Duane Daman Posted March 28, 2007 Share Posted March 28, 2007 Review by Marcus Allen, UK Publisher Nexus magazine Thirty years ago man landed on the Moon. Given public focus by the then US President John F Kennedy in May 1961, he challenged his nation to "...achieving the goal, before the decade is out, of landing a man on the Moon and returning him safely to Earth ". The race was on. A great nation mobilised its industry, its talent and its energies to fulfil their, by then, dead President's dream. Not just once, but six times men landed on, walked and drove across, photographed, measured and returned with bits of the Moon. The greatest scientific achievement of this, or maybe any other century, had been accomplished; and the astronauts had 'gone in peace for all mankind.' The whole world acknowledged and applauded the bravery of those men, the scale of their project and the thrill of being included in each step of their mission. Because we saw the photographs, watched the films and videos, listened to the interviews, read the books, we knew it happened just the way we had been told. No! It probably did not happen that way at all. When we were young we were taught to tell the truth. We should not tell lies because we will eventually get found out. Dark Moon: Apollo and the Whistle-Blowers, is about being found out. It is a brave, timely and inevitable book. It is the book some will dread reading but one which many more will welcome: it exposes a monumental deception perpetrated on us all. We have been systematically lied to, deceived and misled by those who by their position and knowledge, we expect to trust-scientists. Where are the astronomers, astrophysicists, biologists, chemists, cosmologists, designers, engineers, photographers, physicists and the editors and reporters who failed to speak out? If they really were all blind we are in deep trouble. That it took the determined and meticulous research of David Percy, and the eloquent and lucid writing of Mary Bennett to produce this magnificent book is testimony to their integrity. From the small boy who points out that 'The Emperor isn't wearing any clothes,' to the disintegration of the Empire is but a small step. So it is with the Apollo landings. In the words of Mahatma Gandhi: "An error can never become true however many times you repeat it. The truth can never be wrong, even if no one ever hears about it." Dark Moon tells of the truth discovered in a journey which began by looking at one of the most famous photographs ever taken: man on the Moon, allegedly shot by Neil Armstrong showing 'Buzz' Aldrin on the lunar surface. Knowing the equipment used and the extreme conditions of temperature and radiation present on the Moon, scientific analysis is used to demonstrate conclusively that this picture was taken on Earth with controlled, artificial lighting. Once you know what to look for, all the Apollo pictures are suspect. With over 400 pictures in Dark Moon the numerous flaws and inconsistencies soon become obvious. And you start to become angry, initially with the authors-this is understandable, they are the people who have darkened the dream-then with yourself for having been hoodwinked for so long. Eventually this too passes and your energy is redirected to ensuring that never again will you allow such a travesty to occur. In our modern world of visual communications we have a right not to be misled. Those who go out to record our world and its activities have a responsibility to ensure that we will see what they saw. When we are asked to look at a photograph or a film taken on the Moon, then that is where we must assume it was taken. Anything else is propaganda. Dark Moon, with over 500 pages, is in three parts. First is Foreground Action the 'how' of the Apollo records; interviews with Hasselblad and Kodak, whose products were used on the Apollo project, unwittingly revealing the inadequacies of their equipment to operate on the Moon as billed; details, clearly explained, about the 'show stopper' of man's exploration of space-radiation. Earth is protected, space is not, so a man on the Moon, as unprotected as the astronauts were, are highly vulnerable; and the extremes of temperature: as hot as an oven (+250°F) in sunlight and colder than anywhere on Earth (-250°F) in the shade. With no atmosphere in space to retain heat, the switch from hot to cold is immediate. The account of who was really behind the great rockets of both the American and Soviet space programmes is as surprising as it is comprehensive. In mid 1945 the Allies divided the spoils of war. Personnel, many originating from Peenemünde (birthplace of the German V-1 and V-2 rockets used against England during WW2), together with their research papers and equipment were transferred to the USA and the USSR. That these men were Nazis did not matter, they were needed for their knowledge. So began the German rocket scientists influence on both sides of the iron curtain. There never was a real 'space race'. How could there have been when