The Unexplained - Howard Hughes - Edition 231 - Marcus Allen

Dec. 1, 2015 - The Unexplained - Howard Hughes

01:15:00

Edition 231 - Marcus Allen

The case of D.B. Cooper, Moon Landing Conspiracy, Fukushima and more with the world-renownedUK Editor of Nexus Magazine...

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Across the UK, across continental North America, and around the world on the internet, by webcast and by podcast, my name is Howard Hughes and this is The Unexplained.
	Saying hello to you wherever you happen to be from storm-tossed London.
	We've had a couple of really heavy storms in the last week hitting this place.
	First of all, we had Storm Barney.
	That was bad enough.
	And now we've got Storm Cloder rocking the windows, rattling the furniture as I speak to you.
	I went out for lunch today.
	I've been in the middle of preparing my tax return, which has to be done at this time every year.
	And I went out to near Hampton Court.
	Couldn't believe the sky.
	The sky looked like an old grey blanket with a lot of dimples in it.
	And the wind was really blowing and it was rippling the Thames, the surface of the Thames River.
	Quite remarkable.
	And any signs of those snow showers and freezing temperatures that some newspapers predicted about a month ago?
	Not at all.
	The temperatures are like springtime.
	As I record this now, what is it, 6.17 p.m.
	Monday evening, where I am, 17 degrees at the moment, inside, outside maybe about 12 degrees.
	That's Celsius.
	What is that?
	12 degrees, 54 Fahrenheit, 17 degrees, 63 Fahrenheit.
	All those years of doing weather forecasts.
	So, so far, no big freeze.
	No complaints from me.
	The guest on this edition of the show is somebody who's coming back to it.
	He's always popular.
	His name is Marcus Allen.
	He's the UK editor of Nexus Magazine.
	We had the founder from Australia of Nexus Magazine on this show earlier this year.
	And I think it was high time we got Marcus back on.
	He's a man who knows an awful lot, as you will hear, about an awful lot.
	We're going to talk among other things about D.B. Cooper and the moon landing conspiracy, alleged.
	But many other things we'll talk about too.
	They're two things that are perennial topics, and I still every day open my inbox, and there is a strong chance that there will be an email about either one of those.
	Certainly, I get at least one or two about those subjects every week.
	So those are two of the subjects I'm going to get into with Marcus Allen on this edition.
	Thank you very much to Adam Cornwell at Creative Hotspot by Webmaster for his hard work on this site and this show.
	If you want to get in touch with me, send me a guest suggestion, make a donation to the show, that's the place to go.
	Theunexplained.tv, that is my website.
	If you're hearing this show on Dark Meta Network or any other way, please put a hit on my website.
	Very, very important.
	All right, let's do some shout-outs now.
	Martin, nice to hear from you.
	Says I recently discovered your show.
	Very impressed.
	Mainstream media does not cover any subject, especially the unusual ones with the depth that you do.
	That's very nice of you.
	Thank you.
	And you send me a list of guest suggestions, including people like Jenny Randall's, British UFO researcher, probably one of the original UFO researchers in this country.
	I spoke to her when I was about 21.
	And I'm a lot older than 21 now.
	She's still doing it.
	Thanks, Martin.
	Mick.
	Now, Mick, you thought that I wasn't going to get round to mentioning you, but absolutely not.
	I've had your email in my sites for a while here, so thank you very much for reminding me.
	Tells me about a few sightings that he had.
	I'm going to tell you about one of them.
	I hope you don't mind, Mick.
	It says, this one happened about dusk in February this year.
	I was walking my dog when in my peripheral vision I saw an object and I turned towards it.
	The only way I can describe this object is like a silver bus with no wheels flying about 20 feet above the ground slowly and silently before vanishing from view.
	I think you and I need to talk about some of these sightings that you've had, Mick.
	And thank you very much for getting in touch.
	Claire Broad has been in touch.
	She says, just to say hello, after five years of listening, I'm still a listener enjoying your shows.
	I'm from Fleet in Hampshire.
	I do a lot of housework when I'm listening to your shows on a Monday.
	It makes the task more bearable.
	I'm a mum and a professional medium with 19 years experience.
	I think we might have to talk about that, Claire.
	Thank you for that.
	Thank you to Lisa for your email.
	Pete asks if I need the help of a volunteer.
	Now, this brings me to a matter, almost a principle for me on this show.
	A lot of the mainstream media, I have to say, exists on paying people not very much or not paying them at all.
	And I always vowed that I would never, ever use volunteers in the way that they do.
	So I think if I have help on the show, I've made it sort of a principle that I'm going to pay that help or reward it in some way.
	And that's why I can't really take volunteers, even though I need help setting up guests.
	There's no doubt about it.
	There are not enough hours in the day to be able to set up shows.
	And I want to do more shows.
	But when I get to that stage, I will need assistance.
	Jordan in Nova Scotia, can you tell me more about what you wrote about, Jordan?
	It looked interesting.
	Stephen near Manchester, UK, says, what about having Art Bell as a guest?
	Art, if you're listening on your network, on which my show goes, I'm very keen to have that conversation with you.
	Karen in Brunswick, Ohio.
	Fascinating email.
	Karen, seems that you and I have shared experiences.
	Mark and Darlene say, East Los Angeles loves Howard.
	And Howard loves Mark and Darlene.
	Thank you very much.
	Amy, also in California, your email made me smile as well.
	Charles in Shropshire, UK says, the interview with Greg Barton was a belter.
	That means in English, UK language.
	It was a great show, he thought.
	I was totally absorbed in it from the moment it kicked off.
	That is very kind of you to say so.
	Stuart Turnbull, thank you very much indeed for your email.
	You know what that was all about.
	Thank you, Stuart.
	One listener says, I sent you a donation of $5, and I know that wasn't much.
	Well, every little helps, and thank you.
	How do I know if you received it?
	You should get a little acknowledgement back when it goes through.
	Let me know if you didn't get that.
	Tim in Funk, Nebraska says, keep up the good work and keep talking about the weather in the UK, which we've done that, of course.
	Being a farmer, the weather is always relevant to me.
	Thank you for that, Tim.
	A very straight talking email.
	Just how I like it.
	Thank you, Tim.
	John in Kansas City says, Howard, you have a show like no other on Dark Matter Network.
	Well, that's very kind.
	Thank you for that, John.
	Hello, Howard.
	I live in Oklahoma, USA.
	I discovered your show a few months ago via Art Bell's Network, and I listen as often as I can.
	I think you're an excellent interviewer.
	Thank you, and I love your voice, which has prompted me to want to put a face to that voice.
	Are you sure?
	Where can I see a photo of you?
	Well, if you go back on my website, Vivian, have a look up and down my website, okay, on the home page, and you will see at least two pictures of me, one of them sitting on the top of Table Mountain about five years ago in Cape Town.
	So there are photographs of me on the net.
	Let me know if you've managed to spot them, but they're on my website, theunexplained.tv.
	James, finally, thank you very much indeed says, James, I listen to your podcasts while I'm working at Lotus Cars in Norfolk.
	They make some very fine vehicles, James.
	The variety of speakers and views you have excites me.
	I'm very open-minded, and the D.B. Cooper case has got my juices really going.
	Don't give up on your quest.
	The truth is out there.
