Bill Kaysing may have been the first APOLLO Hoax believer, but he was not the first SPACE Hoax believer.

That "award" goes to a rather unknown guy named Lloyd Mallan.

In 1966, he wrote the book "Russia´s Space Hoax", claiming that the Soviet space program had been faked.





In 1975, James Oberg wrote about Lloyd Mallan:

"Observers who do not believe in the superiority of socialism may be tempted therefore to disbelieve the entire Soviet space program. John W. Campbell called this the "Say-it-isn't-so" syndrome, and described it and its chief prophet, Lloyd Mallan, in a definitive article in "National Review".

Since 1957, Mr. Mallan has maintained that each successive Russian space feat has been faked or greatly exaggerated. In 1959 he testified before Congress that the Russian moon-probe had never existed. The next year he maintained that the farside moon photos were faked. Later he picked up and played up the discrepancies and distortions in the manned flight program. The 1965 space-walk was a fake, he maintained; the 1967 Soyuz disaster was not what it appeared, he claims, but was possibly the first "real" Russian spaceflight.

Mr. Mallan's research is thorough; his understanding of some basic principles of astronautics is somewhat less so. He takes a safe and reasonable maxim ("Don't believe everything the Russians say") and extends it ad absurdium ("don't believe anything the Russians say"). Certainly, as this study clearly indicates, Russian claims must be carefully judged against their context and against other sources. Clearly, the Russians would like to hide failures and set-backs, and to give the best possible image to the world. This public relations effort has been known to employ careless if not fraudulent techniques, such as the method of taking US sketches, photos and charts, changing the language, and releasing them, explicitly or implicitly, as Soviet achievements.

The Luna-3 photos are really genuine, all of Mr. Mallan's tedious details notwithstanding. Conversely, Mr. Mallan is right when he says that most of the Leonov spacewalk movies are not genuine. They are shots underwater, shots from wire-suspension training sets, shots in simulations and practices. The Russians were often careless in describing the sources of these films. The spacewalk itself was real."

URL: http://www.jamesoberg.com/russian/phantoms.html

I have also located what appears to be a direct Lloyd Mallan quote:

"American researcher, Lloyd Mallan, called the Soviet's "Lunik" moon landing a hoax, since no tracking station picked up its signals, and that Alexie Leonov's spacewalk on March 18, 1965 was also staged. Concerning the film of the spacewalk, Mallan said:

"Four months of solid research interviewing experts in the fields of photo-optics, photo-chemistry and electro-optics, all of whom carefully studied the motion picture film and still photographs officially released by the Soviet Government ... (indicate them to be) double-printed .. The foreground (Leonov) was superimposed on the background (Earth below). The Russian film showed reflections from the glass plate under which a double plate is made ... Leonov was suspended from wire or cables ... In several episodes of the Russian film, light was reflected from a small portion of wire (or cable) attached to Leonov's space suit ... One camera angle was impossible of achievement. This showed Leonov crawling out of his hatch into space. It was a head on shot, so the camera would have had to have been located out in space beyond the space ship."

URL: http://www.viewfromthewall.com/fwch6.htm





<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Maskelyne on 2002-07-07 18:49 ]</font>

Hmm, I wonder if this is the source of the quote I questioned a couple of days ago in this thread:

http://www.badastronomy.com/phpBB/vi...um=3&8&start=6

I still wonder if anyone has any verifiable proof of this. I wasn't able to find anything on the web.

