Did We Really Go To The Moon
In The Late 1960's and Early 70's? 

Note:  I have not had time lately to do the research necessary to complete this page. All that I have time to do right now is to put out a rambling writing from memory of my previous research as food for thought to those who maybe interested or concerned about such things. As I have time I will be adding and updating this page. Since much of the information I am writing here is from memory not all the facts and figures (especially the numbers) may be correct, but, the basic ideas they are used to show are still valid. IMPORTANT:  What if the moon missions and other space projects were faked, what should be done about it? Please be sure to read the last section to see what I have to say.

(use as bookmarks if you can't read all in one setting)


Brief Explanation of Sources
A Brief Description of the Krishna Conscious Understanding
A Short History of the Space Program
Meet My Neighbors From The 60's
The Cold War: At The Edge of Space
More About the Moores - And My Experiences With Them
The Van Allen Radiation Belts. Did We Or Didn't We Pass Through Them Yet?
Were the Radiation Belts The Start of The Lie?
In the 70's How Did They Fake Deep Space Probes
The Space Age Tower Of Babel
The Real Purpose for Space Stations and the Space Shuttle
If We Had Gone To The Moon, Then What Was So Great About The Shuttle?
Saturn 5 Booster (and the F-1 Engines): Fact or Fiction?
"NASA, I Think We Have A Problem (with the moon landings). Do You Read Me?"
What To Do

Added Note: What about the Mars PathFinder ?

Added 9/29/2000   Digitized Nasa Video clips, with my naration over showing some discrepencies



Maney people would have a real hard time believing or even entertaining the idea that we did not go to the moon. After all, it has been over 30 years since we, supposedly, sent our fist unmanned space missions to the moon. Having been so long, it would be unthinkable, improbable, that so many people could keep this a secret for so long. Even other governments would have to be involved. And it would raise innumerable questions as to how and why it was faked.

These are good arguments, however, there remains a number of unexplained 'flaws' in some of the evidence from the 'lunar landings'. Some of those flaws will be disclosed and discussed here.

The purpose of this essay is to put forth my theory that we did not go to the moon. I do not claim to know absolutely one way or the other. I have no absolute positive proof or evidence. But, please take the time to read as it should leave you with a few unanswered questions. And that really is what my aim is, to make others question these things and see if solid proof can be found out, one way or the other. Actually, my main purpose is to try and convince the powers that be to come clean. The time is now.

Please respond (email) if you have any thing to say about anything presented here. 
(see home page)

Brief Explanation of Source:

I am basing a lot of my opinions on what my next door neighbor and friend when I was between 9 to 23 (during the 1960's to early 70's) told me, which is based on what his father told him. My friend and I were in the same grade and were the same age. His father worked on the space program from the earliest days of it's infancy in the early 1950's (while he served in the Air Force) on up through the Apollo project. I lost contact with them before the Space Shuttle was first launched. This friend of mine later on became a nuclear physicists himself and worked on missile projects for the military, so along with his father he has high security clearance and has worked on highly secretive projects of a high national security nature.

Most of this site will be facts and conjecture meant to be used as food for thought and food for further research by others. I don't have a smoking gun with finger prints, but I can show where a lot of holes exist in some of the data and facts surrounding the lunar landing missions (and other related space work).

A Brief Description of the Krishna Conscious Understanding:

I must also say that I have been inspired to remain fixed in my understanding over the years due to the teachings of my spiritual teacher, His Divine Grace A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupad, who boldly preached that man has not gone to the moon. He based his statements on his firm acceptance of the Vedic scriptures. The Vedas clearly state that it is forbidden for man to travel to higher planets by mechanical means (and the moon is stated as being one of the higher planets).

However, Srila Prabhupad (as we called him, my spiritual teacher) had said, at times, two differing ideas about whether man had actually gone to the moon or not. Sometimes he would state outright that it was a hoax, they had not gone. While other times he gave some concession stating that 'even if' they did travel to the moon planet, because they went in their earthly body they would not able to actually enter the true moon planet. To enter the real moon planet one must first have a moon body.

I have come up with the following analogy to better visualize this: The body is like a TV set. Our eyes and ears are set to only one frequency spectrum or channel. When a TV is set to channel 2 we only see the images and hear the sounds of scenes that are on that frequency. We cannot see or hear the scenes that are on channel 7. The senses of our earth body are tuned to only perceive scenes that can be turned in through our earth frequencies, which requires senses made of earth elements. The Vedic scriptures tell us that there are great cities and lakes and rivers and forests on the moon. But, Srila Prabhupad said that we cannot see them or perceive them with the senses of an earth born body. To enter the moon planet and thus see the life, the forests, the oceans and cities and the living beings that do live there, one must first have a moon planet body that is tuned in to receive the frequencies of that planet.  Otherwise, since we have earth senses all we can see of the moon is what is there that has a common frequency with our earth senses. It appears that the water, air, and other elements are all on a different frequency on the moon. There is air and water, but it is not in the same frequency that we can perceive it.  Just because we cannot see these things does not mean they do not exist.  Just as when we are watching channel 5 on our TV, it does not mean that the sights and sounds that are being played on channel 2, or 3,4,5,6,7,8,9...80..200 are not really there.  All those scenes and sounds are going on, but we can only perceive one at a time.  

Also, the Vedas state that time on the higher planets is on a different frequency or scale. The molecular elements that we perceive as air, water, fire, earth, ether, they are all there on the moon, or on Mars and other planets, but the elements as well as time itself, they are all on a different frequency scale.  A complex one, as well, not just shifted. A different modulation.   As far as time, the Vedas tell us that one moment on the moon is equal to a year here. The Vedas scriptures tell us that the proper way to see these things is by Shashtra-Chakshu, or seeing with the eyes of Scripture. We see by hearing what is there on the moon planet, not by trying to physically see or go there with this earthly body.

Once, one man asked Srila Prabhupad if he knew how to travel to other planets. Prabhupad said yes. So the man asked if Prabhupad cold tell him how to travel to the moon, he wanted to see the moon.  Prabhupad said yes, but you will have to leave your earth body here, and take a new moon body. And once you go, you will not be able to return to this life. The man said, no, no he didn't want to do that. He just wanted to go, then come back here. Srila Prabhupad considered that to be a useless waste of time.  If you really want to go to the moon, then go. Live there, in a moon body, in your next life.  Why go there in the earth body just to see lifeless rocks which is all the earth senses are able to perceive.  We, the devotees of Krishna, are not interested in traveling to other planets, we are only interested in leaving this material world all together and returning to the eternal spiritual world, God's kingdom.

So, there are two ways of understanding the concept that man has not gone to the moon, Either we never traveled there period, it was faked, or we traveled there, but could not enter the real planet due to our senses not being able to tune in to the moon world frequencies.

This writing, however, deals only with physically traveling to the moon.

A Short History of the Space Program:

Let us just wildly assume for a moment that we did not actually go to the moon yet. Let us assume, for sake of establishing our theory, that we have not sent any other missions or 'voyagers', 'probes', et al, into deep space. Let us assume that all deep space missions and explorations were 'faked'. That would pose a flood of many questions, but, lets approach several major questions this would raise: Like, Why?  Why fake the lunar landing missions? And why fake any space exploration missions that followed it?  Another good question: Is the entire space program 'faked'?

I will answer the above questions in the course of this essay. But, in order to understand some of those answers we need to first explain some history of the space program. Understanding what the real space program was, and why we even took on the project of trying to go to the moon, would help to explain why we would have tried to fake some of it.

When did the Space Program start?  In the USA or elsewhere?  How about in Russia?  Excuse my lack of references, as I stated above, I am writing this based on memory of previous research. I can't recall the Tzar's name, or the exact date (but it was in the 1800's). It was either the last, or close to the last, Tzar of Russia. He funded what is probably the first government space program (of modern time). It's mission was to construct a rocket that could house facilities for a group of men that could blast off from earth, fly to and land on the moon, and return. The drawings I saw (in a book which mentioned this) were detailed and showed a large 'fat' rocket with several floors of rooms for the cosmonaughts who were to travel aboard it. This was, remember, back in the 1800's, about the same time that Jules Vern was writing his book 'Journey to the Moon', and the drawings looked similar. This was not a farce, but real research and effort was made back in the 1800's by the government of Russia to build a rocket that could fly men to the moon and back. The Russians really had a jump on the rest of the world.

In the 20's - 40's Germany had many scientist engaged in rocket research. Although the main drive was for military use, much research also went into the idea of space exploration. In America, a scientist called Goddard (oh well, can't recall his first name) pushed for rocket science and space exploration funding in the 1920's, but without much response. It was World War II that suddenly brought rocket science and near space flight to the sharp attention of the US military, especially since Germany was far more advanced in this field than either the US or Russia.

During and even before the War with Germany the US used open and covert means to lure, or even kidnap, leading German scientists to come to America. I do not recall how Einstein came to the US, but he was originally from Germany. So, too, was Werner Von Braun, who I think came to the US after the war. After the war the US and Russia grabbed up the leading German scientist to further their own research.

Another technology that was developed during the war effort was Jet powered aircraft. With Jet Propulsion came the ability and the quest to go faster and faster. To challenge the very speed of sound itself. But, approaching the speed of sound had it's problems. Existing aircraft were not constructed well enough and when entering into Mach I, or the speed of sound, the crafts would literally tear apart at the seams and disintegrate. Chuck Yeagar is credited as being the first 'LIVING' man to exceed the speed of sound. Notice, the term the military often used was the first 'living' man. One might presume (and I do recall reading about Britons, I am sure there were Americans and Germans as well) that there may have been others who surpassed Mach I before Yeagar but never lived to tell about it. During the war many such incidents took place under the blanket of war-time secrecy. After WWII and the Korean War there was the cold war. There was always a need for secrecy.

Now that the US had the ability to build crafts that could exceed Mach I, the next quest was, how fast and high can we go?  However, jet engines had limitations. They required air to both burn the fuel and to pass through the turbines to make the thrust. This meant that jet engines could not operate outside of earth's atmosphere. In the late 1940's the US Air Force and Navy began to design several experimental 'rocket' planes. These were winged aircraft that were powered by solid fuel rocket propulsion. Rocket fuels include oxygen as one component, thus the rocket will still burn even outside of the atmosphere. Thus, rockets were the engine of choice for any purposed space vehicle. Later on the rocket planes became known as the X rocket planes (X = experimental), the most famous being the X-15. Werner Von Braun was among the leading German-American scientists working on this project from the beginning in the very late 1940's. From that time, the late 40's to early 1950's Werner Von Braun developed the underlying basis of deep space travel that became the basis for the US space program, which has not changed that much to this very day!!!! It was in the late 40's to early 50's that Von Braun envisioned a use for these eXperimental Rocket Planes. He foresaw them being used as 'Space Shuttles' that could ferry up into space men and materials in order to build orbiting space stations far above the earth. This was Von Braun's, von Brain storm. But, Von Braun was a man well before his time.

The US military worked on building and perfecting the X-rocket planes and were met with one major technological and/or political obstacle after another. There were a number of previous X-rocket planes, but the X-15 was designed to become man's first Space Craft. It was to be the first man-made craft (rocket-powered, manned, manually controlled and designed for re-entry and landing) to enter outer space. It was designed in or around 1952-53, on paper. But, it had many problems. Problems with the rocket engines (there were originally going to be 2 or 3, very powerful rockets, but this had to be scaled down to 1 not so powerful rocket). Attempts were made all through the 1950's, 55, 56, 57. Pre-flights were made, but not using the engine full bore. When it was used full-bore one of it's missions was to aim for outerspace - and take it to the outer limits (or the twilight zone).

During this same time the Russians were hard at work on ballistic missile rockets. Their idea was based on their original space exploration work of over 100 year history, to build a rocket that could house men to travel into space. (Where as the US idea was similar, except that the rocket had wings and flew like a plane in earth's atmosphere, and like a rocket in space). Both the Russians and US were working on missile war head rockets in which an explosive device (nuclear being the most powerful) would sit atop a rocket. The goal was to make a rocket that could travel from one continent to another (InterContinental Ballistic Missiles, or ICBM's).  Russia was far ahead of the US in ICBM technology. In the mid 1950's they proved this by successfully performing numerous launches using large and powerful rocket engines. At that time, however, the way in which the 2 countries conducted business was quite different. Russia did not publicize any of their attempts until after the fact. After they made successful launches, only then did the state run news agency release the films and disclose the work. But, in the US, each time the Air Force or Navy was to make a launch attempt, the press was invited to attend. One time after another, after another, after another, in full public view, with news press cameras running and reporters reporting, the US attempts failed. Some missiles never left the pad, they simply exploded. Some, just after leaving the pad, exploded. Others went off hay-wire after lift off and crashed in non-predetermined areas. It was an extremely embarrassing time for the US military. But, this embarrassment did not stop with just a few red-faces. It was costing the US very vital and valuable world influence and political alliances.

In the 1950's Russia was clearly ahead of the US in the area of rocket technology. Imagine if you were a wealthy Sheik of a Middle East country which was swimming in oil money and you wanted to buy new military hardware. You have the money, so, you want only the best. Would you decide to go with a country who has successfully shown they have the technology to blast a missile war head from one continent to another, or a country whose public attempts to do so have, for the most part, been one failure after another? This was the far-reaching embarrassment the US was feeling, politically and economically and militarily through-out the developing world. Whoever you bought your military gear from, you would also develop strong political ties to as well. And it wasn't just a small handful of oil rich countries, it was any and all countries who needed to buy everything from guns and ammo, to tanks, jet fighters and helicopters. A hundred countries complete with their political allegiance and their military buying budgets were at stake. This was considered high priority, high-stakes technology.

