What Should We Make of Artemis 2?

Is it America's triumphant return to the moon or an elaborate April Fool's day joke to keep us distracted?

Artemis and Apollo

Some time ago I had an open conversation with one of my favorite surgeons at my facility. We were part of the same book club, one that I haven’t attended for a couple of years. I hadn’t been satisfied with the books that were being discussed. Every member of the club was a physician. Why aren’t we using our time together to discuss the massive issues in health care and the distortion of science? How about we all take the time to read the explosive book by Secretary Kennedy, “The Real Anthony Fauci”?

The one-on-one conversation in the locker room quickly turned to conspiracies, a common occurrence if you are unfortunate to find yourself alone in a room with me. I explained that my interest in vaccines and the Covid pandemic and its mismanagement stemmed from what I learned about what really happened on 9/11 and how the public was sold a fantasy about what transpired on that day.

I stepped through the basics. The implausibility of three direct strikes on iconic buildings by multi-engine commercial jets flown by poor single-engine pilots, the impossibility of the explanation given for the destruction of the twin towers and WTC 7, the physical evidence of explosive residues found by independent researchers as well as the ubiquitous presence of iron microspheres confirmed by the United States Geological Survey in the dust at ground zero (iron-rich microspheres are the product of a thermitic reaction, i.e. explosives).

Steve listened attentively and to his credit, responded the way which an intelligent, open-minded person would.

“I haven’t looked into it like you have. So I don’t know what to believe.”

We never spoke about it again, but later I received a text from him:

“Hi Madhava. What do you think of the moon landing and pyramid construction? Quick opinion-haha!”

I have looked deeply into the Pyramid of Giza and its remarkable architecture and design. Like many people who can appreciate the sheer precision and scale of this structure, it is obvious that we cannot replicate the feat today, making establishment archeologists with their dismissal of basic facts sound like propagandists.

The moon landing was something very different. We might have put men on the moon. We might have faked it too. It is much more difficult for an Earth-bound human being like me to know for sure. While Steve may have been asking my opinion in earnest, he may also have been looking for a way to discount my matter-of-fact dismembering of the official 9/11 story. Why bother listening to a person who tells you your government and the NY Times is lying about 9/11 if he believes we never went to the moon?

However in the realm of conspiracies 9/11 is special. One doesn’t need confirmation from anyone else to see that this building is being blown up from the top down.

It’s always disquieting to anyone who truly sees it for the first time because it leads to bigger questions: if “they” are lying about this, what else have they lied about? If the public accepted their version of this story, how many other stories are they planning to tell us?

This isn’t the first time I have been asked about the moon landing after I speak openly about 9/11. Usually, however, I am asked if I think the Earth is round. That’s much easier to address. Of course it’s round. Anyone can prove it to themselves. When on the ocean looking at distant ships, the tallest part of the ship is visible while the bottom isn’t. This can be observed in every direction. This means that there is always a “higher” point in between you and the ship. The only topological solution is that the ocean is not flat, it is curved.

I believe that so-called “Flat Earth” theorists have been duped by a counter-intelligence operation which seeks to undermine serious consideration of all legitimate conspiracies. Those who group “9/11 Truthers”, “Antivaxxers” and “Moon Landing Deniers” with “Flat Earthers” are being duped as well.

That said, given the recent claim by NASA that four human beings left the Earth, orbited the moon and returned this month, I took a closer look at the evidence we have that we put men on the moon 57 years ago.

So Steve, if you are reading this, this article is for you…

Validation of Evidence

This is always the hardest problem for us “conspiracy theorists”. Ultimately we have to rely on third parties to validate nearly all the evidence. This directly leads to unresolvable differences of opinion. The only evidence acceptable to the conventionalists is offered by the very institution we conspiracy theorists allege is the principal conspirator. Why (on Earth) would you believe your anesthesiologist friend about his doubts about the Apollo program when the National Aeronautics and Space Administration assures us we have been there nearly six decades ago and we just got back earlier this month after a long sojourn in low-Earth orbit?

This makes drawing conclusions about the Artemis 2 mission impossible. What is the proof that the four astronauts aboard the spacecraft “Integrity” which launched on April 1 (also commonly known as “April Fool’s day in America) actually did what NASA claims? Pictures from the cabin? Pictures from space? Obviously all of that can be faked these days.

So too, can images used by “Artemis 2 deniers”. For example, posts on X like this one claim that NASA used the same “Earthrise” shot from Apollo 8 in a series of images from Artemis 2:

Ha! NASA didn’t think we would notice that the cloud patterns are exactly the same! They think we’re idiots!

