Rene, author of NASA Mooned America!, believes that there have been no manned flights to the moon. In this exclusive interview, Rene asserts that the Apollo moon photos are studio creations. He also shows that NASA has lied about deadly solar radiation and the true temperature in space, and charges that NASA has instituted a policy of lying by its “astro-nots.” So what did NASA really do with the money that went into its deep space pockets? Currently enjoying a wave of popularity in Russia, Rene believes the Apollo program helped to finance the CIA’s secret war in Laos and Cambodia.
Joan d’Arc interviews Rene
JD: Mr. Rene, you claim that NASA faked the photos of Apollo moon landings, and in your book you analyze several of these photographs showing why they are hoaxes. Let’s talk about the most famous official NASA photograph, from the cover of your book. The photo of Alan Bean entitled “Astronaut Collecting Lunar Samples, Apollo XII” was purportedly taken on the moon by Pete Con-rad on October 20,1969. At first glance it is an artistically contrived picture of an astronaut with the reflection of another astronaut, standing some distance away, reflected in his face plate. Is it actually possible for astronauts to get this creative on the moon?
R: I think that the creative layout was the result of a composite picture from studio photos created by snip and paste in a photo lab.
JD: So, in your estimation, what’s wrong with this picture?
R: The first thing I noticed about the photo was that the shadow side of Al Bean’s suit was brightly lit. The top front of Bean’s left shoulder and his whole left side is much too bright for the singularly directional sun light found in the vacuum of space.
The next thing is that the lower-inside of his right arm should have been in shadow. Then there is the feet that the Moon’s actual horizon is on the same level as the horizon reflected in Bean’s face plate. Both face plates are curved, and mirrored curves double the angle of incidence. Obviously since only two astro-nots were supposed to be on the Moon, this photo had to have been snapped by Pete Conrad. But when you take a magnifying glass to the original photo, Conrad’s hand is nowhere near where the camera should be. In feet Conrad has no camera, or if he has his hand has obscured the lens. An X-ray camera perhaps!
Examination of Bean’s shadow as shown in his face plate shows that the two figures were less than 10 feet apart. Because of the face plate’s curvature, the camera that took the picture had to be at least 10 feet in the air directly between them. Since we don’t see anything there, it had to have been either taken from a camera boom using a timer mecha-nism to trip the shutter, or there was another astro-not (stage-hand) on that camera boom that we have never been told about
We’ve all seen the TV travel adventures where a lone man pits his life against the wilderness and goes from hither to thither being photo-graphed from every angle by nobody! And if these explanations don’t sit well, try this one. The Man in the Moon is very tall and happened to be passing, so he obligingly snapped the shot for the two tourists before he went on his way.
Another problem is found in the shiny object in Bean’s hand. Again there is no shadow side even though his shadow (shown in his face plate) proves that the sun was behind him and off to his right Since neither flash nor spotlight can compete with the light from the Sun the brightness is inexplicable.
Look at the bright circular object that is level with the top of his helmet and off to his far right side. Notice the two long structural-looking objects below it. It looks like a spotlight on a scaffolding, doesn’t it? Spotlights light best that which they are aimed at, hence the name. Check out Conrad! Of all the places one can imagine, the Moon must be evenly lit because it lacks atmosphere, clouds and trees. Why should an extremely bright pool of light be centered on Conrad? Does the Sun play favorites on the Moon?
If you look at Conrad’s feet you will notice the main shadow on his right going toward his rear and another one on his left coming forward. Two shadows, one Sun. Strange things were happening on the Moon.
JD: Leading Russian space scientists have stated that they know of no way of protecting cosmonauts from deadly solar radiation beyond the Van Allen Belt How does the Van Allen belt protect earth from deadly space radiation?
R: In 1963, Bernard Lovell, the famous British astronomer, was allowed free access to the entire Russian space program. He was told by the leading Russian space scientists that they “could see no immediate way of protecting cosmonauts from the lethal effects of solar radiation.” This is why I call most of the Apollo astronauts “Astro-nots.”
The Russian space scientists made this statement to Bernard Lovell six years prior to the first Apollo landing. He dutifully reported it to NASA’s chief administrator, Hugh Dryden, who just as dutifully … ignored it! The Van Allen Belt (Shield) is a natural magnetic field which diverts from the Earth much of the deadly radiation (X-rays and gamma) that the Sun routinely spits out during solar flares.
JD: Is this why the USSR didn’t bother to compete with America in its zeal to “walk on the moon?”