	James, you are so right, and we are going to be talking about D.B. Cooper, not only because there's a new book on D.B. Cooper out, which was reviewed in the Telegraph newspaper here just a few days ago.
	So we'll talk about that.
	With our guest on this edition, we're going to cross now to equally storm-tossed rural Sussex and speak with Marcus Allen, the UK editor of Nexus magazine.
	Marcus, really nice to have you back on.
	Very good to be here, Howard.
	Now, we are connecting between myself in London, and we're rather molly-coddled here in London.
	You know, it's rather easy for us because we have all modcons and all the facilities.
	You are out in the wilds of Sussex tonight, aren't you?
	Well, it is pretty wild in Sussex tonight.
	We're about 10 miles from Gatwick Airport.
	So if anybody is familiar with the position of London in relation to Brighton, Gatwick's about halfway between the two, and we're about 10 miles from them.
	And every evening, when I go home, we can see the planes flying into Gatwick Airport.
	And with the radar 24, we can actually work out which planes they are as well, which is always quite fun.
	It's funny, isn't it?
	There you are down near Gatwick, which is in the country.
	There are two main London airports.
	One is Gatwick, which is further out in the countryside.
	And the other one is Heathrow, which is London's main airport, one of the main airports in the world.
	I'm near that one, but we're both near airports.
	But the weather tonight is pretty bad.
	I don't think they've stopped any of the flights going into Heathrow.
	I think they're still fine, but they can fly in most weathers.
	But I was down by the Thames.
	I was telling my listener just before we started recording this.
	I was down by the Thames about five hours ago, and it was whipped up.
	It was like whipped cream on the top.
	It was like flecks of foam on the Thames.
	Quite remarkable.
	That is quite heavy duty because the Thames is quite a protected river in terms of the buildings around it.
	So to get that amount of wind, which certainly means it's coming either from the east or the west.
	And I think it's coming from the west tonight because it's the tail end of one of those hurricanes that managed to have a go at America first and then it blew over to Britain.
	And about a week later, it starts having a go at us.
	Yeah, Storm Cloder, I think this one is, which originated as part of one of those American storms in Ireland and then came across here.
	But the weird thing about it is it's not cold at all.
	It's where I'm recording this now.
	I've got no heating on.
	It's 17.6 degrees, which is in Fahrenheit, 65-ish, thereabouts, indoors.
	Quite warm.
	It really is quite warm.
	Anyway, some of my listeners love me talking about the weather here, and some of them say, well, you stop talking about the weather.
	I think we better get on.
	We always talk about the weather.
	I know we do.
	That's being British, isn't it, really?
	Okay, first of all, talk to me about Nexus Magazine.
	Now, I had, thanks to your good offices and help, the founder of Nexus Magazine, Duncan Rhodes, on here a few months ago.
	Fascinating, very interesting man.
	Doesn't do a lot of interviews, so I was lucky to get him on.
	What is the connection between Nexus UK and the master operation in Australia?
	It's basically the same magazine.
	How that connection came about, it occurred about just over 20 years ago.
	I used to work for Toyota in Britain.
	I was working at the head office, and one day they had a reorganization, and I got made redundant, along with about 20 other people.
	They were culling their head count, I think they call it.
	And I thought, well, what did I do now?
	So, well, I could sell cars.
	Maybe I could sell magazines.
	I'd only just come across Nexus.
	It was not easy to get hold of in Britain.
	Anyway, I got hold of Duncan and said I'd like to have a go at selling Nexus in the UK.
	And he said, well, that's great.
	I've been thinking of trying to get somebody in the UK to sell Nexus.
	So you come and visit me.
	We'll have a chat.
	We'll see how we go.
	So I went out to Australia, as you do, and had a chat with Duncan, who's a very, very nice guy.
	I heard your interview with him.
	And he's really got a lot to say, hasn't he, in terms of strange and interesting angles on certain subjects.
	You know, I thought I'd just be talking to a publisher, somebody who was running a business, but he's at the heart of all of these things.
	He's as knowledgeable about the subjects you were talking to about and the subjects your other guests talk about as well as anybody I've ever met, which is why I consider that Nexus is a remarkable means of getting information out to a large number of people.
	It's the world's leading alternative news magazine.
	And beautifully presented.
	I mean, I've got the current copy here, and we can talk if you like about some of the things that are in it.
	But it is, I mean, it tends to lead.
	What I'm finding, because you know that I have to do work in the mainstream media and news, but stuff that I will see in Nexus, I will also later these days see in the mainstream news.
	You know, the mainstream journalists won't admit that, but an awful lot of this stuff that you do filters through into the mainstream news.
	I've just got open here, what is it, page, what page is this?
	Page 51.
	A shadow of Nemesis, the Sphinx, and the Great Pyramid.
	Well, of course, in the news yesterday, if you were looking at the BBC News and News Around the World yesterday, Sunday, was the story that there might be a second chamber behind the tomb of Tutankhamun.
	That is a fascinating area, isn't it?
	It really, really Introduces a whole different aspect of the whole Egypt history, the archaeology side of it.
	And that article, as you say, Shadow of Nemesis, The Sphinx and the Great Pyramid, because there's always been the story that there is a chamber under the Sphinx where the Hall of Records, this is the Edgar Cayce side of it, who was the great prophet or the seer, he claimed that there was a Hall of Records or a room in which artifacts were to be found under the Sphinx.
	and there's been a great deal of differences about how this can be accessed.
	And Zai Hawass, who was the head of the That's right.
	Yeah, he was in charge, basically.
	What's interesting is that he is no longer in that position.
	During the Arab Spring of 2011, when things got a bit heated in Egypt, he was removed from his position.
	Now, the reason he was removed from his position, as I understand it, is that he had the support of Hosmi Mubarak's wife, who was quite interested in what was going on.
	So he was promoted and he was protected.
	But as soon as Mubarak left or was forced out, Zahawa's protection was removed as well, which of course meant that he couldn't do the things he was trying to do, which is to stop a lot of investigation, a lot of research.
	There was some very interesting work being done in the early 1990s.
	You remember the story of Gantenbrink's door in the Great Pyramid, when Gantenbrink, who was a German engineer, sent a little robot up one of the air shafts, they were called, in the Queen's Chamber of the Great Pyramid, and it came up after about 80 feet, it came up against what looked like a door with a couple of handles on it.
	And after that was discovered, nobody really got any further with it.
	And there's a lot of discussion as to why.
	Because Gantenbrig said, I will train anybody you want me to train in your department, Mr. Hawas.
	I will train them to use my equipment so you can continue the research.
	And he was refused.
	And he was banned from Egypt.
	There's some very strange things going on.
	And the story we've got here, which is basically trying to update a lot of the information, and hopefully we'll be having archaeologists who can get back into Egypt and start looking at many of the mystery, because there are many mysteries about Egypt.
	But it is almost beyond credulity, isn't it, that in this day and age, we have the ability to scan anything.
	I mean, for goodness sake, we can look further out into the universe than we've ever been able to look.
	You know, we can travel years from this planet and beam back images.
	So how is it that we haven't been able to adequately scan something that is right here on Earth?
	Well, I think we have scanned it.
	I think it has been done.
	Certainly, some of the German archaeologists and the Japanese teams that have been out there, some of the American teams have been out there, and they have been scanning a great deal.
	And this is partly the report that's in here, the Sphinx and the Great Pyramid.
