Jump to content
The Education Forum

Apollo whistleblower revealed at last!


Dave Greer

Recommended Posts

Nice try Duane, but even Wade does not supply any FACTS . You lose again...please try again next time.

Sorry to burst your bubble Craig by proving you wrong , but even the person you and your pals parrot , Jay Windley of "clavius moon base pick and choose your disinformation", excepts the FACT that Apollo saftey inspector Tom Baron had a 500 page report that went missing after he and his family "comitted suicide" by train.

Since you and Evan and the rest of the Apollo defending gang here claim that every word posted on the clavius site is gospel, then I guess you would have no reason to disbelieve your mentor Jay right ?

" BIBLIOGRAPHY

thomas baron

Thomas Ronald Baron was a quality control inspector for North American Aviation (NAA), the company responsible for building the command module. Baron's activities after the Apollo 1 fire are interpreted by conspiracists as support for a conspiracy.

Mr. Baron started working for NAA in September 1965 and was assigned as an inspector at the Kennedy Space Center (KSC), the launch site. In late 1966, Baron presented to NASA officials a 55- or 57-page report alleging improper action, discrepancies, failures, and other irregularities he had witnessed. KSC officials notified NAA managers, who met with Baron to address his concerns. The senior quality control officer of NAA attended this meeting. They found that some of Baron's criticism had merit, but the rest of his report was inapplicable or unfounded for a variety of reasons.

Baron, apparently displeased with NASA's and NAA's response, leaked his report to the media. This angered NAA officials, who fired him in late 1966. NAA also issued a public response to his report.

On his own, Mr. Baron began to assemble a more thorough report (300-500 pages long, according to various sources) in which he apparently hoped to document his charges of safety violations. After the Apollo 1 fire, he delivered his report to the Congressional committees investigating the incident. He also testified before a subcommittee headed by Rep. Olin Teague (D-TX).

Shortly after the committee rendered its findings, Thomas Baron and his family were killed when their car was struck by a train.

The 500-page report written by Thomas Baron mysteriously disappeared after his death. NASA probably destroyed it."

http://www.clavius.org/baron.html

And here is part of Tom Baron's testimony where he talked about his 500 page report, which is also posted on clavius.

" Mr. WYDLER: Could I suggest that if Mr. Baron has some concluding remarks, or if he would like to submit a statement for the record, that he may be afforded an opportunity? I see you have something before you, and perhaps you would like to put it in.

Mr. BARON: I think I have covered most of it. I have the report that I would like to be submitted as a part of the record, the 500-page report.

Mr. WYDLER: That means printing it. That is something we should leave to the committee, something of that length, whether we want to print it as part of the public documents. We can take it as an exhibit. Whether we will print it as part of the public record is something we should decide after we see it. Is that all right with you?

Mr. BARON: Yes.

Mr. TEAGUE: I think we are through with you. The Board has found some of the things you have said to be true. What you have done has caused North American to search their procedures. Thank you very much.

Mr. BARON: Thank you.

[Mr. Holmburg's testimony immediately follows in the same hearing. --Clavius]

http://www.clavius.org/baron-test.html

IS THAT FACTUAL ENOUGH FOR YOU CRAIG ? ...Or are perhaps Wade Frazier and Jay Windley and NASA making all of this up ?

Edited by Duane Daman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 96
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I have a friend who was based in Benbecula about ten years ago when a party from the USA were contracted to work for a company called Vitro Corps helping installing the radar at the RAF base.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RRH_Benbecula

Two of the team (Larry and Bob-surnames withheld) were about retirement age and had worked for NASA receiving the tv/radio transmissions from the Moon. My friend on one occasion was discussing Neil Armstrong and whether they were involved that night with the tv pictures and one of them responded with this comment.

"Don't believe everything you see on the tv"

Needless to say my friend who has absolutely no interest in conspiracy theories is convinced man, or at least Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin, did not land on the Moon.

Hi James, and welcome to the Forum!

If you like, you can have your friend contact the FIRST people on Earth to receive the TV transmissions from Apollo 11.

http://www.honeysucklecreek.net/msfn_missi...sion/index.html

These were people who were there, and can tell your friend exactly what was received. I've spoken to them and have no doubts. I found them more than willing to discuss what happened, the technical details, anything about those days.

Does anybody know what he meant by this?

but have a small residual doubt about the landings themselves, because I didn't go, so who am I to know for sure, besides the official word and comments from my friends and colleagues who did go? Answers to my questions about activity on the lunar surface were answered strangely at times--hence a bit of doubt.

