Did We Go to the Moon or Not – Solved

By: David John Oates

It has been a huge controversy over the past several years, even the topic of a TV special. Did we really go to the moon or not? Did NASA fake the moon landings? Now one person who claims she is proficient at backwards tapes, Karina Kaiser, has come out with a set of reversals that she claims proves we did not go to the moon. Her reversals can be seen here:

It has always been the opinion of this author that we did go to the moon, and I have not been convinced with arguments that say we did not go. This website examined the question of whether we went to the moon or not a couple of years ago and our results were posted here:

Probably the most significant reversal we found is this one here…

"I don’t accept the Bible as a [gospel of any]thing except a historical record. But we did go to the moon. You betcha sweet ass we went to the moon."Inevitable saga (Congruent. Confirming what he is saying forward. Saga is a historical record, a chronology of events and it was inevitable because mankind was destined to go to the moon.)

I interpreted this reversal as he was telling a true story and an accurate chronology of historical events. In another example, the reversal confirms what he is saying forwards.

"Now what that all meant I don’t know, but it wasn’t the kind of radiation that gave us a problem of any kind. You could see it. You could close your eyes and just [see these things] shoot by." You see this (Talking about travelling through the radiation belt. A congruent reversal indicating they did travel through the belt.)

Given these seemingly congruent reversals, I was very surprised when Karina Kaiser came out with her results. This has prompted me to examine her claims and her reversals closely. Here are my analysis results of each reversal she has posted. My overall conclusion is posted at the end of this analysis. The reversals Karina claims to have found are posted first, just click onto the speaker icon to hear them. I then comment on her reversals below.


This is a hi-resolution image from the new LRO (Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter) of the 1969 landing site of Apollo 11, the first men on the moon and you can even see the footprint tracks
This is a hi-resolution image from the new LRO (Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter) of the 1969 landing site of Apollo 11, the first men on the moon and you can even see the footprint tracks.


This is another hi-resolution image from the new LRO (Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter) of the 1971 landing site of Apollo 15. Notice the LVR (Lunar Vehicle Rover) on the right side of the image.
This is another hi-resolution image from the new LRO (Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter) of the 1971 landing site of Apollo 15. Notice the LVR (Lunar Vehicle Rover) on the right side of the image.


This is a hi-resolution image from the new LRO (Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter) of the 1972 landing site of Apollo 17, where the last men on the moon walked. The inset is of the descent stage of the landing module left there when they launched back to Earth.
This is a hi-resolution image from the new LRO (Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter) of the 1972 landing site of Apollo 17, where the last men on the moon walked. The inset is of the descent stage of the landing module left there when they launched back to Earth.


Reversal 1 – Karina’s comments:

Walter Cronkite, US Broadcast Journalist and CBS’s former Anchorman reports live Apollo 11 lift-off:

1. Thirty-two minutes (past the) hour lift off on Apollo 11… 
It sucks– what an odd thing to say….


Reversal 1 – My comments

Karina has only documented a small portion of the reversal. The whole reversal says Apollo 11 not perfect. Ah. It sucks (right click on reversal to download mp3 file in this file and others to follow). What does he mean by Apollo 11 is not perfect? I don’t know.


Reversal 2 – Karina’s

Unknown Houston speaker:

2. Apollo 11 – (this is Houston, ID check), over?
Guys, stay down the street
– down the street or up in space??


Reversal 2 – My comments

I don’t think this reversal is clear enough to document. "Guys" is not clear at all, and even if it is there, it could mean anything. Houston Space Centre is a big place, he could have been thinking about another part of the centre.


Reversal 3 – Karina’s comments

Apollo 11 to Houston July 1969

1. You never get a role from them..
Bad rapport. Can I come in? – Lets suppose that this conversation between Apollo 11 & Houston took place in a recording studio. Then this reversal might say: “I don’t understand, can I come in to your studio room (and you show me what you want me to do).”


Reversal 3 – My comments

This audio is too bad to really document and that very fact may explain the reversal. I hear the reversal as "Bad rapport, do I come in." This is classic radio talk, Bad rapport (the signals are bad) "do I come in", or can you hear me? Nothing sinister in that.


Reversal 4 – Karina’s comments

Buzz Aldrin Jr, Apollo 11 Astronaut:

2 . Well we shut out the sun coming in from [the other window into] the spacecraft so…
Remember the Lie


Reversal 4 – My comments

I agree with this reversal. But what is the lie he is remembering?


Reversal 5 – Karina’s comments

3. …so ah it’s blocking through a ah the ah number one window [and there isn’t any] reflective light.
Hyena paranoid

Hyena in Reverse Speech describes deceptive cunning and conniving behaviour and indicates someone with ulterior motives who can not be trusted.


