Belief in Apollo hoax conspiracy could grow

[Derek Willis]

1 hour ago, Noteverythingisaconspiracy said:

Yes you do, which is weird since the LM was designed by Grumman Aerospace Company.

Anyway I think we should leave it for now until you have something concrete. Come back when you have something other than "read my book to see the answers".

Yes it was, but the modifications weren't carried out by Grumman. They weren't even carried out by Hughes Aircraft, but they were carried out by former employees of Hughes Aircraft. I happen to know one!

I keep saying I want to bow out for a while, but people keep asking questions or claiming I have said something when I have not said it at all. So I will bow out now.

There has been quite a bit of interest in this thread - over 7,000 views. I feel sure the debate on whether or not any or all of the Apollo missions were "faked" is set to reach epic proportions in the build-up to the fiftieth anniversary! 

[bknight]

59 minutes ago, Derek Willis said:

There were two sample return missions carried out by unmanned, modified LMs. The first landed on the Sea of Tranquility on July 20 1969, and the second landed on the Ocean of Storms on November 19 1969. The LMs were dispatched to the Moon whilst the CSM remained in Earth orbit. The modifications to the LMs were relatively straightforward. A retractable "scoop" was attached to the porch in front of the hatch of the ascent-stage, and a modified Corona re-entry capsule was attached above the docking hatch. A television system was also included so that the scoop could be remotely operated in the same way as the scoops on the Surveyor probes. In essence, the sample-return missions were little more complicated than the Soviet's Luna missions. However, the payload of regolith was substantially greater. And before you ask, with the life-support and astronaut supplies removed, the LM had enough fuel to enter lunar orbit and then land, and then the ascent stage lift-off and head back to Earth. Here is a link to the Wiki page re. the Luna landers. I know you are familiar with them, but others might not be.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luna_15

As regards to who facilitated the "faking" of the Apollo missions, it was the same person who facilitated the building of the Hughes Glomar Explorer - your fellow Texan, Howard Hughes.

You indicated an alleged date of the landing of these modified LM's, but you did not indicate the launch site of either.  How do you the reconcile LRO images that clearly identified artifacts around those LM's including boot prints?

ETA: What boosters were used to send these modified LM's to the Moon?

Edited May 17, 2019 by bknight

[+Desertrat56]

6 hours ago, Derek Willis said:

They took the risk - which the success rate of the Surveyors suggested was 70% - that the unmanned LM would make it to the surface. The risk payed off, so why bother question the hypothetical scenario of the risk not having payed off?

Three men had already been killed inside a capsule that wasn't up to the job. Consequently, owning up to a "hoax" - though that is not the word I would use - would have been better than having to say: "We killed another two men by sending them to the Moon in a craft we didn't believe was up to the job." 

Which three men were killed?  Are you talking about the three who were killed in a fire on the ground in the launch complex?

 

It has been 50 years since the Apollo 1 fire killed Roger Chaffee at Cape Kennedy's Launch Complex 34 in Florida. Chaffee, along with astronauts Virgil “Gus” Grissom and Ed White II, died on Jan. 27, 1967, when a blaze erupted in their command module during preflight testing.

[Myles]

6 hours ago, Derek Willis said:

They took the risk - which the success rate of the Surveyors suggested was 70% - that the unmanned LM would make it to the surface. The risk payed off, so why bother question the hypothetical scenario of the risk not having payed off?

Three men had already been killed inside a capsule that wasn't up to the job. Consequently, owning up to a "hoax" - though that is not the word I would use - would have been better than having to say: "We killed another two men by sending them to the Moon in a craft we didn't believe was up to the job." 

Sorry to harp on this, but this bothers me about your theory.   If they believed the craft "wasn't up to the job", why on Earth would they take such a huge risk creating a hoax which would have shut them down if it got out.   It would have made them the laughing stock of the world.   Not a chance that they would do such a thing.   

[Merc14]

12 minutes ago, Desertrat56 said:

Which three men were killed?  Are you talking about the three who were killed in a fire on the ground in the launch complex?

