The Unexplained - Howard Hughes - Edition 612 - Bart Sibrel With New Details Of Why He Says We Never Went To The Moon And The Price Some People, He Says, Paid For Keeping It All Secret

Feb. 21, 2022 - The Unexplained - Howard Hughes

57:01

Edition 612 - Bart Sibrel With New Details Of Why He Says We Never Went To The Moon And The Price Some People, He Says, Paid For Keeping It All Secret

Controversial researcher, film-maker and author Bart Sibrel with a 2022 update on his research claiming the Apollo missions never went to the Moon - with new details of how he says he was harassed by the CIA... His latest book is "Moon Man".

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.
	Well, I definitely hope all is well with you.
	There is still a howling gale.
	Very strong winds outside my flat as I record these words.
	We're a couple of days away from Storm Eunice, which a couple of days ago created havoc in many parts of the United Kingdom, even brought a huge tree down across a road where I live, a tree that I think had probably been there for hundreds of years and looked like it was going nowhere.
	This tree was just brought down like a child's toy, came down right across both carriageways of the road, stopping buses and cars getting past, and hit the roof of a large house opposite, taking a lamp post with it.
	It was quite dramatic to see.
	I went out in some of it, only very briefly, because it really was very, very risky.
	And it was like standing inside a washing machine.
	I had leaves and all sorts of debris swirling around my head for a while.
	We're still in the teeth of some strong winds here.
	So we have a few more Atlantic systems to endure, I think, before spring arrives.
	And then we get into, hopefully, some calmer weather.
	But then maybe people will be complaining about the boiling temperatures.
	I don't know.
	Thank you very much for all of your emails.
	Some very nice and supportive ones.
	Some from people I haven't heard from before.
	Some from regular listeners.
	It's always good to hear from you.
	Please go to my website, theunexplained.tv.
	Follow the link there, and you can email me.
	The website, of course, designed, honed, and created.
	And the show's got out to you as ever by Adam, my hard-working webmaster.
	Thanks, Adam.
	So, what am I going to do on this edition?
	You are asking yourself, Bart Sebrell is a man who's made a reputation around the world for denying that we ever went to the moon.
	He made a famous documentary in 2004 where he interviewed a lot of the Apollo astronauts and put those points to them and got predictably tough responses back from them.
	I put Bart Sobrell on the air on the radio show, I think, three years ago on the 50th anniversary of the Apollo 11 moon landing.
	And on that night, I recall very clearly, I got a lot of hostile texts and tweets for Bart Sobrelle, which I put back to him because that's my job.
	And I think a lot of people assumed that because I was doing that and reflecting my inbox, which was 99% negative towards him on that night, a lot of people assumed that I was taking a side, which of course I can never do on this show.
	You know, I have to be balanced about stuff.
	And that's the way that I was trained.
	You know, I wasn't taking a side, I was just reflecting what people said.
	And then I came home to open my email inbox, and some people who support Bart Zebrell were saying, don't talk to him again because you're clearly against him.
	And other people were saying, what have you got this man coming on your show for?
	So it really polarized people and it still does.
	So if this is going to make you annoyed in any way, if this is going to upset you, cause you to bang the table, whatever, I would not want to cause you any disturbance.
	And please, don't listen to this edition.
	Turn it off now is the best thing I think that you can do.
	However, if you want to hear what Bart Sebrell is thinking now, if you want to hear about the contents of his book, Moon Man, then you can certainly do that with me.
	And I will be interested to hear what he says.
	As I say, because I was trained in balance, in broadcasting, I am trained to listen to what people have to say and, of course, offer up alternative arguments to them by way of a narrative.
	You know, how well or badly I do, that's up to you, I think.
	So that's what you're going to hear on this edition.
	Bart Sabrel, author of the book Moon Man, filmmaker, very well known in this field.
	And I think you will find the conversation interesting.
	But if it is something that makes you mad, angry, turn it off now and come back to another show.
	It'll be nice to have you there.
	Lovely emails coming in recently.
	Very, very supportive.
	It's nice to know that you're there for me, just as a lot of you believe that I've been there for you through this awful period that we've lived.
	In particular, Darren, who emailed me recently.
	The email that you wrote meant a great deal to me, Darren.
	And thank you very much for getting in touch.
	You can always do that by going through my website, theunexplained.tv.
	All right.
	This conversation was recorded for my radio show here a couple of days ago.
	This is Bart Zebrell.
	And let me tell you a little bit about him first.
	Bart Zebrell, filmmaker, writer, award-winning filmmaker, 35 years or more.
	He's owned five video production companies, been employed by two of the three major U.S. networks.
	He's had pieces published in the New York Times, USA Today, The Washington Post and Time magazine.
	His awards from the American Motion Picture Society include Best Cinematography, Best Editing, and Top 10 Director.
	So the guy's got a pedigree.
	And as you may know, if you followed this show, or indeed you're aware of all of these things, he has been a campaigner on the not going to the moon issue for years.
	He probably hit the headlines and probably is best known to you when he confronted Buzz Aldrin, who of course was first on the moon in a memorable confrontation outside a hotel and Buzz Aldrin hit him.
	You're the one who said you walked on the moon when you didn't.
	Calling the kettle black.
	If you ever thought of it, saying that you misrepresented away from me, you're a coward and a liar and a thief.
	But was also, according to repute, kicked in the backside by the late Edgar Mitchell, who I had on this show 11 or 12 years ago.
	And he said at that time that he believed that if we hadn't gone to the moon, the Russians would have outed the United States in very short order.
	So it wouldn't have been possible to fake it, is essentially what he said.
	Let's get Bart Sabrell on now to us.
	Bart, thank you for listening to all of that.
	Thank you for coming on.