Because space and rocket technology was at the forefront of science and military needs at the time, rocket science and it's uses became tightly wrapped in secrecy for the protection of government interest and national security. Those two words, 'National Security' are the catch all words that demand and call for air tight, water tight, light tight security in all phases of rocket and space technology. The very security of the future of the nation lay at stake.

In Russia, they had combined their space rocket research with their ballistic missile research and by attaching a 'satellite' to the top of a ballistic missile they were able to hurl it up and out into space. Before the US could even get a good ICBM off the pad, before they could get the X-15 rocket plane operating properly the Russians successfully launched 'Sputnik'. The first known man-made object to venture into earth near outer-space and enter into orbit about the earth. In the view of the world, the Russians were clearly the leader in this new and modern technology - Rocket Science and Space Exploration. The US was running a far behind second place. At this point, a no show second place. The X-15 project had more problems and was running more and more behind. (I can't recall the year Sputnik went up, or later dates for X-15's partial successes - 1957 ?).

Even though the US was behind in Ballistic missile research, the word came down from top government and military personnel to 'do something' to show to the world we are not a 'second rate' world power. We are not second rate in technology. We were not going to be beaten by those Red-Commie Russians. Even though US scientists balked at the idea of putting objects on top of ballistic missies and hurling them up into space, even though they laughed at the idea, the word came down to blast something, anything, into space. If the Russians were successful hurling objects up on top of big rockets, and our X-15 program was running way behind, then we should use their same technology to do the same. We couldn't let the Commie Russians out do us. US scientists were scrambling to make a powerful and successful ballistic missile anyway, without the same success as the Russians, now they were told to strap 'things' on top of a big rocket and 'do something'. Just get something up in space. I mean, what if Russia were to put a man in space before us, we would become the second rate country and Russia would become first-rate. Emphasis for the space program got side tracked. The real US space program was to get the X-15 rocket into space, then keep refining it until we could get a Space Shuttle that could take men and loads up. Now funding for that project was put on the back burner as more funding was spent on ballistic missiles and putting cargo's on top of them.

Finally, the US made a few ballistic missiles, we were getting somewhere. But not soon enough. The Russian's sent a dog into space. Oh God, they got a living entity into space first. The US was just starting to send our first satellites up. In the eyes of the world, especially the political-military developing nations, Russia was ahead of the US in technology. The US government and political powers were getting frantic. This was the Cold War, and the US could not be beat by the Communists. This was the cold war, and at this point the US was falling behind, we were getting beaten. The US was struggling with trying to build a reliable large ballistic missile, trying to strap 'things' on top of it. This became priority over the problem prone Space Shuttle and X-15 type projects. Russia, basically, had only one program going, their ballistic missiles.

We were getting closer with the X-15, and we were getting somewhere with the ballistic missiles. But, leading US space scientists felt that it was entirely too primitive and madness to think of putting a man, or even a dog, in a small capsule and put them on top of a large ballistic missile and then blast him off into space. Unlike an airplane - or rocket plane, there was no pilot, no manual navigation controls. It was just a big rocket blasting off at full bore, no way to maneuver it. US scientist felt it was too crude, too primitive. Rather, the X-15 and future craft like it seemed to be more real and practical. A rocket with wings that a pilot has full control over, that can fly in earth's atmosphere like a jet plane, and travel in outer-space like a rocket. But, the mad scientists in Russia went ahead and did it anyway. They actually went ahead and put a man in a little capsule and blasted him off on top of a large ballistic missile and sent him flying out into outer-space.

That was it, the US had egg all over their face. Even though US space scientists objected and tried to thwart the efforts, the word from high command came down, 'Put a man on top of rocket and blast him into earth orbit'.  They said, 'look, the Russians are doing it, they've done it, it works, at least for the publicity of it, for the 'political effects' of it, we have to do it. Put a man in a box and blast him off on top a rocket. Just do it.' So, that was the order. The X-15 project, however, was ready, about 5-6 months too late. The first US man in Space was not Allan Shepard. It was a pilot flying the X-15 into space and re-entering. But, this did not make the same headlines and sensation as the capsules on top of the rockets did.  The X-15 and it's subsequent projects took a back seat and became less public. We started the Mercury program, and that became our publicized space program effort. We put Allan Shepard in a small box and blasted him up into space on top of a big ballistic missile. How primitive. Then we blasted up Glenn in a Mercury capsule and he became the first man to orbit the earth. He was not the first man into space, that was a Russian, and he wasn't the first American into space, that was an X-15 pilot, then Allan Shepard, but he was the first man to orbit the earth. (at least, that is what the world was led to believe - that America was no second rate nation - the world had to know that American's had 'the right stuff'.)

Now, what did the US do with that. The US acted like a sleek New York Avenue marketing firm. They hailed this as a major milestone in technological feats. They hailed Glenn as the pioneer of space exploration. But, this Uri,,, or whoever, the Russian, he was the first man in space. About this fact the US tried to belittle it, locally in the US it was known, it was mentioned, but when we sent Shepard and Glenn into space, that was, somehow, much more important, more valiant, more advanced. And we tried to convince the world of this too. But, actually, we were simply playing catch-up with Russia. And did we really do what we said we were doing?

Meet My Neighbors From The 60's.

Now, here I will introduce my neighbor. As I mentioned at the beginning, In the 1960's I grew up in So. Cal. in La Puente, near West Covina. The boy who lived next door was in the same grade as I so we were friends (well, most of the time). The boy's name was Rob Moore (Jr, but everyone called him Robby, and called his father Bob). His father was also Robert (Bob) Moore. When we moved to that house in 1960-61, the neighbors told us that Bob (the father) was a strange guy. They said he was all right, they guessed, but no one knew anything about him. No one knew where he worked, or what he did for a living. Nothing. The other neighbors told us all he ever said to anyone was 'Hi', then he would walk away. They considered him a sort of eccentric hermit, a nice guy, sort of, maybe, but definitely not the sociable type. My friend, Rob, however, was more than eager to tell me that Bob, his father, worked on 'Top Secret' military projects for the US space program. And latter on (in the latter 60's) Rob told me a lot more about his father and the space program.

During the Korean War Bob Moore was a jet fighter pilot in the US Air Force. He stayed in the Air Force and joined an elite team of pilots who flew experimental proto-type air craft. In the mid 1950's he was in training to become a pilot with the X-15 rocket plane and was assigned to work with that group. However, before he sat in the pilot's seat, while flying another experimental plane he developed a painful ear ache at real high altitudes. This disqualified him from piloting the X-15. He was reassigned to 'other' work on the project and remained with the X-15 project. In the US's attempt to catch-up with Russia and develop a satellite and manned capsule program atop ballistic missiles, Bob Moore was reassigned to work on the Mercury program. He was engaged in highly secretive aspects of the work, not even his son knew exactly what his father did. The son, Rob, told me, and this I cannot confirm, as it is not in the history books, but he claimed that prior to the first 'recorded' X-15 flight into space that another flight had also entered space. However, that craft, along with the pilot on board, never returned to earth. Rather, the pilot was actually the 'first' man to orbit earth. Rob Moore told me that the pilot blasted off his rockets with the order to go up 'full throttle' and to keep going as far and as high as the X-15 would go. The rocket only had enough fuel for about 4 minutes of blast time. He ran the fuel out, but before he did, he had become the first man in space and had reached the fastest known speed. But, something unexpected happened. All other times when the fuel had run out on the X-15 the law of gravity always did it's work and the craft glided back down for a landing. But, this time the X-15 had escaped the law of gravity and had mistakenly achieved low earth orbit. The pilot was helpless. He didn't have one ounce of fuel left, his wing flaps were useless because he was now in space, there was no atmosphere for the wing flaps to work with. And, he had only a limited supply of oxygen and no protection from the extreme heat or cold. As he kept drifting he soon ran out of radar and radio contact as he started his first orbit of the earth. He probably died when his air supply ran out, that is if the extreme cold didn't get him first.

As I said, that is the story my neighbor told me, not when we were still kids, he told me this much latter when he was a nuclear physicists student at UCLA and we were both in our early 20's. He not only told me this, but a lot of other things as well.

The Cold War: At The Edge of Space

Lets go back to our race with the Russians. So Russia sent the first man into space, then we sent a manned X-15 into space, then we sent Sheppard and then Glenn into earth orbit. This was called the Mercury project. However, some people question whether Glenn actually went up on top a rocket or if that was also faked. You see, the rocket used was not that reliable.

Either way, we were embarking on the very early stages of touching the edges of space and at that time, 1961, John Kennedy shocked the world when he boldly announced that the US would put a man on the moon before the end of the 1960's decade. It was a bold statement, because in 1961 we had hardly even begun sending up rockets. We had no idea how to go to the moon and what it all entailed. Think about it. Kennedy's statement that America would put a man on the moon was not based on scientific research. It was not the conclusion of an extensive feasibility study by a panel of leading scientist as to what was or was not actually feasible because at that time we had barely just developed a rocket that could carry a few hundred pound pay load several thousand miles. We had no idea how to go all the way to the moon and back. There was, however, a simplistic idea that all you had to do was build a big enough rocket and blast it off and it would fly all the way there. But, Kennedy's bold declaration was made entirely on the basis of political and military objectives. It was Cold War rhetoric. At the time Russia was clearly ahead of us in missile power and in ability to lift off large loads. We were looking more and more like the second-rate country in the world. We had to do something to confirm our role as technological leader of the world. Since we had touched space for the first time, it seemed to some that the moon was now within our grasp. But, was it?

It didn't matter, on the world scene where political power and economic power and military might rules, the US had become seen as a second rate power, runner up to the first-rate technological achievements of Russia. By boldly announcing to the world that the US would have a man on the moon by the end of the decade was sheer chivalry. It made the world take notice of the US again as possibly being really first-rate and Russia second. Just the psychology of it was powerful and effective.

The next public phase was the Gemini project. Blasting 2 men in a capsule atop a rocket and getting them to orbit. At the same time we and the Russians were sending many satellites into space for spying and weather and telecommunications. Gemini used a much more powerful rocket, the Atlas Centaur. Russia was also sending 2 man crews, and Russia was again the first to claim they made a space-walk while in orbit around the earth. That was around 1964 (?), while I was in the 8th grade.

After this the US claimed we had made a space walk. All of this was exciting to any 12-13 year old boy at the time. I used to watch it on TV whenever I knew something was on. But, my friend Rob, he used to tell me that it was all faked. I had to listen, after all, his father was secretly working on the projects. I recall Rob showing me actual 8x10 photographs (his father gave him) showing the US and the Russian space walks and how they were both made in large water tanks, painted to appear as being in space. The space suits were under water suits and on TV when they showed live videos of it they moved slowly. I will explain the slow movements latter, but, their moving slowly was due to the water, not due to being weightless in space. If you notice the space walks of today that are taken from the Space Shuttle the movements are quick (this will all be explained later in this article). In the photos he showed me you could actually see bubbles in the Russian photos and small hair thin lines in the US photos.

Rob told me that no men were in the Gemini capsules being launched. They were empty. When their flights were completed the men were put in these capsules and flown up way high using spy planes, then dropped from about 6-8 miles up to splash down in the Pacific. It was always odd, the US would splash down in the Pacific, and always 'out of range' of site from the decks of the boats. Helicopters would have to go out and search for them and bring them to the ships. While, in Russia, the men and capsules would land on earth, often to within feet of hitting their targeted landing zones. Why could the Russians land on land and do so with pin point accuracy, while the US had to splash down in the ocean and would be miles off target?  The answer: Because the Russian landings were never attended by the press watching live. They were filmed and after everything looked just right, the film was released. The US had press on board the ships, so the recovery had to be out of site so they could cover things up if need be.

Why would the US and Russia be faking their (so-called) excursions into space and earth orbit? Because, the motto they live by is, "All is fair in love and war", and this was war. The cold war. The world alliances were at stake. Military arms sales were at stake. We are talking major big time importance. We had to be the best, we had to at least keep up. It was all out important. By hook or by crook, we could not be out done by the communist Russians.

The whole time the Russians were always 1 or 2 steps ahead of us. They were the first in space, the first to send up 2 men, the first to do a space walk, the first to do a docking in space, the first to send an unmanned probe to the moon, the first to have a manned space station, they held the record for having a man in space the longest, they were the first to claim to have broken the Van Allen belts (which I will describe more further on), the first to send an unmanned probe to the moon, the first to send a robot to the moon and have it come back to earth. Etc., etc. (Yes, Russia supposedly brought back moon dust and moon rocks "before" the US did).  They were the first all the way along, right up to and until the US beat them to the most important punch when we claimed to be the first to send men to the moon. They were the first all the way - until the very last minute, when we beat them out on the most important mission. Then, once we put men on the moon, oddly, the Russian's never - ever - sent a manned mission to the moon. Why?  Up to that point they had led us in everything, they fully had the where-abouts to do so. They had spent so much time, effort and money and were ahead of us all the way, even though we seemingly beat them to the punch, at least, why didn't they spend the last few dollars and also send at least one manned mission?  That doesn't make all that much sense. Imagine the world-wide prestige had they been the second to send a manned mission, especially if it had been within months of our first mission. They may not have got all the glory, but they would have clearly saved face by being a close second. Why didn't they?