Reversal 5 – My comments

I agree with this reversal and the Reverse Speech metaphor dictionary definition. But what are they being deceptive about?"


Reversal 6 – Karina’s comments

Apollo 11 – Neil Armstrong 20 July 1969

1.I’m at the foot of the ladder, the LM (Lunar Module) footrests are only ah depressed in the surface about ah one or two inches although the surface appears to be ah very very [fine grained as you get close] to it, it’s almost like powder
Joke engineered now


Reversal 6 – My comments

This reversal is too imprecise to be documented. Too many syllables and "engineered" can be heard several different ways


Reversal 7 – Karina’s comments

2. That’s one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind
Man will spacewal(k) -This is a future tense reversal indicating it had not taken place yet


Reversal 7 – My comments

I have been playing this reversal for years and explain it very simply as Armstrong is expressing his hope for the future of mankind in space as he steps onto the lunar surface. Just because I will have dinner tomorrow doesn’t mean i didn’t have dinner today. The same is true for this reversal.


Reversal 8 – Karina’s comments

President Nixon’s phone call to Apollo 11 – 20 July 1969

President Nixon:

1. For every America[n this has to be the] proudest day of our lives
Deep is (our) Sin


Reversal 8 – my comments

Agree with the reversal but what sin is he referring to. We all know the corruption that existed in the Nixon administration.


Reversal 9 – Karina’s comments.

Neil Armstrong:

Thank you Mr President. It’s a great honour and privilege for us to be here representing not only the United States but men of [peace of all nat]ions, and with interests and the curiosity and with the vision for the future.
Share Law – the Fib – This is a sentence building reversal: "men of peace of all nations share Law –  the Fib"


Reversal 9 – My comments

The reversal actually says "They share all the fib." It relates to his exact forward words which is "peace of all nations." Clearly all nations do share all the fib or the lie because we don’t have peace in all nations. The reversal is complementary and has nothing to do with a lie he might be telling about the moon landing.


Reversal 10 – Karina’s comments

Apollo 11 Post Flight Press Conference 12 August 1969, Houston, USA

Neil Armstrong:

1. We all here and people listening in today have the opportunity [to share] that adventure over it’s developing and unfolding in the past months and years
There is shit


Reversal 10 – my comments.

This is tough one to comment on. There are other reversals in this track. First of all the reversal Karina has documented as there is shit, actually says "There is shit. We need to fry the head." This is followed by another reversal that says "Near blood. Its terrible." Did something terrible or ominous happen before, during, or after the mission that we do not know about? Certainly there were deaths in the Space program before Apollo 11.


Reversal 11 – Karina’s comments

Buzz Aldrin:

2. Following this ah separation manoeuvre on the back side of the moon ah we made a descent orbit insertion which is ah [slightly over sev]enty foot per second manoeuvre…
Vessel in House – Apollo 11: shouldn’t it be on the moon rather than in a house??


Reversal 11 – My comments

The whole reversal actually says "NASA built the vessel in a house." This is not an ominous reversal at all. NASA built their vessels indoors.


Reversal 12 – Karina’s comments

3. …that [ah lowers our alt]itude down to fifty thousand feet
Liar saw a Lie


Reversal 12 – My Comments

The reversal actually says "Denied this. Liar saw a lie." What is the lie? And what has he denied?


Reversal 13 – Karina’s comments

4. This second experiment is ah the ah laser reflector, we’ve been successful in bouncing [laser beams off this] in excess of a hundred ah rays of ah our corner reflectors.
Set Farce near Brazil


Reversal 13 – My comments

The only words clear in this reversal are near Brazil – Set farce is too imprecise to be documented.


Reversal 14 – Karina’s comments

5. This ah solution for the ah first sequence of[rendezvous manoeuvres was extremely close and agreed very closely with ah with the value that the ground had given us.
In a Movie now


Reversal 14 – My comments

Agree with this reversal but see nothing ominous with it. They are all in a movie now as a result of the moon landings.


Reversal 15 – Karina’s comments

Neil Armstrong:

6. During our flight to the moon we flew though the moon shadow. In fact the moon was eclipsed in the sun and ah we took the opportunity to try and take some photographs of it bu[t our film] was just not sufficiently fast to ah capture the event…
My Fraud


Reversal 15 – My comments

This reversal is here. What is the fraud? And what is the lie and the denial being referenced in other reversals?


Reversal 16 – Karina’s comments

BBC1 TV The Sky at Night with Patrick Moore  31 March 2002

Patrick Moore, British astronomer and BBC presenter of The Sky at Night – During the Apollo program, he was one of the major presenters of BBC television’s coverage of the moon landing missions, the recordings of which the BBC wiped during the 1970s when it was believed that such old material had little value and the expense of storage could be saved!!

