Gene Kranz's Remarkable Self Incriminating Gaffe, The Storied Ship, " Fraudulent Apollo 13 "

reply to post by decisively


Yes we know Kranz was talking about using the LM as a lifeboat - it is in all the transcripts - I mentioned it above.

By then they knew they were in trouble already - they had a bang, they had multiple strange readings from their instruments - he had decided they wee in a survival situation - which should not surprise you since they were in a minimally equipped vehicle in a vacuum - anything at all goes wrong and they are instantly in a survival situation!

Whoop-de-do

Click here for more information.

I assume that Gene Krantz and the rest of the mission control team were monitoring Apollo 13's telemetry data?
Therefore wouldn't they know exactly what was being vented from the CM ?After all,they had readouts of everything from Jim Lovell,s blood pressure to the amount of CO2 in the CM's atmosphere,I imagine that a sudden fall in O2 levels would have been detected fairly instantaneously,just a thought.

reply to post by nake13


Yes and no.

For starters, the quantity gauge on O2 tank 2 was broken, so they had to infer quantity in that particular tank by way of pressure.

The rise and fall in pressure, perhaps suggestive of an explosion, occurred so fast in O2 tank number 2 that no one saw it.

Because O2 is leaking, does not mean it is leaking because a tank blew. The tank might have been damaged even by way of an external insult.

Other gas readings/pressures were low, nitrogen for example. Just because something was seen to be venting, this does not mean that something was necessarily oxygen. It may have been, on the other hand, perhaps it was nitrogen, or a mix of gases, or water, and so forth. And of course this is what the flight officers were thinking because the venting substance is not identified in any immediate sense as oxygen. They are trying to figure it out given all these possibilities and then some.

Also, because something is venting, this does not mean that the problem is not primarily instrumentational.

I will post the EECOM loop tape and you can have a listen for yourself. I'll try and get it up on line in the next day or two. Once you hear that, you will realize all of this stuff about diagnosing an explosion early on is BULL.

reply to post by nake13


EXCELLENT QUESTION/POINT by the way naked13. Your exact line of reasoning is what we will be following in the days ahead. Studying these very things, and that which was said about this telemetry data, proves Apollo 13, and indeed ALL of Apollo, fraudulent. Additionally, such a telemetry data investigation leads to the indictment and conviction of several key mission control players as Apollo fraud perpetrators.

reply to post by decisively

Studying these very things, and that which was said about this telemetry data, proves Apollo 13, and indeed ALL of Apollo, fraudulent.

How do you propose to go from the specific to the general?

Originally posted by nake13
I assume that Gene Krantz and the rest of the mission control team were monitoring Apollo 13's telemetry data?
Therefore wouldn't they know exactly what was being vented from the CM ?After all,they had readouts of everything from Jim Lovell,s blood pressure to the amount of CO2 in the CM's atmosphere,I imagine that a sudden fall in O2 levels would have been detected fairly instantaneously,just a thought.

edit on 21-6-2012 by nake13 because: .

Here you go naked13, the EECOM tapes, just for you, PART ONE

Your point was/is most excellent naked13. They had all of these "readouts", as you call them. So couldn't they tell immediately what the story was, what happened ?

On the other hand, a good point was also made by one of the the producers of Kranz's film, that point being, they really couldn't tell, at least not early on they couldn't, that there was an "explosion", as Houston only really had telemetry, essentially a "replica" as the producer called it, of the Apollo' ship's "dash board" Let's go through some of Kranz's comments with the producer's point in mind naked13. I do have the EECOM tapes for you too now as well, so lots of great stuff for you to get into. Assuming you really are an Apollo guy, doesn't get any better than this.

Recall that the genesis of the film producers' effective, albeit accidental and rather naive, challenge to Kranz was that he and his colleague, also making comments there in this WITH COMMENTARY VERSION OF FAILURE IS NOT AN OPTION had the opportunity to listen to the Flight Director's loop tapes from the Apollo 13 mission, and so heard Gene Kranz interact with/lead his staff through those early and particularly tense moments of the staged crisis.

