The tempest that has been raging in this teacup makes an excellent segue to my analysis of Jarrah White's "Moonfaker: Double Shot parts 1 & 2." The
debate that has broken out over whether or not a photo that appears as NASA's "Astronomy Picture of the Day" graphic is intended as a canonical
statement from NASA or is simply a routine PR release to remind people that NASA still has a pulse is very germane to understanding Jarrah's slight of
hand in this series of propaganda videos. When examining sources, their provenance is extremely important, that is, it is necessary to know where the
information originated and what its intent was. In the case of NASA's picture of the day, the intent was not to provide serious researchers with
important data, but rather to get fifth graders to think: "Gee, science is cool... I want to be a scientist when I grow up!" NASA's copy writers are
always very careful to attribute the source of their images, although they can sometimes make mistakes, as we shall see.
Jarrah begins the "Double Shots" series by repeating an earlier false statement so that, by familiarity, his hypnotized audience will accept it as a
"fact." He alleges that "NASA sometimes re-uses images," and cites Ralph Rene's "Spacey Twins" as a supposedly proven example:
(Courtesy Jarrah White)
Here is the story behind this little bit of skulduggery as presented by an eminent hoax propagandist, "Dr." Stephen Rorke:
Dr. Stephen Rorke has provided the following text and photo to accompany his appearance on tonight's show:
Photo 1 is from the book "Carrying the Fire" by Astronaut Michael Collins. It shows Collins in a no-gravity test inside an airplane. Collins is
practicing for a space walk inside an aircraft (flying a zero-g loop to temporarily eliminate gravity). Collins is seen holding the jet reaction
propulsion rod in his right hand.
Another famous photograph has Collins holding the jet reaction propulsion rod with his left hand while outside his Gemini 10 capsule -- he is,
according to Collins and NASA, out in space on a spacewalk in Photo 2. That photograph is NASA picture #66-40127. Photo 2 is also from "Carrying the
Fire" and is allegedly of a Gemini 10 space walk.
Ralph René noticed the two photographs were essentially identical- save the fact it appeared the negative had been reversed for the 'space walk' shot
and background features of the interior of the aircraft blacked out. René wondered why NASA would have to fake an image of a spacewalk? And, he
thought, if the Gemini record of a spacewalk is in doubt, why shouldn't the moonwalks be held to the same scrutiny?
Coast-To-Coast, although this exact block of text is parroted endlessly on other
sites.
Let's examine Rorke's statement in detail. The first paragraph is substantially correct. The photograph in question does appear in Michael Collins'
book, and is appropriately captioned:
files.abovetopsecret.com...[/atsimg]]Larger version.
Scanned from "Carrying The Fire," by Michael Collins, trade paperback, 2009, ISBN 978-0-374-53194-2.
Note the caption: "The zero-G airplane- sickening!"
Now Rorke makes an interesting statement: "Another famous photograph has Collins holding the jet reaction propulsion rod with his left hand while
outside his Gemini 10 capsule -- he is, according to Collins and NASA, out in space on a spacewalk in Photo 2. " If this is a "famous photo" it means
you should have seen it before. Isn't that what "famous" means? When you think of famous space walk photos, the first one would certainly be:
(c) Time-Life
Is this the photo he's talking about? Certainly not, but perhaps the Life Magazine archive can produce a photo from the Gemini X mission that was
widely circulated at the time, but has since been forgotten.
Life picture archives. Nope, nothing there. Must not be a very famous picture after
all. Perhaps it is buried in the
Nasa photo archives?
Nothing there, either. In fact,
there were no photos taken of Collins' space walk, nor has NASA ever claimed there were! In other words, his
statement is a blatant lie. As Ralph Rene said, based no doubt on his personal experience, "The trouble with lying is that your lie changes slightly
with each telling." We shall see this at work in this very episode.
In order to give his lie a polish of authenticity, Rorke continues: "That photograph is NASA picture #66-40127. Photo 2 is also from "Carrying the
Fire" and is allegedly of a Gemini 10 space walk." The identification of the photo with an ID number makes it appear that one should be able to find
it in the NASA archives. The problem is, #66-40127 is not a real NASA ID number. The photo in question is S66-40127:
Internet Archive
As you can see, this photograph is the original of the photo reproduced, slightly cropped ro fit the layout of the page. This is everything NASA has
to say about it:
Astronaut Michael Collins, GT-10 spaceflight, undergoes zero-gravity weightlessness training aboard a KC-135 aircraft. The KC-135 flew a parabolic
curve to create zero-gravity condition. WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB, DAYTON, OH CN
Do you see any claim that this represents an actual space walk? No. Rorke's allegation is completely false. The original photo and its description are
completely in agreement with the photo and caption in Collins' book. So where do these allegations come from? Ralph Rene, whose wisdom in lying we
have already seen.
