Into the Impossible With Brian Keating - You're full of SHIT! Piers Morgan & Brian Keating take down Moon Landing Denier

Episode Date: April 4, 2026

The Artemis II mission to the dark side of the moon will be the furthest human beings have ever travelled from Earth. It's the precursor to a return to the lunar surface and perhaps even reaching Mars. But still, there are those who say humans have never set foot on the Moon, such as Bart Sibrel. Once punched in the face by Buzz Aldrin, he says he’s on a CIA hitlist because he blew the whistle on the original moon landings being fake. He speaks to Piers Morgan opposite Dr. Brian Keating, distinguished professor of Physics at UC San Diego and host of the ‘Into The Impossible’ podcast. Then Piers is joined by former astronaut Charlie Duke, who was the youngest person to walk on the Moon, and Star Trek’s very own Captain Kirk, William Shatner. Bart Sibrel's website: https://www.sibrel.com/ Dr Brian Keating's website: https://briankeating.com/ Timestamps: 00:00 Introduction 01:25 Dr. Brian Keating on moon landing conspiracies 03:30 Bart Sibrel discusses his conspiracy investigations 11:20 Bart Sibrel on lights, shadows and radiation belts 18:20 Motivation behind faking the moon landing 22:00 Will the Artemis mission be genuine or fake? 26:43 Charlie Duke and William Shatner join 28:17 Charlie Duke on walking on the moon 30:22 William Shatner on the opportunity to walk on the moon 33:00 William Shatner on being in Space 41:26 Charlie’s advice to Artemis II astronauts 42:43 Charlie and William on moon landing conspiracies Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Your summer starts now with Memorial Day deals at the Home Depot. It's time to fire up summer cookouts with the next grill, four-burner gas grill, on special buy for only $199. And entertain all season with the Hampton Bay West Grove's seven-piece outdoor dining set for only $49. This Memorial Day get low prices guaranteed at the Home Depot. While supplies last, price invalid May 14th or May 27th. U.S. only exclusions apply.

See Home Depot.com slash price match for details. No one goes to Hank's for his spreadsheets. They go for a darn good pizza. Lately, though, the shop's been quiet. So Hank decides to bring back the $1 slice. He asks Copilot in Microsoft Excel to look at his sales and costs to help him see if he can afford it. Co-pilot shows Hank where the money's going

and which little extras make the dollar slice work. Now, Hank has a line out the door. Hank makes the pizza. Co-Pilot handles the spreadsheets. Learn more at M365 copilot.com slash work. powerful government in the world falsified their alleged greatest accomplishment. They did indeed fake the moon landing.

I want to treat part as a colleague, maybe not as an equal. I'm not an equal. Oh my goodness. If you would let me teach you some physics, then you could make your argument stronger. Charlie Duke is an Apollo astronaut, the 10th and youngest man to walk on the surface of the moon. What do you feel about the conspiracy theorists

who think the moon landings were all invented? They never happened. They're fake. You're willfully ignorant if you don't believe that we landed on the moon. What is the mindset of somebody who said, well, it didn't really happen? That's like the denial of humanity. These crazy individuals shouldn't have our attention. Given this is the furthest that NASA have ever sent a rocket,

presumably you think this must be fake too. The Artemis II mission to the dark side of the moon will be the furthest human beings have ever traveled from Earth. It's a precursor to a full return to the lunar surface and perhaps even reaching Mars. But for this trip, historic though it is, there will be no landing, no walking, no flags planted, very much unlike the Apollo mission 50 years ago.

In a moment, we'll talk to the man who says he's on a CIA hit list because he blew the whistle on what he says are the original moon landings being fake. But first, let's talk to the Chancellor's Distinguished Professor of Physics at UC San Diego and host of the Into the Impossible podcast. Welcome to you, Professor Keating.

How are you? Good to see you again, Pierce. Well, good to see you. I'm obviously about to talk to Bart Simbel. He's made himself pretty infamous by ending up being punched by Buzz Aldrin for questioning to his face that he'd walked on the moon

and being part of that, of course, that first immortal trip. Before we get to him, what is your view of people that just don't want to believe this has ever happened? I think it's something we need to take very seriously, but not literally. In other words, there are reasons. You could say there could be reasons why NASA and maybe the U.S. government, maybe even the CIA would want to

put a whack on Bart, as I've heard him describe it. Perhaps, you know, there are some mistruths that our government tell from time to time. But in order to believe the moon landings in the 1960s and 70s were fake, you need to believe a whole host of things that not only require vast conspiracy numbers involving hundreds of thousands of people, you need to suspend your scientific reasoning and your ability to search for truth. You know, peers, we live in an age that's sometimes called post-truth or post-fact where you're entitled to your own, you know, ideas and theories. But in reality, what worries me more is not that people get facts wrong. I mean, that happens all the time. It happens to me all the time as a scientist. But it's that we undermine the process of

