<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: NASA, AstroNOTS Exposed
Review: A fascinating, well written and researched, fact filled book that reveals the hoax perpetrated by NASA (Never A Straight Answer) concerning the Apollo moon missions.All you need to get from this book, besides the voluminious facts concerning the bogus photography, bogus NASA "science", and NASA's and the astro"NOTS" own inability to answer questions pertaining to even the simplest problems of space travel is the big "R" - radiation, which even one director of NASA recently stated is a "showstopper". Simply put, humans can not withstand the large amounts of radiation in space when away from the protective environment of the earth's atmosphere without bulky shielding, or spend time on the moon which has no atmosphere or magnetic field. Conveniently now, 30 years later, they are saying that the moon does have an atmosphere. If this is so then why didn't NASA say so all those years ago? Surely, that would have been part of the essential data we would have wanted to gather? This is typical of NASA - giving bogus answers and mixing up dates, times and facts in order to confuse and cover up. This, along with a myriad of other missing data should be evidence enough that NASA is not being truthful. The authors clearly state how and why NASA saw fit to "hoax" the moon landings and they do propose that perhaps, a human did reach the moon but due to the effects of radiation died shortly after returning to earth. Supposedly NASA went to the moon for "all mankind". So why the secrecy? Are only a priviliged few allowed to know facts about the moon? Why? If they did go to the moon then what are they hiding? Was something found there that we are not supposed to know about? Or, as Dark Moon proposes is it all just a sham and a hoax? Rocks from the moon have been dated to be older than anything found on the earth and its orbit is evidence that it was not "captured" by the earth's gravity. Surely this is evidence that debunks many scientific theories so far proposed for it's origination - so then, what does science now propose? The authors' theory - and they are rightfully entitled to theirs as much as anyone - is "intelligent placement". Given the facts and data gathered so far this is as probable as any other. Everything about the moon is anomalous - anomalies that science, so far, has no answers for. The veracity of the Apollo missions notwithstanding, we know very little about the moon. Its difficult to accept the fact that the moon landings were faked because Americans want to believe that their government and NASA are honorable and doing the right things - that we are the nation of "can do" technological ability. However, American government has a long history of lies and deceit, currently including the "mysterious" Area 51 - which has thousands of workers that seem to keep secrets, probably under threat of death, or worse. If thousands of people can work there and we can clearly see that it occupies a very large area of land, yet the government DENIES its existence, surely the moon landing hoaxes would be no problem for a sinister agency such as NASA to pull off. At any rate it is all revealed, quite convincingly in the book. The authors make a compelling case concerning the behavior of the astronauts who supposedly landed on the moon - reclusive and vague about their "adventures" - they can't even speak to the simplest of questions such as "So, what was it like to land on the moon?". Many of them have contradicted eachother with strange, completely unscientific statements. Its time to re-examine the role that NASA plays in our lives and our country. Do we really want to give these secretive pseudo-scientists/engineers billions and billions of our tax dollars to achieve nothing more than low earth orbit? NASA needs to change its image as a sham and a flimsy disguise for what amounts to nothing more than a "defense" agency - a black hole into which goes enormous amounts of money but out of which nothing much worthwhile comes out. They can't even prove conclusively that the Apollo missions were successful and "Dark Moon" does us all a great service by opening up the lines of questioning - to which NASA has responded with riducule and cover-up - it's typical modus operandi. The authors of this book make some very interesting proposals for how deep space travel can be accomplished - proposals that, indeed, seem "far out" but that is not reason enough to dismiss them immediately. After all, a hundred years ago, space rockets were just a wacky idea - and not long before that the earth was flat. I would wager that NASA is probably already researching the ideas put forth by the authors. Dark Moon is nothing less than an entertaining read if you enjoy science, astronomy or space travel. Even, if, after the copious amounts of questions raised, you do not have any doubt as to the truth behind the Apollo missions it is a fascinating book well worth reading.
Rating: 
Summary: They have got to be kidding!
Review: A friend gave me a copy of "Dark Moon" to read while I was on a cruise this winter. I thought it might be an entertaining and interesting read but instead I found it to be the dumbest read since "Chariots of the Gods". I consider myself to be fairly open minded but I would have to have lost my mind to believe anything they say in this book. It's quite obvious to any educated person that "Dark Moon" is just a lot of baloney. This book just goes to prove that people will say anything for money. Next thing you know, they'll say they've found a second lunar module on the grassy knoll! I'm glad I didn't pay for the book because I threw it in ocean.
