U.S. Intelligence, Dr. Lawrence Cohen, debunks NASA in just over 17 minutes

Video Transcript:

But Grissom was also an outspoken critic of the space program and was quoted as saying someone's going to get killed. Unfortunately Grissom's worst fears were soon realized. On January 27th 1967, two years before the first moon landing, Grissom and his crew boarded the Apollo 1 capsule for a full-scale simulation. The problems began almost immediately. First the capsule's communication systems failed. Suddenly the capsule burst into flames with the astronauts sealed inside. The United States would never make it to the moon. He claimed his opinions made him a target. As part of his testimony, Barron submitted a 500-page report detailing his findings. In exactly one week after he testified, Barron's car was struck by a train. Barron, his wife, and stepdaughter were killed instantly. I believe that Thomas Ronald Barron was murdered because he had the truth to tell about the Apollo project. Barron's report mysteriously disappeared and to this day it has never been found. Between 1964 and 1967 a total of 10 astronauts lost their lives in freak accidents. These deaths accounted for an astonishing 15% of NASA's astronaut corps. To keep something that's alive wrapped up and covered over, you've got to eliminate all the people that can talk about it. NASA's highest-ranking official, James Webb, resigned without explanation just days before the first Apollo mission. Why when he was on the threshold of achieving the greatest accomplishment of his career? All three Apollo 11 astronauts also resigned shortly after their... Color television pictures that the crew of Apollo 11 brought a high-resolution color-video camera with them on their mission. Yet the only pictures broadcast live from the moon's surface were these from a low-definition black and white camera. In fact the networks complained because in addition to this they were forced to shoot the images second-generation off of a projection TV of the technology of 30 years ago and were not even allowed to take a direct feed which further degraded the quality and clarity of the images. From an analytical standpoint photographic anomalies have to be sought out with an understanding of lighting and shadows. The most straightforward is simple. And objects are lit solely by the sun as all the scenes on the moon were said to be. After all lighting equipment was not only impractical it was unnecessary and bright sunlight. Then all shadows, regardless of the landscape, will run parallel with one another and never intersect as shown by this example. In these seldom seen photographs obtained from a rarely used auxiliary NASA archival site it is clear that these scenes were lit with artificial light. These shadows which are cast at different angles are evidence that a second light source is being used. In addition the sun would not cause an isolated hotspot like this, only an artificial light wood. Again, intersecting shadows and another hotspot. And again. And again. In this magnification of an Apollo photograph a rock very likely a paper mache prop because of the crease here is categorized with the letter C. In later releases of the same picture the letter is gone, probably air brushed out. On the moon the astronauts only source of light was the sun. They had no extra lighting, no flashes of things like that. And in this photograph from Apollo 14 the shadows are cast in different directions suggesting multiple light sources. The shadows cast by the rocks in the foreground should have been east west like the limb shadow. And in this photo from Apollo 17 again the shadows are pointing in different directions. Outside and sunlight shadows always were parallel with one another. So the shadows will never intersect. In conspiracy theorists say it's not just the shadows that indicate the use of additional lights. But what has been photographed in the shadows? For example, here's an astronaut who descends into a huge shadow cast by the lunar module. Yet his entire body is still visible. How is it that he is not shrouded in darkness? Here's the same maneuver from another Apollo mission. Again the astronaut is brightly lit and what is obviously dark shadow. And in this picture the sun is directly behind the astronaut. His figure should be a silhouette. Yet even the smallest characteristics of his suit are recognizable. It seems like he's standing in this pot light. And I can't explain that. And that that escapes me. Why? If finally in this picture with the sun behind the lunar module the front of the craft is clearly visible. The words United States are crisp and clear. How could these backlit pictures be so detailed? It's because there's more than one light source which means they're not on the moon. It has been estimated that as many as 20% of Americans believe we never went to the moon. Is it really possible that NASA deceived the world? According to a former astronaut it's entirely possible. Regarding the Apollo mission I can't say 