R: Not being a mind reader I have no idea why Russia (which lied about everything else) didn’t also claim to have landed on the Moon.
However, in the summer of 1972 (after the next to the last Apollo landing) the Russians were allowed to buy (at a low fixed price) 1/4 of our entire year’s grain crop. This raised our price over 60%. I believe that the deal still holds. Hey, a little blackmail never hurt a hungry nation.
JD: How has the Van Allen Belt become one of NASA’s best kept secrets?
R: It wasn’t the Van Allen Belt that was played down. It was the fact that solar radiation is deadly.
JD: How many chimpanzees have gone into orbit beyond the belt and what exactly was their fate?
R: NASA sent a number of space monkeys and apes beyond the shield but I have been singularly unsuccessful at finding any data on those shots. Rumor has it that once past the Van Allen shield only cockroaches (which are able to withstand amazing amounts of rem (radiation equivalent man) were able to live past 10 days.
JD: How much shielding would be required for protection against this deadly radiation, and how much would such a vehicle weigh?
R: It took a couple of years to get the X-ray and proton solar data from NOAA [National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration] and when the floppy came it carried a virus that wrote DOS into every one of my files that had the word NASA in it. When I finally found someone able to read the data we found that only particle energy is given. NOAA Imagineers pretends that there is no space radiation by giving only the data on the velocity of the particles. This man not only gave me the word Imagineers but also told me to ask NOAA “How many rem are there in a 20 ton meteorite moving at 20,000 mph or a car traveling at 120?”
According to ex-NASA astrophysicist Bill Mauldin, 6 feet of water or the equivalent mass of another material is needed to protect life forms from an X-ray flare. Because these flares are always present there is no safe time to make the trip. In fact, the great-est series of flares ever recorded happened in 1972 near the low of that solar cycle. Not being a rocket scientist I cannot say how much weight a shield would add to a vessel. If I subtract the volumes of the command ship and the LEM [Lunar Landing Module] from respective spheres, each 12 feet greater in diameter, we are looking at a volume of water of about 500,000 pounds. When we add tanks and structure to support this, plus fuel and more tanks and structure to lift that fuel, we are probably looking at another 15-mil-lion pounds of mass. This would bring the total mass from 6.5 to 21 million pounds. It would also require another 13 engines for a total of 18.
JD: What would be its chances of getting off the earth, landing on the moon, and again taking off from the moon?
R: The chance of lifting 20-million pounds using chemical fuel reaction motors ranges from none to absolutely zero.
JD: In your book, you claim that with surface temperatures on the moon ranging from 243 degrees (F) above zero to 279 degrees below zero, tons of water would have been required to cool the space capsules in lunar orbit Why would it have been impossible to adequately cool the capsules?
R: Lacking detailed information on the ship’s structure and insulation, I can’t calculate the amount of water that must be ejected into space to provide the explosive cooling that they use. It has to be considerable, though, even for the shuttle which spends half its time in orbit in the shadow of the Earth. In my book I do calculate it for the space suit, and in a half hour (even at 100 % efficiency) they would have been out of water.
JD: Oddly, Buzz Aldrin claimed they couldn’t sleep because it was “too cold” in the lunar module and Cooper and Conrad, on Gemini 5, complained of shivering. Why does NASA want us to believe that space is cold?
R: NASA has always stressed the cooling systems as vital, even as the astro-nots (NASA) tell us how cold it was in the LEM on the Moon. I’m sure that this is because it is easier to heat than to chill. However, since the Moon’s surface becomes so hot, a ship in space must be similarly heated.
JD: Why do you believe this is a deliberate hoax, and that space is actually hot?
R: Space is neither cold nor hot because space contains almost zero matter and heat is a property of matter. It is the Sun that is hot and the continuous passing of infrared, ultra violet and light through space all create heat when they hit matter. This is the problem.
JD: Why did NASA claim to need a Moon Rover on each of the last four trips to the moon?
R: The Rovers were supposed to increase the area that the astro-nots could cover.
JD: How much did each vehicle weigh?
R: The Rovers were supposed to weigh 460 pounds each. However, 1 am suspicious that here the battery was not included.
JD: How would such vehicles have been stored and carried aboard the LEM?
R: They were allegedly carried on the outside of the LEM. This made the load extremely eccentric to the LEM’s center of gravity. In real life, as opposed to NASA fantasy, cargo planes and ships have loading officers to see that the load is distributed as evenly as possible. Had that mass been added to the LEM, which had a single central reaction engine, it would have [caused the LEM to] pinwheel when the engine fired and the only thing that would have stopped the rotation was the final crash onto the Moon’s surface. The tiny thrusters the LEM carried would have been useless to compensate for this out-of-balance load.