truth-seeking that no society can withstand. So, I'm hoping to talk to Bart. You know, he knows about me. I've invited him to chat on my podcast, and he's turned it down for reasons that I don't understand. So I'm eager to talk to him because I think it's instructive for the public to see not only the great triumphs,

but why we know for certain that these things happen and why it speaks to not only American exceptionalism, but humanity's exceptionalism. Well, you know what? We'll come back and discuss Artemis specifically in a bit, but given you've taken, teed this up very nicely. And we have Bart Cerebell waiting. Joining me now is Bart Cerebel, who has been, what many of you,

is a conspiracy investigator about the moon landing, saying they're fake, even confronted. As I said, Buzz Aldrin. Let's take a look at what happened then. You got to keep shooting, man. OK, well, you can put on your shoulder. Don't be shy. Just come with me, Buzz.

You really like you said you said you when you didn't. Calling the kettle black, if ever thought of it. I'm saying I misrepresented myself. You're a coward and a liar and a thief. Well, Bart Semble joins me now. Welcome to Uncensored. I've actually met Buzz Aldrin.

All I remember is he had one of the hardest handshakes I've ever encountered on any human being ever. So you were quite courageous there, Barton, albeit, as you were calling one of the great modern heroes, a coward. Why are you so obsessed about branding the lunar landings fake? Well, because one of the most historic events in human history isn't putting a man on the moon. It's that the most powerful government in the world that hypocritically claims to represent truth and justice falsified their alleged greatest accomplishment. They did indeed fake the moon landing.

And Brian, the first time I've ever seen you speak, he's obviously highly intelligent and a very reasonable person. Unfortunately, people want to believe a tantalizing lie like their team ran or won the Super Bowl. What he's, you know, he claims I'm denying scientific reasoning, but actually he's doing that because it's never happened in the history of the world that a milestone technologically occurred, like let's say flying across the Atlantic in 1927 or breaking the sound barrier or splitting the first atom. It's never happened in the history of the world that more than 50 years later, no one could accomplish it. Absolutely rubbish. What's absolutely rubbish.

Well, you know, let me, let me, I'm up against, we've heard your side of the story for 57 years. I would love to just comment that, because I have actual experience with an event that happened and it was separated by 60 years. I reached the South Pole twice in 2007 and 2009. Do you know who the first people to reach the South Pole were about? Well, Admondson, Scott. Yeah, that's right. And you know, Amundsen was for Norway. It took four attempts to reach the South Pole.

Amundsen was the first person to the Norway to ever reach it. And we didn't go back for 50 years until 1964. Bart, we didn't go back for 50 years exactly like what happened. Was it harder? Have I never been to the South Pole part? I don't know. I mean, I presume that you win. I have video evidence of me there.

Interviewed by John Boxman. I'm not denying that. The fact is we have six decades. But you just made a claim that nothing gets easier unless this is technologically true. So you're saying it didn't happen because we didn't go back. I would like to offer my own contribution. Well, hang on, but.

I'd like to offer my own contribution to that debate. But hang on. I'd like to offer my own contribution to that debate because I personally went on the last Concord flight, which was about 20 years ago. And we have gone backwards in the speed of passenger air travel because it now takes twice as long for me to get to New York as it did 20 years ago. So there's another example.

The question is, are there aircraft that fly higher and faster than the Concord? And there are. Not with passengers. Well, people are on board. They're not with commercial. There's no commercial plane that can get to New York in under about six and a half hours. Rose Concord did it until 58. So the premise of your argument is flawed, because you've already heard one example from Brian.

You've heard one from me. I'm sure there are myriad other examples. But I'm just keen, before we get too far into the weeds on that part of it, you said here about the lunar landings, in order to appreciate the full absurdity of the lie, it bears repeating what both the US government and NASA claimed them a 60s, on the very first attempt to an all with one millionth computing power of a cell phone, they've been able to send astronauts to orbit.

and land on the surface of the moon a distance that is 1,000 times farther than they can achieve with human spaceflight today. To buy into your conspiracy theory about this, and it never happened, the sheer volume of people who must have signed up to this conspiracy, right, is overwhelming. Why has none of the people that were part of the lie? Why have none of them broken ranks to say this was all faked? Well, first of all, you're incorrect. I spoke to Eugene Krantz, flight director. He said that someone in the command center cannot tell the difference between a, quote, rehearsal flight and a quote, a real flight. Just because there's 400,000 bank tellers at Bank of America, what a bank teller knows about corruption in the bank and what the CEO knows, they're completely different.