	Well, Edgar Mitchell is a liar, and he's making excuses for his lie.
	The fact is, if I had a picture of a world leader with a prostitute, I could release that to the media And ruin the person, or the smarter thing to do would be to blackmail them year after year.
	Certainly, the Soviets, the Chinese, the Japanese, the Israelis, they know that the moon missions were fraudulent.
	In fact, it's taught in Chinese universities that the moon missions were fraudulent.
	However, each country has skeletons of the other person in their respective closets, and they keep that under the table to not ruin one another.
	Can I just jump in here?
	When we talk about Edgar Mitchell, and you said that you believe that he was not telling the truth, effectively, he was a liar.
	Of course, he's not alive to sue you for that, is he?
	Well, I mean, I would love to be sued.
	In fact, he threatened to sue me.
	And when I took him up on the offer, gave him my card, he chickened out because he knows we could go to court and we could prove through footage we've uncovered that the moon missions were in fact fraudulent.
	In fact, take a listen to this.
	After he said, I don't hit people, five seconds later, he hit me from behind.
	So he can't even go five seconds without lying.
	And then in the commotion, we left a wireless microphone on him.
	The car outside had the camera in the back seat, and the camera was still recording the private audio in his house.
	And you'll hear right now his son and Edgar Mitchell discussing calling the CIA to have me assassinated.
	Want to call the CIA?
	Have a whack?
	So the question is, if they really went to the moon, and I'm some silly person who thinks otherwise, why would you have to call the CIA to have an investigative journalist assassinated for if what they were investigating was meaningless?
	The fact is they did fake the moon landing, and that's why he had connections with the CIA.
	You have to ask, why is an Apollo astronaut if he really walked to the moon, such buddy buddies with the CIA?
	And of course, why would they have to assassinate some person who thinks they didn't go to the moon if, in fact, they really went?
	We have incontrovertible proof of them faking being halfway to the moon.
	We discovered in the production of a funny thing happened on the way to the moon, tape outtakes of a shot of them faking being halfway to the moon over and over again with this CIA heard on a third channel of audio doing so.
	I'll play the clip now.
	First, you hear NASA ask a question.
	They fake a four-second radio delay because they're supposed to be halfway to the moon when, in fact, they're still in Earth orbit the entire time.
	The CIA counts off four seconds.
	Then you'll hear the CIA say, talk after the four-second fake radio delay, and then they start talking.
	Here's the clip of that.
	Hello, Apollo 11.
	Houston, Gulf of the home, says that the TV looks so great.
	Over.
	Okay, roger.
	So you just heard them right there, you know, basically be asked a question from NASA.
	They could have responded immediately, but it would have given away the fact that they're really close to Earth when they're pretending to be halfway to the moon.
	So the CIA counts off one, two, three, four, and then says talk to create this fake radio delay, all of which we have on tape.
	I mean, it's very simple.
	I need to clarify this point, though.
	How do you know that that was a CIA person saying that?
	Well, I mean, there's a radio EQ, kind of like talking through a walkie-talkie of the astronauts.
	That's how they sound.
	There's the radio EQ of NASA talking.
	And then whoever said talk, it's crystal clear right on top of the microphone where these secret tapes were being recorded.
	All of which we have because they edited out all of this for the public.
	In fact, at the beginning of the reel, it says in big letters, do not show this to the public.
	And it's an entire hour of them doing one fake shot that created a one-foot model of the Earth and the spacecraft and them doing the shot over and over and over again.
	It's very simple through deductive reasoning to prove they didn't go to the moon.
	Today, with 50 years better technology than in 1969, NASA can only send astronauts one thousandth the distance to the moon.
	So what they're claiming is that they had 1,000 times greater capability than they do today, 50 years ago, with 1 millionth to computing power of a cell phone and all of NASA.
	Technology does not go backwards.
	It's impossible for technology to go backwards.
	When Lindbergh flew across the Atlantic in 1927, 10 years later, thousands of aircraft were flying over the Atlantic.
	When they blew up the atomic bomb in 1945, 10 years later, atomic bombs were 1,000 times more powerful.
	So to claim that they went to the moon on the first attempt with 1969 technology, which was one millionth the computing power of a cell phone, if that were true, we would have been on Mars 10 years later.
	We'd be in another solar system by now, and there'd be bases all over the moon, of which there are none.
	That's like Toyota claiming that they made a car 50 years ago that could go 50,000 miles on a gallon of gasoline, but shucks.
	Today, with five decades better technology, their car can only go 50 miles on a gallon of gasoline.
	And it is completely illogical.
	If it weren't for people's religious attachment to the sacred cow of mankind's greatest accomplishment, people would see the truth.
	Let's work through the book then as it presents itself, because I spent a good deal of time over the last couple of days actually reading through the book, and it tells your story of how you came to do this research, Bart.
	Let me quote a little bit to you.
	One day you say, in the course of my filmmaking and writing work, I met an elderly gentleman who worked as a contractor for NASA during the days of the Apollo space program.
	He told me plainly that the moon missions were falsified by the CIA.
	He explained that this was done in order to promote positive domestic morale during the Nixon administration's notoriously unsuccessful and highly protested Vietnam War.
	Can you tell me, because this guy is pivotal to everything that you've done a little more about this guy?
	Well, yeah, his name was William Casing.
	He worked for Rocketdyne.
	His major was in English.
	So basically, what he did is he edited the grammar from the top officials at NASA and the Pentagon as they sent memos to one another so they wouldn't look uneducated.
	He had the highest of security clearances.
	He read a memo written by von Braun to President Kennedy, and it said the likelihood of going to the moon on the first attempt with one millionth to computing power for a cell phone was one in 10,000 chance.
	I mean, all you have to do is look at Elon Musk, okay?
