Randy Walsh, another Moon hoax scammer

[eraplanetearth]

Does anyone have info on this guy Randy Walsh. He's currently hawking a book on Amazon and You Tube, 'The Apollo Moon Missions: Hiding a Hoax in Plain Sight', which at first glance appears to be a rehash of Bill Kaysing' 1976 book of brain dribble.
He claims to be  commercial Pilot and CFI as well, but I've been unable to check on the FAA database as 'Randy' is obviously not his real first name.

[Ranb]

I watched his videos, it seems he has nothing new or else he would have mentioned it.

[bknight]

They never have anything new to add.

[Ranb]

I commented on three of his videos.  He relied with "I see you didn't read my book".    I told him I could not justify spending any amount of money to read something that has been repeatedly debunked.  I invited him to the forum.

[Apollo 957]

Wow. A whole 773 views on YouTube.

[SARCASM]   Taking the world by storm.   [/SARCASM]

Amazon says; "Randle E Walsh" as author, and also "This book is not available. Out of Print--Limited Availability."

[MartinC]

He claims he's registered as a CFI and Commercial Pilot with Transport Canada - not sure if that means his name would appear on the FAA Airmen registry or not?

I've downloaded the book as it's free to Kindle Unlimited subscribers. A brief flick through and it just appears to be a regurgitation of previous claims with a good sprinkling of references to academic (haha) material on Aullis.

I did notice that he's repeated the Bennet and Percy claim about the A13 landing site being in darkness at what would have been the scheduled time of touchdown. It would appear that his research skills don't extend to checking such claims or even trying tools like Virtual Moon Atlas to "model" the Moon. It took me 5 minutes to do this.



I'll see what other gaffs I can find and put an honest review on Amazon.

[onebigmonkey]

Well that's embarrassing, given that a photograph of the moon (taken not long after an image of Earth that can be dated very precisely to within half an hour of the time you use for your moon), matches your representation almost exactly:



with the added bonus that it is from a viewing angle not possible from Earth.

Again, very little effort required to demonstrate that.

I notice he is proudly waving a round a Nexus article that claims:

Problems with Saturn V F-1 rocket engines used in the Apollo missions, a lack of testing, and additional evidence from Apollo 11 launch film used in mathematical calculations, confirms these missions went little further than Lower Earth Orbit.

 

[bknight]

Well that's embarrassing, given that a photograph of the moon (taken not long after an image of Earth that can be dated very precisely to within half an hour of the time you use for your moon), matches your representation almost exactly:



with the added bonus that it is from a viewing angle not possible from Earth.

Again, very little effort required to demonstrate that.

I notice he is proudly waving a round a Nexus article that claims:

Problems with Saturn V F-1 rocket engines used in the Apollo missions, a lack of testing, and additional evidence from Apollo 11 launch film used in mathematical calculations, confirms these missions went little further than Lower Earth Orbit.

 

IIRC the speed of the vehicle was calculated using radar data from point to point, I don't see how anyone with SOME research skills would be able to swat the velocity problem down.

[JayUtah]

"Lower" Earth Orbit.  That's not quite as bad as the Van Halen belts, but it's close.