ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2014 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Thursday, January 09, 2014

Hitler's escape to Residencia Inalco

This is either the non-fiction coup of the 21st century or a spectacular example of WND going off the rails of the crazy train:
In the National Archives at College Park, Corsi discovered a clipping from the U.S. military newspaper “The Stars and Stripes” published Oct. 8, 1945, reporting a shocking statement made by General Dwight D. Eisenhower, then the supreme commander of the Allied Forces.

The short piece read: “There is ‘reason to believe’ that Hitler may still be alive, according to a remark made by Gen. Eisenhower to Dutch newspapermen. The general’s statement reversed his previous opinion that Hitler was dead.”

Tracing Hitler’s escape route, Corsi found in the National Archives documentary evidence Hitler got to Argentina in a German submarine, the U-530 that mysteriously surfaced outside the harbor at Mar del Plata under the command of Otto Wermuth and his executive officer, Karl Felix Schuller, after having spent weeks making surreptitious drops of passengers along Argentina’s Atlantic shore.

Hidden away in the National Archives, Corsi found a U.S. naval intelligence report written July 18, 1945, by the Naval Attaché in Buenos Aires who notified Washington there was reason to believe U-530 had landed Adolf Hitler and Eva Braun in the south of Argentina before the submarine journeyed on to surrender at Mar del Plata.

Corsi had newspaper reports translated of Hitler and Braun being welcomed by wealthy Nazi sympathizers among Argentina’s large German community. The Germans there had constructed a mansion hidden away in the dense mountain forests of Bariloche to provide the Nazi führer with comfort and security in his elder years

Corsi writes: In 1943, architect Alejandro Bustillo, at the request of German supporters of Hitler then living in Argentina, designed and constructed an elaborate resort residence for Hitler and Eva Braun, Residencia Inalco, located in a remote area between San Carlos de Bariloce Villa La Angostura, bordering the Nahuel Haupi Lake, outside the city of Bariloche, in the province of Río Negro, Argentina.”

In southern Argentina in the region of the Andes adjoining Chile, he writes, “the surroundings and the Hitler residence were selected and designed to have a distinct feel of Hitler’s Obersalzberg retreat above the town of Berchtesgaden in the Bavarian Alps. Hitler moved into the residence in June 1947.”
For all that he likes to tackle controversial subjects, Corsi is a careful reporter and his statements here are extraordinarily detailed, so it should be fascinating to see how this plays out.  Either way, it is one hell of an attention-grabbing trailer. And those whose instinct is to mindlessly dismiss it as "conspiracy theory" should keep in mind what happened after Corsi called Obama's birth certificate into question. Considering how inept the current administration has shown itself to be, I wouldn't put it past them to try to pass off some ribs from the local barbecue shack as Hitler's real remains from the bunker.

I can't say I would be in the least bit shocked if it turned out to be true that the suicide in the bunker was a red herring. I can recall that even as a juvenile WWII enthusiast, I thought it was all rather suspiciously convenient that the bodies were burned and buried. And, as we now know with regards to the many Nazis protected by American military and scientific elite, it's no longer unthinkable to believe that the top brass might have struck a deal with Hitler in order to remove him as an obstacle to a speedy unconditional surrender.

As the admiral of the Germany Navy, Doenitz, who ultimately offered the surrender, would have likely been privy to any secret U-boat transport.

And, if it turns out to be true that Hitler escaped the bunker with the knowledge of U.S. officials, I think it is safe to say that we can confidently await the admission that the Moon landings were faked in another 20 years or so. Regardless if there is such a Nazi resort residence, one should be able to find it somewhere near here on Google Maps. It's fascinating to see there is a "Refugio Berghoff" up in the hills, not far from the Aldea Andina Resort, in light of this:

"The Berghof was Adolf Hitler's home in the Obersalzberg of the Bavarian Alps near Berchtesgaden, Bavaria, Germany. Other than the Wolfsschanze in East Prussia, Hitler spent more time at the Berghof than anywhere else during World War II. It was also one of the most widely known of his headquarters, which were located throughout Europe."

Labels:

210 Comments:

1 – 200 of 210 Newer› Newest»
Blogger Laramie Hirsch January 09, 2014 4:36 AM  

I wonder if Hitler took back up his painting hobby.

This, in addition to recent thoughts on geocentricism, have been paradigm shifting for me this evening.

(Yaaay, geocentricism: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U49_IzLeEo4)

I wonder if Hitler--should he have actually lived beyond WWII--I wonder if he had any writings or afterthoughts about what he did that we can read about. I think it would be very interesting to read.

Anonymous Idle German January 09, 2014 4:37 AM  

Werewolf Women of the S.S.

Finally, the tale of Hitler's plan to create a diabolical race of superwomen can finally be told...

THIS IS MY VISION!

Anonymous The CronoLink January 09, 2014 4:41 AM  

So Bart was so close... what else is Matt Groening is hiding from us?

Anonymous redsash January 09, 2014 5:10 AM  

It is all true. I once attended a wedding very near that same residence. A not so distant relative, a very beautiful girl by the name of Noffsinger was married. I was six. It was 1955. The bride wore a pale blue, the Germans wore gray. The mayor, a Don Pedro married the happy couple. A ump pa ? band played for hours. Unfortunately a 300 pound lady named Bertha who had too much to drink while attempting the tango lost her German helmet. It fell on dad's foot, Damn near breaking it. I do remember an obnoxious beaded waiter pestering dad about investing in Volkswagen telling him it vould conquer the vorld.

Anonymous Nate January 09, 2014 5:10 AM  

Say what ya will about Corsi... he is always an interesting read.

Anonymous The CronoLink January 09, 2014 5:16 AM  

LOL, did you read the poll on the page?

Like Hillary Clinton would say, what difference does it make?

Anonymous [profile removed by NSA] January 09, 2014 5:37 AM  

Just take a close look at Axelrod and the ballerina Emmanuel. It's obvious both Adolph and Goebbels snaked out and left some seed scattered about.

Anonymous redsash January 09, 2014 5:46 AM  

Post disappeared. What gives?

Anonymous Nate January 09, 2014 6:07 AM  

the question is... does this over take "Paul McCartney died and was secretly replaced" at the top of the Most Entertaining Conspiracy Theory Poll?

Anonymous VD January 09, 2014 6:14 AM  

I think it would have to. I mean, on the one hand, The Beatles. But on the other, we're talking HITLER LIVES! In the case of the former, the Baby Boomers would lose their minds. In the case of the latter, every liberal in the world would, or at least, they would lose the remnants of what passes for their minds.

Blogger TontoBubbaGoldstein January 09, 2014 6:28 AM  

Ozzie. Madonna. WND.

All a long time ago.

Anonymous Idle X January 09, 2014 6:35 AM  

Since we're on conspiracies. Paging Koanic, paging. There's a phone call at the front desk for you.

I was looking through the latest version of the face photos.

- The female composites are lacking a LOT. For instance you only have one female melon type. I know for a fact there are female snake melons. I've seen them.
- The Asian types are lacking. You only have one Asian melonhead. There are multiple types. For instance Jigme Singye Wangchuck is an Asian snake melon, while his son Jigme Khesar Namgyel Wangchuck is an Asian big eye or owl melon type.
- There are Asian Starchildren. A good one is Huỳnh Phú Sổ from Vietnam.
- I'm getting increasingly convinced there are two types of Starchildren: a wedge shape, and a round shape. Think about it.

Blogger Rantor January 09, 2014 6:42 AM  

Don't know if Corsica has the pictures but years ago I saw a press report like this with pictures of a compound in Argentina that was complete with the occasional carved swastika. The report also claimed that Hitler and Braun lived there. That was before Russia announced that the body of Hitler,

Hard to imagine that Israel's Nazi hunters totally missed this, they did find others in Argentina. Perhaps Peron was able to keep this secret?

Anonymous Peter Garstig January 09, 2014 7:12 AM  

This sends chills up my spine...I was at the Refugio Berghoff once.

Anonymous Peter Garstig January 09, 2014 7:16 AM  

I need to add that it's a small mountain cottage. Not a residence, more of a shelter.

Anonymous Peter Garstig January 09, 2014 7:18 AM  

Burnt down in 2011. They got rid of the evidence in time!

Anonymous zen0 January 09, 2014 7:26 AM  

It is pleasant to read about a happy ending once in a while.

Anonymous DT January 09, 2014 7:40 AM  

...I think it is safe to say that we can confidently await the admission that the Moon landings were faked in another 20 years or so.

There's actual physical evidence of that one, so I'm calling true. Doesn't mean FedGov is telling the truth about anything else. But even the worst liars occasionally tell the truth.

Wouldn't surprise me about Hitler. Heck, I wouldn't be surprised if Osama was vacationing at the same spot right now.

Anonymous hillwalker January 09, 2014 7:42 AM  

Nazis on the Moon

They've been waiting...

Anonymous PhillipGeorge(c)2014 January 09, 2014 7:47 AM  

Doesn't this go down with how many dogs did Genghis Khan own? His life wasn't spared, his death was delayed. God gives out information on a needs to know basis is all. From black ops to the gentleman's smoking lounge people take their secrecy agreements very seriously.

Perhaps he was Jewish and the Wiesenthal centre just overlooked his indiscretions for the greater good. Sorry I haven't laughed all day, at least till Mark Steyn's write up the Clitanic's last voyage into the ecopalypse.

Professionals took secrets to the grave - so we can't ask Armstrong what his obtuse references meant; and when its all said and done would Israel be anything without Pharoah chasing them? If adversity maketh the man, Hitler was their relief. Thus should it be called the "Semi Final Solution" - for the Fat Lady is still warming up.

Anonymous Tom White January 09, 2014 7:55 AM  

Wait until it comes out that Hitler was a puppet of the Rothschilds put into power to destroy the spirit of the German people, stir up everlasting sympathy for the Jews by killing non khazar jews, and elevate America, which was already owned and controlled by the rothschilds et al, to a superpower in order to bring down russia.
rothschild's funded both sides of ww2 and there is a rumor that hitler was an illegitimate rothschild grandchild. In return for his help the rothschild's provided hitler a nice retirement to pursue his artisitic endeavours, some of which now hang in the louvre...I think I just described the next forsythe novel.

Anonymous John Robert Mallernee January 09, 2014 7:58 AM  

Thank you for posting this and bringing it to my attention.

I've now created a similar post, "IS ADOLF HITLER STILL ALIVE?", on my own personal web site, "OUR ETERNAL STRUGGLE", attributing due credit to you and linking to your web site.

Blogger Cinco January 09, 2014 8:03 AM  


Umm, this is all the proof anyone needs that Hitler didn't die in a bunker.

Blogger IM2L844 January 09, 2014 8:10 AM  

Lends another dimension to the term - debunker.

Anonymous jack January 09, 2014 8:11 AM  

Re the moon landings. There was some, and I admit mostly mindless, segments about alien conspiracy theories aired last night on, I think Nat Geo or History. I ran into them and watched several of the half hour airings. One dealt with some interesting ideas that revolved around one of the [or the only?] Ranger probe missions that photographed the moon up close and caught some alien bases and/or ships on film. Apparently, some of the thousands of photos taken were never released. Now, it was speculated that the aliens gave the PTB on Earth an ultimatum not to come back and, then, supplied these PTB certain technology. The implication was that, if the landings were faked, it was done for at least two reasons. One, that a cover, IE the space program, would be the hook that explained all the new tech. The other was that the charade, it that was what it was, had to be kept up to explain the continued use of vast amounts of money poured into space exploration. I don't know, but it was sure fun to eat the popcorn and watch this stuff. Who knows, maybe there is some truth. Some where.