JD: Since that time, what scientific analysis has been made of the 840 pounds of moon rocks and soil purportedly collected by the Roving Moon Rover?
R: The only thing I know about the “Moon Rocks” is that they are supposed to be made out of the same materials as Earth rocks.
JD: You allege that there has never been anything unique reported about the so-called “lunar samples.” Where do you think NASA really obtained the “Moon Rocks”?
R: In 1957 a great number of meteorites were gleaned from the Antarctic ice. Later the Moon Rocks would be found to be so similar that the NASA Imagineers concluded that they were knocked off the moon by meteorites that hit the moon. How do we know? Because NASA says it’s so!) Here on Earth with the science of guns over 500 years old we still cannot fire a shell with a velocity of over 4,200 feet per second. To escape the Moon requires a velocity of 7,785 feet per second. Guns have long tight barrels, oblong shells, rifling and intensely strong breeches to confine the hot gasses and direct all of their pressure to propulsion of the projectile. An explosive force such as a meteor strike creates hot gasses that radiate in all directions and diminish as to the square of the distance.
How do we know? Because NASA says it’s so! Meteorites are either metallic or stony. Some of the stony ones are called Carbonaceous Chondrites because of the large carbon inclusions they contain. But these same Imagineers never tell us that this proves there is life in the universe. God! I love the word Imagineers almost as much as I do the word Psychobabblers.
JD: You claim that Apollo astro-nots never speak about the brilliance of the stars and planets in deep space, yet other astro-nauts who have gone into space have commented on it Why do none of these celestial bodies ever show up in pictures of moon landings?
R: NASA apologists claim that the camera aperture is never opened wide enough nor the time set long enough to film the stars and planets.
JD: So, since NASA was not able at the time to accurately simulate a starry background, has it told astro-nots to report stars as “dim and fuzzy”?
R: NASA has never allowed the astro-nots to call attention to the fact that the stars in space must be brilliant. The pilots of the original rocket planes reported seeing the stars in the daylight. The Russian Gagarin (first man in space) reported them to be “Astonishingly brilliant.”
Since neither the Apollo astro-nots nor the shuttle crew ever report about the stars and planets, I believe that NASA’s standing orders are to evade all discussion and refer to them as dim and fuzzy.
The Apollo missions happened before the age of computer enhancement and at that time it would have been impossible to fake the star fields onto photos taken in a studio. Millions of starbuffs world wide would have instantly detected the hoax. When they “take” us to Mars in a couple of years, we will not be able to dissect the new pictures because of computer graphics. They will be able to tell any lie they wish and we will believe.
JD: How does NASA control the astro-nots’ disclosure of the space hoax?
R: I believe that the early astronauts (most of whom were genuine he-roes) were slowly dragged into die mud by small lies and sexual indiscretions. Then via direct threats to either their fellow astronauts and possibly even their families, they were turned into astro-nots! I do not even rule out drugs or hypnosis..
JD: Since the Apollo space capsules did not have the necessary two meters of shielding mass for protection against space radiation, you believe that most of the Apollo astro-nots would be dying of cancers and blood disorders if they had really gone to the moon. Why have American astro-nots not suffered ill effects from space radiation?
R: Consider the fact that the Concord jet will change its polar route course and drop altitude if it detects 10 millirem of radiation. I believe I got more radiation from my CRT while writing NASA Mooned America! than they ever did because it is hard to get severely radiated without actually penetrating the Van Allan shield.
JD: How did NASA solve the problem that the Russians were unable to solve?
R: The old saying “if you can’t make it – fake it” was applied and the problem was “solved.”
JD: You state that you cannot find a picture of a “space walking astro-not” demonstrating the ballooning effect of a pressurized suit, but rather all of the pictures show wrinkles in the suits. What’s wrong with that picture?
R: To maintain the ability to breathe and move about we need a minimum pressure of over 5 psi (pounds per square inch) even when on pure oxygen. A boxer’s punching bag has a warning label on it to limit pressure to 4 psi. Ever try to bend a speed bag? A young man’s erection (referred to as a diamond cutter) is sustained with about 2 psi of blood. Need I say more?
I made a vacuum chamber that holds a glove whose skin is just strong enough to take 5.2 psi of pressure. When the glove is tested it balloons so badly that it inhibits most hand and wrist functions. No matter what you add to any material it gets stiffer. No matter how much money you have to spend, it will not change that fact.
