<<APOLLO 20 E.B.E. MonaLisa TV unscheduled
posted by "retiredafb" on revver.com, on April 2008
Revver.com, in 2008.
Notice the missing legs of the presumed astronaut.
"retireafb" Revver.com .
Other frames from the same footage
On the lunar horizon are visible the so-called "Cathedral"
(on the left) and the dark-grey wall
of the alien base (on the right)
THE WALL ON THE LUNAR HORIZON: CLOSE-UP OF A FRAME
... according to the insider "moonwalker1966delta"
Moreover, it is visble close to the LEM even what looks like a
Read the interview with Apollo 19 Commander for the reasons
of its presence.
Presumed Apollo 20 mission patch, visible as reflection in the
footage of EBE Mona Lisa inside the LEM, uploaded by retiredafb on
- detail of the footage pointed by an Italian anonymous source -
Video analysis by "a Chinese": comparison between lift-off of the
a presumed Saturn V launched in 1976, and the first stage, spent
and floating in Space
Courtesy "A Chinese"
Frame from the presumed lift-off of a Saturn V, August 1976;
video uploaded by "retiredafb" on YouTube, in April 2007
Video analysis by "a Chinese": comparison of details
visible in the Apollo 19 incident footage (a 16 mm), and details
official NASA photos of Apollo spacecraft interior.
Courtesy "A Chinese"
Frames from the video "Apollo 20 preparing for DPI",
uploaded by "moonwalker1966delta" on February 12, 2008,
Image credit: "moonwalker1966delta",
The AS15-M-1720 NASA picture: you can see the Fermi walled plane,
the Izsak crater on the left and the
"Izsak D" crater on
the upper right of the picture
- Courtesy NASA/LPI
The detail of the NASA picture listed as AS15-M-1720, but rotated
- Courtesy NASA/LPI -
The Izsak crater
Diameter 30 KM
it is a detail of the image
AS15-M-1720 taken from an altitude of 114 km (Apollo 15 mission);
Camera Tilt: VERT; Revolution: 44;
Sun Elevation: 20°;
Lens Focal Length: 3 inch
APOLLO 19 AND 20:
LIGHTS AND SHADOWS OF A DISCLOSURE
THE CATHEDRAL, THE BASE, AND EVIDENCE AGAINST THE
MISSING LEGS OF THE ASTRONAUT IN THE LEM
by Luca Scantamburlo
UPDATING, Jan 31, 2010
The following discussion and
information are not part of my recent book's contents (Apollo
20. The Disclosure, by L. Scantamburlo, Lulu.com, USA,
Jan 2010, essay in English language). I have decided- because of help received by
anonymous and not anonymous sources - to share with you the main
considerations about the video of the E.B.E. "Mona Lisa" inside
the LEM, posting them on my website, available for everyone,
instead of including them in my book available for those who want
to have a right context where to read the story, but with a deep
understanding step by step of my long research, begun in May 2007.
In my book Apollo 20.
The Disclosure, the general public can find not only
almost all my articles in English language I have written on the
issue from 2007 until 2008, but also the possible reasons I have
identified for the disclosure and for this controversial strategy
chosen by the insiders: of course I mean my own opinion on this
unusual disclosure, polluted with some misleading data, and since
the very beginning contaminated with the video fake of the
so-called "City" (Station
one, in the mission targets).
I guess that everything (and even the video fake) had a
meaning but only recently I was able to find a right context for
the single puzzle pieces:in
my book the reader will find some revelations made by William
never published before, and the clues I have identified that could
be indirect evidence of space history (especially through the
memoirs of a former U.S. astronaut, written with his friend, a
Soviet cosmonaut) coherent with the testimony granted by Apollo 20
and 19 Commanders.
The missing legs and torso of the presumed astronaut
visible in the footage uploaded by "retiredafb" on Revver.com, is
an evidence of strong contradiction. ATS (AboveTopSecret)
users and members discussed the topic of Apollo 19 and 20 case
years ago, in a interesting thread of this large and famous
Internet community of USA.
