(Sadly, this link no longer works as it was in violation of copyright.)
Here’s a working link, for the present moment. It is the first of six parts.
You Tube is glutted with videos about the moon landings. There’s a French Documentary called the Dark Side of the Moon. France is known for its conspiracy theories since at least the French Revolution. The wiki article for Dark Side of the Moon plainly identifies it as a mockumentary. The parts with Donald Rumsfield, Henry Kissinger, and Alexander Haig came across as surreal the first time I saw the movie. Now they seem merely complicit in the humor of the movie. Here’s the beginning of a critique from openculture.com
“In that spirit, French filmmaker William Karel spins an elaborate tale of intrigue in Dark Side of the Moon, which you can see above. The 2002 film posits that the Apollo 11 moon landing was staged by none other than Stanley Kubrick. How else did the director get his hands on a super advanced lens from NASA to shoot those gorgeous candle-lit scenes in Barry Lyndon? The film is slickly produced and features an impressive array of interviewees from Henry Kissinger, to Buzz Aldrin to Christiane Kubrick. Some of the other people interviewed include Jack Torrance and David Bowman. If that’s not a tip off that the whole movie is fake, then the blooper reel at the end drives the point home. Only a lot of people didn’t get the joke. Conspiracy enthusiasts Wayne Green cited the movie as further proof that the moon landing was faked.”
I didn’t get the joke either when I first viewed it. Now I get the joke. Ironically, Jonathan Crow doesn’t get that he’s part of the real joke.
Jay Weidner has his own take on the moon landings. He reveals them in Kubrick’s Odyssey. Here’s the teaser. He believes Stanley Kubrick used the Shining to give codes that reveal his complicity in the moon landings. As you should suppose, those who like the idea of a faked moon landing often like Weidner’s take. Those who dislike the idea of a faked moon landing have nothing but scorn for it. Another researcher, Michael Wysmierski, has his take called the Shining Code 2.0.
Weidner is the most persuasive to me of the moon landing skeptics. Seen very roughly, he takes a midway position. The moon landings did indeed happen, but some, perhaps, most of the video footage released to the public was produced by Stanley Kubrick. It’s not a popular belief and puts me squarely in the conspiracy theorists’ camp and it doesn’t endear me to the moon hoax people, either. But it’s the only viewpoint that makes sense to me. It avoids, at least intellectually, the polarized view of either/or. Either the moon landing is a complete hoax or everything about the moon landing is front and center correct and truthfully represented. I find this polarizing to the point of ignorance.
Skeptics may kindly ask me if I believe everything I see posted on You Tube. There was a time when this might have been framed, “Do you believe everything you see on TV?” Upon reflection, I have to say that I seriously consider quite a lot of what I watch to be true. To me, what I accept as true seems patently obviously. I guess we have to agree to disagree.
I originally started and wrote most of the above on 24, 25 October.
Pilgrim of Matter 