There's only three eyewitnesses to every program, and who knows where they're really going. The fact is we did have someone come forward. Two people came forward. Betty Grissom, the widow of the man who was going to be the first man to walk on the moon. I interviewed her for four hours before she died. I bet Brian did not do that. She told me that her husband called her on January 26, 1967 from NASA and said, Han, for some strange reason, the CIA is over the launch pad today inspecting the equipment. I've been here. years, never seen them before. Why did they show up today? That never happened. That never happened. Even your own testimony says that she didn't see. I guess Betty, Chris him's a liar.

Allow Brian to respond to that, please. Brian. She never said that. He interrupted me. Allow me to. I want to do you a favor. I think what you do is important. I think, as I said originally, I think it's important to question things.

Certainly, certainly the government lies to us. Oh, thank you. Hold on one second. But what Betty Grissom said, she said they were all over, the CIA was in the mission command center. She never said that if you go back and look at your own transcripts, she said, didn't say they were on the launch pad. No one had access to the launch pad because it was full of rocket fuel. So they wouldn't even let the technicians near it, as you know. But Bart, I think you have much stronger evidence.

And I don't know why you're leading with the things that are most easily deflated. I'd love to talk about what you claim is a strong evidence. So we could tell people. Did you interview Betty Grissom for four hours before she died? Did you say? but I've read your transcripts. I've read transcripts by you and by her. I'm asking you if you interviewed her for four hours.

She did say that there were CIA. She never said they were crawling over the launch pad. And does that prove that the moon was didn't have to bar? You weren't even alive at the time. That's what she told me in a swear interview. Let me ask you, Bart, let me ask you. What is the most convincing piece of evidence you have that it was faked? Well, I have the crew of Apollo 11 faking being halfway to the moon using a one-foot model of the earth. and I have the CIA on a third track of audio

telling him to fake a four-second radio delay from Earth orbit. And then we have the eyewitness testimony of a deathbed confession of Cyrus Eugene Akers who saw them film it at Cannon Air Force Base in 1968 even confessed to killing somebody to cover it up because the NSA asked them to do so. That's a strange thing to be saying. You've also claimed, I'll come to you, Brian in the second,

but you've also claimed you described what you call us anomalous shadows that are not parallel, suggesting multiple artificial light sources in a studio rather than a single distant sun. So these photographs that we're looking at now, you think are indicative of fakery. Well, let me also say, I went from being the biggest fan,

greater fan than Brian. I had a shrine of Apollo pictures in my house for decades. And a filmmaker's job is to make fake scenes look real. Go back to the picture and look how shadow should be in sunlight. The sun, it's a million times bigger than the Earth in volume. It's 93 million miles away. It's going to cast shadows in the same direction on the Earth of the moon. There's two telephone poles about five feet apart. The shadows are parallel. Here's a picture that claim was taken on the moon of objects five feet apart. The astronaut shadows at 12 o'clock,

the rock, five feet away. The shadows at nine o'clock. That can only happen with a close electrical light. We just proved with one photograph that they fake the moon landing, despite what anybody says, despite what the corrupt federal government says, that picture cannot be duplicated in sunlight. It can only be duplicated with the electrical light, which means they're on Earth, which means they didn't go to the moon. Okay. I'm sorry to bring you the bad news. No, no, that's your claim. Brian Keating, your response. Well, again, I want to treat Bart as as a colleague, maybe not as an equal, but I want to treat him fairly. I don't want to say, Bart, you have much better evidence that I've heard you talk about. I'm not an equal. Oh, my goodness.

Well, I don't think you're a trained scientist, Bart, I mean, if I go to my Wikipedia page. I don't think you're a trained cinematographer either. That's right. When I go to my Wikipedia page, it says, electrical light. Okay, Bart, when I go to my Wikipedia page, people can see that I'm listed as a professor of astrophysics with 40 years of experience. When they go to your page, it says conspiracy theorist. So I don't want to say that we're equal because we're not. We're not in the same league. I will treat you like a peer, I will give you an expert review of what you're talking about. But what I want to tell you very clearly, is being deceived. Your league is parroting back what you're told.

I want to use your own words. I want to treat you seriously, Bart. I want to say that you have talked to Candace Owens on her podcast and you describe what she later called the firmament, the asteroid belt, and then later the Van Allen belts. This is one key piece of qualitative but quantitative evidence that you have presented, which I think deserves attention. You've a claim the Van Allen belts are deadly and they are not survivable, and NASA knew that themselves.

Correct or incorrect, Mark? Well, show the clip. What a clip number is it here, right? Let's hear it in NASA's own mouth. Well, we've got the clip. Hang on, hang on. We've got the clip. Let's play the clip.

So the Van Allen radiation belts, you've argued the radiation surrounding Earth is so extreme, it would have been lethal for any human to pass through making a journey impossible. So let's take a look at the clip. Alan said so. Let's take a little. We're going to play the clip. Okay. My name is Kelly Smith and I work on navigation and guidance for Orion.