At the time I participated to the discussion as a ATS
member, but after a few days I left the on-line debate because of
some considerations on me and against my reputation, and expressed
on ATS forum by a member of that community. Only months ago I
realized the remarkable and right consideration on the missing
legs, which I had missed in reading the debate.
In Italy the same doubts about the missing legs were
discussed soon afterwards my interview with the television news Studio Aperto,
broadcasted by Italia 1
(Italian television channel), on October 25, 2009, during the
television show "Mistero", directed by Enrico Ruggeri. Someone of
the tv audience wrote me after my video-interview with the Italian
journalist Sabrina Pieragostini,
and pointed out to me the above element of contradiction. It seems
that the astronaut figure is an element of a video manipulation
(see one of the first frames on the right of the report, and you
will notice the missing legs).
We must pay attention to that and - if we have a honest
approach - we cannot deny it. Something is wrong with that
footage, the alleged film of Apollo 20 mission, shot at MET 174
(according to the subtitles of introduction).
At the same time we must recognize the presence of Lunar
Module details coherent with the interior parts of a real Lunar
Module, and even the presence of what looks like a Soviet lander
on the lunar surface: the Lunokhod,
the unmanned lunar surface vehicle projected and developed with
success by Soviet scientists, during the Space race, and launched
Moreover, we have to recognize several moving shadows in
the footage, coherent with the presence of someone inside the
Lunar Module. How can we explain this with such a silly video
element of contradiction (the missing legs of the presumed
astronaut)? We have to remember that - if the footage is authentic
- we would have a digital evidence spread on Internet, and coming
from an analogic footage recorded in 1976, and later
transferred to its digital version. Did someone manipulate the
video on purpose, to give less credibility to it?
The astronaut - who would be William
Rutledge, the Apollo 20
Commander, filmed by a presumed Alexei
Leonov, the same person who would have made the shot of
the E.B.E. Mona Lisa, visible in the footage - wears a typical
NASA astronaut white uniform, with a probable blue logo (the
meatball?) on the front, the revised version of the first NASA
logo. That logo was already used even before 1976, although since
1975 was introduced and used the new logo, the so-called "worm
logo", which was replaced in 1992 by the meatball again.
THE COMMENT OF
"MOONWALKER1966DELTA" ON THE LEM VIDEO: THE CATHEDRAL, THE BASE,
THE MOTHERSHIP, AND THE MISSING PART OF THE ASTRONAUT'S BODY
After to have received comments from my Italian readers who
had another point of view on the footage - believed a fake by many
individuals because of the missing legs - at the end of November
2009 "moonwalker1966delta" sent me a message where there were
similar considerations, and I was very surprised, because I did
not write him nothing about my previous contacts with others, not
published yet at the time, who had sent me considerations very
<<[...] In the
William's video of the LM's interior the upper tower of the
"Cathedral" is visible in the external view frames on upper left
side of the crater while on the right upper side is visible the
external dark-grey wall of the alien base. Since I know this
footage very well I can confirm that the video is authentic and
there is no CG involved. Probably the missing William's torso is
caused by an error on image data or lost pixels during video
copy. If you pay a close attention to the footage you will see
on the windows and the bars moving accordingly to the zoom in
the main footage of the mothership. If you try to concentrate on
the reflexes instead of the mothership you will see the window
the bars and the white figure of Alex reflected.>>
message to Luca Scantamburlo by "moonwalker1966delta", YouTube's
Nov 28, 2009
This means - if we pay attention to the words written by
the Apollo 19 Commander (see above) that A. Leonov occupied the
right side (the right station) of the LEM during the flyover of
the mothership - on the far side of the Moon - while the
Apollo 20 Commander (William Rutledge) occupied the left side of
the LEM. Does it make any sense under the technical point of view
of Space history?