More About the Moore's
- My Experiences With Them Confirmed To Me That The Moon Landing Was Faked

Well, with Rob Moore as my next door neighbor I looked at the space program with a different vision. When Apollo came along I would watch it with skepticism and would think, 'all right, they could be faking this part, and that would be easy to be faked, and this is obviously faked'. Nothing I saw on TV made me doubt it was actually being faked. I saw no overwhelming evidence that it was for real.

It was also an interesting time with Rob's father. He had always appeared to be a recluse, never talking with anyone, just saying, 'hi', then walking away. But, the one thing he spent time on the most at home was his one favorite hobby, radio controlled model airplanes. That is all he ever did at home. He sat in his garage - workshop building his model airplanes. I recall one day, it must have been some time in the mid to late 60's, while Apollo mission was getting underway, Rob asked me if I would like to go with he and his dad and watch him fly his radio controlled airplanes. Wow, yeah, that sounded like fun. His father was getting in the car and called Rob to go, and I went to get in the car with him. Bob never said much to me, but he had always been friendly. Suddenly he snapped and said, "Hey, you can't come with us. Rob, you know I can't take anyone, I have made special arrangements just to take you. No one else can come. That is that."  Rob said that I was his best friend and begged and pleaded to let me come. I told them, 'Hey it's all right, if your father doesn't want me to go, I understand', and started walking away feeling sort of hurt. Then Bob called me and told me to come, but he warned me NOT to talk to any of his friends. Strange - but Bob was strange.  I'm not sure where we went. It was about an hours drive. It was a public park and there were about 15 - 20 other members there flying their planes. It wasn't a 'normal' radio control airplane club, however. When we walked up, several men approached Bob and said, 'you told us that you were only bringing your oldest son, the straight A student". Pointing at me they would add, "Who is that?, you know the rules, Bob, no one else is allowed". This same questioning went on from a number of the members. Wow, some elite and touchy radio control airplane club. I could tell Bob Moore was feeling the heat. I heard comments referring to me as a 'civilian'. While they were flying their planes, they also spoke about other things, like their work, which I grasped to be the space program. I was teenager at the time, but it didn't take a rocket scientist to figure out. These guys all worked together, and they obviously all worked on the space program. Now I knew why Bob was all 'touchy' about me coming. All these guys were Bob's equals (all had high security clearance) and all worked on the same part of the space project. And Bob, he was a totally different person out there on the field. I had never seen him act like this before. He was socializing. He didn't just say hi to these guys then walk away. He laughed and joked with them and held long friendly conversations. Bob, all of a sudden, looked and acted 'normal'. I figured out that these were the only people he was allowed to 'socialize' with. The whole purpose of them forming their own private radio controlled airplane club was so they could come together and socialize in civilian life, outside of their work on the space program. Bob was 'free' to talk here, among members of the same group. At home he was not 'free' to talk. He was highly restricted in what he could say. Even with his own wife and children, he hardly said very much. But, among his classified equals he was 'himself', relaxed and talkative. And I also understood that these were no ordinary bunch of guys out there flying their air planes. Maybe there were other models like this in the mid 1960's, but these guys had radio controlled jets, and yup, even a remote controlled X-15 rocket plane (using mixtures of CO2 cartridges and some with controlled valves and 2 gas mixtures). These were not store bought remote controls. They designed everything themselves, including the transmitters and receivers. They taxied the planes and took off and landed them all using their remote controls. Like I said, there were lots of other groups doing this at the time, but I also could see, the technology they had and were using was definitely not average run of the mill stuff. These guys and their planes were definitely a 'different' group.

1969 finally rolled around (the year Rob and I graduated from HS). It was the first (so-called) Lunar landing. Rob and I used to joke about it all being faked. Neither of us believed it was really happening. We would look at different events and say, "Hey, even I can figure out how to fake this part or that'. My friend, Rob, was bound for UCLA as a straight A honor student, and I was headed for the unknown. I planned to major in electronics at a smaller community college, but really, I was not intent on mundane knowledge. I was, at that time, well started in my quest for spiritual enlightenment. I attended college, but my real studies were the libraries where I would try to find God, and my reason for being here. When school started Rob gave an open invitation for me to visit him at UCLA, sometimes, on breaks, or latter after I dropped out of college, I would go there for a week at a time. Especially after I discovered the Research library at UCLA. I spent day after day in there, searching for God. They had many Vedic books, and books about Jesus I never saw anywhere else. Bottom line is that I enjoyed going up there, not just to see my old friend Rob, but for the learning experience. I would even sit in on his physics classes. We discussed physics (although he would have to speak English with me, he spoke Latin and techno physics babble half the time). We would talk about God and religion, the philosophies of life, why we are here. But, it was this time that he also began to openly talk with me about his father and his high level secret work on the space program. I was, for many years, one of Rob's closest friends. I knew him since we were both 9 years old. Rob was his father's closest son, so he confided in him, and since I was Rob's friend, he began to confide to me the same secrets his father revealed to him.

It was probably around 1970 that he showed me color charts and posters and printed reports that his father had given him. On the top it clearly stated the documents were classified, can't recall the exact wording. Bob Moore really liked his son Rob. You see, after the first lunar landing or so, Bob Moore and his wife got a divorce. I stayed in touch with Rob's mother from time to time (she lived next door), and to hear it from her, she was the one who asked for the divorce. She claimed her husband had become a 'zombie'. In order to keep from 'leaking' out any sensitive information he stopped having 'normal' conversations with even his own wife and children. It got to the point that he would only say 'hi' to his own wife and kids. I found out that she actually did not know anything at all about what sort of work he did. He had 3 sons and 1 daughter, Rob, my friend, was the oldest. But, Rob was different. Bob had no longer anything to do with his family, except Rob. Why Rob?  Because Rob was a genius. He had straight A's in HS. This guy would rather discuss quantum physics or deep philosophy then any other thing imaginable (even girls or music) - (oh, except he was also a Superman comic book maniac and his other hero in life was John Lennon). He was a book worm. He couldn't just read Latin, he could speak it fluently. Bob Moore was proud of this son. And he was training him to enter his elite world of those who possessed high security clearance working on projects of national security interests.

Rob would talk about his father a lot with me. We both knew him. But I had never seen him for some time since he had moved out after the divorce. While visiting Rob at UCLA one day, I was just leaving to return home and Rob asked me if I could give him a ride over to his father's place. No problem. (Rob may have been a genius and he may have become a nuclear physicist, but he never learned one thing, how to drive a car). Rob told me that it would be an opportunity for me to meet his father again. Actually, by this time Rob had told me a lot, a lot more than I think he even realized. I was fully aware at the time that his father was intimately connected with the space program, and that he worked on it from 'the other side', from the secret side of the project. Anyway, Rob asked me to give him a ride, so no problem. I cannot recall the exact location, and this was around 1972, but it was somewhere not too far from UCLA - in the Brentwood - Westwood area, near Santa Monica Blvd. We arrived at the apartment. It wasn't the top of the world luxury, but I do recall it wasn't shabby. It was definitely upper class accommodations. A world better than the middle class neighborhood I grew up in and Bob used to live. We knocked at the door. Bob answered. It was 'strange' Bob again. He saw Rob and said, "Oh Robby, your early..... Who??  Is This Jim?" (Jim, that's me). He asked us in, but, without saying anything to me, he sternly told Rob, "Robby, we have to talk", and took him into the kitchen. The kitchen had a swinging door on it, but, at the loudness Bob was speaking, he may as well been standing next to me, I could hear every syllable loud and clear. Bob was yelling at his son, "Robby, you know you are NOT to bring ANY ONE with you when you come here. NO ONE. And especially not ANYONE who knows me from 'BEFORE'". This went on for a solid minute. Rob would say, "But, Jim is my best friend." His father drilled it in again, that no one from "before" was to know where he is or WHO he is. NO ONE. He told Rob that he had committed a very serious mistake, the "nation's security" was at risk. Rob then said something to the effect that I was different than others, he even said I may be of help to 'the project'. The anger and concern in Bob's voice was serious. At that point, at least with Bob, I felt I should take a 'play it dumb' attitude. When the yelling was over and they walked back into the living room, I looked around the apartment and smiled and then started some small talk. I asked how he had been. He tried to act cordial, and asked how I was. Then, sort of trying to snoop a little, I asked a simple question, "So, what sort of work do you do now?"  I was looking around at the luxurious furnishing in the apartment, he certainly was living more well off then ever before. Bob looked surprised. He looked around, then stammered a bit. "I, ah, well, you remember, I ah, I used to play the trumpet (no, I didn't know)". He told me that when Johnny Carson was in Hollywood he played for Mitch Henderson on the Tonight Show. (Really???). I said, "Wow, he isn't in Hollywood that often, do you play for them in New York too?"  He said, "Ah, no, ah, just here, just a few weeks several times a year."  I guess he realized that didn't sound substantial enough work to justify the pad he was living in, so he started stammering and said that he tried to keep him self busy with odds jobs here and there. Then he told me that actually he was 'retired' and his 'company' was taking good care of him. Yeah, well, someone was sure taking good care of him.

Anyway, another curious side-note is that about a year or so latter when I was visiting my parents I went next door to speak with Rob's mom (Bob's ex-wife). While I was talking to her I asked if Bob was still living in Westwood (or Brentwood, somewhere there). She said, "That lazy bum. No way. He's as broke as they come. Before we divorced he lost his job and everything. He lives in some small run down hole in Baldwin Park (Baldwin Park is the lowest income area of So. California, at least at the time)." She said she didn't even know if he was there anymore, he never calls her and she doesn't care to call him. She wasn't even sure if the worthless bum was still alive. I felt it best not to even tell her that just a year or so earlier I had visited him along with Rob is a nice plush apartment near UCLA, that his 'company' (uncle Sam) was taking very good care of him. I felt it was better not create too many waves.

Since I am on the topic, I might as well finish up this part about my friend Rob. In 1973 I joined the Hare Krishna Movement and around 74 or so Rob had left UCLA to go work for Hughes Missile division as a nuclear physicists. I knew that much, but I didn't know how to reach him. I was thinking why not get ahold of him one more time. I really wanted to talk about the space program with him again. So, I drove over to Hughes Missile division (not far from our temple which was near Culver City). I went into the reception area, as far as you can go with out a security pass, and asked about Rob Moore. After some time, after explaining he was a nuclear physists, the receptionists acknowledged that he did work there. I asked to see him or page him. No, that was not allowed. I asked for his home phone #. No, that could not be given.

I left, but I didn't give up. About a month latter I called the same Missile Division and told the receptionist that I was working on 'a project' along with Rob Moore and that I had his home phone number but had mis-placed it and needed to reach him right away, that it was important. She didn't ask anything more, and gave me his home phone number. It had now been at least 2 years or so since I had seen him. I called the number and his 'wife' answered. The rascal got himself married, although it sounded more like his mother then a wife. I asked to talk to Rob, and I got the fifth degree interrogation. When I told her we were old friends and had been best friends for years, she told me Rob wasn't there and didn't live there anymore. She was terse and she demanded to know how I got their phone number. She was demanding a bit too much, so I finished up and hung up the phone. I tried back that evening and Rob answered.

He told me his wife told him that I had called (strange, she told me he didn't live there anymore - a real 'protective' wife). Rob was surprised how I had found him. He explained that he was working on highly sensitive and classified work that was of high national security. I figured that much, and that made me more wanting to talk with him. I asked to see him again, so we could talk. No way. Remember, I was the one living in the Hare Krishna temple, which was labeled a subversive 'cult' at the time, but I was free to call, talk and go where I pleased. I had a car available and asked to drive over and see him, or offered to go pick him up. Here, he was a civilian working at a company that does work for the defense department, but he was 'not allowed' to talk with old friends, he wasn't allowed to talk with anyone who didn't work on the same project and who shared the same high security clearance. He kept using those words, that he 'wasn't allowed' to do this or that.

Rob then explained his situation in more detail. He told me that he worked on a team and that everyone in that team was of the same high security rated clearance. He said that to protect the secrecy of their work they were allowed to associate or speak ONLY with members of the same clearance, and only with members who worked on the same projects. (This was exactly the same as with his father while he worked on the space program). Rob told me that he had to cut off all ties with his past 'life'. That is how he talked about it, his "past life", or previous life. He said he no longer was allowed to speak with even his own mother or brothers or sister, and had not done so for several years and cannot ever do so for the rest of his life. No one, not even me, who used to be his best friend. He even told me that it may even be likely that other staff members may be listening in on our phone conversation. I asked if the lady who answered my previous call was his wife?  Yes, and he explained that it was an 'arranged' marriage. Actually, in Krishna Consciousness it is recommended that the best marriages are arranged marriages, like in India. But, this guy was a Nuclear Physicist working for a major company on military projects. 'They' arranged his marriage? I didn't ask and he didn't explain exactly who 'They' were. Anyway he explained that when he agreed to join the group that he requested one of the conditions be he wanted to marry. So, they 'fixed him up' with one of the few women who also worked on the project and had the same security clearance. The thing was, she was 15 years older then him. He was, at the time, around 25 and she was 40. I told him that was sort of odd, and Rob said it was, and he didn't expect it to last, but, it was the only woman whom 'They' had available for him to marry. It was either her or no one. I'll tell you, this was a very strange phone call. I mean, what exactly was going on?  Rob wasn't allowed to talk to old friends, he wasn't allowed to do this or that. Almost sounded like he was in jail or something. And 'They' arranged for him to marry (and an older lady at that). He said that this was the new system, that the only people anyone who is part of their group is allowed to even speak with are members of the same group. Not just same group, but they also have to be working on the same project. They could only marry another person who also works on the same project. It was decided that way it would be easier to keep the projects they were working on secret. There would be less of a chance of any one member from accidentally leaking out their secrets. (As Rob's father had sort of done with Rob, and Rob had sort of done with me in the past).