We are headed 3,600 miles above Earth, 15 times higher from the planet than the International Space Station. As we get further away from Earth, we'll pass through the Van Allen belts, an area of dangerous radiation. Radiation like this could harm the guidance systems, onboard computers or other electronics on Orion. Naturally, we have to pass through this danger zone twice, once up and once back. We must solve these challenges before we send people through this region of space. We must solve these challenges before we send people through this region of space. It's peak pollination season, and my business is scaling fast. To keep the nectar flowing, I need a phone plan with top priority data speeds.

That's why I chose GoogleFi wireless. My connections stay strong, even when I'm the hive is buzzing. Plus, unlimited plans started $35 a month. Now, that's a deal that doesn't stay. Explore GoogleFi Wireless plans today. Plus taxes and government fees. GoogleFi Wireless is not subject to data traffic deprioritization during times of high network usage. So that's your claim, Bob. Professor Keating, what's your response to that? Well, it's not my claim. It's NASA's claim. He said, we'll solve these challenges before we send people through this region of space, meaning the radiation challenges. Okay, but very carefully, he doesn't say because we've never done it before, he never said, Brian,

let me see. Do you interrupt because I'm not in the same league as you and you're better than me? No, we just played an extended clip that you produced about a certain theory, so Professor Keating wouldn't not respond. Right. So a whiteboard sketch by some NASA engineer who is, to my knowledge, not sketching the exact schematics of the trajectory, he shows, and he describes the Van Allen belts are deadly,

And you're right, Bart, they are deadly, and NASA knew that because who did Van Allen work for? John Van Allen worked for NASA. So in order for us to believe it, and he testified that the Van Allen belts, if traversed safely, were no threat to the astronauts beyond getting a few chest x-rays, which you and I probably do every year, right? So I have a model of the Van Allen belts here. Here's a plasma globe, which has electron plasma in it. I thought you bought that already. Hold on at Bart, please.

Now you're not letting me present scientific evidence, okay? There are electrons in here that are at 30,000 degrees Kelvin, far hotter than the temperature of the melting point of aluminum, which you talk about in that documentary, which I've seen many times to debunk it. Inside of this plasma globe, the reason I don't get melted is because the electron density is tiny. It is anisotropic. If you go at different regions through the Eman Allen belts, it's completely safe. And one last thing that that NASA engineer mentioned, he said it could be dangerous to the navigation systems, the electronics, correct? That means that, according to you, we never even sent electronics, telemetry, anything through the Van Allen belts. But do you know who else agrees that we did?

The Soviets are arch nemesis, peers, you may not know this. The same day that we landed on the moon, the Russians had a probe that they were trying to return samples from the moon, like this moon rock that I have here. And they were trying to return it to Earth to beat us. And they ended up crashing that spacecraft on July 21, 1969. They failed to reach it. But they agreed to coordinate with NASA. didn't hit the Apollo Lander because they agreed that would be a much worse thing. Now, peers, can you imagine us coordinating with Ayatollah Khomeini right now?

And he's going to congratulate us tomorrow or tonight when the Artemis mission lands. That's what goes around the moon. That's exactly what happened. So the best evidence barred doesn't come from America even. It comes from the Chinese, from the Indians, from the Russians who are a nemesis at the time, proving that we went there with their own images, data, and scientific evidence. So that's the way we should do things as a scientifically literate society. And your theory, Barr, you're going quite a bit of facts for a scientist.

One of the facts you're ignoring is that, what is the name, Rotojin Dimitri, he was the former commander of the Soviet equivalent of NASA. He said, as soon as he retired, the moon missions were fake. And then I have a friend who works at the Chinese Space Agency. He says that they're blackmailing NASA in exchange for technology that Congress forbid them to receive. So we have the Russian space. Retroactively to the Soviet Union, which doesn't exist anymore?

Wait a minute. We have the Russian space director saying the moon missions are fake, and we have an employee of the Chinese space agency saying they know the missions are fake and are being blackmailed by the United States. And your theory about motivation, your argument is that they were fate to ensure a Cold War victory for the U.S. over the Soviet Union.

You contend that NASA, was under immense pressure to fulfill President Kennedy's goal of landing a man on the moon by the end of the 60s, but they'd lack the ability technologically to do it. According to you, the risk of high-profile failure and subsequent national humiliation led the US government and the CIA to stage the events in a studio instead, to which my obvious question would be, a, look, full disclosure, I don't believe a word of it. However, let's just assume for a moment your theory is correct. which studio where? Where did they do this? Well, I guess you weren't paying attention when I said they filmed it at Canon Air Force Base, June 1st, 2nd, 3rd of 1968,

according to an eyewitness who confessed to killing a co-worker to cover up the moon landing fraud. Hang on, sorry, I did hear what you said, but there were a number of lunar landings. So you're saying it was all done in this one studio? Well, no, we know that the first one, the TV images were filmed at Canon Air Force Base, according to an eyewitness who confessed to a homicide that was investigated by the military police,