100% for sure whether these men walked on the moon. Bill Cacing was an analyst and an engineer at RocketDine, the company that designed the Apollo rockets. There were many problems that evolved during the 60s that led people to believe that we're never going to make it to the moon. Casing observed that despite the clarity of deep space the stars were missing from the black lunar sky. He saw the American flag waving even though there is no air on the moon. And he discovered that there was no blast crater beneath the lunar lander. For its powerful rocket engine had fired. The noise level of a rocket engine is up into the 140-150 decibel range. In other words enormously loud. How would it be possible to hear astronauts' voices against the background of a running rocket engine? Is this evidence that the footage is actually fake? A sequence shot in a controlled environment here on Earth? Just months before this historic landing a prototype LEM was flight tested at L-Eighten Air Force Base. While NASA cameras record the test flight, Neil Armstrong struggles to control the unwieldy craft. Then at approximately 300 feet, the lander flies wildly out of control. At the last second Armstrong ejects and floats to safety. If the lander was so unstable and difficult to fly in the controlled environment of Earth, then how could the LEM land six times flawlessly in the alien environment of the moon? The LEM had a single engine mounted dead center and then they had little push jets, thruster jets, a couple of them up on top. This was supposed to control their attitude as they came down, well I'll tell you a secret. The instant you moved your tail in that cabin, an inch, you would change the load pattern, it would begin to tilt and it would start that thing spinning. The fact that there's no blast crater under the LEM is one of the most conclusive pieces of evidence that I find supporting the hopes. In fact, no sign of a blast crater is visible for any of the six lunar landings. Yet NASA's own scientific illustrations clearly depict a blast crater. Then there's one other point. If they had truly landed on the moon, this dust would have then descended on the lunar lander on the foot pads and we find not a trace of dust on the foot pads. In the footage of the Ascent Stage going up, what you don't see is an exhaust plume coming out of the rocket engine nozzle. What a ride, what a ride. But what do we see? We see the Ascent Stage suddenly pop up without any exhaust plume whatsoever as though it were jerked up by a cable. Although it appears that the astronauts are moving in the moon's gravity, which is one sixth that of the Earth, Percy notes that when the speed of the film is doubled, the astronauts appear to be running as if in Earth's gravity. Ground discrepancies are also apparent in the lunar video. The best evidence are some pictorial anomalies in the photographic record of the trip to the moon. There is one for Apollo 16 where the same shot, the same hill, appears in two different days. This tape was shot on what was reported to be the first of Apollo 16's lunar excursions. Better get a very spot. And this video was from the next day at a different location. That is the most beautiful fight. NASA claims the second location was two and a half miles away. But when one video was superimposed over the other, the locations appear identical. For reference, crosshairs were permanently etched into the lunar cameras so they would have to appear on top of every image. But in this photo, a crosshair is behind a part of the lunar rover. This situation is impossible and has to be the result of technical manipulation and doctoring of the image. And in this photo from Apollo 11, the equipment in the foreground is covering the crosshair, not behind it. In another from Apollo 12, the American flag is covering one crosshair and the astronaut is covering the other. Come and take a trip in my rocket ship. We'll have a lovely afternoon. Kiss the world goodbye. And away we'll fly destination moon. We'll travel fast as a light till we're off of sight. The Earth will be like a toy balloon. A water thrill you get riding on my jet. A destination moon. A wheel go up, up, up, up. Straight to the moon we too. I am the starry blue. I'll be out of this world with you. So away we'll steal in my space mobile a supersonic animal. Leave your cares below pull the switch. Let's go. A destination moon. A wheel go up, up, up, up. Straight to the moon we too. A wheel be high in the starry blue. I'll be out of this world with you. So away we'll steal in my jet mobile a supersonic animal. Leave your cares below pull that switch. Let's go. A destination. We're flying high up in the sky. A destination moon. A wheel go up, up, up, up. A wheel go up, up, up, up. A wheel go up, up, up, up. A wheel go up, up, up, up. A wheel go up, up, up, up. A wheel go up, up, up, up. A wheel go up, up, up, up. A wheel go up, up, up, up. A wheel go up, up, up. A wheel go up, up, up. A wheel go up, up, up. A wheel go up, up, up.