His quote above is particularly infuriating as he knows the capsule was substantial redesigned after the fire and that there were several subsequent launches one of which orbited the Moon several times awhile releasing the LM and then retrieving it.  Why he thinks the capsule would stay in earth orbit when Apollo had been to the Moon and back is beyond me, he must need to have it do do to justify his bizarre and ludicrous hoax. 

Honestly this is probably the most ridiculous fake Moon landing story I have ever seen,.  Completely unfeasible and absurd, my guess is he is trying to carve out a niche in the hoaxer world so his "book" will coincide with the 50th anniversary.  Sadly, many will fall for his BS and believe him which is why it is important to make sure he is challenged at every turn.

Edited May 17, 2019 by Merc14

[bknight]

10 minutes ago, Merc14 said:

His quote above is particularly infuriating as he knows the capsule was substantial redesigned after the fire and that there were several subsequent launches one of which orbited the Moon several times awhile releasing the LM and then retrieving it.  Why he thinks the capsule would stay in earth orbit when Apollo had been to the Moon and back is beyond me, he must need to have it do do to justify his bizarre and ludicrous hoax. 

Honestly this is probably the most ridiculous fake Moon landing story I have ever seen,.  Completely unfeasible and absurd, my guess is he is trying to carve out a niche in the hoaxer world so his "book" will coincide with the 50th anniversary.  Sadly, many will fall for his BS and believe him which is why it is important to make sure he is challenged at every turn.

Indeed the Block II was in planning stages to replace the Block I in which our three astronauts were killed."Three men had already been killed inside a capsule that wasn't up to the job." I object to this wording as it infers that they were killed a much better sentence construction would be "Three men had already Died inside a capsule that wasn't up to the job"  Of course now know his tactics he would come back and retort where did I say they were killed?  But I digress, your thoughts are spot on. 

And yes some fools will buy into this line of reasoning(?) just as Derek has bought into "John's" fantasy.  The whole mission is so complicated, it would just as easy to perform the missions as history has recorded.  I won't be buying his "book" as he has shown nothing to convince a jury of probable cause.  Nor do I believe that "John" will bring anything vaguely truthful t the table.  Only time will tell, But for around 44 years hoaxers have been trying to prove Apollo was a hoax, rather unspectacularly.

[Merc14]

Not buying Derek's rational fro this whole thing either.  How could a supposedly rational person listen to the ravings of one man and suddenly go from believing the Apollo missions happened to writing a book about how the first two missions were faked.  Oh, and the one man has NOT shown his proof!  No, I see person trying to make a quick buck by hoodwinking the perpetually ignorant on the big anniversary of the first Moon landing.  This whole thread was simply advertising in his mind (see the below)

6 hours ago, Derek Willis said:

Yes it was, but the modifications weren't carried out by Grumman. They weren't even carried out by Hughes Aircraft, but they were carried out by former employees of Hughes Aircraft. I happen to know one!

I keep saying I want to bow out for a while, but people keep asking questions or claiming I have said something when I have not said it at all. So I will bow out now.

There has been quite a bit of interest in this thread - over 7,000 views. I feel sure the debate on whether or not any or all of the Apollo missions were "faked" is set to reach epic proportions in the build-up to the fiftieth anniversary! 

bolding mine

Edited May 17, 2019 by Merc14

[+Noteverythingisaconspiracy]

6 hours ago, Derek Willis said:

As regards to who facilitated the "faking" of the Apollo missions, it was the same person who facilitated the building of the Hughes Glomar Explorer - your fellow Texan, Howard Hughes.

So let me get this straight, Howard Hughes facilitated the faking of Apollo by using a Lunar Module made by Grumman, a launcher made by Boeing, North American Rockwell and Douglas, a guidence system built by IBM and Command and Service module also made by North American Rockwell. Is that really what you are saying ? 

Add to that people from NASA, the CIA (Your own claim), the Air Force (also your own claim) and a host of smaller subcontractors and you have a huge number of people involved. Yet it took 50 years before someone might come forward with anything ? 

Apparently Howard Hughes also managed to convince the USSR to keep quite about the hoax.