But, I insisted that we meet and talk again. This time Rob mentioned that his own wife may 'report' on him if he wasn't careful, it simply wasn't allowed. Then he told me it was also dangerous for him to do so.

We had to hang up, he told me his wife was coming in the room. I didn't even try to call him until at least 5 years latter. I found the number in my wallet and thought, hey, let me give it a try and just see what happens. I was surprised, Rob answered the phone. He was having a real hard time with his marriage, with life is what it sounded. He was now in his mid 30's and his wife was over 50. He told me he wanted 'out', but, said it didn't look like that would happen. I mean, really, it sort of sounded like Rob was under some sort of house arrest or something and his wife was more like a live-in guard or something. I mean that is speculation, but, it just sounded odd. I insisted that we meet again in person. It was still NO. But, this time I asked him about his father. I asked if he still saw his father. "My dad?" "Yeah, do you still see him?"  "Yeah, I still see him". "Does he still live up near UCLA?"  "Yeah". "How is he doing?"  "Fine" "Is he still involved with JPL and the space program?"  At that point Rob said that he had to hang up, someone might be listening, it was too dangerous for us to speak anymore. Before we hung up he asked if I remembered what happened to "John". John?  I had no idea who he meant. He told me it was someone we both knew. Then he said that John was with his brother one day and some guy just walked up to him and shot him through the heart. No one knew who killed him, his brother was in too much shock to remember much. He told me to never call back again, it was too dangerous for me and for him. After he hung up I realized we did have a common friend named John. But, we never called him by that name. We called him Pepe (he was half Apache). I never found out what happened to Pepe. He sort of just disappeared. But, obviously, I got the hint about what might happen to me if I kept calling him. Whoever this John was he must have found out too much.

I don't know if you caught the importance of my question to him about his father or not. Remember, he told me that he was not allowed to associate with Any One outside of those who had the same security clearance and who did not work on the same projects. But, when I asked if he still associated with his father, yes, he did. Obviously they now had the same security clearance. I had assumed that since Rob was a nuclear physicist and he worked with Huges Missile Division that he must be designing nuclear warheads, but now I wonder if maybe he is also working on the space program. Anyway, whether or not he and his father worked on the same projects, they both had equal security clearance and were 'allowed' to socialize with one another still.

Enough about Rob for now, I just wanted to complete the story about him as it was partially relevant to the moon project, at least for me as he was my source of information during that time.

Previously I was mentioning that in the early 70's one day Rob showed me some color drawings and reports. What they detailed was the 'actual' space program (no mention of Mercury, Gemini or Apollo). There were detailed drawings of a reusable winged space-shuttle. I can't recall if the name 'Space Shuttle' was there, but they were drawings of the craft. And it depicted a fleet of 10-20 such shuttles building 'space stations'. The shuttles were to fly up every few days into low space earth orbit. There they would construct the first space-station. What that space station was is real important, and I will explain that latter on.

You see, Rob explained a lot to me. He explained that we had never gone to the moon planet. Not only that, but we had never exceeded about 25,000 miles. Now Rob was a physicists in training himself (for his master's degree in physics, in 1971, he designed a nuclear bomb). I think it was one of Einstein's theories regarding space travel that once a craft reached a speed of a little over 24,000 miles an hour and aimed in the proper trajectory, it would be able to escape the earth's gravitational pull and then 'freely glide', through space at that speed with no need of any further power. To get to the moon, however, the gravity of earth would slow down a craft, but at 24,000 miles per hour it took a long time, after the craft reached over 2/3rd way the gravity of the moon would get stronger and the craft would speed up, being pulled toward the moon. That is the 'theory' about how they were able to travel to the moon.

Well, Rob told me the whole 'public' space program is based on that theory, but, that theory did not prove to be entirely true. What he told me, and what I read detailed in the confidential NASA report, was that, well, first of all, rockets only have a finite amount of fuel. So, even if a rocket or space craft can reach or exceed 24,000 miles an hour, it will soon run out of fuel if you don't turn off the rockets. The last stage rocket that (supposedly) sent the Apollo craft out of earth orbit had only enough fuel for about a 6 sec blast. But, even when the crafts reached that speed and they flew further out into deep space, according to my friend, Rob, they would slow down, due to earth's pull, much quicker than theorized. As long as the craft remained in a orbit, it could, for the most part, maintain it's speed, but when crafts tired to go further out, they ran into a belt of resistance which slowed them down or forced them into orbit (at the higher altitude).

The Van Allen Radiation Belts. Did We Or Didn't We Pass Through Them Yet?

What would slow down the craft out in space, since there was no gaseous atmosphere?. Well, even 25-50,000 miles out there was yet another type of atmosphere around the earth. It isn't made of gasses, but of electrons, and protons. Electro-magnetic Plasma. It is known as the Van Allen radiation belts. In 1958 the US sent the first Explorer craft to see how high and far we could go. Explorer was supposed to escape earth's gravity and fly past the moon and keep on going. At around 25,000 miles it ran into an intense band of radiation. A dense atmosphere of electro-magnetic energy. The band was extremely dense and intense. So much so, that after sending back some data, the craft not only slowed down, but it went hay-wire as all the electrical circuits on board, including the transmitter and receiver, literally 'fried' out, burned up in the strong electro-magnetic currents of the radiation belt. Back in the late 50's and early 60's the US sent one Explorer after the next to try and keep the electronics from frying, and to go beyond the belts. One after another the crafts met with problems. The Russians, too, were sending their own probes. All together by both countries 30-40 attempts were made, all ending in failure. The goal was to reach the moon with an Explorer, or a Luna probe, but the radiation belts proved to be formidable. In the late 50's all the electronics were tube type. By the early 60's transistors were used. Now, historical text books tell us that Russia was first to have broken the barrier with their probe. Somehow, with shielding or whatever, they claim to have gotten a craft through the radiation belt and beyond. (But I have also read somewhere that the radiation is so strong and intense it would take a plate of armor 2 or 3 feet thick to provide enough shielding. And any antenna would offer a conductor for the electron plasma to enter back down into the craft and the electronics to fry it out. If that is so, this thick shield was missing on the Apollo ship, so how did they get through the radiation belts? But, the Russians claimed their probe actually reached the moon by crashing into it. They claimed that their proof at the time that their probe successfully passed through the radiation belts was that the probes exploded large dyed powder bombs that caused a visible red cloud that was over 25,000 miles away. However, the books I read never explained what processes and protection were finally fabricated that gave the crafts the protection they needed to pass through the radiation belts. Later on, with Integrated Circuit Chips the problems with radiation and cosmic rays in space became even more acute as the size of the transistors shrank to become a fraction of a millimeter in size. At that size very small minute cosmic particles caused the chips to at least malfunction, if not fry out. And, as the chips were designed to consume less and less power, this also created the problem that it would take less and less of an electrical interference to cause the chips to malfunction, to set a bit to a 1 instead of a 0, etc. Of course, all space bound IC's are Rad-Hard (Radiation Hardened), and the entire chip is covered over with pure gold to protect them from such radiation. But, is that radiation hardness only good for the space between 50 to 25,000 miles, between earth and the radiation belts, or is it enough to allow craft to pass through the radiation belts as well? I theorize it is not anyway near enough protection to allow such craft to enter, what to speak of pass through, the intense ocean of radiation in the Van Allen Belts. I say my theory, but this is actually what my friend Rob told me as late as 1972,

The radiation belts are very thick (25,000 miles or so) blankets of dense electro-magnetic plasma, an ocean of electrons and protons. On the other side of this shield or blanket of radiation are Solar Winds and intense cosmic, gamma and X rays. Intense enough to fry out radio circuits. What to speak of delicate Integrated Circuitry. Scientists concluded that the radiation belts are part of our atmosphere, that they provide a shield that protects earth from more intense cosmic radiation and solar wind storms that pass through the solar system.

Were the Radiation Belts The Start of The Lie?

Anyway, according to my friend Rob, we never got a craft through the radiation belts. Not with the Explorer crafts, or the Apollo crafts, or any Pioneer, or Mariner, or Viking or Voyager or other such deep space craft. Then why did we fake it and say we did???

This is all theory, by the way. I am not sitting here saying I absolutely believe every word my friend Rob told me about the radiation belts and that we never got through them. (However, I personally gave him a lot more than a grain of salt because by that time I understood who his father was and where he was getting his information from, and he was no quack himself. He was literally a genius, a UCLA Physicist). But, I don't know if all that he told me or I saw was true?  So, I am only theorizing at this point,

But, lets go back to the first claim the Russian's made when they announced to the world they had a craft that passed through the radiation belts. Let's assume, for the sake of theory, that they lied, they faked it. My theory says that at the time the US didn't have any way to know for sure one way or the other if they really did it or they had faked it. We suspected they could have faked it, but we didn't know. If we claimed to the world that Russia was faking it, what if they weren't and they could latter prove us wrong.  How would that make the US look? Russia would be seen to be technically superior while we look very foolish for crying wolf, trying to make them look bad, when in the end we would be exposed as wrong.

On the other hand, whether they actually made it through or not, it didn't matter because the rest of the world thinks they did, and at the same time the rest of the world knows America has not been able to do it. To the rest of the world, passing through the radiation belt was not the big thing, but when the Lunar Probe supposedly got through, it supposedly traveled straight to the moon and crash landed on the moon. Send back some fuzzy data as it supposedly did so.  So where does that leave us? Second place. A no-show. If we don't get through soon, then we will have lost the Cold War, the Russians would win more and more political alliances. So, whether they faked it or not didn't matter, they were winning the world's political influence and were coming out the winner of the cold war. At that time Russia was first to produce successful ICBM missiles. They were the first to be able to land a nuclear warhead to almost any country and city in the world. They were the first to send up an earth orbiting satellite, they were the first to put a dog in space, the first to put a man in space, they had the largest rockets, they were now claiming to be the first to get a craft out of earth orbit, through the Van Allen belts and the first country to send a man-made space craft (unmanned) to crash land on the moon. Russia was claiming to have actually reached the moon with an unmanned craft. This was big-time and it meant a lot to the powers of the world in forming their political alliances. By far they were way ahead of the US at the time, and whether or not they faked this really didn't mater. That is what American intelligence concluded. That it really didn't matter if Russia really did what they said they did, or they had faked it. What mattered is the rest of the world believed them and for this Russia was winning more and more of the Cold War. Communism was spreading.

American intelligence also concluded that it really didn't matter if we faked it or not. This was War, the Cold War. The fight was for world-wide political dominance and influence. We couldn't just sit there and let those communists in Russia make us look like second rate runners up. We had to convince the world that we were technologically more advanced... At least we had to appear equally advanced. This was the basis (according to my theory) that prompted the US military and intelligence to decide to also start faking some of our space missions.

This was the beginning of the lies, at least in terms of the space program. (I must remind everyone here, I am only speaking in theory, I have no conclusive evidence that these things actually did not happen. But in the continuation of our theory...). The Van Allen Radiation Belts proved to be too formidable, and neither we nor the Russians were able to surpass it. Russia made the choice first, to fake it. We were in a race to see who could go to the moon first, and it was a critical time in history. It was around this time that the Bay of Pigs incident took place which took the world to within a push of a button, to within a hair-line decision of the Super Powers to enter into an all out nuclear war. The situation at the time was intense. Neither side wanted a nuclear war. If such a war were to have occurred between the USSR and the USA no one would win, both sides, and the world, would be destroyed. Russia knew this as well as we. Therefore space and technology became the battlefield. But, after 40 attempts to pass through the radiation belts, both sides were getting frustrated at the lack of progress. At that time, the race was for the moon, but if you can't go past 25,000 miles, you'll never reach the moon. Russia decided it was better to fake progress than to risk going on with a battle that was leading no where, for if the battle in space proved to be too futile, the only other alternative was a nuclear battle on earth. The decision to fake some of the early missions may have been made with the better interests of human society in mind. This we have to take into consideration. The men who made these choices may not have been the total demons we might like to think they were, they were all human and we might make some of the same decisions they did if we were in the same situations faced with the same sort of information.

Russia may have made the choice before us that they could win influence by faking some things. But, just like a child who tells one lie soon finds himself wrapped up in a web of one lie after another made in order to support the first lie. Once the fakery and lying began, where and how will it stop? The Russians claimed their probe not only passed through the radiation belts, but escaped earth orbit and entered deep space and that it became the first craft to reach and (crash) land on the moon. That was a phenomenal achievement. It allowed Russia to win a battle in the Cold War. The US then claimed the same thing. If you can't beat them, join them.