	We have five decades of better technology, and Elon Musk, in order to land a rocket vertically in the, you know, right here on Earth in the tried and true tested environment, it took him six attempts.
	The first five times he tried to land a rocket vertically, the thing blew up, and he had five supercomputers that were probably one million times better than the ones they had at NASA.
	And yet they claim on the untried environment of the moon, they landed a rocket vertically with a computer that had one million the computing capacity of a cell phone.
	While I've been reading the book today, I've given a lot of thought to that.
	And look, I don't know.
	I'm just some guy who does a radio show.
	My listeners will have thoughts about this.
	But wasn't the Apollo program more about engineering?
	And through Werner von Braun, the rocket program, and all of that, and of course the great track record in aviation, America was well ahead in engineering.
	So yes, the whole world was behind in electronics, and the best computer we could muster is laughable by today's standards, but the engineering capacity that America then had was decades ahead of anybody else.
	Actually, that's not true.
	The Soviets were far superior than the United States in rocket technology.
	It's very simple to prove.
	The Soviets, they launched the first satellite, the first animal, the first man, the first of two spacecraft simultaneously, the first woman, the first to orbit the Earth.
	For every 100 hours the U.S. spent in space, they spent 500 hours.
	They were so much farther advanced than we are today.
	But they had a lunar program that they had to abandon.
	Well, yeah, because it wouldn't work.
	They sent an unmanned probe to the moon.
	I mean, it doesn't make any sense that every technological achievement that when a milestone happens, that 50 years later, that technology cannot be duplicated.
	That's never happened in the history of the world.
	Science principles says that there has to be independent verification of a scientific claim and duplication.
	That's like somebody saying they did cold fusion 50 years ago, but shuts today.
	We can't do it.
	I mean, it makes no sense.
	Plus, they deliberately destroyed all the schematics, all the electronics, all the telemetry, all the original videotapes of what would be in today's dollars, a $200 billion investment.
	You would never do that.
	I mean, if you're going to destroy any technology, you might do that with the atomic bomb after World War II, but they didn't even do that.
	The fact that they destroyed all the original documentation is proof of the fraud, because if you really went and you really spent $200 billion developing this hardware, you would never destroy it.
	But if you committed a fraud, then you would destroy all the evidence, which is proof of the fraud itself.
	Do you think that those documents may actually have been retained in some form, but they are so deeply buried in secrecy that we simply don't see them?
	You say that they were actually shredded and burned.
	Yeah, NASA admits it.
	I mean, their own astronauts say we destroyed the technology to reach the moon, which is totally absurd.
	Yeah, take, for example, the B-52 was invented 70 years ago, and there's still 200 of them in service today.
	I mean, it makes no sense.
	That's like saying Bill Gates spent $200 billion making the first supercomputer, and then when he was done, he took all the blueprints and the hardware, threw it into a furnace.
	No one would ever do that.
	And so the idea that NASA would spend this investment to build hardware to go to the moon and then destroy it all is totally illogical unless there was a fraud.
	Then they would destroy it.
	So by destroying all the evidence, it's proof of the fraud.
	Because if there was a fraud, that's exactly what they would do.
	And if they really went, they would never do that.
	So there you go.
	It's so simple.
	I mean, I don't know why people can't see the clarity of it.
	They're claiming they had 1,000 times greater capability in 1969 than they do today, five decades later, where NASA can only go 250 miles above the Earth with an astronaut.
	It makes no sense.
	One of the most powerful things to me that you say in the book, Bart, is this.
	It boils down to nobody has copied this.
	Now, if you achieve something before anybody else, chances are they'll catch up with you and they'll want to do it themselves at some point.
	But I find it very powerful and very compelling in your book, whatever my listeners may think, that you say that nobody's tried to copy it.
	And that suggests that nobody's tried to copy it because nobody could.
	That's right.
	According to scientific principle, a scientific claim of a breakthrough has to be independently, meaning not the United States.
	Somebody else has to verify it and duplicate it to prove that it's not a fraud.
	I mean, Nobel laureates have been proven to be cheating before.
	And it's very simple.
	I mean, there's only three eyewitnesses to this claim.
	And the picture is controlled by the United States federal government that admits that they faked the Gulf of Tunkin incident in order to promote enthusiasm behind the Vietnam War.
	So they just admitted they contrived something that led to the death of a million people.
	So I think they'd be willing to fake a TV picture.
	And as you know in the book, we have an eyewitness who was there at the time.
	He was chief of security at the military base where Apollo 11 was filmed June 1st, 2nd, 3rd of 1968.
	He stood beside President Johnson while they filmed the thing.
	We have the code name for the project.
	We have a list of 15 eyewitnesses who were there.
	I mean, it's not a theory they didn't go to the moon.
	It's an absolute fact.
	And what that means is the people who run our country and the countries of the world are a bunch of juvenile criminals.
	And these people are at large.
	That's why it's so important for the truth about the moon landing fraud to come out to institute change.
	Because if we don't institute change, I mean, things are going to get a lot worse for the people of the world.
	That was one thing, just quickly before we have to get to commercials here, that struck me about the book.
	You know, I thought that you would be making which you do in the 300 or so pages of the book, you know, a compelling case for why you believe that we never went there.
	There's also a lot of political anger there, it seems to me.
	You seem to be very angry about the fact that this is almost the tip of a spear.
	If we accept this, then we're going to accept all kinds of other lies.
	Yeah, it's not really anger.
	It's shock and alarm.
	When I popped in the secret tape of them faking part of the mission over and over again in front of your eyes with the CIA audio on there telling them how to do it, my heart was broken and I quietly wept.
	I said to myself, is mankind so depraved that we would fake the greatest accomplishment of mankind?
	And the fact is, yes, mankind is that depraved.
	The people who run the world are criminals.
	They're liars.