This is only my opinion, but I think it falls into two areas. Firstly, as a true skeptic, Dr O'Leary admits that because he was not actually there on the lunar surface he cannot say with 100% certainty that they were there. In this respected I am reminded of the 'Fair Witness' from Heinlein's "A Stranger in a Strange Land". When the witness is asked what colour a house is, they say that the side facing them is white. They don't mention the sides they cannot see because they cannot say what colour it is. They do not assume the other sides of the house are painted in the same colour. It doesn't matter if they were there 5 minutes ago and saw it was all white - it could have changed in those 5 minutes. So the good Dr leaves that bit of doubt.

Secondly, the replies to his questions about lunar activity might be considered strange, but we can't be sure. For a start, the good Dr was a member of the "XS-11" intake. He would have developed friendships amongst the later group of astronauts, and not necessarily have developed a relationship with the moonwalkers. This relationship has been mentioned in many books. Also, we don't know what questions he asked, when he asked them, and what the replies were; the replies may have simply been curt, flippant or incomplete answers. They may have been clouded by time. We simply don't know.

So overall, I think he was being a "fair witness" - saying he has no doubts personally but cannot swear to it because he was not on the surface with them. He has left that to the people who did walk on the lunar surface.

Edited by Evan Burton
added "curt"
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Errr - but he submitted the report:

"...and finished a 500-page report that he delivered when he testified to Congress in April of 1967."

So the PTB waited until he testified in a public hearing, and submitted two reports, but only THEN after he had no further evidence to give decided to "off" him. Yep, that certainly drew attention away from his testimony.

A comparison: Jack White testified before a House committee (I am unsure of which) regarding photographic evidence showing that the Oswald photograph (of LHO holding a rifle and a newspaper) was faked.

Why wasn't Jack "offed" after HIS testimony?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why wasn't Jack "offed" after HIS testimony?

Because luckily for Jack, the House committee decided to CHARACTER ASSASSINATE him instead.

Here is the part of Wade Frazier's article again, which would be the best explanation as to what happens to some of the Whistle-Blowers who go up against the US military industrial complex/ NASA /CIA /defense establishment... Tom Baron was a Whistle-Blower who took on NASA to expose their Apollo fraud, and unfortunately paid the ultimate price for his efforts .

"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? "

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nice try Duane, but even Wade does not supply any FACTS . You lose again...please try again next time.

Sorry to burst your bubble Craig by proving you wrong , but even the person you and your pals parrot , Jay Windley of "clavius moon base pick and choose your disinformation", excepts the FACT that Apollo saftey inspector Tom Baron had a 500 page report that went missing after he and his family "comitted suicide" by train.

Since you and Evan and the rest of the Apollo defending gang here claim that every word posted on the clavius site is gospel, then I guess you would have no reason to disbelieve your mentor Jay right ?

" BIBLIOGRAPHY

thomas baron

Thomas Ronald Baron was a quality control inspector for North American Aviation (NAA), the company responsible for building the command module. Baron's activities after the Apollo 1 fire are interpreted by conspiracists as support for a conspiracy.

Mr. Baron started working for NAA in September 1965 and was assigned as an inspector at the Kennedy Space Center (KSC), the launch site. In late 1966, Baron presented to NASA officials a 55- or 57-page report alleging improper action, discrepancies, failures, and other irregularities he had witnessed. KSC officials notified NAA managers, who met with Baron to address his concerns. The senior quality control officer of NAA attended this meeting. They found that some of Baron's criticism had merit, but the rest of his report was inapplicable or unfounded for a variety of reasons.

Baron, apparently displeased with NASA's and NAA's response, leaked his report to the media. This angered NAA officials, who fired him in late 1966. NAA also issued a public response to his report.

On his own, Mr. Baron began to assemble a more thorough report (300-500 pages long, according to various sources) in which he apparently hoped to document his charges of safety violations. After the Apollo 1 fire, he delivered his report to the Congressional committees investigating the incident. He also testified before a subcommittee headed by Rep. Olin Teague (D-TX).

Shortly after the committee rendered its findings, Thomas Baron and his family were killed when their car was struck by a train.

The 500-page report written by Thomas Baron mysteriously disappeared after his death. NASA probably destroyed it."

http://www.clavius.org/baron.html

And here is part of Tom Baron's testimony where he talked about his 500 page report, which is also posted on clavius.