What you'll want to be paying particular attention to naked13 is Kranz's "chronology of awareness" . When does Kranz say he became aware of this, that and the other thing, and why does he say he became aware of these important "somethings". Those "somethings" which became objects of Kranzian awareness that we are most concerned about include;


1) When and how did Kranz become aware of the "something" that was THIS IS NOT AN INSTRUMENTATION PROBLEM ?

2) When and how did Kranz become aware of the "something" that was an EXPLOSION ?

3) When and how did Kranz become aware of the "something" that was specifically an O2 TANK EXPLOSION ?

4) When and how did Kranz become aware of the "something" that was THE GASEOUS SUBSTANCE VENTIING FROM THE LM ?

A key point to keep in mind is that what we find here, the story as Kranz lays it out in the context of this particular telling, is very much not a bit of misremembering. Kranz tells this story over and over and over, whether it be here in his film, in his book by the same title, or whether he is being interviewed or giving a talk. He has been consistent with this particular version of things since the get go. He has never deviated, and will never deviate. As you'll come to realize, this must be the case. He has to tell the story this way. He must tell the story with this and only this version of his own personal "chronology of awareness". Such is the case because 15 minutes into the crisis, Kranz delivers a little speech to his staff telling them to settle down and reminding them that they can USE THE LM. At that point in time, 15 minutes into this drama, as you'll hear when you listen to the EECOM tapes naked13, these guys are no where near CRISIS mode, a light year from it.

One more long and necessary introductory comment, piece of analysis, before beginning with a straightforward review of Kranz's claims based on this particular film, my sense is that Lovell's statement about the venting of "something" was intended to push the flight officers to begin thinking along the lines of a hardware problem, not an instrumentation problem, and in particular a hardware problem that involved the loss of gas, maybe even oxygen from the service module bay.

Recall that when this all begins, there are so many "malfunctions", and malfunctions, instrument reading anomalies, of so many different types, the flight officers first and quite naturally so, believe the problem to be based on an instrumentation breakdown. Their point being, multiple fuel cells out, not just loss of 02 pressure, but low nitrogen pressure as well in the lines, lack of system responsiveness to attempts to remedy by way of altering the BUS configurations and so forth, all this, that translated for them temporarily into, "could it really be the case that so much equipment is actually broken or malfunctioning ? Perhaps this is just our information/data/telemetry that is bad for whatever reason. The equipment is OK, all except for the equipment that provides us with the data here in Mission Control". When you listen to Leibergot and the other technical people, the people actually responsible for the trouble shooting, tell the story, this is always a point that is emphasized. Never before had they seen so many things go so wrong in so many different ways. It was hard to initially imaging what type of hardware problem could bring this about, account for it. It seemed much more reasonable to look at the possibility of this all being INFORMATION ERROR BASED/INSTRUMENTATIONAL, THE EQUIPMENT/THE HARDWARE WAS MORE OR LESS GOOD, THE PROBLEM WAS WITH THE INSTRUMENT READINGS PER SE. The gauges were broken/malfunctioning, at least temporarily so, the equipment that the gauges was monitoring was fine. Here "gauges" refers not literally to readout dials, but the whole system that monitors the ship's state of being, transmits that data, and then presents it to the fight officers for their view/assessment/interpretation.

naked13's EECOM tapes, PART TWO

So that is what Leibergot and the other flight officers meant by an instrumentation problem more or less, EQUIPMENT FINE, "GAUGES" READING THE EQUIPMENT'S STATUS, MALFUNCTIONING IF NOT BROKEN. And again, to emphasize here once more, a "gauge" is not to be taken literally. It is a reference to a complex system that monitors important parameters and delivers that data to the flight officers sitting at consoles in Houston's Mission Control.