	The unexplained Bart Zebrell here, the subject of did we go to the moon, which emphatically Bart Zebrell will tell you we absolutely did not.
	You said, Bart, that you had a key witness.
	Apart from the engineer gentleman, there was another person who was actually there when the moon missions were filmed in a studio.
	Is that so?
	That's correct.
	How did you find that person?
	Well, actually, they found me.
	A relative of this person saw me on television, I think, during the 50th anniversary, you know, greater interviews, and I think it was on an HBO special.
	And they deemed me to be sincere and someone they would trust with the information.
	This person on their deathbed confessed that they were chief of security of this particular military base here in the United States, and they were assigned to safeguard the filming of Apollo 11 on June 1st, 2nd, and 3rd of 1968, a year in advance.
	They gave me a list of 15 people who were on the visitors list.
	A lot of them I knew of and some I did not, including Neil Armstrong, Buzz Aldrin, Gene Krantz, Von Braun were all there.
	And they basically said they must have had a really good reason for faking it.
	So we know where it was filmed.
	We know when it was filmed.
	We know the military official CIA code name for it.
	And we have a list of 15 people who were there at the time, some of whom are still alive.
	And my eyewitness stood beside President Johnson while they filmed it.
	And that's the way it went down.
	So they couldn't go.
	And they could have either told the truth that they bit off more than they could chew, which would have been an embarrassment.
	And so they contrived it.
	And it's pretty sad if you think about it.
	I mean, not having the guts to say you set a goal and couldn't accomplish it and lying to the world is really juvenile.
	And so what we have here is not only are the people who run our country and the governments of the world criminals and really gangsters because they murder people in order to keep their crimes a secret, they're also juvenile because, I mean, hey, we can't go to the moon.
	Why don't we just fake it and pretend?
	I mean, it was completely unnecessary to do.
	And it will end up biting them back in the end because the truth will come out.
	We have an eyewitness confessing that he was there at the time it was filmed.
	And of course, 50 years later, they now can only go one thousandth the distance to the moon, which is totally illogical to the progress of technology, right?
	I mean, if they could go on the first attempt before the cell phone and the microwave, we would have bases all over the moon today.
	We'd be in another solar system, would have been on Mars 10 years later, rather than having only one thousandth the capability that they claimed they did 50 years ago.
	Would you be willing for your eyewitness to take a lie detector test?
	We don't use them in the United Kingdom routinely, but you do in the States.
	Well, this person is now deceased.
	One of the things that they confessed, they wanted to get it off their chest, was that they participated in this thing that really troubled them their entire life.
	We verified that the person was indeed assigned to that particular military base and verified all this information with their relative as well.
	And after they talked to me, their house was broken into, all the documentation was taken, and their lives were actually threatened if they talked to me ever again.
	I had to contact the White House, the FBI, and a United States Senator on the Intelligence Committee to get this person whistleblower protection.
	Right.
	So that's what he said.
	You have clearly, you don't think you have any reason to doubt that.
	How many people do you think were involved in that faking then in 1968, in total?
	Not many.
	I mean, one of the excuses that they say is proof that we went is that there were hundreds of thousands of people involved and that many people couldn't keep a secret.
	But I mean, it's very simple.
	I mean, do you really think the CIA is so stupid to tell the guy making the glove or the door of the boot, hey, we're really not going to the moon, but don't tell anybody?
	I mean, come on.
	The atomic bomb involved 145,000 people and yet only eight knew what they were making.
	And it's a literal pyramid scheme to where you only have three eyewitnesses going up and the computer controllers admit afterwards That they could tell no difference between a simulation and an actual flight.
	All that information on their consoles was simply a computer program, the same thing that had run during their simulations.
	And if you look at the beginning of a funny thing happened on the way to the moon, which you can see at Sabrel, S-I-B-R-E-L.com, you'll see all the computer controllers when they're 10 seconds before going to the moon for the very first time, all kicked back watching television like the rest of us.
	Okay.
	That didn't entirely answer the number of people who might have been involved in this.
	If I make an estimate, you said it's a low number.
	If I make an estimate of 50, that means that of those people who are still alive, there might be another 10 people, perhaps, maybe another 15 people who might also know the truth, but haven't come forward to you.
	Why do you think that is?
	Well, if only one person had claimed to have gone to the moon one time, they probably would have told the truth by now on their deathbed.
	But the fact that there are several surviving people who claim to have walked on the moon, it's inadvertently turning them in as well.
	It'd be like a bank robber, you know, confessing that they robbed the bank and saying, oh, yeah, and here's the address and phone numbers of the other people involved so you can arrest them too.
	So that's kind of why they're keeping it a secret.
	Plus, they're probably afraid of, quote, ruining the reputation of America, but it's the faking of the moon landing that ruined the reputation of America, not the revealing of the crime.
	It's so preposterous when there was election fraud in 2016 because Bernie Sanders kept winning more electoral votes, but he got the fewer number anyway, that the whole thing was rigged.
	The person who leaked that information, that it was totally rigged so that Hillary Clinton would win, even though Bernie Sanders got more votes.
	Instead of the FBI, you know, indicting Hillary Clinton, they went after the person who released the information.
	I mean, that's how backwards our country is.
	I can hear that there's an awful lot of anger within you or a lot of frustration within you about what you think is a lot of fakery and lying within your country in a whole variety of fields.
	And from what you say in the book, and we'll just briefly come back to this point, you think that the American public have got to dispel their preconceived notions about this, give it another thought, and then ask themselves a whole raft of questions that flow from not going to the moon.
	In other words, like we said, this is the tip of the spear.
	And if people recognize that fact, as you would put it, then they're going to have to ask themselves a whole bunch of other questions about the way things are conducted in the United States.
