Did We REALLY Go To The Moon?

April 26, 2024: Joe Rogan interviewed filmmaker, Bart Sibrel and they had a super fascinating conversation on the top of whether or not we really went to the moon.

 

August 21, 2023 Update: I just watched this video which features Charles Duke, who was the pilot for the lunar shuttle aboard Apollo 16 in 1972 and he is one of only twelve Apollo Astronauts who claimed they walked on the moon:

Did We REALLY Go To The Moon?

Did we really go to the moon? I don't know. I genuinely hope we went to the moon, but I have seen a great deal of evidence that suggests we never went to the moon. 

This article attempts to separate the fact from the fiction, which is not always easy. I plan to keep updating this article until I draw a formal conclusion.

There are many, many, many inconsistencies with the official narrative. For instance, if we spent $36 million on the moon buggy, why is all the photographic and video footage is so low resolution? Most importantly, why haven't we gone back to the moon yet, and why aren't there bases on the moon today?

Think about that for a second!!! If you drive a car today that was manufactured in 1969, which is 55 years ago, it is like driving a car from the Flinststones. Chances are it probably has windows that have to be cranked up by hand, and it probably has drum brakes, and certainly lacks GPS Navigation. 

Even better, compare a portable phone from 1969 to an iPhone 14 Pro Max. What a minute, they didn't have any portable phones in 1969, but they had payphones all over the place. You get the idea... I find it very hard, if not almost impossible to believe we had the technology in 1969 to go to the moon, and come back, but we can't do it today???? This makes ZERO sense!!!!

President Kennedy gave one of his greatest, and most inspirational speeches at Rice University which is commonly referred to today as the "Why go to the moon speech", which can be seen below.

So did we REALLY go to the moon? I have a great deal of respect for Elon Musk's intellectual horsepower and integrity, and he said he is 100% confident we did go to the moon, and if anybody should know, it would be Elon. On the flip side of that coin I have seen quite a bit of evidence that suggests the contrary. This article explores both sides of the coin...

One of the long running rumors suggested the famous director, Stanley Kubrick, was involved in faking the moon landing video footage. I recall seeing a documentary years ago named "The Dark Side Of The Moon", which, if I recall correctly, featured Kubrick's widow saying he was responsible for faking the moon landing video. Below is a fascinating authentic photo that shows Stanley Kubrick walking with some NASA executives.

From left to right: Wearing All White: Frederick Ordway III (NASA Advisor), Donald "Deke" Slayton, (NASA Mercury 'Original 7' Astronaut & NASA's first Chief of the of the Astronaut Office and Director of Flight Crew Operations, Arthur C. Clarke (Science Fiction Author who wrote 2001: A Space Odyssey), Unknown (behind Clarke), Stanley Kubrick (Director of 2001: A Space Odyssey 1968), George Mueller (Senior NASA Administrator for Apollo Project and Director of Flight Crew Operations). 

The context of the photo above is from a grand tour that Dr. George Muller (Director of NASA Flight Crew Operations) and "Deke" Slayton (Director of Flight Crew Operations) took on the set of 2001 A Space Odyssey on September 25, 1964.

The video below, which is alleged to be an interview of Stanley Kubrick from May of 1999 by filmmaker T. Patrick Murray was supposedly shot just 3 days before Kubrick passed away, and has been circulating on the internet since at least August of 2015. 

It is suggested T. Patrick Murray agreed to sign an 88-page NDA to keep the contents secret for 15 years. When I first watched this I thought it was really compelling, but then I learned it has been attacked as being potentially fraudulent with an actor pretending to be Kubrick, which seems pretty elaborate to me...So is this video part of a psyop, or is it authentic?

The interview suggests Kubrick confessed to being personally responsible for creating fake footage of the moon landing for Apollo 11 and 13. 

According a detailed article on Snopes.com which seeks to discredit the authenticity:

"A spokesman for Kubrick's widow also proclaimed that the interview is a lie, Stanley Kubrick has never been interviewed by T.Patrick Murray the whole story is made up, fraudulent and untrue."

Just for frame of reference, the video below is of Stanley Kubrick in 1998, which would have been shot a year before the video in controversy which is seen above. When I study many of the unique facial characteristics between both videos they seem to be a match for me. Particularly details like 

    -Shape and color of his eyebrows

    -His nose seems to be a perfect match, including the unusual tip which has a slight cleft to it. This includes the mole located on the left side of his upper nose (or does it? We will take a closer look soon). 