The perpetrators of this fraud cannot come out and TELL THE FIGHT OFFICERS WHAT THE PROBLEM IS. They must more or or less fool the flight officers into believing they, the flight officers themselves, have figured this all out on their own. THEY BAIT THEM !!!, and the first piece of bait they throw is Lovell's comment about the venting of a "gaseous substance". This occurs 14 minutes from the time of the , "Houston, we've had a problem" line. Lovell's and his PERP COLLEAGUES' intent is to encourage Leibergot and crew to draw the conclusion from this that it is oxygen that is venting, and they of course do, but NOT RIGHT AWAY.

There are several different "gases", gasses in quotes here, as the relevant substances are stored under hyper-cool conditions and in that sense are not gases in a conventional, literal sense. Stored in the service bay are; nitrogen, helium, oxygen, and though not viewed typically as a "gas", water can viewed as such, a possible candidate here, something that might escape/vent from a ship as described by Lovell generically. Water was made from the combining of oxygen with hydrogen and along with energy is a fuel cell product. Water, made by the fuel cells, might also be viewed a possible "explanation" for the venting.

What the PERPS hoped was that Lovell would deliver this venting line, and because the O2 pressures were low, the flight officers trouble shooting all of this would bite on that possibility more or less right way. But as we'll see as we go through this in ever increasing detail, if instrumentation issues are a concern to begin with, there was no reason to assume up front a lowish O2 pressure reading meant low O2 quantity, let alone leaking O2 gas. And, the flight officers as it turns out, as you'll learn for yourself, were not focused exclusively on pressure issues per se in this. Also, there were other potential "culprits" . Nitrogen pressures in one line were particularly low and so forth. I'll provide the fascinating details as regards all of this as we go along. References will include the raw EECOM data which can be found in Leibergot's excellent book.

Apollo 13 was staged. This is obvious. The script as written called for Lovell to deliver the venting line roughly 14 minutes in. Keep in mind, were Lovell at that time to HIMSELF SAY THAT IT WAS OXYGEN THAT WAS VENTING WE WOULD NAIL HIM RIGHT THERE IMMEDIATELY AS HAVING FOREKNOWLEDGE, AND SO CONVICT HIM OF STEALING FROM OUR PARENTS RIGHT THER ON THAT EVER LOVING SPOT. SO LOVELL'S VENTING COMMENT IS INTENTIONALLY GENERIC, NONSPECIFIC, NO MENTION OF OXYGEN. This is because if he said it was oxygen, at that point with nitrogen, water, helium, hydrogen all being viable candidates as explanatory, AND, given the fact that just because something was venting does not preclude an instrumentation problem as being nevertheless primarily responsible, we would nail Lovell right there as a PERP. Indeed, if he made that big a gaffe in 1970, he may have been found out IMMEDIATELY, way back then.

To be sure, their stuff is fairly carefully written. By that I do not mean the writing is any good from a literary/screen play/on the level of being convincing perspective. I don't mean that it worked, obviously didn't fool me, and I sure am not a CIA type, have no special knack for busting open an overt/covert operation like Apollo, but have done so, and rather easily matter-0-fact. What I do mean is that the writer of the Apollo 13 script, the men/women that created the story and wrote Lovell and Kranz's lines more or less, he/she thought about this stuff, about what could be disclosed and when it could be disclosed in the fraud scenario's timeline. Obviously they cannot have the astronauts talking about oxygen leaking before the EECOMs have figured out that oxygen was leaking, otherwise a clever gal in 1970 would have busted their jive yapping chops way back when Nixon was prez, instead of a guy like me busting their jive yapping chops 43 years after the fact for this BULL infested tax payer rip off.