The reader of my essay can find more information about it,
reading my book and consulting the bibliography I have written.
But this was already confirmed by William Rutledge, in the
interview granted in 2007, for those who remember what he said.
REFLECTIONS INSIDE THE LEM: SIGNS OF THE INVISIBLE ASTRONAUT?
In my closing remarks of this updating - not discussed in
my book Apollo 20. The
Disclosure - I want to give the right acknowledgement for
those Italian citizens who wrote me after my video interview with
the Italian television (Studio
news, with the correspondent Sabrina Pieragostini), and who were
able to go beyond the simple opposition true-false:
1) the first individual is the Italian citizen Giuseppe
Sabatini, a fond of Space exploration and of UFO
phenomenon who gave me his permission to mention him.
He wrote me in November 2009 because he had had the feeling
that the video of the LEM has not been manipolated, in spite of it
is true that the astronaut legs are missing. Moreover he pointed
the presence of a lunar map inside the LEM, on the panel, a clear
sign of the mission targets. A detail very consistent with the
testimony spread by the insiders.
2) Another person who wrote me in November and December 2009,
concentrated his attention on the reflections visible in the
footage, especially on that LM window and on the plastic used by
the astronaut (an envelope, a plastic bag?).
CHALCEDON67, YouTube user,
(http://www.youtube.com/user/CHALCEDON67), who has posted a video
called "Apollo 20 - The invisible
man_0001.wmv", result of a his analysis of the video of
the Mona Lisa inside the LEM, posted by "retiredafb" on
Revver.com, on April 8, 2008.
According to my source of information - in contact
with me and who prefers to stay behind the scenes - it is possible
to see not only the structures on the lunar horizon, but also the
signs of the presence of the other astronaut, in front of William
At the beginning he was very skeptical about the disclosure
discussed by me, but later he changed his opinion because a deep
video investigation of the video he has done: there would be
another person in front of the astronaut with the white uniform: a
Caucasian man, wearing a blue uniform and a white t-shirt, and
this man would handle a camera; there would be the reflections of
its presence, and of its camera, like a red spot on the LEM
triangular window, and even the mission patch of the Apollo 20
mission, probably belonging to the uniform of the astronaut. You
can see the detail of the frame he has cut out (figure on the left
of the report).
About the YouTube video of the invisible man of the
footage, click the following link: video about the Apollo 20, the
I have decided to present to you not only some video
analysis provided by "A Chinese" (a reader of mine who prefers to
stay behind the scenes) but also some passages of my unpublished
essay, concerning the Apollo 19 and 20 case, which is coming
This controversial case - the Apollo 19 and 20 story -
contains some kernels of truth, I believe, and this is the only
reason I have been working to the best of my knowledge and ability,
since May 2007.
Many people - from several countries of the world - have
been writing me since May 2007. I thank them. I thank above all
"retiredafb" and "moonwalker1966delta": they have been disclosing
secret pages of space history, in spite of some misleading data
and video fakes spread at the beginning. Perhaps, the real
reason behind this, is under our eyes...for those who want to see
Virgilio, the ancient Latin poet, wrote "Carpent tua poma
nepotes" in his "Bucoliche". The Apollo 20 mission patch quotes
Maybe we are those grandchildren.
OTHER INFORMATION FROM W. RUTLEDGE'S MESSAGES SENT TO L.
[...] Other clues on William Rutledge's knowledge of space
flight and Apollo procedures, are contained in that message. The
discussion is about the contamination of Apollo 20 footage with
Apollo 11 footage: audio (which contaminates the presumed lift-off
of Apollo 20) and video (frames which pollute the beginning of the
presumed LM-15 flyover video, on the Moon).