In addition, I recently detached the space glove and inserted my bare arm into the vacuum chamber. I threw the switch and the pump began to extract the air. By the time it reached 3 psi my arm had been sucked into the metal sleeve a few more inches. It got to 4 psi and my hand felt very bloated and started to feel “pins and needles.” Then I became light headed. I flipped the switch and since I always maintain a bypass valve slightly open to the air, I knew that the vacuum would zero out in less than 10 seconds.
What I had forgotten is that time is relative. When there is no trouble a second goes by in the blink of an eye. When you are in trouble a second can seem like an hour. It is possible that the normal pressure on the rest of me caused that feeling, but I don’t know. I do know that NASA is supposed to have made similar tests over 30 years ago. If I am so wrong they can prove it real quick. Just suit up a man and blow the suit pressure up to 19.9 psi during a big TV show. Then let him prance around like they did on the Moon for the duration of the show. But I want to use my own brand new gauges to be sure that they aren’t using a half pound of pres-sure.
Examine the Collins photos, one taken in an airplane and the other allegedly taken in space and see if you can find any ballooning.
JD: On the subject of Aliens, you state that the “new wave of NASA apologists,” mainly generated since the first draft of your book, claim that “we went to the moon as hitchhikers using either ships or technology provided by aliens.” What is your feeling about the belief that “somebody else is on the moon” and that is why we were not allowed to land there?
R: The Winter 1995 edition of PARANOIA carried an article entitled “The Dark Side of the Moon” by Scott Corrales. The theme was that strange things were happening on the Moon. And these, the author reported, were believed to be caused by ETs. Although I believe that our infinite universe must have other intelligences, I do not believe the recent conjecture that aliens are in charge, have been captured, or are cooperating with us. I think these stories are all government-based New World Order propaganda. I expect any day now to be told we must give up our guns, our property, our children and our sovereignty or else the aliens will get mad.
NASA apologists then claim that spacesuits are radiation shields. If this were true, then they would have sent men into the partially melted-down Three Mile Island reactor to remove all the fuel rods. To the best of my knowledge, fuel rods become ever more radioactive through use. The term “spent” fuel rods is a deliberate government misnomer. Because of the speed of fission, controlling atomic reactors is always a hairy job. With ever more reactive material in the pit, the atomic beast must become increasingly unstable.
Furthermore, if “beams of light” from moving vehicles on the moon can be seen by astronomers, as the PARANOIA article claims, why didn’t NASA include a few magnesium flares in the six missions that allegedly landed men on the Moon? The whole world would have held its breath each mission just before they lit the flares. Why weren’t the exhuast gasses of the LEM’s landing and take-off visible? That much burning fuel must have generated an incredible splash of light.
As far as there being gigantic shadows from immense spires, the Empire State Building is pretty tall and it dosn’t case a shadow across the Hudson River first thing each morning. Airliners are also pretty big and they go over the New York area continuously and once they are 1,000 feet in the air they have no more pronounced shadow. And during an eclipse, the Moon doesn’t cast night upon us. Dusk, yes. Night, no.
I believe that the same forces that faked the landing are now about to finish the destruction of both Christianity and our country by “proving” that powerful aliens are demanding both our weapons and our last bits of national sovereignty.
If we ever, in any way, landed men on the Moon, why would NASA have to fake the photos? I can understand them faking the equipment and the capsules, but why did they fake the landscape? Why didn’t they take real pictures? And even then, how did the astro-nots live after hours of exposure under the naked sun? Please bear in mind that all Moon photos originate with NASA. When do you trust a known liar? I don’t believe there is anything on the Moon. Why are all the alleged remains on the backside that we can never see with our telescopes? Were those ancient alien builders (or modem ones) so afraid of us that they hid their works?
JD: Do you believe the three Sky Lab missions were at least partially faked, as were the Apollo missions?
R: The SkyLab rescue had to have been faked. The Sun heated the ship hot enough to disassociate the plastics, which stopped NASA from pressurizing the ship to prevent an oxygen fire from breaking out. It had been supplied on launch with food which would have been destroyed CIA drug war.
JD: Was the Apollo program a way to preoccupy us during the war?
R: Yes, but the Apollo program also helped to cover up and finance the CIA’s secret war in Laos and Cambodia. It also demonstrated how gullible we were when they waved the flag, and this show of patriotism probably set back the timetable for our destruction by a few years.
