The Russians never duplicated Apollo 8

originally posted by: SayonaraJupiter
It's also possible that the Russians launched the N-1 successfully on July 3/4? with Frank Borman observing it from an airplane, en route from Yalta to Novosibirsk. It is possible that the 'destruction' on the ground captured by US spy satellites was simply the normal aftermath associated with a successful launch. It is possible that the Russians have written a totally false history in order to keep some secrets for later use.... because it serves Russian core interests.

im sure that makes total sense to you..

but please explain how faking the failure of the N1 rockets helps the soviet lunar program in any way?

a reply to: choos

Especially faking a failed launch while showing the genuine launch to an American astronaut in secret.

My brain starts to hurt with the craziness of it all.

originally posted by: Rob48
a reply to: choos

Especially faking a failed launch while showing the genuine launch to an American astronaut in secret.

My brain starts to hurt with the craziness of it all.

Go visit the NASA gift shop. Do you think they sell "The Race for Space"? www.imdb.com...
In Mike Wallace words "a very sensitive piece." and "IBM was interested."

"it broke a taboo on independent documentary producers." - Mike Wallace

Well, Jarrah White is an independent documentary producer who breaks taboo subjects, such as, questioning the Apollo moon landings. What about Richard Hoagland, David Icke? There's too many to mention so I won't go any further.

Apollo deserves to be under scrutiny just like any other conspiracy considering all the effort that is put into the JFk assassination.. or Watergate... etc.

a reply to: SayonaraJupiter

And that scrutiny, when done properly, shows that Apollo happened as documented.

The type of 'research' done by idiots like White, Icke and Hoagland is not research, it is selling an agenda, and in the case of Icke selling his books and lecture tours. Icke in particular is not a good example for you because his story changes depending on who his audience is. White is just a high school nerd who made a film for a college project and managed to find his own little niche selling lies to the gullible.

Questioning something does not automatically invalidate the subject. Saying "I am questioning Apollo" does not suddenly stop the historical record of Apollo being correct.

if you are going to question something you have to be prepared to accept the answer whether you like it or not.

Rejecting an answer because you don't like it, or telling someone that they are too dumb to understand things properly, or appealing to some sort of secret stuff that only you know about is not research and it is not questioning something - it's pushing your own agenda regardless of the facts. It's propaganda.

a reply to: SayonaraJupiter

Apollo deserves to be under scrutiny just like any other conspiracy considering all the effort that is put into the JFk assassination.. or Watergate... etc.

Are you being deliberately disingenuous or what?

The Apollo missions are, unquestionably, the most widely scrutinised journeys any human being has ever undertaken in history.

Thousands, if not millions, of pages have been written examining every aspect of Apollo.

Right from the first theoretical studies before the programme even came into being, through the design of the hardware, the testing of the hardware, the physiology of space flight, the mission planning...

And that's before we even get onto the minute scrutiny of every detail of the flight: how the hardware performed, how the astronauts reacted to the conditions, how the orbits compared to the computer simulations...

And then the further analysis by thousands of experts around the world after the event: countless analyses of rock and soil samples, photogrammetric analyses of the still photographs, film and video, and so on and so on.

All of which makes the hoax believers who present five-minute "analysis" of a couple of photos — often with little or no knowledge of what the photos even show — totally laughable.

The Russians never duplicated Apollo 8

- it's pushing your own agenda regardless of the facts. It's propaganda.

That's exactly what Frank Borman was doing on his Apollo 8 propaganda trips to see the Queen, the Pope and visit Star Town '69. It makes good publicity in the papers which was the real goal of the trip.

As Nixon's special emissary, Borman was pushing an agenda, he's on different missions (maybe like a 007?) First visiting the Queen Elizabeth and the Pope Paul VI, just two of his many visits among the many waves of hard core Apollo propaganda trips going on in early 1969. That's how Nixon builds up the suspense. In the third reel of the picture it shows Frank Borman detonating the N-1's range safety self-destruct with a remote jamming device made by Hughes Aircraft.... with the huge explosion imaged by a spy satellite, using high speed film, also constructed by Hughes.

NPIC/NRO is still keeping the secret image of the N-1 explosion. They can't let out the picture because it could cause irreparable damage to the integrity of the United States government, by either confirming or denying the satellite image showing the purported flash of light. The international good will of the US government and the CIA/Apollo space narratives would both be gambled away. Keeping the purported image in secrecy for forty years is indeed just a standard poker bluff.

Either way you look at it the Apollo Defenders have no where to go with Apollo 8. The Russians did not need the N-1. The accepted sources have confirmed the existence of the Russian dual-track lunar program. We also know from these sources that the Russians were still considering the propaganda value of lunar flights even after the N-1 purportedly exploded.

originally posted by: SayonaraJupiter

That's exactly what Frank Borman was doing on his Apollo 8 propaganda trips to see the Queen, the Pope and visit Star Town '69. It makes good publicity in the papers which was the real goal of the trip.

