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.
12/12/2015 by Alexander Light – Humans Are Free
Original Title: “Where On Earth Are NASA’s Rovers Sending Pictures From? Devon Island, Canada”
UPDATE: Due to effective Photoshop, CGI and Crisis Actor deception to rip-off the American taxpayer, the US congress rewarded NASA with a significant budget boost for Fiscal Year 2016. (More)
Check out the following video for further evidence (please notice the identical terrain as that from NASA’s pictures):
It’s been discovered 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It is very possible that by now, both rovers are stored in a hangar, somewhere at NASA’s JPL headquarters, and have been replaced by their smaller and more practical baby brothers.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 is Devon 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 Holdron proclaims 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:
NASA LIES: Apollo and Mars Landing Hoax Revealed
RICHPLANET 3-Part Analysis of Mars Rover Hoax
Richard Hall Where are the Mars rovers? – PART 1 OF 3
Richard Hall Where are the Mars rovers? – PART 2 OF 3
Richard Hall Where are the Mars rovers? – PART 3 OF 3
Mars Rover Hypothesis – RichPlanet (Complete Hypothesis – Richplanet – The Mars Rover Hypothesis PDF)
This document is a collection of evidence, which builds a hypothesis that, “The Mars exploration rovers are not situated on the surface of Mars, and never left the Earth” The hypothesis may seem preposterous to anyone who is not familiar with the evidence contained within this document, therefore I would encourage readers to consider ALL of the evidence contained herein before dismissing the hypothesis. Evidence for the hypothesis comes from analysis of data which has been published primarily by NASA. If the hypothesis can be proven, the implications are very serious for mankind, which are discussed in the final chapter. The purpose of the document is to stimulate a public debate on the issue and stimulate further research which can establish whether the hypothesis is true. The issue was first brought to my attention by researcher Douglas Gibson of London, who approached me on 3rd August 2014 when I was giving a lecture in London at the Crown Moran Hotel in Cricklewood. In the short time available Douglas explained his hypothesis and also outlined some of the evidence he had been studying. Douglas has a degree in biochemistry and also interests in aviation, astronomy and theosophy. A few weeks later I visited Douglas in London to go through his evidence in more detail. After this meeting, I came to the view that some of the evidence is quite compelling and decided the best way forward was to produce a document which sets out the hypothesis and contains all the relevant information. The document is a working draft and is subject to changes once the material has been evaluated and discussed by all parties concerned. If we accept all the information put out by NASA, the exploration of space is a straightforward affair, which does not have a hidden agenda. There is evidence, however, which is outside the scope of this document, which suggests that other organisations such as the U.S. Air Force and the N.S.A. (National Security Agency) over several decades have designed and developed their own clandestine space faring hardware. Some allege this hardware has been used to for space exploration without the knowledge of the majority of the U.S. government or the knowledge of the citizenry of the world. The reason why I raise this point is to demonstrate that the real purpose of NASA may be different to what most people perceive, including those who work for NASA. If there are secret space technologies which the majority of NASA personnel do not know about, then NASA, the main public facing organisation, is effectively helping to conceal the truth about these technologies. It is important that all the information being put out by organisations such as NASA be scrutinised to see if it has veracity. If it does not have veracity, then the evidence should be given exposure. Many people having read this far will probably be dismissive because they cannot see a reason why an organisation like NASA would be involved in such a fraud. To condemn the hypothesis on that basis is unscientific and frankly very naïve. If the hypothesis is true, then we can address the possible reasons why it is true after we have proven it to be true. This is a mindset that unfortunately many people fall into and is summarised by the expression, “Investigation before condemnation”. There are a number of researchers who claim that certain photographs taken by the Mars rovers have been tampered with to make the sky look red or orange. They have shown that if the colour is corrected using graphics software, the sky is in fact blue, very much like the earth. They then jump to the conclusion that the Martian sky is therefore really blue and NASA are hiding this from the public. This argument however may be based on a flawed assumption: that the rovers are taking photograph of Mars. If the rovers were actually taking photographs from the surface of the Earth, would the reason for NASA colouring the sky red or orange not seem more logical? The reason why NASA are colouring the images of the sky could be to conceal the fact that they were taken on Earth. The same argument can also be applied to the work of Charles Schultz, author of “The Fossil Hunters Guide to Mars”. He contends that some of the photographs taken by the Mars rovers contain identifiable fossils, some of which we will examine later in this document. He has compared the Mars rover fossil images with fossils found on earth, and concluded that Mars has fossils all over the surface, which are similar, if not identical to those found on earth. Shultz concludes that Mars’s surface contains fossils. Again, another explanation for Schultz’s evidence could be that the photographs he has studied were actually taken on Earth. If somebody showed you a photograph of an Earthlike fossil from Shultz’s book, and asked you where the photograph was taken, would you say Mars?, probably not. As you will see in this document there are a number of images which have been published by NASA from the Mars rovers which seem to contain objects common to the Earth. These objects are not usually immediately obvious at first glance. This could be because all images are checked before they are published and therefore only small or semi concealed imagery slips through the net, so to speak. That said, in my opinion some of the images are compelling and suggest strongly they were taken from the surface of the Earth.