    -His overall facial shape as well as the beard pattern is very similar despite the fact his beard has grown longer by 1999. The video below was shot on, or prior to March 8, 1998, and the video above was shot in May of 1999, which would have been 14 months later. If the man in the video never cut his hair or beard over the course of 14 months, it should look and be very similar to the man in the video above who is purported to be Kubrick. 

    -The eyeglasses are different, but similar in style, and the prescription looks to be about the same. 

    -The age/aging of both men are entirely consistent. 

    -The skin appearance is consistent with both men.

    

I created the comp below that takes a photo of the real Stanley Kubrick taken in March of 1998 on the left, and an image from the purported video of Kubrick. Then I converted both to black and white, and I airbrushed out his eyeglasses. Then on the left image I airbrushed the light to create the same shadow. To my eyes, it sure looks like the same man...

There is one serious inconsistency I can't seem to reconcile that would suggest the man is NOT Stanley Kubrick!?!! As seen below, the real Stanley Kubrick appears to have a dark brown mole on the left side of his upper nose which appears to be about 3/4 of an inch from his left eye (right side below). 

The man in the purported video also has a mole on the left side of his face, but it appears to be lighter in color, much larger, and seems to be located much lower, (1.25 inches below his eye) and further away from his nostrils. 

There could be many different explanations for this, including different camera angles, or perhaps since he may have been in ill health, the lower mole may have grown over the course of the 14 months between the images. I will investigate this more, but this is worth pointing out.

In the photo below of Stanley Kubrick taken decades earlier we might see the upper mole, but notice his crazy hairstyle that is grown really long on the sides, which is consistent with the man alleged to be Kubrick in the moon confession interview.

The Epoch Times published an article in 2015 saying that:

    "A video that purports to be of legendary film director Stanley Kubrick saying the NASA Apollo moon landings were "fake" and a "hoax" is probably not real. A spokesperson for Kubrick's family told Gawker: "The interview is a lie, Stanley Kubrick has never been interviewed by T.Patrick Murray the whole story is made up, fraudulent & untrue."

The more I study and think about this, the more I am on the fence—so to speak. The facial characteristics do look similar, and if the man who is purported to be Kubrick is not, then the actor would deserve an Academy Award for his performance. Particularly based up his knowledge base and lightning fast, naturally organic answers. 

That being said, there is some strange language in the video interview that suggests it might not be him...In particular there is some bizarre language that suggests the interviewer might be directing him.

My understanding is the original interview was 2 hours long, but the version above is only an hour and twenty minutes long. The version below has additional footage. In particular the discussion about Neal Armstrong's role.

The video below is also fascinating as it features a man who claims his father was forced to conceal that the moon landings were fake:

The documentaries below goes into great detail on how the alleged moon landing hoax worked:

Doctor Robert N. McCleelland M.D. Conflicting Analysis of The Warren Report

JFK Assassination 
Dallas, Texas, Parkland Hospital Physician

Robert N. McCleelland M.D.
Conflicting Analysis of The Warren Report

It is profoundly true that context gives content meaning, which is particularly true if you watch the video interview below of attending physician, Robert N. McCleeland. If you were to watch the interview without understanding the context you would easily just think it was about an attending physician who treated President Kennedy gunshot wounds at Parkland Hospital after he was shot on November 22, 1963. But there is more...much, much more to this... 

Dr. McCleeland was unusual as he exhibited the highest level of honesty and medical integrity, as he refused to ever change his story about what he personally witnessed in Dallas. Dr. McCleeland kept insisting President Kennedy had a huge gapping would on the back right side of his head that was at least 5 inches in circumference. 

This of course was direct evidence of an exit wound from a frontal shot. Dr. McCleeland also maintained the wound on the front of President Kennedy'd neck was also an entry wound. This confirms JFK was shot both from the front and the side, as well as from the rear as there was another bullet entry wound on his upper right back. This is concrete evidence of three different shooters firing in controlled synchronicity with triangulation. 

The TRUTH is Dr. McCleeland's account as a first hand witness radically contradicts the Warren Commission report. The Warren Commision was completely fake and intended to try pin JFK's assassination on Lee Harvey Oswald as a lone-nut assassin who allegedly shot the President from the 6th floor of the Texas School Book Depository.