The problem is that I couldn’t find that image on NASA’s Artemis 2 site. This was a false claim about a potentially false claim. For these reasons, I will restrict this article to the Apollo program.

I will begin at the end: my conclusion. NASA has done next to nothing to address legitimate questions about the footage from the moon, their physical evidence of a moon landing and the strange behavior of the original Apollo 11 astronauts in the years since their epic voyage.

Of the three, it is the last which is the most disturbing.

Some Photos from the Lunar Surface appear to be shot in a Studio

Professional photographers assure us that some pictures taken from the moon clearly demonstrate two or more sources of light (e.g. shadows which are not parallel, light “fall-off” and other technical observations incompatible with the single and distant source of light on the moon: the sun). The best and only explanation for this was that the footage in question was shot in a studio.

Moreover the experts who were familiar with the modified Hasselblad 500EL Data Cameras which were used to take the still photographs from the lunar surface assure us that film would have been significantly affected from hours of radiation exposure.

If you are old enough to have accidentally allowed film from a 35mm camera get exposed to radiation from a metal detector at the airport you will know that the photographs from the moon could not have been from the moon. They are simply too crisp.

I highly recommend this long and comprehensive Italian documentary called “American Moon” which offers in-depth interviews with experts in lighting and photography with ample examples which support their questions.

But this doesn’t prove that we didn’t go to the moon. It proves that not everything the public was shown was legit. This is important to accept if you wish to validate evidence solely on the integrity of the authority who offers it as proof.

Were the “Moon Rocks” actually from the Moon?

The highly-prized rocks purportedly taken from the surface from our moon and gifted to the Netherlands were discovered to be nothing more than petrified wood according to NBC in 2009.

Well that’s embarrassing, NASA…

Three years after the counterfeit rocks were discovered, the BBC reported that more than half the samples given to nations around the world have gone mysteriously missing. How odd that such precious stones were not kept more secure and available for analysis…

But what about the authentic moon rocks which haven’t been pilfered or lost? It turns out you don’t have to go to the moon to find moon rocks. There are a lot of them here on Earth which have been found, especially in Antarctica after meteorites strike the moon’s surface and send them hurtling outwards.

Two and a half years before Apollo 11 Commander Neil Armstrong made his giant leap for mankind, Werner von Braun, ex-Nazi rocket expert and chief architect of the massive Saturn V rocket, made a trip to Antarctica to learn about extreme environments in preparation for the moonshot. Perfectly reasonable. It’s also plausible a few lunar rocks were collected while they were down there to keep as souvenirs, or perhaps to offer as gifts to our friends around the world.

Why does Buzz Aldrin say we never went to the Moon?

And finally, the bizarre responses made by the astronauts to simple questions. It’s this evidence which is not only the most compelling, it doesn’t require third party validation.

Aldrin has given evasive answers when asked about the moon over the years, but this was his most direct response. An eight year old girl asks him why we have never been back. His answer: we never went there to begin with:

You don’t need to be a geologist or a professional photographer to validate this kind of evidence. Is he stoking fake moon landing conspiracies for some ulterior motive when he confirms “we didn’t go there” and “if it didn’t happen, it’s nice to know why it didn’t happen”? Or is he unable to look this little girl in the eyes and lie to her?

Here he is on late night TV clearly asserting that the footage of the moon landing was actually animation.

Maybe he’s not thinking straight after all the years.

Let’s see what the young Buzz had to say a few days after he and his two crew mates returned from the most famous journey in human history when asked to put the significance of this accomplishment into context. Here is the most telling segment from a longer interview:

They were asked to field a question that they were not just expecting to be asked, but a question they should have been excited to answer:

“Many of us and many other people in many places have speculated on the meaning of this first landing on another body in space would each of you give us your estimate of what is the meaning of this to all of us?”

Astonishingly all three were reluctant to say anything. Our buddy Buzz took a cut at it after an awkward silence. In addition to the body language of all three astronauts pay attention to Aldrin’s choice of words (emphasis mine):

“I believe that what this country set out to do was something that was going to be done sooner or later whether we set a specific goal or not.

I believe that from the early space flights we demonstrated a potential to carry out this type of mission and again it was the question of time until this would be accomplished.

I think the relative ease with which we were able to carry out our mission which of course came after a very efficient and a logical sequence of flights, I think that this demonstrated that we were certainly on the right track when we took this commitment to go to the Moon.

I think that what this means is that many other problems perhaps can be solved in the same way by taking a commitment to solve them in a long term fashion. I think that we were timely in accepting this mission of going to the Moon.