everything was carefully planned in advance? Part two of Dark Moon Middle Distance looks at this planning, such as Project Horizon and the establishment of NASA, officially a civilian agency but financed by the US Government and acting as the public face of the Department of Defense's own extensive but secret space programme. Is it any wonder that it often lives up to its reputation of giving 'Never A Straight Answer'? As the authors found during their research, there was a great deal more going on behind the scenes than had previously been thought likely: "If it is of any consolation to the reader, we too, at first, could not believe what we were uncovering as our investigation proceeded. Yet as each new stone was turned over, it revealed a conspiracy of labyrinthine proportions". Dark Moon is not a conspiracy theory book. When the evidence is presented so clinically, with every fact double checked and confirmed, in some cases by initially sceptical specialists, then it is fact on which we can now base our decisions. Not propaganda. Yet we may choose to ignore such facts because they may lead us to a conclusion with which we are still uncomfortable. It is natural to want mankind to reach for the stars and to explore beyond each new frontier. So if we accept the evidence of Dark Moon, do those dreams die too? No. Quite the reverse. If you have ever wondered about the Apollo Moon landings and whether the stories about them being somehow faked or hoaxed may be true, then Dark Moon has the answers. This book is an essential reference for anyone who has ever wondered how a conspiracy is created and how the 'knowledge' filter works to keep it in place. Now we can move on. The future will not only be more exciting than we can imagine, but far, far more dramatic. For showing us a part of that future, we should thank the two authors of Dark Moon: Apollo and the Whistle-Blowers. http://aulis.com/nasareviews.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Jeffries Posted March 29, 2007 Share Posted March 29, 2007 Sounds like an interesting book. I predict that Len Colby and other disbelievers in the moon hoax theory will not find it convincing. I also predict that Jack White and other believers in the moon hoax theory will find it convincing. As I've said, I'm "on the fence" on this issue. I would like to know, however, if it is true that the lunar lander was never tested on earth. If so, I find that amazing. Would NASA actually take a gamble like that on something that had never been tested before? I'd love comments on that, please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Greer Posted March 29, 2007 Share Posted March 29, 2007 Sounds like an interesting book. I predict that Len Colby and other disbelievers in the moon hoax theory will not find it convincing. I also predict that Jack White and other believers in the moon hoax theory will find it convincing. As I've said, I'm "on the fence" on this issue. I would like to know, however, if it is true that the lunar lander was never tested on earth. If so, I find that amazing. Would NASA actually take a gamble like that on something that had never been tested before? I'd love comments on that, please. Two very good predications! The Lunar Module (LM) could not be flight-tested on earth as it physically couldn't operate in full earth gravity, nor in an atmosphere (it wasn't aerodynamic). The main thruster would be incapable in full earth gravity of preventing it crashing (maximum 10,000 lbf thrust). The LM and its components were tested during development of course. Here's some links to some problems that were found during testing (I'm sure there were many others as there are in all engineering projects). Failure of propellant tank during testing - http://www.astronautix.com/details/two18038.htm Failure of window of Apollo 5 during pressurisation test - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_5 Here's an overview of the LM shakedown tests in space. Apollo 5 - intended to test the Lunar Module in a space environment, in particular its descent and ascent engine systems, and its ability to separate the ascent and descent stages. Apollo 6 - second unmanned test Apollo 9 - first manned test flight (ten day earth orbital mission) Apollo 10 - second manned test flight, first in lunar orbit Apollo 11 - third manned test flight, first test landing An issue that many proponents of the hoax theory have is their belief that the LM should have had an unmanned test lunar-landing prior to the manned landing. This is interpreted as evidence that the actual landing was faked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Burton Posted March 29, 2007 Share Posted March 29, 2007 Don, If you are interested in reading about the history of the LM, may I suggest Chariots for Apollo: A History of Manned Lunar Spacecraft. A very good overview of the LM development, from conception to the Apollo 11 landing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Daman Posted April 1, 2007 Author Share Posted April 1, 2007 