	Yeah, I mean, my enthusiasm about this isn't anger.
	It's alarm.
	It's alarm that, yes, indeed, 100% certainty, the people who run the United States of America faked the moon landing.
	They did do 9-11.
	They did kill their own President Kennedy.
	They did fake the excuse to enter the Vietnam War.
	And there's more than enough documentation to prove all of this.
	These people are running our nation and in large part, all of the countries of the world.
	This idea that we have democracies of the people, by the people, and for the people is a complete lie.
	I mean, both political parties, let's say Republican, Democrat, that got rid of Ron Paul and the Republicans and they got rid of Bernie Sanders on the other end.
	So they're only going to elect their lying, corrupt people to the top.
	They've well established that.
	And the idea that, you know, the Congress and the Senate, did they vote to fake the moon landing?
	Certainly not, because none of them would have done it.
	So that means that the Congress and the Senate do not run the country.
	I mean, so that whole thing's a lie.
	If the Congress and the Senate don't run the country, then who do?
	I have no idea.
	But they're the wicked people who are controlling the puppet masters of the United States.
	I had privy.
	I was in Washington a couple of times.
	I got to see with my own eyes the desk of the president at the time and the desk of the vice president at the time.
	And the desk of the president, I think it was George Bush Jr. at the time.
	I mean, it had like a telephone, a nice pen and pencil set, a picture of his wife.
	And that was it.
	And then Cheney's desk had like a, not a walk-in safe, but a big old-fashioned safe with the door half open to paper stacked everywhere.
	I mean, who's running the country here?
	You know, and if anybody was to blame for 9-11, I would certainly be talking to him first.
	And how odd that when the president and vice president are asked about 9-11, they say, well, we'll only testify if we don't do it under oath, meaning you give us permission to lie about it.
	And somehow people accept this.
	I mean, because of that film that came out about JFK's assassination in the late 90s, Oliver Stone, they passed through legislation that said in 2017, we're going to release the Kennedy assassination files.
	And then you read this fine print and it says, unless in 2017 we change our mind.
	I mean, why bother writing the law in the first place?
	It's totally preposterous.
	They can't even tell the truth about something that happened 50 years ago because they know that the CIA definitely killed their own president.
	They were involved.
	Bobby Kennedy Jr. knows so.
	And then we have the testimony of the relatives of astronauts who know for certain that their Apollo astronaut loved ones were murdered in the Apollo 1 fire.
	And I know that's because they wouldn't cooperate with the fraud.
	I mean, we have the dead man's widow, the dead man's son, who's a 747 pilot who I've interviewed for hours at a time.
	They are 100% certain that the fire that killed the crew that would have been the first crew on the moon was set intentionally by the CIA.
	That's an established fact.
	It's not my opinion.
	It's their opinion, and they have the forensic evidence to back it up.
	It's an astonishing claim to make.
	Why haven't they gone to court with it?
	They have numerous times, and they're stalling and stalling.
	I mean, how many lawsuits are there about 9-11?
	They're still unresolved.
	We have here in the United States of America, a guy went to jail a few years ago for killing a bunch of people in a church in the 1950s.
	He just went to jail a couple of years ago.
	I mean, that's how it works over here.
	You say that the people who want to keep this secret, who were part of it all, complicit in it all, driving it all, would stop at nothing.
	And one of the things you describe is an Apollo astronaut who was heading for a conversation with your whistleblower.
	And on the way to the conversation, or just before the conversation, he had a fatal heart attack.
	That's true.
	James Irwin contacted one of my sources, Bill Casing, who basically said we didn't go to the moon before I did.
	He was like my main first person I interviewed.
	And in August of 1991, one of the Apollo astronauts contacted him.
	So you can imagine my surprise as I'm making astronauts gone wild trying to track these people down that one of the astronauts calls me to confess.
	So Irwin called Bill Casing, says, we need to talk about the assertions you're making about the moon landing fraud.
	He says, I'm concerned for my safety.
	Please call me at this number on this day.
	And on that day, he was dead from a fatal heart attack.
	So I don't think that was a coincidence.
	And by the way, James Irwin had just become, quote, a born-again Christian, right?
	Meaning he had a religious experience that basically calls for people to repent of their sin and to confess their sin.
	And whoever's, you know, monitoring the astronauts or Bill Casing's phone calls, you know, made sure that that confession did not happen.
	But that was his imperative.
	You think he wanted to do the right thing, but didn't get the chance to.
	That's right.
	And so when I get this information about an eyewitness who was there at the time of the filming, their house is broken into.
	Men in black appear and threaten to kill them if they ever talk to me again, to the point where I have to go to the White House, a senator, and the FBI to get protection for this person.
	You say that the Apollo astronauts never left what we would call today near-Earth orbit, and you say that the pictures, the famous pictures of them being halfway across this great trek to the moon, are all faked up.
	How do you know that?
	Well, I mean, it's pretty simple.
	You can look at A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Moon at Sobrell, S-I-B-R-E-L.com.
	You can see the side-by-side comparison of them faking the shot right in front of your eyes.
	Any cinematographer would agree it's a fake shot.
	In fact, my greatest critics who claim, you know, we really went to the moon, they admit that this is fake footage from the first Apollo mission.
	Their excuse is, oh, well, they were just rehearsing the shot with a one-foot model of the Earth.
	And I'm like, well, you know, if every minute cost a million dollars and every ounce of weight probably costs $10 million, I don't think they're going to bring a fake model of the Earth to rehearse being halfway to the moon.
	They would just rehearse with the real Earth far away at a distance if, in fact, it were the case to be out of the window.
	So, I mean, even my critics admit that this is fake footage.
	And then if you look at a simple shot of an astronaut's shadow going at 12 o'clock and a rock about five feet away, the shadow's going at 90 degree 9 o'clock.
