Use Our New Powerful Search Engine To Search Any Topic Now!

Marcus Allen – The Apollo Moon Landings: Fact or Fiction? – September 11, 2012

THE MORNING SHOW
with

Patrick Timpone

Marcus Allen

UK Publisher of Nexus Magazine

The Apollo Moon Landings: Fact or Fiction?

Man has landed on the Moon! We have seen it on TV, looked at the pictures, listened to the interviews and read the books. So, how can it not be true?

We all want it to be true. It is said to be the greatest scientific achievement of the past 100 years. It has been voted top TV moment of the 20th century; It would be if it had all happened the way we have been shown. But did it? Or has NASA yet again lived up to its other name – Never A Straight Answer?

The Apollo Moon Landings took place 43 years ago. The world has moved on to other matters, and the emotion of the event has dimmed. Now it can be examined in detail. There are many anomalies in the photographs and the films. There are many unanswered questions as to how men could survive the very real dangers of the vacuum of space.

* How were the acknowledged dangers of radiation in space overcome, when no protection was built in to the Apollo space craft, the spacesuits or the Hasselblad cameras used on the Moon?

* The Lunar Landers sat on the Moon’s surface for up to 72 hours, in direct sunlight, the temperature of which, on the Moon, is higher than the boiling point of water (100degC/212degF). How did the astronauts keep cool?

* How were such great photographs taken on the Lunar surface? The astronauts used cameras which had no viewfinder, no exposure meter, no means of knowing if a picture had been taken, manual control of focussing, aperture setting and shutter speed dials. They were operating the Hasselblad cameras while wearing spacesuits, with what were, in effect, heavy duty gardening gloves on their hands. Under such severe restrictions how did they still produce such professional results?

NASA is the only source for all the evidence of man’s landing on the Moon. Much of it is so questionable I contend that it could not have happened the way we have been led to believe it did: At worst the whole Apollo mission could have been fabricated, at best we have been seriously misled as to man’s ability to survive more than a few hundred miles above earth’s surface. Could this be the reason there are now no plans to return any astronauts to the Moon?

Visit Nexus Magazine

Visit The Aulis Investigation Into Apollo

Marcus Allen is the UK publisher of Nexus Magazine, which he and his wife introduced to the UK in 1994. Nexus is the world’s leading alternative news magazine, originating from Australia and sold in over 100 countries.

He is now able to persue his life long interest in The Unexplained, on a full time basis. The Moon Landings are just one of the many ‘taboo’ subjects he has investigated, around which new questions arise that have yet to be adequately answered.

Marcus has appeared on several TV programmes to discuss the Apollo Moon Landing controversy: BBC – The One Show and The Clarkson Show; Channel 4 – The Big Breakfast; Channel 5; Sky News; Sci Fi and Discovery Channels; Edge Media, as well as numerous national and local radio shows in Britain, and in the USA, on Coast to Coast AM. He has also given many public presentations throughout Britain and Europe.

 

 

marcus allen, moon hoax, september 11, 2012

Download

Play

Similar Podcasts You Might Like:

Filed Under: All ShowsGeo-politicsHistoricalUncategorized

Tags:


About the Author:

RSSComments (3)

Leave a Reply | Trackback URL

  1. Trevor says:

    *1) Radiation exposure in space is not significant for short missions.

    *2) The lunar landings deliberately took place during the moon’s long sunrise when temperatures were like earth’s. The astronauts actually complained of being cold! On Skylab (1973, which was NOT a joint USSR/USA mission as stated by Marcus Allen) the craft was exposed to fully-incident sunlight every half-orbit of earth, and thus overheated with a jammed foil shield which was subsequently augmented to bring temperatures down.

    *3) The astronauts intensively practiced taking photographs on earth, and exposure settings were relayed from earth, based on data drawn from unmanned Surveyor missions and other computations. The Surveyor-3 camera was brought back by Apollo 12 in 1969 and found to contain living earth bacteria! Furthermore, Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter images from 2009 subsequently showed trails and instruments left by all 12 Apollo moonwalkers.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Apollo_12_LRO.jpg

    So, Patrick, this show was something of a farce of one unscientifically-trained interviewer asking questions of another, equally-unqualified publisher who wants to sell magazines touting conspiracy theories, and who can’t even get basic facts right.

    If you want a rational, objective discussion you need to mediate between two parties, at least one of whom must be scientifically-trained in the discipline under discussion.

    Trevor Perry, B.Sc.

    Final-year project, with assistance from the Jet Propulsion Laboratory: ‘Techniques for Mapping the Moon and Planets’, University of North-East London, 1976.

    • Marcus says:

      *1) Radiation exposure in space is not significant for short missions.

      That may very well be the case. It is certainly what NASA state in reply to anyone who asks about the dangers of radiation in space. But it does depends on what is considered a ‘short mission’ – is that an hour, a day, a week, a month or a year?