As Nixon's special emissary, Borman was pushing an agenda, he's on different missions (maybe like a 007?) First visiting the Queen Elizabeth and the Pope Paul VI, just two of his many visits among the many waves of hard core Apollo propaganda trips going on in early 1969.

Lots of Apollo astronauts went on goodwill trips to lots of places. Borman is probably unique in that the Soviets invited him. It does indeed make good publicity. It does indeed show that Apollo was not a secret mission and everything was open to public scrutiny.

That's how Nixon builds up the suspense. In the third reel of the picture it shows Frank Borman detonating the N-1's range safety self-destruct with a remote jamming device made by Hughes Aircraft.... with the huge explosion imaged by a spy satellite, using high speed film, also constructed by Hughes.

Explain this to a psychiatric nurse, let us know how it turns out.

NPIC/NRO is still keeping the secret image of the N-1 explosion. They can't let out the picture because it could cause irreparable damage to the integrity of the United States government, by either confirming or denying the satellite image showing the purported flash of light. The international good will of the US government and the CIA/Apollo space narratives would both be gambled away. Keeping the purported image in secrecy for forty years is indeed just a standard poker bluff.

Read the articles: there is an image that is 'believed' to exist. I'm telling you it doesn't. The news of the N-1's demise is based on before and after pictures that are already public. You're beginning to sound like McCarthy, still droning on at the microphone long after he has been made a fool of by Joseph Welch, still blustering at your audience despite everyone realising how idiotic your empty rhetoric is.

Either way you look at it the Apollo Defenders have no where to go with Apollo 8. The Russians did not need the N-1. The accepted sources have confirmed the existence of the Russian dual-track lunar program. We also know from these sources that the Russians were still considering the propaganda value of lunar flights even after the N-1 purportedly exploded.

Make up your mind - did it explode or not? You were complaining a paragraph ago about the alleged photo of this event being hidden and even claiming Borman was personally responsible for it. Remember we do have the before and after images, as well as the diaries and evidence from Soviet personnel involved.

Maybe you should look up what 'dual track' means. Maybe you should check the history books to see if the Soviets emulated the historic and extensively documented Apollo 8 mission. If they didn't need the heavy lift CIA approved N-1 method and had the option for other ways to get to the moon, how come that didn't happen? The answer has already been given to you, so it shouldn't be too hard to work out.

There is nowhere to go with Apollo 8. It happened. There is documentary evidence that it happened, and this evidence is irrefutable.

After the Soviet Union fell, films of the N1 flights were released. Here is the 23-second flight of N1 5L on July 3rd, 1969. It wasn't a range-safety triggered explosion. The rocket fell back on the pad.

From Encyclopedia Astronautica:
"N1 5L launch - . Payload: Soyuz 7K-L1S s/n 5 / Dummy LK. Nation: USSR. Agency: RVSN. Program: Lunar L3. Class: Manned. Type: Manned spacecraft. Flight: Apollo 11. Spacecraft: Soyuz 7K-L1A. Decay Date: 1969-07-03 . COSPAR: F690703A. N-1 serial number 5L began to fail at 0.25 second after liftoff when the oxidizer pump of engine number 8 ingested a slag fragment and exploded. A fire ensued as the vehicle climbed past the top of the tower. Engines were shutdown until the acceleration dropped below 1 G; then the vehicle began to fall back to the pad at a 45 degree angle. The escape tower fired at the top of the brief trajectory, taking the L1S dummy descent module away from the pad. Upon impact of the base of the N1 with the pad, the vehicle exploded, destroying launch pad 110 east, which would take over 18 months to repair." Link

a reply to: Saint Exupery

That N-1 video explosion is clearly an edited piece. Where are the source films held? Who holds them? Is the entire piece available or not? Or shall we just rely on what "looks like" a Michael Bay Hollywood explosion from a Russian Tv show, uploaded by an anonymous youtube account...

a reply to: SayonaraJupiter

Go find it yourself. It exists.

originally posted by: SayonaraJupiter
a reply to: Saint Exupery

That N-1 video explosion is clearly an edited piece. Where are the source films held? Who holds them? Is the entire piece available or not? Or shall we just rely on what "looks like" a Michael Bay Hollywood explosion from a Russian Tv show, uploaded by an anonymous youtube account...

Why not? You rely on edited movie posters to make your points.

originally posted by: Rob48

originally posted by: SayonaraJupiter
a reply to: Saint Exupery

That N-1 video explosion is clearly an edited piece. Where are the source films held? Who holds them? Is the entire piece available or not? Or shall we just rely on what "looks like" a Michael Bay Hollywood explosion from a Russian Tv show, uploaded by an anonymous youtube account...

Why not? You rely on edited movie posters to make your points.

I have not posted any of my conspiracy infographics in this thread. Go back and look.

originally posted by: Saint Exupery
a reply to: SayonaraJupiter

Go find it yourself. It exists.

Think again before you post a random anonymous youtube video to one of my threads without reading the entire thread. We have gone to great lengths to drill down in the source material and it has turned out to be a very good learning thread. Why can't you tell where the original N-1 explosion film is kept? Maybe it doesn't exist anymore.

originally posted by: Saint Exupery
a reply to: SayonaraJupiter

Go find it yourself. It exists.