Rating:
Summary: Silly - No Science in this book at all
Review: About two years ago, fox (deliberately not capitalized) aired a TV show about how NASA had faked the moon landings and I couldn't believe that with the great wealth of scientific and engineering data available that the moon landings were faked. Since that time, I have become very interested in the Moon Hoax Conspiracy and have researched both sides of the arguments. As an engineer with twenty years of research, design and development experience in the areas of heat transfer, thermodynamics and fluid mechanics research, I felt that I could provide an unbiased scientific/engineering evaluation of at least some of the claims. One thing I should also add, unlike others who have probably provided a review without even having read this book, I can honestly say that I read this book from cover to cover (but boy was it hard to do). The first thing the reader should notice in the prologue is that the authors make no claims that moon landings did not occur, just that the official record is not correct. Quoting, "We are not claiming that astronauts have never walked on the Moon. Our personal interpretation of the evidence is that surrogate astronauts were employed. It is our further view that the famous named astronauts for example Neil Armstrong, Buzz Aldrin and Ed Mitchell in all probability never left Earth orbit, ..." These statements clearly imply that NASA had to create an elaborate hoax of massive portions to fool all worked for NASA and the billion or so people who watched the Moon landings live. The reader should take note of one last thing; there is no opposing point of view from either NASA or the scientific/engineering community in this book, only non-scientific hogwash and deceptive writing (For an example, see the review provided by William O. Wood, a former NASA employee). Since others have provided a review of this book, especially the entertaining review by Ed Boyes from Perth, Australia, I will comment some sections that were not covered in other reviews. I think I should point out that on just about every other page I found something wrong or a complete misunderstanding of physics. I'll just cover a few. The first thing that struck me was how could a conspiracy of this magnitude, with 400,000 people and hundreds of companies working on the project, be maintained for over 30 years, without someone coming forward and saying that the landings were faked. There are no whistle-blowers named in the book, at most just a few interviews with people who worked on the project. In all the years since the last moon landing occurred, there has not even been a deathbed confession. The authors of this book believe or at least want the reader to believe that only a select few were involved in creating the faked landings; however, thousands of engineers and scientists received data on vehicle performance, such as pressure, temperature, flow rates, acceleration and many other parameters that also had to be faked. These data were compiled and evaluated by NASA and sent out to the appropriate engineers and scientists. You can still download these engineering evaluation reports from several NASA websites or occasionally pickup an original on Ebay. There are only two possible ways that NASA could have faked these engineering evaluation reports. First, NASA had an alternative of group of engineers and scientist that provided fake data to all parties involved, but I don't how they could fool the thousands who actually designed and built the hardware and software and of course survive over thirty years of scrutiny. The second possibility is that those thousands of people were in on the hoax too, but if that were the case, that would mean that a large number of people involved. On page 159 of the book, there is a photograph of the Surveyor 3 unmanned lunar lander probe on the lunar surface that was taken by one of the Apollo 12 astronauts. The authors state that the vehicle should be covered with dust that was generated by the Lunar Module as it lands; however, the picture they present only shows the probe's surfaces that are facing away from the exhaust plume. So of course, these surfaces are dust free. If the authors had examined ALL the Apollo 12 photographs, they would have seen that the surfaces, which faced the Lunar Module (LM), are covered with dust. Only presenting part of the story is Very Deceptive and Unprofessional!!! On page 156, the authors attempt to convince the reader that exhaust leaving the descent engine should have produced a blast crater. Again, the authors do a poor and incomplete job of researching this topic. First of all they quote William Woods who states that the temperature of the exhaust gasses is 5000F. It is important to note, by his own admission, William Woods is a communications expert, not a rocket engine designer. This is the temperature of the gasses within the combustion chamber, this is not the temperature of the gasses that will impinge of the lunar surface. One of principles behind a rocket engine is to convert the energy of a high temperature gasses into a velocity which in turn produces thrust. Therefore, as the hot gasses leave the combustion chamber, they cool off thereby producing a fast moving jet of gas. As a result, the temperature of the exhaust as it leaves the LM's engine is around 2700 F. While this temperature is still high enough to melt rock, it is a far cry from 5000F. Furthermore, there is no analysis to show that the short contact time for landing, around 5-10 seconds is enough time to melt the surface. For example, I can stick my hand in a hot oven for 10-15 seconds and I barely feel it, and my blood doesn't start boiling. Finally, if the authors had actually examined the historical record, they would have found that Buzz Aldrin of Apollo 11 fame, actually states in the Mission Report that the LM did in fact actually singe the lunar surface. (You can get this report from several NASA websites, Apogee books, or sometimes it is for sale on ebay). On page 153 the authors state "NO EXHAUST = NO HYPERGOLIC FUELS = NOT A TRUE RECORD OF AN ACTUAL LUNAR LANDING." For those that don't know, hypergolic fuels are liquids that ignite instantaneously upon contact with each other. They have the advantage of not needing a sophisticated ignition system. There are many different types of hypergolic fuels and as with all combustion processes, the color of the flame or lack of any color depends of the materials being burned. Once again, the authors fail to provide a full account of all the relevant facts. As one can, by these three simple examples that occur in just six continuous pages of the book, that there are serious problems with book. Whether or not the authors were deliberately trying to deceive the reader, I cannot say. My final thought is save your money and a buy a book or a movie that is written by people who understand, science and engineering.