JD: The NASA moon hoax swindled an incredible amount of money from the American taxpayers over the course of many years. What happened to all of this money? Did it go to the Black Budget?
R: I can answer this in another way. In May 1994, Congress reduced NASA’s budget to its 1961 level. This information made headlines. I celebrated because from the very first printing of my book whenever I heard of a Congressman or national political leader who was the least bit rebellious 1 sent them a free copy. Every copy was accompanied by a prepaid and addressed postcard to enable them to verify receipt. During the past 3 years I sent out almost thirty books but only David Duke acknowledged receipt.
Suppose you were working for nickels and dimes back in 1961 and then you began to rake in the money hand over fist However, your employer stipulated that you couldn’t keep any of it year to year. When he fired you, how long would it be before you had to let the servants go and sell the Rolls? What about the big parties you used to throw? Could you still afford them?
Even before I knew the truth about the Federal Reserve I had always suspected that they bypassed Congress and directly funded the CIA. Well, by the end of that summer, when NASA’s lifestyle changed not a bit, I finally knew the truth. The private corporations known as the FED do anything they damn well please. The only thing this dispensation costs them is that these funds do not show up on the federal debt tab. Big Deal!
JD: Has NASA now found a way to get a ship into deep space with the necessary two meters of radiation shielding?
R: Not only couldn’t it be done with the technology available in the late 1960s, it can’t be done even today. The greatest reason is that men cannot survive a trip past the Van Allen Shield to the Moon without six feet (two meters) of radiation shielding. The shield must completely surround the crew to block the powerful x-rays and protons emitted from solar flares. According to NASA, we were barely able to send a ship that was 13 feet in diameter with a paper thin hull, let alone the 30-ft. diameter required if the shielding is added. For shielding we can either use a layer of thin lead or 6 feet of water. It is the equivalent mass that counts more than the material that is used. Where would we get the engines necessary to lift this mass from the Earth, then lower it onto the Moon’s surface and then take it home again?
The original Apollo ships purportedly lifted a mass equal to that of a destroyed (6.4 million pounds) because of the fuel needed to land the tiny LEM on the Moon and lift the top half of it off again. However, since this much shielding would be required on both the orbiting command capsule and the LEM, there would be no great fuel saving in having two separate craft. Then, even though the Moon has only 1/6 gravity, it would still require a vehicle at least one third as big as the original to lift it from the Moon and back to Earth. That’s two million pounds!
JD: Do you believe that any future space rides by NASA would constitute further swindling of American taxpayers?
R: It took 6.5 million pounds of vessel to launch about 75 tons (150,000 pounds) of command capsule and LEM. This ratio is about 43 to 1. To launch the new 2-million pound vessel from the Earth would need a vessel that weighs about 43,000 tons (86-million pounds). This is 14 times larger than the monsters that we saw launched all those years ago.
Until and unless we develop anti-gravity or unlock a new power source that we don’t even know about today, the simple ejection of mass (hot gasses) to drive ever larger space ships on ever longer trips will not happen except in NASA’s computer graphics department.
JD: Will NASA continue to “moon” America until we wake up and smell the hoax?
R: A while ago NASA released word that they had found possible ancient life forms in a rock from Mars. The NASA Imagineers claim that this rock was blown off of Mars 16 million years ago by an asteroid collision. It is further claimed that after 16,870,000 years (13,000 years ago) it plunked down in Antarctica. Since it must have been red hot and traveling like hell when it hit it must have buried itself deeply in the ice.
Add to that the known fact that about 2 feet of ice a year accumulates there. If it doesn’t, then how did a light density object like an airplane come to be buried under 30 feet of ice after being parked there for 15 years. Let’s see, 13,000 years x 2 feet per year equals… really deep. In feet, deeper than the deepest ice known.
How do they know that it wasn’t a piece of the asteroid instead of a piece of Mars? Don’t these same Imagineers claim that gravity breaks up meteors as they approach a planet? Wouldn’t a glancing approach leave some pieces of a meteor traveling even faster from NASA’s famed slingshot effect?
For it to have finally hit Earth it must have had an unstable orbit. In this whirling solar system, before you can tell where it came from you must know orbit, trajectory, direction, velocity, date and time! Did they ask that dumb chunk of rock its personal history? I am unaware that we ever lifted anything from Mars let alone another piece of rock. That kind of an accomplishment would have been loudly touted.
Therefore, how do they know this rock is Martian? In their dreams!
Nasa Mooned America! is available for $28 postpaid from Rene @ http://ralphrene.com/materials_available.html