the United States Senate Intelligence Committee, and the FBI. And when they investigated, they asked him why did he kill this coworker at Canada Air Force Base in 1968? He said to cover up the moon landing fraud. He took an oath by the NSA for secrecy. His coworker was going to tell the public. And he killed him to keep it a secret. And back to whether the radiation bouts are lethal or not, don't take my opinion. Brian's opinion, go to subrel.com and read Van Allen's opinion. His document that he published after

sending probes up into the radiation belts in 1958, Scientific American article, and he says they are 250 times a lethal dose. So when they say we have, it's depending on how you go through it. If you go through a rainstorm through the eye of a hurricane, it's much different than going through the outer outstarts of it where it's a nice light London fog perhaps. It's very different. Their Van Allen belts are highly anisotropic part. I want to teach you some physics. If you would, if you would let me teach you some physics, then you could make your argument stronger products, okay?

There's multiple Van Allen belts. There's an inner Van Allen belt. There's a powder van Allen belt. Teach me professor who parents back. I've heard you refuse to debate me. This is my only chance to debate you. You refuse to debate me on Joe Rogan. You refused to debate you.

I never received an invitation to debate you. Yes, you said you've received the invitation on Danny Jones's podcast, and you said, you don't want to debate me because I'm a victim, much like pedophilia victims. It was so bizarre, so I want to take my opportunity. He asked me if I wanted to debate you, and I said, no, because you're a victim. You have Stockholm syndrome. You're defending the people who are deceiving you. You're not the perpetrator of the...

Did the Russians, did the Politburo that testified and said, congratulations, the President Nixon? I mean, you're so confident what happened on the moon. I can't believe that. Let me ask you. Why would the Russians... Bob, can I just ask you? But do you mind if I just cut to the quick here?

Do you think you're just full of shit, mate? What's that? Do you think you're just full of shit? No, I don't think he does. Is it all just a scam just to make money, raise your profile, spewing such obvious bullshit around the world about something that everyone knows happened? And you made yourself well-known, notorious.

Let me boil it down for you. I'm going to answer your question. You've insulted Buzz Aldrin to the point he punched you. I'm sorry to the truth about. corruption is insulting to people who are flattered by it in a fallen world. The fact is JFK's relatives say with 100% certainty he was killed by the CIA. Robert McNamara on his deathbed said they started the Vietnam War and killed 58,220 of their own people on a CIA fabrication. So they're killing tens of thousands of their own people. So presumably.

They're killing your own president. Wait a minute. So they're not going to have a problem faking a TV image. Okay. The only problem is that it's a positive life. Okay, but just to be clear, then, to extrapolate your theory, to extrapolate your theory, given this is the furthest that NASA have ever sent a rocket to the dark side of the moon, presumably you think this must be fake too? Oh, no, I hope they are able to do it.

The issue is how can they can only do... So do you believe the optimist rocket is going to be a genuine mission or a fake? Does it have to go to the Van Allen balance? I would assume it's going to be genuine. How does it get through the... Why is it, listen, the issue is, how does it get through the Van Allen Radiation belt? I can't have two people not letting me finish this end. How does he get through?

The issue is, the issue is, why is it with six decades of better technology? They can only do 20% of what Apollo did. That's illogical. So do you accept, but do you accept now that space rockets can get through the Van Allen radiation melt? unmanned ones and maybe they have protection. We know they didn't have protection as of 2014. He said we must solve these radiation challenges before we send people through this region of space, which anything prior to 2014 did not leave Earth orbit. He said so himself. Okay. I'm sorry. So do you think Elon Musk is in? Do you think Elon Musk is deceiving himself?

Well, he knows the moon missions are fake. He's playing ball. He didn't want to buy. the hand that feeds him. So he's all part of the conspiracy, is it? It's not a conspiracy. It's simply they perpetrated a fraud. They did a counterfeit. They cheated. Elon Musk says to return to the moon,

they're going to need 15 fuel launches first. I got a clip here. Number five, a guy who works for NASA says it's going to take 30 launches of fuel in order to have enough fuel to go to the moon. So how did Apollo do it? with one-thirtieth the amount of fuel. I mean, the truth is right there in front of you.

Five decades of better technology, and they can only do 20% of what they claimed to did with one million. Okay, Professor Keating. Can't even land. Professor Keating, final word to you about the armatist to mission? Well, I just want to say, first of all, to fake the moon landings would have been much more cost-prohibitive,

difficult, and involve a much larger conspiracy than actually doing them. from around the world scientific work. Scientists are the most likely people to want to shoot that experts, Bart. This is where I feel like you're not taking advantage of me as a collegial engagement. Because we're the most interested in proving things wrong. That's what we do for a living bar. But on the topic of science, what Artemis is going to do appears

is perhaps pave the way for us to extend our consciousness, our civilization into the solar system, into the universe beyond. Because what happens if a large meteorite, a huge asteroid impacts the Earth, God forbid, or a global pandemic happens again. And all those reasons, by the way, are reasons that Bart should support the mission of NASA, which has provided such a great deal of technology that has enabled him, if he's ever been on a commercial airliner. I used to work for NASA working on aviation safety.