" Mr. WYDLER: Could I suggest that if Mr. Baron has some concluding remarks, or if he would like to submit a statement for the record, that he may be afforded an opportunity? I see you have something before you, and perhaps you would like to put it in.

Mr. BARON: I think I have covered most of it. I have the report that I would like to be submitted as a part of the record, the 500-page report.

Mr. WYDLER: That means printing it. That is something we should leave to the committee, something of that length, whether we want to print it as part of the public documents. We can take it as an exhibit. Whether we will print it as part of the public record is something we should decide after we see it. Is that all right with you?

Mr. BARON: Yes.

Mr. TEAGUE: I think we are through with you. The Board has found some of the things you have said to be true. What you have done has caused North American to search their procedures. Thank you very much.

Mr. BARON: Thank you.

[Mr. Holmburg's testimony immediately follows in the same hearing. --Clavius]

http://www.clavius.org/baron-test.html

IS THAT FACTUAL ENOUGH FOR YOU CRAIG ? ...Or are perhaps Wade Frazier and Jay Windley and NASA making all of this up ?

Well NO DUANE! Can you show that the report was ACTUALLY submitted? Lots of folklore here, not much in the way of documentation. I'l be happy to admit my error if you can bring solid documentation to bear, and that means more than you being a parrot for someone else.

Edited by Craig Lamson
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a friend who was based in Benbecula about ten years ago when a party from the USA were contracted to work for a company called Vitro Corps helping installing the radar at the RAF base.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RRH_Benbecula

Two of the team (Larry and Bob-surnames withheld) were about retirement age and had worked for NASA receiving the tv/radio transmissions from the Moon. My friend on one occasion was discussing Neil Armstrong and whether they were involved that night with the tv pictures and one of them responded with this comment.

"Don't believe everything you see on the tv"

Needless to say my friend who has absolutely no interest in conspiracy theories is convinced man, or at least Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin, did not land on the Moon.

Hi James, and welcome to the Forum!

If you like, you can have your friend contact the FIRST people on Earth to receive the TV transmissions from Apollo 11.

http://www.honeysucklecreek.net/msfn_missi...sion/index.html

These were people who were there, and can tell your friend exactly what was received. I've spoken to them and have no doubts. I found them more than willing to discuss what happened, the technical details, anything about those days.

Thanks for the welcome Evan and for the link to Honeysuckle Creek. Very enjoyable that Sam Neil film The Dish.

I spoke to my friend about this again last night. Bob and Larry came from the Florida area(Pensacola) and never mentioned anything in the time they were at Benbecula about being based at Honeysuckle Creek or Australia during Apollo.

You wouldn't happen to have a link to lists of employees that dealt with the radar side of things(in the USA) from the time of Apollo for my own personal research?

Does anybody know what he meant by this?

but have a small residual doubt about the landings themselves, because I didn't go, so who am I to know for sure, besides the official word and comments from my friends and colleagues who did go? Answers to my questions about activity on the lunar surface were answered strangely at times--hence a bit of doubt.

This is only my opinion, but I think it falls into two areas. Firstly, as a true skeptic, Dr O'Leary admits that because he was not actually there on the lunar surface he cannot say with 100% certainty that they were there. In this respected I am reminded of the 'Fair Witness' from Heinlein's "A Stranger in a Strange Land". When the witness is asked what colour a house is, they say that the side facing them is white. They don't mention the sides they cannot see because they cannot say what colour it is. They do not assume the other sides of the house are painted in the same colour. It doesn't matter if they were there 5 minutes ago and saw it was all white - it could have changed in those 5 minutes. So the good Dr leaves that bit of doubt.

Secondly, the replies to his questions about lunar activity might be considered strange, but we can't be sure. For a start, the good Dr was a member of the "XS-11" intake. He would have developed friendships amongst the later group of astronauts, and not necessarily have developed a relationship with the moonwalkers. This relationship has been mentioned in many books. Also, we don't know what questions he asked, when he asked them, and what the replies were; the replies may have simply been curt, flippant or incomplete answers. They may have been clouded by time. We simply don't know.

So overall, I think he was being a "fair witness" - saying he has no doubts personally but cannot swear to it because he was not on the surface with them. He has left that to the people who did walk on the lunar surface.

Bit confused with your comparison of a passage from a Sci-Fi novel, and about who Brian O'Leary might or might not have formed friendships with, questions, answers, etc.

It stikes me as quite extraordinary that somebody who was involved with the Apollo program, and seems to be have known more than one moonwalker -'friends and colleagues', would have made that statement in the first place, and then given permission for it to be published.

Edited by James Douglas
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the welcome Evan and for the link to Honeysuckle Creek. Very enjoyable that Sam Neil film The Dish.

I spoke to my friend about this again last night. Bob and Larry came from the Florida area(Pensacola) and never mentioned anything in the time they were at Benbecula about being based at Honeysuckle Creek or Australia during Apollo.

You wouldn't happen to have a link to lists of employees that dealt with the radar side of things(in the USA) from the time of Apollo for my own personal research?

James, you mention the 'radar' side of things, but to the best of my knowledge they didn't get involved in the TV transmissions. There was the Deep Space Tracking Network, which was able to track the craft (and thus my association with your 'radar'). The telemetry - including the TV transmissions - were handled by the Manned Space Flight Network (MSFN), a separate organisation. The transmissions were also received in the US at Goldstone in California, but they were nearing the end of their receiving window at the time of the EVA.

I'll send you a PM with the e-mail addresses of John Saxon and Mike Dinn, who were there; they will be able to help you out with your research.

Bit confused with your comparison of a passage from a Sci-Fi novel, and about who Brian O'Leary might or might not have formed friendships with, questions, answers, etc.

It stikes me as quite extraordinary that somebody who was involved with the Apollo program, and seems to be have known more than one moonwalker -'friends and colleagues', would have made that statement in the first place, and then given permission for it to be published.

Yeah, it wasn't that clear, was it? What I meant was that his initial statement had the 'doubt' in it because he could not swear that those people were there; no-one except the lunar walkers themselves can swear to that.

When his statement was being used as "evidence" by some to say that even an astronaut did not believe they walked on the Moon, he clarified his statement, saying that he personally believed they walked on the Moon.

The difference is being able to swear to something happening, and the belief that something happened.

I have never personally witnessed a Space Shuttle launch, but I have seen heaps of video of them.

I cannot swear to them being real because I have never actually seen one - but I can swear that I personally believe they launched as advertised because of the footage of them I have seen (and seeing the hardware, having an understanding of the physics and engineering involved, etc).

Finally, the "strange replies" section of my post I think was clear enough. We don't know what he asked, and what the replies were. Were the people tired at the time, the post-flight letdown? Exhausted from post-mission publicity tours? Simply sick of being asked the same questions over and over? I don't know.

lastly, I don't know how much you have personally read into the US manned space programme, but the various intakes of astronauts sometimes tended not to mix. Sure, you worked in the same building, even in the same office... but you did not necessarily know them. People like Al Bean (LMP, Apollo 12) come to mind. He felt like an 'outcast' at times, not part of the main astronaut group. His peers were being selected for missions while he was being pushed aside over to Apollo Applications (the early name for Skylab). The people who mattered were not his friends - only co-workers. It was only that Pete Conrad decided he wanted Al as his LMP that rose him from relative obscurity.

If you like, I can recommend some books and some online material that more clearly describes the relationships.. or at least, more clearly than I can.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Evan thanks for the e-mail addresses. Very kind of you. I've sent you a message.

I see we have another forum member here who has had contact with Dr O'Leary and hopefully can explain the reasons for his statement.

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...mp;#entry136352

Any reading material you could recommend would be very appreciated. I was loaned a book called Moon Dust last year about the Apollo Astronauts which was a good starter.

Edited by James Douglas
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well NO DUANE! Can you show that the report was ACTUALLY submitted? Lots of folklore here, not much in the way of documentation. I'l be happy to admit my error if you can bring solid documentation to bear, and that means more than you being a parrot for someone else.

And that would be Craig speak for ... "I would rather die than admit that I'm wrong about something, or ever admit than Duane is right".

And where exactly would I be able to find this "documentation" about Tom Barons damaging saftey report ? .. At the Goddard Space FLight Center where NASA "lost" that one ton of telemetry tapes for all of the Apollo missions perhaps ?

First you wanted proof than the 500 page report existed and now you want proof that it was submitted ? ... Why don't you just admit that you know nothing about this subject and got caught on that fact .

Here's the bottom line Craig ... The 500 page report did exist and this was even admitted to by NASA and one of NASA's top watchdogs , Jay Windley ....But regardless of whether Baron had the opportunity to submit it or not, it magically just disappeared after he and his family "committed suicide" by train .

