Former NASA Employee: “The Moon Landings Were Faked”

Former NASA contractor Cyndi Holland says she found proof that the moon landings were faked when she worked at the agency a few decades ago.

A former NASA contractor claims to have proof that the Apollo 11 moon landings were faked when she worked at the agency a few decades ago.

When Cyndi Holland got a job at NASA, she was over the moon. Metaphorically of course – not in the way she believed the astronauts of the time were as they pootled around on the International Space Station.

I was a college student and janitor for the US Air Force when I applied for the contractor position with NASA,” she recounts. “It was the winter of 1996, I was a single mom to a five-year-old boy and was trying to get into a career. I was told by several Air Force employees that NASA wanted to hire women and black people, so I sent them my resume.”

Within days, Cyndi had an interview and, shortly afterwards, was offered a job. “It was an entry level IT Support position,” she says. “I was thrilled and terrified.”

Cyndi landed a job at NASA in 1996
Cyndi landed a job at NASA in 1996

Cyndi loved her job. “I felt important for the first time. The job was unique and fun. I managed the computer back-up system, logged trouble calls, managed the plotter machine from the SR71 flights, installed software on users machines and put together computer stations.”

Cyndi’s office was right next to the NASA photo lab. “That’s where the photographic history was kept,” explains Cyndi. “It was off limits to most NASA employees unless escorted.”

Being situated next to the lab, she often heard the technicians and photographers chatting while they worked. One afternoon, she overheard two photo lab technicians discussing the Apollo 11 moon landing of 1969. “I could hear every word they said,” claims Cyndi.

It was only when I heard one of them say ‘I can’t believe everyone in the world fell for it. Surely everyone can see it was all fake, one big hoax’ that my ears pricked up.”

NASA contractor Cyndi Holland says she overheard other NASA engineers claim the moon landings were "fake" and "one big hoax."
NASA contractor Cyndi Holland says she overheard other NASA engineers claim the moon landings were “fake” and “one big hoax.”

Despite the scandalous nature of this revelation, career-minded Cyndi, 28 at the time, engrossed in her work and not wanting jeopardize her job in any way, decided to forget about it. “I’m not sure if they knew I could hear them, if they wanted me to hear them… but they were being bold about it… I thought they were crazy and blew it off.”

It was only much later – in 2009 – that the story sprang to Cindy’s mind once more. “I started to become aware of what was going on in the world and began to look into various conspiracies. It all started to fall into place.”

The first person she mentioned it to was her eldest son Brandon, then 18. “Brandon had already worked out for himself that the moon landings were fake, so I decided to tell him about what I’d heard at NASA. He wasn’t surprised.”

Now 47, a mum of four and living in Phoenix, Arizona, Cindy has recently become involved with the Flat Earth Movement. Through this, she has discovered that fellow members believe that the Apollo 11 moon landing never happened and that much of what happens around NASA is fake. “I ‘woke up’ in 2009 and I learned about all the fake stuff the US government had done and were doing. Around that time, I remembered an engineer at Lockheed Martin – where I worked after I left NASA – telling me the earth was flat. I didn’t take it seriously at the time: it was not on my radar.”

In May of 2016, Cyndi saw a YouTube video about the earth being flat…”I was very surprised,” she claims. “I was intrigued and started my journey. For at least two weeks, I was in a daze, researching the subject overloading my brain with information.”

Cyndi recalled the photo lab engineers at NASA laughing about how people believed in the moon landings and that’s when she realized the truth… those technicians, like the Lockheed engineer before them, KNEW the true shape of the earth! As Cyndi says: “They had to know if they worked in the photo lab… the pilots would bring photographers and take photos, they must have seen a ton of proof!

After further research, Cyndi has decided that it’s time to tell the world. “I had to speak out,” she says. “It’s too big a truth to withhold. I was afraid at first – worried about the repercussions – so didn’t speak to anyone about it for months. But now I don’t care who I lose or upset by sharing this truth. We are all flat earthers – some people just don’t know yet.”

