Exopolitical Comment #51
Did the USA/USSR Fly a Secret Joint Mission to the Moon in 1976

To Investigate a Crashed Extraterrestrial Mothership?
by Michael E. Salla, Ph.D
Kona, Hawaii
June 26, 2007

from Exopolitics Website


Luca Scantamburlo, an Italian UFO researcher, has published online an interview he conducted with a whistleblower claiming to be a former astronaut on a secret mission flown by NASA and the Air Force Space Command to the moon in August, 1976. The alleged mission was titled Apollo 20 and was a joint US and Soviet mission that followed by just over a year the joint Apollo-Soyuz 1975 mission. The Apollo 20 mission filmed the dark side of the moon where a very large extraterrestrial vehicle appeared to lie wrecked on the moon's surface.

This 'wreckage' was first captured on film by Apollo 15 in 1971 which shows a moon panorama with what appears to be a large elliptical object on the moon's surface in an official NASA photo.

blow up on right of AS15-P-9630 - original below

Apollo Image Atlas

Image Collection: Panoramic
Mission: 15
Magazine: P
Revolution: 38
Latitude / Longitude: 19° S / 117.5° E
Lens Focal Length: 24 inch
Camera Altitude: 117 km
Sun Elevation: 27°
Stereo Pair: AS15-P-9625
Film Type: 3414
Film Width: 5 inch
Image Width: 45.24 inch
Image Height: 4.5 inch
Film Color: black & white
Index Map

The alleged Apollo 20 mission comprised three astronauts:

  • William Routledge and Leona Snyder - both from Bell Laboratories and employed by the USAF but not officially part of the US astronaut corps

  • Alexei Leonov - first man to walk in Space and Soviet Commander on the 1975 Apollo/Soyuz Mission

The mission was launched from Vandenberg Air Force Base in California. There was an alleged moon landing by Routledge and Leonov wherein the crashed vehicle was entered and found to be an ancient mothership. A dead EBE female was also found who was well preserved in some protected layering.

The whistleblower, "William Routledge", began in April of this year to upload hours of film footage of the secret Apollo mission on to YouTube video. Scantamburlo investigated some of the videos and had them analyzed by Italian film experts who concluded they were authentic. He then contacted Routledge to conduct an interview by email correspondence.

Scantamburlo is a well respected writer/journalist in Italy that has commented on many UFO cases and conducted a number of investigations that have been published in Italian UFO magazines. My own knowledge of Scantamburlo is that he is a very competent and thorough UFO researcher who first came to my attention due to his efforts to verify the Vatican's involvement in extraterrestrial affairs and discussions between Mikhail Gorbachev and Ronald Reagan to form an alliance against a possible extraterrestrial threat.

Scantamburlo's report on Routledge demonstrates a sincere effort to verify a number of the details provided by Routledge who supplied much information about the secret mission and his own background. Scantamburlo's overall conclusion is that Routledge's testimony and film footage are genuine, and that a secret Apollo 20 mission did indeed go to the moon.

I recommend that all take Scantamburlo's analysis and conclusions very seriously. Scantamburlo's report and interview can be read far below. I also recommend viewing some of the Youtube videos uploaded by William Routledge (see below).


The one to begin with is the following:



My own view at the moment is that it is very possible that such a secret Apollo mission went ahead to explore the wreckage first discovered in the Apollo 15 wreckage. It would have made sense for that to be a joint US-USSR mission, that followed the joint 1975 mission. Routledge's account of his background as a Foreign Technology expert and recruitment by the USAF to fly on the mission is credible given the Apollo 15 photograph.


It would make sense that exploration of a crashed ETV would need to be investigated by someone with expertise in foreign technologies. Routledge has also given much information about his work background and credentials online for verification purposes. His background and credentials can be checked and the other individuals mentioned on the Apollo 20 mission can be interviewed for their responses to his allegations.

There are two inconsistencies I find in Routledge's testimony. First, the Apollo 20 insignia that is shown in a number of his films only show the names of the three astronauts (Routledge, Synder and Leonov) and the name of the Apollo mission. This is inconsistent with the 1975 insignia of the joint Apollo-Soyuz mission which had both the 'Apollo' and 'Soyuz', and the names of the three astronauts/cosmonauts on them (image right).