If wikipedia and a self serving nasa book are the best you guys can do , then you are both losing your touch ... The Apollo LM's were never properly tested .... Give me a couple of days and I will find the info to prove it . Meanwhile , I will bump forward my article on the Van Allen Engima, so hopefully Don Jeffries can jump off of that fence ... On my side of course ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Burton Posted April 1, 2007 Share Posted April 1, 2007 If wikipedia and a self serving nasa book are the best you guys can do , then you are both losing your touch ... The Apollo LM's were never properly tested .... Give me a couple of days and I will find the info to prove it .Meanwhile , I will bump forward my article on the Van Allen Engima, so hopefully Don Jeffries can jump off of that fence ... On my side of course ! I look forward to your trying. Perhaps you should bear in mind what Dave posted; ground tests various, two unmanned flight tests in Earth orbit, two manned flight tests... They did a lot of research & testing, you know: LEM Critical design Review, 1966 Trip report: LM ascent engine, quarterly review Characteristics of LM aborts with LNGCS during early powered decent Design control specification for lunar excursion module propellant system and thrust chamber assemblies reaction control subsystem Feasibility study and detailed test plans for LEM-1 and LEM-2 Lunar module alightment system Results and analysis of piloted lunar module LM landing simulation studies Handling qualities for pilot control of Apollo lunar-landing spacecraft Dynamic simulation of lunar module docking with Apollo command module in lunar orbit Application of digital computer techniques to the study of the impact dynamics of lunar- landing vehicles Characteristics of a lunar landing configuration having various multiple-leg landing-gear arrangements Dynamic model investigation of touchdown stability of lunar-landing vehicles Lunar navigation study, sections 1 through 7 Final report, Jun. 1964 - May 1965 Lunar navigation study, sections 8 through 10 and appendices Final report, Jun. 1964 - May 1965 A procedure for computing the motion of a lunar-landing vehicle during the landing impact Analysis of sextant navigation measurements during lunar module rendezvous Status report on the space radiation effects on the apollo mission. b- apollo shielding analysis A study of thermal response of the lunar surface at the landing site during the descent of the Lunar Excursion Module LEM Verification of performance of the LM guidance and control systems Landing dynamics of the lunar excursion module Technical development status of the project apollo lunar excursion module Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Burton Posted July 28, 2008 Share Posted July 28, 2008 (edited) Update to the claims made by Percy & Bennett in the book DARK MOON, specifically about an "Una Ronald" who claimed to see a coke bottle kicked across the lunar surface when she watched it "live" in the Perth night, only to have it disappear from the repeats the following day. She also claimed that the newspapers had letter from people who also saw it. Percy and Bennett claimed the the newspapers refused to answer if it was in the papers or not. Jay Windley has already shown these claims to be completely false, but I decided to check for myself at the State Reference Library in Perth, where copies of the newspapers are held. I looked at both the WEST AUSTRALIAN and the DAILY NEWS for the period 20-28 JUL 69, and can re-confirm that neither newspaper had any letters which mentioned the "coke bottle" incident. The letters - if they involved Apollo - were generally in praise of the landing, or against it saying how it was a waste of money better spent on social programmes. I can also confirm the broadcast times. Armstrong stepped onto the moon at 1058 Perth time (i.e. the morning) with Aldrin at 1116. if Una Ronald stayed up late to watch it, she watched repeats. There were repeats throughout the day, starting at 1750 on Channel 7 (40 mins duration), 1830 on Channel 9 (30 mins duration), and 1955 on Channel 2 (145 mins duration). The lunar ascent coverage started at 2105 on Ch 7 (35 mins), with Ch9 doing a "Three Hour Moon Coverage" starting at 2230. (All times from the final edition of the Daily News, 21 JUL 69, TV schedule, page 6). Of interest, The West Australian on 25 JUL 69 had details of a passenger jet flight from Brisbane to Honolulu, which witnessed the re-entry of the Apollo 11 CM. Various passengers saw it. The re-entry witnessed by a jetliner was a Qantas jet from Brisbane to Honolulu, piloted by Capt Frank A. Brown, starting when they were at 39,000 feet over the Gilbert and Ellice Islands in the mid-Pacific. There were 82 passengers aboard. They viewed the re-entry from the left hand side of the aircraft, and the captain asked them to share the view with other passengers. "See the trail behind them - what a spectacle!" said Capt Brown. "You can see the bits flying off. Notice