Did we figure out how to break through the Van Allen Belts or not?  That really is the crux of my whole theory, and I am only basing it on what my friend and neighbor of the 60's told me, which is what he learned from his father who worked on the projects. Between near space, about 50-60 miles above earth surface, up to about 25,000 miles up there is no atmosphere and nothing to slow down a craft. It is in that space that we can successfully orbit satellites. However, between 25,000 and 50,000 miles is this dense ocean of plasma radiation that slows down crafts that enter it (preventing them from deeper space travel) and that literally frys out all electronics that enter it. That was what the paper I read said that my friend Rob showed me. If that is true, then every single deep space mission was faked. The Voyagers, Gallileos, or whatever. The probes to Venus, to Saturn, to Mars, etc., were all faked. What has not been faked were most all flights (excluding Mercury, Gemini and Apollo), at least in the last 20 years, made within the first 25,000 miles.

These are all conjectures. I do not really know. I am basing all of this only on what my friend told me. Maybe he was misled, maybe none of this was faked. I am not going to take the strong position of saying I know more than I do. But, I am presenting this as food for thought. I do know his father worked on these projects, I do know I saw confidential documents. But, I don't know any real details.

What if the theory is right and we never did pass through the radiation belts? Then why did we fake the space probes, the flights to Venus, and Saturn, etc.?  For the same reason as stated above. Once the lying began, where and how do you stop it?  University researchers didn't know it was faked. Senators didn't know. Outside of a small select handful of scientists, none of the other scientists knew it was faked. So, there has been an on-going demand from the public, from scientists, to keep going out into space, to keep making more and more probes of the solar system. What are those who make such decisions supposed to do?  They can't say they can't do it, because on one hand they are saying they are already doing it. So, elaborate missions are set up and one lie after another keeps coming. Once it got started, how do you stop it?

In the 70's How Did They Fake Deep Space Probes.

How did they fake so many trips to Venus and Saturn, Mars, etc.?

Well, one day around 1978 I was also wondering the same thing myself. I had seen the pictures of Saturn and it's rings and moons and I was also wondering, wow, 10's of 1,000's of electronic photos were being transmitted from, what was it, Voyager?. I kept wondering, How?  Of course, they could just be models and photos were taken. But, then, one day, just after Star Wars II came out and Star Trek the movie (# 1) came out I had got hold of a movie industry magazine that was called Business Pictures. In it were ads from special effects companies who work for Hollywood. This was the dawn of computer graphics being used in motion pictures. Star Wars I was made using mostly models, but, after Star Wars I, George Lucas used some of the profits to set up a new lab called Pixar, which strove to push the technology and create stunning effects using state of the art Computer Workstations. CG, or Computer Graphics. I was looking at some of the ads and articles in the magazine and I found a peculiar one. Unfortunately I do not recall the name of the company running the ad. But, they were selling computer graphics "programming", not a finished program, but the algorythms and 'basic mathematical building blocks' used to create a program. What they claimed to be was a company that does contract work for JPL, NASA and the military. What they were selling were the software foundations and routines that did texture mapping and perspective, surface reflection, shadow mapping, etc. Then, what really caught my eye and peaked my interest was that the ad stated that the information they were selling had been developed over 10 years prior by NASA and the US military and had, up until now, been considered highly classified and secret information. With this technology and the use of super computers they claimed it was possible to create virtually any special effects scene. The reason given that the information was now being declassified and being offered for sale was that the movie industry (specifically the work down by Lucas's Pixar team - which became the foundation for Industrial Light and Magic, the premiere computer graphics company of the entire industry), had begun to catch up with the secret technology and it was decided there was no longer any reason to keep the information classified.

Wow. The same technology that helped to produce the visual effects of space, planets, and space crafts used for Star Wars II and Star Trek I had been developed and used by NASA and JPL for over 10 years earlier. That would mean that NASA and JPL had the ability to create virtual reality graphics effects as early as the late 1960's. Texture mapping, shadow mapping, light reflection, etc. Then I instantly realized how JPL was turning out 10's of 1,000's of electronic photos of Saturn and space. They had CG technology for a long time before Hollywood finally caught up and learned how to do it. The 'fly-by' probes that mapped Venus and Saturn, etc. all sent back to earth electronic data and photos. It was feasible to generate all of this on computer. JPL had at it's disposal the fastest and most powerful super-computers of the day, like the Cray. All they had to do was bounce signals off a distant satellite so that the ground crews would receive real signals that they thought were coming from deep space.

The Space Age Tower Of Babel

Let me go back a little and fill-in some things about the 'real' space program, the Space Shuttle. If you recall originally I started talking about the X-rockets and the space shuttle. According to the documentation Robby showed me that was America's 'real' space program. Werner Von Braun is credited with developing this plan in the 1950's and according to not only my friend, but, from other research I have made, this was, always has been, and still is the backbone of our space program.

The mission of the Space Shuttle was to travel up to at least several 1,000 miles or further and carry with it cargo to build an orbiting space station at as high an altitude as possible. The main purpose of the space station was to serve as a research lab for further investigation of the radiation belts and how to get around them or through them, and part of the purpose of the space station was to act as an orbiting launch pad and re-fueling station. Once the first space station was complete, space shuttles between earth and that first station would continue to carry more loads, but now a new sort of shuttle would be built. One that did not have to travel into the earth's atmosphere and therefore it had no wings. This shuttle would launch off from the first space station at several thousand miles up and would travel out to a much higher orbit. In that higher orbit the next level of shuttles would construct a second space station. Thus, the first ground level shuttles would be ferrying loads from earth to the first station, then another shuttle ferrying loads to the next station. The second space station would then be at the edge of the radiation belts with the mission to find holes in it, or find a way through it. Once that was done, then another space station could be built even further out. This time, 50,000 miles, or on the other side of the radiation belts. The plan that I saw for the space program was to reach the moon by building about 7 such space stations as a modern 'stairway' to the moon. The Space Age Tower of Babel.

The Real Purpose for Space Stations and the Space Shuttle

The reason for these space station stairsteps was because, first of all, the radiation belts had to be surmounted. And secondly, at least according to my friend Rob, the earth's gravity caused the crafts in space to slow down when trying to escape orbit, such that when the fuel runs out, the crafts settle into an orbit. It was calculated that in order to reach the moon refueling stations would be needed along the way, one craft could not carry enough fuel to make the trip in one flight.

About 5 years back, I went to a public library in California and started researching the space program to see what I could find. I was surprised when I found a number of leading directors of NASA claim that the 'real' space program was the space shuttle, from X-15 through to the Shuttle. I was not surprised about what they said, but was surprised that they admitted it publicly. They claimed that because Russia started putting men in capsules and blasting them off of ballistic missiles the US was forced to do the same thing as well. And they admitted that this was actually only for political 'publicity'. As I have stated at the beginning, I do not have that research in front of me right now, I cannot quote who said these things or in which books I saw them, but these statements were made by several of the past directors of NASA, by senior leaders of the space programs, and some of the books were even printed by NASA itself. They actually stated that the Mercury, Gemini and Apollo projects were cold war publicity stunts performed only to keep up with the Russians. The only thing that these men did was stop just short of saying that the projects were actually faked. Rather, their (public or official) stand is that those project, including the trips to and landing on the moon, were real, but they were not the real US space program. They claim that the real space program is and has been since the 1950's, the Space Shuttle program. For political reasons the program was side-tracked into using capsules blasted off on top of missiles because that is what the Russians were doing and for political and cold war military reasons we had to make a show of it as well. Yes, the former leaders of NASA have made statements precisely to that effect. The only difference is they claim the shows were actually executed and were not faked. But, they do admit and have even proclaimed, that the real US Space Program has been the Space Shuttle.

Now, that is real interesting information. In 1970-72, while Apollo was still going on, before the first Shuttle was ever launched, Rob had told me the same thing, that the Shuttle was the real space program.

So, while all of these other missions, Explorer, Mercury, Gemini, were going on, what was happening, then, with our 'real' space program?  Remember I was telling earlier how we first put a man in near space (50 miles altitude) around 1957 using the X-15. And the US space scientist at that time felt that putting capsules on top of ballistic missiles was 'primitive' and to put a man inside such a capsule was insane. So, what happened after the successes of the X-15?

By sheer coincidence I have another source of information on that. During the early 1980's I was producing some multimedia slide shows and I would attend AMI (Association for Multi Images) conventions and seminars. These were well attended by many of the world's leading multimedia producers of the time, most of whom worked for large international corporations. At each convention they would have an awards show in which leading producers submit their show to be judged per many different categories to see who had produced the best shows for the year. It was the Oscars of the multimedia world. One show was submitted by a producer who had produced the show for the US Military. The producer claimed one reason why he produces those shows is that he has high security clearance. The show he played for us (using, about 16 slide projectors and 1 or 2 large screen video projectors) was produced for showing at a world market military convention in Europe. He said that just like we had conventions where the latest multimedia hardware would be showed, the military branches of the governments of the world also held conventions to show off their latest military hardware. These were high-stakes extremely crucial conventions, he told us, where billions of dollars of contracts for military hardware are bought and sold and often political alliances were traded at these shows. That year (sometime between 1981-84) he said was the first year anyone had used large scale multimedia at their booths, and the first country to do so was the US. He said that previously only hardware was shown, and sometimes a movie or a 2 projector show. But, the military commissioned him to make the first multimedia show. The US booth didn't feature hardware in the flesh that year, but sported a large tent with 3 screens, 16 slide projectors and the large screen video projectors.

Now, he claimed that these shows are only attenuated by the very top military brass and their highest ranking aids and that much of what is shown at these shows is highly sensitive data. He said that the show he made was much longer and contained a lot of highly classified sensitive data that could not be shown to non-classified personnel, but, because it was such a great show, the producer edited it and had it screened by top military brass to be okayed for showing at the AMI convention. He claimed that the audience present (about 4-500 leading multimedia producers from around the world, and myself who was in attendance), were the only ones that would be able to see even the edited version. He said that he was only granted permission to show even the edited version only once, only for the awards ceremony, that was it.

So, what was so 'sensitive' about this show. Well, the presentation was designed to show the top military brass of the world just how superior US military technology is. And what topic did they center on to do this? Space Technology. The show began by giving a history of the US space program, starting from the first jets to break the sound barrier of the late 1940's. That led into the work on the X-rocket planes, the most widely known, the X-15. It hailed the X-15 as being the first manned space craft, achieving 50+ mile altitude, and that the flight was made under full pilot control of the winged craft. It went on for some time about all of the achievements of the X-15 project. Then, it went on to discuss the X-16... X-20 and X-22 rocket plane crafts. These were crafts, up to that time, I had never heard about before. They all looked like fat, winged jets, and they were all single pilot crafts. The show stated that each craft achieved further and further break-throughs. Going into and out of orbit, developing heat shield materials for re-entry, testing how far and how fast one can go in near space, etc. It also explained how they developed control throttle rocket engines for some of these test craft. Then they discussed the X-24, the last of the X-Rockets. This was still a single manned winged rocket plane (or maybe it was a 2 man crew, I can't recall), but this was the last of the 'smaller' eXperimental Rocket planes. Yet, these tests were all said to have been going on all through the 1960's and 70's. The next step was the Space Shuttle. This was the intended culmination of the US space effort and all of the X-rocket planes. After all tests checked out with the X-Rockets, a version large enough to house a large (8+ man) crew and allow for a large cargo bay was built. This, according to the show made in the early to mid 1980's, was the APEX of the US space program and the apex of mankind's technological advancements. The show went on glorifying the Space Shuttle as the greatest achievement of mankind so far, taking man into space... etc. etc.

Now, as I said, there were about 400 to 500 top multimedia producers sitting it the room that night watching this show, and I don't know about them, because I am sure none of them had the previous knowledge I had, but I what I had just seen totally, 100% and more, confirmed to me that the moon landing was faked. This show, made for the top military personnel of the leading industrialized nations of the world, had just showed the history of the space program and totally conspicuous by its absence was any reference what so ever to putting men in capsules and blasting them off on top of ballistic missiles. Totally missing was any reference at all to Mercury, Gemini and the big one, Apollo. There was no mention of any craft ever going to the moon, what to speak of men going to the moon. No mention of any voyager or deep space craft ever whizzing past a distant planet. All of this was extremely conspicuous by it's absence. All that the show presented was the X-rocket planes that finally, after 25+ years of research culminated in the Space Shuttle. This was depicted as being America's true space program. And it centered on and ended with the Space Shuttle as being the absolute pinnacle, the apex, of man's reach into space, and man's scientific conquest.  Again, no mention of the moon or other deep space probes.   Strange.  And out of that room of 400-500 producers, I wonder if I was the only one who really caught that?

Everything seems to have confirmed what Rob had told me. And later, this was again confirmed in my library research from the quotes of the leading men at NASA. Another realization this show gave me was that if the capsule programs and deep space probes and lunar landings were faked, it wasn't just the US faking it alone, or even just the US and Russia, but it appeared that all major industrialized nations, at least on the level of top military brass, were all in on it. This show was made for them, so all of them would have to know what was really going on. That sort of seems inconceivable, but, I am not presenting absolutes here, only theory and conjecture. It may be hard to believe or understand, but not impossible. It may be that after some time some an accord was made among the top nations and the real facts shared. In one way that would seem probable because many of those countries do have some sort of space program, and at some point their research would find inconsistencies in the data from faked space missions. But, still, what about all the Universities and all those NASA workers?  I admit, it is hard to comprehend. But, my mission in writing this is to present that which I know or have a good idea of as a way of sparking further research.

If We Had Gone To The Moon, Then What Was So Great About The Shuttle?