(added)

Doh, I should have read the quote in the OP a little more closely:

So it seems that some of the Soviet footage was misrepresented, whether accidentally or deliberately. But there's not much doubt as to the spacewalk actually happening. Still, I'd like some independent verification. You know, to know just what was going on there.
_________________
<font size="-1">PLEASE NOTE: Some quantum physics theories suggest that when the consumer is not directly observing this product, it may cease to exist or will exist only in a vague and undetermined state.</font>

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: David Hall on 2002-07-07 19:30 ]</font>

<a name="20020707.4:09"> page 20020707.4:09 aka Mint1
On 2002-07-07 19:08, David Hall wrote: To A mint1

On 2002-07-07 18:47, Maskelyne wr
Thinking along these lines
about Lies & Deceptions
YES! I believe in " Lies & Deceptions "
to name just two..
Anyway some when not so long ago
I had a post HERE on Ba

to another Board somewhere
not as crowded as this one

where some of the BA posters appeared
Grapes for 1.. ? and some others

Now days I can't find my way "BACK"
darn it anyway............... 4:14 P.M. PST










_________________

At last! A hoax that is different from the Standard Apollo-Bashing Mk I set of nonsense!
Completely barking mad, but original.

__________________
Garlic Bread?!?!

Actually, this does bring up a point for those of us who are not that in-depth-knowledgable (yes, there's a pun hiding in there somewhere): if the only film of the Leonov space-walk was definitely faked (I'm guessing that was done because they didn't send a camera along, or something happened to it and/or the film), how do we know that the space-walk actually happened?

No, I'm not a HBer, I'm just curious as to what other sources of info we have on the Soviet missions.

The (PRAVDA nyet pravda) Curtmudgeon

Well, a large amount of information on the Soviet space program is coming to light, and we find that a lot of what we once believed about it is some what propagandaic. Soviet space prowess was not all it was cracked up to be. Gagarin, for example, ejected from his Vostok capsule, invalidating his orbital flight according to FAI rules. (He fulfilled the spirit of the law, so we give it to him anyway.) Leonov had so much trouble getting back in his spaceship because their airlock was a thrown-together design intended to beat the Americans to the first spacewalk. The Vokhshod capsule was horribly unsafe.

We don't harp on these too much because it sounds like sour grapes. But it's important to realize that the Soviets were not as pre-eminent in space as the hoax believers want us to believe.

So the HBs claim that the USSR was way ahead in rocket technology and 'firsts' at the start of the space race and they claim that the USSR space program was not as succesful as they origional made out.

So which is it?

Maskelyne: In 1966, he wrote the book "Russia´s Space Hoax",

Mallan's first book was entitled The Big Red Lie, which was printed in 1959.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Karamoon on 2002-07-08 18:58 ]</font>

JayUtah: We don't harp on these too much because it sounds like sour grapes. But it's important to realize that the Soviets were not as pre-eminent in space as the hoax believers want us to believe.

I agree. The Soviet "space first" epidemic reached proportions of..

The first man in space to eat a candy bar.

The first man in space to sing 'I'm the King of the castle'.

The first crew in space to play 'Eye-spy with my little eye'. (something beginning with E)

They had a whole other bucket of space firsts that they are too embarrassed to admit to.

The first crew in space to play 'Eye-spy with my little eye'. (something beginning with E)

That's the funniest thing I've read in ages!!! I can imagine it to be the shortest game of I Spy ever.
(Does the Russian word for Earth begin with an E?)

[img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img] [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img] [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img] [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img]

Yeah, the space race does have some fairly humorous overtones. I think the U.S. holds the record for first corned beef sandwich in space too. The debate over Gagarin is heated among some participants.

Thankfully we aren't too concerned with records today. We let Gagarin slide. But people like Bart Sibrel want to read a great deal into those official records. First this, first that -- to him it all means that the Soviets were way ahead in space. Now we're hearing from the former Soviets that they really didn't consider themselves that far ahead. They knew the Mercury capsule was better technology than the Vostok, etc.

John: Does the Russian word for Earth begin with an E?

It probably begins with an È, or É, or Ê, or Ë, or any one of a thousand other squiggly characters?

Jay: Now we're hearing from the former Soviets that they really didn't consider themselves that far ahead.

I think Robert Seamans sums it up well when he says: "They got amazing mileage out of what capability they had."

The Red Files.

Earth = çåìëÿ (Bah, didn't take the characters, here's the URL I used: http://www.freedict.com/onldict/rus.html

Sorta looks like an e, I guess.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: RalphVanDyke on 2002-07-08 19:19 ]</font>