SPACE-18. Comparison of faked "mountaineerings" with faked "moon landings"

"Moon plays": The moon was the Earth - Lies and Truth in the Atmosphere

18. Comparison of faked "mountaineerings" with faked "moon landings"

The obvious parallel operations concerning faked discoveries of geographic spots in the "USA"


Mount McKinley mountain group, Denali, Belshaya Gora, panorama.
Who was first on the top?

from Michael Palomino (2006)

of:
-- Gerhard Wisnewski: Lügen im Weltraum [Lies in space]; Knaur 2005
-- Häussler, Oliver: Dreifache Verhandelbarkeit von Authentizität im alpinistischen Diskurs [Three points to speak about authenticity in alpinistic matters]
-- Internet sources

Mount McKinley (Denali, Belshaya Gora)

Since 1000s of years the native in Alaska, the Athabascs, named the mountain "Denali", the "high mountain". In 1897 the white dominance gave the mountain a new name after murdered "US" president McKinley (since 1901). Denali (Mount McKinley) is 20,320 feet (6193 m) high, the highest mountain of North "American" continent, and it is growing 3/4 inch a year. The Russian name is Belshaya Gora.

(http://www.mindspring.com/~alutiiq/akpix8.html; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denali; Wisnewski, p.149)


The simple conditions for a predication before handy century

When there existed only newspapers and no handy a spot out of a village was more or less a spot without connection. When they were especially far away one could not control what happened there precisely. This is an advantage for discovery fakers. The parallel between faked mountaineerings and not controllable "moon landings" are obvious (Wisnewski, p.148).

Faked mountaineerings

There are many possibilities to fake mountaineerings. In former times there were many lies in mountain climbing (Wisnewski, p.148). At the beginning of the 20th century a "race" is coming up to the farest peaks to make fotos with "American" flags. There are many lies about it.

(In: Häussler: Verhandelbarkeit; Wisnewski, p.148-149)

Wisnewski:

(Wisnewski, p.149)

Rising of a flag

To rise a flag on a mountain is a pseudo proof. If there is a foto with a flag presented as a "mountaineering" it also can be on a false peak (Wisnewski, p.149).

The foreplay to the frauds about Mount McKinley (Denali) and the North Pole

Cook is doctor in medicine since1890.
(http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frederick-Cook)

In 1891 Robert Peary undertakes a long Greenland expedition, with Cook as anthropologist. Peary hurts a leg and Cook can cure it so Cook gains Peary's confidence. The expedition impresses the Inuits when the White build a house ("Redcliffe House") and when they present oil lamps. The Inuits call them "baby suns". One part of the expedition succeeds to cross Greenland. At the end Verhoeff is lost. In Peary's book "Northward over the 'Great Ice' " Cook is mentioned with much commendation.
(http://home.earthlink.net/~cookpeary/1891.html)

Greenland expedition 1891 with Peary and Cook
The Greenland expedition of 1891: Cook, Henson, Astrup, Verhoeff, Jo Peary, Peary.	Greenland expedition of 1891: Redcliffe house of the expedition. Cook shows to the Inuits the oil lamps, the Inuits call them "baby suns".

The second foreplay: Expedition "Belgica" From 1898 to 1899 Cook is an essential part of surviving in a South Pole expedition with a ship stuck in the ice. Cook convinces the other crew members to eat raw meat. One of the members is also Roald Amundsen. During the winter in the ice Cook is also inventing things like better protection glasses, a fish oil lamp and the construction of tents. In the year 1900 Cook publishes his book about the expedition "Belgica" ("Through the First Antarctic Night" 1898-1899). With this book Cook gains worldwide reputation and is praised as a hero with polar experience. (http://library.osu.edu/sites/archives/polar/exhibits/cook/cook.php; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roald_Amundsen)

The ship "Belgica" in Antarctic ice 1898-1899

With the two expeditions in Greenland and in the Antartctic ice Cook gains a worldwide reputation, but now he misuses it, and Peary is doing the same...

since 1903
Cook's explorations in the Mount McKinley (Denali) region
It's a little strange that Cook has the idea to go with a mountaineering group in direction to Mount McKinley (Denali). Since 1903 already he is exploring the region around the mountain group.
(http://library.osu.edu/sites/archives/polar/exhibits/cook/cook.php)

At the same time Amundsen and his expedition is passing the North West Passage in Northern Canada and will reach Alaska in 1906.
(http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roald_Amundsen).

Cook wants also to have a success now:

1906
Dr. Frederick Cook claims he had been on Mount McKinley (Denali)

Frederick Cook, since 1906 he becomes a lier and cheater.

Cook on the wrong peak without ice. The real Mount McKinley (Denali) has a 20 feet thick ice platform.