Rating:
Summary: Dumb and Dumberer
Review: As a student of history, I find the suggestion that the Apollo moon landings were faked, as one of the most asinine ideas that has come around in a long time. NASA programs in general, and the Apollo program in particular are unsurpassed in their documentation, and openness. Thousands of photographs were taken on the surface of the moon, thousands more in orbit and ten of thousands more were taken on the Earth documenting everything from vehicle assembly, crew training, mission control, the "average" NASA engineer, testing, simulations and countless more. This visual documentation is nothing compared to millions of pages of technical documentation related to the moon landings. Additionally, thousands of scientific papers have been written about the scientific data returned by the Apollo missions. Lastly, tens of thousands of non-government and foreign reporters, journalists and photographers covered this event and no stories have ever appeared about a hoax. Since I am not a technical person, I approached the hypothesis of the book from a different perspective. Are their facts correct? And do their arguments make sense? Typical questions asked by historical researchers. The answer to both of these questions is "NO" In some cases, they've actually lied to the reader and hidden the facts from the reader. First of all, do their arguments make sense? No, they do not. It is inconceivable that the hundreds and thousands of engineers and scientists who worked on the project could keep silent about their government creating a moon hoax. That would imply that all these people were morally bankrupt, plus the people around the world, such as Australia and Spain, who provided technical support were also morally bankrupt. I'm sorry, I just can't believe that guilt wouldn't cause at least one person to come forward. What about the enemies of the United States? Why would they go along with this hoax? Again, it doesn't make sense. Second, are their facts correct? Again, the answer is No. Here I'll give some specific examples. On pages 319 - 321, there is a story of an Australian women named Una Ronald who stayed up late to watch the Apollo 11 moon landing and said she saw a Coke bottle roll across the lunar surface and that the next day there were letters in her local newspaper that confirmed her story. The problem with this story is that it was nighttime in the United States and daytime in Australia when the moon landings occurred. Ask any US citizen over 45 and they will probably tell you that they stayed up late to watch the moon landings. Of course this can be easily verified by numerous space websites. The second problem with this story is that it doesn't make sense. It was estimated that a billion people watched the Apollo 11 moon landings live and only Una Roland saw a Coke bottle. This implies that somehow only Una Ronald could see a Coke bottle, during a time warp I guess, and the rest of the world is blind. By far the most flagrant deceptions occur in the author's discussions about photographs. They make some incorrect statements that light from the sun should produce parallel shadows. First, sunlight from the sun does not travel in parallel rays, it expands slightly. Second, as any art or photography student knows and I suspect most people know as well, objects and their shadows vanish to a point. This is known as perspective. If you didn't see this in the NASA photographs, then you'd know it was fake. To emphasis this flawed point, on page 22, the authors show two photographs of some scenery with several trees and their shadows in each photograph. The authors superimpose two parallel lines on each of the these photographs; however, when I draw a straight line on the shadows cast by the trees, they were not parallel, as they should be. The author's lines are only there to deceive the reader and not allow the reader to draw their own conclusion. Another example of the author's deceptive ways occur on the next page, page 23. Here, there is a black and white photograph taken on the moon that shows an astronaut and the moon lander in the background and some rocks in the foreground. The authors again draw some lines to try and convince the reader that NASA is pulling off a hoax. For this case, they use a poor quality black and white photograph instead of the original color photograph. Going to a NASA site and reviewing a high resolution color scan, it is clear that the shadows indeed fall the way they should to a vanishing point and that missing shadows from several rocks and the astronaut appear. From my perspective as a history major, these people are neither researchers, investigative reporters nor whatever they choose to call themselves, but the new snake-oil salesmen of our age.