The second inconsistency concerns what was revealed by another whistleblower, Ingo Swann in his book Penetration. Swann revealed that he had been secretly recruited by a covert intelligence agency to remote view artifacts on the dark side of the moon in 1975. He discovered extraterrestrial artifacts and extraterrestrial entities on the moon. Swann deduced from what he had been told that there was a concerted effort to gather intelligence using remote viewing since physical access to the moon had been curtailed. Presumably, the extraterrestrials declared that no further moon landings would be allowed.


This according to Swann (and a number of other whistleblowers) is the real reason why the Apollo moon missions were quietly terminated after the 1971, Apollo 17 mission.

If Swann's experience and conclusions are correct, then this does appear to be inconsistent with Routledge's testimony that a secret Apollo 20 mission was allowed to go ahead and land on the moon to explore an extraterrestrial artifact. Combined with the first inconsistency, this could lead to the conclusion that Routledge's testimony and videos are a sophisticated hoax to deceive the public.

On the other hand, if proven to be true, Routledge's video evidence and testimony may be the final straw that breaks the camel's back concerning UFO secrecy. His testimony, background and film footage can be confirmed. The Apollo 15 photograph of the alleged alien vehicle is genuine and does point to an object that could have been the focus of a joint US-USSR secret moon mission. The reasons for Routledge's disclosure may be as he claims that he wants to divulge the truth for the "wonder of it all".


He also commented that that UFO sightings will increase dramatically in September 2007 and this will speed up disclosure efforts considerably. Routledges comments and revelation suggest that he continues to have access to a benign faction within the extraterrestrial management system that desires official disclosure, and that events associated with September 2007 and 2012 will force disclosure.

If Routledge's background, testimony and film footage prove to be true, and simple answers are found for the two inconsistencies above and any others found, then this will lead to an escalation of public disclosures. More officials will recognize that the secrecy system is imploding and will wish to be on the winning side of history as that part of the government that played a proactive role in preparing the public for disclosure of the extraterrestrial presence.


If Routledge's testimony is proven to be a sophisticated hoax, this may nevertheless signify an attempt to raise the public's awareness of extraterrestrial life through partially valid information.


I recommend considering Scantamburlo's report due to the possibility that this is a genuine disclosure of a secret mission to investigate an ancient extraterrestrial mothership first identified in a photo taken during the Apollo 15 moon mission.






Update on Secret Apollo 20 Mission

From: Exopolitics
Date: 06/28/07 10:39:38
To: Exo-Institute-News; Exopolitics Institute; exopolitics@yahoogroups.com; prepare4contact@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [exopolitics] Update on Secret Apollo 20 Mission

Update to Exopolitics Comment #51

It appears that William Rutledge (aka retiredafb) has used part of the audio feed from the Apollo 15 mission for the alleged Apollo 20 videos he uploaded onto the web. If you listen to the audio at the start of the following video concerning the ancient moon city uploaded by Rutledge you will hear the following words:

Presto chango; there's the TV.
[Pause] Oh, beautiful, I'm glad to hear that.


These are identical words to part of a dialogue from an actual Apollo 15 mission. The Apollo 15 audio can be heard below:



The actual transcript is available at 'Apollo 15 Lunar Surface Journal - Loading the Rover' (go to: 121:05:30)


It looks as though Rutledge has simply uploaded some genuine Apollo 15 audio on to his moon city video. That suggests that his videos and story are part of an elaborate hoax. For some, this discovery will suffice to dismiss the whole affair and conclude that the alleged Apollo 20 mission was entirely contrived. However, this does raise the question of what the underlying agenda of Rutledge is in performing such an elaborate deception? Is it merely to disinform the public or to direct the public's attention to something important?

If we consider the second possibility, then the natural starting point is the elliptical object found in the Apollo 15 photo AS15-P-9630 below.

That is a genuine photo and may depict an extraterrestrial artifact as Rutledge claims.