Douglas Arnold was the Assistant to the Managing Director of Kodak Ltd. He was a member of the BBC TV Apollo Studio team along with Patrick Moore and others.

In this 2002 TV show Patrick Moore played Devil’s Advocate for Douglas Arnold as they sorted through various bones of contention raised by those who question the Apollo record.

Patrick Moore:

1. Lets go on now to this weird idea that the lunar landings [never happened] and were faked ah by NASA.
They haven’t


Reversal 16 – My comments

This reversal is too imprecise to document


Reversal 17 – Karina’s comments

Douglas Arnold:

2. They had a TV camera on [the outside] of the ah lunar module and when the crew was preparing for Neil Armstrong to come down, being the first one down the ladder, they initiated this ca – they switched on this camera
We are sly


Reversal 17 – My Comments

The reversal actually says "They are slime." The "m" was clipped off the end of it. No idea what the reversal means.


Reversal 18 – Karina’s Comments

3. Way back in the sixties one of the lunar orbiters photographed Surveyor I sitting on the lunar surface. Now we couldn’t actually see Surveyor, what we saw was a bright point of light throwing a very very definite shadow. Now nobody at that time [said ‘oh] this is a fraud, Surveyor isn’t on the lunar surface. They accepted the interpretation. Now it so happens that we have a similar Apollo image.
Whoo(p) it is– this relates to the forward section "said oh this is a fraud…"


Reversal 18 – My comments

Too imprecise to document


Reversal 19 – Karina’s comments

CBS 60 Minutes – Presenter Ed Bradley with Neil Armstrong & Walter Cronkite July 2006

Walter Cronkite, whom a major poll once named the "most trusted figure" in American public life, was one of the foremost boosters of America’s technological prowess, anchoring the flight of Apollo 11

Walter Cronkite:

1. "We were following the flight plan, and we suddenly realised that he’d made a detour. And [we didn’t know how long that] detour was gonna be
Then I lie on Video


Reversal 19 – My comment

The reversal is weak but it is there.


Reversal 20 – Karina’s comments

Astronauts Gone Wild – A Documentary Film by Bart Sibrel 2004

Buzz Aldrin – Apollo 11 – 2004

1. [You oughta be ash]amed of yourself
Shame the Lie


Reversal 20 – My comments

Yes, the reversal is there but Buzz Aldrin could very well be talking about the lie he believes the other person is spreading – ie: that we didn’t go to the moon. He should be ashamed of his lie.


Reversal 21 – Karina’s comments

2. Well you are [talking to] the wrong guy…
The Nigger – (sentence building reversal: "you are talking to the Nigger". Aldrin describes part of himself as being in a powerless position.

NIGGER; a derogatory term, regardless of race; an insult; dysfunction in life; to be attracting rubbish; to destroy ones power.


Reversal 21 – My comments.

A weak reversal. And it doesn’t mean much, he could just be abusing the interviewer like the previous reversal.


Reversal 22 – Karina’s comments

3. But you are doing it the wrong way. You don’t mis[lead somebody like] me to come in here
Gauleader must kneel

MUST = insistence; dominance; control; a command
KNEEL – to be humbled; submissive; to learn; to kneel before God.

Gauleaders were local potentates of the Nazi party. They were given many authorities, but were responsible directly to Hitler himself who had sole power over them. The Fuehrer had them in his grip.

With this in mind I offer this explanation:

In forward speech Mr Aldrin told Mr Sibrel that he was talking to the wrong guy referring him to NASA. He accuses Mr Sibrel for having mislead him to come here to do this interview. Within that sentence we have this reversal: –

Gauleader must kneel –.

Mr Aldrin refers to himself as being in a Gauleader position, directly responsible to NASA who has sole power of him. Therefore he can’t give Mr Sibrel what he is asking because he has been commanded to be submissive to NASA, having to "kneel to higher power", now as well as at the time of the Apollo programmes.


Reversal 22 – My comments

The reversal actually says "Your leader must kneel. See mighty hell." He’s having a metaphoric dig at the leaders of those who say we didn’t go to the moon, telling them to get off their high horses and see the damage they are doing.


