Concerning the Moon landing, don't stop at Bart Sibrel's confession to Candace Owens; it being fake. Yield to the idea that the Moon isn't what you've been told it is.

On December 20th, Candace had Bart on her podcast explaining how the Moon landing was faked. Don't stop there. The Moon isn't what you think it is. I made a post about the true nature of the Moon a while back, but it failed to gain traction in r/conspiracy. I posted it in the proper community as well, but it was removed because they insist on believing in ferries. Nobody ever went to the Moon and nobody ever will. I'll repost my evidence.

"First off, observation of phenomena is fundamental to belief. I accept an orb silently fleeting towards the horizon as true because I know somebody very close to me who's seen it. I never saw it, but I did see something else. After googling what I saw, I found few results.

(…)

I'll describe the phenomenon. The Moon shakes, visibly. Don't take my word for it; take somebody else's. 'I got out of the car and the moon was moving left, right, up, down, all over the place for a short amount of time. It was freaky as hell.' This is a good description. The Moon doesn't always move like this though, otherwise the phenomenon would be more widely reported. No worthwhile explanation can be found for what was observed. I'll go through all of the so-called explanations I came across.

Apparently, NASA & Co. think two things are happening, but moon-quakes wouldn't cause visible shakes and libration (often termed wobble) is a slow process. These are not the case.

The most robust explanation in the eyes of those who never saw it is something along the lines of atmospheric turbulence. Supposedly, moonlight bends/refracts when it passes through various layers of air at different temperatures and densities. An example of this is a star twinkling. By definition, a twinkle is a rapid change in brightness. This sounds like what you see when you look at a star, but not the phenomenon observed. Another example given is a coin at the bottom of a fountain. This rippling effect is wavelike and in no way represents the observation. The last example of this is similar to the previous one. It ultimately involves some form of heat wave, but this is akin to a mirage. I've seen mirages. This was not a mirage. The Moon's disk/saucer is clear and it shifts entirely from one place to another.

The last explanation is in the eyes of those who saw the phenomenon. One individual supposes involuntary eye movements to be the likely cause and suggests that something stable should've been in the line of sight between the observer and the Moon to confirm its movement. This is exactly what I did and the movement persisted. By the way, there was definitely no earthquake. Another individual mentions the brightness of the Moon and its contrast to the darkness of the night sky as something difficult for the eyes to fix on. This is demonstrably false, by looking at the Moon when it seems to be stable. An illusion was brought forward by another person who referred to it as autokinesis. I know the autokinetic effect because I've experienced it. It also has nothing to do with the observation.

Alas, no credible explanation was found.

I'll leave you with this. If the Moon is the satellite of Earth, it shouldn't act like somebody accidentally hit its projector. Historically, there are accounts of the Sun moving erratically in the sky too, but that's material for a different post. My dictionary has the word earthshaking as another term for world-shattering and goes on to define it as 'loud enough to shake the very earth.' Could sound/vibration be the cause? Regardless, if the Moon's identity is questionable and it's arguably flying, should we not think of it as a UFO?"

This is what it looks like.