I like to read them sometimes and then depending on my mood I like to ridicule them.
However, this one is pretty well presented:
http://www.jayweidner.com/ShiningSecrets.html
How “The Shining” reflects Kubrick’s guilt over faking the moon landings.
What? Yes, I am serious that is what it is about.
M_P
I do like reading them, there are some with merit. I gotta run and do some stuff but I’m tagging this for later.
Maybe this’ll shed some “light” on the subject. 
Many, many times I think these theories are just putting together a bunch of random things and then trying to make them sound plausible/ as if they were connected, but this is almost too random! Very interesting!
Never heard this theory before, but I do enjoy this kind of stuff.
This is the newest version of the book The 50 Greatest Conspiracies of All Time, which was featured on an episode of The X-Files ( it was on Mulder’s Desk):
As you can see by the price it’s out of print, but you can get the previous version (70 Greatest) used for less than a buck. Just ordered one since my copy got borrowed and never returned. Each new edition just repeats the conspiracies from the previous editions and adds 10 more. The newest one has the 9/11 conspiracies, and theories related to Princess Diana’s death.
The reason I like the book is because the writers present each theory in a way that doesn’t say “here’s the theory and its true” but they present the theory, then documented evidence that supports it, or documented evidence that refutes it. Basically things that make you go “hmm”. One of the better documentations they had that refuted a theory was their chapter on the anti-Semitic Protocols of the Elders of Zion:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Protocols_of_the_Elders_of_Zion
Along these lines is a documentary called “A funny thing happened on the way to the moon”. You can watch it for free here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nOMHSgQuuiw. The part that’s interesting to me is when they show the filming of earth but they make it appear much further than it truly is by moving the camera back in the craft and creating a fake crescent shadow silhouette on the planet. It’s interesting and worth watching if you have an hour.
Guess what! A movie made in 1939 meshes-up perfectly with an album with the Moon in its title made in 1973!
The Wizard of Oz and the Dark Side of the Moon.
And:
Lincon had a secretary named Kennedy who told him not to go to the theater
Kennedy had a secretary named Lincoln who told him not to go to Dallas
Lincoln was elected President in 1860, while Kennedy was elected President in 1960.
Lincoln’s successor - Andrew Johnson - was born in 1808, while Kennedy’s successor - Lyndon Johnson - was born in 1908.
Lincoln’s killer - John Wilkes Booth - was born in 1839, while Kennedy’s killer - Lee Harvey Oswald - was born in 1939.
The names Lincoln and Kennedy each contain seven letters.
Lincoln’s secretary was called Kennedy, while Kennedy’s secretary was called Lincoln.
Lincoln’s and Kennedy’s successors both had the surname Johnson.
The names Andrew Johnson and Lyndon Johnson each contain thirteen letters.
The names John Wilkes Booth and Lee Harvey Oswald each contain fifteen letters.
Lincoln and Kennedy were both killed on a Friday.
Both were killed in the presence of their wives.
Both were shot from behind and in the head.
Booth shot Lincoln in a theatre and hid in a warehouse, while Oswald shot Kennedy from a warehouse and hid in a theatre.
Lincoln was shot at a theatre named ‘Ford’, Kennedy was shot in a car named ‘Lincoln,’ made by ‘Ford’.
Both assassins were killed before being brought to trial.
Lincoln and Kennedy were both directly concerned with Civil Rights.
Booth and Oswald were both Southerners favouring unpopular ideas.
Abraham Lincoln was elected to Congress in 1846.
John F. Kennedy was elected to Congress in 1946.
Abraham Lincoln was elected President in 1860.
John F. Kennedy was elected President in 1960.
Both wives lost their children while living in the White House.
Both were succeeded by Southerens.
Both successors were named Johnson.
Both assassins were known by their three names.
Both names compromise fifteen letters.
John Wilkes Booth’s brother once save the life of Abe Lincoln’s son - Robert Todd Lincoln (son of U.S. President Abraham
Lincoln) Edwin Booth, brother of man who assassinated President Lincoln, rescued this Lincoln from a train accident.
A week before Lincoln was shot, he was in Monroe, Maryland.
A week before Kennedy was shot, he was with Marilyn Monroe.
But the big problem with this lunar hoax nonsense is as of last summer, we have pictures of the landing sites:
A little bit about the man who made that ‘documentary’:
Bart Sibrel gets Buzzed
Note: I am assuming that before reading this page you are familiar with the idea that some people think NASA faked the Apollo Moon missions. If this idea is new to you, try reading my page with links to other pages about the Moon hoax, and my page debunking specific claims of this hoax “theory”.
One of the more active proponents of this silliness is one Bart Winfield Sibrel. He claims to have been a journalist (although he actually was only a part-time editor at a local Nashville NBC affiliate for a couple of months, and “he has no right whatsoever to claim any association with our news organization” according to the news director there, according to this news article: note that this is a pay-per-view article service).
Actually, he claims a lot of things that turn out not to be true (and, in fact, lied on national TV about me during a “debate” on MSNBC; go down about 2/3 of that page to a post I made about this). He created a “documentary” called “A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Moon”, which he claims is full of evidence the landings were faked. In reality, his claims are completely wrong. His evidence is either grossly misinterpreted by him or just plain wrong. In the links at the bottom of this page, you can find details about both Mr. Sibrel and his ridiculous video.
He is certainly a publicity hound. He has been known to stake out Apollo astronauts and then leap out, asking them to swear on a Bible that they did indeed walk on the Moon. Why would he do this? If they do swear, what does he say? Apparently nothing, because Apollo 14 astronaut Edgar Mitchell says he did indeed swear on a Bible for Mr. Sibrel, yet there is no mention of this in Mr. Sibrel’s website or video. And if they don’t swear, of course, he can claim it’s because they are liars.
Sometimes making that kind of claim can get you in trouble. It certainly did with Buzz Aldrin. Mr. Aldrin, the second man to walk on the Moon, was ambushed by Mr. Sibrel with the Bible trick. On September 9, 2002, Mr. Sibrel jumped out at Mr. Aldrin with the Bible, daring him to swear on it. Buzz told Mr. Sibrel to go away repeatedly, and even asked for the police. When Mr. Sibrel physically blocked his path, Mr. Aldrin (who is 72, 5’10" and 160 pounds) punched Mr. Sibrel (37, 6"2" and 250 pounds) in the face.
Some say Mr. Sibrel had it coming. I have no comment (though you can leave yours on my bulletin board). But it shouldn’t surprise you to learn that Mr. Sibrel wants to sue Mr. Aldrin for attacking him. From what I heard, it’s Mr. Sibrel who might be in trouble. Besides asking the court (or a jury) to prosecute a man who is in every sense of the word a national hero, the case can easily be made that it was Mr. Sibrel who stalked and attacked Mr. Aldrin first.
If Mr. Sibrel were interested in the truth, he wouldn’t try to prosecute, in my opinion, since this seriously undermines whatever credibility he may have. If he only wants publicity, he’ll take it to court.
Since we are on the subject of conspiracy theories, has anyone seen Jesse Ventura’s new show “Conspiracy Theory” yet? I liked the 2012 episode, the murals and monuments in and around that airport were freaky as hell.
Even if the whole thing was BS, which I’m sure it is… the fact that someone would put those kinds of things in an airport is messed up.
HM - Please list a link or at least who the author is so people can read more if they choose. The video is entertaining and I do find it curious that they were faking a shot of how far away they were from the Earth.
Interesting quote made at a public speech: “There are great ideas, undiscovered breakthroughs available, to those who can remove one of truths protective layers”
-Neil Armstrong, ‘First Man on the Moon’. July 20 th 1994
They weren’t faking anything, Sibrel was misrepresenting what was being shown and the audio he was presenting did NOT belong to the video whe was showing.
The only faking going on was by Sibrel himself and the midleading editing he was conducting.
http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/misc/sibrel.html
PS, you can copy and pase a snippet of text into google and it will lead you to the source.
BTW, you do know Sibrel claims the Moon Landing Hoax was a cover for our reverse-engineering of crashed UFO Tech do you not?
Nope. Reading stuff on the link you posted… if anything it’s entertaining.
http://www.thekeyboard.org.uk/Bart%20Sibrel.htm
This conspiracy is a conspiracy Jim McDade 4/1/2001. Extract from the Birmingham News.
Bart Sibrel is a really friendly and likeable guy. Good traits for a salesman. Sibrel’s technical production skills are also excellent. His conspiracy DVD looks and sounds great. Too bad that it is full of falsehoods, innuendo, strident accusations, half-truths, flawed logic and premature conclusions. It has all of the hallmarks of tasty conspiracy theory material. It even ties itself to the most popular conspiracy of all time by playing the notorious Zapruder film of the JFK assassination. The documentary included somber violin music, heart-rending scenes of starving children in Africa, clips of napalmed Vietnamese villagers, wounded American soldiers in Vietnam and police beating protesters with nightsticks. Bart masterfully cranks up the viewers emotions and distrust of government leadership early in the show so that the viewer is primed for the “stunning” new evidence at the end.