Anonymous dh January 09, 2014 8:16 AM  

VD, I can't believe that you think Corsi was vindicated in the birther thing. Is that your take on how it turned out?

Anonymous David of One January 09, 2014 8:26 AM  

Really very entertaining (and maybe educational) reading over one's morning cup of "joe".

It does make me wonder if Vox might consider a novel made specifically for One's Morning Cup of Joe ... Vox's Cup of Joe Novela or some such. A chapter or parts of a chapter every morning. Maybe even a paying subscriber link ... 2-3 bucks.

Anyway, a really nice way to wake up ... so maybe "Hitler" died in 2011 if we consider the fire wasn't accidental.

Anonymous Eric Ashley January 09, 2014 8:27 AM  

You definitely need to read Clive Cussler.

Anonymous Josh January 09, 2014 8:29 AM  

WND has gone full retard.

Anonymous David of One January 09, 2014 8:31 AM  

I should add that he died after normal life extension through secret German scientific developments utilizing science and south american shaman incantations ... 1889 to 2011 is a wee bit long.

Anonymous Dawkins Doughnuts January 09, 2014 8:32 AM  

It is a testament to the respect gained from your battles against the forces of evil (liberals) that the commentators here don't mock you incessantly over your 'moon landing is fake' nonsense.

Blogger Some dude January 09, 2014 8:34 AM  

@Cinco

That was hilarious.

Anonymous foamingatthemouth January 09, 2014 8:36 AM  

Right wing nuts really love a far fetched conspiracy. Link it to the evil gubmint to make it really irresistible. Is there a leftist bias anywhere to be imagined? Please let it be so!

Anonymous Josh January 09, 2014 8:39 AM  

Guys what if Hitler was really Obama's father?

Anonymous RedJack January 09, 2014 8:39 AM  

Tin Foil Thursday... God I love it!

So, did the Japanese invade South America to set up in Chile?

Anonymous VD January 09, 2014 8:48 AM  

VD, I can't believe that you think Corsi was vindicated in the birther thing. Is that your take on how it turned out?

Let's see... first the White House released a fake birth certificate and then the woman who supposedly validated the unreleased one was killed. Yes, I see that as sufficient to vindicate the charges of funny business, even though we still don't know where the guy was born.

Anonymous T January 09, 2014 8:54 AM  

The Weekly World News was WAY ahead of this story.

Batboy is ALIVE!

Anonymous AlteredFate January 09, 2014 8:59 AM  

There's actual physical evidence of that one...

Of what exactly? That the US has landed some sort of craft that returned samples, or the US landing men on the moon? If the latter than you must have access to the Groom Lake facilities, or maybe you are part of the team that highly discouraged the Chinese from landing their rover away from the US moon landing site?

Anonymous Just Mark January 09, 2014 9:02 AM  

In all candor, I thought both sides in the cold war accused the other of harboring Hitler. Think of the man hours and capital wasted trying to track down and confirm that goober was worm food.

Occam's Razor says left over Cold War bullshit.

Corsi is to the press what a dung beetle is to _________? Ya, that works.

Blogger IM2L844 January 09, 2014 9:09 AM  

dh, I'm looking for a thorough and definitive dialectical debunking of Corsi's work, but can't seem to find one. I see a lot of largely rhetorical derogation pieces that hang their hats on a few false claims by various people, but nothing really substantive. Does a thoroughly methodical point by point refutation based on unequivocal facts actually exist as claimed by virtually everyone on the left? I'd like to read it. Help me out.

Anonymous Poli_Mis January 09, 2014 9:16 AM  

That rack of ribs comment is going to crack me up all day.

Ach! Das Mobile Phone ist ein Nuisance Phone!

Blogger Expendable Faceless Minion January 09, 2014 9:20 AM  

I find it a bit far fetched that a pregnant girl would leave the US to fly to Kenya to have her kid. Not impossible, but getting there.

The biggest reason that I believe Obama was born in the US is, of course, that Obama himself was the first birther. He told other students in college he was an Indonesian/Kenyan prince.

Step two was his autobiography where the publishers had him born in Kenya. Considering that there was exactly one source only where they could get the info, BHO himself, I consider it to be a lie, trying again to make himself look exotic.

The fake birth certificate thing I put down to his radical communist gov't hating mother refusing to cooperate with 'the man' and never registering the birth as a bit of stupid rebellion.

The reason O never took it seriously was that he knew to the core of his soul that regardless of what irregularities came out, the media would move heaven and hell to cover it up. Which they did. It let him have a great time trashing anybody who was stupid enough to believe his earlier lies of an exotic birth.

Anonymous Edjamacator January 09, 2014 9:21 AM  

Sigh...the real question is, after getting out of Germany and living in peace for awhile, was his brain finally put in a jar? Or maybe his whole head Futurama style?

Anonymous Athor Pel January 09, 2014 9:23 AM  

" Peter GarstigJanuary 09, 2014 7:12 AM
This sends chills up my spine...I was at the Refugio Berghoff once.
...
I need to add that it's a small mountain cottage. Not a residence, more of a shelter.
...
Burnt down in 2011. They got rid of the evidence in time!"




So it was the snow shack that burned and not the candy store?

Anonymous McHaHa January 09, 2014 9:29 AM  

Almost as funny as this:

http://reason.com/24-7/2014/01/09/sunday-morning-church-for-atheists-getti

Blogger Christopher B January 09, 2014 9:31 AM  

Hmmmm. Anyone with a clue about what was happening at the end of WWII in the ETO would understand that there's little surprising about Eisenhower not claiming definite proof of Hitler's death. The Russians had physical control of the area around the bunker, and if I recall correctly refused to allow the US and the other Allied powers to perform an analysis of the remains they claimed to be Hitler's for some time after the end of the war. It's not hard to imagine that after initially accepting the Russian claims the USA backed off to a stance of 'not proven'.

IM2L844- if you'd like to read some fairly even handed though sympathetic analysis of Corsi, I'd suggest searching for Maguire's posts on him at JustOneMinute.typepad.com.

Anonymous Sigyn January 09, 2014 9:34 AM  

The biggest reason that I believe Obama was born in the US is, of course, that Obama himself was the first birther. He told other students in college he was an Indonesian/Kenyan prince.

Step two was his autobiography where the publishers had him born in Kenya. Considering that there was exactly one source only where they could get the info, BHO himself, I consider it to be a lie, trying again to make himself look exotic.


And then he decided he wanted to be president, and since it would be more useful to him to be an American, he started telling people he was an American.

And you believe it, because obviously, he would never lie about THAT.

Anonymous Athor Pel January 09, 2014 9:36 AM  

"Expendable Faceless MinionJanuary 09, 2014 9:20 AM
...
He told other students in college he was an Indonesian/Kenyan prince.
...
Step two was his autobiography where the publishers had him born in Kenya. Considering that there was exactly one source only where they could get the info, BHO himself, I consider it to be a lie, trying again to make himself look exotic.
...
The fake birth certificate thing I put down to his radical communist gov't hating mother refusing to cooperate with 'the man' and never registering the birth as a bit of stupid rebellion.
..."




So... he's telling the truth now because he lied in the past. Mmm hmm, right, sure.
What we know for sure is that he either lied then or is lying now. Either way he's a liar and I haven't heard any repentance out of his mouth.

That anybody would back a known and unrepentant liar for the highest office in the land is proof of their moral turpitude.

There is no covering this up for those with eyes to see and ears to hear.

Anonymous McHaHa January 09, 2014 9:36 AM  

The Führer is a Kindle publisher?

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/hitlers-mein-kampf-surges-book-sales/story?id=21466401

Anonymous MendoScot January 09, 2014 9:40 AM  

But Peter, the Berghof has been rebuilt!

Look at the fourth photo, the guy sitting at the back, the mustache...

Anonymous bw January 09, 2014 9:42 AM  

So, did the Japanese invade South America to set up in Chile?

No, that has been the Nazi Bush family, of late...

It is a testament to the respect gained from your battles against the forces of evil (liberals) that the commentators here don't mock you incessantly over your 'moon landing is fake' nonsense.

Fascinating. It is the same mind that has won the hard earned "respect" in other areas that is doing the "hinting at" regarding the "moon landings". We look forward to your psycho-spiritual explanation of how this mind goes off the rails in this particular instance. (I'm going on your own use of language to assume you believe VD really believes it or believes it posssible.)

Frau im Mond , director Fritz Lang, 1929 German silent film.

(a Frau im Mond logo was painted on the base of the first successfully launched V-2 rocket - Nazi SS Officer / NASA founding member Werner vonBraun's rockets).




Anonymous Porky January 09, 2014 9:43 AM  

If you were Hitler, wouldn't you have an escape plan? Of course you would.

Anonymous DT January 09, 2014 9:44 AM  

Of what exactly? That the US has landed some sort of craft that returned samples, or the US landing men on the moon?

Both.

Anonymous Stiliicho January 09, 2014 9:49 AM  


The fake birth certificate thing I put down to his radical communist gov't hating mother refusing to cooperate with 'the man' and never registering the birth as a bit of stupid rebellion.


I suspect that the original contains embarrassing or politically damaging information, thus it is hidden. Likewise with his scholastic records (embarrassing grades and test scores, registration as a foreign student, etc.). Registration as a foreign student (after turning 18) in particular could be argued as a denunciation of citizenship, so that has to be hidden at all costs.

Anonymous Titus Didius Tacitus January 09, 2014 9:50 AM  

We learned recently that Hitler's real escape was via time machine and he is now a dedicated anti-racist.

Anonymous ck January 09, 2014 9:51 AM  

This all begs the question of where our current Dread Pirate Roberts is located:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aHZGqBVBCRw

Anonymous Stilicho January 09, 2014 9:52 AM  

Look at the fourth photo, the guy sitting at the back, the mustache...

Look at the outer edge of the dinner plate in photo 3; is that a sigil?

Blogger swiftfoxmark2 January 09, 2014 10:00 AM  

Vampire Nazis love war

Anonymous I can't stand Skip Bayless January 09, 2014 10:04 AM  

Fascinating. It is the same mind that has won the hard earned "respect" in other areas that is doing the "hinting at" regarding the "moon landings".

Just as a particle physicist can be relied on when it comes to giving a cogent explanation of what 'color' means as a quark property, but cannot necessarily be relied on when it comes to whether the US should invade Syria.

It is lazy to assume that someone who makes great points in A, a field he takes great interest in and attention to, automatically makes great points for everything else in the world - and apologies to the tremendous intelligence of your dear leader, but no one can be qualified in everything.

"Hinting at" - well I suppose that's a nice way to hedge a bet, although I don't think he's delusional enough to even hint that the Earth is 4000 years old, so it is good to see there are limits.

Anonymous bw January 09, 2014 10:05 AM  

as we now know with regards to the many Nazis protected by American military and scientific elite VD

Correct as far as it goes, but doesn't go far enough. Everything is about the funding and Intel.
Behind the "scientists" and the MIC (same thing) would be the Financiers/Banking Houses and their Intel Agencies and Networks.
And their Lawyers, of course, like the Dulles brothers. Dulles and WWII and Switzerland, etc. Very important background and pattern being painted.

Anonymous RedJack January 09, 2014 10:06 AM  

No, that has been the Nazi Bush family, of late...

Nuts, now I have to update my spread sheet.