	There appear to be chambers or something appearing on ground-penetrating radar, which indicates there's a cavity.
	It is also indicating there are metal objects.
	Now, what are metal objects doing under the Sphinx unless they were put there?
	And also, some of the drilling that took place a few years ago, before it was all stopped, some of the drills went down about 50 feet, which isn't that far down, and came across granite.
	Now, granite is not a stone that is normally found on the Giza Plateau, unless it's been brought there from the only place in Egypt which granite exists, which is near Aswan, which is where all the granite in Egypt comes from.
	So what were the drills doing when they met granite?
	And it's quite easy to tell.
	You pull the drill head out and you can see the bits on it.
	But this has never been researched.
	And modern equipment, which can now look into the earth when it's ground-penetrating radar, drill a tiny little hole and put a camera with a light down it and you can see what's going on.
	You don't have to destroy everything as used to happen not that many years ago.
	People were being quite destructive about it.
	You don't have to be destructive anymore.
	So all of this suggests that there is some kind of built environment down there that we need to be knowing about.
	But the fact of the matter is some people are saying that what may be discovered down there may be a little bit much for us to take.
	There may be more information than we can handle right now.
	It's possible, but I think that we can handle the information.
	I think there are so many people now who are very willing to look at the possibility of virtually anything occurring.
	Now, if it is a hall of records, which is the name used to describe this secret place or whatever, well, secret because it hasn't been discovered yet.
	If it is a hall of records, we don't know what it will contain.
	A lot of speculation goes on about it, but nobody actually knows what a hall of records would look like.
	And what exactly would it be recording?
	Exactly.
	Now, I think what we found over the last, literally the last five or six years with the discovery of so many very much older areas, like the remarkable site in Turkey, Gobleki Tepe, which is known to be 12,000 years old, because it was carbon dated and some of the carbon dating was very accurate at that point.
	This is the oldest known structure made by an intelligent race, presumably our ancestors, that has ever been discovered on planet Earth.
	There are probably many more to be discovered.
	Now, until that, it was first discovered in 1994 when a shepherd who got very fed up with his sheep tripping over these large lumps of stone which appeared out of the ground, tried to dig one up.
	Well, as soon as it weighed 40 tons and it was about 20 foot long, he didn't have much luck with it.
	But archaeologists found out about it and the whole thing started to be investigated.
	And it's a remarkable sight.
	I'm just looking at this piece here.
	I've got up to page 55 while you've been talking.
	Oh, yeah.
	And there's a paragraph here.
	It says, by early 1977, Dolphin and the SRI were doing the initial resistivity work, resistivity work on the bedrock of the Sphinx for Lena and the ARE.
	The ARE was convinced that the entrance to the Hall of Records would be found beneath the right front port of the Sphinx, as Edgar Casey had predicted.
	Sure enough, Dolphin located anomalies there.
	He would publish those results in a brief report entitled Application of Modern Sensing Techniques to Egyptology.
	This stuff goes back 40 years.
	Yeah, exactly.
	There were the first reports of it.
	The first reports I've read of it, or the earliest reports I've read, were back in 1936, where, ironically, an Egyptian archaeologist named Hassan was doing some similar type of work and was identifying many of the anomalies around the Sphinx.
	I mean, this is why it's the world's top visitor site.
	Everybody's heard of the Great Pyramid, or the Great Pyramid, or the Pyramids of Giza.
	And there is a great mystery about it, because who could possibly have built something?
	It's the largest sculpture ever made is the Sphinx.
	The Great Pyramid was the largest building on the planet until the Eiffel Tower, the tallest building until the Eiffel Tower was built in 1889.
	I mean, who could do?
	We couldn't build a Great Pyramid today.
	As we've said on this show many times.
	I mean, you don't only talk about things like that, though.
	I see that page 13 of the new edition, not that we're reviewing the new edition, but it's just interesting to go through it.
	Project Censors Top 25 News Stories of the Year, which include all sorts of things like, for example, half of global wealth is owned by the 1%.
	That's explored here.
	There is also Fukushima, the Fukushima nuclear disaster deepens.
	What else?
	Millions in poverty get less media coverage than billionaires do.
	And there are pages and pages of details about these things.
	And these are things that you occasionally hear referred to in conversations in bars and pubs and restaurants.
	But really, they don't get a lot of outings, a lot of coverage in mainstream media, do they?
	They don't.
	And basically, that is where Nexus steps in.
	Because there are many things which are covered in the mainstream press to add nausea.
	What isn't covered is what more and more people are finding of greater interest.
	As you say, there are certain things that you've just identified.
	There are 25 major stories.
	And this is a regular annual feature that Nexus publishes.
	What are the stories that should be investigated that weren't?
	And what is Project Censored?
	Project Censored is part of the University of West.
	Hang on a minute.
	I'm just going through it here.
	Yeah, Project Media Freedom Foundation in California.
	ProjectCensored.org will take you to the site.
	And a lot of these things, it's true, you may get a headline and then the story will disappear.
	Or there'll be a disaster like Fukushima.
	And then people stop talking about it.
	And story five of the 25 Fukushima nuclear disaster deepens.
	The 2011 nuclear reactor meltdown at Fukushima, Japan continues unresolved, despite assurances by government authorities and major news media that the situation has been contained and the assessment of the United Nations International Atomic Energy Agency that Japan has made, quote, significant progress in cleaning up the site.
	You and I both know, if you talk to people like Linda Moulton Howe, that that is far from the truth.
	Absolutely.
	In fact, occasionally you'll see little reports of radiation levels in the Pacific increasing on the west coast of Canada and the west coast of America, because the circulation of the Pacific Ocean is such that it goes in a clockwise direction.
	So it's pulling water from Japan across past the Aleutian Islands, down through past Alaska, Canada, down to the United States.
	And it will continue doing that.
	So if the water has been contaminated, which appears to be the case because a lot of water was used to cool the reactors, which was then just dumped in the Pacific, there is an unfolding story here.
	Now, as soon as you start getting mammals, such as whales, dolphins, fish, washing up on the coast, which some of them have been, then it's going to start maybe breaking through into the mainstream press.
	But then who decides what is published in the mainstream press?
	Most papers seem to cover the same stories, maybe from different angles, depending on the political stance of the publishers.
	But a lot of the stories appear to cover the same area.
	And you can understand the media focusing down on something like the Paris attack, which has to be covered in full by the media, or whatever is happening in Syria, or the latest outrage, or a plane being brought down somewhere.
	You can understand that.
	But at times when those things are not happening, you would think that stories like Fukushima, which I often think about, would be in the news all the time.
	So the question then would arise, and the likes of Nexus magazine ask these questions.
	The question arises, is this part of the news cycle?
	In other words, is it just that journalists are not interested?
	Or does somebody somewhere have an interest in making sure that this is not explored too deeply?
	For whatever reason that might be.
	Now, in Japan, the government has a culture.
	The Japanese have a culture of control.
	You know, people are happy to accept and defer to the will of the government.
	They don't want Major social shifts and changes and stuff, and the government will tell them in return, We've got your best interests at heart, everything is okay, and that's exactly what's happened.
	But there are other governments in this world who fringe that particular area of the Pacific.
	Why aren't they making merry hell, as we say here, jumping up and down and saying, You know, what about the levels of contamination?
	Are we checking the seafood and sea life?
	You know, have we been told the truth?