	I mean, that's impossible.
	Sunlight is always parallel shadows.
	Go outside during the day, stand five feet apart from a friend, and you'll see your shadows will never intersect.
	And yet they intersect at 90 degrees from objects five feet apart and pictures they're claiming are on the moon.
	And I'm a filmmaker.
	My job is to make fake scenes look real.
	That's 100% certainty that that was taken with artificial light.
	It cannot be duplicated in sunlight and can be duplicated with electrical light, meaning these pictures were taken with electrical light, meaning they're not on the moon.
	And again, you don't even need that proof.
	And that one picture is scientific proof we didn't go to the moon.
	This video of the CIA telling them to create a fake radio delay, that's proof.
	You have the logic that it's never happened in the history of the world that a scientific milestone could not be repeated 50 years later when it really should be a thousand times greater 50 years later.
	That's never happened in the history of the world, which means it didn't happen.
	They faked it.
	And if this weren't such a sacred cow to people, they would easily see the truth.
	You say that you've paid a price for all of this.
	In the book, you tell the story of how you were on the way to CNN in 1999 to be interviewed about all of this and blow the lid on it.
	And you were followed, you say, by the CIA.
	There were two cars.
	And ultimately, you found that you were, well, you were essentially roughed up by some people.
	You were arrested.
	Then you ended up in a hospital.
	I mean, this is cutting out a lot of ground here.
	But you're saying that essentially they were harassing you.
	Well, yeah, at one point when we found this footage of fake photography right in front of your eyes, that at the beginning of the reel, it says, please do not show to the public because it's proof of the fraud.
	I panicked.
	And I'm like, oh, my gosh, they really didn't go to the moon.
	What do I do?
	Friend said, you better get this hot potato to CNN.
	I drove to CNN.
	I'm surrounded by police when I'm trying to, you know, enter the building.
	How did they even know I was there?
	And then I'm abducted.
	I'm drugged with something very strong to the point where I'm vomiting and hallucinating.
	And then I escape their custody.
	I make my way back to Nashville and I pee in a cup.
	I give it to a friend to take to a lab to put in his name.
	And I say, I got him.
	I'm going to prove that I was drugged by some exotic drug.
	So my friend calls back in a few days and says, well, there was a problem at the lab.
	And I said, well, what was the problem?
	They said, well, they had a break-in over the weekend.
	And I said, yeah.
	Well, they said they told me the only thing that was stolen was your urine sample.
	I mean, if you can imagine living a life where this is going on.
	So a third of the book, Moon Man, which you can get at Sibrell, S-I-B-R-E-L dot com.
	A third of it is how and why, indeed, 100% certainty the moon missions were fake.
	A third of it is just the alarm that this means our world and governments are super corrupt and we better do something about it.
	And the other third are these behind-the-scenes espionage X-File adventures, which I've never discussed publicly before.
	I figure this is my final statement on the matter.
	You might as well know the full story.
	Returning to Bart Sobrell and the notion that he wants you to buy into and then do something about that we never went to the moon.
	And you've heard the various things he believes flows from that for our democracy.
	I want to get to some listener questions, which I asked for at the end of the week, and you were very kind to send them in.
	Carl in Norfolk says, Can you ask Bart Zebrell why more media coverage wasn't given to the footage he unearthed of the astronauts faking being halfway to the moon when it was clear from the video, says Carl, that they were in Earth orbit?
	So, I mean, we kind of touched upon that, but why do you think, bearing in mind that when you had this first, it was dynamite, it didn't get more attention?
	Yeah, the BBC was going to air it, and they got a phone call from somebody in the United States who said, do not air it.
	And they asked us not to publicize that fact.
	Same with NBC.
	One NBC news director said he didn't want to be responsible for something that would cause a civil war when the people revolted and realized they were fooled to such a degree.
	And another NBC news director was going to air it.
	And they were told by their superiors that NASA called them and told them not to do it.
	So there you have it.
	People who watch this agree that it's the crew of Apollo 11 faking being halfway to the moon from Earth orbit.
	And the thing is dated two days into the flight.
	So they're still in Earth orbit when they're supposed to be halfway to the moon.
	So they can't be walking on the moon the next day when this tape proves they're still in Earth orbit, right?
	It proves that the moon missions were fraudulent.
	And because they had all identical equipment, if the first mission's equipment can't leave Earth orbit, as the tape proves, it means they never went.
	And people know this.
	People in the news media know this.
	The Washington Post knows this.
	And he said if he wrote a story about it, he would be fired.
	Okay, well, if you can tell me the person that you were dealing with, perhaps off-air at the BBC, I can try and contact them, even if they're not at the BBC now, and I can ask them about what happened when you approached them and why you say the material you had wasn't broadcast here.
	I've got a question for you from Ian, regular listener to the show.
	He used to work for the BBC in the engineering department.
	And he says this, if the Apollo missions were faked, how did many well-equipped radio amateurs all over the world listen to and record the FM signals transmitted on VHF and UHF from the Apollo vehicles?
	The signals had the position in space, the path loss, Doppler shift, polarization, and propagation delay consistent with what you'd expect from such missions.
	What would you say to Ian?
	Well, they had fake satellites out there to do that.
	One of them was called the Tetra-A satellite, which simulated transmissions coming from the moon.
	Conveniently, right before Apollo 11, they claimed it crashed, which is, you know, the cover for it secretly being up there to do simulations.
	The Soviets admitted the same thing.
	They sent an unmanned probe around the moon, and they claimed to have astronauts on it, and they later admitted that was not the case.
	They were transmitting radio signals to the spacecraft and back again to make it appear as if they were coming from the moon.
	Okay.
	And can that be verified?
	Well, I mean, the Soviets admitted they did the same shenanigans.