that the top one is almost unchanged while the bottom one is shattering to pieces. The part that is disintegrating is the rocket service module, the top one is the command module." (The West Australian, 26 JUL 69, page 12, "A Birds Eye View of the Return") For 22 JUL 69 (the moonwalk took place 21 JUL in Australia), the WEST AUSTRALIAN (a morning newspaper) gave a number of pages to the moonwalk. "Mans day on the Moon" describing the events of the moonwalk; "$21,000 wager won" describing how Englishman David Threlfall won $21,000 when he bet the moon landing would be accomplished before 1971; A brief column on local TV coverage; "New aims to be set" talking about Nixon considering new space initiatives; "Crowds in city watch moon walk"; "Calling the moon" about the phone call from Nixon; a section on the meals they ate; a story about how Buzz took Communion on the lunar surface; and two articles about the telecast procedure. ... the WA picture, transmitted via Pacific satellite, was slightly inferior to that received in the Eastern States <of Australia>, which took a direct split of the picture received by the Parkes radio telescope."But it did not really matter," <OTC commercial manager Mr G. Maltby> said. "The picture received by the Parkes radio telescope was so good that the slight deterioration by the time it reached WA made little difference." (The West Australian, 22 JUL 69, page 7, "United Efforts Made Live Telecast Possible") More on how Perth got the broadcast: - PMG (PMG - Post Master General, in control of post and telephonic services.) and ABC (Australian Broadcasting Commission) transmission equipment was installed at Carnarvon to receive signals from OTC (Overseas Telecommunication Corporation) and NASA; this was vital because the coaxial cable runs only from Perth to Carnarvon.- Six Channel 2 (ABC) technicians had the problem of receiving the signal from NASA and OTC which are about eight miles out of Carnarvon. - The Apollo signal was fed into the cable and the Pier St Transmission Operations Centre in Perth. - From Pier St, it went to Channel 2's tower, but the problem was only half over. - As viewers sank into their easy chairs ready to look at the moon surface, technicians frantically converted the "Americanised" TV picture for our TV screens (Changing the NTSC picture to the Australian format). - Then the pictures were "split" from the ABC studios, transmitted to another microwave link and commercial channels Seven and Nine were also able to receive the picture. (my comments in italics) (Source: the Weekend News, Saturday 26 JUL 69, page 13, "Moon men take a bow") (The Weekend News was the Saturday edition of the Daily News) When I get back home, I'll scan the copies. I went back today and got some better quality ones... although the quality is still not great. It does show, however, that the claims supported by Percy & Bennett were completely false, and they didn't try very hard to investigate if they were true or not. Like many other hoax believers, it fitted with their opinions and therefore immediately became credible. This is typical of their claims: baseless or inaccurate. Edited July 28, 2008 by Evan Burton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Burton Posted July 30, 2008 Share Posted July 30, 2008 Scanned copies available here: http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v241/evi...pollo/Page1.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v241/evi...pollo/Page2.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v241/evi...pollo/Page3.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v241/evi...pollo/Page4.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v241/evi...pollo/Page5.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v241/evi...pollo/Page6.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v241/evi...pollo/Page7.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v241/evi...pollo/Page8.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v241/evi...pollo/Page9.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v241/evi...ollo/Page10.jpg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Colby Posted November 28, 2008 Share Posted November 28, 2008 An “eminent…scholar” backs Jack White’s theories I am reading The Looming Tower by Lawrence Wright and highly recommend it for anyone wishing to gain insight into the thinking of the people responsible for 9/11, 7/7 and the more recent attacks in Mumbai. What does this have to do with Jack? From page 104 of the paperback edition (Chapter 4): "The leader of the ulema [saudi clerical establishment] was Abdul Aziz bin Baz, blind, seventy years old [in 1979], an eminent religious scholar but a man who was suspicious of science and hostile to modernity. He claimed that the sun rotated around the earth and that the manned landing on the moon never happened." I don’t wish to imply that Jack believes the universe is heliocentric but I imagine that bin Baz also rejected evolution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now