Lovell's line about the venting, was Kranz's que to deliver the RAH RAH RAH SETTLE DOWN AND WE'VE GOT THE LM SO NOT TO WORRY SPEECH. The problem was that the flight officers didn't buy in. They simply proceeded methodically. "Well it could be anything" type of thinking. "Let's not botch this by jumping to any unwarranted conclusions" type of thinking. Indeed, at that time, the flight officers were not freaked out in any sense, not yet anyhoo.

Naked 13's EECOM tapes, PART THREE

Now let's go through KRANZ' S the history channel film, the segment in which he specifically the "chronology of his awareness". We'll be doing this over and over in this thread, using many different references, but again, i like this one as an intro reference as Kranz's being blindsided by his own producers and then running to another subject with his "liar liar pants on fire" is just too good an opportunity to pass up. As mentioned, i could have used literally a dozen different references for this , all of which feature Kranz incriminating himself as he does here. I will indeed be presenting at least 3 or 4 of those and will be reviewing Kranz's own book FAILURE IS NOT AN OPTION, not to mention the books and videos of several others with reference to this subject, but this one is precious, for the reason stated.

1) At 2:35 in, one of the producers makes reference to the now famous line and MOMENT THAT LIVES FOREVER , ""Houston, we've had a problem"

2) Immediately after this producer comment, Kranz speaks of his personal "chronology of awareness" with respect to the events of concern here and mentions this chronology in the context of his frequent contact with Lovell, as though the two of them chat about this very thing when they talk, chat about this very chronology. He even says and I quote; "AND JIM LOVEEL MENTIONS THIS", as though Lovell agrees or concurs with respect to this point Kranz is about to make and that point is that Kranz claims to have gone through 3 phases, each 5 minutes in duration from the time of the "Houston we've had a problem line".

3) Beginning just a bit before the 3 minute mark in this film clip, Kranz indicates that for the first 5 minutes after hearing "Houston we've had a problem" he was under the impression that they more likely than not were dealing with an electrical problem, the reason being, they had had a couple of electronic "glitches" earlier in the shift, so why not a third ?

4) At about 3 minutes and 10 second in, Kranz tells us about phase 2 of his evolving sense of crisis awareness. According to Kranz, 5 minutes from the time of hearing , "Houston, we've had a problem" Kranz claims that he was reminded by a flight officer that according to the astronauts a pretty loud bang was heard. Additionally, he says he was "seeing a lot of thruster activity", and furthermore, several valves had been closed. And he sums up his personal psychology of this 2nd five minute period as one characterized by a sense, "TREAD LIGHTLY LEST YA' RUN INTO TROUBLE". I presume what he means by this is that there are some unusual things going on and they need to proceed cautiously.

5) At 3 minutes and 30 seconds into our clip here, Kranz makes reference to Lovell's comment made by the commander 14/15 minutes from the time of the "Houston we've had a problem" line. NOTE HERE HOW WHEN KRANZ REFERENCES LOVELL'S CRITICALLY IMPORTANT CALL HE LIES AND SAYS LOVELL MENTIONED AT THTA TIME THAT THEY WERE VENTING OXYGEN. OF COURSE THAT IS NOT THE CASE, LOVELL SAID THEY WERE VENTING ONLY "SOMETHING" , AND WE HAVE ALREADY COVERED THE POINT THAT LOVELL CANNOT SAY OXYGEN HERE AS MANY THINGS ARE IN THE SERVICE BAY THAT COULD BE VENTING AND THE GUAGES/INSTRUMENTS HAVE BEEN READING ANOMALOUSLY WITH RESPECT TO MEASUREMENTS MADED AS REGARDS TO MANY PARAMETERS.

Kranz must link his speech given immediately after Lovell's line to an awareness of oxygen leaking, a concrete hardware, a substantive material problem, otherwise his comments are gibberish, which they are anyway, but that is beside the point here.

As readers of this thread go out and find Kranz interviews on their own, listen to accounts given by Kranz as to the events of that day, you will find him consistently lying with respect to this moment of truth event. He always says Lovell made reference to oxygen venting here, which he decidedly did not, for reasons given. Oxygen is not identified as the substance venting for some time yet to come.

6) So now he know it is a "matter of survival" to quote the Apollo Fraud Perpetrator himself.

This will be a long and revealing thread. Below is a link to the first of several Leibergot EECOM tapes. He provided several hours worth of these tapes with his excellent book about his experience working Apollo. This first tape includes the time from a few minutes before the staged explosion until Leibergot goes off shift, handing off to Clint Black. I'll post the following tape, featuring Black's first hour on duty as well.

Obviously this stuff is particularly tough for us all to take and is one of the reasons that I did not write about it out of the blocks. Thinking of Kranz as a PERP engenders anger most unimaginable, blinding confusion, deep deep deep pain.

The EECOM tapes directly contradict Kranz.....

plus.google.com...

reply to post by decisively


In short; if there is a single inconsistency, it proves Apollo fraudulent. On the other hand, if there is consistency, it proves that Apollo was scripted and, therefore, fraudulent. Decisively, do you have any grasp at all of either logic or historical methodology?

reply to post by decisively

. Thinking of Kranz as a PERP engenders anger most unimaginable, blinding confusion, deep deep deep pain.

And you wonder why I pursue you with such vehemence.

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by decisively

 

. Thinking of Kranz as a PERP engenders anger most unimaginable, blinding confusion, deep deep deep pain.

And you wonder why I pursue you with such vehemence.

NASA had more than 40 years to clean up and "harmonize" the Apollo scriptures. What decisively has found, as well as many others, the tape recordings are not in perfect harmony with other NASA narratives.

Apollo 13 narratives are such a big problem for NASA they had to outsource to Hollywood, as they had done many times before, to make a major motion picture, in 1995, to mythologize the entire Apollo 13 mission. It's very effective strategy for the C I A. The film was very successful.

In the "plot" of the Hollywood film "Apollo 13",

On 30 October, while giving a VIP tour of NASA's Vehicle Assembly Building, Lovell is informed by his boss Deke Slayton that he and his crew will fly the Apollo 13 mission instead of Apollo 14. Source Wiki

That's the same flight that Alan Shepard wanted. Shepard wanted 13 to gratify his own ego. Shepard went to Slayton and proposed to him the crew for Apollo 13 should be as follows - Shepard, Mitchell and Roosa.

According to Shepard's February 1996 1998 interview, he stated less than 6 months before he died, Washington denied it. Washington denied Shepard's 13 and then dictated to Slayton what the crew for 13 should be - Lovell, Swigert and Haise. Who is pulling those puppet strings from Washington D.c.?

reply to post by SayonaraJupiter

Inharmonious ? I'll say …….

Thanks for the post SayonaraJupiter. Your comments/reference has given me a few other ideas.

You are of course correct. There are the apocryphal tales, and then there is Apollo's official canon.

To be sure, the official story was and is in need of ongoing consolidation. At some point, I will introduce a thread on the various types of authors/consolidators.

Chaikin types I see more or less as well meaning, naive stooges. They are PLAYED, fed nonsense, fed the official story which they dutifully write down for us all, for posterity.

Barbree types, the guy that wrote MOON SHOT, he falls into the class of authors I refer to as sycophantic astronaut/NASA heiny magnets. They are complicitous. Jeffrey Kluger(Apollo 13) I think sort of falls into this category as well. They are not dumb like Chaikin is. When I say "dumb", I do not mean having a low IQ, I mean naive, unaware of their world's realities. Barbree and Kluger are not fraud insiders, but were they to do their job honestly, they would become either insiders or whistle blowers. By that I mean, any halfway intelligent investigative journalist will come to know Apollo as fraudulent on their own if they honestly research it with an open mind. But Barbree and Kluger don't investigate. They write what they know the astronauts/NASA want them to write, would like them to write.