Blogger IM2L844 January 09, 2014 10:08 AM  

IM2L844- if you'd like to read some fairly even handed though sympathetic analysis of Corsi, I'd suggest searching for Maguire's posts on him at JustOneMinute.typepad.com.

Thanks, Christopher B., I checked it out and it was interesting, but there was nothing remotely similar to what I am looking for as delineated in my comment above. I'm beginning to think the standard go to response from leftists that all questionable speculations regarding Obama are tantamount to beating dead horses that have been thoroughly and repeatedly shot down is nothing more than rabbits regurgitating claims to debunkings that in reality have never existed.

Blogger Laguna Beach Fogey January 09, 2014 10:20 AM  

If true, then good for him.

Anonymous bw January 09, 2014 10:24 AM  

@Skip Bayless

First, it should be noted that Skip Bayless is indeed a moron. But I warn you of that "hate" thing - of course, perhaps he is simply your first true love that has become your first hate...

The typical "you're just a follower of the deluded" attempted ego-slap is noted. Fail

You spent several paragraphs explaining something that VD himself has long ago pointed out - before you had ever heard of him likely - that people outside their own knowledge center and frame of reference may not have the intellectual and perceiving capacity to......blah blah blah...He covers this all the time. It is your own frame of reference that is so narrow. You lecture in the insistence that others don't already know and take for granted what you are pointing out. Fail2.
So, once again, we will wait for you to show exactly why and how VD or anyone who believes like he does has gone wrong in this particular instance of the "hinted at fake moon landings".
Your use of "hedge" is interesting. It presupposes that you can and must actually know for sure - at least on certain subjects.
The subject matters in which someone must use the term "impossible" is very telling.
What does young earth/old earth - or Christianity - have to do with evidence for or against "faked moon landings"? Irrelevant or category error...or something.
And stop watching Disney.

Anonymous bw January 09, 2014 10:25 AM  

Nuts, now I have to update my spread sheet.

You were humble enough to use Pencil to begin with, weren't you?

Blogger stareatgoatsies January 09, 2014 10:42 AM  

I'm looking for a thorough and definitive dialectical debunking of Corsi's work, but can't seem to find one.

A quick search found me this. The author has written a 221 page book on the forgery claims, claims to have done hundreds of hours of research, and has voluminous and detailed set of blog posts. It passes my smell check.

OpenID cailcorishev January 09, 2014 10:44 AM  

I'm beginning to think the standard go to response from leftists that all questionable speculations regarding Obama are tantamount to beating dead horses that have been thoroughly and repeatedly shot down is nothing more than rabbits regurgitating claims to debunkings that in reality have never existed.

Of course they are. Anyone who took those claims seriously enough to investigate them with an eye to debunking would himself be suspected of heretical leanings. There's no advantage for a leftist in trying to prove something that all leftists have already agreed to accept as a matter of faith, and that only a few kooks argue with anyway.

Anonymous I am not a fan of Skip Bayless January 09, 2014 10:44 AM  

So, once again, we will wait for you to show exactly why and how VD or anyone who believes like he does has gone wrong in this particular instance of the "hinted at fake moon landings".

Not sure what you are looking for here; there's hundreds (thousands?) of people that were involved in the moon landing, from the astronauts to ground control, with observations taken by impartial (or even hostile, in the case of the USSR) observers all over the world. If someone hints that the Earth might be flat, it's kind of silly for them to ask to prove them wrong, when all the evidence around them proves them wrong. A better question is, what evidence out there lends a shred of credence to the 'hinting'?

I do apologize for using 'hedge' to imply that some things can be known for certain. I cannot prove that my car will not explode when I turn if on in the morning, or that the road will not transform into a fire breathing dragon. Both things are not logically impossible, and I'll grant the explosion is more likely among the two - but you would be a crank if you spent an hour every morning searching your car for bombs. Unless of course you recently threatened to publish some damaging info against the Obama administration...

The young earth comment was just to show that your dear leader's belief system - as wide and far-reaching as it is - still maintains some sense of reality.

Anonymous cheddarman January 09, 2014 11:06 AM  

I thought Hitler was hangin' with Loki and Sigyn.

Sincerely

Cheddarman

Anonymous VD January 09, 2014 11:11 AM  

Not sure what you are looking for here; there's hundreds (thousands?) of people that were involved in the moon landing, from the astronauts to ground control, with observations taken by impartial (or even hostile, in the case of the USSR) observers all over the world.

That's logic. Not evidence. You're just trying to excuse your refusal to actually examine any of the evidence. Which is fine, but every single successful coverup of the past belies your argument.

A better question is, what evidence out there lends a shred of credence to the 'hinting'?

The fact that so-called Moon rocks that have passed out of NASA's possession have turned out to be of Earth origin. Nate had a good one too, something about the suits and the lander or something, I don't recall exactly.

The young earth comment was just to show that your dear leader's belief system - as wide and far-reaching as it is - still maintains some sense of reality.

Some sense of reality? My dear Not Skip Bayless, if we ever debated the Moon issue, I'd soon have you admitting that you have absolutely no idea whether anyone ever landed there or not, or more to the point, if the actual landing was the one that is portrayed as per the official NASA story.

Has it ever occurred to you that the Moon landing was faked, but there were real Moon landings that required a more innocuous coverup? Among other things, that would explode your logical argument above.

Now, you don't seem to understand that I am a Moon landing skeptic, not a Moon landing denier. And the two primary reasons I am skeptical are a) the fact that neither we nor anyone else has ever officially been back despite it presumably being much, much easier now with modern materials, computers and assorted technologies, and b) the fact that the government supports the official NASA story.

I do not believe anything at all that the federal government claims. My contention is that the mere fact they say something true is sufficient reason to doubt it.

Anonymous VD January 09, 2014 11:11 AM  

The author has written a 221 page book on the forgery claims, claims to have done hundreds of hours of research, and has voluminous and detailed set of blog posts. It passes my smell check.

And have you read it?

Anonymous cheddarman January 09, 2014 11:12 AM  

On second thought, if Hitler was reincarnated as Sigyn and Loki's baby, it would make sense from an Asgardian perspective.

sincerely

cheddarman

Blogger IM2L844 January 09, 2014 11:17 AM  

Not even a nice try, stareatgoatsies.

I followed your link and read the page. Not a lot of facts there. It was mostly:" They're wrong because here are some of my unwavering opinions and conclusions. Now, buy my book...dotted with a lot of wishy-washy qualifiers such as "probably" and "seemingly". When I tried to follow one of his links "For some of the more detailed analyses", I got the old "the page you requested could not be found" message. Vacuous rhetoric is exactly what I was trying to avoid. Next.

Blogger stareatgoatsies January 09, 2014 11:22 AM  

I haven't read the book. I've read the blog post and comments at the link posted. If I had read the 221 page book, I would be able to elaborate further than a smell check.

Anonymous cheddarman January 09, 2014 11:25 AM  

speaking of former luminaries of the 3rd Reich, i could see Otto Skorzeny hangin' with Nate these days. Skorzeny definitey had the bad ass thing down.

Anonymous fnn January 09, 2014 11:31 AM  

If Hiler is still alive he's badly needed in France.

Renaud Camus is an extremely pro-israel and philosemitic gay writer who thought that being pro-israel gave him the right to wonder about whether it was slightly innapropriate that very often, in the media, you only had jewish people talking about jewish topics while pretending to talk about french culture.

That was the beginning of the end for him and he's pretty much banned from the mainstream media.

I remember a particularly shocking segment during a tv show where he was being *ridiculed* for stating that there was such a thing as a native French culture and a native French people. Who was ridiculing him the most ? Colombe Schneck, a jewish radio host who has extensively written about her lithuanian jewish background, which seems to be a real culture to her, unlike French culture which is supposedly a myth.

Blogger Tom Kratman January 09, 2014 11:32 AM  

As everyone knows, Obama was born from a virgin test tube in a super secret lab somewhere in Siberia during the Cold War. His genetic makeup includes Lenin, Stalin, and Patrice Lumumba. The ovum was rescued from Rosa Luxemburg’s corpse by a dedicated member of the Spartakusbund who had been studying eugenics at Humboldt University in Berlin at the time. The ovum was frozen at the University but seized by Red Army troops on or about the 3rd of May, 1945. He was decanted sometime before the 4th of August, 1961, and the new baby brought to Hawaii by a special KGB-manned submarine, landed, and registered as native born. His notional mother was recruited expressly to raise him as a Red. She is not, in fact, dead but retired to a nice little dacha on the Black Sea. The cancer killed his grandmother story is a lie; George Soros had the poor old typical white woman killed lest she reveal the secret.

Ahem.

And you know, none of that nonsense is one whit more scurrilous than some of the absurdities directed at and about Sarah Palin.

OpenID cailcorishev January 09, 2014 11:38 AM  

I spent about a day reading a site claiming that the moon landing was faked. He made some pretty good arguments, some of which I even remember: Why no dust on anything in the pictures? Why does there seem to be ambient light on things? What about statements from NASA suggesting that we couldn't even go there now, with all the improvements we've had in technology? And lots more.

One of these days I'll get around to reading a debunking of the debunking. Until then, like Vox, I'm skeptical. It would require a lot of people to have kept the secret for a long time. But we know for sure of other situations where that was the case, and they managed it. Steve Sailer reported on some of the successful code-breaking in WWII which was successfully kept secret by large numbers of people until recently declassified. When no-one but a few crazies is investigating something, and no one else will listen to what they turn up anyway, maybe it's not that hard to keep a secret. If you were a NASA engineer in 1969, how many serious journalists have ever tried to get you drunk and get the truth out of you?

Anonymous E. PERLINE January 09, 2014 11:39 AM  

If the Germans didn't kill the Jews, etc. who knows how WW2 would have turned out? The Germans killed their own kind, who in a regular war, would have fought as loyal citizens. Instead, Hitler made the German people look threatening to other nationalities. They fought back passionately, and that translates to morale.

The Germans have Hitler to thank for making them look evil and stupid. I don't
know know-- maybe every nation has a stupid element in its population. But not so stupid as would take generations to get over.

Blogger stareatgoatsies January 09, 2014 11:40 AM  

Not even a nice try, stareatgoatsies.

I can only lead the horse to water...

I followed your link and read the page.

How much of the page did you read, and how long did you spend reading it?

They're wrong because here are some of my unwavering opinions and conclusions.

The title of the post is 'The Bottom Line', and you've a problem with it containing conclusions?

dotted with a lot of wishy-washy qualifiers such as "probably" and "seemingly".

"probably" occurs three times. The first two refer to what he believed before he started a serious investigation. The third is from " But any traveler going from Kenya to Honolulu would have cleared immigration in the Eastern United States, probably in New York City." The only occurrence of "seemingly" refers to seemingly persuasive, but wrong, arguments. None of these are wishy-washy qualifiers.

If you can give an honest reading of the link and call it "vacuous rhetoric", nothing I say will convince you otherwise. Your smell check is broken. Note also that the author is active in the comments section.

Anonymous I am not a fan of Skip Bayless January 09, 2014 11:53 AM  

Now, you don't seem to understand that I am a Moon landing skeptic, not a Moon landing denier. And the two primary reasons I am skeptical are a) the fact that neither we nor anyone else has ever officially been back despite it presumably being much, much easier now with modern materials, computers and assorted technologies, and b) the fact that the government supports the official NASA story.

It was - and still is - a very expensive endeavor to not just get to the Moon, but safely land and come back. What would it serve to go back to a boring rock? We definitely don't have the technological ability to start efficiently mining the place for valuable resources. Besides the fact that the government is much more concerned with black kids not doing as well as whites in school. Priorities!