Reversal 23 – Karina’s comments

John Young –Apollo 10 & 16 Astronaut – 2004

1. I’m gonna give you the opportunity to get the [hell knocked out of you] if you don’t leave me alone.
See the Rat can’t lie


Reversal 23 – My comments

A weak reversal but it is there. Not sure what it means


Reversal 24 – Karina’s comments

Eugene Cernan – Apollo 10 & 17 Astronaut – 2004

1. It was the warmth that accompanied your visit to another planet. For instance our lunar module when we lifted off the surface, had to burn for 7 minutes and 14 seconds. And that’s just light off, only one engine ah you we had redundant or back up [valves in] but only one engine, one set of propellant tanks, it had to light off and had to burn for 7 minutes and 14 seconds.
This Lie


Reversal 24 – My comments

Too imprecise and goes straight into gibberish.


Reversal 25 – Karina’s comments

Michael Collins – Apollo 11 Astronaut – 2004

Mr Sibrel: Well you have the opportunity to set the record straight…

Michael Collins:

I’m not on the record right now
I will no(t) – direct response to the opportunity given by Mr Sibrel


Reversal 25 – my comments

Quite a clear reversal. Nothing ominous though. He indicates forwards he wont speak to this person. The reversal confirms it.


Reversal 26 – Karina’s comments

Ed Mitchell – Apollo 14  – 2004

1. I ah don’t’ particularly [like to take oaths like] that either (swearing on bible)
Gull swore. Dead Gull

SEAGULL the part of us that is striving to be free; the part that can be free; a very gentle part of us; the part that is exploring; like the dove; unlimited boundaries for personal growth; used as the soul seeking freedom

DEAD refers to emotional death or death of energy, drive, or purpose in life; the inability to achieve or follow through with drive or purpose in life.

This reversal says that by doing what he did – Gull swore – he killed that part of himself within that it relates to his personal growth and freedom within – Dead Gull – and this is harmful to his most inner self.


Reversal 26 – My comments

The reversal actually says, "Gull swore, gets gull." This makes the meaning the opposite of what Karina says. The Gull is not dead and he is standing by his convictions.


Overall Conclusion

There are not enough reversals in this analysis to say we didn’t go to the moon. Many of the reversals have routine meanings. There are, however, reversals that indicate a lie of some sort or something being hidden. This could be anything – maybe something about the mission that we weren’t told about, something that they found or saw maybe? I have no idea. The reversals are not conclusive and further work needs to be done to unravel this mystery.

Some emails received


There are a lot of lies with regards the "Moon Hoax", but not going to the moon is not one of them.

Most people believed that the Apollo and Saturn V rocket were the height of US technology at the time. That was in itself a lie. The Saturn V was a dangerous launch vehicle. The Apollo was a dangerous space craft. Neither would qualify for human space flight ratings today. They were simply too unsafe. It was a miracle, that the Apollo missions were so successful. It is generally agreed, had they not stopped the missions when they did, failure and death would have eventually occurred. The systems they used were prone to failure and they really survived by the skin of their teeth.

All communications were done slyly. Had to be, it was an open channel. Every time something went wrong (and a lot of things went wrong), they couldn’t just blurt it out. So all their communications were actually cleverly coded to hide mishaps, failures and the unexpected. For instance: After jettisoning the S4B (Stage 4 Booster), they had an encounter with an unknown craft. They needed to clarify that what they were seeing was not the S4B. It wasn’t. They could not just blurt out the encounter. There was also the computer failure (several times) on landing. They could not just blurt that out either. It left them with only 15 seconds of fuel for the landing engine, after landing the Eagle. Then there was the broken breaker for the take off engine. They very nearly got stuck on the moon.

Nixon, truly believed, that having landed men on the moon, the US would not get them back. He even had speeches prepared for the eventuality of failures. He was probably very surprised when the mission completed with all Astronauts surviving. He expected that they would not make it there, nor back.

The entire reason for going to the moon was itself a lie. What else is on the moon? There are things the US gov does not want us to know. What is so special about the crater Nansen? Why did the Astronauts from the last Apollo mission make a b-line straight to it?

Who owns the large space craft that are in orbit around the Earth?, that telescope enthusiasts have start spotting and photographing? Even I have seen Satellites (tracking across the sky) make manoeuvres that no Satellite aught make. There is something major that we are not being told.



Interesting concept. What I am concern about is the Hubble telescope. When NASA wanted money to launch it they said in their plea, "with this telescope we will be able to see the footprints our astronauts left on the moon." Suddenly they tell us that the Hubble can’t do that. We have satellites that can see a man drinking a beer in his back yard from hundreds of miles out through clouds but it can’t show us the flag or that little car we left on the moon.

All pictures that come from space do not show stars. If the space shuttle is shown at the station the background is always earth. We have telescopes and satellites that can see peculiar things on Mars but we cannot see the stuff we left on the moon. I don’t ask for much, just turn a satellite or the Hubble telescope around and show us the flag we left up there and that little car, and some stars so we can the validity the time and position. We could then put this argument to rest.