Apollo whistleblower revealed at last!

[Dave Greer]

I've un-earthed (should that be un-mooned?) undeniable evidence proving who the main Apollo whistleblower is.

Take a butchers at this photo, AS14-66-9261. It shows the area under the LM descent stage taken during the Apollo 14 mission.

Here's a close up of what appears to be some kind of loose foil beneath the lander - what it's doing there is anyone's guess.

There appear to be some strange symbols on the foil, in the light diagonal strip. In my next post I'll examine each one, using cutting edge forensic detection methods, from top right to bottom left.

The conclusion will shock you.

[Dave Greer]

Put it all together... what have you got?

ROCKET WHISTLEBLOWER PLAIN TO SEE - GENE KRANTZ

So there you have it people. Gene Krantz was the infamous Apollo flute-blower all along.

I know what you disinformationists are going to say - "bunnies in the clouds", or "pareidolia", or whatever the lastest NASA excuse is. Ask yourself this: what are the chances of random reflections on foil spelling out such a sentence? I've used my wristwatch to calculate that it's about the same chance as 2 people in an elevator sharing the same birthday - in other words 30 TRILLION TO ONE. How about applying Occam's shaver for once?

I'd like to take this opportunity to offer my most cromulent apologies to Duane and Jack - seems they were right all along.

[Dave Greer]

Double post.

Or CIA interference.

Edited February 1, 2008 by Dave Greer

[Guest Stephen Turner]

Bring it on, oh sage of Redcar.

[Guest David Guyatt]

Sorry to throw a bucket of iced water on your conspiracy theory, Dave, but your analysis s badly flawed.

The first image analysis - upon which you whole subsequent theory shakily rests - is not a rocket. If you look closer at the image, you'll see that it is this:

I happen to know from the many millions of NASA technicians who have approached me for eye-tests and a pair of my world famous patented ispace spectacles... that they are a bunch of cowboys.

Now armed with the truth, please feel free to visit my online spectacle store: www.SuckerSpecs.com, where you too, can apply for an online guaranteed bank loan to be exclusively used to make a down-payment on a pair of extra cool glasses Glasses moreover, that can be used for all occasions -- weddings, birthdays, bar-mitzvahs, funerals, holidays-in-space, queueing for F1 tickets, moon-walks... the list endless (as is the payment plan )

[Duane Daman]

Speaking of possible Whistle-Blowers ....

People who might have talked died under mysterious circumstances.

" The issue of mysterious and untimely deaths also plagues the moon shots. Were whistleblowers silenced? The January 1967 death of Gus Grissom, along with Ed White and Roger Chaffee in the Apollo 1 fire, is a possibility. One of the more prominent debunkers of the “we-never-went-to-the-moon” crowd has published his “disgust” that Bill Kaysing would suggest that Gus Grissom was murdered in order to silence him. Who else makes such a “disgusting” claim? Grissom’s wife and son do. They both believe that the Apollo 1 fire was no accident, and that the truth is being covered up. They have evidence that such a notion might be true, and Grissom’s son Scott is calling for an official investigation into the matter as of 2002. Grissom was critical of NASA, hanging a lemon on a NASA simulator before he died. People associated with the Apollo 1 simulation on the day of the fire remarked on the strange atmosphere that prevailed. Grissom told his wife that if somebody died in an “accident,” it would likely be him, and not because he was accident prone. Straight-talking Grissom apparently made the NASA brass uneasy with his observations. During the Apollo 1 simulation, just before he died, the communications with the Command Module completely broke down, and Grissom said in exasperation, “How are we going to get to the moon if we can't talk between two buildings?”

Lola Morrow was the astronauts’ secretary. On the show Moon Shot she can be heard describing the atmosphere on the morning of the fire. She described the mood of Grissom, White and Chaffee as one she had never seen before. Before each flight and major event, the astronauts were eager to get to it. Not that day. They obviously did not want to do the simulation. Clark MacDonald, an engineer working for McDonnell-Douglas, was hired by NASA to investigate the fire. He now has admitted that more than thirty years earlier, NASA destroyed the evidence he gathered, as well as the report he produced, for “public relations” reasons. MacDonald determined that an electrical short started the fire when the battery power was switched on. Grissom’s son Scott was granted access to the Apollo 1 craft, where he gathered evidence that he says pointed to sabotage, and that there has been a cover-up of it.