Jacqui Deevoy

Jacqui Deevoy

My love of fashion and music led me - several decades ago - into working for some of Britain’s top-selling magazines, specialising in news, reviews, fiction, features, astrology and quizzes.

These days, as a journalist, writer and editor I write a wide variety of features, frivolous and serious. I work mainly for women's magazines and national newspapers and also enjoy writing for independent news outlets and websites - the sort that publish stories the mainstream media fail to report.

Email: jacqui.deevoy@gmail.com
Jacqui Deevoy
  • Todd Browning

    I just don’t believe it. Aldrin and Armstrong did set foot on lunar soil. I just don’t think they could keep a secret that they faked it all for so long. I don’t believe they faked it all.

    • Teb Tb

      Nobody can keep secrets like this. You couldnt pay someone enough, you would have to kill them all.

      • Maggie May Lynn

        Yes ur right but that’s all part of the whole deception. U can research the firmament to find out the real reason behind such a successful elaborate hoax tho.

        • D Barnes

          There is no firmament.

          • Bumm Fuzz

            prove it.

          • D Barnes

            There is nothing to prove. A firmament does not exist in the form you think.
            The bible is just a book. A book you dont even follow 100% and if you did you would contradict yourself everyday.

          • D Barnes

            Not one person living or dead, has ever seen, felt, touched, smelled, shipwrecked into, flown into, shot at, a ice wall, a invisible wall, a firmament. Nothing in the entire history of man on this round planet.

      • Mr Sir

        You’re right. Many have come forward. What’s wrong, CNN didn’t tell you this?

        • Ryan Scott Mozert-

          i want links to former nasa employees who have come forward-

    • Mr Sir

      You clearly don’t know how secret societies work. All Apollo astronauts are 33rd degree Freemasons.

      • Robert Stone

        I am a Freemason and we are gonna eat your livers.

        What a bunch of ignorant morons.

        • Mr Sir

          You’re the ignorant one who is just a low level lackey being used for your money and to put a good face on the organization for the public to believe you are benevolent. Plus you are a Christ denier ‘in the darkness seeking the light’ which unbeknownst to you, is Lucifer.

          • Arno van Harskamp

            Lucifer will be bumfucked off this globe earth; its followers’ days are NUMBERED.

            http://imgur.com/gallery/LP6pPqY

          • Robert Stone

            Yes I deny that Jesus was divine but what do textiles have to do with anything?? I mean I work in the carpet industry but what does linear mass density have to do with anything?? To Deny is a verb..
            If you require a label then I guess Deist would be close..

          • Robert Stone

            Denier is a unit of textile measurement..

        • Hugh Hefner

          Oooh very intelligent comment there you dumb ass!

          • Robert Stone

            Damn it was a fucking joke.. But your liver with some fava beens sounds awesome..

      • D Barnes

        So you know how secret societies work now do you? So please explain how secret is this society if someone like you know everything about them.
        Not a very secret society is it now.

        • Bumm Fuzz

          whistleblowers all over the place. you are arguing from a position of mind controlled ignorance.

          • D Barnes

            Really whistle blowers all over the place? So where is the whistle blower for the mpon missions.
            JFK
            9/11
            Sandy Hook
            Columbine
            So where are these whistle blowers?

      • Brad Scott

        “All Apollo astronauts are 33rd degree Freemasons”

        Um, no… out of the 500+ people that have been to space, less than 12 have been Freemasons

    • D Barnes

      Youre right they didnt fake it. Why would they

      • Bumm Fuzz

        you obviously have done zero research into your own claims.

        • D Barnes

          Ive done enough to know that you cannot provide one verifiable piece of evidence that would back up your conspiracy claims

    • Hugh Hefner

      You have no clue on what you’re are saying…. you’re brain washed!