When it comes to the Apollo hoax evidence you really are clueless .... Maybe you should stick with a subject you're not so ignorant about, like photography ! :ice

Edited by Duane Daman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any reading material you could recommend would be very appreciated. I was loaned a book called Moon Dust last year about the Apollo Astronauts which was a good starter.

Moondust is a good retrospective-type book.

For an in-depth look at the the overall programme and the people, there is probably no better book than A Man on the Moon, by Andrew Chaikin.

To learn about the more technical nature of things, I highly recommend Apollo by Charles Murray & Catherine Bly Cox. It focuses on the people who made things happen on the ground, the flight controllers, the engineers, etc.

A great overview of the space race - both US and Soviet - can be found in THIS NEW OCEAN: The Story of the First Space Age by William E. Burrows.

Individual perspectives are available, and are recommended. They highlight the different personalities, how two astronauts can have completely different opinions on a person or event:

Men From Earth by Dr Buzz Aldrin (Apollo 11) & Malcolm McConnell

First Man by James R. Hansen (Neil Armstrong, Apollo 11)

The Last Man on the Moon by Gene Cernan (Apollo 17) and Don Davis

Moonwalker by Charlie Duke (Apollo 16)

The Way of the Explorer by Dr Ed Mitchell (Apollo 14)

Rocket Man by Nancy Conrad & Howard A. Klausner (Pete Conrad, Apollo 12)

Countdown by Frank Borman (Apollo 8)

Schirra's Space by Wally Schirra (Apollo 7)

A Man Called Flight by Chris Kraft (Flight Controller)

Failure Is Not An Option by Gene Kranz (Flight Controller)

Apollo EECOM by Sy Liebergot (Flight Controller)

The Unbroken Chain by Guenter Wendt (Launch Pad Chief) & Russell Still

and many, many more are available.

A relatively unknown resource is the Johnson Space Center Oral History Project, interviews done with various people associated with NASA including astronauts, engineers, administrators, etc. Transcripts of the interviews are available online free, or you can purchase audio CDs of them if desired. Very entertaining reading.

Online there is a wealth of data:

NASA Technical Reports Server - An amazing storage house of various technical reports. Want to read about the LM thermal protection system? The tests they did to determine the shape of the CM? Biomedical results of various missions? This is the place.

To get transcripts of the landings and lunar activities, you need not go any further than the Apollo Lunar Surface Journal (ALSJ). A fantastic resource with comments from post-mission reports and from interviews with the astronauts, describing what was happening at the time, etc. Also contains a number of links to images, reports, essays, etc.

The best source for good quality scans of the images is the Apollo Image Gallery section of the Project Apollo Archive. Images are available from both the missions and the ground-based activity, pre- and post-Apollo, with a large amount of the scans being very high resolution.

There are a number of NASA online publications, dealing with all sorts of aspects: management history, histories of the various programmes (Mercury, Gemini, Apollo, etc). Some of my favourites are:

Moonport - A History of Apollo Launch Facilities & Operations

Chariots For Apollo - A History of Manned Lunar Spacecraft

Stages to Saturn - A Technological History of the Apollo / Saturn Launch Vehicles

Now, keep in mind this is only a fraction of the data that is available out there. There are websites dedicated to explaining obscure bits of the hardware, personal recollections of people who were contractors to NASA, how to build a replica of the Apollo computer, even a guide to find out where each piece of NASA manned space hardware is today.

Enjoy!

Edited by Evan Burton
Added bolding
Link to comment
Share on other sites

James ... After you read all of that Apollo disinformation listed above, try reading the truth ....

Moon Landing - A Hoax

______________________________________________________________________

NASA ,perfects the art of "The Deal". Twenty five years ago, they pulled off a heist that makes the "Great Train Robbery" look like a schoolboy prank.

mlh1.jpg

The Moon or a Studio in the Nevada Desert!

_____________________________________________________________________

NASA Mooned America contains 17 chapters , hundreds of footnotes, a total of 15 photos (3 of which are full size NASA color photos), 9 charts, a mission list, bibliography, and index. The book is 8 1/2 by 11 and almost 200 pages long.

The Spacey Twins - Photo taken inside aircraft simulating 0 g gravity and later passed off as a "space walk".

Divergent shadows which could only have been produced by a spotlight.

Space rocks which have "Hollywood Type" letters.

Backdrops for "The Mountains of the Moon".

