Ken, Webmaster of About Facts Net and Interviewer

Graphic Source: Stock.xching
Anonymous Guest and expert on the Apollo Missions

Our guest today is someone who has studied the claims for years, that NASA has sent people to the moon. He wants to remain anonymous.

Ken:

Hello.

Guest:

Hello

Official NASA Moon Landing Practice Photo

Ken:

When did you first start to study the Apollo Moon landings?

Guest:

Well I have been studying it from afar for about 10 years now, but I have gone really in depth within the last 7 to 8 months.

Ken:

What do you think about the old Soviet Space program, do you believe that Yuri Gargarin actually went into space?

Guest:

Well there is evidence that the Soviet space program was partly fraudulent as well, especially Yuri Gargarin's feats, so yes I do believe that some of the Russian space program was also a hoax.

Ken:

Let me ask you about Yuri Gargarin. When you refer to the fact that some of the feats in the Russian space program were fraudulent, can you give us an example of that?

Guest:

Well there was a Russian author that came out with a book, probably about 10 years after that feat showing that the Russian space program was a hoax. This book doesn't seem to be available in America, but with a little research on the Internet you should be able to track that down.

Ken:

Do you happen to remember the name of the author of the book?

Guest:

Not off the top of my head. I could come back to you with it.

Official NASA Moon Landing Practice Photo

Ken:

Would you tell us about some of the evidence you have found that proves to you that we really didn’t land Apollo 11 on the moon?

Guest:

Well I should begin by saying that it is very confusing with all of the information that is available, to firmly state whether the Project Apollo landed on the moon or not, however some of the evidence that I have seen relates to something called the film slate where specifically for Apollo 11 they showed that portions of that famous video were recorded weeks in advance of the actual mission launch. In addition to that, evidence through a search of the CIA's freedom of information website I found documents that connect the CIA to NASA through such avenues as recommended reading for the CIA field agents in the art of deception that leads us to the author of a book who also authors famous NASA papers and his name is Irving Adler. Apparently through the CIA, NASA also has a committee called COMIREX, who's sole responsibility is to review satellite imagery and remove what they deem too sensitive for public viewing. That is some of the evidence that I have seen.

Ken:

Well what do you think they have removed?

Guest:

I don't know. That is a problem, because I don't know what was there to begin with and that is what leads to all this misinformation that you find all over the Internet and the mass media.

Ken:

There are many photos out there of the Apollo astronauts practicing for their flight on a recreation of the surface of the moon. There are also large models of the moon’s globe that were constructed, are you saying that these were used to deceived the public?

Guest:

Although that I can't say 100% for sure that they were used, it certainly seems that way. If you go onto the Internet and lookup the images of this giant moon ball that was created by NASA, you will notice that there were tracks put on to it which would simulate an orbit around the moon, as well as images of engineers of some sort creating the moon ball, going through painstaking, excruciating detail trying to match what seems like authentic satellite imagery to the giant moon ball. I don't see the need for a simulation to create such a perfect representation. I think that something questionable is there. The last thing that I wanted to mention was that as soon as Project Apollo was finished, the giant moon ball was destroyed.

Official NASA Moon Landing Practice Photo

Ken:

That is a little strange, isn't it?

Guest:

Yes.

Ken:

Well are we saying that maybe cameras were used to zoom in on the moon ball and we thought that the moon ball was actually the moon. Is that what we are saying here?

Guest:

That is what I believe, yes.

Ken:

The Apollo 11 lander was said to have the most advanced television camera of the day and that it was specially engineered to produce a very good picture and yet the television pictures from the Apollo prevented us from seeing the background and only showed a fuzzy picture of the astronauts, while it was said that the station in Australia had a very clear picture. Why do you think that this was?

Guest:

Well what seems to be a common practice with NASA which is verified in other ways besides research in Project Apollo. NASA seems to take pictures of pictures, or take movies of movies, so basically you are getting second generation prints. I believe this is being done intentionally to hide what could be some evidence in the background and what not. So what I have seen before is NASA producing copies of copies and essentially supplying second generation and reduced quality imagery. This has also been verified by a Apollo hoax researcher from a few decades back by the name of Ralph Rene, who was very famous for researching the Apollo hoax. He ordered 3 prints from NASA and not only did it take an inordinate amount of time for him to receive these prints, but once he received them, he could see that they were images of an image and not the source image. In addition the LRO imagery that was provided to all of us over this past summer to show us the Apollo landing sites, seems to suffer from the same problems.