It might be timely at this point to think of many other areas of other missions that could be accomplished.

Did you hear what I heard? Did we all not hear the same thing? He never said that they landed on the moon. Instead he tiptoed around it. He never said what we would have expected. He never said that he was proud to represent our country and humanity on this mission. He never thanked all of the people involved in the program. Instead:

It was going to be done sooner or later whether we set a specific goal or not?

It was a question of time until this would be accomplished?

We were certainly on the right track?

It might be timely to think of many other missions that could be accomplished?

Many other problems perhaps can be solved in the same way by taking a commitment to solve them in a long-term fashion?

It sounds to me like an explanation of what was learned through a failure and not a proud and honest review of the culmination of a decade long pursuit of mankind’s greatest technological achievement.

These men don’t seem proud. They look ashamed. It’s one thing to attempt a dangerous mission and fail. There’s no shame in that. It’s another to grossly misrepresent oneself to the entire world after risking one’s life in pursuit of something extraordinary. These three expected to not only be received as heroes, they expected to be heroes—if they were lucky enough to make it back in one piece. Instead, they were forced into being phonies. This couldn’t have been easy for a person who was willing to die for a purpose. It’s written all over their faces.

Michael Collins, captain of the command module which remained in lunar orbit while Buzz and Neil were on the moon’s surface left NASA within five months. Buzz and Neil followed less than two years later. If NASA had proven that the seemingly impossible could be attained through ingenuity and courage why would these ground-breakers abandon the program at the height of its potential and credibility?

So what really happened during the eight days between launch and splashdown? We cannot know for sure. Tens of thousands watched the launch from Cape Canaveral. Much fewer were witness to the capsule descending into the Pacific Ocean. We rely entirely on NASA for what happened in between.

How can we reconcile the problems with photos from the lunar surface, the disappearing moon rocks and the peculiar behavior and responses of the Apollo 11 astronauts?

Here is a speculation:

The three left the surface of the Earth on July 16, 1969, obtained low Earth orbit, awaiting the go-ahead for the Translunar injection from Johnson Space Center. This re-firing of the third stage of the Saturn V rocket would have committed the three on a trajectory to the moon. The go-ahead never came. They were told that they would remain in Earth orbit until a technical problem could be fixed and then eventually were informed that the mission was scrubbed due to one reason or another. This happens.

The real shock came when they were debriefed privately back on terra firma. Maybe they were told something like this:

“Great job gentlemen. I know this was a disappointment for you, but rest assured given what we have learned from your mission, Apollo 12 will surely succeed. But here’s the thing…

The entire world believes you went to the moon and back. It was a matter of national pride and security that this mission succeeded so it was decided to release some of the footage from your training to the public. Yes, it’s a lie but not as big a lie as you might think. We have a logical sequence of flights planned that will get us there. It is only a question of when this will be accomplished. Many of the problems we faced on Apollo 11 will be solved in the months to come. You did an amazing job putting on us the right track.

In the end it won’t matter if it was you or one of your teammates that ends up walking on the moon. You are patriots. Your country needs you now more than ever.”

What do you think?

Significant Safety Concerns were Dismissed or Downplayed

Just two years earlier, while von Braun was at the South Pole, a tragic fire inside the cabin during a systems check of Apollo 1 took the life of three astronauts including Virgil “Gus” Grissom, a vocal critic of the entire program.

Grissom said and did several things in defiance of NASA’s public facing image. Just before his death he infamously hung a lemon on the spacecraft simulator to indicate to all he thought it was poorly designed.

He earned the nickname “Gruff Gus” from his occasionally direct criticisms of the program, telling reporters that issues with the program came in “bushelfuls”, and moments before the conflagration that took his life was disgusted at the communications failure between the capsule and the control center stating “How are we going to get to the Moon if we can’t talk between two or three buildings?”.

Grissom and his two crew mates had little chance of surviving. The cabin was pumped with 100% pure oxygen and faulty wiring set the whole thing off.

Thomas Ronald Baron was a quality control inspector for North American Aviation (NAA), the primary contractor for the Apollo Command Module. Baron was a whistleblower and released this 55-page document which cited his safety concerns to the public late in 1966. He was fired from NAA days before the Apollo 1 tragedy.

Others have claimed that Baron authored a much longer document which included more of the safety issues he had identified and condemnation of the program’s leadership for silencing him. He presented it to the Congressional Subcommittee, but like many of the rocks from the moon, it has since been lost or gone missing. He died in a car-train collision on April 27, 1967, just six days after testifying before a House subcommittee investigating the Apollo 1 tragedy.