	Well, it's not are we being told the truth.
	I think are we being told anything that could be relevant to human health and condition?
	Now, a great deal of this will be manipulated to the extent that there are powerful companies out there.
	They are controlled by powerful individuals who may well feel that, let's say that they are involved with the manufacture of nuclear power stations, and there are major companies, even in Japan, there are companies that manufacture nuclear power stations.
	If one of them goes wrong, what you want to do is to make sure that as little of the bad news gets out as possible.
	So what you do is you employ people, they're called PR consultants, they're called lobbyists, and they're the people who will whisper in the ear of the opinion leaders of that particular society, whether they're newspaper editors or reporters or senior correspondents on television networks or radio networks, and they will misdirect them.
	They will ensure that the bad news is, how shall we put it, disappeared, buried.
	The good news, which could be something completely different, but from the same company, is promoted.
	Now, nothing scary, there's nothing unusual about that.
	That's just the way the world works.
	But what is happening now is that given the fragmentation of news presentation through the internet, primarily through the internet, and also through magazines like Nexus, which has been going, Nexus was first published in 1989, so we're talking a magazine that's been going for some time,
	so it has an audience out there, this is where the information is starting to percolate through into, some people call it the mainstream press, but it's the way in which it is reported by the outlets that most people use to obtain their information, whether it's in the UK, the BBC or ITV or Sky News, in America, NBC, CBS, ABC.
	And let's not forget Fox News, of course, fair and balanced.
	It's interesting that Fox News has risen quite dramatically over the last few years with a particular viewpoint, which obviously resonates with a fairly large proportion of the American population, which is why it's so popular.
	I mean, we could talk a lot about that and we don't have time, but there are various things like the decline of CNN.
	Now, 20 years ago, CNN was king.
	You go anywhere, any airport lounge, anywhere in the world, and you could probably buy yourself a beer, turn to the TV screen, and there would be Larry King staring back at you.
	CNN is not doing as well these days, it seems, as it used to.
	Exactly.
	Now, maybe it's because the good people, and there are probably very few really skilled, creative, enthusiastic, and professional promoters of certain news media.
	Maybe when Fox News started its rise to prominence, it took a lot of people from CNN because it will be the same type of means of getting information out there.
	It has to be reported.
	Because CNN really came to prominence in the First Gulf War in 1991, the famous report of the cruise missile flying past the hotel, in which the reporter was doing a live broadcast.
	I think we all remember Wolf Blitzer, Christiana Manpoor, all of those people.
	Exactly.
	Are they as prominent as they used to be?
	Probably not, because there are other means.
	But I mean, that's a whole other debate that we can have another time.
	A lot of the media is becoming, I think, trivialized.
	I think a lot of the media assumes that everything has to operate in the way that it operates on game shows and reality television.
	In other words, people don't have a very big attention span.
	They've got to have everything cut down into tiny little chunks and made incredibly clear for them with lots of pictures and diagrams.
	Otherwise, they're not going to understand it.
	And I wonder if that's true.
	I mean, that's just a question we have to leave hanging in the air.
	But that is an issue I think that is going to come back and bite us on the backside quite soon.
	And that actually is why more and more people around this world are doing things like listening to this show, reading Nexus magazine, and questioning the stuff that they are fed by mainstream media.
	Exactly.
	Exactly.
	Now, just one final point on Nexus, if I may, Howard.
	If anybody listening in America is not familiar with Nexus, you can now buy it in North America.
	Barnes and Noble sell it.
	Major outlets sell it.
	It's Nexus magazine.
	You'll find, if you haven't come across it yet, that it's worth your while having a look at it because you'll find that it's a very addictive type of publication.
	Once you get into it, once you find out where it's coming from, what it's doing, what it's reporting on, what it's saying, you'll find you want to get more and more of it.
	And that is what we find.
	We have many subscribers in North America now.
	Because we've reintroduced Nexus just over a year ago.
	It's been extremely successful.
	You say you reintroduced it.
	Why did it disappear from the market for a while?
	Well, it used to be distributed in North America, which is the United States and Canada and Mexico.
	It used to be distributed by an individual who worked over there for many years, and he would arrange the printing of the magazine, because it's produced in Australia.
	The editorial side is all produced in Australia, but it does carry American themes in many cases.
	And he decided about five years ago that he wasn't going to be interested in doing it anymore and closed it down.
	We over here in the UK were finding it was going very well.
	We were getting A lot of inquiries when the distribution in America stopped.
	We got inquiries over in the UK and we decided that we would use our own distributors here in the UK to distribute in North America, which they did a year ago.
	Every issue has had increased sales as more and more people discover it.
	Well, you know, I have most of my listening is in North America.
	Numerically, most of my audience is in the US or Canada, and then it's the UK, and then it's the rest of the world.
	So there is tremendous appetite for this kind of thing, I think.
	And I have to say to anybody who says, are you in the pay of Nexus Magazine?
	Is this an infomercial or an advertorial?
	It is neither of those things.
	Just that I happen to like it, and I happen to enjoy greatly talking to Marcus Allen.
	I'd never even heard of Nexus Magazine until one of my producers at TalkSpot, when I was on that radio station, suggested you.
	And then you came on air with me and we talked about various things and you told me about the magazine.
	That was how I discovered it.
	That was a long time ago.
	Ten years now, Marcus.
	Ten whole years of our lives.
	Now, look, I made a promise to my listener that I would talk about two things today.
	One of which you wanted to talk about because I know Nexus has covered it extensively twice in the last year, and that is something that keeps coming into my inbox, the moon landing, quotes, conspiracy.
	Did it really happen?
	Was it all covered up?
	What's that all about?
	And the other thing being the case of D.B. Cooper, which I'd like to talk about first.
	There is a new book out about the case of D.B. Cooper, and that's something else that keeps coming into my inbox.
	Now, I have never talked about the case of D.B. Cooper.
	I know that Coast to Coast AM have, and Art Bell has talked about D.B. Cooper a lot over the years.
	So I'd like to do it for the first time for people who've never heard of D.B. Cooper.
	Let me just set the scene and you can tell me if I get any of this wrong.
	We're talking about 1971.
	We're talking about the only Ininverted Commas successful aircraft hijack in the United States.
	Man goes to an airport, gets on a plane, hijacks the plane by saying that he's got explosives on him.
	Plane then lands.
	The passengers are disembarked by this man, D.B. Cooper, who then demands $200,000.
	I think the amount was.
	Plane takes off again.
	It's a 727.
	Those who've flown on 727s know that the 727 has a rear entry.
	You can actually enter that plane by some steps at the back.
	These days, that's quite rare.
	He got his $200,000 and exited from the plane with the money by parachute and was never seen again.
	Is that right?
	Is that all right?
	Yep.
	Covers it well.
	And the man has never been found.
	More recently, there is a claim that some dollar bills or some larger denominations of U.S. currency were found in or near a lake.
	And I think a whole door was found and a tie was found, but D.B. Cooper was never found.
	Well, that's, yeah, the tie is interesting because it comes from a very specific grocery store that insisted all their employees wear this particular tie with a particular tie clip, which he actually left on the plane.
	The dollar bills, this was 1971, the hijack took place.
	1980 was when these dollar bills were discovered quite by accident near the Columbia River, where the serial numbers on the bills matched the records that the FBI had taken of the ransom money.