Grissom’s death (taking White and Chaffee with him) is not the only strange one. Bill Kaysing thinks that another man was silenced by murder. Thomas Baron was an inspector for North American Rockwell, the contractor that built the Command Module. The astronauts are united in the opinion that what Rockwell produced was of initially poor quality. The astronauts comment on it in Moon Shot. Baron was not an engineer, and only had a high school education, but was the detail-oriented fanatic that all technical organizations need. His pals gave him the initials “DR,” which stood for discrepancy report. His supervisor ran out of discrepancy report forms regularly, because Baron used so many of them. He was the squeaky wheel. He made some of his findings public, and Rockwell fired him about three weeks before the Apollo 1 fire. Baron originally produced a fifty-five-page report, and finished a 500-page report that he delivered when he testified to Congress in April of 1967. His testimony received a hostile reception. A few days later he was dead. His car was struck by a train, killing not only himself, but also his wife and stepdaughter. In shades of Casolaro and Wilcher, his death was officially ruled a suicide. It was worse than that, because he did not only “kill” himself, but also murdered his wife and her child. It took some interesting psychology to arrive at that conclusion, going from being overly conscientious to becoming a murderer. One theory is that he was distraught over the Apollo 1 fire, so he killed himself and his family. I have not heard about anybody else connected to the Apollo program killing themselves or becoming murderers over the Apollo 1 “accident.” How strange that the biggest whistleblower did. Just what are those odds? The 500-page report disappeared, and has not been seen since. The moon hoax debunkers have lined up behind the official explanation. Jay Windley thinks that Barons’ report has come up missing partly because it had little investigative value, and that Baron may have indeed killed himself, but if he were murdered, it would have been a private contractor, not NASA, and if they wanted to silence him, they should have done it before he testified. Jay may be right, but I have encountered far too many conveniently timed deaths during my investigations to make my suspicion go away, especially when Grissom’s son thinks he was murdered.

Killing whistleblowers such as Thomas Baron was standard operating procedure for the defense establishment, if it related to military matters. I know people who have been involved in Department of Defense whistle-blowing activities. It could get pretty scary. Sometimes, people would simply “disappear,” Jimmy Hoffa-style. When billions of dollars are at stake, murdering a few people with “big mouths” or who otherwise stand in the way is standard activity. That is the nature of American-style capitalism. Why should it be different regarding space matters? I was challenged to provide some evidence of what I know about whistle-blowers, and without naming names, this footnote presents a little of what I am aware of.[62]

James Irwin was an Apollo 15 astronaut. He became a Born Again Christian, leading an effort to find Noah’s Ark. According to what I have read and heard, in 1991, Irwin contacted Kaysing to have a chat. Why would Irwin call a “kook” such as Kaysing? Four days after allegedly trying to contact Kaysing, Irwin was dead from a heart attack. Did “Born Again” Irwin want to unburden his conscience? Irwin had heart disease, so that may explain it, but the spooks can apparently induce heart attacks using normally undetectable means. "

http://www.ahealedplanet.net/cover-up.htm#died

[Dave Greer]

Dave,

I would like to thank you for having the decency to post what you have found. At least you are honest enough to let others know.....

Had Turner or Burton discovered this, I can ASSURE you that they would have kept it to themselves.

Can you explain how you decided to use the Apollonic Rebus Technique? And in your use of it(is it a newly acquired skill?), have you come upon any Hidden Mickeys??? I think this question is critical.

Kathy

Yes, the Apollonic Rebus Technique is one I've been perfecting over the years. I became interested in the Rebus Technique while reading a book on ancient Egyptian hieroglyphics. Through my research I discovered evidence that the ancient Egyptians knew all about helicopters, motor cruisers and zeppellins.

I find a very good way of analysing Apollo images is by blinking my eyes very quickly while staring at the computer screen, then keeping them firmly shut and analysing the resultant patterns that form on the inside of my eyelid. That way I can be sure that what I'm seeing is the raw image that hasn't been photoshopped in any way.