  • Arno van Harskamp

    OK. “Involved with the Flat-Earth movement”. That says she is acting on behalf of the CIA Flat Earth psy-op to delegitimize real human accomplishments. And more so to make us think that we DON’T have the ability to visit other locations.
    This is total dis-info. And this is the very reason why this Flat Earth psy-op has been launched. Don’t fall for it. Buzz Aldering smacking a journalist up the face when he remotely suggested the moon landings to be fake is telling too.

    • D Barnes

      Buzz Aldrin did not hit a journalist. He hit a idiot who got into his face and said he was a liar and a crook. Thats why he hit him, and he deserved to be hit.

      • Artificial Duality

        Absolutely deserved yes. It told of an insult to a first-degree experience Buzz had gone through.

    • David Evans

      Actually Buzz Aldrin slapped the man for calling him a liar and a coward.

  • Christian Thomas

    Sorry Todd, if we have been to the moon it wasn’t in rockets and it wasn’t in 1969. A week, or three, of scouring the internet will convince you of that. A really simply test is to ask if the USA would have risked its reputation on a real-time mission to the moon? Of course they wouldn’t have. But why include the Flat Earth in this, Jacqui? It’s tangential to the topic at best. The pertinent questions are whether the world was lied to (it was) and whether the US taxpayers were deceived and ripped off (they were). The flat earth, if it is not a dividing psyop, comes much, much later.

    • Teb Tb

      We went to the moon. Sorry to burst your bubble.

    • D Barnes

      We did go to the moon, and your assumption that NASA would risk their reputation is just another asinie retort from people who cannot grasp the science of how it was.achieved so they must mock it or try and deny it.

      • Cyrus Macintosh

        Sorry to say but Armstrong never went to the moon and I know this for a fact. My father worked at the highest level of the CIA and Armstrong was also a close family friend. And Armstrong could never admit to this hoax and for obvious reasons too. My father told me that Apollo 11 never went to the moon and at the time I thought my Father was just pulling my leg at the time and he said some day i will understand because stuff like this is impossible contain in secrecy. In fact he told me this in 3 separate times. So sorry if you have been deceived.

        In fact when all of this evidence was starting to be exposed publicly on TV many many years later it just reminds me of my father and his words.

        Now i don’t expect and even careless that you would believe me but this is the God honest truth and my father was highly involved with that whole mess back in those days.

        • D Barnes

          If your father told you we didnt go to the moon and really believed that, then your father was an idiot.
          If you believed it than youre a bigger idiot.
          If you are just making shit up, which is more likely you wouldnt be saying this on social media, you would be trying to capatalize on it.
          And if you cannot verify a fact then it is not a fact it is an opinion.
          Here is how I know we went to the moon.
          There is both physical and non physical evidence od us going to the moon.

          1. There is no reason to lie about it.
          2. To lie about it would have to involve almost every government and college/university on the planet.
          3. Why would they lie when if ever properly questioned all the equipment used can be tested to verify if they had been in space.
          4. What about every engineer that designed the crafts.
          5. Every engineer that calculated the distance and trajectory.
          You just cant understand the amount of people and resources that would have to be involved for this to have bren faked.

          • AverGo

            D Barnes, Now you’re starting to see. Let go of the anger and feel the scales fall away from your eyes. The world is not what you think, it is. Who Runs it and Why? These answers can only truly be found in God’s Word. https://tbfe.space

          • D Barnes

            The world is exactly what I think it is.
            We went to the moon.
            The earth is a sphere.
            911 was a real terrorist acr.
            Elvis and Tupac and Biggie Smalls are all dead.

      • Cyrus Macintosh

        Sorry to say but Armstrong never went to the moon and I know this for a fact. My father worked at the highest level of the CIA and Armstrong was also a close family friend. And Armstrong could never admit to this hoax and for obvious reasons too. My father told me that Apollo 11 never went to the moon and at the time I thought my Father was just pulling my leg and he said some day i will understand because stuff like that is impossible to contain in secrecy forever. In fact he told me this in 3 separate occasions. So sorry if you have been deceived.

        In fact when all of this evidence was starting to be exposed publicly on TV many many years later it just reminds me of my father and his words.