I think you would agree that foreign agents have infiltrated the US government throughout its history. Are you telling me the USSR (or Putin today) would have passed up the chance to leak the truth? Or that a massive conspiracy involving thousands has lasted this long without any Snowden-like exposure? I too have a tendency to distrust whatever the USG gives as the official story. But the USG also does say they sent soldiers to Vietnam, and I can ensure you that is true.

We are all skeptics if the benchmark is logical possibility - perhaps aliens told the world leaders to keep quiet. Anything not logically impossible is possible. But hanging your skeptic hat on the moon landing? Come on, man.

Blogger stareatgoatsies January 09, 2014 11:53 AM  

When I tried to follow one of his links "For some of the more detailed analyses", I got the old "the page you requested could not be found" message.

I don't know what's wrong with your internet, but the guy has enough free materials, interviews etc etc to keep you busy. This, for instance. It has a 30+ point breakdown comparing the forgery theory with the "Optimization & Other Innocent Processes Theory". Vacuous rhetoric?

Blogger IM2L844 January 09, 2014 12:18 PM  

This, for instance.

I ask for a substantive and thorough point by point refutation of Jerome Corsi's work (and, BTW, I didn't specify the birther controversy) and you give me a link to Woodman's "The Arpaio Posse’s Fatally Flawed “Analysis” of Barack Obama’s Birth Certificate"? I think your reading comprehension skills may be suspect.

Anonymous dh January 09, 2014 12:27 PM  

I ask for a substantive and thorough point by point refutation of Jerome Corsi's work (and, BTW, I didn't specify the birther controversy) and you give me a link to Woodman's "The Arpaio Posse’s Fatally Flawed “Analysis” of Barack Obama’s Birth Certificate"? I think your reading comprehension skills may be suspect.

The problem is not that a refutation does or does not exist. The presumption is that anyone is says where they say there are from.

The problem is that Corsi's case, having read his book, is very bad. There are mountains of things that he presents which are not evidence. A few high-profile things in his book turned out to involve deceit.

I am not aware of a point by point refutation of anything he has published, but that's not actually how the world works. He tried to make his case, and it was weak.

The timing was also very bad. He publishes a book asking where is the birth certificate, and then a few days later, exactly what he said he was looking for was released.

Corsi did not come off looking good and his very weak. And the problem in opinion, with VD and others, is that there is no proof of Obama's birthplace that would convince them.

Anonymous dh January 09, 2014 12:29 PM  

I suspect that the original contains embarrassing or politically damaging information, thus it is hidden. Likewise with his scholastic records (embarrassing grades and test scores, registration as a foreign student, etc.). Registration as a foreign student (after turning 18) in particular could be argued as a denunciation of citizenship, so that has to be hidden at all costs.

These are plausible scenarios. Esp. re college admissions.

Anonymous Huckleberry - est. 1977 January 09, 2014 12:37 PM  

there's hundreds (thousands?) of people that were involved in the moon landing, from the astronauts to ground control, with observations taken by impartial (or even hostile, in the case of the USSR) observers all over the world

Despite the seeming complexity, really the only necessary conspirators for such a fix would be the astronauts, a purported film crew, a handful of top brass at NASA, and the guy who gave the thumbs-up on the astronauts being strapped into what was really an empty rocket.
Mission Control basically just watched the whole thing unfold through telemetry monitors -- easy enough to fake from anywhere in the world.
The astronauts would have every reason to protect the secret -- the cache of being the only moonwalkers in human history.
As far as the Russians are concerned, tracking a rocket going around the moon doesn't actually reveal if anyone was in it.
Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if the President didn't know.
Keep in mind, this is the same government that weaponized modern art pretty much just because they could.
I put nothing past them.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/modern-art-was-cia-weapon-1578808.html

Anonymous cmate January 09, 2014 12:39 PM  

"Right wing nuts really love a far fetched conspiracy. Link it to the evil gubmint to make it really irresistible. Is there a leftist bias anywhere to be imagined? Please let it be so!"

I hear ya. next thing you know some wingnut will claim that the gubmint is secretly monitoring cell phone calls and e-mails and can turn on the microphone on your phone and record conversations in the near vicinity totally without your knowledge.

Blogger ajw308 January 09, 2014 12:40 PM  

If the Germans didn't kill the Jews, etc. who knows how WW2 would have turned out? The Germans killed their own kind, who in a regular war, would have fought as loyal citizens.
Look at the top Physicists on the Manhattan Project. Imagine if they would have stayed in Germany.

Blogger stareatgoatsies January 09, 2014 12:41 PM  

I ask for a substantive and thorough point by point refutation of Jerome Corsi's work

Which I provided you. (unless you're now demanding a work by a single author debunking everything Corsi has ever said? I'll admit that probably doesn't exist.)

As to the relevance of my second link, Corsi co-wrote a book on the investigation with Arpaio's lead. He also took part in press conferences with and fed information and documents to Arpaio's investigation.

You're flailing and making mistakes because you're unwilling to do your own research, which calls into question the sincerity of your original request. I'm finished doing your googling for you.

Anonymous Huckleberry - est. 1977 January 09, 2014 12:42 PM  

However -- I don't necessarily believe that.
One good explanation for why we've never been back is that we're simply duller and less mentally agile than the last generation of humans to grow up without television and helicopter parenting.

Blogger crazyivan498 January 09, 2014 12:44 PM  

The moon landing was not faked. Mythbusters has an episode on it.

Blogger crazyivan498 January 09, 2014 12:44 PM  

The moon landing was not faked. Mythbusters has an episode on it.

Blogger crazyivan498 January 09, 2014 12:44 PM  

The moon landing was not faked. Mythbusters has an episode on it.

Blogger crazyivan498 January 09, 2014 12:46 PM  

sorry blogger had an error and when i relaoded the page it most have multiple posted again

Anonymous clever hans January 09, 2014 12:47 PM  

as regards 'large number of people needed to keep false moon landings secret' idea...Vin Suprynowicz has pointed out that in the '30's and '40's, newspaper photogs had a gentlemens agreement to not take pix of FDR in a wheel chair because Dear Leader, or America, or something. That 'agreement', not having any of the power of bloodoaths or Official Secrets Act oopmh behind it, was strong enough that (Suprynowicz says) that of all the millions of photos taken of FDR, there are only 2 showing him in a wheelchair.

I'm not sure if there were only 2, but I do know there ain't many. This on a handshake agreement. Now imagine what secrets could be kept by folks who were really _serious_ about it. Of course the Faked Moon Landings notion still has to take the Sovs into account: they would have had to have known the landings were faked, no? So why would they have allowed the hated Americanskis that massive propaganda triumph? Why wouldn't/didn't they piss into the punchbowl?

Blogger ajw308 January 09, 2014 12:47 PM  

And the problem in opinion, with VD and others, is that there is no proof of Obama's birthplace that would convince them.
When two documents are produced that are obvious bad forgeries, the skepticism is reasonable. That's hardly proof that nothing would convince them.

Blogger stareatgoatsies January 09, 2014 12:50 PM  

On second thought, I retract my questioning of your sincerity. But at least google "site:www.obamabirthbook.com corsi" to get a start on what Woodman has to say about Corsi.

Blogger Scott January 09, 2014 12:57 PM  

@I am not a fan of Skip Bayless

I was about to respond with a similar reply. Thanks for saving me the trouble.

@Vox

Seriously? I am at least as much dubious of our government's ability to accomplish anything of value and even more so of its claims thereof, but faking the moon landing? Dude, if our government could pull that off and keep a lid on it for nearly 45 years, I'll start trusting them. Put another way, it's probably harder to plan and achieve deception at that level than to land on the moon in 1969.

Whatever credibility you have amassed, quite a lot in my estimation, is at grave risk of going poof. "Who? Oh, Vox, the moon landing skeptic, yeeeeaaah..." Why throw that bone to the rabbits?

Anonymous VD January 09, 2014 1:24 PM  

Seriously? I am at least as much dubious of our government's ability to accomplish anything of value and even more so of its claims thereof, but faking the moon landing?

Yes. Seriously. Argument by incredulity cuts no ice with me. I had people telling me that I was paranoid about the NSA and there was absolutely no way the government could possibly be spying on everyone around the world for more than 12 years. Then Snowden. And crickets.

Whatever credibility you have amassed, quite a lot in my estimation, is at grave risk of going poof.

I don't give the smallest of shits what any incredulist thinks. You see, I have noticed that when I'm absolutely right about something like this, they never seem to recall that or even remember that they were mocking me for correctly deducing the truth for years.

If NASA comes out tomorrow and admits the whole thing was faked, there isn't a single person who has claimed that I was deluded and ridiculous and insane to have doubted the absolute historical fact of the NASA version of the Moon landings who will apologize or even admit that I was correct to be skeptical.

Anonymous foamingatthemouth January 09, 2014 1:33 PM  

Which is it? Is the gubmint a sprawling self-serving bureaucracy staffed by incompetent idiots that can't even get a website up, or competently forge a single birth certificate, or is it a monolith of crack SS troops and elite true believers able to keep the biggest secret in history under cover for 40 years?

You right wing nuts are a barrel of laughs.

Blogger JaimeInTexas January 09, 2014 1:37 PM  

Has Obama's mom ever been in Argentina early to mid1960?

Has our illustrious POTUS traced his DNA lineage?

Mr. Kratman may be trying to some deflection. Pay no attention to him.

Blogger abcdefgh January 09, 2014 1:51 PM  

Those elites in government are competent at committing great evil. The nature of government, a monopoly on power and violence, seems to encourage sociopaths to take the helm. It's why the government seems blazingly incompetent at doing anything good or worthwhile.

Anonymous foamingatthemouth January 09, 2014 1:53 PM  

If the evil gubmint was willing to fake mankind's greatest technical and historical achievement and keep it under wraps for over 40 years (why?), don't you geniuses think it would be a little curious that they would attempt to (poorly) dress up a couple of rickety old wagons and present them as proof of Saddam's WMDs in order to justify war? Or send a top bereaucrat into the spotlight with a vial of lube to persuade us? All to hoots of laughter and derision all over the world?

Well, you can't disprove a conspiracy theory, I'm sure you wingnuts will come up with something.

Blogger RobertT January 09, 2014 1:53 PM  

"And have you read it?"

I read the author's web page and there is no actual evidence stated there. Everything is about how many people said it was true. I remember a Republican Women stalwart who was very active in politics getting the emotional shivers because a sitting Senator called her on the phone. (The guy was running for reelection and part of that means calling activists in every county.) She couldn't stop telling people about it. She went on and on. It was pathetic. I can imagine anyone who is at all interested in politics being completely eager to jump on the President's bandwagon just so they could say, until the day they died, that once they were important enough to weigh in on the Obama birthing issue. .

Another scary thing is this. In this state, but not every state, people like this play a significant role in deciding who gets on the ballot.

Anonymous VD January 09, 2014 1:58 PM  

You right wing nuts are a barrel of laughs.

Do you doubt that the NSA spies on people around the world too? Do you think it is crazy to suggest that the federal government has put backdoors in most hardware and software products allowing them to freely access people's computers?

Do tell.

Anonymous Noah B. January 09, 2014 2:01 PM  

"Seriously? I am at least as much dubious of our government's ability to accomplish anything of value and even more so of its claims thereof, but faking the moon landing?"

Maybe they hired Orson Welles to do it.

