THE MOVIE SET LANDED

NASA astro not tells us that they destroyed the technology to go to the moon but that technology has been spotted at thrift shops.

An interview with 3 astronauts back in the day reveals that when two of them were asked about what they saw 'when on the moon' they stated they did not remember seeing stars. They were on the moon and did not see stars? That is impossible, if there is no atmosphere on the moon it would not be like Earth is during the day where space gets blanked out by the atmosphere that illuminates as blue during the day whereas on the moon it has to be since there is no atmosphere like this black background and like in the photos they claim they took on the moon that show a sunny day there THEY WOULD HAVE TO SEE STARS like they saw the Earth in the distance or....

THEY WERE NEVER THERE

As we rotate what has captured our IMAGINATION to actual LEVEL we start to notice the backdrop has a perfectly straight horizon line before the painted hills.

The other clue is that we see the moon in the background instead of Earth.

I believe that the tilting of the image for publication was used to divert the mind away from looking at it as it is, an movie set, which is more noticible when presented level and without narration, music, captions and analysis offers glimpse of theatricks used, staging 'being on the moon'. You might use this same technique when making your own films that are now so easy to make and share with the world.

Here we see in the fake station a screw drop and a connector drop instead of floating in "space".

On the other scientific hand 9-11 conspiracies are so incredibly stupid. Twin Towers fell because of large sections of the building destroyed, fire, then massive weight causing complete structure failure floor by floor. The steel beams on the outside basically just pulled away and let all above floors pancake down. The basic physics is so obvious but a lot of people do not really understand physics. Some even claim the towers should have fallen over on their side. That's absurd and would also defy physics unless there was a sinkhole that opened up swallowing one side of the entire foundation. This video that tries to show the conspiracy theory basically tricks the viewer showing 'floors' and heavy weight dropping, but it's structural makeup is no where near the same. The plates as 'floors' are no where near the same density in comparison or build. The structuring used in this simplistic 'recreation' is massively stronger than the towers. The presenter does not explain these aspects of physics. The towers steel beams and supporting floor structuring of New York's Twin Towers were like toothpicks all glued together breaking apart, separating from the floors. The massive collapse and gravity just tore everything below it apart floor by floor in an instant. Built as it was with minimal stresses like wind and weight the structure was solid, but now when comprimised. This analysis all fits into one theme I want people to understand, visual presentations can be a song and dance tricking the viewer into believing things that are simply not true even when appearing so real.

Science is often not a project it is a projection. We are seeing projections and assertive scripts like never before.

More hot air wind farms keep ruining the planet. Coachella Flats and Painted Hills turbines from the 1980's that were rather short in stature are replaced with skyscraper size ones. A new CCA is formed a few years back at suggestion of the CVAG to facilitate purchase of the wind driven energy called 'clean energy'. Rate payers have options. If they want this 'clean energy' they pay 10% more for it. This in simplest terms shows how 'clean energy' actually wastes energy as it uses more of your $ energy and $ energy takes fossil fuel energy to make it. article at wind watch & tonnes more at HORSEPOWER.net

Mention is often made in the sales pitch about protein coats and spiked virus hair and other things in the endless marketing pitch world disguised as caring. We might study at least the wikipedia entry on protein and learn it is carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, and the average bacteria contains 2 million proteins per cell. I don't think any protein is the problem.

"Once linked in the protein chain, an individual amino acid is called a residue, and the linked series of carbon, nitrogen, and oxygen atoms are known as the main chain or protein backbone.
^{[25]:19" wikipedia}

^{A few things about viruses:}

1. they do not infect a cell from outside they are made in the cell as a response to toxins

2. they are like detergent cleansing out things we could call the body soap

3. they only do the work they were created for in the cell, when they are done breaking down toxins they escape the cell like how things escape certain orafices into a toilet, they make their way as debris into that device

4. all claims that they infect are assertions, many so boldly made as if they are absolute, there are no absolutes in such claims, mountains of data on viruses is so limited as there is no proof viruses exist, they are too small to quantify and 'track and trace'

5. notice how they isolate you and do not isolate the virus, expecially with this new novel assertion, it has not been isolated to prove it's existence nor has it's blueprint been provided as to how it's constructed, it's all computer models and scientific assertions with no absolutes at all, in fact so much evidence supports no viral cause of anything as there are way too many other factors that cause complex diseases

6. there are no new diseases just new assertions and marketing pitches

7. the medical industry top brass is behind all the lies they basically own the news networks used now to brainwash the public with propoganda so they are so fearful of infection from others they demand government 'fix the problem'

8. testing is a fraud, PCR was used in 2020 to disingenuously create cases to the moon which are meaningless, 99.995% of those were healthy people and it finds only biologic stew in everyone

When women have a job.....