In 2006 Cook mounts a lower mountain of the Mount McKinley-/ Denali mountain group with a group of mountaineers. Coming back he shows a foto with himself and the mountaineers group on the alleged peak and a flag risen allegedly on the peak Mount McKinley (Denali) (Wisnewski, p. 149). There follows a distinction of the National Geographic Society.
(http://library.osu.edu/sites/archives/polar/exhibits/cook/cook.php)

1907
Frederick Cook publishes his alleged mountaineering
in "Harper's Magazine" with fotos.
(In: Verdict is in on Cook's claim to be first on McKinley; University of Alaska, 16 February 1996; www.uaf.edu/univrel/media/fy96/054.html)

But Cook is on a lower peak without any ice. The real peak Mount McKinley (Denali) is covered by a 20 feet thick ice platform.
(http://www.pearyhenson.org/dr_frederick_cook/brycePAGE.htm)

Cooks book "To the Top of the Continent" of 1908, cover.

In the next years Cooks description is controlled and it comes out that Cooks mountaineers group was on a lower peak of about 6,000 feet resp. 2,000 m. The trail's description results very unprecise (Wisnewski, S.149).

1908
Frederick Cook: Book: "To the Top of the Continent"
Cook publishes a fantasy about his invented mountaineering of Mount McKinley (Denali), with fotos.

(In: Verdict is in on Cook's claim to be first on McKinley; University of Alaska, 16 Feb 1996; www.uaf.edu/univrel/media/fy96/054.html)

Frederick Cook is going on "tour" again: To the North Pole

Frederick Cook in fur clothes.

In the same year 1908 Cook is going on "tour" again. By this he is hiding himself from questions about his faked fotos of the alleged mountaineering of Mt. McKinley (Denali). The new tour shall reach the North Pole now, he says. With two Inuits he undertakes a long hike in the Arctic.
(http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frederick-Cook)

Cook means that with a little team the hike would be faster. For this tour he develops a special light sled which can be used also as a boat and as a tent.
(http://library.osu.edu/sites/archives/polar/exhibits/cook/cook.php)

Coming back Cook claims he had reached the North Pole, but without any proofs.
(http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frederick-Cook)

Robert Peary in fur clothes, portrait.

Robert Peary in fur clothes.

6 April 1909
Robert Peary also wants to have detected the North Pole first
(http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frederick-Cook)


The Peary team in 1909 allegedly on the North Pole, flag foto.



The 4 Inuits who shall have been with Peary and Henson at the North Pole.

During Pole expeditions Peary looses all in all  8 toes by freezing and amputations.
(http://en.wikipedia.com: Robert Peary)

Peary blames Cook that his detection of the North Pole is a lie (Wisnewski, S.149, 150).

Since April 1909 the quarrel between Cook and Peary concerning the detection of the North Pole is escalating. (http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frederick-Cook)

1910

Two mountain guides of Mount-McKinley (Denali): Ed Barrill (left) and Printz (right), cover of 1910.

Final proofs against Cook's lie about Mount McKinley (Denali)
In 1910 Cook is given final proofs for his lies about Mount McKinley because another group of the Mazama club is following his prescriptions and detects that his trail is differing more than 10 miles from the trail to Mount McKinley (Denali). By this proof of fraud Cook looses a big part of his reputation.
(http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frederick-Cook)

It comes out that Cook bribed his mountain guide Ed Barrill to keep quiet for accepting the mountaineering of Mount McKinley (Denali) in public. But the false reputation gives Cook - despite of all - new financial sources.

(In: Travel Magazine 1910; http://www.pearyhenson.org/dr_frederick_cook/bradleyland3.html (August 2006)

since 1910
Cook is going on lying - the "Cook Association"
Despite of proofs Cook is not stopping his lies about his claimed first mountaineering of Mount McKinley (Denali) but he gets also "scientific" approval, e.g. with the foundation of a "Frederick A. Cock Society" etc.

Cook Society, member's newspaper, e.g. July 2001

In a reader's survey the detection of the North Pole is given to Cook against Peary with 96 to 4.

(In: Gibbons, Russel W.: True North: Peary, Cook and the Race to the Pole, by Bruce Henderson; Pittsburgh Post Gazette, 1 May 2005; Wisnewski, S.150).

Amundsen on South Pole in 1911, flag foto.

South Pole hero Amundsen
Amundsen reaches South Pole in 1912.
(http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roald_Amundsen)

Peary becomes North Pole hero... Peary with his claim having reached North Pole first becomes "American" national hero and gets a grave at Arlington on the hero cemetery... (Wisnewski, S.150). So, both polar researcher Cook and Peary fight against each other also after death, the one with an "Association", the other with a grave on hero cemetery...

Arlington hero's cemetery with the grave of Henson (left) and Peary (right)

since 1950 approx.