Another thing to consider is the alleged date of the Apollo 20 mission in 1976, just one year after the joint Apollo-Soyuz mission of 1975. I have already mentioned the insignia problem for a joint US/USSR mission in my initial commentary that a joint mission insignia was not correctly depicted in Rutledge's Apollo 20 videos. Rutledge is probably here suggesting that there may have been joint secret mission to discover more about the artifact depicted in the Apollo 15 photo, but its actual name was not Apollo 20 which would have signified solely a US space mission.

Confidence in the authenticity of the videos uploaded by Rutledge is significantly eroded by discovery of him using Apollo 15 audio for his alleged Apollo 20 video. There is nevertheless a possibility that something important was discovered during the Apollo 15 mission that justified a joint secret US/USSR mission to investigate.


Rutledge may be conveying this information by a combination of genuine information and deliberate deception.

Michael E. Salla, Ph.D
June 28, 2007


Further Update on Apollo 20 Mission

From: Exopolitics
Date: 06/28/07 15:49:58
To: prepare4contact@yahoogroups.com; Exopolitics Institute; exopolitics@yahoogroups.com
Cc: Exo-Institute-News
Subject: [exopolitics] Further Update on Apollo 20 Mission

Aloha, more information is available concerning the alleged Apollo 20 mission. I received information that Apollo 17 also took photos of the elliptical object first depicted in the Apollo 15 mission that is allegedly a large crashed cylindrical extraterrestrial vehicle.


You can view these Apollo 17 shots below:




A number of Apollo 15 shots of the same object are available below:







Furthermore, Luca Scantamburlo has written an update on his website concerning what he believes is more confirmation that such an Apollo mission existed. He believes that the mixing of footage from an Apollo 11 launch for the Apollo 20 launch is due to Rutledge’s friends mistakenly uploading the wrong video sequences to YouTube video (see: New Evidences Provided by William Rutledge, CDR of The Apollo 20 Crew

While this is a plausible explanation, it doesn’t satisfactorily explain how audio from Apollo 15 could be mistakenly added to Apollo 20 video. Also the flight insignia that Rutledge used was wrong for a joint US-USSR mission, compare with the Apollo-Soyuz 1975 mission:

That led to my re-evaluation of the Apollo 20 mission as most likely a hoax in my last update. I suspect that we are being given an important truth concerning the object in the Apollo 15 & 17 photos that is surrounded by a veil of fabrications. So discernment is necessary. My guess is that a covert mission did occur in 1976 but it probably didn’t use a Saturn V rocket nor was NASA involved. If the USAF has an antigravity fleet of vehicles as many suspect were built through reverse engineering of extraterrestrial technologies in cooperation with certain corporations, why would they use NASA personnel or launch vehicles that use outdated propulsion technologies and navigation principles?


That part of Rutledge’s story doesn’t make much sense given what others have said of the antigravity technology covertly developed in the 1950s/1960s and used for the construction of “Alien Reproduction Vehicles”. If a crashed extraterrestrial mother-ship was located on the moon, surely a joint mission would use the most advanced ARVs, rather than Apollo hardware.


Sources for the existence of ARVs include:

  1. Mark McCandish who claimed he saw in a secure Air Force facility at an air-show

  2. Gary McKinnon who learned about a Naval space fleet during his hacking ventures

  3. Nick Cook who describes the covert nature of antigravity research in The Hunt for Zero Point

Finally, I have received information from a source that I can’t confirm that a covert mission did occur to explore the elliptical object/crashed ETV, but it involved a multinational crew of several dozen. If true, that would suggest that the covert mission used antigravity technology capable of transporting such a large mission crew, something not possible with the Saturn V rockets used for the Apollo missions which had crews of three.
So the Apollo 20 mission component in Rutledge’s testimony in my view is a fabrication.


That does not disqualify all the videos or the information Rutledge is sharing. Some videos of the crashed ETV may be genuine and come from the actual covert mission the details of which we do not have. We can suspect this was a joint US-USSR mission to explore a large crashed ETV on the moon. We have no way of being certain at this stage of how much of Rutledge’s information is accurate so there is plausible deniability for all concerned. Rutledge is likely educating us through a disclosure of genuine facts mixed with fabrications. He may be also seeking to prompt other whistleblowers to come forward to disclose what really happened.


Whatever the underlying agenda, great caution is needed in evaluating Rutledge’s material.

Michael E. Salla, Ph.D