Not bad for a man who had begun his decend into insanity by then. 

 Do anyone honestly think that this is even remotely possible in the real World ?

Edited May 17, 2019 by Noteverythingisaconspiracy

[Obviousman]

14 hours ago, Derek Willis said:

I already explained that any proceeds from my book beyond the cost of production and marketing will be donated to charity.

Yeah, I have heard that one before.

[Merc14]

5 minutes ago, Noteverythingisaconspiracy said:

So let me get this straight, Howard Hughes facilitated the faking of Apollo by using a Lunar Module made by Grumman, a launcher made by Boeing, North American Rockwell and Douglas, a guidence system built by IBM and Command and Service module also made by North American Rockwell. Is that really what you are saying ? 

Add to that people from NASA, the CIA (Your own claim), the Air Force (also your own claim) and a host of smaller subcontractors and you have a huge number of people involved. Yet it took 50 years before someone might come forward with anything ? 

Apparently Howard Hughes also managed to convince the USSR to keep quite about the hoax.

Not bad for a man who had begun his decend into insanity by then. 

 Do anyone honestly think that this is even remotely possible in the real World ?

Don't forget the CIA spoofed all signals and trajectory from a satellite in earth orbit. 

[bknight]

4 hours ago, Merc14 said:

Don't forget the CIA spoofed all signals and trajectory from a satellite in earth orbit. 

Indeed, but the DSN and MSFN dishes would have to be trained on those satellites.  But that leaves Mr. Baysinger in on the conspiracy, because he and a couple of others listened first hand to communication with their amateur equipment.  Or did he simply point his antenna at the Moon to record conversations? 

http://www.arrl.org/eavesdropping-on-apollo-11

[Habitat]

I'm shocked that all these people were in on this racket, I guess the only people we can trust are conspiracy theorists.

[Derek Willis]

8 hours ago, bknight said:

Indeed, but the DSN and MSFN dishes would have to be trained on those satellites.  But that leaves Mr. Baysinger in on the conspiracy, because he and a couple of others listened first hand to communication with their amateur equipment.  Or did he simply point his antenna at the Moon to record conversations? 

http://www.arrl.org/eavesdropping-on-apollo-11

Baysinger said he was receiving the VHF signals transmitted from the astronauts to the LM. Is it really feasible those signals could have been picked up on Earth using a relatively small receiving antenna?

He also said the signals he received arrived 5 to 10 seconds earlier than the signal on T.V. He suggested the networks had put in a delay to avoid having to transmit anything "embarrassing".

http://observatory.jctcfaculty.org/APOLLO11/Default.htm

Can I suggest he was picking up signals from one of the CIA satellites used to relay the transmissions from the CSM in Earth orbit down to Earth, and then to the Moon using the DSN. That would account for the delay I mentioned in an earlier post.

[Derek Willis]

14 hours ago, Noteverythingisaconspiracy said:

So let me get this straight, Howard Hughes facilitated the faking of Apollo by using a Lunar Module made by Grumman, a launcher made by Boeing, North American Rockwell and Douglas, a guidence system built by IBM and Command and Service module also made by North American Rockwell. Is that really what you are saying ? 

Add to that people from NASA, the CIA (Your own claim), the Air Force (also your own claim) and a host of smaller subcontractors and you have a huge number of people involved. Yet it took 50 years before someone might come forward with anything ? 

Apparently Howard Hughes also managed to convince the USSR to keep quite about the hoax.

Not bad for a man who had begun his decend into insanity by then. 

 Do anyone honestly think that this is even remotely possible in the real World ?

Did I say Howard Hughes also managed to convince the USSR to keep quiet about the "hoax"?

No, I never said that - you seem to have made it up. 

[Derek Willis]

16 hours ago, bknight said:

Indeed the Block II was in planning stages to replace the Block I in which our three astronauts were killed."Three men had already been killed inside a capsule that wasn't up to the job." I object to this wording as it infers that they were killed a much better sentence construction would be "Three men had already Died inside a capsule that wasn't up to the job"  Of course now know his tactics he would come back and retort where did I say they were killed?  But I digress, your thoughts are spot on. 