See the Astro-nots jump out of their own shadow. (Above photo clearly shows shadow of flag, but shadow of "Astro-not" is absent).

Photo showing absolutely no crater under the main rocket of the LEM.

Photo of Astro-not taken by fellow Astro-not who had no camera.

Read how radiation should have turned the Astro-nots into crispy space bacon.

Why are there never any stars showing in any of the moon pictures? If the Hubble Telescope can see them, why can't the Astro-Nots?

______________________________________________________________________

About the Author

R. Rene "bright kid from the slums", skipped a grade in school and later became a self-taught structural and mechanical engineer and possesses two patents. a Mensan, he has produced a hundred controversial columns for various Mensa publications and has written 7 books.

How to order

Priced at $26, the book is available directly from the author:

R. Rene

3321 W. Weir Rd.

Scottsburg, IN 47170

Edited by Duane Daman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

James ... After you read all of that Apollo disinformation listed above, try reading the truth ....

Moon Landing - A Hoax

______________________________________________________________________

NASA Mooned America contains 17 chapters , hundreds of footnotes, a total of 15 photos (3 of which are full size NASA color photos), 9 charts, a mission list, bibliography, and index. The book is 8 1/2 by 11 and almost 200 pages long.

James

Please do read Rene's book, and some of the other claims on his website. Apparently 1000 foot high cliffs should not exist. The moon should leave Earth orbit and move towards the sun every new moon. Oh, and the mathematical constant Pi isn't the value that mathematicians have calculated for centuries.

The Spacey Twins - Photo taken inside aircraft simulating 0 g gravity and later passed off as a "space walk".

Is this the Collins Gemini training picture or a different one?

Divergent shadows which could only have been produced by a spotlight.

Which image(s) does Rene refer to?

Space rocks which have "Hollywood Type" letters.

The infamous 'C' rock? No-one from the pro-hoax side has ever produced a copy of as16-107-17445 showing the 'C' on the rock, only as16-107-17446. Close up examination of the anomaly shows it's likely to be a fibre on an enlarger when the photos were being scanned, not something on the rock itself.

Backdrops for "The Mountains of the Moon".

Is this a similar claim to that which Percy has on Aulis about Apollo 17, i.e. a complete mis-unerstanding od perspective? Does he mention any particular photos?

See the Astro-nots jump out of their own shadow. (Above photo clearly shows shadow of flag, but shadow of "Astro-not" is absent).

I'm assuming he's referring to AS16-113-18430. Astronauts shadow is clearly visible.

Photo showing absolutely no crater under the main rocket of the LEM.

Why should there be a crater? There is visible scouring of the surface dust to reveal the more compact regolith beneath. For example AS14-66-9261.

Photo of Astro-not taken by fellow Astro-not who had no camera.

Don't know which photo he refers to. The astronauts often swapped cameras (for example the Apollo 17 flag sequence).

Read how radiation should have turned the Astro-nots into crispy space bacon.

Already being discussed on this forum. You haven't presented any empirical evidence to back up your claim. Does Rene present any empirical evidence to back up his claim? Could you precis it here?

Why are there never any stars showing in any of the moon pictures? If the Hubble Telescope can see them, why can't the Astro-Nots?

Duane, I thought you'd accepted the valid photographic reasons why there should not be any stars visible in the moon photos? If not, perhaps you could explain why ISS EVA images don't show any stars either? If you do accept that Rene is wrong on this point, why repeat the claim and call it the truth?

Edited by Dave Greer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any reading material you could recommend would be very appreciated. I was loaned a book called Moon Dust last year about the Apollo Astronauts which was a good starter.

Moondust is a good retrospective-type book.

For an in-depth look at the the overall programme and the people, there is probably no better book than A Man on the Moon, by Andrew Chaikin.

To learn about the more technical nature of things, I highly recommend Apollo by Charles Murray & Catherine Bly Cox. It focuses on the people who made things happen on the ground, the flight controllers, the engineers, etc.

A great overview of the space race - both US and Soviet - can be found in THIS NEW OCEAN: The Story of the First Space Age by William E. Burrows.