The challenge is Lee Harvey was photographed at the exact moment of JFK being shot, as Oswald was standing on the stairs of the Texas School Book Depository casually observing the Kennedy Motorcade. This fact was discovered and proven by the Team of Researchers from The New JFK Show. Namely Dr. James Fetzer, Larry Rivera and Gary King. 

The photo seen above with the zoomed in close-up seen below was taken by Ike Altgens and is commonly referred to as Altgens #6. This is a profound photo in many, many ways. 

First and foremost this exculpatory evidence proves Lee Harvey Oswald was not on the 6th Floor of the Texas School Book Depository when President Kennedy was shot. Also it's profound as it is the only photo that shows President Kennedy with his falsely accused assassin, Oswald at the same time. 

If you closely examine the zoomed in photo below you can see Lee Harvey Oswald clearly is not firing a gun, and you can also see President Kennedy in his limo, grabbing his neck in reaction to the first gunshot that hit him in the neck which was fired from the front.

Note: It's important to understand the Altgens #6 photo was HEAVILY ALTERED with airbrush techniques before it was seen by the public. This is a fact that has been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt. Much of the visual evidence from The Big Event in Dallas that day was altered in one way or another, and much of it has remained hidden from the public to this day. More on this subject later.

The photo show Lee Harvey Oswald after he was arrested and notice he is wearing a white T-short with a long sleeve short that is buttoned very low, kind of like a suit button. This is clearly a one-to-one match.

I created the collage below that shows the images of Oswald side by side. Notice how many frames of reference match up including:

-Hairline and forehead match exactly, as do the rest of the proportions of his face including ear shape and position. Also his jaw shape matches perfectly.

-His right collar sits unusually low on his neck and is resting flat and high up on his shoulder

-The ill shaped/fitting V shaped lower crew neck white T-Shirt is identical.

-The first front placket buttoned position of his long sleeved shirt is extremely distinct.

Think about what you are seeing for a moment. If indeed Lee Harvey Oswald was innocent, and did not shoot JFK, but was subjected to the extremely cruel treatment the world witnessed, this is horrendous and beyond unjust. 

The composite image above is a crude analysis whereby I created it to compare the two images above at the limited resolution of the photo from the Alton's #6 to the arrest photo of Oswald. I blacked out the background and reverse engineered some of the light and potential manual airbrushing done on the original image and this is what I came up with, which looks like the EXACT same person to me. Just to be clear (no pun intended :-), I maintained ALL the original silhouette proportions of the original Altgens, but just added back some of the original details.

One of the reasons I appreciate Arthur Schlesinger's Jr.'s quote seen below is because it's so precise. It is important to understand the amazing amount of financial and human resources the CIA invested in Kennedy's assassination, not to mention the cover-up, which continues to this day.  

“President Kennedy's assassination was the work of magicians. It was a stage trick, complete with accessories and false mirrors, and when the curtain fell, the actors, and even the scenery, disappeared.”

—Arthur Schlesinger Jr. 

L’Americque Brule (America is Burning)

There is good news with all this information and that is President Kennedy's assassination left behind a great deal of direct and circumstantial evidence that cannot be refuted. 

Since all the technology and techniques used to cover up and camouflage the truth were so primitive in an 8 bit black and white kind of way, it makes it possible to unearth and reveal the truth using time and technology.

President Johnson gave the speech below on November 27, 1963, just three days after President Kennedy was assassinated. Johnson was crying fake crocodile tears over JFK's passing, which he was deeply involved in. When you watch Johnson, you are witnessing a man who has just stolen the Presidency, by killing his duly elected President so he could fulfill his lifelong dream of becoming the President. You are witnessing pure Evil that is pretending (not very well) to be pure and good.

The photo of President Johnson with his wife and daughters was taken just 7 days after President Kennedy's assassination, on November 30, 1963 and as you can tell from their facial expressions they are deeply sad and still in deep mourning based upon the loss of their beloved former President Kennedy. Take a very close look at the facial expression on Lady Bird Johnson's face. Why is she smiling and glowing like that? Is it because she is sad and feels bad for the Kennedy family and the loss of JFK, or is she ecstatic because her long desired dream to become First Lady, and have her husband finally become THE President of The United States finally came true?