NASA does a whole lot more than just landing on the moon, as amazing as that is, and they do it all peers for a budget that's equal to what women in America spend on makeup, about $20 to $25 billion. dollars. Most people think it's 10 times higher. It's very low amount of money. We're going to go there. We're going to build telescopes. We're going to explore habitation there. We're going to build rockets because the moon is full of ice and its craters that are shadowed. The ice is hydrogen and oxygen. You know, I think it's going to be great. And I love all this stuff. And I think the answer to the whole thing is that when they actually send people to walk on the moon again, they should send Bart up there.

Barth, you should get on the rocket. Let's do a debate there, Bart. Yeah, and we can continue the debate on the surface of the moon. And then, Bart, my opening line would be, see, told you. Got to leave it there. Thank you all very much. Thank you. Thank you.

Professor Keating, thank you very much. Thank you, Pearson. Thank you, Bart. Well, let's turn out of two men who most certainly no fact from fiction when it comes to space travel. Charlie Duke is an Apollo astronaut, the 10th and youngest man to walk on the surface of the moon, a legendary actor and part-time astronaut. William Shatner, sometimes known as Captain Kirk of the USS Enterprise, particularly by men of my generation who will wean on that glorious character.

Welcome to both of you. Charlie Duke, what an amazing thing to have walked on the moon. We've got some footage of you, which I'll just show my viewers to remind them of your great moment. Let's have a look at this. Hey, John, while you're sampling there, you might look around and see you. Well, my first thought watching that, Charlie, was a couple of months ago, I tripped and broke my hip. And if I'd been in an airless environment like that, I probably would have escaped without injury. So I'm very jealous of the fact that you were falling over there in such conditions.

But to be serious for a moment, you were 36 when you walked on the moon, the youngest to do it at the time. It's 1972. Just a basic question. What was it like? Well, it was one of the most exciting adventures that I've ever had in my life, of course. We enjoyed every moment of it. We had three excursions out on the surface. We had a tremendous opportunity to explore the lunar highlands for three days, and John and

I didn't want to come home. We were having so much fun, but they said, get back inside, guys. It's time to come back. So anyway, we did a great job, I thought, corrected 200 pounds of moon rocks and did a lot of good experiments and left a lot of experiments up there to operate. So it was a tremendous opportunity for us. You also had another extraordinary role in the first lunar landing when you famously responded to Neil Armstrong saying the eagle has landed with the word. Roger Twang, Tranquility. We copy you on the ground. You've got a bunch of guys about to turn blue. We're breathing again. Thanks a lot. Which was fantastic. I was so excited that Tranquility came

out Twang at first. And so I corrected myself. Neil had told me that he was changing a call sign to Tranquility from Apollo 11. or whatever, eagle. And so I was prepared for it, but it was so exciting a moment there. You know, we landed with maybe 20 seconds fuel remaining. And so there was a lot of tension. And when Neil said, well, bus said contact, engine stop, and we there on the ground, it was just excitement got me, and Twang came out instead of train.

William Shatner, welcome back to Uncensored. Always great to talk to you. You obviously went to space recently, and you were very emotional. I remember about the experience, understandably. How much would you have liked to have walked on the moon like Charlie? And how envious are you of this latest mission, which is the precursor potentially to people doing it again? Well, these guys, like test pilots and explorers and people who venture. route into essentially

unknown, enjoy it. Like it's a thrill. Like, I mean, falling, like you described, you fell on Earth and you had difficulty, you broke your hip, he falls on the moon and there's nobody

there to help him up. Right. And he's got a pack on his back. It's awkward. He's alone. Yeah. These explorers, these test pilots, these astronauts, they get off on the adventure. We ordinary people

have to imagine what it's like to see flame going past your window, wondering whether the shields are going to hold or not, whether 20 seconds of fuel is enough to get back up. And there's this whole exploration

mentality that requires, I mean, it's insanity, really, to want to do that. And they're insane in a great way. Furthering us, but these people going up in Artemis, they're in the same tentative position.

They don't know whether that shield is going to hold. They don't know whether the hydrogen is going to explode. And when I went up and on my way up the gantry, I passed by the off-gassing, I said, what's that? They said, it's hydrogen. It's hydrogen.

That's one of the most explosive elusive gases we have. They're dealing with the unknown. They're dealing with exploration. They're dealing with death. Have they come to grips with what death is? What's on the other side? All those enormous questions are...