Here you are an excerpt of that, without any correction by
me, as usual (part of it already disclosed, and part of it
unpublished until the publication of this book):
<<[...] One day, i'll
invite a special friend who is well known in space community, it
could be a good surprise. Abut the soundtrack, i think you'r
right, ididn't compare the sound, but some tapes are polluted with
apollo 11 , sometimes it is a question of one or two frames. A
youtube poster showed me frames from the flyover video, i didn't
notice that. One bravo was an abort procedure,
we had ONE A B ONE C which allowed us to control thrusters on the
LES (escape tower). IMHO, only apollo 12 was effectively using ONE
bravo, after being hit by a lightning strike, but Alan Bean
commuted from SCE to AUX to override and continue the flight. Anyway, i have no apollo 11 tapes,
i can't compare it about soundtrack, but i'll be more carefull
about the title pages. I'll rip off some sound or title pages if
necessary. Honestly, the material has nothing
common with apollo 11. On the lift off sequence, the saturn 5 has
no markings till the third stage. the S IV b had "CCCP" and "USAF"
markings, it was the only part marked, because S IVb never get
back to earth, the other stages had to fall into the sea and
could'nt were markings. µBecause of this lack of markings, one
youtuber told the community he recognize a saturn 1b, which could
not be powerfull enough to send LM+CSM to the moon. In vandenberg,
the saturn V launch had to be not reconizable, no BW lines or USA
marks on the rocket. Only the last ring was black painted, and it
could look like an ordinary DElta rocket at 4 miles distance. I
know it can be confusing for peoples, [...]>>
June 06, 2007, 01:37 AM, from a "retiredafb's message" to Luca
Scantamburlo's YouTube account
CCCP AND USAF MARKINGS ON SATURN V STAGES?
I have always had the impression that ? at least part of it
(maybe the beginning) - the footage named <<APOLLO
launch feed stage 1 and interstaging unit separation>>
uploaded in January 2008 by ?retiredafb? on revver.com, is a
computer graphic work, perhaps based on an original Apollo footage
(so we could have an editing of a fake and an authentic footage);
does it make any sense comparing the film with what Rutledge wrote?
No markings until the third stage, he said: but on the presumed
first stage we can see what it looks like a marking.
Anyway, the altitude of the rocket - when the separation of
the first stage takes place - is enough coherent with what
?moonwalker1966delta? said in my interview with him. Much higher
than previous Apollo missions, and for good reasons as he explains.
Another thing to point: some Revver.com and YouTube users ?
very attentive ? has recognized in that footage a landscape which
does not look like the American coast, but an African Coast and the
Middle East, we can say. They have written their comments on the
Web. Could it be in accordance with a possible launch from Diego
Garcia Island? I do not know. If these presumed missions did take
place indeed, it is possible that after a launch from Vandenberg, in
February 1976 (Apollo 19), the following mission (Apollo 20, taken
place in August 1976) has been launched from the Diego Garcia
Island - as suggested by John Lear ? but, I suppose,
maintaining Vandenberg as Mission Control Center.
That' s just my opinion. I could be wrong. But what we can
watch in the footage ? the presumed first stage (S-IC) after the
separation from the point of view of a probable camera fixed on the
interstage ? is not the Saturn V third stage (S-IVB), that was used
twice during the launch of an Apollo mission and had a single engine
(not 5 engines like the first stage) with restart capability: the
first ignition of S-IVB was necessary to inject the Apollo
spacecraft into earth orbit; the second ignition was used to set the
spacecraft into a translunar trajectory from Earth orbit. According
to ?retiredafb? only the Saturn V stage S-IVB had markings. So, I do
not understand the comment by ?retiredafb? on revver.com, when he
<<Separation of stage one
an interstage unit, the USAF and CCCP markings are slightly
visible on some pictures.>>
What does it mean? That on the other stages there were
writings, but very small compared to the usual markings of a Saturn
V (?USA? marking, for example)?