I've taken this technique a step further and use it as a kind of "mental satnav". Before I set off on a long journey, I plan the route in Google Earth, then use the "blink technique" to "burn" the image of the desired route onto the back of my retina. If I get lost along the way, all I have to do is squeeze my eyes tightly shut while driving along, and lo and behold I have an instant "mental map" of the area. I actually made it to the bottom end of my street using this technique not so long ago. Sadly the magistrates were somewhat bemused by this concept, and saw fit to add 6 points to my driving licence instead. I remain undeterred.

As for Hidden Mickeys... I've uncovered proof that aliens knew about Mickey Mouse many millenia ago, in fact I suspect he is some kind of uber-mouse that was worshipped by the murine aliens. And you thought Mount Rushmore was a wonder?

[Dave Greer]

Sorry to throw a bucket of iced water on your conspiracy theory, Dave, but your analysis s badly flawed.

The first image analysis - upon which you whole subsequent theory shakily rests - is not a rocket. If you look closer at the image, you'll see that it is this:

I happen to know from the many millions of NASA technicians who have approached me for eye-tests and a pair of my world famous patented ispace spectacles... that they are a bunch of cowboys.

Now armed with the truth, please feel free to visit my online spectacle store: www.SuckerSpecs.com, where you too, can apply for an online guaranteed bank loan to be exclusively used to make a down-payment on a pair of extra cool glasses Glasses moreover, that can be used for all occasions -- weddings, birthdays, bar-mitzvahs, funerals, holidays-in-space, queueing for F1 tickets, moon-walks... the list endless (as is the payment plan )

You might be on to something with your Cowboy connection David old bean.

I've managed to dig up photographic proof that cowboys have indeed been to the moon. As you can see, this photo has stars in the background, something NASA curiously left out of their Apollo photos as they knew they would never be able to accurately fake them in 1969, despite the invention of planetaria in the early 20th century.

http://api.ning.com/files/0enKoagnOm*Nam9R.../CowboyMoon.jpg

As for your ispace specs, I've ordered a pair off your "Suckerspecs" website for my mate Bob from down the pub. Hopefully he'll have better luck on a Friday night than he does with just his beer goggles.

[Guest David Guyatt]

Sorry to throw a bucket of iced water on your conspiracy theory, Dave, but your analysis s badly flawed.

The first image analysis - upon which you whole subsequent theory shakily rests - is not a rocket. If you look closer at the image, you'll see that it is this:

I happen to know from the many millions of NASA technicians who have approached me for eye-tests and a pair of my world famous patented ispace spectacles... that they are a bunch of cowboys.

Now armed with the truth, please feel free to visit my online spectacle store: www.SuckerSpecs.com, where you too, can apply for an online guaranteed bank loan to be exclusively used to make a down-payment on a pair of extra cool glasses Glasses moreover, that can be used for all occasions -- weddings, birthdays, bar-mitzvahs, funerals, holidays-in-space, queueing for F1 tickets, moon-walks... the list endless (as is the payment plan )

You might be on to something with your Cowboy connection David old bean.

I've managed to dig up photographic proof that cowboys have indeed been to the moon. As you can see, this photo has stars in the background, something NASA curiously left out of their Apollo photos as they knew they would never be able to accurately fake them in 1969, despite the invention of planetaria in the early 20th century.

http://api.ning.com/files/0enKoagnOm*Nam9R.../CowboyMoon.jpg

As for your ispace specs, I've ordered a pair off your "Suckerspecs" website for my mate Bob from down the pub. Hopefully he'll have better luck on a Friday night than he does with just his beer goggles.

Don't let your mate Bob, down the pub, obfuscate things.

He's my best customer to date.

He owns not just a pair of the ispace-specs, and the nifty slimline, bow-tie spinning, "totty-totters" self-dimming shades, but he has two pairs of our popular "willy magnifiers" (the night version has a minute and indispensable torch inspection beam) that are designed to provide a positive interaction for those who have consumed 10 or more pints of lager (Bob obviously falls well within this -- and falls rather often, in fact), but he has just purchased a pair of the newly launched "Egypto bifocals", designed to assist people to accurately transcribe ancient cuneform. I see he has let you borrow these even though he hasn't paid off (and never will either) the loan our subprime mortgage company, "Myopia Finance limited", advanced to him to buy them.