	So if the Soviets can do it, I'm sure the U.S. can do it as well.
	Sorry.
	You saying?
	I mean, we have the tape of them faking being halfway to the moon from Earth orbit.
	I think that's enough proof.
	And we have a picture of two shadows intersecting at 90 degrees from objects five feet apart.
	I think that's enough proof.
	And we have a deathbed confession from a person who was there who said he eyewitnessed them faking it.
	And then we have the simple logic that what they're claiming is that they had a thousand times greater space travel capability 50 years ago than they do today.
	I mean, how much more proof do you need?
	Damien in New Brunswick, Canada has asked this.
	Are there any ideas or elements that were a prerequisite to the lunar landing hoax, or similarly elements that must be maintained that go hand in hand with the narrative that we indeed landed on the moon?
	I think what he's saying here is he's saying, are there other conspiracy theories or elements that go in tandem with this?
	Deception, as you would see it?
	Well, I mean, all it really proves is how arrogant and criminal the United States government is and, you know, and basically all the governments of the world.
	Their common language is lies.
	They lie all the time.
	And so this is really, you know, an important thing to realize, and it must be changed or we'll be in big trouble.
	What about the Artemis missions that are planned now?
	America is well advanced with that.
	They're in the process of recruiting people to go there, designing rovers and landers and all sorts of equipment that will cost billions of U.S. dollars.
	They're adamant this is going to happen in the way that they've described it.
	Are you saying that what is being planned now would also be a fake?
	Well, let me put it this way.
	I guess people have short-term memory.
	Since 1969, the United States government has said they're going to return to the moon in five years, 10 times.
	They've never been able to do it.
	In 2016, NASA said they were going to take an Orion unmanned spacecraft and orbit the moon by 2018.
	Never happened.
	Then they said in 2017, we're going to return to the moon by 2024.
	They said that can't happen either.
	Then we have China, the most industrialized nation on Earth, says to go from never going to the moon to going to the moon is going to take them 15 years of development, which is twice the time it allegedly took with five decades older technology, which is completely illogical.
	Stephen asks this.
	I've always believed that we did go to the moon, but I've always been critical of the so-called official footage of the events of the moon missions.
	Could you explain some of the discrepancies in these official video records?
	I have a feeling I know what you're going to say about this, but what do you think?
	Well, basically, people just want to believe Emotionally, that they went to the moon.
	Mankind is great, science is great, and moreover, they don't want to live in a world where the governments are so corrupt that they would fake such a thing.
	They have eyes that see, and they see that it's impossible for sunlit shadows to intersect at 90 degrees from objects five feet apart.
	So, somehow, they want to acknowledge that the photography is fake, but somehow believe that the missions are real.
	It's very simple.
	The reason why the pictures are fake is because they didn't go.
	The reason why the Apollo 11 crew looked like they were at the funeral of their mother at their first press conference instead of winners of the Super Bowl was because they didn't go.
	It's that simple.
	Do you believe that they were encouraged to forget what they hadn't experienced?
	Well, I'm not sure how they dealt with it.
	I mean, a lot of them got divorces.
	They became drug addicts.
	And a lot of them just enjoy lying.
	I guess when people are hit men, they get into killing people.
	And when people are criminals and they make their living off of lies, they kind of get into it.
	I mean, that's pretty sad that the heroes of our nation are bold-faced liars.
	They held ticker-tape parades for these guys.
	They gave them medals of honor.
	And what a sad state it is that our national heroes are known for something that they didn't do.
	Our national heroes are known for lying.
	That's pretty sad.
	I know that there will be some of my listeners who will be saying that in saying what you've just said about the people who say they went to the moon by saying what you're saying, you're impugning their reputations.
	Well, they did that themselves by participating in this great government fraud.
	What they should have done is at the press conference, spilled the beans.
	I mean, no doubt their lives of their families were threatened, but all they had to do was to confess that it was fake right at the first press conference and get protection from the FBI, the good members of it, for their family.
	They had plenty of opportunity, and they still have plenty of opportunity to come forward.
	Remember, the government didn't go after the people who rigged a presidential primary, the Democratic side in the 2016 election between Bernie Sanders and Clinton, when Bernie Sanders received more votes and yet Clinton won anyway.
	They didn't go after Clinton like they should.
	They went after the person who released the information of the corruption, saying the way they released it was wrong.
	I mean, this is totally preposterous.
	And rather than saying me, who's pointing out that these criminals murdered people and embezzled 200 billions of dollars and are deceiving people, who are creating a fake democracy of the people, by the people, for the people, I think you should go after them because they're the criminals who are doing it.
	One of my listeners, Francis, said to me, some conspiracy theories I get, not this one.
	There are going to be an awful lot of people.
	There are an awful lot of people who simply will not buy this, that simply will not buy that there is some mega great conspiracy, that the government they see is not the government they see, and things are being done in their name that are wholly and totally wrong and reprehensible.
	Well, it's not really that complicated.
	I mean, people counterfeit money.
	They make fake $100 and 100-pound notes because that's what people do.
	And they fake paintings.
	They fake masterpieces and claim it's a Picasso when it's not.
	All they did is they counterfeited an accomplishment.
	Nobel laureates have done the same thing and had to give back their prizes.
	People have cheated in the Olympics and they had to give back their prizes.
	It's no different than that.
	Look, if they could go to the moon on the first attempt with 1960s technology, there would be bases all over the moon today by everybody.
	If it takes Elon Musk six attempts with five supercomputers that are made in the 21st century, six attempts before he can land a rocket vertically in the well-known environment of the Earth, I don't think that a 1960s computer can land a rocket vertically on the moon on the first attempt.
	Come on, people.
	Wake up.
	It's not just the United States now, and it's not just the government who are planning missions to Mars.