	So $5,800 appeared on a riverbank.
	It was found by a young boy.
	He was out with his family.
	They were camping, having picnic, and he just dug it up.
	They were quite badly damaged in many cases.
	Some of them were readable.
	Even the rubber bands which held them all together were still intact in some cases.
	So either this was an extremely clever piece of misdirection that D.B. Cooper either survived the parachute out at night over rough, very rough ground, forested area, or he was killed.
	If he was killed, his body has never been found.
	They had huge search parties looking in the area immediately after the hijack, because they knew roughly where he'd come down, because the pilot could see the light coming on when the rear steps of the 727 were lowered.
	And believe it or not, you could still lower them in flight in 1971.
	Gee, whiz.
	And this man, if we assume that he survived, he's bucked all kinds of odds, hasn't he?
	Because, you know, jumping out of a jet aircraft, unless you absolutely know what the hell you're doing, is a very, very dangerous thing to do.
	Well, if you're jumping out at night over unknown ground, it's extremely dangerous.
	Now, you could say, well, maybe he was just mad.
	Or you could say that he was extremely clever.
	He knew exactly what he was doing because he was given four parachutes by the FBI.
	I mean, it's extraordinary to think of it now, that a plane could land being hijacked.
	Nobody saw the bomb.
	He just wrote a note to one of the stewardesses on the plane, whose name was Tina, and said, I've got a bomb and I want some money.
	Please land the plane, take the passengers off, give me the money and up we'll go again.
	So they set off from Seattle back and they were going to fly down to Reno, Nevada.
	They never made it.
	Well, the plane did land at Reno in the end, but without the hijacker or the money or the parachute.
	Minus his tie.
	You know, when I first heard Art Bell talking about this, and this is probably 10 years or more ago, I actually thought, well, you know, I was alive then.
	I was very young.
	I can't remember it being reported.
	And I actually thought that this was some kind of fiction, that somebody was making this up, but this really happened.
	Oh, yeah.
	And people have been investigating it and checking it out and trying to solve it ever since.
	This is 44 years ago.
	And now this new book, which has been reported on by Britain's Daily Telegraph newspaper in the last few days, is suggesting that the identity of D.B. Cooper they may have pinpointed.
	That's what they're claiming.
	It's a book by Ross Richardson.
	It's called Still missing, which I think gives you a clue as to where he's coming from.
	And yes, they do claim that they have identified the person that they think went under the name of D.B. Cooper.
	In fact, D.B., even that is interesting because on his airline ticket, he wrote his name as Dan.
	Excuse me.
	He wrote his name as Dan Cooper.
	And for some reason, it's always been reported as D.B. Cooper.
	And the FBI, probably in an unguarded moment, who've actually given up looking for him, they said that they used that because anybody who came forward with information about D.B. Cooper, they would dismiss.
	But if they came forward with information about Dan Cooper, they would investigate.
	I'd never heard that, okay.
	Yeah.
	So there's these little anomalies in the whole story.
	I mean, it's a fascinating story because, as you said, in the introduction to this, this is the only hijacking to ever take place in America that remains unsolved.
	Nobody actually knows who this person is.
	Well, in the book Still Missing, Ross Richardson has claimed to identify it.
	And there's a fair bit of good information around the fact that it could be a guy called Richard Lepsey, who used to work at a grocery store, which required them to wear certain ties with certain tie pins.
	And this man, Richard Lepsi, or Dick Lepsey, disappeared.
	He was married.
	He had four children.
	And two years before this hijacking, he apparently just disappeared.
	He was not reported as a missing person because he didn't appear to have gone...
	Maybe he just wanted to get away.
	His car was found with the keys in it.
	So he was not reported as a missing person, which meant the FBI didn't really follow up on this particular individual called Richard Lepsey.
	And can it really have taken 40 odd years to join these dots together and point at this man?
	Well, this is what appears to have happened, because it's only as a result of people like the author of the book, Ross Richardson, investigating so much of the information around it when you find that the FBI really didn't make much of an effort to follow up on people who could have been the person.
	Because the way this particular information came to light was Dick Lepsey's daughter, called Lisa, reported when she was watching the news.
	She was upset at the time because her father had disappeared.
	He'd been gone a couple of years.
	She was age 13 at the time.
	And she was more upset that her father hadn't said goodbye to her if he was going to go.
	And they were watching the news, Walter Cronkite reporting, and he reported on this story November the 24th, 1971, just around Thanksgiving.
	And he reported the story and they showed a photo fit picture.
	It wasn't a photograph, a photo fit, which had been created by the airline crew at the time who had given the FBI, who were investigating the hijack, had given them enough information to come up with a picture.
	And Walter Cronkite showed the picture on the news and Lisa said, hey, that's Dad.
	Like she recognized him immediately.
	Because if you look at a photograph of Richard Lepsey taken before he left home, there is a great deal of similarity.
	There's a lot of similarity, certainly, in the reports and images from the book that were published in the Daily Telegraph newspaper here between the artist's impression for the police of D.B. Cooper, Dan Cooper, and the photograph of Mr. Lepsey.
	Exactly.
	Exactly.
	Now, obviously, if he's still alive, Richard Lepsey will be probably over 80 right now.
	Whether he wants to be discovered, whether he wants to find out, I don't know.
	I would doubt it, because $200,000 back in 1971 is the equivalent of over a million dollars today.
	It's a tidy sum of money.
	And if it is him, or if it's any of the other people who've been identified as possible suspect or possible D.B. Coopers, and there are several of them around, he will have either invested the money rather successfully or he was killed when he jumped out of the plane.
	Now, this, I think, and having given over this last 10 years or so since I've first heard of the story of D.B. Cooper, first impacted on my consciousness, this is the situation, isn't it?
	That the police at the time, the FBI at the time, the powers that be at the time, maybe were guilty of assuming.
	Now, the first rule of journalism, I was always taught, is never assume anything, because if you do, the chances are you may be wrong.
	Now, doesn't it look like with the benefit of hindsight?
	And as a good friend of mine used to say, hindsight how he is 2020, yes, it is, but with the benefit of hindsight, probably those people assumed that anybody jumping out of a 727 at that kind of height at night is just going to be spattered all over the countryside.
	They will have died and the money will just disappear because, you know, it will be floating in the wind and floating in lakes and on the tops of trees and all the rest of it.
	In other words, it wasn't really worth seriously pursuing this.
	I think that's very, very, very near the situation that occurred.
	They would have looked at the situation.
	They would have looked at, well, could he have survived?
	If he took that sort of parachute, it was a standard military-issue parachute.
	It wasn't like a modern steerable parachute or anything that could be used other than to just descend slowly enough so you don't kill yourself when you hit the ground.
	They probably put it all together and said, nah, I don't think so.
	I think he's dead.
	Next.
	And just moved on.
	And it may well be the case that that is what happened.
	If it was this lepsy man, of course.
	My dad was a policeman, and People who would go on the run like that would tend to contact their families eventually.
	Now, because they've been talking to his daughter, Mr. Lepsy's daughter, that is, are we to assume that if he was alive, he made no attempt to contact his family?
	That really does stretch credibility, credulity, doesn't it?
	It does.
	It does.
	That is a very strange piece of human behavior, if that is the way it was.
	But bear in mind, he had walked out on his family two years before any of this took place.