If it is true (and I have no absolute way of knowing right now myself) that all other manned space flight had been faked, then that would mean that the Space Shuttle flights were truly man's first real space flights. The first space-walks were from the shuttle. Etc. Everything before was faked. And really, I recall in the early 80's, and even to today, the excitement that NASA and the press showed over the shuttle (the press simply following the 'leads' and excitement NASA was making over it) seemed a bit out of place. I mean, look, if we believe we had gone to the moon, than what was so great about the Shuttle?  I mean, think about it ! ! !

For instance, lets assume that we did go to the moon, and that we have sent probes all over the solar system. Than what is so great about the Space Shuttle?  In 1958 the USSR and America supposedly sent crafts into near space, and even out of earth orbit, up through the Van Allen Belts. In the early 60's we supposedly sent crafts all the way to the moon, crash landing on the moon. USSR had Lunar missions supposedly sending back photos of the dark side of the moon as well in the very early part of the 60's. Then we sent 2 man crews and docked craft together, performed space walks, etc. Then 3 men, then we sent unmanned robot missions to the moon, controlled all the way from JPL or Moscow which took off from earth, entered earth orbit, exited earth orbit, traveled all the way to the moon, entered lunar orbit, landed on the moon, scooped up samples, blasted off the moon, re-entered lunar orbit, exited lunar orbit traveled all the way back to earth, re-entered earth orbit and then landed back on earth, all operating in remote control with relatively primitive computers and navigation all in the mid 60's. Then we did it, right. We sent man to the moon and made the same trip. 2 men landing on the moon, 1 man in orbit, then coming all the way home. All that weight, a lunar lander which carried enough fuel for blast off from the moon, and enough fuel to get 3 men all the way back to earth. Some Trip! All that we did, supposedly, 6 times. Now, again, I ask, in comparison, what is so great about the Shuttle?

Well, the Shuttle does have a capacity to carry 6 to 8 men (even 10 in an emergency). It has a large cargo bay. Okay, the Lunar landers were also heavy and there was a 3 man crew. So, how high can the Shuttle go? "250,000 miles?" No way. "Okay, 25,000 miles, 1/10 of the distance to the moon (1/20 the distance of a round trip)?"   Sorry, try again. "All right, 10,000 miles?"  Better think closer to home. "Okay, 5,000 miles?"  A lot closer. "2,000 miles?" I said a lot closer. "1,000 miles, at least, right?  I mean, hey in the late 60's we took 3 men 250,000 miles along with their lunar lander and rover and got them back to earth, another 250,000 miles, so at least the Space Shuttle can go 1/250th of that right?"  Well, ah, no, not quite. "All right, all, right, 500 miles, it has got to go at least 500 miles up, right, I mean any 747 or jumbo jet has the ability to go 12 miles high?" Well, ah, no, the shuttle can't really go that high. "Then, what is it, how high, or low, does it go?"   Try between 100 to 250 miles high. That is it folks. Most Shuttle flights go up less than 200 miles.

Granted, we are speaking straight up height, and that is well above the atmosphere and well into near space orbit (which starts at about 50 miles up), but it is only 1/1000th of the distance to the moon (according to modern calculations). 1/2000th of a round trip to the moon. Most flights do not venture more than 200 miles from the surface of the earth. Chew on that for a while. I mean, think about that. In 1968 we were sending unmanned missions (supposedly) to the moon and back, in 69, to the moon and back with 3 men on board, 250,000 miles up and back. Okay, so the Shuttle can carry 6 to 8 men. But, it only goes up about 200 miles high, then back down. Seriously people. Think about it. Did we really go to the moon 28+ years ago?  I mean, the Space Shuttle has been flying now for about 17 years, and is the same old shuttle. In 17 years it hasn't gone any higher than 250 miles up. Come on people. Think. Did we go 250,000 miles up and back 28+ years ago?

Lets look at load capacities. The Space Shuttle has a lift off thrust of 6.6 million pounds. I admit, we are talking big time lift off power here. It can take into low earth orbit payloads of up to 40,000 pounds. Now, lets compare that with the Saturn 5 Booster rocket that lifted off the Apollo missions. The Saturn 5 Boosters have a lift off thrust of 7.5 million pounds. But, over all the Saturn 5 was lighter, giving it a higher load carrying capacity to lift off thrust ratio. The total weight of the lunar lander was 100,000 pounds. Saturn 5 could take that 100,000 lb load and lift it into high altitude orbit. The Shuttle can't even reach high altitude orbit at all. But, even more impressive, the Saturn 5 could carry 280,000 pound cargo into low earth orbit! We are talking mammoth. The Saturn Booster 5 was the largest most powerful rocket the US had ever built. It had the largest capacity of any rocket we've ever designed. It was by far the greatest rocket the US ever had... ... or is it????

Saturn 5 Booster (and the F-1 Engines): Fact or Fiction?

Here is something to chew on, if the Lunar landings were faked, then did the Saturn Booster 5 rocket ever actually exist or was it too faked? My theory says it was also faked. And, there is one book by Bill Kaysing called "We Never Went To The Moon" (or something like that). He claims to have worked at Rocketdyne during the 50's and 60's. He claims they that they tried to make a rocket that size, but the rockets never worked properly, they exploded or were not controllable. Then he claims NASA took the project away and on their own had a 'working' Saturn 5 in 6 months. We had to 'show' something to make it look like we could really go to the moon, so NASA faked the Saturn 5 Booster rockets. They built a large shell and strapped modified rocket engines on them. The rocket engines were modified to only operate at a fraction of their power so as to keep them from exploding and to keep them controllable. These empty shells were blasted off which made for a good spectacle. It was all part of the 'show'.

Lets assume they were faked. That would mean that they were never again used for any purpose. Right, they weren't. (I can't recall if they were said to be used for SkyLab, but, there were real Saturn 5 rockets that could get some payloads up (using less than full bore engines), but, whether they really had all the power NASA said they did? No, I say not.) NASA claims that the Shuttle was better, so we didn't need the Saturn 5 any more. That is what NASA wants the public to believe, but their own data doesn't support that argument. The Saturn 5, by their own data, was a far more powerful launch system. With 280,000 lb low altitude orbit payload capacity it has7 times the cargo carrying capacity of the Shuttle. Seven times greater! How can NASA say the Saturn 5 was no longer needed because they now had the Shuttle? The Saturn 5 could have put 7 Hubble telescopes into orbit in a single launch ! And the shuttle cannot make high altitude trips, but the Saturn could take 100,000 lb loads into high altitude orbit. How can NASA say Saturn 5 was no longer needed?  Think about it. It doesn't add up.

Yet, if the Saturn booster was not faked, then it wouldn't make sense if we didn't keep a few in inventory for other purposes. Well, you would think so, wouldn't you?  Strange, we don't have a single one. Back when Challenger blew up I recall reading an article in the newspaper. When the Shuttle program was going strong it became the space vehicle of choice in America to get large cargo and communication satellites, etc, into orbit. But, when the Shuttle program was grounded, the US and commerce found itself with no vehicle capable of lifting off the cargo, as many satellites had been designed to be carried up by the Shuttle and were too large or heavy for most other rockets. The paper published a list of all rockets in the US arsenal that were available at the time for carrying loads into earth orbit. NASA noted that the most powerful rocket America had, excluding the Shuttle which was grounded, was the Atlas Centaur. The Atlas rocket was designed and developed in the 1950's as an ICBM, with improvements made in the 60's when it was (supposedly) used as the booster rocket for the Gemini project. To lift off Apollo NASA required a rocket with many times the lift capacity, that was the Saturn 5 Booster. Second to the Saturn 5 was the Atlas. So, the US had about 7 Atlas rockets in it's arsenal at the time of the Challenger accident and lead time was, if I recall, 6 months to a year for additional rockets. But, there were no Saturn Boosters. One sharp reporter asked why? NASA's reply, because once they built the Shuttle they no longer needed Saturn. They stopped ordering them and since then the manufactures eventually destroyed their tools and dies. They claimed it would now be too costly and take many years to build another. They claimed they would have the Shuttle up long before they could build another Saturn.

Well, I am not convinced. It makes no sense to me. The military has always needed bigger and more powerful rockets. Commerce now needs such high capacity rockets. There was always a need for it. The Shuttle didn't have anywhere near the capacity of the Saturn 5. I just don't believe that we would not have kept a few around. After all, we did keep making the Atlas rockets. They were still considered work-horses and were needed for satellites, etc. Why wouldn't NASA or the military keep at least one of the Big Ones, the Real Big capacity Saturn 5 rockets in inventory? And, why would they stand around while the manufactures destroy their tools and dies?  It isn't like NASA wasn't aware that is what happened.

Interestingly, NASA still has plans to build a space station, but they now claim they would like to take more heavier pieces up into orbit then the Shuttle can manage. So, NASA called for plans to A), build a higher capacity Shuttle, or B) build a whole new rocket launch vehicle.

Some scientists are very perplexed about this and have tried, in vain, to convince NASA to revive the Saturn 5 Booster. They heralded it's (supposed) statistics, pointing out it's proclaimed large carrying capacity. And they heralded it's perfect record of 0 failures (not too hard to do if it were a faked rocket), it had 17 launches, 0 failures. Perfect. They claimed it was not only the biggest and the best, but one of the most reliable. So, they cannot comprehend why NASA doesn't revive it.

No, NASA says they would prefer to spend hundreds of millions of dollars and they have given themselves a long deadline, over 6 years, to develop either a larger capacity Shuttle or an all new larger rocket launch system for lifting cargo's up to 100,000 pounds. (That is even a longer time frame than engineers had during the 60's to develop Saturn 5 using know how and technology of the 60's!). NASA says they want 100,000 pound capacity lift into low earth orbit. Hey, the Saturn 5 could (supposedly, if it really ever existed) lift up to 280,000 pounds, over 2.5 times what NASA claims they need right now, into low earth orbit. Some scientists have claimed that we have learned a lot since the 60's. We have developed new materials that could cut the weight of the thrust chamber and make it stronger. We have smaller, faster more powerful computers that can enhance the guidance systems of the rocket, making it even more reliable. And now we have the know-how to make a controllable rocket engine (the F-1 Saturn engines simply were turned on full power, no way to throttle down). They say that with improved technology and know-how they can modify the F-1 Saturn engines dramatically increasing the usability of the rocket. They say that it makes absolutely no sense at all to redesign the wheel. NASA has all the designs locked up, all they need to do is pull the designs out of storage and apply the new technology to them and they could enhance the Saturn 5 to become even more reliable, to increase its already 280,000 pound lift capacity, and do so for far less costs, and in far shorter time frame, then redesigning an all new system. To those scientists, it makes no sense to do it any other way. Is NASA agreeing to their proposal. No. Why?  I have not heard their reason why.  If you ask me, I will tell you what I think. The Saturn 5 Booster never existed, it was faked along with the whole Mercury, Gemini and Apollo missions. Otherwise, you tell me why?

At least think about this for a while.

These 'side issues' only support the theory that it was all faked.   [ This is added since this was first written, it seems that now the US, along with Russia and Europe, maybe Japan, is going ahead with plans to finally build the first 'real' orbiting space station.  They seemed to have scrapped all plans for a larger shuttle or a larger rocket launch system, and are going to use the 22+ year old Space Shuttles with their smaller payload capacity.  Again, I ask you to think about this. That the Saturn 5 rockets supposedly had the capacity, in the 60's, to lift 280,000 lbs into low earth orbit, 100,000 lbs into 25,000 mile high-orbit.  And scientists are saying that capacity could be improved with today's technology, while the Shuttle can only do 40,000 lbs top to a low-orbit, and the payload restrictions is one of the most crucial limitations on building the space station.  Why not revive the Saturn Rockets? ? ?    Who care's the companies no longer have the tools and dies, rebuild them.   If we could build it from scratch in a few years in the 60's, and we already have all the plans, why not rebuild it now? ? ?     -  did the Saturn Booster Rockets really ever exist ?  Did they really have the load capacity NASA claims they had (or would have needed to get 3 men and their space crafts to the moon and back)?

"NASA, I Think We Have A Problem (with the moon landings). Do You Read Me?"

There are other anomalies in data supposedly about the lunar landing. The one that gets me the most is the lunar lander rocket thrust and dust... and another would be the way in which the astronauts moved in space in NASA's films of the 60's.

About the lunar lander rocket thrust and dust. This one many people have pointed out. The lunar lander weighed, on earth, about 32-36,000 pounds. The moon has about 1/6th earth gravity (according to NASA), which would equal about 6,000 pounds equivalent weight. 6,000 pounds is still quite a lot. That is probably about the same as a good sized motor home, or a UPS truck.

Now, imagine a UPS truck dropping out of the sky. It will take some thrust from a rocket to allow that truck to have a soft landing. Now imagine this truck landing on very fine powder. Scientists say that the moon surface is covered by a very soft and very fine powdery dust, like talcum powder. The rocket under the belly of the Lunar Lander produced a thrust of 10,000 lbs or more, so that it could make the landing soft for the equivalent 6,000 pound lander (36,000 pounds in 1/6th gravity). Now, 10,000 lbs of thrust is one big giant leaf blower. If you turn on even a large leaf blower and hold it over a surface of fine talcum powder, what will happen?  You could dig (or blow) a hole with it. Imagine what 10,000 lbs of thrust will do?

Odd, isn't it, that all the photos of all the lunar landings don't show any hole or depression at all, even directly below the cone of the rocket engine which sits only a few feet above?