Individual perspectives are available, and are recommended. They highlight the different personalities, how two astronauts can have completely different opinions on a person or event:

Men From Earth by Dr Buzz Aldrin (Apollo 11) & Malcolm McConnell

First Man by James R. Hansen (Neil Armstrong, Apollo 11)

The Last Man on the Moon by Gene Cernan (Apollo 17) and Don Davis

Moonwalker by Charlie Duke (Apollo 16)

The Way of the Explorer by Dr Ed Mitchell (Apollo 14)

Rocket Man by Nancy Conrad & Howard A. Klausner (Pete Conrad, Apollo 12)

Countdown by Frank Borman (Apollo 8)

Schirra's Space by Wally Schirra (Apollo 7)

A Man Called Flight by Chris Kraft (Flight Controller)

Failure Is Not An Option by Gene Kranz (Flight Controller)

Apollo EECOM by Sy Liebergot (Flight Controller)

The Unbroken Chain by Guenter Wendt (Launch Pad Chief) & Russell Still

and many, many more are available.

A relatively unknown resource is the Johnson Space Center Oral History Project, interviews done with various people associated with NASA including astronauts, engineers, administrators, etc. Transcripts of the interviews are available online free, or you can purchase audio CDs of them if desired. Very entertaining reading.

Online there is a wealth of data:

NASA Technical Reports Server - An amazing storage house of various technical reports. Want to read about the LM thermal protection system? The tests they did to determine the shape of the CM? Biomedical results of various missions? This is the place.

To get transcripts of the landings and lunar activities, you need not go any further than the Apollo Lunar Surface Journal (ALSJ). A fantastic resource with comments from post-mission reports and from interviews with the astronauts, describing what was happening at the time, etc. Also contains a number of links to images, reports, essays, etc.

The best source for good quality scans of the images is the Apollo Image Gallery section of the Project Apollo Archive. Images are available from both the missions and the ground-based activity, pre- and post-Apollo, with a large amount of the scans being very high resolution.

There are a number of NASA online publications, dealing with all sorts of aspects: management history, histories of the various programmes (Mercury, Gemini, Apollo, etc). Some of my favourites are:

Moonport - A History of Apollo Launch Facilities & Operations

Chariots For Apollo - A History of Manned Lunar Spacecraft

Stages to Saturn - A Technological History of the Apollo / Saturn Launch Vehicles

Now, keep in mind this is only a fraction of the data that is available out there. There are websites dedicated to explaining obscure bits of the hardware, personal recollections of people who were contractors to NASA, how to build a replica of the Apollo computer, even a guide to find out where each piece of NASA manned space hardware is today.

Enjoy!

Evan I'll be taking a trip into my local Borders book store this week with the list of your recommended reading. Thank you again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dave ... Have you ever read Rene's book or are you just parroting the typical clavius and BAUT responses to his work ?

If you're read the book yourself and these are your own findings and conclusions, then I will respect that ... but for some reason I believe your replies are nothing but the typical put down character assassination tactics of one the main CT's, who has taken the time to not only educate himself but also research and then refute the official Apollo record.

I haven't read Rene's book myself, but I have read a lot of the hoax evidence that he has provided in it, and though I may not agree with all of it, most of what I have read seems to blow NASA's faked manned Moon landings right out of the water.

I will go into more detail later, after you have answered my question and when I have more time to devote to this subject.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dave ... Have you ever read Rene's book or are you just parroting the typical clavius and BAUT responses to his work ?

If you're read the book yourself and these are your own findings and conclusions, then I will respect that ... but for some reason I believe your replies are nothing but the typical put down character assassination tactics of one the main CT's, who has taken the time to not only educate himself but also research and then refute the official Apollo record.

I haven't read Rene's book myself, but I have read a lot of the hoax evidence that he has provided in it, and though I may not agree with all of it, most of what I have read seems to blow NASA's faked manned Moon landings right out of the water.

I will go into more detail later, after you have answered my question and when I have more time to devote to this subject.

Duane

Like you I haven't read Rene's book. I assumed that since you claim it is the truth, you would have read it yourself. I have however read his website, which is where he makes claims such as 1000 foot high cliffs should collapse, the new moon should leave Earth orbit and drift toward the sun. He also sells "proof" that Pi doesn't equal the value that Mathematicians have calculated it to be for several centuries. I didn't bother shelling out $6 to find out where the error is.

My personal opinion is that he's a colourful character and the world is a more interesting place with him in it. His grasp of some scientific concepts, however, leaves plenty to be desired. Some of his views make him come across as a crackpot. That doesn't mean that all of his views are invalid of course, which is why I asked for clarification of some of the points you raised, so we can look at the claims themselves.

Could you be more specific about which of Rene's claims you support and which you don't?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...