Ken:

Would you tell our audience what LRO stands for so that they know?

Guest:

The LRO is the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter, a satellite currently going around the moon, who's main mission as per NASA, is to locate what they would deem to be the decent landing sites. However a second function of this mission is to take pictures of the old Apollo hardware that is supposedly left on the lunar surface. They promised half a meter resolution per pixel and they are just starting to deliver on that now. The first few waves of imagery provided, only showed us one meter or one and a half meter resolution and in addition for some inexplicable reason, NASA is holding these images before releasing them. In the initial press conference back in July (2009) when the first wave of images was released, the press questioned NASA as to why they withheld the images for 3 days. NASA's response was that they needed time to configure the raw data and present it as a quality picture for the public. The reporters never followed up and in the second round of pictures that were released, it turned out that NASA had withheld one specific photo for 50 plus days.

Official NASA Moon Landing Practice Photo

Ken:

Getting back to the camera. The camera was specially engineered so that it would be the best (tv) movie camera of its day. Now even if it took secondary pictures they should have been better than what we saw on our television sets back then. The pictures were so bad that you could hardly make out the astronauts stepping on the moon. Do you think that this was done to disguise what was in the background?

Guest:

Yes and it was potentially done to disguise the fact that this was shot in a studio. I can't say that I am 100% sure one way or the other. Currently I believe that there were parts of the video that were shot in a studio, however there are parts that could potentially be authentic. The reason why is that I believe that they are sprinkling in this disinformation to throw people off the trail of true research or to get to the bottom. There is obviously a problem here and I believe that the video is a big piece of that. Even looking at the still photography of the Apollo mission, you can see how clear and crisp some of these images are, when you compare them to the Apollo 11 video. The official retort from NASA, or people that actually believe this, is that the television video was basically secondary in NASA's mind and that we are lucky to have anything as far as video is concerned relating to this mission. To me I feel that is just another way to cover up the questions about that low quality video footage. (see footage near end of this interview)

Ken:

Are you aware that over 80 boxes of this video has gone missing from NASA and has never been found?

Guest:

I am aware of that, which also would leads me to introduce people to another website, I don't want to be plugging other websites, is it okay to mention it?

Ken:

Sure it is.

Guest:

I believe that this is a very important website in this whole debate and it is called badastronomy.com, and believe it or not, the posters on this website which has a message board, are NASA employees. If you don't believe me, you can go find out for yourself. Basically what you are doing is you are arguing with NASA when you go to this website and what was the question again?

Ken:

The question was that there are over 80 boxes of this film missing and what most people believe that the reason that it is missing is because we have made such huge advances in technology, that NASA is afraid that we could bring the backgrounds out in some of these films and we would see things that they don't want us to.

Guest:

Which I wholeheartedly believe, which brings me back to that website. I have been there myself, I have argued this point and the official answer was that NASA is the government and the government makes mistakes and this is no big deal because we have second generation copies of these events, for the boxes of data that is missing. What they fail to address is that contained in those boxes wasn't just the raw video feed, there was also the telemetry data., which I am sure could have many uses in other fields, such as video analysis.

Official NASA Moon Landing Practice Photo

Ken:

There are so many rumors that have been going on for years, that state that the United States has a space fleet anchored somewhere in space and that we have had one even before the Apollo missions. Do you think that we really did land on the moon, but we didn’t travel there in the Apollo, but in some far more sophisticated vehicle that was being kept secret from the public?

Guest:

Currently from the evidence that I have seen, my theory is still a work in progress. However what I am starting to believe, as crazy as it might sound, is that the second half of the lunar module, the half that actually took off from the moon when the astronauts met up with the CM (Command Module) in lunar orbit to go back to earth, I believe that was UFO technology that was dressed up to look like 1960s spaceship technology. I don't say this lightly. I believe that there is evidence that points to this. One of the biggest complaints in the entire debate of whether Apollo was a hoax or not, is that when that top half of the LM lifts off from the lunar surface we never see any kind of rocket exhaust what so ever. When you take a look at it, it almost looks like potentially it could be anti-gravity. The answer to that from the official science party line is that there was some kind of hypergolic fuel that was used that is invisible in a vacuum. However the more you research you see that the space shuttle uses similar fuel and that when we have the space shuttle in low earth orbit, and it fires its thrusters, you can actually see a reddish tint to the color of the fuel. I don't know what the truth is, but like I said it is a work in progress.