THE ZERO G AIRPLANE This photo in Carrying The Fire, a book written by Apollo Astronaut Michael Collins, was snapped by a professional NASA
photographer as the plane flew an outside loop to temporarily eliminate gravity. The cabin is padded to protect the occupants from the inevi- table
fall the instant the loop is terminated. Here, Collins, as he practices space walking, is holding the propulsion rod in his right hand. Note the
similarity between this picture and the one on the adjoining page. Note also that the suit's wrinkles deny that it is inflated.
The GEMINI 10 SPACE WALK This picture was also extracted from Carrying The Fire and was allegedly taken during a space walk on the Gemini 10 mission
exactly three years before his Apollo 11 mission to the Moon. NASA claims to have landed the first men on the Moon during this mission. He is shown
holding a jet reaction propulsion rod with his left hand. On page 124 of Heroes In Space by Peter Bond, published in 1987, I discovered that Collins
allegedly lost his camera on this space walk. That was a contrived excuse by NASA so they could turn a zero-g picture into one of a spacewalk so no
one would ask why he wasn't carrying his camera.
[Edit for brevity-- DJW001]
THE SPACEY TWINS # 1 Following an obvious hunch I had negatives made of both previous pictures. Then I had another negative made of the first photo
reduced in size and flopped over. Collins is now practicing with his left hand, the same hand he used in his alleged space walk. I then had the
"Gemini 10" picture blown up until the figure of Collins was the same size as this one
[Photo deleted for brevity-- DJW001]
THE SPACEY TWINS # 2 I then rotated the blown-up photo clockwise until the propulsion rod made the same angle across the page on both pictures. Even
the expression of his face is the same. Collins would have us believe that this picture was taken by a different person many months later. However,
the negative of either picture placed over the print of the other produces a point to point coincidence until the binding line at the knee is reached.
The missing area was re- moved when the photo was bound in his book. If I do the same to the original NASA picture #66-40127 (which took over 18
months to get from NASA), the point to point coincidence continues to the soles of his boots. Why did NASA feel it necessary to fake pictures and lie
to us as early as July 1966?
NASA Mooned America
Now, where did Ralph Rene ever get the idea that NASA claimed that the second photo was taken on Gemini 10? He did a lot of work to show that the
second picture was in fact a "flopped" version of the first, but he made no attempt to prove that NASA ever claimed that the photo was of an actual
space walk. In fact, Rene made that part up. It was a lie.
Let's return to Rorke for a moment. Why didn't he do his "due diligence?" All he did was parrot Rene without bothering to check Rene's facts; indeed,
he embellished them. Could it be that he knew it was all hogwash, but that his readers would be too lazy and gullible to investigate on their own?
In another video, Jarrah rushed to Rene's defense, and in so doing revealed just how superficial Rene's investigations were. The "smoking gun," the
"proof" that NASA lied. is the
cover art on the hardcover edition of Collins' book!
I ask you, does this look like it was ever intended to be documentation of anything? No. It is clearly the product of a graphic artist who wanted an
eye catching cover. There was no representation that it was an actual mission photograph. In other words, NASA had nothing to do with this... and yet
Rene somehow twists this into "NASA claims...."
This image is also reproduced as the endpapers to the book, and why not?
Again, there is no representation either by NASA
or the publisher that this image was taken on Gemini 10. Let's get an impartial opinion on
that:
The 'spacewalk' image has no caption.
Thanks,
Exuberant1.
To summarize, Jarrah starts his video series by alluding to alleged "recycling" of images by NASA, when in fact the case in hand was no such thing.
The primary sources are all in agreement: NASA photo S66-40127 is a picture of Michael Collins training in a "zero-G" airplane. That's what NASA says
in its archives, that's what the caption says in the book. The hoax propagandists seized upon
secondary sources (commercial illustrations) to
create the impression that there was deception on NASA's part, Jarrah uses this slight of hand constantly during this video series; he seizes upon the
product of a second or even third party, waves his hands and says: "NASA claims...."
Next up: how to prove a truth while maintaining a lie.
edit on 25-2-2011 by DJW001 because: Edit to re-size photo.
edit on 25-2-2011 by DJW001 because: Edit to correct
formatting.
edit on 25-2-2011 by DJW001 because: Edit to correct formatting.
