Letter To Bill Kaysing Part 1-2
Dutch Nobel Prize Winner Doesn’t Believe in Apollo 11
When I first heard that Bill Kaysing had received a letter referring to a Dutch news article critical of Apollo 11, I was determined to find this article. For years I went through old newspaper archives and contacted different Apollo moon landing investigators, but none of them could tell me which article it was. I had almost given up when, like lighting from a clear sky, I was presented with the letter. It is a hand written letter and included a copy of a Dutch newspaper article and political cartoons, as well as references to books. The letter finishes with a question for Bill Kaysing and is signed “Scott”.
Source: Bill Kaysing tribute website
The Letter: Aug 25, 2004
Dear Mr. kaysing,
Several of the articles in the Dutch press back in July of 1969 about the Apollo program were deadline Houston and those stories are, of course, similar to stories that ran in the U.S.
I enclosed a copy of an article that ran in the July 21, 1969 issue of the Dutch newspaper Het Parool (on page 2.) The headline of the article is “Maanlanding is Geld Verknoeien” and that means “Moon Landing is a Waste of Money.”
On the front page of the July 23, 1969 issue of Het Parool there is a political cartoon of Nixon holding the earth on his shoulders and balancing the moon on his toe.
The person who sent me the “Maanlanding is Geld Verknoeien” article said he found a political cartoon of the lunar module squashing Vietnamese peasants in a Dutch paper. Unfortunately, he didn’t send me a copy of that cartoon. He was searching Het Parool and de Volkskrant for articles about the Apollo program that were printed in July of 1969. Both Het Parool and de Volkskrant are Dutch newspapers.
The Apollo program has been described in several different ways: Author Walter Mc Dougall described the Apollo program as the “largest single civilian pork barrel project in history.” (p. 374 of “The Heavens and the Earth”)
On page 8 of your book, you implied that the Apollo program was a military project. Some people have called the Apollo program propaganda (because the words “United States” were displayed on the LM, astronauts were saluting, there were photos and videos of the American flag, etc.)
Author James R. Hansen wrote a book called “Spaceflight Revolution” that is part of the NASA History series. On page 439 of that book, Hansen makes the following comment: “We should not look to Apollo as a model to emulate.” (Hansen, page 439)
If the Apollo program was nothing more than propaganda, then pretend missions to the moon would simply give Americans false pride and junk science.
However, I can’t imagine the U.S. gov’t launching several Saturn Vs “just for fun.” That’s why I think I have only part the story.
The “Discoverer” program (pre-Apollo) had a “cover story.” The STATED purpose of the Discoverer program was “to do science experiments” and “study the weather.” The REAL purpose of the Discoverer program was to launch spy satellites into polar orbit from vandenberg AFB and photograph the former Soviet Union to assess its military strength. The Discoverer program has been declassified.
Do you think that the Apollo “lunar” missions may have been a “cover story” for military activity of some kind? If so, can you elaborate? Parts of the apollo program remain classified to the day.
Scott
Scott, in his correspondence with Bill Kaysing, cites a Dutch article titled "Moon Landing is a Waste of Money," claiming it was published on July 21, 1969, in the Dutch newspaper "Het Parool." This assertion is inaccurate, as the article actually appeared on July 22, 1969, on page 6 of the same publication. While it is conceivable that a similar article was released a day earlier in other newspapers, the version Scott referenced is identical to the one published on the 22nd, with the sole distinction being the inclusion of a photograph of Prof. Dr. Tinbergen accompanied by the caption "...I don't believe in it...".
Correction: On January 18, 2025, it was noted that the article originally did appeared on July 21, 1969, in "Het Rotterdamsch Parool," with a subsequent publication in Het Parool the following day. Scot was correct; the original printing occurred on January 21, 1969.[7]
This is a translation of the article that was published on July 22, 1969, in The Parool.
'MOON LANDING IS A WASTE OF MONEY'
(From our reporters)
"AMSTERDAM, Monday — Despite his admiration for the achievement, Prof. Dr. J. Tinbergen, economics professor in Rotterdam and director of the Center for Development Programming, considers the moon landing "a waste of money". He was not watching his television nor did he listen to the radio last night: "I don't believe in it" said the professor.