[ As you can see in this photo. The large gray cone under the LM (Lunar Module) in the middle is the cone of the rocket engine. Do you see any disturbance to the dust below it? Any depression or hole at all? ]

Not even a small depression. Try making a 6,000 lb UPS truck make a soft landing on top of ground made of talcum powder and see how deep and large a crater 10,000 lbs of thrust would create in extremely fine dust.

Well, lots of people have pointed this glaring little mishap out, and what is NASA's response?   "Although the descent engine of the LM is powerful, most of its operation takes place thousands of feet above the moon during the early stages of the landing," says a NASA information sheet. "At the moment of touchdown, a small amount of surface dust is blown away, but the relatively cohesive lunar surface seems to deflect the blast sideways."

The following are 3 excerpts of Nasa's video clips with my own commentary to point out the discrepancies.
The Videos must be downloaded first, unless you have a cable or DSL connection, then you can try the 'streaming' option. They are in RealVideo format and so you will need to have RealPlayer installed on your system, Files are approximately 2~2.5 meg each.

Landing   (Streaming Video)
Dune Buggy (Streaming Video)
TeleTubies (Streaming Video)

Okay, the official answer. The major thrust is thousands of feet above the surface. Maybe I am wrong, but I  don't get it. We are talking about 36,000 lbs, the equivalent of 6,000 pounds on the lunar surface. I was speaking with one scientist about just the fact that dust should have blown hundreds of feet in the air, so I speculated that since there was no atmosphere and the gravity were weak that the dust might take hours to settle down. I was thinking that there should have been some sort of heavy dust cloud just floating around for hours (like things do float around in space). My Phd friend told me no, just the opposite. He said when there is a total vacuum, no atmosphere, then there is nothing to slow down the descent of the dust. Even though the gravity is 1/6th less on the moon, because there is no air or atmosphere there is nothing to slow down the dust. Therefore, he concluded the dust would fall at a very fast speed, even if it blew hundreds of feet into the (non-air?) Lunar sky, he said it would all fall within a second. (However, I just thought about another factor to enter into the equation. The rocket engines used, I think oxygen and hydrogen gasses, or some type of gasses as rocket fuel. When they burn, isn't there a gaseous exhaust? Wouldn't the gas that exits as exhaust create it's own temporary atmosphere - until it dissipates sufficiently? And wouldn't the dust particles become suspended in that gas?  Just something else to think about).

At any rate, it is interesting that on the moon, where there is no atmosphere, that objects will drop to the lunar surface even faster than on earth even considering the 1/6th less gravity, simply because there is no air pressure to resist the fall. Now, lets apply that reasoning to the landing of the LM. Lets assume that the LM has come to a total stop 2,000 feet above the lunar surface. If the rockets were to totally shut off, then the 6,000 lunar lb weight of the LM would fall with tremendous speed to the lunar surface because there is no air pressure to resist it. Yes, the moon has 1/6th gravity, but we have already accounted for that by reducing the earth weight of the 36,000 lb Lunar Module to only 6,000 lunar lbs. So, the only other factor is the total lack of air pressure to cushion or resist and slow down the fall of the LM. This would mean that on the moon the LM should descend with at least the same force as on the earth, if not more according to my Phd friend, as air pressure does account for a major factor in cushioning falling objects on earth (air planes use air pressure to allow them to fly). What would happen, then, if you were to allow the LM to free fall for several thousand feet?  It would slam into the lunar surface at a tremendous force. Which means that those rocket engines would have to be operating all the way down to touch-down to give a soft landing. Even if not at full bore, they would need to be running at a very high force. I could be wrong about this, I would like more input to make NASA's explanation fit all the data.  

Well, it could be that NASA has adapted one of Einstein's idioms:  "If the facts don't fit the theory, change the facts".

NASA says the surface is relatively cohesive. What does that mean?  It didn't look or act so excessively cohesive when the astronauts tried to kick up some dust. What creates this cohesive quality, and has this been properly studied from samples gathered from the moon dust?  Secondly, they say that only a small amount of surface is blown away, give me a break, a big UPS truck falls on soft dust with a rocket engine blasting away to make it a soft landing and only a 'small amount' of dust is blown - Sideways. Somehow it goes sideways. Interesting phenomena that should be studied further.

Also, about the dust. When the astronauts walked around on the surface their shoes left impressions nearly 2" deep. Now, their space suites had oxygen and all sorts of equipment, all together these guys weighed nearly 360 lbs each. On the moon that was the equivalent of only 60 lbs. Their lunar boots where thermally insulated and were extra large - oversized. This gave their soles a larger than normal square inch coverage. Combine the lightness of a 60 pound weight with a larger almost flat surface of the shoe bottom, and yet with only 60 lbs of pressure it manages to leave a 2" deep impression. That would mean that the surface dust had to be extremely soft. With such extremely soft dust and a craft that was dropping down in an atmosphere that has no air to cushion it, with thrusters blowing (even if they were at reduced throttle), there would still be a large amount of dust flying all over.

Now, amazingly here is a NASA photo of a lunar lander pod, the craft's foot, with one of these 2" deep foot prints right next to it. Odd, the lunar lander pod or foot is spotlessly clean. It's gold mylar foil covered foot hasn't got one speck of dust on it. That, to me, seems very odd. I mean, take a low powered leaf blower and blow a pile of fine powdery dust around and do so near a piece of mylar foil. That foil will attract the dust, at least, even if it has been coated, it will receive an amount of dust on it. I don't care if the rocket was running at reduced thrust, this was still a heavy craft, enough thrust had to be there, which would mean that a large amount of dust would have to be kicked around. All my logic dictates that those mylar covered pods should have had a thick coat of dust on them. Especially when you take into consideration a comment one astronaut gave while he was supposedly driving around a rover on the moon. He claimed that the dust was clinging to everything. The reason for that was there was no moisture, so the dust and all objects were totally dry causing the dust to cling electrostatically to everything. So, why didn't it cling to the mylar on the lunar landing feet after the rocket engine shut down and the dust all settled? Also note: A man's foot will sink down 2" into the soft dust, but it looks that the LM pod (foot) is just sitting on top of the dust. Or is that an optical illusion? It sure looks to me like the foot is just sitting, not like it pushed down into the dust with any sort of force. I mean, look right up close next to the foot, the dust isn't even disturbed at all! A 6,000 Lunar lb object would have to have had made a 'splash' into the dust when it landed, unless it landed extremely slowly and softly (meaning the thrusters would be blasting the dust like mad) - NASA - I think you have a problem. (NOTE: Click photo to access NASA's original photo - and site of a number of photos)

One last thing for now. I have made another observation about their movements while on the moon. (Or in the old space walks of the 60's). I have often wondered why they moved so slowly on the moon?  The answer is generally due to reduced gravity. In the mid 60's the astronauts were supposedly performing space walks, and they too moved in slow motion. Well, something is a little screwy here. You see, when you are underwater your body weight becomes relatively less due to the density and weight of the water. Relative to the atmosphere you are in, being water, the body weight is less than the atmosphere. Water is so heavy, so the body floats in water, similar as one would float in space. However, due to water being so dense and heavy this causes more resistance to movement then normal air does, so that when one is under water he/she will move slowly. The slowness is due to the fact that the body strength hasn't changed, but the atmosphere around it, in this case from normal air to dense water, has become much heavier and thus puts up a higher resistance to movements. What is different in space is that rather than there being a more dense and heavy atmosphere, there is no atmosphere. There is no resistance caused by either water or air, therefore there is much greater freedom of movement. The body has the same strength and there is no resistance from the atmosphere to slow down or resist that movement as there would be under water. Movement in space or on the moon presents less resistance then on earth, so the movements should not be SLOW, but if anything as fast or faster.

Therefore, I have always been puzzled why the astronauts moved around in slow motion on the moon? And it is extremely interesting to note that when I have watched video of space walks from the Space Shuttle, they do not seem to have this same problem. The clumsy suits make movements a bit more restricted, and there is the problem of equal force in one direction causes equal force in the opposite direction, meaning if you move your arm quickly you may find your whole body spinning around, but there is no atmosphere to slow your movement down. What I have concluded is that NASA blew it by photographing movement on the moon in slow motion. This may have been a totally miscalculated idea that sprang from the earlier Space Walks that were probably photographed underwater in large water tanks. The underwater movements were slow, so someone may have concluded movement on the moon would be slow.

It is also extremely interesting to note that when I have taken NASA video coverage of moon walking and the rover riding on the moon and speeded it up 1.8 to 2 times faster then normal something very remarkable happens. All of a sudden everything looks 'normal'. These guys simply look like they are hopping around a little bit in some big over-sized suits. And the rover looks to move around completely normal as well, like any little dune buggy on soft sand. They simply filmed everything about 2 times speed, then played it slower so that it appears everyone is moving around slowly. But that was a very big mistake, as the movements should not be slow in the first place.   (See Videos)

And what about the dust that gets kicked up by the wheels of the rover? According to my friend that dust should fall back down extremely quick as their is no air or atmosphere in which it can suspend itself, there is no air pressure to counter it's fall. But, the dust appears to magically fall in 1/2 speed slow motion. Run the video at x2 and amazingly the dust falls 'normally' (for Earth).

And one other related item. Jumping. Several times the astronauts tried jumping. It was ridiculously done in the same slow motion, but it was also strange that they only left the ground about 3" or so. They could only jump about 3", which would be expected on earth for a man who is wearing all that gear and the space suites. But, on the moon the gravity is 1/6th less, and there is no atmosphere to cause resistance. That means that their weight was only equivalent of 60 lbs, but they still retained all their full strength. Okay, take the full strength of a man and put him in a body only 60 lbs, now how high could he jump?  If he can jump several feet on earth, then In the 1/6th gravity he should jump 3 to 6 feet. Remember, there is only 1/6th the gravity, only 1/6ht the resistance to jumping up. And no air to either resist going up, or to slow down the fall. Wouldn't that mean that they should jump up rather quickly, nothing that would resist their motion up except 1/6 the gravity of earth, so going up should not have been slow, then no air to resist the falling down, so coming down would be even faster than on earth. But, these guys are jumping both up and down in slow motion, exactly the opposite of what they should be doing. Again, crank up the playback speed to x1.8 to x2 and, hey, wow, these guys are just jumping up and down like earth speed normal... Strange, isn't it? Kinda makes you think they may have faked it and really flubbed a few things doesn't it?

This is also seen vividly in videos of the Lunar Rover, the electric go-cart that was used to drive around on the moon's surface. There are videos of the rover going up and over small dunes. In the video you can see one tire slowly leaping into the air as it comes over the small dune, then slowly descending down to the ground, with the dust slowly flying around. Speed this up 2 times and everything looks amazing normal, like a couple guys wearing some suites driving around on dusty dunes. (See Videos) Now, my point is this, if they were really going as slow as the NASA film depicts then the only reason the wheel would be leaping off the ground at that slow speed would be due to 1/6th gravity. That means because everything is 1/6 weight it take less force to cause it to fly up (great, then when those guys were trying to jump up, why only 3"?). Okay, so the wheels leap easier on the moon, but men don't, okay, then it follows that it should also leap 6 times higher as there is less gravity to restrict it from doing so. And with no atmosphere to slow it down, maybe it should be leaping further out as well. But, either way, it should NOT be doing so in Slow motion. No, if anything it should be even faster than on earth as there is no atmosphere and less gravity, meaning less resistance to motion, meaning increased speed, not decreased speed. If we say these are real and actual videos of men on the moon, than something is screwy here. Don't hand me Einstein's idioms, changing facts to match the theory.  And speed up the video x2, very revealing, it all looks 'normal'. The evidence points to the fact it was faked. Think about it.

As I keep saying, I don't know for 100% sure, but, there are definitely holes in NASA's presentations and their explanations. Holes that fit that it was faked. There was sufficient reason for faking it. I have not yet found anything that would 100% without a doubt prove to me that the missions were not faked.

There is one thing, however, that I have not been able to find out very much about, one way or the other. It is one thing that may provide proof the mission did take place. On one mission a University, I think in France, gave the astronauts a small, approx. 1 foot square, reflector that the astronauts placed on the ground and aimed it toward the earth. The university then used the coordinates supplied by NASA as to the location of the mirror then the university aimed a high powered laser at the reflector and was able to capture it's signal back on earth after the laser beam had traveled all the way to the moon, hit the 1 foot square reflector, then traveled all the way back to earth and strike their receiver. A total of 500,000 miles.

Over the years NASA says they have used this laser data to more precisely track the moon's distance from earth and it's exact speed of revolution and orbiting speed, etc., etc.

This should be a project that is on going, or could be repeated by others. What would be needed would be a powerful enough laser and the exact coordinates of the mirror. If we could do this 25 years ago, we could certainly do so now. If several independent universities were to duplicate this, shinning lasers at that mirror and collecting data from different points on earth, it would certainly go a long way to dispel the theory the lunar landings were fake. Especially if we could shine beams that would allow a spectrum to be read that could determine the type of material the reflector is made from, just to confirm it would be the same reflector the astronauts supposedly left (and not just some random reflecting object on the lunar surface.

Now, having said that, I have some problems about how this project was carried out. We are talking about a beam that traveled 500,000 miles. That was one very true and tight parallel beam of light. Another thing is that this beam has to pass through the earth's atmosphere, which has a certain percent of moisture and causes a measurable refraction of a parallel beam of light. The atmosphere could also cause the light to bend and go slightly, or greatly, off angle. All of this would be multiplied by 2 when the beam re-enters the earth atmosphere on it's return from the moon, however, the re-entry beam will have been already spread out and weakened and off angle from its first pass through the atmosphere.