	So if we're thinking that it might have been him, then he walked out two years before this happened.
	Now, two years would have given him time to plan this, to become somebody else, take on another identity, and do all of the checks that you need to do to pull off something like this.
	If he's that calculating, he may not have contacted his family.
	It's quite possible.
	Maybe he started another family.
	Maybe he had another family.
	Maybe this was all part of a really cleverly thought-through disappearing act.
	I want to get that book and read all about this because the fascination that this has for my listener is remarkable.
	I always get emails about this.
	I've had one recently.
	I mentioned it at the beginning of this show.
	And the other topic that people never tire of talking about, even though all sorts of scientists have been on, there have been all sorts of programs about it on television, the moon landing.
	There are still people who say that man didn't go to the moon.
	It's astonishing, isn't it?
	Yeah, there's more and more people saying it now, believe me.
	Because I've been investigating or researching it for about 20 years, just over 20 years.
	And initially, a lot of people would say, oh, you silly idiot.
	You know, of course they landed on the moon.
	We all saw it on television.
	You can't fool that number of people.
	No, of course we landed there.
	No, this was what, 20 odd years ago.
	We're now 46 years since Apollo 11 landed.
	Have they been back?
	No.
	Why haven't they been back?
	Well, money.
	Finance.
	Oh, oh, oh, yeah, that's a big excuse.
	That is.
	No.
	How much do you think the GWAT has cost?
	I have the foggiest idea.
	The Great War on Terror.
	$5 trillion.
	That's trillion with a T. That's a lot of money.
	A huge amount of money.
	A vast amount of money.
	How much did the moon landings cost in today's dollars?
	About $125 billion.
	We're talking a rounding error.
	We're talking petty cash.
	So you're saying that if we wanted to do it, the money was there.
	Of course the money is there.
	The money can be magicked out of anything if you really want to.
	Whether there was the political will to do it or not is a completely different story, but the money is not the reason they haven't been back to the moon.
	You sent me a list of wonderful questions.
	A lot of these I have heard asked before.
	But for example, was the Saturn V rocket powerful enough to do the job we were told that it actually did?
	And why did a completely new rocket need to be developed to launch the shuttle?
	Good question.
	I like that.
	Well, it's one of yours.
	I'm glad you do.
	I have no idea.
	It's based on hard information.
	The Saturn V rocket, to launch what we were told it launched to the moon, required had to be able to lift into Earth orbit 130 tons of kit other than the rocket itself, which weighed about 3,000 tons, most of which, or all of which was fuel, which got burnt on the way up.
	So when it got to Earth orbit, it would have 130 tons, or that's what it launched into Earth orbit.
	What it had to then do was to launch 46 tons of that 130 to the moon.
	Now, Earth orbit is where the space shuttle flies, where the International Space Station operates.
	It's about 250 miles up, directly up.
	Look straight up in the air and 250 miles there.
	That is low Earth orbit.
	The moon is a lot further away.
	In order to get to the moon, you have to then accelerate out of Earth orbit, which you will be doing at 17,500 miles an hour, because that is the speed you require to be traveling at to stay in orbit and not crash back into Earth.
	If you're going to go out of Earth orbit, you have to accelerate your craft to 25,000 miles an hour, aye, a 50% increase.
	And that requires more fuel, which is why it would wade so much.
	In order to get to the moon, you fire your rocket up, you get to 25,000 miles an hour, and then you switch it off and you gradually slow down.
	You're being pulled back by gravity, the Earth's gravity.
	When you get into lunar orbit, you're traveling at about 2,500 miles an hour because you've been slowing down all the way there.
	We'll come to what happens when you come back in a minute.
	When you get into lunar orbit, you're then being attracted by the lunar gravity, so you accelerate up to 3,500 miles an hour, and then you have to land your craft.
	In order to land it, you have to use a rocket to slow yourself down, i.e.
	come out of orbit and slow down so you don't hit the thing with a great whack and break up.
	So you've got to carry quite a bit of fuel, you've got to carry quite a bit of kit.
	The lunar lander that we all are familiar with the pictures of, it's sitting on the lunar surface, weighed about 17 tons with the fuel on board that was required to take off to get back into lunar orbit, to link up with the command module, which had been orbiting the moon.
	And then you come back to Earth by accelerating out of lunar orbit.
	You're attracted by the Earth's gravity.
	And by the time you reach Earth, you're traveling at 25,000 miles an hour.
	And then the excitement starts.
	You've got to slow down again, because you can't hit Earth at 25,000 miles an hour.
	You can land On the end of a parachute at about 25 miles an hour.
	And if you're doing much faster than that, you're going to get very, very badly bruised, if not killed.
	So there are a lot of questions.
	And we're all told that the Apollo missions were highly successful.
	There was only one minor hiccup on Apollo 13, but even that got the astronauts back alive.
	So what?
	You're saying that the task of getting the craft there and bringing it back was not possible.
	It actually was not scientifically, mechanically, engineeringly possible.
	Is that what you're saying?
	No, I'm saying that getting to the moon actually wasn't that difficult.
	It depends how much you had to take on your way there, which means that you had to have a rocket of a certain size.
	The Saturn V was very large, obviously, to get into Earth orbit.
	And the other part of your question was, well, could the Saturn V rocket do what we were told it did?
	And why did they have to develop another completely different rocket to launch the space shuttle 10 years later?
	And I always thought the answer to that question was that the shuttle was designed to be reusable, whereas the Saturn V was throw away.
	Well, yes, up to a point.
	I mean, not much of it was reusable, and it cost an absolute fortune to dig the solid rocket boosters, those two white tubes on the side.
	They got parachuted back into the Pacific, and somebody had to go and find them and dig them out of the ocean and then bring them back to Ohio to be, you know, it cost a fortune to do it.
	And all they were just metal tubes, basically.
	But that was the story that was being put out.
	It had to be reusable so they could save money.
	Every space shuttle launch cost $500 million, every single one, because they had to replace virtually the whole of the heat shield because it would be damaged on the re-entry and then it had to be reconditioned and inspected and made sure it didn't break up the next time.
	Okay, now you've investigated this for 20 years.
	What is this parade of data that you've just given me?
	Very interestingly, Marcus.
	What conclusion do you come to from all of that?
	The conclusion I reach is that the Saturn V rocket did not operate at the required technical ability that we're told it did.
	So it's my word against NASA's here.
	And who are you going to believe?
	The 400,000 people who worked for NASA or little old me sitting in England near Gatwick Airport?
	No, it's a tough one.
	I know that, very tough.
	The point is that there's no one single item of information or there's no one single fact which you can quote and say, well, look, it didn't happen because it's an accumulation of details, an accumulation of information.
	As I say, I start with that rocket, the Saturn V rocket.
	The Saturn V rocket appeared to be a completely flawless piece of kit.
	It worked every single time.
	And it launched Apollo 8 in December 1968.
	We're coming up to the 50th anniversary.
	It launched Apollo 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17.
	And then three, 18, 19, 20 were cancelled.
	And they were used to launch Skylab and the Apollo-Soyuz link up.
	Parts of the rockets were used because that was all in low Earth orbit.
	Now, what's not normally discussed is Apollo 6, which was the first full-time test of the Apollo rocket fully loaded, all major aspects of it, first, second, and third stages.
	If it was going to go into low Earth orbit, they only used the first two stages because they didn't need the big one at the bottom.
