I certainly can entertain the possibility that the transcript is, at least in part, embelished. Yet even if the cited transcript is flawed, it is only a remnant of much more cogent findings: the "tip of the iceberg" you might say. The point you make is valid and I acknowledge, in all fairness, that you have provided a substantial body of evidence. However, this is a conspiracy website. I raised a conspiracy theory. You can't disprove the conspiracy simply by citing evidence that anyone can find on the web; evidence presented by the estalishment for public consumption. What I am suggesting is that NASA switched to a secure channel when things got "heavy". Can you refute that argument? No.
I make the claim that when the astronauts arrived on the moon they saw huge craft of alien origin: "motherships", if you will. Can you disprove that? No. In private, witnesses back up that claim but have, to date, refused to go pubic, for a variety of reasons (with the notable exception of Ed Mitchell). Abscence of evidence is not evidence of abscence. It only re-inforces the lengths the establishment has gone to to cover up reality and ridicule alternative views, views that do not have the funding or resources to be heard above the media fog. While your information is very "informative", there is nothing you have said or provided that changes the fact: aliens were seen on the moon by the Apollo astronauts.