And since this beam has to travel 250,000 miles to strike this 1 foot square reflector, then another 250,000 miles back to a reception device on earth, a very minute fraction of a degree off will throw this beam miles off center in any direction. In other words, the beam has got to be extremely precisely positioned, and all the diffractions and bending the atmosphere would cause would have to be very precisely taken into account and made up for to within a tiny fraction of a degree. I may be wrong, but really, is it possible to do all this? It doesn't seem very probable to me.

What was interesting as well as frustrating is that all data for the experiment was under NASA's supervision. That would mean that they could be 'making up' the data, not collecting it.

Another idea would be to turn Hubble on the moon set to the coordinates of the Lunar landings and see if we could see the flags and rover and landers that were left there. I mean, does Hubble have that sort of magnifying power? But, the similar problem to this is that Hubble is under NASA's control, how would we know if they were faking the photos again or not?

Now finally, one last note for now...

What if the moon project, Gemini and Mercury were all faked?
What should we do about it?

Lets assume it was all faked, and even assume the space probes were faked. What would it mean? Should the masses revolt against the government? Should we demand the end of all government?

No. I am not a promoter of anarchy nor of overthrowing the government, not on something like this. If my theories are correct and the fakery was a product of the Cold War effort and there were valid reasons for it, then, we, the people, have to give some consideration for that.

If my theory of why the US got in the mess of faking one thing after another is correct, then the decisions may have had some validity. There may have been sufficient justification for it. No, I do not like being lied to, but, for those who may not know or recall, the threat from the communists was a very real and frightening thing, especially in the 1950's and 60's. It was in the mid to late 50's that Soviet tanks had rolled into the streets of the Poland and Hungary. Who was next? There was real fear of a full invasion of Europe. And the Soviets had ICBM's, at the push of a button New York or Los Angeles or Washington DC could be turned into a pile or radio-active ashes.

I guess everyone from that period onward grew up under that blanket of the threat of nuclear war, but, it was much more intense in the early 60's then any time I recall afterward. At the time of the Bay of Pigs incident the world escaped an all out nuclear melt-down only by the grace of God, Krishna. Fallout shelter signs were everywhere, in schools, in shopping centers. People, like one of my neighbor's down the street, paid thousands to have a family sized A-Bomb shelter installed under their own backyard. It was at the time of the Bay of Pigs when a civil disaster worker came to our school to teach us kids (maybe 12-13 years old) what to do and what to expect 'when' an atomic bomb fell on downtown LA - about 30 miles away. First he told us there would be a blinding light, so intense that we would all be permanently blind if we didn't bury our head in our arms and lay face down on the floor. Even then we should not be afraid if we get temporary blindness from the intense flash. Then he said there would be a wave of intense heat - that possibly some of our clothes may burst into flame, polyester cloth may melt, and fires would break out all over the city. Then there would come a shock wave that would cause all the glass to fly out, desks and objects may go flying, etc. But he told us the classroom should still survive. Yet, we would have to expect that the sound and pressure wave would cause our ear drums to break, so we should expect blood to come out of our ears, and we probably wouldn't be able to ear anything, at least for some time. So, there we would be, a class of 30 blind and deaf kids and a blind and deaf teacher, but don't worry, it only gets worse. The worse thing we had to fear was the radiation fall out, which he said maybe totally invisible. I mean, that was 'taught' to us in 7th grade.

Anyway, I gave this account to give insight into the atmosphere and mood of those days. We intensely feared and expected a nuclear war to break out at any second. And it almost did.

Politically the Soviet Union, along with Marxist Communism, was growing and spreading, and much of it was due to the fact that they were proving and showing themselves to be technologically advanced. Hey, if there were an all out war between the US and the USSR, the one with the most advanced technology was sure to win, so if your are a smaller, less powerful nation, whose side would you want to be on?  The winning side. You would want to be on the side that showed superior technological prowess. And, the Soviet Union was winning in this race. In fact, as early as 1955, before even the first satellite was ever launched, Russia proclaimed to the world that within a year they intended to send a man to the moon and back!!! It was a bold statement. But, sort of ridiculous in light of where the space programs were at the time. Yet, it also outlines how naive many scientists were at the time about the enormity of the undertaking. Many felt it was simply a matter of building a large enough rocket...

The spread of communism was a real threat, and it was growing, and what was empowering that spread was the USSR's advanced technology. And, what came to the forefront in the very late 50's and early 60's of technology prowess was the conquest of Space. Rocket science and space exploration.

Why should communism be stopped?  If you don't know the answer to that, what can I say. In Krishna Consciousness we are not opposed to a true communistic ideology, however, the basis of such a true communistic ideology is that everything belongs to the Supreme Godhead, not that everything belongs to the mundane man-made, man-run State. But, we are diametrically opposed to Atheism, especially forced atheism. Marxist Communism forced atheism as the State religion. It virtually banned or crippled all other forms of true religion and in its place it enforced the State imposed atheistic ideology where the impersonal and faceless State is Supreme. When communism was taking over in the streets of Russia many years ago the State had captured control of all farms and food production and processing. Then they would drive trucks through the small rural towns and tell people that God was dead, there was no God. To prove it they told the people to go to their churches and pray to God for their daily bread. For a week the communists would withhold food supplies to the town. A week later the military trucks would go through the same town and tell the people, "Now, ask the State to give you bread". When people came to the truck and asked for bread, the communist military would give them, telling them, "Now, who is supreme? God or the State?  Who has supplied you with your daily bread?  God or the State?". Thus, they turned masses into atheists, turning them away from religion and forcing them to accept their atheistic ways. If you are a religious person, you can see why I and most American's in the 50's and 60's feared communism.

If Russia was winning world-wide influence by showing the world they were the superior technologically advanced nation, the US had to do what was needed to stop them. Whatever it took (up to a limit) we had to do. Using nuclear bombs and risking total obliteration of the entire human race was not a viable alternative. It was madness, and we knew that. Neither side wanted to risk that. So, we wagged a cold war whose main battlefield was technology and space exploration.

As any aspiring (or master) artists (or photographer or cinema photographer, or videographer) will tell you, "It doesn't have to be, it only has to look like it is". In this cold war race for space, somehow that became the modus operendi. It no longer really had to be, it just had to look like it was. Russia found they really didn't have to send men up into space, they only had to make it look that way. The US found they really didn't have to send men to the moon, it only had to look that way.

Now, imagine if my scenario is correct - and you are the President, or the head of the CIA or the head of NASA or whatever - . When do you come clean? And, how do you stop the ball once it got rolling?

You see, to convince the other side, you had to convince your own people. For the US to make Russia and the rest of the world actually believe you could send a man to the moon, you had to fool everyone. Only a very minute handful of people could know. Most of the workers at JPL and NASA and especially the Senators and other non-essential personnel, they also had to be believe the lie. There could not be any exception. Universities, the companies building the rockets, most all military personnel, no one could know the truth.

Is it possible to have perpetuated such a lie of such magnitude for all these years?  Well, I guess so, there doing it. Either that or there has to be some other reason why no hole below the lunar lander rockets, why no Saturn 5 boosters, why no dust on the lander feet, why movements were slow on the moon when they should not have been, etc.

But, now we live in a whole different world. The Cold War is over (or at least we hope so). The Soviet Union has collapsed. There is now no longer any reason to keep up the lie.

But, put yourself in the shoes of those who have kept the secret all this time. How do they go about revealing the real truth without causing a major social upheaval? What would really happen? How will the masses react?  I think you can see, there would be a legitimate fear on their part. They definitely will have a dilemma on their hands. (And, all along universities and law makers will want to see more and more deep space exploration and give the funding for it, so more missions have to be faked).

However, now that the need for deceiving the masses is no longer present, now there is no justification for perpetuating it. The truth must be disclosed.

If my theories are correct, I would strongly suggest the time is now finally ripe to come clean and tell the real truth. It should be done in a widely advertised message delivered by the leaders of the US and Russia, along with leading scientists. It should be done in a live video presentation that should be aired on all TV and radio channels and the Internet simultaneously. It should be fully explained why it was done, and exactly what was done, and exactly what was faked. It should be explained how the fakery was done. Then it should appeal to human society's common sense and urge that there should be no disruptive reactions, that that will not be to any one's benefit. If I am right, and there was justification for the lies, than give the masses some credit, they will understand if it is presented properly. Explain what the reasons were for starting the lies, then explain how the reason had remained valid until now, when there is no longer a cold war.

If the parties involved wait any longer to come clean, then they will miss the opportunity. Then it will go past the time of having legitimate reason for continuing with the lie. Right now the time is perfect.

However, if they follow my plan I only request that they give me, a devotee of Krishna, the credit for prompting them to do so...

That is it for now. I will try to update or add a few things as I think about it.

Completed April 30, 1997.

(C) 1997 by Ameyatma das (James Beals).


Chant Hare Krishna, your life will become sublime.

Use your own BACK button, or go Back Home (my home) Home

Top of Page

Added Note: What About the Mars PathFinder?

What goes on in Area 51? Just 70 miles north of Las Vegas there is a military base that includes some very off-limits areas. In the last 5 years or so the Fed Government has given even more land that is now part of the off-limits ranges. Off limits means that NO ONE is allowed to go in there, no one is allowed to fly over there, etc. Not even top military brass, not unless they have been selected to be given admittance. I doubt that even the President could go in without creating a major problem. I don't have the square miles size, but lets say it is quite large. From memory I think I recall it is larger than the size of Rhode Island. And , as I said, they have increased its size over the last 30+ years. (Do an Internet search for Area 51 to get more info)

Many UFO people believe there are UFO's there. Others think there is a secret military city there. Others say that because it is so highly restricted and secret that it is probably Uncle Sam's military illegal and secret toxic waste dump. The military says it is no more then it's secret weapons test area. Actually, officially the military says it doesn't exits, although they admit that it is a secret weapons test site. They first flew the Stealth Bomber there. Yes, in only one small section of Area 51. What goes on in the rest of the site? And, unless the test are going on daily, why not at least allow some people access to the areas once in a while, just to keep an eye on Uncle Sam and make sure that they are not using the site as an illegal toxic waste site? I mean, you know, put all the military toys away for a few days each year and let the press and environmentalists double check it once in a while? The military says that absolutely cannot be done. Why? Are they afraid someone will recognize the terrain as being from out of this world?

What is my idea? This is the place where they create other world sites. They created the Lunar settings here for filming the lunar landing scenes. And, starting a few years back they staged the Mars mission here, and are producing future missions right now. This is, however, pure speculation. However, one day many years ago NASA supposedly sent it's first probe to Mars and a newspaper article with photos was shown to Srila Prabhupad. The reporter made a comment that the Martian landscape looked like the Arizona desert, and Srila Prabhupad added that the photos WERE of the Arizona desert (or Nevada, or whatever).

Can it be faked?  Yes. All the signals can be relayed to earth through high orbit military satellites. In other words the ground crews are receiving data from space, but it is being secretly sent up to secret military satellites, then bounced back to earth. As far as the sets, today all of the rocks and mountains and terrains could be easily produced via an array of SGI high end computers and SoftImage type programs, including the Martian rover. But, they still could be using real sets in Area 51. Even the fact that the hours or sunlight are different could be engineered and faked. Especially via computer simulation.

Is it faked?  Really, I don't know. If my other theories are correct, then, yes, it is. If not, then what can I say, I am wrong. however, it would be similar to the idea of the lunar landings, even IF they did go by mechanical means, still, they are taking earth frequency machines into the Mars frequency planet, all they will see is Earth frequency existences, they cannot enter the true Martian world with earth based elements.

If it is faked, then WHY? The cold war is (hopefully) over. So why fake it now? What compelling reason is there now?  None. Not like the early 60's when we were in a face to face, nose to nose nuclear face-off with Russia. Where we were trying to win world alliances. However, if it is faked then I would say the only real compelling reason now is as I explained previously, once they made the first lie to keep up with the Russians it slowly evolved into a very complex web of one lie after another, at first with military basis. But, now those in the know, those in charge, they simply don't know what to do about it. How do they announce to the world that it was all faked? How would the world, how would the American people, respond?  Would it cause widespread rioting, would they be a demand for the overthrow of the government? Would America loose it's superior power in the world? Since they don't know, and since they don't know what else to do, and since scientist and the general public want to see additional space exploration missions, they simply keep producing shows.

If I am wrong, oh well, no harm done. Just show me undeniable positive affirmable facts that can be double checked and proven without doubt and I will eat my words. (However, we still stick to the fact that you can't go to the moon with an earth body or earth machines. All you are going to see is what exists there that is perceivable to the Earth senses. You will not see Moon life and water and cities because they exist on a higher vibration, a different plane of existence).

However, what if I am right?  Am I sticking my neck out?  Could I be snuffed out? If Krishna wants me to die, no one can save me. Not with all the technology of the US. And if Krishna doesn't want me to die right now, then no one, not even the whole US military, can kill me.

That is my firm realization. It is in Krishna's hands, not the little people who think they are so great, in charge of national security. Besides, I am not at all trying to provoke anarchy or dissention or rebellion. It is time to face the truth. If it is faked, then it cannot remain a secret forever. Someday it will be revealed. Why make it any more difficult?