What ever happened to DENY IGNORANCE at this site that was a normal request for the source of the material that you quote .

For the actual original footage of N1 launches, you'll have to ask the Russians for that.

However, there are other YouTube videos :



Equinox even made a docu back in 2000 called "The Engines That Came In From The Cold"



It goes into pretty good detail, especially why the Soviets were so far ahead at first (they firmly believed in building....then testing, hehehe, which is great hands on learning. Expensive as hell, but great hands on).

During the first week of July 1969,

when Frank Borman was visiting Soviet Russia on Richard Nixon's orders and just by coincidence the Russians were launching an N-1 missile that week. It exploded. Or did it?

Borman's first top secret visit in Russia was to Star City, north east of Moscow. Borman's second top secret pit stop was to 'Eupatoria' space tracking station, near Simferopol, on the Black Sea.

"All the foreigners in Borman's party... were barred from the Eupatoria station..."


Now Go Over To astronautix and look at the entry on Frank Borman you will read a completely different story.

Borman's plane makes an emergency landing in Canada when an engine fails en route. His late arrival wrecks Kamanin's carefully-laid out schedule for his trip."

I present this as a fine example of why astronautix should not be trusted for space history, especially Russian space history and the Apollo program.
Source www.astronautix.com...

Next, I present Frank Borman's oral history on nasa.gov. Why is Frank Borman skipping over the importance of his Russian trip? Why did the interviewer skip over the importance and timing of this trip? Does he not remember the impeccable timing of his visit coincided with the explosion of Russia's N-1 rocket, Webb's Giant?

www.jsc.nasa.gov...

originally posted by: SayonaraJupiter

During the first week of July 1969,

when Frank Borman was visiting Soviet Russia on Richard Nixon's orders and just by coincidence the Russians were launching an N-1 missile that week. It exploded. Or did it?

Yes, it did. Satellite evidence at the time showed something catastrophic had happened and first hand Soviet accounts showed it too. You can even buy a book about it www.collectspace.com...

Borman's first top secret visit in Russia was to Star City, north east of Moscow. Borman's second top secret pit stop was to 'Eupatoria' space tracking station, near Simferopol, on the Black Sea.

"All the foreigners in Borman's party... were barred from the Eupatoria station..."

So top secret that it was in the papers? No link again. Tsk.

Now Go Over To astronautix and look at the entry on Frank Borman you will read a completely different story.

"Borman's plane makes an emergency landing in Canada when an engine fails en route. His late arrival wrecks Kamanin's carefully-laid out schedule for his trip."

I present this as a fine example of why astronautix should not be trusted for space history, especially Russian space history and the Apollo program.
Source www.astronautix.com...

Why? Because it says something you don't like as opposed to a media hack who writes something you do? You're happy to quote its contributors when it suits.

Next, I present Frank Borman's oral history on nasa.gov. Why is Frank Borman skipping over the importance of his Russian trip? Why did the interviewer skip over the importance and timing of this trip? Does he not remember the impeccable timing of his visit coincided with the explosion of Russia's N-1 rocket, Webb's Giant?

www.jsc.nasa.gov...

He wasn't asked about the N-1 explosion. He was asked about the significance of the Apollo-Soyuz mission that the trip was laying the foundations for. Your point proves what?

a reply to: SayonaraJupiter

the Russians were launching an N-1 missile that week. It exploded. Or did it?

Yes. It did. You have been shown:

Footage of the rocket exploding

Satellite images of the destruction caused by the explosion

Diary entries by the Russian cosmonaut leader referring to the explosion

US intelligence documents relating to the explosion.


And yet you expect us to believe about bouncing Mobots on the moon with ZERO evidence. Double standards are a wonderful thing.

originally posted by: onebigmonkey
He wasn't asked about the N-1 explosion. He was asked about the significance of the Apollo-Soyuz mission that the trip was laying the foundations for. Your point proves what?

I'm the OP and I have been delivering the goods for 12 pages.

Frank Borman had 2 top secret stops on his Russia tour. Would you like to know about the third stop?
Who else was with Frank Borman on this tour besides his beautiful wife and his two boys. And drummm rolllll.....
a team of Nixon's propaganda specialists working for the United States Information Agency (USIA).

Borman, in Moscow, at the US embassy, Fourth of July, 1969 "Asked whether he would brief President Nixon on his Soviet trip, Colonel Borman said he was not an emissary of the President. But, I think there will be something along the lines of a White House briefing, he added."

a reply to: SayonaraJupiter

I still don't see where you are going with this. What do you even believe?

That the N-1 was actually a roaring success and Borman was shown the launch? And failed to tell anyone because...???

And that the Russians wanted everyone to believe that their flagship heavy lifter was an abject failure because...???

And that with their really-not-at-all-explodey N-1 rocket which they had shown Borman, the Russians still decided not to attempt a moon shot because...???



What is your theory, SJ? I'm dying to know.