|(published in Uncle John’s “UNSTOPPABLE” Bathroom Reader)
One Giant Hoax
Did NASA fake the moon landings?
On July 20, 1969 millions of television viewers around the world watched as Neil Armstrong stepped down from a lunar landing module onto the surface of the Moon and intoned the now famous words “That’s one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind.”
In western Australia a woman named Una Ronald watched the images of the Moon landing in the early hours of the morning. As the camera showed Armstrong’s fellow Apollo 11 astronaut Edwin “Buzz” Aldrin demonstrating his moon walk technique Ronald clearly saw a Coke bottle kicked into the picture from the side. The scene was edited out of later broadcasts, she says.
Was this one small “blooper” evidence of one giant hoax?
Recently NASA experts have admitted we do not have the capability of manned missions to the Moon now. How could we have done it more than 30 years ago? Even simulations these days take powerful computers, but the computer onboard Apollo 11 had a capacity smaller than many of today’s handheld calculators.
Kaysing and others think they know the answer, and cite a number of anomalies that lead them to conclude the Apollo missions were faked.
The Fluttering Flag
Rene’s suspicions led him to research inconsistencies in the Moon landing story, and to publish a book called NASA Mooned America. The fluttering flag was just the beginning.
Defenders say that light reflected from the lunar surface bounced back to light the shadow side of the astronauts. Oddly, that same reflective light does not illuminate the dark side of lunar rocks which are even closer to the ground.
Shadows seem to fall in different directions, and look to be different lengths even for objects of a similar height, such as two astronauts. This leads some to conclude there were multiple light sources—some much, much closer than the sun.
Even when everything else around is in shadow, the American flag and the words “United States” are always well lit, and sometimes seem to be in a spotlight. Was someone trying to get the most PR advantage out of the fake photos?
Starlight, Star Bright
Where’s the Dust?
Two doughnut-shaped rings of charged particles, called the Van Allen Belts, encircle the Earth. To get to the Moon astronauts would have to pass through the belts, exposing themselves to possibly deadly radiation unless they had a lot more protection than the thin shield the Apollo spacecraft provided. And that’s just the beginning.
Once outside the radiation belts and the Earth’s protective atmosphere astronauts would be exposed to solar radiation. Expert opinions differ as to whether or not the radiation the astronauts would have been exposed to would be life threatening. But inexplicably not one of the astronauts from the seven lunar missions even got cancer, a well known result of exposure to radiation.
Even more sensitive to radiation is photographic film. On all those beautiful Moon photos there is absolutely no sign of radiation damage. Why not?
Follow the Bouncing Astronaut
Bill Wood, a scientist who worked for the NASA subcontractor responsible for recording the Apollo signals and sending them to NASA headquarters at Houston, explains that the original film footage, shot at 30 frames per second, was transferred to video which runs at 60 frames per second. The footage the public saw was half the speed of the original. If the film of the astronauts walking on the surface of the Moon is view at regular speed their movements look remarkably normal.
[UPDATE: According to correspondence with Bill Wood, what he said was misunderstood or misquoted. “…We received the 320 line, 10 frames per second, television signal directly from the Lunar Module while it was setting on the lunar surface. The slow scan TV signal was scan-converted and sent to Houston.” He refers the reader to a report he wrote entitled “Apollo Television” (http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/ApolloTV-Acrobat5.pdf), which is a fascinating insiders look at this aspect of not just the Apollo 11 mission, but all the missions from Apollo 7 through Apollo 17.]
Remarkably well preserved in the ice of Antarctica scientists have found remnants of lunar rocks blasted off the Moon by meteoric impacts. Numerous expeditions have explored the continent looking for rock samples from the Moon, Mars and comets.
In 1967, two years before the Apollo mission, such a group visited Antarctica, including the ex-Nazi rocket scientist Wernher von Braun, by then working for NASA. Why a rocket scientist would be sent to look for rocks is a good question. Hitler reportedly believed Antarctica concealed a subterranean paradise. Moon rocks may have been the least of what NASA and the ex-Nazi were after.
How and Why
The why is fairly easy to understand. The 60s were the height of the Cold War. The Space Race was on and the Soviet Union had already beat the US with the first satellite to orbit earth, the first man in space (and later the first woman), and the first space walk, among other important firsts. The US was clearly behind. In 1961, President Kennedy issued the challenge “I believe this nation should commit itself to achieving a goal, before this decade is out, of sending a man to the moon and returning him safely to the Earth.” The Apollo program was born, and five months before the end of the decade NASA showed pictures of Americans on the Moon. We had beat the Russians to the most important prize, and we felt good about it. Mission accomplished.
But was it accomplished by actually sending men to the Moon, or just making it look that way? Investigative journalist Bart Sibrel claims to have found a mislabeled NASA film showing multiple “takes” of a scene shown to the public as part of the “live” broadcast of Apollo 11’s flight. In the footage the astronauts appear to be rehearsing the lines the public heard. Sibrel claims to have spent half a million dollars investigating the Moon landings, and produced a video called A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Moon.
In 2002 Sibrel, backed by a Japanese film crew, confronted Buzz Aldrin outside a Beverly Hills hotel and challenged him to swear on a Bible that he had really gone to the moon. Aldrin responded by punching Sibrel in the face.
What about those excellent still photos? Many believe they were staged, perhaps in a secret location in Nevada, or even in a giant geodesic soundstage in Australia. Either way it would have been much easier to manipulate the lighting to get the results shown in the Moon landing photos.
Would such a monstrous hoax have been easy to pull off? Certainly not. But it seems more possible to many than actually sending someone to the Moon and back. Consider this statistic: Of the seven manned missions to the Moon, only Apollo 13 had trouble, which is an 86% success rate. In the years since the Apollo program 25 unmanned craft have been sent to Mars. Only seven have succeeded—a 28% success rate. Which figure seems more realistic?
Just When You Thought it was Safe
copyright©Jim McCluskey 2002-2012