        Now i don’t expect and even careless that you would believe me but this is the God honest truth and my father was highly involved with that whole mess back in those days.

    • D Barnes

      They did go to the moon, to say otherwise diminishes the accomplishment of the men and women who were responsible for going

      • Christian Thomas

        If they didn’t go then there is no accomplishment. Watch “A funny thing happened on the way to the moon”. 90 minutes that will change your outlook on who is in charge. Everything you have been told is a lie.

        • D Barnes

          You mean the fake documentary? LMAO So thats your proof your evidence, some fake documemtary made by people showing gullible peoplw are.

          • Christian Thomas

            At what level would you like to start? I can take you right up to the rocketry and show you that we didn’t have control mechanisms to keep a rocket going in a straight line in a vacuum if you like, let alone hit a target that required fractions of arc seconds in accuracy.

          • D Barnes

            Please show us and tell us how we couldnt navigate in a vacuum

          • Christian Thomas

            Control surfaces don’t do anything in a vacuum so there is no ‘steering’. You would therefore be reliant on the direction of thrust from the engines. These are pretty powerful. If that thrust doesn’t go exactly through the centre of gravity (which is changing all the time with fuel burning and astronauts moving about) then the rocket goes spinning off into space like a Catherine wheel. Even with technology today, building a servo that could react quickly enough to a moment like that would be very hard, not least because there is no damping whatever. I wouldn’t have a clue how to even model a system that invites oscillations with an infinite Q. There point is that there is zero chance of a the computers on board Apollo 11 being able to do it.

            I’ll just add that we have had rockets on earth for 500 years or more. Doing it in air is easy, but you will notice that almost all our missiles have tail fins and control surfaces. Very probably all of them, but I am not an avid reader of Jane’s Defence Weekly.

          • D Barnes

            No sir, you would not be relying on engine thrusters alone. They also had directional thrusters, which they used to keep themselves oriented correctly.

            “For guidance and control, the Apollo spacecraft featured a large engine and smaller reaction control system thrusters that, when fired, changed the roll, pitch, and yaw of the spacecraft, as well as providing thrust in what direction was necessary to get back on track”

            “For the Apollo space missions, engineers at the MIT Instrumentation Lab (now the Charles Stark Draper Laboratory) developed the Primary Guidance, Navigation, and Control System (PGNCS), which consisted of a computer, software, inertial measurement unit (IMU), and optical instruments.”

            http://engineering.mit.edu/ask/how-were-we-able-navigate-earth-moon-such-precision

            This took me all of 5 minutes to find.

          • Christian Thomas

            We know it had a control system. I said that when I mentioned the word servo. I am saying that you couldn’t do the correction fast enough with 1969 technology. You have an engine that is going to accelerate you to 25,000 mph and if that doesn’t go exactly through the C of G the moment created will have the ship spinning in microseconds, and there is nothing to damp it. And there are no aerodynamics to keep its nose pointing forward. Even if you apply correction the lack of damping ensures it is an oscillatory system. It just simply wouldn’t work, let alone attain an accuracy well below arc seconds needed to put it in the corridor for orbit round the moon. Really, the idea that you can fire the engines for a fixed amount of time, starting at exactly the right point in your orbit around the earth, and then find yourself in orbit around the moon because of your good work is almost comical.

          • D Barnes

            Actually not comical at all, it is a testament to the Engineering and Mathematical skills of the men and women who worked on the Apollo missions.

            I guess you made no effort to read the article I linked. It explains exactly how they were able to stay oriented.

            It explains how they would be able to re-orient if the craft went into a spin.

            Why would it take too long for 1960 technology to orient the capsule. How long would it take to ignite thrusters as needed.

            Anyway, here is more information on the IMU unit used to keep the craft oriented.

            “For guidance and control, the Apollo spacecraft featured a large engine and smaller reaction control system thrusters that, when fired, changed the roll, pitch, and yaw of the spacecraft, as well as providing thrust in what direction was necessary to get back on track. However, in order to fire the engines in a specific direction, the spacecraft had to know what its orientation in space was. That’s where the IMU came in. The IMU was about the size of a soccer ball and contained a platform mounted on three gimbals. Sensors on the gimbals could tell how many degrees the spacecraft was rotated around each axis with respect to the platform and thus report the orientation of the spacecraft to the crew via the computer. With that information, the crew could take the steps necessary to stay on course”
            Again the ship would not be at full thrust the entire trip to the moon. They would use thrust as needed to either keep them oriented or to move them forward into position. The thrusters are used to move the craft forward or backwards, left or right, fast or slow.

          • Christian Thomas

            Do you have any background in engineering? You seem to have no sense of the scale of the forces involved. Each one of the five main engines on the Saturn Five rocket has the power of an entire Formula One grid. It’s actually a bit tricky to work out what the actual power is because it’s rocketry, but that gives the sort of scale you should be looking at. That’s fine in the atmosphere because it has quite a high rotational inertia and has aerodynamic drag keeping the rear at the rear, but when it’s down to 3 men and some fuel and aluminium it’s far from fine. It is vastly shorter. Anything just a tiny bit off and the rocket would be in a spin. The astronauts wouldn’t be able to move around, the centre of gravity would have to be maintained as the fuel burnt and you’d have to allow for uneven burning of the fuel.

            Why does the control servo need to be quick? Because it would take about a microsecond to put it into a spin. This happens in modern fighter jets and in modern Intercontinental missiles. And that’s on earth, with accelerometers, gravity, GHz processing speeds and an atmosphere.

            Examine what needs to be done. That’s a measured force, in 3D, an interface bus to gather the data and digitise it, software code to work out what to do, stepper motors with feedback to align the corrective thrusters in 3 dimensions, followed by firing, measurement of fuel flow, calculation of energy converted and God knows what else. And you think that could have been done with less processing power and speed than a Sinclair Spectrum. It’s total fantasy – as I am sure you will find out, very possibly officially, at some point in your life.

          • D Barnes

            You seem to be stuck in a loop.
            And yes i do have experience in Engineering. More computer than rocketry though.
            You seem to completely ignore what I said earlier and what was written in the article as well. It clearly states and I clearly stated that the main engines are not used for orientation of the craft, there are special thrusters throughout the ship that would Orient the craft not the main engine, it was the Reaction Control System, or RCS, what is so hard to understand about that.
            You seem to think that because what we can do today IT couldn’t be done in 1960. But that’s a false understanding of technology. In the 1960s everything was done in analog not digital, and yes even jet fighters were all analog. Which means that they pilot without computer control. The same with the Apollo Mission craft.
            The ship used thrusters along the sides of the craft to navigate it manually. Yes we have computer-assisted control now, Which is called fly by wire. And no they did not have it during the Apollo missions, but that doesn’t mean that the pilot was unable to control a craft manually.
            Youre correct while in space there is no atmospheric friction and any irregular movement could send the craft spinning, but not uncontrollably. The same frictionless environment also makes it easy to keep oriented. Because not.much rhrust is needed to move the craft in any direction.
            You can go here to learn more about rcs and the thrusters used.
            en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reaction_control_system

          • David Evans

            Serious question here. What do the directional thrusters push against or thrust against in the vaccuum and void of space?

          • Brad Scott

            For every reaction, there is an equal and opposite reaction… pressurized gas forced through a nozzle at one end, the craft moves in the opposite direction… please remove your head from your ass…

          • D Barnes

            So what do You think causes a jet to fly? Do you really think its pushing against something.

          • David Evans

            A jet has to draw air in, compress it then expel it out the other side to create forward thrust. Nothing like the principal of a rocket. A jet is more like a propeller on steroids.

          • D Barnes

            Exactly. Flat earthers seem to believe that air flight is caused by pushing against something.

        • D Barnes

          But again they did go, and there is no proof that they didn’t. There is both physical proof and objective evidence.
          You do not have that with the conspiracy that they didn’t go.

  • Chris Race

    I think this author works for the CIA.. or for David Brock.

    Media matters is trying to associate sources that report on Pizzagate with the CIA psyop flat Earth society…

    This is a delegitimization campaign… And this author should be fired from news wire immediately!

  • Teb Tb

    I read the article because the beginning claimed she found proof. No proof and she fell for the flat earth video, ive seen about 20 of them. All flat earth videos make the same silly errors and of course they say NASA is a conspiracy. They all deny gravity, they deny the Focoult pendulum really works, they think it would be impossible for planes to fly east an that there is no curvature of the earth even though it is very easy to prove from earth eithout going up and looking back. They also claim that plane pilots would have to be constantly decending if they flew on earth as if gravity didnt work. My favorite is the notion that we should all fly off into space from centrepetal force at the equator. You try spinning a rope once every 24 hours round and see how it works.

    • Kaliegh_Ann Moir

      Absolutely astonished that an educated person would ever believe in nasa, moon landing, iss!! Indoctrination is obvious please please open your eyes. The American government is totally corrupt. Next you will be saying 9/11 was orchestrated by 19 Saudi high jackers OMG come on wake up!!!!!

      • Mr Sir

        Teb Tb is a good little citizen of the NWO..

        • Arno van Harskamp

          Nope you are such troll. Wide advice to everyone: Do not engage in discussion with flat earth pushers. It’s what they want. To keep your attention from the things that matter for real like gate pizza and gate pedo (circumvention of disqus censor bot, they don’t get context).

          And to shut you up real good: This Shia LeBouf prank has been made possible by laws of physics that account for a globe earth:

          http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-03-10/weaponized-autism-stupid-shia-labeouf-livestreams-hwndu-flag-remote-tennessee-field-

          • Mr Sir

            Ding dong. You’re wrong. Pizza gate IS important to me. VERY much so. So is the fact that NASA has bilked the public for billions pushing the ball earth.

            That Shia prank (which I enjoyed very much, by the way) and any other ‘proof’ of a ball earth can be done on a plane if you would just look into it, but you are too lazy.

          • Mr Sir

            Why are you engaging in discussion with me, btw?

          • Hugh Hefner

            Fuck you!

      • D Barnes

        Tell you please.answer this question, if people really belive the earth to be flat, and that NASA has lied. Why havent anyone gone to this supposed edge and taken a picture or video.
        It would be so simple and they could prove themselves correct.
        But to date not one flat earther has ever made the attempt and they never will, because they know they will never find an edge.

        • Maggie May Lynn

          They don’t allow anyone to be able to freely go & explore on their own. They have very brief, expensive & strictly controlled guided tours to areas referred to as Antarctica. The actual outer edge of our flat earth is surrounded with an enormous ice wall that is hundreds of feet in height. Research Operation High Jump but MOST IMPORTANTLY ask urself why wud NASA need to continue these hoaxes? Clearly they have the required technology now so what keeps them from doing so? The obvious answer will also explain what’s really behind the motivation for such a great deception & its been hidden in plain sight all along.

          • D Barnes

            An Ice Wall really? So please explain what keeps you or anyone from flying over this ice wall?
            You are aware that we have the technology to fly several thousand feet in the air?
            So tell us what stops you or anyone fron chartering a plane and flying over to Antarctica and video whats on the other side of this ice wall?
            Its 2017, why havent anyone done it yet?

          • Joe G

            If Admiral Byrd never reached the firmament then it def. is not going to happen today. Its intentionally too harsh of an environment to survive the trek to reach the dome. Think about it. You can go up, down, or sideways. If you try to go up and reach the dome’s roof you have a series of obstacles. The higher up you go, the harder it is to breath and the hotter it gets. Eventually you’ll need some kind of sophisticated technology that probably doesn’t exist yet. So let’s go down. We’ll dig to China! Except the Russians proved its impossible to drill any deeper than 7-8 miles straight down. But the Earth’s core is magma, right? Sure. What’s left? Well, we can go left or right. But that’s not very easy, either. The farther out you go towards the ice wall, away from the land, the harder the journey becomes. First, you’ll have to deal with salt water. So you have to bring enough of the fresh stuff to drink. Then it will get colder and colder as you go. You’ll run into an ocean full of dangerous ice and deal with weather that is unpredictable. Even if you reach the ice wall and conquer it, you’ve still got a ways to go. There’ll be no animals to hunt for food, so be prepared for that. Gradually it’ll get darker and darker until there is no sun light. And again, the weather. So who or whatever made this environment we live in made it very challenging to say the very least to reach any boundary in any direction.

          • D Barnes

            So you’re not making any sense at all.

            1. You say we can’t go up because, “higher up you go, the harder it is to breath and the hotter it gets”, ok, but we have the technology today that it does not require a manned trip to go up. There are any number of rockets that can go up past the atmosphere and into space. But of course you don’t believe that because that would burst your theory of a dome correct.

            2. Then you say, “So let’s go down. We’ll dig to China! Except the Russians proved its impossible to drill any deeper than 7-8 miles straight down. But the Earth’s core is magma, right?

            Digging down is not a good idea, but you believe that you are on a flat earth, so what has China have to do with it then? If you truly believe that we are on a flat earth then you should have no problem digging down and finding the bottom of the earth.

            3. Then you say, “we can go left or right. But that’s not very easy, either. The farther out you go towards the ice wall, away from the land, the harder the journey becomes. First, you’ll have to deal with salt water. So you have to bring enough of the fresh stuff to drink. Then it will get colder and colder as you go. You’ll run into an ocean full of dangerous ice and deal with weather that is unpredictable. Even if you reach the ice wall and conquer it, you’ve still got a ways to go. There’ll be no animals to hunt for food, so be prepared for that. Gradually it’ll get darker and darker until there is no sun light. And again, the weather. So who or whatever made this environment we live in made it very challenging to say the very least to reach any boundary in any direction.”
            Here’s the your problem again.
            A. Salt Water, you are aware that we have ships right now sailing on salt water every day. Cruise ships, military ships, private Yachts. Cruise ships sail fro weeks without restocking, and military vassals for example sub marines operate for months at a time without surfacing. So that destroys that excuse.
            B. Darker and Darker you said, wait what happened, why would it get darker? I thought your FE Sun circled the planet, and based on every flat earth model I have seen the Sun covered Antarctica or the edge as you people claim. So why would it get darker, what happened to the Sun? But again ships today can navigate underwater, they can certainly navigate above water in the darkness.

          • Brad Scott

            We have thousands of satellites in orbit, some of which I’ve triangulated myself

          • Bert Novilla

            You are asking sarcastic questions. See for yourself by going to YouTube and exploring. Begin your search with Rob Skiba, jeranism, or “flat earth” itself. We don’t claim to know the true dimensions of the earth, but we DO know that NASA has lied 100% in order to keep this a secret.

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THIHg0fNGnk

          • D Barnes

            Really, you know NASA has lied? Really? So who in NASA has lied? Which department?
            And then the big question, why would they lie? If the earth was really flat, why would anyone need to lie about it.
            The Earth was calculated and known to be round before NASA ever existed, so why would they lie back then if they did?
            Then here’s the big question that FE’ers run scared from every time, and lie to keep from doing it.
            Why not or why haven’t one person or a group of people, an organization for example, let’s say the “Flat Earth Society”, Why haven’t they just do one simple thing, charter a plane, and fly over Antarctica and video the edge, take pictures. Anything that would back up their claim of a Flat Earth.
            Why are guys, like who you mentioned, making so much money from this conspiracy and none of them are making any attempts to just do a fly over the South Pole. And yes they are making money from this. They are making money from their websites, I’m sure you have seen the donate button, and they are making money on YouTube, by monetizing their videos.
            So where is all that money going to?

          • Brad Scott

            “See for yourself by going to YouTube and exploring”

            Youtube is used my slow kids to further indoctrinate themselves…

          • Brad Scott
          • Brad Scott

            “They don’t allow anyone to be able to freely go & explore on their own.”

            There is no “they” stopping you from going

            “The actual outer edge of our flat earth is surrounded with an enormous ice wall that is hundreds of feet in height.”

            How can you make this assertion if no one is allowed to go there? You contradicted yourself in consecutive sentences you slow kid

            “hidden in plain sight all along.”

            The big deception is your own indoctrination into this retarded hypothesis you subscribe to… http://imgur.com/1N5CVgy

    • Mathematics

      I agree. NASA is real. I think they faked the moon landing to get ahead. They just did not have the technology. By end of 2018 Space X will do a fly by of the moon. With his self landing rockets we now have the ability to land on the moon for real this time. Bush Jr. wanted us to land in the moon again by 2020 which will most likely happen. And a moon base will make it easier to get to Mats.And I believe nothing about the earth’s shape until I go up there and look or find the equation to gravity.

      • Maggie May Lynn

        Can’t get past the firmament. Do the research to find out for urself bcuz it’s also described in the bible which cudve only been known by the creator & shows what’s truly behind such an elaborate hoax to fool us all.

        • D Barnes

          There is no firmanent. If you take the bible literally then you do not think for yourself.
          I asked you earlier why not just xharter a plane and do a fly over the so called ice wall, becausw you are aware that we have the technology to fly several thousand feet?
          By the way there is no provision in the Antarctica treaty that prevents you and others from forming your own scientific expedition and going to Antarctica.

  • Q

    Disgusting show of misinformation and distractions not to mention a waste of time. What baloney, what a buffoon, the stupid believing very body else s stupid.

  • Rhonda Henderson

    People don’t be fooled again The earth is spherical concave. The globe model inside out, basically. We live inside. The karman line is actually a glass sky. Behind the glass sky is the celestial sphere which contains the stars. Heaven, the heavenly octahedron, is in the center. Research LSC Earth.

    • Arno van Harskamp

      LOL from what planet are you?

      http://imgur.com/gallery/LP6pPqY

      Run the experiment. A concave earth should yield a result where the left- and right image at the bottom should be swapped.

    • Brad Scott

      What kind of drugs are you on? And where can I get some?

  • Voice of God

    If NASA had faked the moonlandings, then they’d have faked a more impressive achievent in the intervening years don’t you think? Why have they stopped faking impressive things and only fake boring shite nowadays? Not got a lot imagination have they?

    If I was in charge of faking things at NASA I’d have faked saving the earth from an asteroid at the very least.

    Why nothing since?

  • unam_sanctum

    Why am I the only person who can tell for sure that the photo of this woman is totally fake ? The woman in the photo is cropped onto the picture. This entire article is fiction, so is the woman, fictional.

  • Dave

    The flat earth has lots of physical evidence pointing towards it being closer to the truth, and is so easy to see once you accept it is possible, which is not easy lol. Just do the water test, water would have convexity to its surface over a distance and it never does. Lots more evidence other than that but water is so real.

    You pretty much have to get over NASA being real before you even entertain flat earth. Here’s a fun video to get your eyes open and YES that photo comes DIRECTLY from NASA archives!
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KNQ9ln40ARE

    So if you already question NASA, Flat Earth is actually much easier- go back to that water.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FUrV34pNZO4

    So here I am 3 weeks after learning about flat earth, for 45 years I believed I lived on a ball. I laughed just like most here are laughing while reading my words, I would have preferred coming to my current belief sooner in life, it changes things. BIGLY lol. Please don’t believe me, investigate what I say regarding water and prove it wrong. Good luck!

    “There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance – that principle is contempt prior to investigation”

    • D Barnes

      Sorry Sir, there is nothing, I mean absolutely nothing that supports a flat earth.

    • Brad Scott

      “water would have convexity to its surface over a distance and it never does”

      So how do you test a ~70 mile stretch of water? Then how do you measure the one degree of convexity over that distance?

  • mark williams