	I know this is not a Mars conversation, but do you think that that is a big conspiracy?
	The idea that we're going to Mars?
	Well, just another money cow to milk money from the public.
	I mean, George Bush Jr. said something interesting when he was president.
	He said we're going to return to the moon.
	I think he said by the year 2012 or something like that.
	Of course, never happened.
	And he said the reason was, is because going to the moon is a logical first step to Mars and beyond.
	Meaning we have to practice on the moon first in order to go to Mars.
	So if you really went to the moon six times, why would you have to do a first step a seventh time?
	It seems like you'd be already over there.
	And like I said, you know, 10 years after the atomic bomb was built in 1945, it was 1,000 times greater capability.
	So if they could go to the moon on the first attempt with 1 millionth the computing power of a southern in 1969, we would have been on Mars 10 years later, and we would be in another solar system by now, and there'd be bases all over the moon.
	There are bases at the South Pole, where it's minus 100 degrees Fahrenheit and 100 mile per hour winds, and it took six attempts to reach the South Pole here on Earth.
	So if you could go to the moon so easily, there would be bases all over there.
	The reason why there are bases at the South Pole under those incredible conditions is because it's humanly possible.
	If it were humanly possible to go to the moon on the first attempt with five decades under technology, there would be bases all over there today.
	The reason why there aren't is simply because it cannot be done.
	That means you don't think we're going to Mars.
	Of course not.
	They can't even go to the moon.
	So how can they possibly go to Mars?
	Here's a question from Scott in Dallas, Texas.
	It's not strictly about the conspiracy in Inverted Commas.
	He wants to know, and I wonder if you do have an opinion, do you have an opinion on whether the moon is hollow, cavernous, honeycombed, etc?
	You know, is it 15 years or so ago they did the lacrosse mission, they crashed a craft, a rocket into the moon, and then they listened to see if it was, you know, a dull thud or whether the moon, which it actually did, rang like a bell.
	Do you have any thoughts about what the moon is and how it's constructed?
	Well, I think it's less dense than people originally thought.
	You know, there's a movie out saying that it's an alien spacecraft.
	I mean, come on, give me a break.
	I mean, the whole thing about ancient aliens and all that is basically they've scientifically proven through DNA analysis.
	It was called the Eve Project.
	They took DNA from all nationalities, traced it backwards.
	They absolutely concluded that all humans came from one woman, just like the Bible said.
	But intellectuals who don't want to believe in God, they said, well, aliens, you know, made us.
	But they don't ask the third grade question.
	Well, then who made the aliens?
	I think the moon is a rock.
	I think, you know, prior to 705 BC, the year of the earth was 360 days.
	I mean, and every single month had exactly 30 days.
	I mean, that's absolute proof of divine creation.
	The moon is designed, I believe, to block out the sun exactly, you know.
	And that was what led to the discovery of helium.
	And without that discovery, all of our technology would not be existing today.
	All of that was designed, I believe, by God for the purpose of our intelligent discovery.
	So you believe that what you are sure, in your terms, is true about the faking of the moon missions?
	You believe that all of that fits with the idea of a divine creator?
	Well, the reason why I started making this movie, first, I was afraid to investigate it.
	I looked at the evidence and I said, look, this really could have been fraudulent.
	And if I start overturning these rocks, it could be dangerous.
	I turned down the project.
	I started reading the Bible.
	I wasn't a Christian, but I realized there is a right and a wrong, and there is a judgment for what we do.
	And if they did fake the moon landing, that is more profound historically than if they'd actually gone.
	So what we have is one of the gravest events in human history is the faking of the moon landing out of pride and greed and arrogance.
	And that needs to be known to the world.
	So we open up the film with the Tower of Babel, which until a couple of hundred years ago, the greatest technology was simply to build the tallest building.
	And that competition is still ongoing.
	And of course, it was never finished.
	And we showed the Titanic and a publicity poster that says the ship that God himself could not sink.
	And it never made a voyage, just like the Tower of Babel was never finished.
	And then Nixon had the audacity to say, when he knew they were not on the moon, that putting a man on the moon was the greatest event since creation itself.
	So I think that offends God.
	I think there's a rebuke coming where this will be exposed, and it will put us in our place.
	Right.
	So there's going to be, for the people who were behind this, you think, a day of reckoning.
	Yeah, I think my belief is, and my dream is, that the truth will come out in our lifetime.
	This is a humbling that mankind needs to do.
	We need to see that this is how low we have sunk.
	Like I said, when I popped in that tape that said, do not show to the public, and I realized that they were faking being halfway to the moon, which means they can't go halfway.
	And lo and behold, they still can't leave Earth orbit today, my heart broke and tears came to my eyes.
	I'm like, mankind is so deplorable that we lied about our greatest accomplishment.
	How pathetic is that?
	And so until this truth comes out, we're not going to progress.
	These criminals who are doing these things, they are going to still be in power if we don't expose them for our good and really for their good.
	The people who did this, they're not my enemy.
	I feel sorry for them.
	They will gain the world and lose their soul.
	Bart Sobrell, the book is called Moon Man, and there are a whole variety of other things, as you've heard, documentaries and projects he's been involved in.
	If people want to read about you, Bart, what is your website?
	They just go to my last name, Sabrel, S-I-B-R-E-L dot com, and they can get a copy of the book and read it for themselves.
	Bart Sabrel, I know that he would welcome your thoughts.
	You know where his website is.
	He's told you.
	If you want to email me about this, then please do.
	More great guests in the pipeline here at the Home of the Unexplained, so until next we meet, storms allowing.
	My name is Howard Hughes.
	This has been The Unexplained Online.
	And please, whatever you do, stay safe, stay calm.
	Above all, please stay in touch.
	Thank you very much.
	Take care.

▲