Below is an ancient rock drawing of an ancient astronaut (standing on the left) sporting a pair of our stylish "Egypto bifocals":

And an ancient lager drinker modeling a pair of our best selling "willy magnifiers":

[Guest David Guyatt]

I've taken this technique a step further and use it as a kind of "mental satnav". Before I set off on a long journey, I plan the route in Google Earth, then use the "blink technique" to "burn" the image of the desired route onto the back of my retina. If I get lost along the way, all I have to do is squeeze my eyes tightly shut while driving along, and lo and behold I have an instant "mental map" of the area. I actually made it to the bottom end of my street using this technique not so long ago. Sadly the magistrates were somewhat bemused by this concept, and saw fit to add 6 points to my driving licence instead. I remain undeterred.

My wife uses the same "blink" technique...

[Duane Daman]

Funny stuff Dave ! ... Not only can you tap dance but you're a comedian as well !

I have always thought that mockery was one of the highest forms of debate .... To make your opponents views appear ridiculous wins every time .

Speaking of things that are ridiculous, not to mention, highly suspicious.... Here are ten good reasons why conspiracy theorists believe that the Apollo Moon landings were ridiculous on so many levels .

This list was written by a believer in the authenticity of the Apollo record, yet he is open minded and courteous enough to admit that conspiracy believers have many ligitimate reasons to believe what they do about the validity of NASA being able to soft land manned missions on the Moon almost 40 years ago, when this technological feat can not even be accomplished using the advanced technology of today.

1. With our national security state and its penchant for secrecy and record of fabrication and cover-up, nobody in the public can say for certain what really happened during the Apollo program. There were definitely national security games being played at NASA during the Apollo program. If these kinds of conspiracy musings are to be avoided in the future, the national security state needs to be dismantled. Dismantling the national security state, however, is far more important for the survival of the human species than it is to avoid the propagation of conspiracy theories.

2. Apollo whistle-blowers have probably been murdered or silenced. Thomas Baron’s death is suspicious (and the disappearance of his 500-page report). There is reason for suspicion regarding the Apollo 1 fire, concern regarding Jim Irwin’s sudden death, and less violent suppression efforts directed toward people such as Bart Sibrel (him being silenced until his evidence was analyzed). The defense establishment has silenced or murdered many whistle-blowers when it related to military matters, and the same defense establishment players built the equipment that went to the moon. However, when I have encountered dead and silenced whistle-blowers, it was usually for the understandable defense contractor motivation of money. Defense contractors do not want whistle-blowers airing the fact that they made substandard equipment or were wasteful. The contractors could get disciplined, lose contracts and get a public black eye. Killing “big mouths” has been typical behavior in the defense establishment, and I am particularly aware of that kind of activity happening back during the Apollo days, while the very same defense establishment was committing genocide in Southeast Asia. They could have silenced whistle-blowers but also taken their criticisms seriously and attempted to make their equipment better. Before Baron died, Major General Samuel Phillips was making observations similar to Baron’s, and issued his own report. Murdering a low level technician would have been a much easier task than bumping off a major general.

3. NASA played fast and loose in the editing room with its official movies, and their web sites cannot be relied on to always give the correct information. There are inconstancies in the images, such as disappearing and off-center reticles, visor reflections and other anomalies that can appear suspicious, although none appear to be the smoking gun of faked footage.

4. There were definitely screw-ups that can lead to suspicion, such as the inconsistencies in calculating the neutral point in academia, but they have been more innocent errors than proof of a cover-up.

5. There were many substantial risks regarding the Apollo missions. They were awesomely dangerous undertakings. Moon hoax debunkers have agreed with me regarding NASA continually minimizing the problems overcome and the dangers faced. There was plenty of held breath at NASA during the moon shots. Little about them was really “routine.”

6. The relatively hitchless nature of the Apollo missions, and the seemingly scripted nature of the Apollo 13 drama, can give one pause. It is awe-inspiring to ponder all the things that had to go right for the moon landings to be successful, and when even Robert Seamans says that it is hard to believe that we went, for the moon hoax theorists to have doubts is understandable.

7. The fact of no visible exhaust coming from the LMs during lift off appears strange, and the moon hoax debunkers have had to invoke several phenomena to explain the situation. However, I heavily lean toward thinking they are right.