And yes some fools will buy into this line of reasoning(?) just as Derek has bought into "John's" fantasy.  The whole mission is so complicated, it would just as easy to perform the missions as history has recorded.  I won't be buying his "book" as he has shown nothing to convince a jury of probable cause.  Nor do I believe that "John" will bring anything vaguely truthful t the table.  Only time will tell, But for around 44 years hoaxers have been trying to prove Apollo was a hoax, rather unspectacularly.

I didn't mean the Apollo 1 astronauts were deliberately killed. They were killed - or died, if you prefer - because the Command Module wasn't safe, as demonstrated by the fire.

[Derek Willis]

20 hours ago, bknight said:

You indicated an alleged date of the landing of these modified LM's, but you did not indicate the launch site of either.  How do you the reconcile LRO images that clearly identified artifacts around those LM's including boot prints?

ETA: What boosters were used to send these modified LM's to the Moon?

Perhaps I have not made myself clear. The boosters used to send the LMs were the Saturn V rockets used to launch Apollo 11 and 12. After the time spent in parking orbit, the third stage fired again. At the appropriate altitude the CSM separated and entered a high Earth orbit. The LM continued atop the third stage, and was sent on its way to the Moon.

[+Noteverythingisaconspiracy]

2 hours ago, Derek Willis said:

Did I say Howard Hughes also managed to convince the USSR to keep quiet about the "hoax"?

No, I never said that - you seem to have made it up. 

No you never said that outright, but as we have shown many times the Soviets would have known if the missions were faked, so someone would have had to convince them to keep quite and you just said Howard Hughes was the mastermind, so its logical that he would have had to do something about the Soviets. Itssimple an inferrence from your own claims. 

You never even attempted to address how a man with severe mental issues managed to convince some of his fiercest competitors to work for him. Let alone how he got NASA, the CIA and the Air Force to work for him too, despite said organisations having no reason to follow the orders of a man who had no jurisdiction over them. Can you explain how he did that ?

Edited May 18, 2019 by Noteverythingisaconspiracy

[+Noteverythingisaconspiracy]

I'm reminded of this sketch by Mitchell and Webb. 

Just to make it clear, its a sketch and its not supposed to be accurate. 

[bknight]

2 hours ago, Derek Willis said:

Baysinger said he was receiving the VHF signals transmitted from the astronauts to the LM. Is it really feasible those signals could have been picked up on Earth using a relatively small receiving antenna?

He also said the signals he received arrived 5 to 10 seconds earlier than the signal on T.V. He suggested the networks had put in a delay to avoid having to transmit anything "embarrassing".

http://observatory.jctcfaculty.org/APOLLO11/Default.htm

Can I suggest he was picking up signals from one of the CIA satellites used to relay the transmissions from the CSM in Earth orbit down to Earth, and then to the Moon using the DSN. That would account for the delay I mentioned in an earlier post.

You may suggest anything you like as you have presented nothing but a fantastic unbelievable, by most, fairy tale.  "a delay to avoid having to transmit anything 'embarrassing'" Mr. Baysinger was only recording radio transmissions, not TV. 

Baysinger’s wife and daughter watched the Apollo 11 landing on TV while Baysinger and Rutherford listened via Baysinger’s equipment.

Further from the article a little bit of information which you may have overlooked.

if the antenna was not kept aimed at the Moon, the signal disappeared.

  Not at some fictitious CIA satellite.

[bknight]

2 hours ago, Derek Willis said:

Perhaps I have not made myself clear. The boosters used to send the LMs were the Saturn V rockets used to launch Apollo 11 and 12. After the time spent in parking orbit, the third stage fired again. At the appropriate altitude the CSM separated and entered a high Earth orbit. The LM continued atop the third stage, and was sent on its way to the Moon.

And you bought into the fairy tale?  You appear to be much smarter than that, but perhaps I misjudge you.