I don't know whether the astronauts are sitting in the Artemis thing right now. But you can imagine them leaning back, looking up into the sky, waiting for this explosion under them, wondering whether they're going to live or die and see their children and their loved ones again. I feel exactly the same way. I just want to show viewers a clip of you in space, because it was great. Let's take a look at this. God.

Waylessness. Oh, Jesus. No description. This is nothing. This is Earth. Holy hell. You said this place was steps from the water. I just haven't found the steps yet.

How much did we save? Enough. Enough to get lost. Or you could book a stay with Hilton. Welcome to your ocean front room. Just steps from the water. The Hilton sale is on now. Book on Hilton.com or the Hilton app

and save up to 20% to get the stay you expected. When you want savings, not surprises. It matters where you stay. Hilton, for the stay. I'm an amazing experience, and like I said, you got emotional after us, but I do remember very vividly, I was born in 65, and I remember watching the original series of Star Trek, which I think there were three series, weren't there, of the original television show?

Three years, yeah. Three years, and, you know, the mission statement was to boldly go when no man has gone before. And what I just remember being struck by, and particularly is, now I look back on it, was how kind of multicultural the Starship Enterprise was. You had Mr. Sulu, Chekhov, a Huru. This was a real visionary thing that you guys were putting on TV. It was. It was a visionary television.

But it reflected what the visionary was happening on Earth. That was the time when things were being built and the concept of going into space was new and exciting. This shot, this thing, this Artemis thing, I think is even more precarious than any of the others,

because there's so many unknowns. These are ships that haven't been flown that way before. There's technology that hasn't been used. There's four inexperienced trained, but inexperienced astronauts. The trepidation on this thing that's

happening in our lifetime and in our present day. ranks with Shackleton and Scott and exploration of the South Pole, which I was at, and I sat on a ice cap that was a desert. There was nothing around. There was nothing. Imagine nothing around you.

You're forlorn. It's one thing to be stuck in an airport. We have a man sitting here still Charlie Duke, who can. only imagine it. He was there. He was on the mood on his own. I know. So you need to explore that mind, that mindset. When he fell over, did he think I'm going to die? Well, let's ask him. And what a way to die? Let me ask him. Charlie, like a turtle on his back. Well, let me, let me ask the man himself. We can ask him. Charlie, what did you feel when he fell over?

Well, when I fell down, I said, I got to get up. We practiced and practiced. in practice. We'd been in the zero-g airplane. We've done that on bed. I've fallen on my back. I've did this. And we had, we'd practiced all of that. And so we were prepared for these unusual eventualities, but it wasn't like it was something that we hadn't thought about. Yeah, but it's one thing. How do we get up? It's one thing to practice for it. It's one thing to practice. It's one thing to practice. and practice and practice and practice. And somebody says, are you okay? Yeah, I'm okay. I'm practicing.

It's another thing to be forlorn on a planet that there's no way out. You're falling and you can't get up. I mean, that's just one of the things. 20 seconds of fuel. You've got to get back up there and rendezvous. I mean, the things are extraordinary. I mean, it's a great point by Bill. I mean, Charlie, obviously this...

Wait a minute, we had... Well, the question I was going to ask you was, it obviously carries enormous risk, obviously. And this Artemis 2 is the most powerful rocket that NASA have ever fired up, and it's going the furthest distance in turn to the dark side of the moon, literally, that we've sent people in relation to the moon.

So this carries with the enormous, obvious jeopardy. How do you, when you were doing this, How do you deal with the potential of not coming back of just something terrible going wrong? We never thought about it. I can't believe that. I can't believe, Charlie, I can't believe that. Okay. That was an astronaut.

We had never thought about not coming back. We had trained. if you got caught, if it exploded, it exploded. We had an escape system on top of the spacecraft for liftoff if the thing exploded. I mean, NASA had thought about all of those things. You just know that if it was going to happen in some way and the suit split open and you got hit by a meteorite, it just wasn't your day. Yeah, but Charlie, you got to make it.

You got to remember the Challenger. The Challenger is before us all. Those of us who haven't trained and have your mindset think Challenger and Artemis. And if Artemis fails, what a psychological blow that would be to the space program. I mean, there are so many complex things happening here to those of us who don't have your ability to deny the potential of death. Do you remember Apollo 1? Apollo 1 blew up on the pad

in a training accident. It caught fire. They were killed. Yeah, yeah, I remember that. Because of some all right. But it didn't stop us. We said, we got to fix this thing. We got to fix it and do it right. And so it took a year and a half. I'm not talking. I have to redesign the space screen. I'm talking about your frame of mind. I mean, the challenger set back psychologically the space program for a long while.

If Artemis fails, what a psychological blow that is. If Artemis is successful, what a glorious thing for the space program and progress to the moon. Well, let me tell you, if it fails, we're going to try again. We're not going to stop. That is just the attitude of the space program, attitude of the United States of America, and attitude with the astronauts. We're going to make it successful. It might not be right away, but we're going to make it successful. It's something that we're committed to, and we're going to do it right.