Rating:
Summary: Dumb and Dumberer
Review: As a student of history, I find the suggestion that the Apollo moon landings were faked, as one of the most asinine ideas that has come around in a long time. NASA programs in general, and the Apollo program in particular are unsurpassed in their documentation, and openness. Thousands of photographs were taken on the surface of the moon, thousands more in orbit and ten of thousands more were taken on the Earth documenting everything from vehicle assembly, crew training, mission control, the "average" NASA engineer, testing, simulations and countless more. This visual documentation is nothing compared to millions of pages of technical documentation related to the moon landings. Additionally, thousands of scientific papers have been written about the scientific data returned by the Apollo missions. Lastly, tens of thousands of non-government and foreign reporters, journalists and photographers covered this event and no stories have ever appeared about a hoax. Since I am not a technical person, I approached the hypothesis of the book from a different perspective. Are their facts correct? And do their arguments make sense? Typical questions asked by historical researchers. The answer to both of these questions is "NO" In some cases, they've actually lied to the reader and hidden the facts from the reader. First of all, do their arguments make sense? No, they do not. It is inconceivable that the hundreds and thousands of engineers and scientists who worked on the project could keep silent about their government creating a moon hoax. That would imply that all these people were morally bankrupt, plus the people around the world, such as Australia and Spain, who provided technical support were also morally bankrupt. I'm sorry, I just can't believe that guilt wouldn't cause at least one person to come forward. What about the enemies of the United States? Why would they go along with this hoax? Again, it doesn't make sense. Second, are their facts correct? Again, the answer is No. Here I'll give some specific examples. On pages 319 - 321, there is a story of an Australian women named Una Ronald who stayed up late to watch the Apollo 11 moon landing and said she saw a Coke bottle roll across the lunar surface and that the next day there were letters in her local newspaper that confirmed her story. The problem with this story is that it was nighttime in the United States and daytime in Australia when the moon landings occurred. Ask any US citizen over 45 and they will probably tell you that they stayed up late to watch the moon landings. Of course this can be easily verified by numerous space websites. The second problem with this story is that it doesn't make sense. It was estimated that a billion people watched the Apollo 11 moon landings live and only Una Roland saw a Coke bottle. This implies that somehow only Una Ronald could see a Coke bottle, during a time warp I guess, and the rest of the world is blind. By far the most flagrant deceptions occur in the author's discussions about photographs. They make some incorrect statements that light from the sun should produce parallel shadows. First, sunlight from the sun does not travel in parallel rays, it expands slightly. Second, as any art or photography student knows and I suspect most people know as well, objects and their shadows vanish to a point. This is known as perspective. If you didn't see this in the NASA photographs, then you'd know it was fake. To emphasis this flawed point, on page 22, the authors show two photographs of some scenery with several trees and their shadows in each photograph. The authors superimpose two parallel lines on each of the these photographs; however, when I draw a straight line on the shadows cast by the trees, they were not parallel, as they should be. The author's lines are only there to deceive the reader and not allow the reader to draw their own conclusion. Another example of the author's deceptive ways occur on the next page, page 23. Here, there is a black and white photograph taken on the moon that shows an astronaut and the moon lander in the background and some rocks in the foreground. The authors again draw some lines to try and convince the reader that NASA is pulling off a hoax. For this case, they use a poor quality black and white photograph instead of the original color photograph. Going to a NASA site and reviewing a high resolution color scan, it is clear that the shadows indeed fall the way they should to a vanishing point and that missing shadows from several rocks and the astronaut appear. From my perspective as a history major, these people are neither researchers, investigative reporters nor whatever they choose to call themselves, but the new snake-oil salesmen of our age.
Rating:
Summary: Doubts about Apollo
Review: DARK MOON is an essential read for anyone interested in the subject of space travel, and getting to the moon in particular. What is easily overlooked is that the authors do not state that we didn't go to the moon, just that there is something seriously wrong with the record. I found this book very disturbing, because there does appear to be some doubt about Apollo when all the available evidence is examined. Apollo supporters, `defenders of the faith' are obviously very offended, I have even seen a number of totally incorrect and highly misleading objections to the ideas put forward by the Apollo skeptics.