	What's not reported very often, or not known about, is that Apollo 6 was almost a complete disaster.
	The rocket virtually shook itself apart.
	It's called the POGO effect.
	Anybody familiar with rockets will know that given the huge amounts of liquid that has to be pumped from the storage tanks into the combustion chamber, and they use a very powerful engine to do that.
	I mean, it's a very scaled-up version of what happens on your car when fuel is pumped out of the fuel tank into the fuel injectors.
	On the Saturn V rocket, this set up a resonance in the combustion chamber, which is basically it's the Pogo effect, and it describes it pretty well.
	It goes up and down, but it's not meant to go up and down.
	It's meant to be smooth.
	If there had been an astronaut, this is part of the report of the Apollo 6 launch, the first time the Saturn V, the fully equipped Saturn V rocket was test-launched, and the only time, it virtually shook itself apart.
	And the report was that if an astronaut had been on board, he would have been totally unable to do anything.
	It would have been like on an out-of-control fairground ride.
	And yet the other missions that went ahead were pretty much, apart from Apollo 13, where we had a very serious issue and they couldn't land on the moon.
	And a great piece of script writing, by the way.
	But never mind, let's go on to that later.
	That all of the others were suspiciously hunky-dory.
	Yes, exactly.
	Hunky-Dory covers it rather well.
	Apollo 8, which was the first one to go to this.
	Apollo 8 was launched just after Apollo 7 when Apollo 7 had shown that there were serious design problems on this whole rocket.
	Anyway, Apollo 8, successful, apparently.
	Apollo 9, which is a low Earth orbit test, full-up test of the lunar lander.
	Quite why they wanted to test it in Earth orbit when it wasn't going to go into Earth orbit.
	It was going to go to the moon.
	I don't know.
	Apollo 8 flies around the moon.
	Read the book of Genesis.
	Caused a bit of a problem that.
	Apollo 11 lands.
	Apollo 12 lands.
	Apollo 13 gets to the moon, but doesn't land.
	Apollo 14, 15, 16, 17 all get there successfully.
	And then what would have been Apollo 18, now this I'm not 100% sure of because I know there are some rockets on display at the Kennedy Space Center lying on their side.
	It shows how big they all are.
	But one of them was used to launch the Skylab project, which is going to Earth orbit.
	If you read the reports of Skylab launch, you'll hear that some of the solar panels were quite badly damaged on launch.
	And that's all you hear.
	You don't hear why they were badly damaged.
	They were badly damaged and they thought that the whole Skylab project had been lost because get this, it was overheating.
	Seriously?
	Hang on.
	It was overheating on the moon.
	Buzz Aldrin says it was too cold to sleep.
	These do not make sense.
	How can you have too cold to sleep on the moon when we're in the sun the whole time?
	And Skylab overheating when it spends half its time in the shadow of the Earth.
	When it orbits the Earth, it spends half its time in the sun, half its time in the shadow.
	The only way that it was rescued was a second crew was sent up to try to salvage it, and they used the solar panels as sun shields to stop the thing overheating.
	There's something seriously wrong here.
	Now, you tell me in an email that you sent me before we recorded this that Nexus magazine's published two recent articles about this by a man called Phil Koutz or Koutz, who used NASA's own reports and records to show that, as you've been saying, how hard it is even now to get to the moon and then return people from it alive.
	Yes.
	I've always said getting to the moon is not a problem.
	The Russians did that first in 1959.
	The Americans did it with unmanned craft, the surveyor, the ranger, the surveyor, and the orbiter craft who were sent to photograph the surface to look for suitable landing sites.
	These were unmanned craft.
	They landed, soft-landed, for the orbiter ones.
	The Russians also landed unmanned craft on the moon and returned with samples of lunar soil, about 300 grams.
	Zon 16 and Zond 20 in 1971 and 1976.
	So it is possible to get to the moon, land, take a bit of soil and get back to Earth.
	But the only people I claim to have done it successfully are the Russians, not the Americans.
	If you're looking into deep conspiracy territory, then if Apollo 6 showed that there were serious flaws with the rocket that you wanted to use, perhaps too serious to fix, then that might be an incentive to fake it all.
	Because you're committed to the project.
	You'd lose terrible face internationally.
	And look at all the vested interests that had committed money to this thing.
	And that's just leaving the politics aside from it all.
	Then you would have to fake it all to make it appear that your project was successful.
	And you'd do a little bit of this.
	You'd complete as much of it as you needed to.
	And then eventually you'd dump and forget the whole thing.
	Is this where we're getting to?
	That's where we're getting to.
	I think that's a pretty good summary of it, really.
	Because don't forget that this was all going to be shown live on television.
	And we watched it.
	That's why we all say, well, I watched it live on television.
	Was it live?
	That's debatable for a start.
	Now, if you're going to show something live on television to the whole world, not just to your mates, not just a head office, you're going to show it to the whole world.
	If there is the slightest doubt that there could be a disaster live on television, i.e.
	an astronaut dying, let's put it that way, would you risk it?
	Or would you have a plan B?
	Would your plan B possibly be, plan B possibly be, to ensure that the success is seen around the world?
	You don't have to achieve it, just so long as people believe it happened.
	Now, you also have to then look at what else was going on in the late 1960s in the United States.
	The Vietnam War was getting extremely unpleasant.
	The Maillé massacre in May 1968, where very unpleasant things were happening.
	Napalm bombs were destroying people.
	Millions of people were being killed.
	Thousands of American soldiers and GIs were being killed.
	58,000 in total.
	And let's face it, I can remember being a little boy, and this was in the 70s, going on holiday.
	We met an American family, and I can remember my dad, you know, I was young, but I could still remember the conversation, telling me about how much he feared that his sons in a few years would have to go and do their service in Vietnam.
	There was tremendous fear about it.
	There was, there was.
	And probably the most famous draft dodger, I think they were called at the time, was Muhammad Ali.
	He flatly refused to fight in Vietnam.
	He said, I'm not going.
	I am not going to kill people.
	And he didn't.
	And he was vilified for it.
	So you're saying that the Apollo, if we follow this line of thought, and you're saying that even now, in fact, there are more people now saying these things.
	If we follow this line of thought, America needed something to show the world that it was great.
	And Vietnam was not that thing.
	Definitely.
	Vietnam was not that thing.
	We'll come on to what was going on with Vietnam, which ties in with another aspect of the Apollo missions many, many years later.
	But you've not only got the Vietnam War going on, you've got the unrest on American campuses.
	Students were being shot by the National Guard in Ohio.
	You've just had President John Kennedy killed a few years earlier.
	You had Martin Luther King.
	You had Robert Kennedy being assassinated.
	It's almost as if America is going to descend into anarchy.
	And some of the memoirs from the presidential leaders at the time, Nixon was president during the moon landings, don't forget, and Lyndon Johnson had refused to serve A full second term, which is why Nixon got in.
	We won't go into Watergate.
	But you've also got the Cold War going on.
	You've got the standoff with the Soviet Union as it was then, Russia as it is now.
	So you've got the Cold War, you've got the space race, you've got the Vietnam War.
	Everything is going badly for America.
	They've got to have some sort of success.
	America doesn't have the option of coming second to anybody.
	There will be my listeners, some of them agreeing with you and some of them screaming at whatever device they're using to hear this, saying, why don't you challenge this man?