8. The poor video quality of Apollo 11 on the moon and the way the TV networks were forced to record it, lends itself to suspicion.

9. Hiring Nazis to help make the space program a reality (as well as staffing the CIA with Nazis) was one of history’s more disgusting instances of realpolitik, and the very Nazis America hired demonstrated their ruthlessness and penchant for deceit numerous times during their Third Reich days. Nazi fabrications at the CIA greatly contributed to the Cold War tensions, and it is legitimate to wonder if von Braun and pals pulled some of their Nazi tricks out of their bag for NASA.

10. With our government’s penchant for secrecy it is difficult to know just what really happened, but John Glenn’s recent strange appearance on television, Gordon Cooper and Ed Mitchell’s support for Steven Greer’s Disclosure Project, Brian O’Leary’s skepticism, Aldrin’s seemingly strange reaction to the footage that Bart Sibrel showed him, David Adair’s incredible testimony and so on, leads to legitimate suspicion regarding things not being as NASA would have them appear. Factor in strange events such as NASA giving the rights to Mars images to a private contractor, the Brookings Institute’s recommendation to hide signs of intelligent extraterrestrial life from the public, and there is plenty to be suspicious of.

http://www.ahealedplanet.net/cover-up.htm#died

[Evan Burton]

Were you going to add the next piece Duane?

However, although the above points can be compelling, they do not add up to NASA faking the moon landings. They may have tried faking it if they felt they had to, but there are too many strong pieces of evidence that argue for legitimate landings, such as how the moon dust behaved, aerodynamically clumsy objects flying horizontally for quite a ways and other things flying as if they were in a vacuum, and now there is Armstrong’s leap to deal with. It has been tiring to watch the conspiracy theorists sift through the same worthless mine tailings over and over. Very little of the photographic analysis, such as shadows not running parallel, astronauts lit up in while standing in shadows, supposed differences between video and still footage, moving mountains and the like have stood up to the slightest scrutiny, and an area of evidence is easily and thoroughly explained, and then a new researcher presents the same evidence.

.

.

.

Although I think we landed on the moon with human beings, I have little doubt that the powers that be were not above trying to fake it if they had to. In significant ways, the space race was a grotesque display of nationalism, where we made a big deal of planting the flag each time (it looks like Columbus in 1492) with the Stars and Stripes all over the Apollo equipment (did somebody think they might be Chinese astronauts?). In addition, I doubt we are being told the whole truth about the Apollo program and its findings.

In case you don't know, Wade is a member here and I have asked him to join the discussion in this thread.

[Duane Daman]

I already stated that the author of that article was a Moon landing believer, so there was no reason to post the points I was not trying to make ...It's always game with you isn't it Evan ?

I had no idea that the person who wrote this amazing article was a member here ... I would very much enjoy discussing any of this with him, as his article is just about the most intelligent and honest, not to mention most reavealing piece of work that I have ever read coming from someone who believes that the moon landings happened .. I'm amazed at his willingness to agree that the conspiracy theorists have many ligitimate reasons to doubt the authenticity of the official Apollo record, as was presented to the world .

So let's try that last quote again, shall we ?... and this time I will highlight what I believe are the important parts of his statement.

"Although I think we landed on the moon with human beings, I have little doubt that the powers that be were not above trying to fake it if they had to. In significant ways, the space race was a grotesque display of nationalism, where we made a big deal of planting the flag each time (it looks like Columbus in 1492) with the Stars and Stripes all over the Apollo equipment (did somebody think they might be Chinese astronauts?). In addition, I doubt we are being told the whole truth about the Apollo program and its findings."

Looks like there were more negatives in that statement than positives , weren't there ? ... Maybe you should have played your game using a different quote .

Edited February 3, 2008 by Duane Daman

[Evan Burton]

My apologies - I did not see your acknowledgment.

[Duane Daman]

My apologies - I did not see your acknowledgment

Thank you ... Apology accepted .

I didn't join this forum to argue or to insult any of the members here, or to be insulted or ridiculed in return ... I only want to discuss a subject which I find very interesting without all the game playing... and I don't see any reason why that can't be accomplished .