This is 
    not what one would expect on an airless super dry Moon surface.

    http://spaceflight1.nasa.gov/gallery/images/apollo/apollo17/html/as17-146-22367.html 
  
In the above 8th image, now we're back 
    to the Apollo 17 evidence in the AS17-146o-22367 
    strip. Here the rover is loaded with its equipment and slightly heavier than 
    in the initial stripped test stage. Note how at this sunlight angle the astronaut 
    footprints at various angles disturbing the soil shows up as a pronounced 
    shiny surface within each footprint. We should then be able to anticipate 
    that any tire track disturbed soil here would behave the same way, yet there 
    are no such tracks.
    
    On the other hand, the lone yellow arrow I've added on the right behind the 
    left rear tire points out a short shallow linear depression course that is 
    likely part of the left rear tire track. If it is, note how it is not sunlight 
    reflective as the many footprints are and it is not very long. This again 
    suggests that the tire track that logically has to be there has been either 
    eliminated or partially eliminated by likely image texture tampering covering 
    in the background areas that was not completely successful in visually eliminating 
    the rover track.
 
    
    http://spaceflight1.nasa.gov/gallery/images/apollo/apollo17/html/as17-137-21011.html 
  
The above 9th image is again from the 
    Apollo 17 data image number AS17-137-21011. It's 
    a bit blurry because the original is blurry. This scene is actually a distant 
    view showing a lot of terrain surrounding the small distant rover. Even so 
    and as you can clearly see, the rover is sitting there with no tire tracks 
    leading to or from it. Further, even though at least one astronaut is clearly 
    on the ground tromping around beside the rover, there are no footprints.
    
    I am satisfied that this is because most of this terrain is covered with a 
    grainy smudge (not landscape texture) treatment that has eliminated both the 
    rover tire tracks and any astronaut footprints. Now understand that I do not 
    believe that the tire tracks and footprints were the target of the tampering 
    field. Almost certainly the general terrain in this wide context scene surrounding 
    the rover and stretching off into the distant background of hills was the 
    true target with the goal of eliminating any visual truth there. Covering 
    over the tire tracks and footprints was just incidental to that and a mistake 
    in not replacing them.

    http://spaceflight1.nasa.gov/gallery/images/apollo/apollo17/html/as17-137-20979.html 
  
In the above 10th and last image from 
    the Apollo 17 data image number AS17-137-20979 
    we're back to a very crisp sharp close image of the rover's right rear wheel 
    and tire. Again, even though there is an astronaut onboard and the rover is 
    loaded with equipment and weighs a bit more than in its stripped version in 
    the Moon's minimal gravity, there are no right rear tire tracks. Note that 
    here again the tracks are not just eliminated, they are replaced with soil 
    mimicking textures demonstrating intent to deceive.
    
    This 10th image and the 5th image further above are ones often used by those 
    questioning whether there was a manned landing at all on the Moon during the 
    Apollo missions. They advocate that the missions were faked and produced on 
    set here on Earth during the height of the space race between the USA and 
    the USSR. Some arguments suggest that the rover was simply lowered down on 
    the raw ground of the prepared set and they just forgot to move the rover 
    to develop some tire tracks before filming.
    
    I can't say one way or the other with any confidence whether the above collection 
    of evidence was produced on the Moon or Earth. What I can say is that the 
    incentive was certainly there back in those days to take short cuts and deliver 
    the perception of manned landing mission success if not the fact. However, 
    the above evidence, especially the rover in motion evidence, from the Apollo 
    15 and 17 missions tends to negate the extrapolation that the rovers were 
    simply lowered down on a set.
    
    What is more likely in a lot of this Apollo evidence is that someone was trying 
    to either fake and/or hide large areas of terrain in this imaging via graphics 
    work and eliminating smaller evidence like rover tire tracks was only an incidental 
    mistake inherent in this process as practiced at that time. However, note 
    that this does not necessarily answer the question of what was there about 
    the terrain that required such covert administrations? Were they trying to 
    create a suitable Moon looking landscape via graphics work from scratch in 
    an Earth set scenario and/or were they trying to hide landscape evidence that 
    may have been too Earth like or trying to hide Moon evidence that may have 
    been objectionable from secrecy's point of view?
    
    Remember that this reporting is only a small limited slice of the body of 
    information that is available on this subject. For more go to this LINK. 
    The intention of this reporting is only to add some more insight into the 
    lack of rover tracks issue and demonstrate that a graphics image tampering 
    process is a strong candidate for consideration. That was the purpose of the 
    first half of my reporting in Report 
    #191 on the coiled cable to prepare the way and show you just how 
    careful one must be on the issue of successful image tampering and the dangers 
    of accepting too much at face value just because the source may be trusted 
    by preference.
    
    I acknowledge that the purpose of the covert activity in the Apollo data, 
    as best exampled by the rovers in motion evidence such as in the above 3rd 
    and 4th images, may have been to obfuscated something on the Moon suggesting 
    that we did go there and there was something there to hide from the public. 
    On the other hand, I also have to admit that the soil adhering to the metal 
    wheel of the rovers in images 7 and 10 just as would dry gray concrete ready 
    mix spread over the ground to metal in a humid environment is also very suggestive. 
    As always, you must decide for yourself.
    
    One thing is for sure on the bottom line here, secrecy derived covert obfuscation 
    evidence is too plentiful in the official Moon science data to the point that 
    the data cannot be trusted to represent truth and what we think we in the 
    public know about the Moon is not truth. The real truth has been hijacked 
    into secrecy by a hidden few. Why?
    
    , Investigator