David Harland, Eric Jones, the latter guy is the keeper/organizer/creator of the Apollo Lunar Surface Journal, this type of "writer"/ "historian" is an active canonizer, an active consolidator, not passive like Chaikin writing what he is told, but actively creating the the official cannon. These men are PERPS themselves.

I have only scratched the surface here as regards the Apollo 13 story. There is so much dissonance, inconsistency, incoherence, contradiction to come. Hopefully soon, I'll be posting more of Leibergot's EECOM tapes, including the taps featuring Clint Black's early work at the console. I would encourage all to carefully listen to the EECOM tapes for themselves.

One of the reasons that I will be covering this in great detail SayonaraJupiter is because I believe it is important for a person like myself who has spent the requisite time and energy studying these events, to help create a public record in which it is explicitly spelled out what it is we know about KRANZ, YOUNG, AARON and some of the others here. It is one small way in which a modicum of justice is served.

Gene Kranz knows now that modern 21st century Apollo historians are aware of his lying, and specifically, we know about his lying with respect to the "substance venting" issue. We want Kranz to know, and believe you me he does know now, he's briefed on this stuff so he's not blindsided, that we all know he gave the LM speech prematurely and that incontrovertibly implicates him as a fraud perpetrator. Believe you me, Gene doesn't feel so good when he is reminded of this, that we know, AND THAT WE KNOW IN THE MOST EXPLICIT AND THEREFORE INCRIMINATING OF TERMS.

As I go through Kranz's book, Leibergot's book, a half dozenl films/videos, I will expose AARON, KRANZ, YOUNG and others in the most explicit of terms for the bottom feeding scum that they are. Their bogus patriotic pretense is beyond disgusting, and when I am done with this thread and some others, they'll wish they never signed on and agreed to participate in this embarrassing ruse. They'll realize they were wrong, and that everything kicked back to them in myriad ways, was stolen from the American people.

Recent series of Posts on the James Irwin Thread , also with relevance here

I just posted a bit over on the James Irwin thread about the Apollo 15 Falcon's landing and James Irwin's alleged "BAM". Irwin was actually alleged to have shouted "BAM !!!!" at the time of the Falcon's lunar contact/landing.

I need not go through all that here again except to note the posts were relevant in as much as they made reference to some aspects of the Apollo 15/Falcon "BAM situation" that are similar to those of the alleged Apollo 13 O2 tank number two "bang /explosion situation".

Do recordings of these sometimes alleged loud sounds exist, or better said, should they exist ?

I may discuss this some more here in this thread, the issue having to do with whether or not the Apollo 13 O2 tank explosion "bang" was ever recorded, or was ever alleged to have been recorded.

Here are the posts from the James Irwin thread in which the topic was discussed;

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by decisively

I may discuss this some more here in this thread, the issue having to do with whether or not the Apollo 13 O2 tank explosion "bang" was ever recorded, or was ever alleged to have been recorded.

You really should learn to do your research before you post.

reply to post by decisively

Their bogus patriotic pretense is beyond disgusting, and when I am done with this thread and some others, they'll wish they never signed on and agreed to participate in this embarrassing ruse. They'll realize they were wrong, and that everything kicked back to them in myriad ways, was stolen from the American people.

What do you care about the American people? You're Australian.

reply to post by decisively

Hang down your head, Ted Dooley...

1) At 2:35 in, one of the producers makes reference to the now famous line and MOMENT THAT LIVES FOREVER , ""Houston, we've had a problem"

Okay....

2) Immediately after this producer comment, Kranz speaks of his personal "chronology of awareness" with respect to the events of concern here and mentions this chronology in the context of his frequent contact with Lovell, as though the two of them chat about this very thing when they talk, chat about this very chronology. He even says and I quote; "AND JIM LOVEEL MENTIONS THIS", as though Lovell agrees or concurs with respect to this point Kranz is about to make and that point is that Kranz claims to have gone through 3 phases, each 5 minutes in duration from the time of the "Houston we've had a problem line".