[+Noteverythingisaconspiracy]

2 hours ago, Derek Willis said:

Perhaps I have not made myself clear. The boosters used to send the LMs were the Saturn V rockets used to launch Apollo 11 and 12. After the time spent in parking orbit, the third stage fired again. At the appropriate altitude the CSM separated and entered a high Earth orbit. The LM continued atop the third stage, and was sent on its way to the Moon.

If the rocket continued to the Moon why didn't they just send the CSM along with it ? Why keep them in low orbit if you had a rocket that could send them to the Moon ? There were two previous missions to the Moon, so were Apollo 8 and 10 also faked ?

[bknight]

1 hour ago, Noteverythingisaconspiracy said:

If the rocket continued to the Moon why didn't they just send the CSM along with it ? Why keep them in low orbit if you had a rocket that could send them to the Moon ? There were two previous missions to the Moon, so were Apollo 8 and 10 also faked ?

The way orbital mechanics works, if the CSM was attached to the SIVB through its complete firing(~5:54 minutes), then the CSM would have reached the gravitation influence of the Moon.  If the "plan" was to detach the CSM prior to the full burn of the SIVB, then there would have a collision issue to deal with, and I'm not saying this could not be accomplish just more dangerous than leaving it attached for the full burn.  

[bknight]

2 minutes ago, bknight said:

The way orbital mechanics works, if the CSM was attached to the SIVB through its complete firing(~5:54 minutes), then the CSM would have reached the gravitation influence of the Moon.  If the "plan" was to detach the CSM prior to the full burn of the SIVB, then there would have a collision issue to deal with, and I'm not saying this could not be accomplish just more dangerous than leaving it attached for the full burn.  

ETA:  I'm not sure the CSM had sufficient to prevent it from deceasing the apogee sufficiently to prevent the Moon's gravitation as I haven't done the calculation of the maximum delta H the CSM had with its fuel capacity.

[Derek Willis]

2 hours ago, Noteverythingisaconspiracy said:

No you never said that outright, but as we have shown many times the Soviets would have known if the missions were faked, so someone would have had to convince them to keep quite and you just said Howard Hughes was the mastermind, so its logical that he would have had to do something about the Soviets. Itssimple an inferrence from your own claims. 

You never even attempted to address how a man with severe mental issues managed to convince some of his fiercest competitors to work for him. Let alone how he got NASA, the CIA and the Air Force to work for him too, despite said organisations having no reason to follow the orders of a man who had no jurisdiction over them. Can you explain how he did that ?

You seem to be getting things the wrong way round. It wasn't Hughes who approached the CIA - they approached him. Hughes had been approached as early as the 1950s by the CIA to facilitate all manner of covert projects. Then, for example, in the early 1960s he was approached to attempt to remove Fidel Castro from Cuba. The people within NASA at the heart of "faking" the missions first approached the CIA, who then approached Howard Hughes. During the 1960s Hughes' right hand man Robert Maheu was a former FBI agent and a CIA "fixer", so he was the conduit, though he never actually met Hughes.

Hughes and the people working on his behalf didn't need to persuade other contractors to do anything. All they needed was access to the two LMs. They did this at the Kennedy Space Centre, after each of the LMs had been delivered by Grumman.

Howard Hughes was a very odd person, but there is no evidence he was insane. He had the wealth to live exactly as he chose - so if he chose to live in near isolation, stopped wearing clothes, and let his hair and beard grow, then that was up to him. If he was "insane" in 1968 when the CIA approached him, then he must have been even more insane in 1972 when they approached him to provide a cover story and resources for Project Azorian, the attempt to raise the sunken submarine.

You say the Soviets must have known. Perhaps there were many flaws in the primitive misunderstandings of what went on in "hoaxing" the missions. Consequently these would have been easy to debunk. However with what actually went on according to John Kelly, the plan was essentially watertight. Which is why to this day no one has ever uncovered it.    

[Derek Willis]

2 hours ago, Noteverythingisaconspiracy said:

If the rocket continued to the Moon why didn't they just send the CSM along with it ? Why keep them in low orbit if you had a rocket that could send them to the Moon ? There were two previous missions to the Moon, so were Apollo 8 and 10 also faked ?

I already said Apollo 8 and Apollo 10 were "faked".