There is harmful radiation in space from recent statements by the Administrator of NASA, that is clear. So bearing in mind radiation can fog film, and bearing in mind the recent film crew making an Imax presentation on the Space Station had trouble avoiding film fogging, it is reasonable to ask how the Apollo astronauts managed to obtain pictures on the moon that were not fogged.
This book is an eye opener on many other aspects of Apollo. The fact that there have not been any further attempts to return to the moon is very suspect. Today, apparently it would take at least 20 years preparation to return to the moon. So how they did it with all that `old technology' in less than a decade really is a puzzle to me.
DARK MOON is Great stuff!
Rating:
Summary: Beavis and Butthead meets Enemy of the State
Review: I should have guessed what I was in for when I read the authors' bios on the dust jacket and it states of one author "Unusually talented, Mary Bennett has developed the PSI abilities that have been with her since childhood, among which is the natural gift of remote viewing" and of the other, that he (David Percy) produced the video The face on Mars: The Avebury Connection. If I may add the observation that in my opinion the authors are so totally brainless that if they picked their nose they would tear the lining in their hat. So what's this book about then. Well this hopelessly inept manuscript is really about a colossal conspiracy theory that incorporates (among other things); faking the US moon landing(s), the sphinx, the entire US space program, the Soviet space program, the face on Mars, NASA, Stonehenge, crop circles,UFO's, alien autopsies and (you guessed it) the Roswell incident. Regrettably they missed Lee Harvey Oswald but presumably he will crop up in part 2. These dark and sinister conspirators are a group referred to, rather dramatically, as the "Masters of Infinity' and if you think you have heard this before, you are probably just confusing yourself with one of the many other conspirational groups that are in competition with each other to make our dull and boring lives even more unenjoyable. Although I am a skeptic by nature, even I enjoy a good conspiracy yarn if the ideas are sound enough but I need not have worried about this feeble epic as all of the arguments in this book are just plain silly. Had the authors compiled a tale based on NASA fudging a few photos they may have got away with it ,but they just couldn't leave well enough alone because after the fake moon landing scenario is explored they move directly into the a series of more and more idiotic exposes, including the following: The moon was placed in orbit around Earth deliberately (just who this was is not specified); the NASA space program was funded by Nazi gold acquired from Swiss banks; Stonehenge is actually a design for an interstellar spacecraft (unfortunately the instruction manual is still missing); the US and Russian space program engineers were in cahoots right from the beginning and (wait for it) that the Roswell crash was actually a fake UFO put there by aliens. The authors' demonstrate a complete lack of objectivity and freely distort facts and circumstances to suit their arguments which, when coupled with the loading of every statement with bias and innuendo, creates an annoying meter that eventually becomes so disruptive that the book is unreadable after only a few chapters. There are literally hundreds of ideas in this book that are completely irrational, like using the film `Independence Day' as a technical reference (it's true!) and claiming the fact that because virtually all the lunar astronauts are alive and in rude good health, this proves conclusively that they didn't go to the moon in the first place. While most of this work is just plain stupid, but there are some parts that are more idiotic than others - here's a few of my favorites: (I have abridged these to save space) Page 552: "The Speed of Light - Between the years of 1928-1945 the speed of light was found to be 3% slower than the (currently) accepted value...During that period many major historical events occurred...the Wall Street Crash, the great depression...the Spanish Civil War...the rise of the Nazis, the second World War, the development of the A Bomb... The activity of a significant portion of the world's population, taken together with the fluctuation of the speed of light, is truly worthy of note - especially when considered from the viewpoint of quantum physics." (I always knew the Nazis should have used the `Speed of Light' defense at Nuremberg). Pages 443 & 444: The authors claim that a physical upwelling of energy occurs at 19.47 degrees North latitude (over the Hawaiian islands) and then go on to comment "Does the reason that the Roswell Incident occurred in 1947 begin to make even more sense? Coupled with the fact that this event was precisely in the middle of 19 (point) 47!" As further confirmation they note that one of the Sphinx's paws is offset by 19.47 degrees. (No, the whole idea doesn't make any sense at all. Since the division of latitude into degrees, minutes and seconds is purely arbitrary and is only accepted by international convention as a convenience; coupled with the facts that the year 1947 is only valid in the Gregorian calendar [why not the Chinese, Hebrew, Islamic, Hindu, Mayan