Blogger Jeff January 09, 2014 2:07 PM  

Vox Day thinks we (may have) faked the Moon Landing? That's going to come back and take a huge chunk outta your hindquarters my friend.

Anonymous Noah B. January 09, 2014 2:14 PM  

"Vox Day thinks we (may have) faked the Moon Landing?"

If nothing else, it's a good exercise in logical thinking. We should at least occasionally ask ourselves how we know what it is that we think we know. What proof or evidence do we have that a moon landing actually occurred?

If you're so certain the moon landing happened, why would you find this question the least bit threatening?

Blogger IM2L844 January 09, 2014 2:15 PM  

Which I provided you.

You did nothing of the sort.

You're flailing and making mistakes...

I've made no mistakes. I've already done the research and there is no comprehensive fact based rebuttal to the allegations against Obama. There is nothing but foamingatthemouth prosaic snark and spurious claims that there are. However, I'll read John Woodman's book and see if he has packed more than shooting the messengers and cherry picking solvable problems into his couple of dozen paragraphs.

Anonymous foamingatthemouth January 09, 2014 2:15 PM  

Do you doubt that the NSA spies on people around the world too? Do you think it is crazy to suggest that the federal government has put backdoors in most hardware and software products allowing them to freely access people's computers?

Do tell.


Exactly, by your logic we shouldn't know anything about it, and wouldn't for at least the next 30 years. Because the gubmint is so good at keeping secrets.

Anonymous Noah B. January 09, 2014 2:16 PM  

With the moon landing -- for most people, their reason for believing it probably is some variant of, "it happened because the government says so." Stop to ponder that for a moment.

Anonymous RedJack January 09, 2014 2:21 PM  

Because of this, I just spent an hour looking at aether therories and listened to some guy who is convinced about geocentrims. Like I said, I love Tin Foil Thursdays!

Back to the moon landing. Personally, because I have talked with people who worked on missles and rockets of the day, I think it was possible. But the I have wondered about many things involved with the lander. In short, the thing was made very light. It must of been a bitch to heat.

Blogger stareatgoatsies January 09, 2014 2:37 PM  

There is nothing but foamingatthemouth prosaic snark and spurious claims that there are.

I can only shake my head that you continue to claim this is all I've referenced. However, you have decided to check it out further, which is fair enough by me.

Anonymous Concerned Rabbit Hunter January 09, 2014 3:06 PM  

"What about statements from NASA suggesting that we couldn't even go there now,"

Ask yourself, why is/was there an X-Prize for the first team to come up with a rocket that could take off, hover and land back safely on the same rocket engine? And then ask yourself when it was.

Anonymous WaterBoy January 09, 2014 3:08 PM  

cailcorishev: "One of these days I'll get around to reading a debunking of the debunking."

When you do, I recommend starting here. Much of the work has already been done and recorded there. Also keep in mind that some denialists have intentionally faked "evidence" that it was a hoax, especially the "curve of the moon" photo which was deliberately cropped to make it appear that NASA was faking the photos.

Vox: "And the two primary reasons I am skeptical are a) the fact that neither we nor anyone else has ever officially been back despite it presumably being much, much easier now with modern materials, computers and assorted technologies, and b) the fact that the government supports the official NASA story."

a) Weak argument. The government has never dropped an atomic bomb on another nation despite it presumably being much, much easier now with modern materials, computers and assorted technologies. Does this mean that Hiroshima and Nagasaki didn't happen, either? The missing element is the reason for going back.

Remember that NASA cancelled the last three scheduled Apollo missions, and it had even been proposed to cancel the last two which did go; this was largely for budgetary purposes, but also because there was no compelling purpose to go back and the money could be better spent on other projects like Skylab and the Space Shuttle.

b) The conspiracy theorists have absolutely made stuff up, as evidenced in the "curve of the moon" photo. At this point, lies abound all around, so this is no longer as compelling an argument as it once may have been.

Anonymous Concerned Rabbit Hunter January 09, 2014 3:09 PM  

Never trust government if you are not a big, politically-connected investor:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/06/world/europe/spains-solar-pullback-threatens-pocketbooks.html?ref=science&_r=0

Anonymous Concerned Rabbit Hunter January 09, 2014 3:11 PM  

"The conspiracy theorists have absolutely made stuff up,"

And of course, the government has never made stuff up. Why, they are too honest to do that.

Anonymous WaterBoy January 09, 2014 3:14 PM  

crazyivan498: "The moon landing was not faked. Mythbusters has an episode on it."

The Mythbusters show only proved that the NASA evidence could have been true; it did not (and could not) prove that it was actually true.

Again, there is nothing that can 100% prove that the Apollo missions actually landed men on the moon. Even going up there yourself and viewing the landing sites and footprints will only prove that sometime before you got there, somebody had placed those relics there and made those footprints...but it will not prove when that was done, or by whom (or what).

Anonymous Inquiring Minds... January 09, 2014 3:16 PM  

Has any skeptic, or anyone who is not a Democrat, appointed by a Democrat, or otherwise beholden to a Democrat been allowed to see the actual original birth certificate?

Anonymous VD January 09, 2014 3:20 PM  

Exactly, by your logic we shouldn't know anything about it, and wouldn't for at least the next 30 years. Because the gubmint is so good at keeping secrets.

Your logic is flawed. We didn't have confirmation of it for more than a dozen years, and we got it only because one person was willing to sacrifice his career and risk his life to expose it.

Weak argument. The government has never dropped an atomic bomb on another nation despite it presumably being much, much easier now with modern materials, computers and assorted technologies.

Your logic is bad due to your use of a false analogy. The government hasn't declared war on anyone since then either.

Vox Day thinks we (may have) faked the Moon Landing? That's going to come back and take a huge chunk outta your hindquarters my friend.

Do you have any idea how many times people have said that about one subject or another? And yet, my reputation for having an excellent track record continues. I find it very amusing that you think my having an open mind on the subject would affect my credibility in any way.

There isn't a single person here who isn't relying on hearsay and testimony with regards to the Moon landings. Including many who claim they only believe in science and material evidence, none of which any of us have ever seen.

But, as always, my assumption is that the truth is much stranger than advertised.

Anonymous WaterBoy January 09, 2014 3:29 PM  

Concerned Rabbit Hunter: "And of course, the government has never made stuff up. Why, they are too honest to do that."

Fail.

Read my comment again:

lies abound all around

Anonymous Concerned Rabbit Hunter January 09, 2014 3:32 PM  

"Fail.

Read my comment again:"

Yeah. I didn't read it all.

Any thought on how the lunar lander could land using a rocket when we didn't know how to do that until recently?

It's not easy.

Anonymous BluntForceTrauma January 09, 2014 3:36 PM  

@Dawkins Doughnuts on 8:32 AM: Yep. ;-)

Anonymous WaterBoy January 09, 2014 3:37 PM  

Vox: "Your logic is bad due to your use of a false analogy."

Not a false analogy. Your assertion that the manned moon landings couldn't have been done because we didn't do it again is false for the same reason that somebody saying we didn't drop the atomic bomb because we didn't do it again would also be false. The analogy demonstrates that your assertion is incorrect because it is based on a premise of false equivalence (purpose = capability).

Blogger Tom Kratman January 09, 2014 3:41 PM  

Actually, Jaime, it's a complicated triple or perhaps quadruple sneer, not a deflection.

Anonymous VD January 09, 2014 3:45 PM  

Your assertion that the manned moon landings couldn't have been done because we didn't do it again is false for the same reason that somebody saying we didn't drop the atomic bomb because we didn't do it again would also be false.

You're wrong on two counts. First, that is not my assertion. I have never said it couldn't have been done for that reason. I have said that I doubt that it was done for that reason. And your analogy is still a false equivalence. We had a martial reason to drop atomic bombs that we have not had since.

And a warning: I've left you an obvious way out... but it is a trap.

Anonymous WaterBoy January 09, 2014 3:58 PM  

Concerned Rabbit Hunter: "Any thought on how the lunar lander could land using a rocket when we didn't know how to do that until recently?"

We didn't? Then how could Werner von Braun already be working on it in 1952?

Anonymous rho January 09, 2014 4:11 PM  

I know a lot of smart people who are skeptical about the Moon landings. I don't get it, but it doesn't automatically make them dumb.

FWIW, to answer one of VD's earlier questions, we don't go back to the Moon because there's little desire to do so. We can send unmanned probes much more cheaply to do the kinds of experiments NASA wants to do. The Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter, for example, which incidentally gave us photos of the landing sites for the various Apollo missions.

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/LRO/news/apollo-sites.html

People are free to dismiss that as more mere propaganda if they wish to. I'd be interested to read any proof that these photos are phony.

I haven't heard the reports that Moon rocks that have escaped NASA's control have been proven to be of Earth origin. It sounds hinky, if only because that's sort of the point of the Moon's origin vis. a huge impact with Earth some 4 billion years ago. Moon rocks are going to look like Earth rocks on some chemical level if they came from the same wad of mantle material that we have here on Earth.

While it may not count as proof (what does count as proof for the Apollo landings being genuine?), but plenty of people watched the Saturn V rockets shoot into space. Did we really build (several) giant rockets, put nothing in them and shoot them into space so we could stage a TV show? I'm too thin a cord to suspend that much disbelief from. As complicated and technical as the entire operation was, I'd say it was easier to just go ahead and send men to the Moon than to fake it.

That the federal government lies about many things is perhaps sufficient to be skeptical. But if so, then the similar evidence that large-scale conspiracies do not hold together for long would suggest that the Moon landings did happen. The NSA spying scandals would be a good example. There has been a more or less constant buzz about nefarious NSA goings-on for decades. Hell, it's one of the central plot points in Sneakers back int 1993. Snowden's document dump provides us with a lot more, but we've had reasonable evidence at least since Echelon. The NSA is a secretive government agency that deals in secretive work, and is backed up by harsh punishments for breaking those secrets--yet it happened.

I'd like to hear the reasoning that keeps all of the folks involved with the Moon landing fakery from breaking silence.

Anonymous WaterBoy January 09, 2014 4:13 PM  

VD: "First, that is not my assertion. I have never said it couldn't have been done for that reason. I have said that I doubt that it was done for that reason. "

You are correct. I will restate my last:

Your suspicion that it was not done originally because it has not been done again since, even though it has become technologically more feasible, is unwarranted since the two are not logically connected. Purpose ≠ capability; we had no reason to go back after the initial program, not that it couldn't be done.

Unless the portion of your comment related to the technology was actually a red herring and the original comment was mainly related to the "beat the Soviets" aspect?

VD: "And your analogy is still a false equivalence. We had a martial reason to drop atomic bombs that we have not had since."

And I hold that the analogy is still valid, since we had an American Exceptionalism reason to go to the Moon that we have not had since.

Blogger stareatgoatsies January 09, 2014 4:13 PM  

And a warning: I've left you an obvious way out... but it is a trap.

Is it that similarly to not having declared war on anyone since WWII, America hasn't been in a cold war with a major ideologically opposed superpower since then either? Or that in analogy to not having a martial reason to drop an atomic bomb, there has been no prestige-related reason for going back, since it the Soviets can and only needed to be beaten to the punch once? Now what's the trap?

Blogger IM2L844 January 09, 2014 4:15 PM  

I can only shake my head that you continue to claim this is all I've referenced.

Your abject failure to comprehend what I actually wrote is completely expected. Keep re-reading it until your brain catches up.

Anonymous WaterBoy January 09, 2014 4:18 PM  

rho: "I'd be interested to read any proof that these photos are phony."