	And the ultimate point is, if it was faked for public consumption to give people a bit of good news, if it was faked, how many people would have had to have been in on a fake?
	Too many to make it practical?
	No, very few.
	This is one of the major arguments which is normally voiced against this particular aspect of the Apollo programs.
	When I say that there is enough information and evidence, hard evidence, to indicate that it didn't happen the way we were shown it happening.
	Now, 400,000 people we're told worked on the Apollo program.
	That's probably a fair figure.
	But don't forget, they weren't all working for NASA, National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
	NASA actually employed that great a number of people, a few tens of thousands.
	And they're mainly down at Cape Canaveral or Cape Kennedy and at Johnson Space Center, named after the president who pushed most of it through in Texas.
	They were also working for Boeing, who made the Lunar Rover.
	They're working for Lockheed and Martin Marietta.
	They're working for Hamilton Standard, who were making the spacesuits.
	These companies are all privately owned companies based right across America, from Washington State to Virginia, from Texas up to Massachusetts, from California.
	They wouldn't have known what...
	If you work for a major multinational company, as I have for Toyota, I knew what was happening in my department, and I knew maybe a couple of dozen people and knew what their jobs were, and I knew what they were doing.
	So you're saying that if everybody's in a compartment, if there is a big lie, it is possible to perpetrate that big lie, and most people in their own compartments involved in the project won't know about it.
	Yeah, of course they won't.
	It's called compartmentalization.
	It's a security measure.
	It's operated by the military under normal conditions.
	So Marcus, I've had people tell me absolutely that the moon landings happened.
	And you're telling me you spent 20 years investigating the reasons why the moon landings didn't happen or they may not have happened in the way that we were told.
	As of tonight, as we record these words, after 20 years research, what do you believe?
	They never got beyond low Earth orbit for one very simple reason.
	They'd be dead before they got back.
	Because low Earth orbit, I said, it's 250 miles up.
	Another 250 miles up, you start to get into the radiation belts, named after the man who identified them, Professor James Van Allen.
	There are three belts now.
	They stretch from about 500 miles up to about 40,000 miles out.
	And they are basically held in place by the Earth's magnetic field, and they prevent the harmful radiation and some of the good radiation, but they prevent radiation reaching the Earth's surface.
	There's also the atmosphere, which is the equivalent of a few feet of lead in terms of protection.
	The atmosphere will protect us.
	But the Van Allen radiation belts are not good places for humans to go.
	All right.
	We're running out of time, but I have to ask you this.
	Why are we planning then to go to Mars, which we actively are?
	If it's so dangerous and so impossible to do it, if we're going to get irradiated, if it is not physically possible to go and come back, why is this plan being formulated, do you think?
	It keeps the American space program operational to an extent.
	It employs quite a lot of people.
	In the film The Martian, which is a pretty good depiction of what Mars is alleged to look like, given what we know about it, we do know quite a bit about it.
	When the author of the book, The Martian, David Weir, was asked, well, you didn't mention radiation at all, he said, no, it would have spoilt the story.
	We gave them a little bit of protection.
	Radiation will kill humans unless they are protected.
	And the only way to protect humans on a nine-month voyage to Mars is with a craft which either has a magnetic shield generated around it, which would require a craft so big it couldn't be launched because the requirement to produce it is quite heavy in terms of power generation.
	You couldn't get to Mars.
	Now, Mars is also not protected on the surface, so you'd have to be protected from the radiation.
	This is gamma rays, X-rays, all the nasty stuff in space.
	And I claim that if it is so easy to reach the moon and do what we were told Apollo did, A, how come they haven't been back in nearly 50 years?
	And B, why aren't they even planning to go back?
	And the answer is simple.
	They never got there in the first place, so they don't know how to do it.
	NASA have already said that their most difficult objective is protecting humans in space from the dangers of radiation.
	But maybe they've been able to achieve that.
	They haven't.
	This was an announcement made just at the end of last year.
	Marcus, I find it fascinating, a little depressing as somebody who was born into the space generation.
	And as a little boy, you know, I watched people go up to the moon and I was fascinated by it.
	It is a little depressing.
	Are you going to keep researching this?
	Oh, absolutely.
	And if I could just say that there is a very interesting website, you might like to make a note of this, to check out A lot of this information because it answers one of the other questions I'm always asked when I give presentations on the subject.
	If what you say is true, Marcus, how come the Russians didn't blow the whistle?
	And the answer is they have.
	You can read all about it.
	Make a note: aulisaulis.com.
	Just go to that website, check out the articles by the Russian physicists, scientists, filmmakers, who, by the way, have debunked that whole MythBusters episode, which tried to prove we did go to the moon.
	They faked that as well.
	When do they stop faking things?
	Why can't they tell us the truth?
	Why can't they actually come up and say, look guys, sorry, we had to show we got to the moon, otherwise the Russians would have roasted us.
	Well, the Soviet Union doesn't exist anymore.
	America uses Russian rocket engines to launch everything these days.
	They haven't even got one that will launch the Orion craft.
	They have to use Russian engines into that.
	Russians' rockets will get them to the space station.
	So let's acknowledge the Russians are as good, if not better, in many aspects of space travel that we are.
	And they're not trying to get to Mars.
	And they didn't try to get cosmonauts to the moon.
	They got them there unmanned.
	So let's get real about this.
	Let's not go on with this idiot fiction that NASA keep coming up with.
	But now they're actually starting to get honest about space travel.
	They're saying it is very dangerous for humans to travel into space.
	But they still want to do it or say they want to do it.
	Oh, they want to do it.
	And by the way, all this money that we keep hearing about is all spent here on Earth.
	None of it is ever spent in space.
	Every cent that NASA spends goes to pay somebody's salary here on Earth.
	What's the problem?
	If they weren't building rockets to go into space, they'd probably be building rockets to carry nuclear bombs and drop them on people again.
	Oh, dear, no.
	Let's get into space.
	Let's do something a little bit honest and decent.
	Marcus Allen will talk again about the many things you know about.
	And this is one of them.
	This is going to be controversial.
	I know I'm going to get email about this, but it's always lovely to talk with you, Marcus.
	Thank you very much, Howard.
	I appreciate it.
	And if people want to find out more about Nexus Magazine, here's a chance to plug that website.
	Well, NexusMagazine.com will take you to the Nexus Magazine website.
	And if you want to email me, if you want to berate me, if you want to tell me that I'm a complete idiot and a fruitcake and I'm far too British to understand anything about space, then send me an email through nexusmagazine.com.
	So let's just enter a decent dialogue.
	Okay.
	Thank you very much.
	On behalf of myself and my listeners in the UK and my many American friends, Marcus, have a good and peaceful evening.
	Thank you.
	Marcus Allen, I told you he knew a lot about a lot, and of course he was controversial, but that is what makes Nexus Magazine what it is.
	If you want to get in touch with me, then please go to the website theunexplained.tv.
	You can send me an email or make a donation through that.
	Thank you very much to Adam Cornwell, my webmaster at Creative Hotspot in Liverpool for his hard work on the show, getting it out to you and keeping the website looking as good as it does.
	More great guests in the pipeline coming soon.
	So until next, we meet here on The Unexplained.
	My name is Howard Hughes.
	I am in London, and please stay safe, stay calm, and stay in touch.
	Thank you.
	Take care.

▲