Are you implying that Kranz and Lovell never discussed the accident?

3) Beginning just a bit before the 3 minute mark in this film clip, Kranz indicates that for the first 5 minutes after hearing "Houston we've had a problem" he was under the impression that they more likely than not were dealing with an electrical problem, the reason being, they had had a couple of electronic "glitches" earlier in the shift, so why not a third ?

Yes, why not? It turns out that it was wishful thinking however.

4) At about 3 minutes and 10 second in, Kranz tells us about phase 2 of his evolving sense of crisis awareness. According to Kranz, 5 minutes from the time of hearing , "Houston, we've had a problem" Kranz claims that he was reminded by a flight officer that according to the astronauts a pretty loud bang was heard. Additionally, he says he was "seeing a lot of thruster activity", and furthermore, several valves had been closed. And he sums up his personal psychology of this 2nd five minute period as one characterized by a sense, "TREAD LIGHTLY LEST YA' RUN INTO TROUBLE". I presume what he means by this is that there are some unusual things going on and they need to proceed cautiously.

Where do you have a problem with all this? The thruster activity was undoubtedly to correct the random change in attitude caused by the rapid venting of gas. Kranz would be aware that trying to maintain perfect trim might exhaust the thrusters' fuel supply. Would you recommend panic over caution in this situation?

5) At 3 minutes and 30 seconds into our clip here, Kranz makes reference to Lovell's comment made by the commander 14/15 minutes from the time of the "Houston we've had a problem" line. NOTE HERE HOW WHEN KRANZ REFERENCES LOVELL'S CRITICALLY IMPORTANT CALL HE LIES AND SAYS LOVELL MENTIONED AT THTA TIME THAT THEY WERE VENTING OXYGEN. OF COURSE THAT IS NOT THE CASE, LOVELL SAID THEY WERE VENTING ONLY "SOMETHING" , AND WE HAVE ALREADY COVERED THE POINT THAT LOVELL CANNOT SAY OXYGEN HERE AS MANY THINGS ARE IN THE SERVICE BAY THAT COULD BE VENTING AND THE GUAGES/INSTRUMENTS HAVE BEEN READING ANOMALOUSLY WITH RESPECT TO MEASUREMENTS MADED AS REGARDS TO MANY PARAMETERS.

Again, you betray your lack of understanding of the way memory functions. In retrospect, Kranz knew that it was oxygen that was venting, so he naturally identified the "something" as O2 in his paraphrasing of Lovell.

Kranz must link his speech given immediately after Lovell's line to an awareness of oxygen leaking, a concrete hardware, a substantive material problem, otherwise his comments are gibberish, which they are anyway, but that is beside the point here.

No, it's not Kranz that is spouting gibberish.

As readers of this thread go out and find Kranz interviews on their own, listen to accounts given by Kranz as to the events of that day, you will find him consistently lying with respect to this moment of truth event. He always says Lovell made reference to oxygen venting here, which he decidedly did not, for reasons given. Oxygen is not identified as the substance venting for some time yet to come.

See my comment above. When discussing the past, it is natural to fill in what was then unknown with what is now known.

6) So now he know it is a "matter of survival" to quote the Apollo Fraud Perpetrator himself.

Every moment of the flight was a matter of survival. Now they had an unexpected problem that wouldn't just go away like an electrical glitch.

reply to post by decisively

Interesting information there Decisively,however,it still does not (to me anyway) provide the "smoking gun",personally,the one aspect of the 13 mission that I found odd was the lack of television coverage of that particular mission,I can't believe that the public were so "used to moon shots" that 13 was just another routine bore fest! If the apollo 13 mission was scripted,the media "blackout" would eliminate the possibility of obvious gaffes being witnessed by the viewing public.After all,there were numerous anomalies discovered in the Apollo 11 footage,did NASA wish to avoid a rerun in the case of 13?