The main evidence for that is the the FedGov issued them. Of course they're going to fake them.

Secondarily is that even if the photos are real, they still don't prove that men landed on the moon. The tracks could have been made by bipedal robots with moon boot treads on the bottoms of their feet, for instance.

It is the nature of the conspiracy that every piece of evidence in favor of the landing has been manufactured. Or, in the case of testimony, is of somebody in on the conspiracy.

OpenID cailcorishev January 09, 2014 4:26 PM  

the money could be better spent on other projects like Skylab and the Space Shuttle.

"Better spent" and "Space Shuttle" in the same sentence; that's a good one.

Anonymous Athor Pel January 09, 2014 4:27 PM  

" clever hans January 09, 2014 12:47 PM
...
Of course the Faked Moon Landings notion still has to take the Sovs into account: they would have had to have known the landings were faked, no? So why would they have allowed the hated Americanskis that massive propaganda triumph? Why wouldn't/didn't they piss into the punchbowl?"


Just to guess, I'd say

Mutual benefit.

and/or

Compulsion from a third party.

Speculation as to how either of those things work themselves out in concrete terms with names and real world identities, can't help you, or rather, unwilling to help.

Blogger stareatgoatsies January 09, 2014 4:32 PM  

IM2Lwhatever, have you actually read beyond the introductory paragraph of anything I've linked? You asked for a point-by-point rebuttal, and I gave it to you.

Anonymous BluntForceTrauma January 09, 2014 4:35 PM  

Looked at the photos referenced above at 4:11 PM.

Tangentially, it brings to mind a Creationist's argument for a "young earth" that the depth of dust on the moon is far, far shallower than evolutionary theory would have suggested. I note the the tracks — if real! ;-) — are still there, more than 40 years later.

Anonymous rho January 09, 2014 4:35 PM  

It is the nature of the conspiracy that every piece of evidence in favor of the landing has been manufactured. Or, in the case of testimony, is of somebody in on the conspiracy.

Which is fine, I suppose. It's been a while since I've looked into the various evidences that the Apollo missions were faked, but last I recall they all dealt with things like the supposed errors in the photographs, which all have simple and well understood explanations. I haven't read Nate's "suits and lander or something" evidence, and I'd be interested to see that one.

I find it a greater logical burden to discount the validity of the Apollo missions than to accept the conspiracy explanations.

Anonymous WaterBoy January 09, 2014 4:36 PM  

Concerned Rabbit Hunter: "Ask yourself, why is/was there an X-Prize for the first team to come up with a rocket that could take off, hover and land back safely on the same rocket engine?"

Because -- as the announcement noted -- "NASA’s exploration vision calls for putting humans back on the moon in the next decade. The vehicles to land on the moon no longer exist.” Said Diamandis. “We believe that entrepreneurial companies can build these lunar spaceships, and a Lunar Lander Challenge can stimulate the required technology in an efficient and rapid fashion."

The machines no longer exist -- but the technological concepts do, as evidenced by the fact that it did not take decades for the winner to redevelop these concepts; they only had to expand on what already existed.

The competition was to engender multiple possibilities for a future craft rather than relying on a single design. Ask yourself, if Ford had already come up with a quickly and cheaply produced automobile like the Model T, why was it necessary for other manufacturers to develop more?

Anonymous WaterBoy January 09, 2014 4:40 PM  

cailcorishev: ""Better spent" and "Space Shuttle" in the same sentence; that's a good one."

That was the thinking. Execution is another matter entirely.

Anonymous Noah B. January 09, 2014 4:42 PM  

I'd like to hear the reasoning that keeps all of the folks involved with the Moon landing fakery from breaking silence.

It could be something along the lines of, "They promised to kill my entire family as well as anyone who's ever spoken to me if I say anything."

Blogger stareatgoatsies January 09, 2014 4:42 PM  

I'll stop jamming the feed with this particular back and forth, but for those who question the relevance of Woodman's body of work to the question posed, here's a debate between Woodman and three prominent "birthers" (including Corsi), and here's a wrap-up show Woodman did with Reality Check radio.

Anonymous Noah B. January 09, 2014 4:51 PM  

"The machines no longer exist -- but the technological concepts do, as evidenced by the fact that it did not take decades for the winner to redevelop these concepts; they only had to expand on what already existed."

They had flip phones on the original Star Trek. Private industry created those, but it has yet to achieve a moon landing.

OpenID cailcorishev January 09, 2014 4:53 PM  

I'd like to hear the reasoning that keeps all of the folks involved with the Moon landing fakery from breaking silence.

Say you're a now-retired NASA engineer who was in on the truth back when. You'd like to tell the truth -- maybe you want to clear your conscience; maybe you think there'd be a sweet book deal in it. But then you think again: you have no proof beyond some anecdotes, so it will be your word against everyone else's -- including your own, since you will be accusing yourself of having lied for decades. The press will be quick to suggest that you might want that sweet book deal to pad your retirement, or maybe you're just getting a little senile in your old age. Whom are people going to believe: your younger self and all those at NASA who shake their heads in compassion at what you've come to, or the crazy old coot you've suddenly become?

With that as the likely prospect, maybe you just keep keeping quiet.

Anonymous RedJack January 09, 2014 4:54 PM  

A more interesting question (for me anyway) is the rumours of the failed Soviet moon launch that ended with the ship crashing back. There were some Italians who supposedly taped the radio conversations.

When we looked at the lunar missions in school (I dabbled in aeronautics for a while) what impressed me was how fragile each part was. We blew up two shuttles which were much more robust. Granted there were more launch cycles, but still the fact we didn't freeze dry Buzz Armstrong is pretty empressive.

And yes, as I stated before, I do believe we went to the moon. But I don't blame some skeptics for wondering about why certain parts don't make sense.

Anonymous rho January 09, 2014 4:56 PM  

Noah B.
It could be something along the lines of, "They promised to kill my entire family as well as anyone who's ever spoken to me if I say anything."

Certainly possible. Almost anything is possible. To be probable, you'd have to accept that somebody, with proof, could not secure a measure of safety for themselves and their kin and still release said proof.

We know it's possible, because Snowden managed it. You could argue they also want to keep their name from being besmirched, which is also possible.

Argument of incredulity again, but I have a hard time believing it.

Anonymous Noah B. January 09, 2014 4:59 PM  

I believe we went to the moon too, but the strongest case against it is that the government is so consistent in claiming that they did send men up there.

OpenID cailcorishev January 09, 2014 5:02 PM  

When we looked at the lunar missions in school (I dabbled in aeronautics for a while) what impressed me was how fragile each part was.

Yep. I believe it's possible that we did it; but if we did, it's amazing that even a single mission succeeded, let alone several, considering the fragility of the equipment and the fact that much of the conditions couldn't really be tested ahead of time at all.

Anonymous Noah B. January 09, 2014 5:04 PM  

"considering the fragility of the equipment"

Almost as though it had been hastily assembled in someone's garage...

Anonymous Concerned Rabbit Hunter January 09, 2014 5:05 PM  

"We didn't? Then how could Werner von Braun already be working on it in 1952?"

Then surely William Bourne had a working submarine in the 1850s?

http://www.submarine-history.com/NOVAone.htm

Ohhh, you mean he had a concept but had not actually got it to work as yet because of unforeseen technical problems?

Anonymous rho January 09, 2014 5:06 PM  

cailcorishev:
Whom are people going to believe: your younger self and all those at NASA who shake their heads in compassion at what you've come to, or the crazy old coot you've suddenly become?

There were a lot of people working on the Apollo missions, and for quite a long time. That's a lot of people who will willingly self-censor, and not one outrageous iconoclast in the bunch.

I can't get a half dozen people together in a dining room without at least one being a loudmouth about something.

Anonymous WaterBoy January 09, 2014 5:06 PM  

rho: "I find it a greater logical burden to discount the validity of the Apollo missions than to accept the conspiracy explanations."

The biggest thing that makes me question the hoax theorist side is their incessant goalpost moving. Not specifically anyone here, per se, but of the movement in general.

First, it was that we never went to the Moon; all we did is shoot a rocket into orbit around Earth, and they faked the radio signals.

When that was countered with the radio triangulation evidence, they moved the claim to 'we went to the Moon, but we only orbited it and never landed'.

When that was countered with the laser reflector evidence, they then moved the claim again to 'we landed on the Moon, but it was only a probe'.

When that was countered with the photographic evidence of geographically separated components, the posts were moved again to 'we landed on the Moon, but it was only with robots'. This is where we now stand, though if the latest photographic evidence to which you earlier linked is accepted, the robots wore moon boots.

Anonymous rho January 09, 2014 5:16 PM  

Noah B.
I believe we went to the moon too, but the strongest case against it is that the government is so consistent in claiming that they did send men up there.

It's a weird metric, but I don't have a problem with it as long as it's applied consistently. If it's only applied here or there when convenient, then it becomes a rationalization.

Anonymous WaterBoy January 09, 2014 5:17 PM  

Noah B.: "Private industry created those, but it has yet to achieve a moon landing."

You realize, I hope, that it was commercial companies that created the Apollo components under contract to NASA, don't you? If 'private industry' hasn't gone back to the Moon since, it's only because there was nobody willing to pay for it.

The only difference between the two is the source of the money; just as NASA is currently funding the aforementioned Lunar Lander Challenge via the X PRIZE Foundation, there would likely be no challenge otherwise.

And when

Anonymous Noah B. January 09, 2014 5:22 PM  

You realize, I hope, that it was commercial companies that created the Apollo components under contract to NASA, don't you?

Assuming they did in fact go to the moon -- yes, of course.

Anonymous DonReynolds January 09, 2014 5:26 PM  

Very recently, during this most recent cold storm, the Weather Channel pointed out that some places in the US were as cold as the surface of Mars. That is actually pretty encouraging. If there is a next place to go, my vote would be for Mars rather than Venus. (We can warm much easier than we can cool.) Humans could go either way and in the end, I am sure they will go both ways.

Did humans land on the moon? I believe they did. Would it bother me if they did not? Not really. Not many reasons to go to the moon.

OpenID cailcorishev January 09, 2014 5:27 PM  

Are we sure that no one involved in the Apollo program has ever come out and denied the moon landings and been ignored? I don't know, just curious, because I can easily see some guy coming out in 1983 and saying he was there and has the scoop (but no evidence), getting his only offer from the Enquirer, and quickly being forgotten as a kook or hoax. Has no one ever said, "I was involved and it was fake"?

Blogger Scott January 09, 2014 5:28 PM  

@Vox

Which is more plausible:

1) All the evidence and testimony and science of the moon landing is an astronomically elaborate conspiracy, still holding together 45 years later.

2) All the evidence and testimony and science of the moon landing actually happened.

I mean just think of one bit of physical evidence: the moon rock samples collected. Independent researchers in thousands of labs have analyzed them, confirmed the moon's signature, the isotopes, and none found evidence to the contrary.

At some point you have to at least consider Occam's razor.

Anonymous WaterBoy January 09, 2014 5:34 PM  

Concerned Rabbit Hunter: "Ohhh, you mean he had a concept but had not actually got it to work as yet because of unforeseen technical problems?"

The obvious difference, of course, being that WvB did have working rockets already, thereby proving the propulsion concept.

If you're hung up on the 'hovering' aspect, that's really a function of the guidance system (ie, computer and sensors), not the rocket itself. Are you claiming that gyroscopes and the ability to program computers to perform the necessary corrective calculations did not exist before the X PRIZE? Or that the actual landing could not be done under on-board manual control, either?