Conclusion

I didn’t know what I wanted to do with my life when I finished college. My degree was in Electrical Engineering, but I was seduced by popular culture at the time. Being in tech wasn’t as cool as it is now. Back then we had movies like “Wall Street” and TV shows like “LA Law”. I sought and received offers to work for an investment firm in New York and a patent Law firm in Boston which needed help understanding the technology they were hired to defend.

But I had had a fascination with space flight since I was a kid. I was only two when the world watched breathlessly as the three men above rode that enormous rocket into outer space. The exploration of space was a big part of our culture in the 1970’s and 80’s. I grew up with The Jetsons, Star Trek and Carl Sagan’s “Cosmos” series on PBS. I still vividly remember watching the first test flight of the Enterprise, a prototype of the Space Shuttle Columbia, which piggy-backed on a Boeing 747 and glided back to Andrews AFB.

In the end I accepted a position with McDonnell-Douglas Space Systems Co. to contribute in a tiny way to the design of the International Space Station. I was 21 and the Apollo missions less than two decades before were still fresh in the minds of the older engineers with whom I worked.

Today I have a lot of uncertainty around the veracity of the claim the Apollo 11 mission successfully put two human beings on the lunar surface and brought them back to Earth safely as JFK challenged our country to do.

To reiterate, there are valid questions, some technical, which have never been adequately addressed by the governing authority in the matter, NASA. That is very suspicious to say the least. Moreover, one of the astronauts has been out there candidly stating that we never went to the moon.

There is a lot more to consider which I have not mentioned here. There is a video of Neil Armstrong getting very agitated and even violent when asked to place his hand on a Bible and swear he went to the moon.

Others claim to have been present at large hangers in the Nevada desert which were filled with sand and mock-ups of the Lunar Module. They swear that footage was shot by professional film crews in the months prior to the Apollo 11 mission.

There’s a candid video of Stanley Kubrick, the brilliant director of “2001: A Space Odyssey”, who gave the public its first impression of what the surface of the moon might look like, admitting late in his life that NASA enlisted him to shoot simulated moon landing footage. He claims he was sworn to secrecy his whole life. Some say that he tried to let the public in on the secret through certain scenes from another one of his blockbuster movies, “The Shining”.

NASA hasn’t made any effort to dispel these insinuations. In fact, they openly admit that they have “accidentally” destroyed all of the original video from the Apollo 11 mission. How inconvenient for us.

However, the most interesting question is why would NASA take such steps to create this illusion in the first place? Why was it so important that the public believe that we succeeded? It seemed impossible to begin with. Why would everyone be so downtrodden if we failed? The Soviet Union had already given up so what difference would it make if we took a few more years to get it right? What was their motive?

The most plausible explanation is that it was about, per usual, money. Two years after the historic lunar mission, President Richard Nixon ended the US dollar’s convertibility to gold. The reason behind this was clear. We had been printing too many dollars and we didn’t have the gold in our reserves to back it up. No doubt economists predicted that few would wish to keep their wealth in US dollars if there was nothing behind it. Our nation had to maintain the mystique of invincibility to prevent the collapse of our currency and our economy.

The Apollo program also served to restore Americans’ faith in their country which at the time was fighting (and losing) a terribly unpopular war and was grieving a series of assassinations of heroic figures who spoke truth to the power and corruption in the highest offices in the land before they were slaughtered. Many felt justice was not served. Especially with regard to the murder of the person who attempted to put the nation on a road to enduring peace and challenged the country to place a man on the moon and return him safely earlier that decade. Why sully the legacy of President Kennedy by second guessing the Apollo program?

And so it seems, the symbolism runs deep as history repeats itself. We are again in a global conflict brought on by our own nation’s aggression under the leadership of arguably the most corrupt administration in our history. The US Dollar, buoyed by GCC oil sales exclusively using our fiat currency, is again in a perilous state. Potential crimes against the most innocent are being ignored and the slaughter continues. (Warning: The video below is graphic)

This time it is Artemis, twin sister of Apollo, Greek goddess of the moon and protector of childbirth and, ironically, young children who directs our attention to the skies and away from the tragedies and scandals unfolding on the Earthly plane.

Did we just watch NASA successfully complete the second in a series of “logical and efficient” missions to return our species to the moon? Or was Artemis 2 actually the sequel to the Artemis project depicted in the 2024 movie, “Fly me to the Moon”, a top-secret government operation to film a fake moon landing as a backup in case the actual Apollo 11 mission failed, coincidentally?

By buying another story as it is being sold are we once again tacitly consenting to accepting false versions of reality whenever necessary?

Please leave your comments.