Creation of a code of proofs for mountaineering

The state boards develop a code of proofs for mountaineerings. The proofs must be:

-- a peak's foto
-- the mountaineer on the foto must be identifiable
-- there should be witnesses which can give testimony for the mountaineering
-- there should be a trail's description so independent experts can verify the description
-- a proof is also possible by leaving there a personal object (Wisnewski, p.151)
-- a proof is also possible by taking back stones from the peak (Wisnewski, p.152) [with the danger that the peak will loose height when all mountaineers are doing this].


1969-1972
Apollo "missions" without any check to verify

Moon landing with toilet seat? Nobody can make a neutral check what happened on the "moon" until now...

What concerns the "moon landings" there is missing any possibility to verify them according to the mountaineer's code (Wisnewski, p.149).

-- there are fotos, but many of them are faked as can be seen (Wisnewski, p.151)

-- on the moon fotos one cannot even see the faces of the astronauts  with exception of Apollo 17 with Harrison Schmitt (Wisnewski, p.149)

-- neutral witnesses for the "moon landings" beyond the military and beyond NASA with it's secrecy does not exist

-- there is no description of the way which could be neutrally verified because independent experts never were sent "to the moon" to verify the way "to the moon"

-- there could be looked for left objects on the moon when a "moon landing" would be possible, but it's strange that after 1972 there have never taken back objects "from the moon" which were left there

-- the "moon stones" are only verifiable when experts have been on the moon, so the stones which are named "moon stones" are no proof until now (Wisnewski, p.151) [and not either the "moon dust"].

1984
Documents of Robert Peary and the conclusion of his lies about North Pole
By opening the personal documents there are doubts of Peary's North Pole expedition and also what concerns other attainments of Peary (Wisnewski, p.150),

because the investigation of the documents shows that his description of the trail to the North Pole had been done in much too long distances.
(http://en.wikipedia.com: Robert Peary)

"First there is the question why on the last part of the expedition to the North Pole only the assistant and four Inuits should have been with him.  So, these were persons who could not confirm Peary's measuring. Second it is not comprehensible why Peary urged his Arctic expert Bartlett to turn home 248 km before the goal. And since Bartlett's turning back 250 km shall have been made within four days, and the homecoming should have taken only 56 hours."
(http://www.medienwerkstatt-online.de/lws_wissen/vorlagen/showcard.php?id=5571&edit=0)

Despite of all Wikipedia tables are going on claiming that Peary had "planted" the "American" flag "on the North Pole" in 1909...
(http://en.wikipedia.com: Timeline of United States history (1900-1929) (August 2006)

[The best liars appartain a encyclopedia article...]


Change of dictionary entries about North Pole
The encyclopediae as e.g. the Encyclopaedia Britannica say now that Richard E. Byrd was first discoverer of the North Pole (by plane) or the team of the Norwegian Roald Amundsen (by air ship) (Wisnewski, S.150).

New North Pole discoverer
Richard E. Byrd, new North Pole discoverer by air plane in 1925.	Roald Amundsen, new North Pole discoverer in air ships in 1925.

Amundsen almost had not come back during his expedition...

(http://magma.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0312/feature1/online_extra1/zoom5.html; http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roald_Amundsen)

1996
An Alaskan committee of three judges determines officially the lie of Cook about Mount McKinley (Denali)

The judged state that Cook never had reached the peak of Mount McKinley (Denali):
-- the Cook fotos are taken underneath of 6,000 feet resp. 2,000 m, but Mount McKinley (Denali) has 20,300 feet resp. 6,200 m
-- Cook describes the peak very inexactly
-- the peak's foto shows a peak which is essentially lower

(In: Verdict is in on Cook's claim to be first on McKinley; University of Alaska, 16 Feb 1996;
www.uaf.edu/univrel/media/fy96/054.html; Wisnewski, S.149).

-- the fotos in the articles of 1907 in "Harper's Magazine" and in the book of 1908 "To the Top of the Continent" are all a fake
-- Cook never had given a comment about the mistakes on the fotos or explained the mistakes.

The representatives of the Cook Association refuse the invitation to the court hearing.

(In: Verdict is in on Cook's claim to be first on McKinley; University of Alaska, 16 Feb 1996;
www.uaf.edu/univrel/media/fy96/054.html)

By this Cook's claim having been on the peak of Mount McKinley (Denali) is also officially a swindle now... (Wisnewski, S.150)


Conclusion: We need neutral judges for the moon lie and the faked "moon landings"

Judge's hammer: For the faked "moon landings" a judge's sentence is wanted.

The claim to have been at a spot which is not controllable has a tradition in the "USA".

So, mankind needs a neutral judgement of the "moon landings" according to the data facts. The media are as stupid and believe all impossible artificial films, and the media are too lazy to read books. So it seems only a sentence of a judge can determine the truth, and only by a sentence of a judge it will be possible to make the correction in the encyclopaediae and school books that "moon landings" never were possible and are impossible until now.