If it doesn't work right, then we're going to fix it. Just like we did on Apollo after Apollo 1 caught fire. just after a couple of others that almost didn't make it back. Apollo 13, Mission control, and the crews came through and made a spacecraft that was built for two guys for three days, made it last for four guys, no, three guys for five days. So, I mean, there's just a waste of work at it. As you're talking, Charlie, all I can think is to Bill Shatner, you know who would be 100% in agreement with everything Charlie is saying?

Katim James T. Kirk, he would have exactly the same mindset. Because actually, it's the never stop dreaming, you know, boldly go when no one's been before. It's that that motivates people. I mean, Charlie, just to ask you, I mean, if we do get back on the moon, what advice would you give for the astronauts who make that next amazing drink a lot of water drink a lot of water well if just I they haven't the first landings on the moon whatever Artemis that is in a couple of years I hopefully have a chance to be around to give them some advice if they want it and it's just

train, be prepared. That's what we did over and over and over again. It was like doing it in your sleep. We had trained so much. We'd work with mission control. We'd work with the crew. We'd work with the rover. We'd trained and trained and trained. And so that is the motivation behind Apollo crews. And what Artemis is, those are. Those are you. guys, they're not just going out into the ether with no training. And Charlie, out of interest. They are going to be well prepared. Out of interest, what do you feel about the conspiracy theorists who think that all the moon

landings were all invented? They never happened. They're fake. Well, the moon landed, the evidence is overwhelming that we landed on the moon. You're willfully ignorant if you don't believe that. we landed on the moon, six times. And the evidence is there. We left experiments packages. Every landing spite has been photographed by the lunar incontorocence orbiter. You can see the decent stage. You can see the experiments package. You can see the cars on the last three missions.

And the experiments have been operating, or they operated for five years and got We've got tons of data. We've got 600 pounds of moon rocks. Where did they come from? They just didn't appear. And we brought them back. What's the mindset of somebody who says to these brave individuals and all the taxpayers' money that went to making that happen? What is the mindset of somebody who said, well, it didn't really happen? I mean, that's nihilistic. That's like the denial of humanity. These crazy individuals. shouldn't have our attention. It's absurd.

Charlie, do you have any of the moon at home? Did you keep a bit? No, they gave me a moon rock after 40 years, but I had to give it away. So I gave it to my prep school down in Adderall Farragut Academy. Two moonwalkers graduated from there, me and Alan Shepard.

How amazing. How amazing. I watch with moon dust on it. Really? Fantastic. I've got a Captain James T. Kirk, baseball cap. That's all I can contribute to this debate. Gentlemen, what a fascinating time talking to you. All I can think of looking at both of you,

I know your ages, I don't need to repeat them, but I hope I have half the vitality for life and curiosity and excitement about what we don't know, as you two guys have. You are an inspiration to all of us, mere 61-year-olds. So thank you very much indeed to both of you. Thank you for having us. It's great. It's great to see you, Charlie. Bye-bye.

I hope I'm still around when we make that first landing and that next walk. That would be quite something. Charlie and I walk hand in hand to greet the... That would be brilliant, wouldn't it? I would love that. Can I come too? Yeah. You may. Thank you, my.

I told NASA, I'm still, I am still, at 90, I'm still physically qualified to go into space. Really? But NASA says, don't call us, we'll call you. So I'm not expecting to call. Great to talk to you both. Thank you both very much indeed. Pleasure. Thank you. Pleasure to see you.

It's been a pleasure. Thank you, Pierre. Thanks, Charlie. Take care. Pierce Morgan Unsensit is proudly independent. The only boss around here is me. If you enjoy our show, we ask only one simple thing. Hit subscribe on YouTube and follow Pierce Morgan Unsensit on Spotify and Apple Podcast.

And in return, we will continue. our mission to inform, irritate and entertain, and we'll do it all for free. Independent, uncensored media has never been more critical, and we couldn't do it without you. Aw. Pay off your home, travel for life, drive a Ferrari. In celebration of the world premiere of the Monopoly Big Board Buckslot Machine by Aristocrat Gaming, Yamava Resort and Casino at San Manuel is giving one person a $1.6 million dream package. The biggest prize in Yamava's history.

Club Serrano members can earn daily instant prizes and secure a spot in the finale May 29. Don't pass go and own it all. Only at Yamava, celebrating its 40th anniversary. U.N. Details at yamava.com must be 21st winter. Please gamble responsibly. Monopoly is a trademark of Hasbro. Hasbro is not a sponsor of this promotion. Ambition comes in all shapes and sizes. At First Citizens Bank, we roll with your goals because we're built for what you're building. Fit for your ambition for Citizens Bank.