Anonymous DonReynolds January 09, 2014 5:37 PM  

I do not share the morbid hate and fear that some seem to have regarding Hitler and the other top Nazis, or the guards at the prison camps, etc. The war is over and been over for 68 years. I notice in the news the German government is prosecuting an 88 year old (who was 19 at the time) who was one of the soldiers who participated in a massacre in a French village. He claims he never fired a shot, which is more believable than not.
.
They need to forget it. Find something else to do. The war is over and we still do not have the full truth about that conflict, more than a half century later. Plenty of blame to go around, on all sides.

Anonymous WaterBoy January 09, 2014 5:44 PM  

rho: "There were a lot of people working on the Apollo missions"

Again, it would not be necessary for everyone involved with the program to be in on the hoax; only a small cabal of the most important people, as I believe somebody already mentioned above. To everyone else involved, it would have seemed to go off exactly as planned, with nobody the wiser.

For example, the biometric telemetry and the voice transmissions could all have been preprogrammed in compliance with a timed script, or even dynamically arranged to respond with different tracks in accordance with real-world events. To the ground controllers, this would all seem as if it were coming from actual sources on the craft.

Anonymous WaterBoy January 09, 2014 5:51 PM  

cailcorishev: "Are we sure that no one involved in the Apollo program has ever come out and denied the moon landings and been ignored?"

Not that I'm aware of. However, if the cabal theory is correct, there would be tons of evidence of "disgruntled employee", or somesuch, ready in advance to denounce him.

Though I do note that it only took two women who couldn't keep their mouths shut about a dress to break open one conspiracy of silence.

Anonymous Noah B. January 09, 2014 5:57 PM  

"He claims he never fired a shot, which is more believable than not."

Figure the odds of that guy getting a fair trial.

OpenID cailcorishev January 09, 2014 5:58 PM  

And to turn my question around: let's say there are 1000 people who were involved with the Apollo program and know that we did land on the moon. Wouldn't you think at least one of them by now would have claimed that we didn't? Not one of them ever needed cash and hoped to get a few grand from spinning a few yarns for Weekly World News?

Anonymous rho January 09, 2014 6:07 PM  

WaterBoy:
For example, the biometric telemetry and the voice transmissions could all have been preprogrammed in compliance with a timed script, or even dynamically arranged to respond with different tracks in accordance with real-world events. To the ground controllers, this would all seem as if it were coming from actual sources on the craft.

Sure, I get it, and it makes a good story, but again: everybody involved would have been building something that looked plausibly like a rocket ship that goes to the Moon. Once you've built all that, why not go ahead and put some Air Force guys in suits, strap them to the top of it and press the "Go" button?

The alternate explanation requires that everybody involved built discrete components, with no coordination with anybody else. They also had to be a bit simple and/or docile so they wouldn't ask any questions. And continue to do so for years.

You also have to get a ship full of sailors to agree they pulled astronauts out of the water. And keep the airplane crews that dropped the Command Module into the ocean quiet. And, and, and...

Anonymous DonReynolds January 09, 2014 6:14 PM  

"He claims he never fired a shot, which is more believable than not."

Noah B......"Figure the odds of that guy getting a fair trial."

Even more nutty, Noah......the Germans are now saying since he was only 19 at the time, he will be tried in juvenile court! I am just guessing, but it may be the first "war criminal" to be tried in kiddie court.

Anonymous foamingatthemouth January 09, 2014 6:14 PM  

Your logic is flawed. We didn't have confirmation of it for more than a dozen years, and we got it only because one person was willing to sacrifice his career and risk his life to expose it.

There was a better rebuttal, I'll leave it as an exercise.

Your rebuttal here is at least as logically flawed as my contention: if the NSA secrets were exposed by a guy willing to risk his career and his life to bring out the truth, how much more likely would it have been for a moon landing hoax to be exposed by the numerous participants who have passed away since then and had no such risks to worry about at the end of their lives?

Anonymous Josh January 09, 2014 6:15 PM  

Why hasn't anyone mentioned rivets yet?

Blogger JaimeInTexas January 09, 2014 6:15 PM  

Tom Kratman January 09, 2014 3:41 PM
Actually, Jaime, it's a complicated triple or perhaps quadruple sneer, not a deflection.

In other words, a"made'ya look and not even moved a muscle.

You are good.

LOL

Blogger JaimeInTexas January 09, 2014 6:23 PM  

The direction in some of the discussions remind me of the words faith and/or trust.

How do we know what we know?
How do we know that what we know is true?
Who do you trust?

We can only testify to that which we have witnessed. All else is subject to interrogation and, possible, rejection.

And, sometimes, we even have to question what we think we have witnessed.

I do not believe that space aliens exists but it would not surprise if, one day, we find out that they exists and certain government people knew all along.

Hitler hidden in Argentina, as an intellectually curious level, wouldn't that be something if true? Don't buy it but one heck of a story.

Blogger JaimeInTexas January 09, 2014 6:38 PM  

Government as a system may be inept. But that does not mean that there are capable individuals in the system that can make some things work.

SOme years ago I read a book titled "A Man Called Intrepid" (http://www.amazon.com/Man-Called-Intrepid-Incredible-Narrative/dp/159921170X) By William Stevenson. One heck of a read. I followed that book with "My Silent War" (http://www.amazon.com/My-Silent-War-Autobiography-Spy/dp/0375759832/ref=sr_1_4?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1389310097&sr=1-4&keywords=my+secret+war) By Kim Philby. Philby's book is all very nebulous and hazy.

Stevenson says in his book that Glenn Miller was killed when his plane flew, flying low and secretly, in a bomb drop zone when ordnance was discarded by returning bombers.

Also, how come that even to this day there are classified documents, that will not be released through FOIA requests, dealing with Pearl Harbor the attack, if Stinnet is to be believed?

Anonymous WaterBoy January 09, 2014 6:43 PM  

@ Concerned Rabbit Hunter:

Here is video of the Lunar Landing Research Vehicle (LLRV), developed by Bell ) circa 1964, and used to develop the LLTV trainers which the Apollo crews used to trained for landing the LEM.

Even if WvB himself didn't have a workable model in the '50s, they did exist by the '60s.

Anonymous JBO January 09, 2014 6:44 PM  

Corsi's "discovery" is old news to people who follow the subject, especially the Argentines themselves. It was not U-530, it was a whole goddamn submarine convoy.
For the Spanish-speakers out there, let me recommend "Ultramar Sur: la fuga en submarinos de más de 50 jerarcas nazis a la Argentina", by Juan Salinas and Carlos De Nápoli, published in 2002 by Grupo Editorial Norma, Buenos Aires. They include facsimiles of the handwritten testimony the submarine crews gave to the Argentine authorities on arrival (which were classified until recently). And also show that the American and British navies knew about the operation and kept quiet. Hitler was not among the 50 documented by Salinas and De Nápoli, but they do not exclude the possibility that he might have survived and arrived in Argentina through other means. This book also gives the references for the very great quantity of published material (usually in Spanish) about postwar Nazi emigration to Argentina.

Blogger Outlaw X January 09, 2014 7:24 PM  

Not gong into a long dissertation as to why I believe we went to the moon with manned missions, but I am not a skeptic. I am the first to disbelieve anything government says but the physics tells me we went, and have read almost all the skeptics positions.

We went, and without better proof from the skeptics I won't be changing my mind anytime soon.

Anonymous WaterBoy January 09, 2014 7:39 PM  

Outlaw X: "without better proof from the skeptics I won't be changing my mind anytime soon"

Proof? You want proof? OK, then check out these photos....

Anonymous Robert in Arabia January 09, 2014 9:04 PM  

Jews never tell lies nor desire money therefore the six million story is true.

Blogger stareatgoatsies January 09, 2014 9:14 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger stareatgoatsies January 09, 2014 9:20 PM  

Robert, your argument is flawed - obviously some Jews do lie some of the time and some (probably most of them) do desire money. That said, I won't pull the fallacy fallacy on you and claim that your inability to construct a sound argument falsifies the conclusion.

Anonymous Heaviside January 09, 2014 9:39 PM  

Hitler will be back, physically or in spirit -- and he will bring an army with him.

Anonymous jackw January 09, 2014 9:55 PM  

Moon rock in Dutch museum was petrified wood.

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/offbeat/2009-08-27-moon-rock-museum_N.htm

Anonymous Concerned Rabbit Hunter January 09, 2014 10:05 PM  

The info on the not-always-reliable Wikipedia about the LLRV and LLTV goes some ways towards giving confidence that there was training in simulated lunar conditions:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_Landing_Research_Vehicle

Anonymous bw January 09, 2014 10:11 PM  

The direction in some of the discussions remind me of the words faith and/or trust.

Thus the term True Believers, which has been in use around here for many years.

Blogger Outlaw X January 09, 2014 10:32 PM  

Moon rock in Dutch museum was petrified wood.

I know someone who got to see the moon rocks from Apollo11, none were red, he said there were about 70 lbs earth weight of rocks. I let people believe what they want, I would expect moon rocks would be very similar to earth rocks other than isotopes. But their would be no petrified wood on the moon and no one from the program would be dumb enough to try and pass off a piece of petrified wood as a moon rock.

Anonymous bw January 09, 2014 10:33 PM  

Are you telling me the USSR (or Putin today) would have passed up the chance to leak the truth?

I'm sure the Intel agencies in the West have absolutely nothing whatsoever on Soviet goings on behind the oppressive and very secretive Iron Curtain that they wouldn't ever want to "get out".
Who funded the Bolshevik Revolution again? I forget...
Trotsky-ites and Neo-cons come to mind at this point for some reason, but I can't recall just why.

But hanging your skeptic hat on the moon landing? C'mon man.

That's not what he said. You speak as if this is the only subject matter on which he is skeptical. What he said was: I do not believe anything at all that the federal government claims.
And with each passing year and revelation, in every area (of which most Americans are comfortably ignorant), that skepticism is validated.

Anonymous bw January 09, 2014 10:35 PM  

and no one from the program would be dumb enough to try and pass off a piece of petrified wood as a moon rock.

Incorrect. You're missing the psychology. You have it exactly backwards.

Blogger Outlaw X January 09, 2014 10:36 PM  

The problem the skeptics have if they are right (which I don't believe they are) is you can't prove a negative.

Blogger Outlaw X January 09, 2014 10:48 PM  

Incorrect. You're missing the psychology. You have it exactly backwards.

Maybe the Grays are hovering over your house right now and you are calling a lot of good people either liars or stupid compartmentalized fools. I personally know the project manager who calculated exactly how much radiation the astronaut's would get on the total trip (During a solar minimum) and his team nearly hit it on the money. Badges, we don't need no stinking badges.

Anonymous Orville January 09, 2014 10:56 PM  

Waterboy said

The machines no longer exist -- but the technological concepts do, as evidenced by the fact that it did not take decades for the winner to redevelop these concepts; they only had to expand on what already existed.

The competition was to engender multiple possibilities for a future craft rather than relying on a single design. Ask yourself, if Ford had already come up with a quickly and cheaply produced automobile like the Model T, why was it necessary for other manufacturers to develop more?


The original lunar landers were Model A's compared to what is being developed today such as the Morpheus autonomous lunar lander project jointly run by NASA and Armadillo Aerospace, which is owned by game designer John Carmack.

Then there is the Google Lunar XPrize with a $30 million reward if the following conditions are met, "In order to win this money, a private company must land safely on the surface of the Moon, travel 500 meters above, below, or on the Lunar surface, and send back two “Mooncasts” to Earth."