      However, I have yet to read any definitive accounts of research conducted to establish the true facts of the effects of radiation on humans and photographic film in space.

      Radiation is produced by the Sun in unpredictable quantities and for unpredictable durations. No protection for humans or film is available beyond the Van Allen belts, which cease at about 40,000 miles above Earth.

      It is not in question that there is radiation in space but is it sufficient to adversely affect photographic film, or not? That was the point I was making during my interview.

      *2) The lunar landings deliberately took place during the moon’s long sunrise when temperatures were like earth’s. The astronauts actually complained of being cold! On Skylab (1973, which was NOT a joint USSR/USA mission as stated by Marcus Allen) the craft was exposed to fully-incident sunlight every half-orbit of earth, and thus overheated with a jammed foil shield which was subsequently augmented to bring temperatures down.

      You are correct in stating that Sky-Lab was not the joint USSR/USA mission. The joint mission I had intended to refer to occurred in July 1975 and was the Apollo-Soyuz flight.

      The Moon Landings all took place early in the Lunar day. When Apollo 11 landed the sun-angle was reported to be about 13 degrees above the horizon. The Sun was in a similar position for all 6 Apollo landings. That would have been about 24 earth hours after the Sun had appeared above the lunar horizon. On the Moon there is no atmosphere, as there is on Earth, which diffuses and dissipates the strength of the solar radiation, making early morning on Earth quite cool. The same conditions do not apply on the Moon.

      Many reports of the operation of the Space Shuttle confirm that when it orbited into the shadow of the Earth its external temperature dropped to within a few degrees of absolute zero. When it then moved into direct sunlight, ‘within a few minutes the temperature rose to over 100 deg C’. This indicates that when solar radiation strikes any object in the vacuum of space its temperature will be high.

      The astronauts and their landers, when on the Moon, are all perpendicular to the sun angle and so would immediately be affected by the radiant energy of the Sun. There is no gradual increase in temperature on the Moon. Any object on its surface in sunlight will be hot. The reports that ‘it was too cold to sleep’ from Apollo 11 do not make sense when compared to reports of the overheating experienced on Sky-Lab.

      *3) The astronauts intensively practiced taking photographs on earth, and exposure settings were relayed from earth, based on data drawn from unmanned Surveyor missions and other computations. The Surveyor-3 camera was brought back by Apollo 12 in 1969 and found to contain living earth bacteria! Furthermore, Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter images from 2009 subsequently showed trails and instruments left by all 12 Apollo moonwalkers.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Apollo_12_LRO

      I am well aware that all astronauts practiced and rehearsed for the activities they were scheduled to carry out on the lunar surface. There are numerous pictures of them doing so.

      The exposure settings for the pictures taken on the Moon were actually attached to the Hasselblad cameras in the form of a rather basic illustration which indicated the shutter speed and aperture settings to use, depending on the astronaut’s position relative to the Sun. For example, if the Sun was behind them the settings would be 1/125th at F11. Having used a similar Hasselblad camera my point was that when wearing the ‘armoured gauntlets’ or ‘heavy-duty gardening gloves’, on their space-suits to then accurately set the dials on the camera would be very difficult, as would focussing the image without a viewfinder. Let alone to know if the shutter button had been pressed, when it could not be seen from inside the space-suit. These were not point-and-shoot cameras.

      There is no evidence that any astronaut did what any professional photographer would do in a similar position and bracket the exposure, so ensuring at least one image was likely to be correctly exposed. There was also no duplication of photographs to ensure that ‘no heads were cut off’, which is what would be expected when taking pictures without a viewfinder. They may well have practiced extensively, but were they then good enough to produce the high quality, accurately exposed, correctly focussed photographs we are told were all taken on the Moon? They had many other things to practice such as flying the Lunar Landers and getting themselves back to earth in one piece. Photography was not considered a high priority at the time.

      What point were you making in referring to the Surveyor 3 camera and its bacteria?

      I have studied all the LRO images of the Apollo sites. Given the technological advances made in the intervening 40+ years since Apollo I find these LRO images to be of very poor quality. The Apollo landers are at least 10 feet high and the same across yet all we see are a few pixels of ‘something’, labelled by NASA as an ‘Apollo lander’. The close-up LRO camera, we are told, can record an object of a few centimeters across. There have been serious questions raised as to the veracity of these images.

      I do find it more than a little strange that there are no images taken by the LRO of any impact craters, made when the Apollo ascent stages of the LM were jettisoned after link-up with the CSM and crashed back onto the lunar surface. A 1 ton object hitting the lunar surface at over 3,000 mph would leave some sort of visible mark. To my knowledge, none have ever been identified, nor have any of the Soviet landers still on the lunar surface.

  2. Graeme Bird says:

    The pro-NASA crowd don’t know any sort of analysis. They are all about one ad hoc excuse after another.

web development