Professor Tinbergen considers it more important that the technical ingenuity and funds invested in the moon project are used for "projects on continents that can significantly improve living conditions on Earth". He believes that development aid is of much greater direct importance.[1]
The other people mentioned in the article are Shipbuilder Cornelis Verolme, Prof. dr. C. de Jager, Prof. dr. J. H. Oort, Prof. dr. M. Minnaert, Kardinaal Alfrink and Minister of Foreign Affairs Luns. They were all convinced that it was real, they had seen and heard it with their own eyes and ears on television.[1]
Nobel Prize for Economics
In those days, as well as today, publicly asserting that the Apollo 11 moon landing was fabricated would lead to significant professional repercussions. This underscores the significance of Prof. Dr. Tinbergen's remarks, as he explicitly mentioned that he neither watched television nor listened to the radio, indicating his disbelief in the event. By acknowledging the achievement without specifying its nature and distancing himself from mainstream media, he cleverly conveys skepticism while avoiding direct confrontation. Notably, later in 1969, Prof. Dr. J. Tinbergen was awarded the first Nobel Prize in Economics. Contrary to claims by NASA supporters that no prominent figures questioned the moon landing, it is evident that several notable individuals, including this Nobel laureate, have voiced similar doubts.
The Cartoons
Atlas ‘69
Het Parool 23nd July 1969, page 1 (See image) Scott refers to a cartoon published in Het Parool on the 23rd of July 1969, showing Nixon in a juggling act with the Earth on his back and the Moon balanced on his toe. The cartoon is titled “Atlas ‘69” and there are other cartoons on page 11 of the same newspaper. To me it is just a funny cartoon and doesn’t hold any reference to a fake moon landing, only to the political instability of the late sixties and seventies.[3]
Moon Shadow
Het Parool 22nd July 1969, page 3 (See Image) The second cartoon, that Scott didn’t find, was published in Het Parool on the 22nd of July 1969 on page 3. It shows the Lunar Module (LM) landing pad squashing the Middle East, Biafra and Vietnam. The cartoon is titled “In de maanschaduw”, which translates to “In the moon’s shadow”. The Apollo 11 story just made people in the west forget the conflicts and the wars, as Apollo 11 stood in the spotlight for a day or two.[4]
What I like about this cartoon is that those same shadows later became NASA’s biggest nightmare, as many of the Apollo photographs made on the moon clearly show the use of an artificial light source or studio lights. However the person who drew this cartoon couldn't have known that at that time. In my opinion this cartoon is also just a reflection of the political instability of the late sixties and seventies.
The Books
Author James R. Hansen wrote “Spaceflight Revolution” and Author Walter Mc Dougall wrote “The Heavens and the Earth”.
These two book validate the reports of Thomas Baron [5], a quality control inspector working at North American Aviation (NAA), the prime NASA contractor for the construction of the Apollo spacecraft.
Mr. Baron wrote two critical reports. The first was presented to NASA officials in January 1967, alleging improper actions and irregularities that he had witnessed while working at the Kennedy Space Center (KSC). NAA managers met with Baron to address his report. They decided that some of Baron's criticisms had merit, but that the rest of his report was inapplicable or unfounded for a variety of reasons.
After leaking his report to the media Baron was fired.
Baron then started to assemble a more thorough report. After the Apollo 1 fire he delivered this report, containing at least 500 pages, to the Congressional committee investigating the incident. During his testimony to the committee, on April 21st 1967, Baron stated that the Apollo program was in such disarray that the United States would never make it to the moon. Six days later Baron was killed instantly, along with his wife and stepdaughter, when a train crashed into their car near their home in Florida.[6]
About 50 pages of the 500 page report have been made public, the rest seems to have disappeared?
Julian Scheer was assistant administrator of public affairs for NASA in Washington D.C. from 1962 to 1971. He was best known for his contributions to the 1969 Apollo 11 moon landing mission. He said it best in the 2001 documentary “Did we go to the moon”. When he was asked about the Baron Report he said: “There was a real fear that the program could be stopped dead in its tracks”.[6]
Scott ends his letter with some thoughts and a question for Bill Kaysing. Do you think that the Apollo “lunar” missions may have been a “cover story” for military activity of some kind? If so, can you elaborate? Parts of the apollo program remain classified to the day.
Summary
NASA supporters will assure you that Professor Tinbergen never claimed the Apollo 11 moon landing was a hoax. They contend that Thomas Baron's death was merely an unfortunate accident and dismiss the existence or significance of the 500-page Baron report. In response to these NASA advocates, I would like to echo Julian Scheer's statement:
"There was a real fear that the program could be stopped dead in its tracks."
It confirms that Mr. Baron's report was indeed critical, and individuals like Professor Tinbergen would recognize the extensive financial implications associated with NASA.
All of these sources are utilized in accordance with the "fair use" doctrine. [1] “Maanlanding is geld verknoeien” - Het parool 22 July 1969 - page 6 | [2] Britania | [3] Cartoon Nixon - Het parool 23 July 1969 - page 1 | [4] Cartoon LM - Het Parool 22 July 1969 - page 3 | [5] Baron Report PDF | [6] Did We Land On The Moon | [7] Het Rotterdamsch paroolHet Rotterdamsch parool