or ancient Egyptian calendars], and that ancient Egyptians didn't use degrees at all,instead they quoted angles (like the slope on the sides of a pyramid) in terms of a gradient e.g. 1:20, it seems clear to me that the linkage of all these facts is purely illusionary.) Page 500: The Face On Mars - Plate number 37 is the Viking 1976 photograph 170A13, which is low resolution and is one of the original pictures purporting to show the famous Martian face. Next to it is Plate 38, the MGS 1998 image of higher resolution and adjusted using new imaging techniques. Needless to say the new image looks exactly like what it is - a nondescript pile of rocks. Undaunted by this minor setback, our two optically challenged authors then declare "...we can see that indeed it is still a face." Having said all this, the book could be seen to have some value. If you are one of those people who, when late for work uses the excuse "the voices told me to stay home and clean my guns" or you believe that the CIA and FBI spend virtually all their waking hours just "messin' with my head" then this work will have your paranoia glands pumping at maximum pressure. There is enough conspiracy allegations inside this stultifying tome to make you suspicious of everyone on the planet for the rest of the millennium and then some. With a whacky combination of lamebrained ideas, irritating writing style, distorted facts and loopy logic, I personally found reading this book eye-glazingly painful, it's the sort of book that your analyst tells you to stop reading before it gives you some kind of mental breakdown. How these books get published at all is the greatest conspiracy theory yet to be investigated. Absolute nonsense.
Rating: 
Summary: Silly YES.. but not that bad
Review: It's interesting seeing the "True Belivers" on both side of the question. So much of all of this "Hoax" business must contain the "dark forces" of our friendly neighborhood dissinformation police. Simply stated.. there are very good reasons for our Apollo Astronauts to act the way that they do. This also goes for all the folks connected to the Apollo moon project. They found some very fundamental "National Security" secrets up there. These secrets probably have nothing to do with UFOs! (Seesh! you know something is up when every pin head stands up and yells U.F.O! The real question is how many of these idiots are really paid by uncle sam?) Dark Moon is written in a text book format. It has many neat pictures and some compelling questions. The problem with this book (and others like it) is they base their argument on "if this fact has been faked.. it is obvious that THIS happened." They dance around the real reason every now and then but eventually fall flat on their face. The way they use the "Whistle Blowers" concept is very silly indeed. Another book (and web site) BadAstromony is the other end of the spectrum. This guy is another true believer but completely refuses to admit the obvious evidence. "Apollo was faked? How stupid!" I'd like to see this guys W2. A book that really asks the RIGHT questions is: Penetration: The Question of Extraterrestrial and Human Telepathy by Ingo Swann ASIN: 0966767403 Of course it is out of print. I'm sure you can probably find it on the Twiggs web site. One thing that nobody talks about is the FACT that the moon has an atmosphere. They (NASA and others) finally and quietly admitted that fact a few years ago. So that answers many of the questions raised in the Dark Moon book. It is Amazing (or maybe not) that neither side of the Hoax question brings up the fact that the moon does not exist in a Vacuum. GENE
Rating:
Summary: A laugh a minute!
Review: Mary Bennet and David Percy have put together a classic in the genre of silly books about the Space Age. They flit from one thing to the next, ranging far beyond the scope implied by the title. Although their argument is impressively silly, in part because neither of the authors seems to have passed General Science 101 and so are fundamentally ignorant of basic physics, there is much fun to be derived from picking apart their flawed analyses. Their blurb says that they are "professional researchers", which is a fairly meaningless credential, and also that "they keep a low profile in London, their home" - if I'd written this book I'd do the same! dmh
Rating:
Summary: "Dark Moon" written and poorly researched by Dim Bulbs
Review: The depth of research that went into this alleged book is best exemplified by a sidebar on page 256 that chides the US for not launching communications Satellites until 1972(!).Perhaps they were busy deveoping their PSI abilities when Telstar was placed into orbit in 1962 and beamed television pictures live from the US to the UK and vice versa. They probably never thought about the true meaning of the title to the Tornados and Ventures hit recordings of "Telstar" which also came out in 1962. I would challenge them to apply the same criteria they applied to the moon photos to some of Ansel Adams landscape photographs. ("Note the deep shadows in the foreground while the mountain is brilliantly lit. Adams obviously used a big honking flash blulb") Save your money and pray thatMary Bennet et al are abducted by aliens. As previously stated, the real conspiracy they expose is their intent to foist this trash on the public.
<< 1 >>
| 