As far as Bart’s much ballyhooed “never-seen”, secret NASA Apollo videotape was neither “never-seen” nor secret. It was all taped footage from the Apollo 11 CM Westinghouse three-color camera telecasts that were broadcast live on NBC, CBS, ABC, the BBC and every other decent network on the planet back in July of 1969. Many ordinary citizens have documentary videos that show the same broadcasts. The times and dates of those broadcasts have long been a matter of public record and the documentation can be viewed in the NASA Apollo 11 Post Launch Mission Operation Report (Number M-932-69-11. The video was so blurry and fuzzy that Houston had to prompt the characteristically un-talkative Apollo 11 commander, Neil Armstrong to describe what he was pointing the camera at so that NASA could correlate what he was shooting with what he was describing on later tape playbacks.
Color TV cameras small enough to fit inside tiny spacecraft cabins were brand new and balky technology back in 1969. Global communications networks could not even synchronize the audio and video signals coming back to Houston from receiving antennas in Australia and Goldstone, California. The only thing new and weird revealed in Sibrel’s A FUNNY THING HAPPENED ON THE WAY TO THE MOON is his bizarre personal interpretation that the video views of earth were shot through a small hole (template) to give the impression that Apollo 11 was not in low earth orbit. Sibrel insists that none of the Apollo spacecraft ever left low earth orbit because of the “radiation barrier” called the Van Allen Belts. This radiation barrier is greatly exaggerated by all of the “moon hoax” proponents. Sibrel’s misinterpretation of the archival Apollo 11 video results from a combination of Bart’s longing to see something awry and his lack of understanding about the Apollo cabin and TV camera configuration.
Sibrel attempts to describe to the viewers of his documentary what is going on inside the darkened Command Module while the crew was attempting to give the TV viewers back the best possible view of earth with the primitive handheld color TV camera carried aboard Apollo 11. The problem with his explanation is basically that he does not know what he is talking about. Sibrel may know a lot about current video editing and production technology, but he does not have expertise about Apollo. In order to provide 1969 TV viewers back on earth with the best possible view of our planet from space, it was necessary to eliminate the glaring reflected light and direct sunlight that was streaming into the spacecraft and interfering with the shot. The official Apollo 11 mission documentation from 1969 contains astronaut Michael Collins’ own discussion of these lighting problems and the difficulties he experienced with the window shades in the Apollo spacecraft. Unfortunately for Bart Sibrel, he is obviously unaware of astronaut Mike Collins documented statements. The astronauts shuttered most of the capsule windows with special shades that blocked most of the glaring direct and reflected sunlight coming off of the bright, shiny Lunar Module which was docked in close proximity to the location of the windows.
The earth was then clearly visible out of the other “unblocked” cabin window when the shades were closed. What one actually witnesses in the video are not cutouts or templates passing between the earth and the TV camera, it is the communications headset wiring, arms and body of astronaut Michael Collins as he reaches over to remove the shade blocking one of the spacecraft windows. As soon as the shade is removed, the video shows the cabin immediately illuminating with glaring reflected sunlight. We also see that Collins is the one opening the window shade and that another member of the crew is obviously handling the camera from the vicinity of the foot area of the crew couches. Sibrel expressed the mistaken impression that the hand-held Westinghouse TV camera was hard-mounted to the face of the cabin window. Sibrel, as well as his devoted followers are the victims of misinterpretation and apparent misinformation.
Bart is far from what you would call a space expert (although he does have good TV editing and video production skills). He does not appear to possess an understanding of the basic layout and configuration of the Apollo Command Module or the procedures followed by NASA during the Apollo telecasts. Bart has misinterpreted things that are immediately obvious to anyone who has extensively read Apollo history and documentation or anyone who has ever been inside an Apollo Command Module or accurate mockup.
Um, for the record, I view these the same way I do gambling - entertainment and little else. I don’t believe this stuff but it is fun to read and see how they come up with the explanations.
M_P
fixed it for you!
Here is the part where I laughed out loud and woke up my wife…
“It was necessary to hide the advanced U.S. saucer technology from the Soviet Union.”
In addition to that is all the stuff like reflectors we placed on the moon that we still use all the time.
They are mainly BS and used by misinformed uneducated people who have no love for the bitter truth in many instances…plus, they are a favorite of radicals of all couleur.
I like the one about private banking cartels that run the world from the shadows…
…wait…
:eek:
I love a good conspiracy theory. Namely, for the entertainment value. I like watching the “Bigfoot” shows on the Dish, too. But I really think someone would have hit one with their car by now if they were real.
I think this particular theory is such a stretch that it’s not even entertaining.
One thing that I am pretty sure of is that something like that just could not be kept a secret. The government is so incompetent in nearly everything they do, I seriously doubt they could cover things like this up.
Now, I DO think the government explots theories like this to help cover up secret military projects, which is clever. How many people thought the early Stealth Fighter flights were aliens? How often did the government just say “nothing” - fueling the suspicion and diverting attention from the real project.
However, a jet fighter is nothing compared to being behind 911, the JFK assasination, or faking the moon landings.