Ken:

I have noticed that some secrets that are kept by the government are already known by foreign governments so therefore these secrets are really only being kept from the public, why do you think that this is?

Guest:

I believe that at the highest levels of government there is collusion and I believe that the governments work together, its you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours kind of scenario. Which leads to another popular argument in the NASA Apollo hoax debate. People say that if it truly was a hoax, countries like Russia and China would have cried foul right from the beginning, but you can't say that so quickly without first researching the political atmosphere at the time. Again I believe at the highest levels that they could have been working together. There is another theory out there that we as Americans supplied Russia with a wheat crop and helped the country avoid starvation and this was our way of buying their silence. I have no way of knowing if this is true or not, however if we go back to the CIA freedom of information documents, in the mid 1950s NASA was starting to research satellite imagery of different farmland areas to see how bountiful certain crops were. Maybe its tied in or maybe its not, I don't know.

Ken:

The Apollo program ended early, with quite a few saturn rockets left. The official reason was stated as lack of public interest. Why do you think that the program was ended?

Guest:

From what I can see there is really only 2 options here. Either it did not end and went underground and became top secret and we no longer heard about it, or it really did end. These are the 2 choices. I do not know personally what the answer is. I tend to believe that it continued on, because this excuse of lack of public interest is just psychological control. They want people to believe that they are no longer interested, so that put out in the mass media that nobody is interested. Everybody starts to believe them and then they have the perfect cover story to continue these missions in secret.

NASA Apollo 11 Photo

Ken:

Well taking that a step further, if that is true then apparently they were going there without Saturn rockets. Wouldn't you say?

Guest:

I don't know if I could say that. They are still going to need that heavy lift vehicle to get into low earth orbit. I don't see how else they can do it?

Ken:

The only reason that I say this is that they had a lot of Saturn rockets that they never used.

Do you think that the United States is now routinely traveling between the Earth and the Moon in secret and possibly to Mars?

Guest:

Well if my theory holds true and they had this ability in the early 60s and late 70s to potentially use some kind of anti-gravity technology to get us beyond the bounds of low earth orbit into lunar orbit and eventually on to the lunar surface, I don't see why these missions would not have continued on to Mars and eventually to other planets. I would just like to add that this is the only feasible explanation for breaking these Van Allen Belts. This is a big holdup in the Apollo moon hoax debate. Its the radiation. It is the fact that the lunar module and the command module are not built strong enough to withstand the radiation and if you do your own Internet research you will find out that it is not so easy to nail down the actual measurements of the radiation. I believe this was done on purpose to again confuse the issue. I can't sit here and tell you it is going to take 4 millirads to make someone nauseous and sick. In fact they have taken it a step further and they use three or four different measurement systems. You can't even nail down whether it is millirads, or an S MeV, or svm. Again this information is out there to confuse people. If they are to get past the Van Allen radiation belts, it is going to be in this non terrestrial technology.

Ken:

Are you aware of the fact that we have admitted that we are working on an electronic shield that stops radiation from penetrating a spaceship?

Guest:

I wasn't aware of that specific claim, no.

Ken:

Yeah, we have been working on that now for a couple of years and there was a big breakthrough in it and my thinking is that maybe, possibly, they had this back 60 years ago and never told us and it is just leaking out now that we are working on it.

Guest:

It makes sense. Don't forget that the command module and the lunar module are about 3 to 4 inches of aluminum and there is no way that it is enough of a barrier against deadly radiation.

Ken:

Some say that the Germans at the end of World War II, actually had technology that would allow them to launch a rocket into orbit and maybe even travel to the moon. Do you think that we might have used this technology to get a start on a secret military space program that could have allowed us to develop advanced spacecraft.?

Guest:

Specifically regarding the Germans, I really haven't done any research into that. What I do find ironic is that this happens around the same time frame as the famous Roswell incident.