If we were able to see in the footage the separation of the
third stage (SIV-B), that could be the stage marked with the CCCP
acronym, and with the last ring black painted, as William Rutledge
told me and claimed. This is not the case. But my knowledge of
space flight and space history is not great (I am too young and I am
not a specialist), so it is difficult for me to say what the footage
represents. But I agree with the opinion expressed by ?allojz1986?,
YouTube user. The reader should remember who he is: again, he helpes
the discussion with comments posted on Web, but not on Revver.com in
this occasion: he explains that the first part of the footage is
filmed by the first camera on Saturn V S-II (the second stage),
while most of the footage (so it is an editing) shows from the point
of view of the second camera, fixed inside the interstage module,
floating in Space.
THE CCCP MARKINGS ON THE S-IVB? THE APOLLO 19 INCIDENT AND ITS
Before I disclosed this Rutledge's information about possible
CCCP and USAF markings only on the last stage of the rocket,1 I had
received - in December 2009 ? an e-mail from a source of mine (we
call him ?a Chinese?), in which he attached an analysis of the
footage, and telling me what he believed to be the marking of ?CCCP?
visible on the rocket stage, floating free in Space (snapshot at
The CCCP is ? of course ? the well-known acronym used for
the USSR. This, in my opinion, would be a strange contradiction if
confirmed, which would give less credibility to the William
Rutledge's testimony. It seems there is a marking close to the what
looks like a black ring on the upper part, but I cannot read it. On
the contrary, it is true that the presumed lift-off from Vandenberg
AFB, uploaded on YouTube in 2007, showed a very unusual rocket as
colours and painting, very different from a normal Saturn V. And
this is in accordance with the Rutledge's testimony. A part from the
audio, which comes from an Apollo previous mission.
THE APOLLO 19 INCIDENT: THE KEY
However the same anonymous source ? this Chinese individual
? showed me his personal work of image comparison among the frames
from the Apollo 19 incident YouTube video (a 16 mm footage), and the
interior of the Apollo spacecraft.
It seems that the details visible in the footage uploaded by
?moonwalker1966delta?, are the same details that it is possible
to recognize watching carefully the panel instruments of an
Apollo spacecraft. Of course, if the Apollo 19 incident footage is
an authentic film, it is possible that the crew is not visible
because busy on the frontal panel of the spacecraft (in fact, the
footage itself shows what it looks like the lateral part of the
THE DPI: A TECHNICAL EXPLANATION, EVIDENCE OF AN INSIDER KNOWLEDGE
In December 2009 I asked ?moonwalker1966delta?
(the Apollo 19 Commander) what DPI means in the context of the
preparing for DPI>>, uploaded on YouTube by him on
February 12, 2008 (see the Appendix IV), and which as introduction
has a DoD marking and a warning (?internal use copy? and ?not for
general...?). The footage seems an editing. In its second part is
clearly visible the lunar surface, through the LEM window. The LEM
seems in lunar orbit yet.
The insider (?moonwalker1966delta?) gave me a technical
explanation (a little too much for a simple hoaxer, as many
individuals claim) that I reproduce as follows:
<<DPI or PDI is nothing then
the acronym for Powered Descent Initiation that is the second
phase of braking phases on lunar orbit right to the motion
surface. The first is called DOI (Descent
Orbit insertion) that is a retrograde manouver that is made in the
orbit 180° and called Hohmann type transfer. It is made to reduce
the altitude from about 60/70 nautical miles to 50000 feet. At
this point DPI initiates and it's devided in 3 phases. The
breaking phase to reduce orbit velocity, the approach phase that
is controlled visually by pilot and the landing phase made to
override automatic guidance for final approach and
December 05, 2009, from a moonwalker1966delta's message to Luca
Scantamburlo's YouTube account
This Website contains cookies analytics and can contain cookies of
third parts! The visitor is informed and allows the use of the
cookies, otherwise, please abandon the Website or discharging this
function of allocation of cookies, acting on the configuration and
preferences of the browser navigation. For more information,
please go to the link privacy.