The deadline is the end of 2015, so it's still questionable if anyone gets something there.

The major point of all this is that the tech is there, and the cost for getting stuff into orbit is getting a lot cheaper due to SpaceX's new rockets. It's only a matter of time until someone lands a bot near the original landing sites and proves or disproves the conspiracy.

Probably won't count for some of you, but there is photographic proof from a moon mapping satellite of the recent Chinese landing there.

Blogger Fubar January 09, 2014 11:01 PM  

The problem with the skeptics is that they grew up in the Star Wars era, where it's obvious that all one has to do to fake a lunar landing is call Industrial Light and Magic. There are many ways of refuting the skeptics, but I'll focus on two points: The tracking/telemetry data could be simulated, and that only a small number of cognoscenti would have to be in on it.

To sum up before I head into the weeds, it would have been easier to land men on the moon than to simulate it.

The state of the art computer of the day was the IBM S/360-91, the first units of which were shipped to NASA. It ran at an amazing 16MHz, had 1024 fast memory (registers) with up to 8M volatile "core" memory. Disk drives were the size of refrigerators, each of which could hold anywhere from 7-30MB. Your programming tools would be Fortran II and COBOL. Your method of entry was to write your code out on a coding pad and hand off to a keypunch operator. Interactive computing was non-existent, and programs ran single-file FIFO.

To avoid that limitation, the wizards at Houston Space Center developed something called HASP, which along with its HASPlings could actually run multiple job streams simultaneusly. Multi-tasking hadn't been invented yet, so the HASPlings employed a rudimentary cooperative mt model.

What's this techno BS getting at? Each one of the myriad consoles that you see in the space center and throughout the world-wide network of ground stations would have be fed a simulation of real-time data, some of which would have to appear to be coming from the moon.

To repeat: The technology of the time simply could not support a simulated lunar landing that would fool literally thousands of experienced engineers monitoring the mission.

Anonymous A. Nonymous January 09, 2014 11:19 PM  

I'm getting increasingly convinced there are two types of Starchildren: a wedge shape, and a round shape. Think about it.

At least once per thread, there's at least one comment that seems to make no sense whatsoever...

Anonymous bw January 09, 2014 11:37 PM  

Maybe the Grays are hovering over your house right now

Silly deflection, at best. You did not address or acknowledge whether or not you flipped over the psychological coin you are trying to sell people concerning the handing out of "moon rocks". I'll attempt to help you. Your focus, as a TrueBeliever, is only on the giver, who of course in your mind is the benevolent authority.
The bigger the lie, the more advantageous for said authority - for a time - from a psycho-spiritual perspective. The Nazis noted out loud the truth of that. Also note the use of repetition.
Bernays covers some helpful territory as well.

Anonymous Sam January 09, 2014 11:56 PM  

Forget Hitler. I want to know where SS General Hans Kammler went. Head of all Nazi research and development.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Kammler
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Glocke
https://sites.google.com/site/nazibelluncovered/

Supposedly the Nazis exploded at least one nuke but didn't have enough material to change the war. Even more interesting so did the Japanese. See Japans Secret War. I read this book and the author talked to Japanese who worked on the bomb. This also ties in with the Kamikazes and the strange Japanese sub that had aircraft in it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I-400-class_submarine
None of those make military sense "unless" you had a nuke.
http://www.amazon.com/Japans-Secret-War-Against-Atomic/dp/156924815X

Anonymous Gapeseed January 10, 2014 12:19 AM  

It would seem likely that Hitler got out. After all, who wants to commit suicide when fanatical followers have already planned a way out?

It is important to remember that it was the Soviets who captured Berlin. Given the good bloody nose Hitler gave the Soviets in his betrayal of Stalin in Operation Barbarossa, a living Hitler would have been intolerable to the frenzied Russians who bled more than anyone else in World War II. While Stalin was a tyrant, he was not a god - he had a propaganda need to achieve total vengeance in a war effort that killed tens of millions of Russians. In so doing, Stalin's need for total victory and revenge would not have tolerated a living Hitler. Stalin probably wanted Hitler dead as much as the Jews did, and when he couldn't capture him, faked the death and sent word to people who would know Hitler's whereabouts that the USSR would start World War III to kill Hitler if he ever popped up again in public view.

This site rightfully views with skepticism much of what the US Government says, but we should not forget that the Soviets - atheistic and far more ruthless, were less trustworthy still.

Anonymous DT January 10, 2014 12:28 AM  

Fubar - nice point.

I'm curious to know if skeptics in general also question that we've been lifting heavy equipment into Earth orbit since the 1960's. Because once you can lift enough weight into Earth orbit, getting to the moon takes time and costs money...but you basically have all the technology you need. It's a solved problem if you're willing to write the check and go.

A lot of people watched Saturn V's lift off their pads and go up. Professionals around the world...including professionals in nations that would have loved to embarrass us...tracked those Saturn V's into orbit on radar.

Was it actually a weak rocket carrying fake, balsa wood models? That's not very consistent with non-lunar launches like Skylab. Or the fact that it lifted off the pad in the first place since the rocket itself was one heavy beast of fuel and metal.

Was it legitimate and capable of carrying roughly the claimed payload weight into orbit? Then why the hell wouldn't NASA load up three astronauts and send them to the moon? What's stopping you at that point?

FedGov lies. I get it. It wouldn't completely shock me to find out that there was more to the lunar missions then we were told. Though I don't suspect this because the military and space race with the Soviets seems sufficient.

Regardless, I'm about as confident as I can be in a historical event that yes, we were there. Between our orbital lift capability, all the project engineers, the telemetry data, the laser rangefinder mirrors still on the moon, the rocks that were returned, the photographs, the new photographs showing landing sites and tracks...we were there. Maybe we were actually looking for Transformers with space pillars and a Victoria's Secret model...but we were there.

As far as Hitler is concerned...not sure what to tell you. He could be sharing his Nazi German anti-aging drugs with Osama in Argentina as we speak.

Anonymous WaterBoy January 10, 2014 12:56 AM  

Fubar: "To repeat: The technology of the time simply could not support a simulated lunar landing that would fool literally thousands of experienced engineers monitoring the mission."

You mean they didn't have magnetic tapes that could have played back scripted voice transmissions and precanned data patterns? I'm not talking about an actual RTS running on the on-board computers. I'm talking about a scripted, prerecorded sequence of data that would simply play back over the course of the mission and be fed into the transmitters. Granted, it would take multiple tapes on multiple players to cover the entire duration of the mission, but switching between them according to the script would have been easy.

The actual vehicle telemetry would have been real, but the biometric telemetry containing the astronaut's vital signs and the voice transmissions could have been recorded. The only real sticking point is how much voice/data would fit on a reel, to determine how many reels/players would be required.

Anonymous DT January 10, 2014 1:21 AM  

The actual vehicle telemetry would have been real, but the biometric telemetry containing the astronaut's vital signs and the voice transmissions could have been recorded. The only real sticking point is how much voice/data would fit on a reel, to determine how many reels/players would be required.

So you concede that a ship was sent but believe it was filled with prerecorded tapes?

Once again: if you can get the weight into orbit, why not just send the men?

Do you think there is something especially difficult about keeping three men alive for a few days in a capsule? Or for a few hours in a suit? Didn't we solve the former problem by the late 1800's (submarines), and the latter in the early 1800's (diving suits)?

I would love to know what they put on those capsules besides men to align the retroreflectors to the accuracy we observe. Today we could build a robot rover to do it. Back then we could not. And no matter how hard I try to play skeptic to understand the skeptic's position, I come to a screeching halt on the laser ranging experiment. Someone set that up on the lunar surface.

Anonymous rho January 10, 2014 1:22 AM  

WaterBoy:
The actual vehicle telemetry would have been real, but the biometric telemetry containing the astronaut's vital signs and the voice transmissions could have been recorded. The only real sticking point is how much voice/data would fit on a reel, to determine how many reels/players would be required.

Let's assume the telemetry equipment at the time allowed for a pre-recorded signal from a data reel to be fed into it. (Could it? I don't know. Do you?) Now you have a member of the elite cabal changing out reels, without any regular breaks in the system that the suckers in Mission Control would find odd, some 12-24 times a day.

This fake Moon landing is starting to take a lot of work.

Anonymous WaterBoy January 10, 2014 1:45 AM  

DT: "So you concede that a ship was sent but believe it was filled with prerecorded tapes?"

No, I think the evidence supports a manned mission that actually landed men on the moon. This is only an exercise to demonstrate how the conspiracy mission could have been carried out. Devil's Advocate, if you will.

"Once again: if you can get the weight into orbit, why not just send the men?

Do you think there is something especially difficult about keeping three men alive for a few days in a capsule? Or for a few hours in a suit? Didn't we solve the former problem by the late 1800's (submarines), and the latter in the early 1800's (diving suits)?
"


Agreed. No. No. Something like that, I don't know the exact dates.

"Today we could build a robot rover to do it. Back then we could not. "

Incorrect. In 1970, the Soviets landed the Lunokhod 1 RC robot, which carried a payload including a laser retroreflector. Not only that, but they had also tried to launch one in 1969, which blew up. But the technology existed for Apollo to do the same thing (except for the bipedal aspect, that is).

Anonymous WaterBoy January 10, 2014 1:56 AM  

rho: "Now you have a member of the elite cabal changing out reels, without any regular breaks in the system that the suckers in Mission Control would find odd, some 12-24 times a day."

Not the way I envisioned it -- the tapes would be aboard the spacecraft; multiple players would negate the need to swap out reels, since nobody would be there to do it. The end of one tape would trigger an automatic cutover to the next reel with no noticeable break (similar to how an 8-track player signals a switch to the next track, but less cludgy). Really, the technology to do this already existed; the only limitation that I can see would be how much tape would be required for a complete lunar mission -- and those reels could be as large as their physical limitations would allow.

Doing it from Earth would not only have to incorporate transmission lag time to the Moon, but would also require separate frequencies to carry the extra bandwidth -- something which could be picked up on by outsiders, as well.

But as I said, it's only an exercise.

Blogger Fubar January 10, 2014 1:56 AM  

DT, Exactly. We had all the tech needed to at least slingshot astronauts around the moon. Unless the skeptics want to claim that we didn't do Mercury or Gemini either. So the issue becomes whether the LEM actually landed. At that point, the skeptics have to debunk the recent high-res images of the actual LEMs and their tracks still sitting on the moon. Or the laser ranging experiment that you pointed out ....

rho summed it up well: This fake Moon landing is starting to take a lot of work.

Anonymous rho January 10, 2014 2:08 AM  

WaterBoy:
Doing it from Earth would not only have to incorporate transmission lag time to the Moon, but would also require separate frequencies to carry the extra bandwidth -- something which could be picked up on by outsiders, as well.

I'm just guessing, but the telemetry equipment will be tailored to receive radio transmisssions. Since that's how they will be coming in. So you're right that it's easier to have the faked reels loaded on the Saturn V rocket, with all the requisite reading and transmission equipment out in space. If you wanted to put a signal from a reel into a system designed to receive RF in Mission Control, you'd need a lot more elite cabal members.

However, let me be clear--I, too, am skeptical of the Apollo missions. It doesn't cost me anything to be skeptical, since whether it turns out that the Moon landings are 100% true or 100% false, I land squarely on the middle of that fence.

1 – 200 of 210 Newer› Newest»

Post a Comment

NO ANONYMOUS COMMENTS. Anonymous comments will be deleted.

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts