The Book:“And I suppose we didn’t go to the moon, either”(2015) provides conclusive evidence the Apollo mission was a hoax that never landed and returned a man from the moon.
We now have solid evidence the 2012 mission to send rovers to Mars fell short of the red planet and landed on Devon Island, Canada.
Original Title: “Where On Earth Are NASA’s Rovers Sending Pictures From? Devon Island, Canada” (scroll down for video)
UPDATE: Due to effective Photoshop, CGI and Crisis Actor deception to rip-off the American taxpayer, the US congress rewardedNASA with a significant budget boost for Fiscal Year 2016.
Check out the following video for further evidence (please notice the identical terrain as that from NASA’s pictures):
There is an increasing number of people who believe that NASA’s rovers never left the Earth in the first place, and the pictures they are allegedly sending back from Mars are taken in remote areas of our planet.
But if NASA’s rovers are not on Mars, then where exactly are they?
First of all, evidence suggests that the pictures that we see on NASA’s website are not even taken by the Curiosity and Opportunity rovers.
It is very possible that by now, both rovers are stored in a hangar, somewhere at NASA’s JPL headquarters, and have been replaced by their smaller and more practical baby brothers.
Sure, if needed, they can always be taken out for a spin, but other than that, the smaller rovers are more convenient to work with.
One of the known locations where NASA is playing around with these small rovers isDevon Island, Canada.
(It’s worth noting that Devon Island is “the largest uninhabited island on Earth,” which seems like a pretty good location for a fake Martian photo shoot).
Just take a look at these pictures:
NASA base in Devon Island, Canada — even without the color filters,
it’s strikingly similar to Mars, isn’t it?
Above: NASA’s “baby rovers” taking pictures in Devon Island, Canada
Sure, one could think NASA just needed a place where they can simulate the conditions on Mars, but what’s the point of simulating those conditions with miniature rovers, that look and work almost nothing like their bigger brothers?
Their shape, size and weight are different and the wheels are worlds apart. It’s really impossible to make even remotely accurate tests.
They also don’t have the on board laboratories, so what’s there to simulate? Except for taking pictures, the “baby rovers” look useless.
The cameras mounted on the “baby rovers” have color filters already applied, but the final images — those that we get to download from NASA’s website — are color-corrected even further, until they get that fake, reddish color that is so familiar to us.
We have been tricked into believing the myth that Mars is the “red planet” (even though all amateur telescope pictures show otherwise), so NASA is now only perpetuating the lie.
In the following video, from minute 3:18 to 5:30, you can see just how easy it is to make any environment look like a Martian desert.
The author of the video, Danny Wilten, takes a random picture from Earth (Ireland, to be more specific), where there is a fair amount of vegetation and even has a road with a white van on it.
In only five minutes of work, he manages to remove the car and the road, and turn all the vegetation into a barren, reddish landscape, similar to NASA’s pictures of Mars.
Take special notice at 8:15 when Obama’s science fraud and cognitive infiltration advisor, John Holdronproclaims with Orwellian honesty:“Today on Mars history was made on Earth.”
Before concluding this article, I leave you to watch NASA’s absolutely ridiculous press conference about the alleged touch down of the rovers on Martian soil.
It has bad acting, fake excitement, lots of sweat and numerous in-your-face statements about this being just a movie that you paid for($2.5 billion, to be specific).
These guys have absolutely no idea what they are talking about, they are unable to answer any scientific questions whatsoever and the journalists definitely know volumes more about this phony mission, but hey, as the guy says, it only cost you $7/person – less than the price a movie ticket to see “Star Wars” – so you might just as well enjoy it: