Conspiracy Theories

So there's something you just HAVE to get off your chest, and it doesn't fit into any of the above catagories? All spam, rants, and random chatter belongs in here.
Thomas Jeffrey
Posts: 95
Joined: Wed May 08, 2013 7:47 pm

Re: Conspiracy Theories

Post by Thomas Jeffrey » Mon Dec 16, 2013 10:23 pm

All the appendixes are here:
http://www.levendwater.org/companion/in ... anion.html
Many thanks for the link to the appendixes.

I just read the USA Today story about China’s moon landing. This is the first I’ve heard of China’s moon landing. I’m having a hard time typing because of the rolling laughter. Next year it’ll be North Korea!
I figure the Chinese have the U.S. over a barrel. The U.S. can't very well say, "You Chinese didn't go to the moon, it's impossible!" Heck, I've been to moon too. Can you prove I haven't?
Gregory, as long as you don’t actually tell that to anyone I know, I’ll back you up… :D In fact, I may know some people out here in L.A. who can set you up with some video equipment for your next lunar mission.

Thank you for the tip on Vernor Vinge. One can only take in so much factual literature before the mind needs a break. These sound like interesting books to get lost in for a while. There’s nothing like a good sci-fi book to let the imagination run!
Thomas
User avatar
notmartha
Posts: 770
Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2013 1:16 pm

Re: Conspiracy Theories

Post by notmartha » Wed Jan 22, 2014 2:50 pm

Some good reading from The American Christian:

How to Believe in Conspiracy Theories Without Being a Wacko
User avatar
Firestarter
Posts: 1536
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2016 3:02 pm

Moon landing hoax

Post by Firestarter » Mon Feb 19, 2018 3:22 pm

My most important reason to know that the Apollo moon landings (there were a whole bunch of them), is the problem of gravity without an atmosphere (vacuum). The only way to have an ignition where there is no oxygen is to provide it. But because there’s vacuum, the oxygen will immediately disappear in thin air (quite literally). So they couldn’t even have a “normal” fire.
1) It would be very difficult to land on the moon (without smashing), even more difficult as they couldn’t test this.
2) Then it gets even more amazing - lift-off from the moon. How? No way!
3) The probe would have to overcome the gravity until it would reach the rocket. Reportedly the rocket was still circling around the moon, so it would also be difficult to connect with the rocket.
This amazing feat never once went wrong: every astronaut to reach the moon… got safely back to earth.

Then the following video of the Apollo 17 moon landing …
0:18 – 0:33 - The astronauts are wearing a spacesuit (including oxygen tank) that would hamper their movement. He is jumping up and down like some buffoon, knowing that a tiny hole in the suite would mean instant death!
This doesn’t look like a scientific mission exploring the moon, but more like bad actors trying to make it interesting to watch at home.
0:34 – 0:44 - lift off of the probe. There is some kind of red “ignition” at 2:05-2:06 in the video. And some animated parts, rocks blown away, but no crater.
The lift off is immediate, without a slowly increasing speed (before) lift off. EDIT video was deleted...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3fOSTfGXVN4


See the following photo (2:24) from the documentary "IN HIS OWN WORDS: BUZZ ALDRIN 40 YEARS LATER": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1j9Fo7XayCg
The flag and pole are the only things in colour.
Notice the flag waving in the wind…
Image

See the blow up of the bottom of the flag pole.
The pole has NO shadow.
The bottom of the pole is perfectly straight, looks like it’s floating instead of inserted into the lunar surface.
Image

editor wrote:
Sun Nov 17, 2013 11:38 pm
A few years ago I got a taste of my own medicine, when I read Dave McGowan's online series of essays called Wagging the Moondoggie.
http://www.davesweb.cnchost.com/
I've found the 14 part "Moondoggie" series here: http://centerforaninformedamerica.com/moondoggie-1/

Part 8 ends with the following conclusion: http://centerforaninformedamerica.com/moondoggie-8/
As we already know, their cockiness was entirely justified since that aluminum foil capsule provided all the protection the astronauts needed to get home safely. No fewer than eight lunar modules allegedly made the hazardous voyage to the Moon, and all of them arrived in immaculate condition. The Apollo 13 lunar module was exposed throughout virtually the entire mission – all the way to the Moon and all the way back. In all, the eight LEMS allegedly logged some 2,000,000 miles of unprotected space flight and not one of them suffered so much as a scratch. That, my friends, is 1960’s technology at its finest.
Last edited by Firestarter on Wed Feb 13, 2019 5:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Firestarter
Posts: 1536
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2016 3:02 pm

Re: Moon landing hoax

Post by Firestarter » Sat Jun 30, 2018 4:30 pm

I’ve found some special effects from the Apollo moon hoaxes that failed...


The first video shows Buzz Aldrin turning transparent as he descends from the “lunar module”. Notice the black line that indicates the horizon (?!) through the astronaut.
To make it more interesting for the viewers at home, Buzz jumps up and down the ladder again.
At about 1:00 in the clip, a silhouette emerges out of nowhere behind Buzz's back. That can’t be Neil Armstrong, without his space suit, can it?
Image

Image

Also see from 0:54 in the video - The astronaut walks in front of the pole, but we can still see the pole through him (why doesn't he leave a trail?)...

https://youtu.be/3CMlHmURHm0


Here is the "Moon Rover" in the middle of a moon landscape. How did it get there without the wheels leaving a trail?
Image

See a close-up.
Image

For comparison I looked at the video I posted earlier for the astronaut jumping up and down like a buffoon.
I’m not saying that the following are convincing footsteps on the moon, but they only showed after the astronaut had jumped up and down at that spot.
Image
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cwZb2mqId0A


The following 2 pictures have shadows that are almost OK… Image

The following from the "APOLLO 17" movie.
Image
Last edited by Firestarter on Wed Feb 13, 2019 5:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Firestarter
Posts: 1536
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2016 3:02 pm

Ralph Rene - NASA Mooned America

Post by Firestarter » Wed Jul 04, 2018 5:13 pm

Firestarter wrote:
Sat Jun 30, 2018 4:30 pm
The first video shows Buzz Aldrin turning transparent as he descends from the “lunar module”. Notice the black line that indicates the horizon (?!) through the astronaut.
A NASA-astroturfer on Davidicke.com defends this with that the videos were sent to earth with "low bandwith".

Firestarter wrote:
Sat Jun 30, 2018 4:30 pm
The following from the "APOLLO 17" movie.
Image
The NASA-astroturfer has confirmed that this is a compilation of photos, but thinks it is ridiculous that I make a big point about it...


I've found a pretty good book on the Apollo moon hoax by the late Ralph Rene (1933-2008).
My main problem is that some of the arguments are hard to understand. I think this means that Rene didn’t understand all the arguments in his book…
Most of the following comes from the book, but I’ve added some information on radiation.

Ralph Rene's - "NASA Mooned America" (1994): https://ia800406.us.archive.org/31/item ... 37%20p.pdf


Radiation
One of the important problems in the moon landings are the Van Allen radiation belts: energetic charged particles circling earth and held in place by earth's magnetic field.
The following Youtube video shows that even in 2018, the Van Allen belts are considered a serious problem in staging a new moon landing. I wouldn’t say that NASA “admits” that the Van Allen belts would have prevented the Apollo moon landings though.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IDBBUwdyz4I

If theoretically the rocket could get passed the Van Allen belts the radiation problems do not end. The Van Allen belts and our atmosphere effectively protect us on earth from radiation.
According to the “reputable” NASA:
In the late 1940s, sounding rocket experiments showed that the Sun is, in fact, a very strong X-ray emitter. Astronomers were surprised! What's going on?

The X-rays we detect from the Sun do not come from the Sun's surface, but from the solar corona, which is the upper layer of the Sun's atmosphere. Only very hot gases can emit X-rays, and the corona, at millions of degrees, is hot enough to emit X-rays, while the much cooler surface of the Sun is not. Thus, the Sun's atmosphere is an excellent source of X-rays.
https://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/science/objects/sun2.html

The problems with radiation also apply to the voyage to the moon…
There are ways to block radiation, but these (metals) add a lot of weight, which makes them impossible to use in rocket “science” (but in rocket “science fiction” radiation won’t be a real problem).

A large solar flare emits massive amounts of radiation and if any would happen during the moon missions, including the voyage, this could be fatal. These solar flares cannot be predicted...
In 1963, Soviet rocket “scientists” told the British astronomer Bernard Lovell that they "could see no immediate way of protecting cosmonauts from the lethal effects of solar radiation". Had the Soviets never heard of H.G. Wells?

The table below shows the monthly amount of solar flares from 1967 to 1973. From 1969 to 1972, when the moon landings were staged, there were 18.5 flares a “day” (24 hours) on average. This is even worse than the Van Allen belts.
The astronauts would have gotten more than 100 solar flares per trip on average. If one flare wouldn’t kill you: 100 surely would…
Image

Heat on the moon
Most people imagine that it’s very cold on the moon. The following picture shows the surface temperature on the moon according to the “reliable” NASA.
Image

Surface temperatures on the moon range from about 120 degrees above zero Celsius in the sun at lunar midday, to precisely 273 degrees below zero in the lunar night.
The moon landings were staged at the part of the moon in the full sun: hotter than the hottest desert in the burning sun or a car that has been standing in the burning sun (hotter than boiling water). This doesn’t only apply to the time on the moon, but even to the 3-day-trip in the rocket from and to the moon…
Touching objects on the moon, like rocks, would burn your hands because of the heat (unless of course you have magical gloves).

Because of vacuum, it is very difficult to get rid of the heat as there is absolutely nothing to give the heat to – no cooling wind. Theoretically opening a window while moving fast wouldn’t even get rid of the heat.
The only way I know of to get rid of heat in vacuum is by radiation. Getting rid of heat by radiation can be calculated by the Stefan-Boltzmann law: how much heat an object can get rid of through radiation is dependent on its temperature. Under “normal” circumstances this would be a slow process (especially for the type of reflective material they would use to block radiation), not enough to cool down the additional heat that continues to come from the sun.
I guess that NASA has made up a great story on “radiation cooling” – not only for the “normal” cooling of the rocket, but also for the magical engine that could generate enough power to stop the lunar module from crashing and lifting off the moon…


Magical space suits
How these elegant space suits would be able to prevent those poor astronauts from boiling in their skin because of the heat is beyond my comprehension. Another big problem (arguably even bigger) would be the vacuum.
There was reportedly a crotch-to-shoulder zipper across the suit. In science labs, where they use vacuum compartments to conduct experiments, they don’t use zippers. Maybe because zippers have many small holes...
Going to the toilet would be impossible. I haven’t heard stories on how these courageous astronauts wore diapers yet (although maybe at the age they are now)…

Of course these flexible suits looked great for the cameras! I would expect that, because of the difference in pressure inside the suit compared to the vacuum outside, the space suit would blow up like a balloon. This could cause a fatal puncture in the suit…
This ballooning effect is missing from the moon videos and photos.
Collins has explained how this ballooning was overcome:
Instead of having a simple restraining net, it controlled the shape of its inflated bladder by a complex array of bellows, stiff fabric, inflexible tubes, and sliding cables.
I would expect that the gloves in particular would be impossible to design. How could they make vacuum-proof gloves and prevent the balloon-effect?


Apollo 13
While the “normal” Apollo missions were clearly impossible, the Apollo 13 was even more laughable.
Because the main rocket ship was having problems, they took the Lunar Module instead and got safely back to earth…
If this would be possible, they wouldn’t even have needed 2 different space ships (the main ship and the module) in the first place!


A mistake?
The author Ralph Rene claims that he “saved the best for last” (added information after his book was first published)…
Rene explains that he and Bill Kaysing had been working with Bart Sibrel. And refers to Sibrel’s video "A Funny Thing Happened On The Way To The Moon" (2000): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xciCJfbTvE4

Rene claims that this video (about 34:00 to 40:30) exposes that on 18 July 1969, Aldrin, Armstrong and Michael Collins were supposed to be half way to the Moon (“130,000 miles out” from earth) but in reality they were in a low Earth orbit (under the Van Allan Belts) staging earth shots.
The voice-over sounds convincing when claiming that also on 19 and 20 July 1969 (only 9 hours before they reportedly reached the moon) they were in low Earth orbit again staging earth shots. I don’t see any evidence for this wild claim…
I conclude that not all the claims in the book are sound, but mostly strong arguments are presented.


More strange shadows
Just look at the shadows of Armstrong (on the left) and Aldrin (with their magical gloves!).
Their shadows aren’t parallel, which is only a minor discrepancy compared to the huge difference in length of their shadows. Neil and Buzz are of a comparable length (Buzz a little longer), but Buzz's shadow is almost 1.5 times as long as Neil’s!
Image
User avatar
Firestarter
Posts: 1536
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2016 3:02 pm

Dave McGowan - Wagging the Moondoggie

Post by Firestarter » Fri Jul 06, 2018 4:57 pm

Because there is no atmosphere the effects (of the heat) of the sun are much larger than on earth.
On earth when the sun is at a low angle (for example in the morning), the intensity of the sunlight falling on earth becomes much less because the sunlight travels a longer distance through the atmosphere. The atmosphere “dims” the sunlight that warms the atmosphere.

There is another effect of the angle at which the sun shines on the moon that is explained in the following picture.
When the sun shines at an angle of 60 degrees from shining “straight down”; the sun becomes 50% less intense as the same (amount of) sunlight heats an area twice as large…
Image

Following through on this “effect”, the part of a hill in the sunlight on the moon would heat up much faster than the surrounding ground area. The “dark side” of a hill would hardly heat up at all in the early “morning” of the lunar day.
The Apollo moon “movies” were mostly staged on the “sunny” side of hills on the moon, where the heat, during the lunar “morning”, would be even more intense.

The astronauts (in their “magical” space suits) stand or walk (vertically) on the moon. Because of this same “effect”, during the lunar “morning” they would (theoretically) heat up even faster than when the sun would be shining straight down (a couple of earth days later)…
The lunar module would also receive relatively more sunlight during the lunar “morning” than the surrounding surface.
The rocket ship travelling towards the moon (and back) would also be in the full burning sunlight…


I found an interesting article on the amounts of “soft” X-ray radiation the astronauts were exposed to on their trip to the moon. This includes “high energy” X-rays of an intensity of > 10 ^ -4 W/m2.
Image

For what it’s worth: according to NASA the T in the following table indicates the total intensity of the flares in July 1969 (left side of the table; the right side is June/July 1970).
Image


Here’s a picture of a “pressure garment” zipper from Ed Mitchell’s “Apollo 14” spacesuit.
Image

Here’s a picture of the “Mercury space suit” that is best known for its use in the Project Mercury spaceflight hoax. It includes “magical” gloves and boots...
Image


The 14 parts story on the moon landing hoax, already posted in this thread, by the late Dave McGowan - "Wagging the Moondoggie": http://centerforaninformedamerica.com/moondoggie-1/

I don’t think that McGowan spend nearly as much time as Ralph Rene to “research” this nonsense, but McGowan is easily the better writer. The big advantage in reading this next to Ralph Rene’s “NASA mooned America” is that there is hardly an overlap between their stories.
McGowan also takes aim at the (lying) “debunkers” that harass anybody that tries to expose NASA for the fraud it is.
Following are some highlights from the “Moondoggie” articles...

Strangely in the overhead pictures, the alleged lunar modules are the only things casting long shadows on the moon...
Image

NASA once contemplated using “force fields” to repel the radiation, an interesting idea (for a science fiction movie), but certainly not available to NASA in the 1960s. The lunar modules didn’t have any type of physical shielding…

See the image below of one of the landing pods of the 33,000 pounds Apollo 11 lunar module, that left no craters nor sink into the surface…
Image

Several pictures show unequivocally that more than one light source was used. See for example the following famous picture of the Apollo 11 movie.
The surface of the moon is unevenly lit.
Notice the lack of shadow on Buzz Aldrin’s spacesuit (that should be in the shadow). Because on the moon there is no atmosphere shadows would be much darker.
Notice that Buzz’s spacesuit isn’t pressurised.
Image

In the final photo, the lunar module suddenly appears much closer to the “mountains”.
It’s also strange that the mountains in the background look very similar to the second photo. Notice the tracks...
Is this supposed to be the same spot? Is the second picture supposed to show the “crater” of the (earlier) lift off? If so where are the flag and other garbage left behind?
Image

Image
http://centerforaninformedamerica.com/moondoggie-4/
(archived here: http://archive.is/WLqXx)


See a NASA image of the moon rover folded up (to save space in the lunar module) and ready to go.
Image

The following picture shows a Soviet Lunokhod rover that was supposedly used in the late 1960s and 1970s and had an “ingenious method” to generate enough power to operate for up to 11 months.
Image

The very smart NASA “scientists” made up a story including astronauts landing on the moon. The Soviets came up with another story about dropping their own “rover” to “research” the moon. Maybe this could be considered “easier”, as they wouldn't need a story on lifting off from the moon and flying back to earth.
They would need some heavy duty computers to be able to perform this feat. Back in the 1960s and 1970s computers weren’t what they are now. See for example the specifications for the 2012 iPhone 5 compared to the 1969 Apollo “guidance computer” - EDIT "fixed" link: http://ibb.co/cCQQnH


Apollo 13
On 13 April 1970, Apollo 13’s command and service modules were made powerless by an explosion that seriously damaged the exterior of the craft while cruising some 200,000 miles from home. The oxygen tank explosion was fortunately not powerful enough to alter the course of the ship.
The 3-man crew retreated to the 2-man lunar module. The lunar module’s descent engine was used to “slingshot” the module around the moon and successfully back to Earth again! How could they find enough room in that tight module?


I’ve spent some time thinking about these magical engines in the lunar module used to make a soft landing and lift off from the moon.
Dave McGowan shares my idea that this is a major impossibility in the official story: http://centerforaninformedamerica.com/moondoggie-8/
(archived here: http://archive.is/LlGL6)

I won’t limit myself to McGowan’s arguments though...

1 – No testing possible
Because it’s impossible to make a large vacuum testing site, the lunar engines couldn’t effectively be tested at all (besides “simulation” exercises). Because the engines couldn’t be tested, they couldn’t be designed. It’s that simple!
Because the fuel and oxidizer were so corrosive the engines could only be used once, so they needed an engine for the descend AND for the ascend, and they couldn’t test-fire the engine prior to flight.

2 – No possibility to get enough thrust in vacuum
In vacuum the only way to slow down (or accelerate) a space ship is by “shooting” out objects.
Just imagine throwing down rocks to slow down after jumping from a skyscraper. You could also try to shoot a machine gun at the ground to go “flying like an eagle”...
You probably know that this is preposterous, but this would be a feasible method to make a relatively minor change (correction) in the direction of the space ship.

To use this for the amount of power needed to descend to and ascend from the moon is impossible. Completely impossible amongst others because they would have to carry all of the mass needed to “shoot” the amount of power needed.
In “rocket science” the only feasible solutions are lightweight...

3 – Engine burning in closed compartment
The only way to have an ignition where there is no oxygen is to provide it. But because there’s vacuum, the oxygen would immediately disappear in thin air (quite literally). So they could only make the engine fire in a closed off compartment.
Here’s a NASA picture of the lunar engine.
Image

This leads to the following impossibilities.
The engine would get very hot (much hotter than boiling water). Cooling down wouldn’t be possible.
Even “more impossible” is how to somehow transfer the massive amount of energy needed (to “shoot down” the needed mass that couldn’t be carried along in the lunar module) from the closed off engine to the outside.
As there is no fire outside the (closed off) engine this wouldn’t even look like the burning fire we would see in the lift off from the moon Apollo movies.

4 – The spinning lunar module
Descending to the moon would need an engine that could stop the very fast movement of the module in front of the movement.
Image

Even if they could build an engine with sufficient power to make a “soft landing” on the moon possible, the result would be a spinning rocket. In vacuum that would be an even bigger problem than in earth’s atmosphere.

5 - 100% success rate
This amazing feat never once went wrong: every astronaut to reach the moon… got safely back to earth.
This is statistically impossible.

6 – Design story
What I was looking for was a science fiction story on the design of the lunar module that would explain the amazing discoveries by a group of genius “rocket scientists” by accident.
The official story reads like they were designing a new version of an engine of proven technology.

NASA asked several money laundering arms companies to come up with a “plausible” story of designing (parts of) the engine.
The descend engine was especially impossible to design as they would need a “throttleable engine ... new to manned spacecraft” and “Very little advanced research had been done in variable-thrust rocket engines”.
And this couldn’t be tested!

Even though there was no way of real-life testing and this was completely new, NASA later said that they could have chosen both companies - STL and Rocketdyne – as both of their stories were “plausible” enough to sell to the gullible public.


Here’s a link to information from the “independent” Wikipedia on the Lunar Module Engine for the lift off and reconnection with the main module: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ascent_ ... ion_System

Here’s a story from the “reliable” NASA: https://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/Hist ... ch6-5.html
(archived here: http://archive.is/QuQS)
Last edited by Firestarter on Mon Aug 20, 2018 8:52 am, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
Firestarter
Posts: 1536
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2016 3:02 pm

NASA - Hollywood and the German Nazi

Post by Firestarter » Thu Jul 19, 2018 4:34 pm

The Hollywood movie industry has been working with the Pentagon and CIA since its inception: posting.php?mode=quote&f=7&p=2817

The first Administrator of National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) from 1958 to 1961 was Thomas Keith Glennan.
Glennan had already worked for the movies (for real) before turning his attention to the “hydrogen bomb” and “rocket science”.

After his graduation in 1927 until 1947 he worked in the film industry in the US and Britain, to become operations manager for Paramount and studio manager for Samuel Goldwyn.
In 1950, at President Harry S. Truman's request, Glennan became one of 5 commissioners of the Atomic Energy Commission for 2 years. The most significant hoax the commission staged was the hydrogen bomb.

One of Glennan’s first NASA recruits was German Nazi “rocket engineer” Wernher von Braun: https://www.nytimes.com/1995/04/12/obit ... gency.html

Here’s an overview of the career of T. Keith Glennan.
1935-1941 - Operations, Studio Manager Paramount Pictures
1941 - Executive Vega Airplane Corporation
1941-1942 - Studio Manager Samuel Goldwyn Studios
1942-1945 - Administrator, Director U. S. Navy Underwater Sound Laboratory
1945-1947 - Production Manager Ansco Division, General Aniline and Film

1950-1952 - Commissioner U. S. Atomic Energy Commission
1958-1961 – Administrator NASA
1970-1973 - U.S. representative International Atomic Energy Agency: http://www.case.edu/its/archives/presid ... ummary.htm

For more information on Glennan’s career in the movies:
During his five and a half years at Paramount Glennan provided the logistics necessary to allow the studio's creative teams to stage their productions. He worked with such Hollywood notables as Cecil B. DeMille.
Glennan was also credited with important innovations in the film industry during his time at Paramount, including the first full-fledged engineering department in the business and the first recognized industrial relations department.
http://www.smashwords.com/extreader/rea ... sa-sp-4105


The ancient Hebrew “Nasa” has been translated in the KJV as lift up, arise, exalt, extol, raise, high, etc.
The ancient Hebrew “Nasi” is actually derived from “Nasa”; I think that “Nazi” is just another spelling of “Nasi”.

According to Ralph Rene:
I have been told that Werner Von Braun retrieved two cases of rocks using a U.S. Navy ship in the Antarctic years before the Apollo missions. The shipping labels on the cases said "NASA, Houston, Texas".
(...)
Or they could have used rock samples picked up in Antarctica during the intensive exploration of that continent during the International Geophysical Year in 1957, when that continent was extensively explored. Werner Von Braun had Antarctic rocks shipped to NASA. Any strange rock would do if there were no fossils in it. These rocks could be slowly doled out, but only to those geologists who could be counted on to agree with anything the government said. Much of academia can be relied on to do just that!
Strangely enough, rocks were later found in Antarctica that closely resemble "Moon rocks". In point of fact, some geologists are now positive that these rocks were blasted from the Moon to Earth during immense meteoric impacts.
From Ralph Rene - "NASA Mooned America" (1994): https://ia800406.us.archive.org/31/item ... 37%20p.pdf

During the summer of 1966–67, Von Braun and a small group of other top NASA managers took a “field trip” to Antarctica.
Image

Wernher Magnus Maximilian Freiherr von Braun (1912 – 1977) was a German-born science fiction writer. He was so successful because he belonged to a “noble” family.
His father, Magnus Freiherr von Braun served as Minister of Agriculture. His mother, Emmy von Quistorp traced her ancestry to medieval European royalty and was a descendant of Philip III of France, Valdemar I of Denmark, Robert III of Scotland, and Edward III of England. He descended from Royal blood, maybe you haven’t heard that these Royals claim that the “lion” in all of their coats of arms, represents the “lion of Judah” (to illustrate their Jewish ancestry).
Not coincidentally Wernher von Braun married his maternal first cousin, Maria Luise von Quistorp (born in 1928), in 1947 (she was 16 years younger and he proposed after she turned 18).

In 1930, Von Braun attended a presentation given by Auguste Piccard (pioneer of high-altitude balloon flight), and reportedly said to him: "You know, I plan on traveling to the Moon at some time".
According to the state propaganda Von Braun was involved in the development of rocket technology in Germany, and helped to design and develop the V-2 rocket. Before 1939, German “scientists” contacted American physicist Robert H. Goddard with technical questions. Goddard was glad to help them to develop the A-4 rocket that would later become known as the V-2.
Hitler personally made Von Braun a professor because he had showed him a really “scientific” colour movie showing an A-4 taking off on 7 July 1943; an exceptional promotion for an engineer of only 31 years.

After the “suicide” of Adolf Hitler was announced, Von Braun immediately joined the Allied forces, at the beginning of May 1945.
He and his group that developed missile technology were part of the about 1,600 German “scientists” that were recruited by the US in Operation Paperclip.
Between 1952 and 1956, Von Braun led the Army's rocket development team that developed the Redstone rocket for nuclear ballistic missile, which was never used for real. Van Braun supposedly developed the rockets that launched the US’s first space satellite Explorer 1.
Wernher von Braun and his group were recruited by NASA in 1958.

In 1952, Von Braun first published his science fiction story on a manned space station in a series of articles titled "Man Will Conquer Space Soon!". This built on the 1929 science fiction story by Herman Potocnik in his book “The Problem of Space Travel – The Rocket Motor”.
The 1968 movie “2001 a space odyssey“ would draw heavily on this science fiction story.

Von Braun wrote a science fiction novel on human spaceflight to Mars the subject, Von Braun later published small portions of this opus in magazines. Wernher von Braun “anticipated” later stories on serious adverse reactions caused by weightlessness (space sickness).

Von Braun also made science fiction television films with Walt Disney and the Disney studios in the 1950s. The initial broadcast about space exploration “Man in Space” had 40 million viewers.
See Wernher von Braun, Willi Ley, Walt Disney and Dr. E. Heinz Haber (another Nazi Rocket "scientist" brought to the US in Operation Paperclip).
Image

In staging Apollo, Von Braun worked closely with former Peenemünde teammate, Kurt H. Debus, the first director of the Kennedy Space Center. His dream to sell the science fiction story of “The first men in the moon” became a reality on 16 July 1969, when the gullible public was fooled by some stupid video footage. It were reportedly the Saturn V rockets that made the astronauts land on the moon.
See Charles W. Mathews, Von Braun, George Mueller, and Lt. Gen. Samuel C. Phillips in the Launch Control Center following the Apollo 11 liftoff, 16 July 1969.
Image

When the Apollo program didn’t get enough viewers it was aborted, and Von Braun retired from NASA on 26 May 1972: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wernher_von_Braun

In 1930, von Braun attended the Technische Hochschule Berlin, where he joined the Spaceflight Society and assisted Willy Ley in his liquid-fuelled rocket motor tests with Hermann Oberth.
German immigrant Willi Ley was America’s primary source on the Vril Society and the flying saucer technology of Nazi Germany. Ley had been a Vril-Thule member.

Starting in 1931, Willi Ley tutored Wernher von Braun on rocket science. In 1939, Wernher von Braun became a high ranking Nazi SS Officer. He was head of the team that designed the German V-2 rockets.
In 1945, through “Operation Paperclip” Von Braun was brought to the US where he became a founder of the US disinformation campaign NASA.
https://www.resistance2010.com/m/blogpo ... t%3A331860
(archived here: http://archive.is/pUMp1)

See the following video with the Wernher Von Braun who presents a pure science fiction story of going to the moon (look at the pictures!).
He tells about a refuelling operation in low earth orbit, and an atomic reactor.
This goofball was made a physics professor by Hitler for his coloured movie presentation.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-GXFPXala6k
Last edited by Firestarter on Sun Jul 21, 2019 1:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
notmartha
Posts: 770
Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2013 1:16 pm

Re: Conspiracy Theories

Post by notmartha » Thu Jul 19, 2018 7:58 pm

While looking for something else, I came across this by William Cooper. He explains, in detail, why the moom landing couldn't have happened the way they say it did, if it all.

http://www.hourofthetime.com/majestyt.htm
User avatar
Firestarter
Posts: 1536
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2016 3:02 pm

NASA- Freemasons; Rocket engine

Post by Firestarter » Sun Jul 22, 2018 4:59 pm

I had forgotten that William Cooper also wrote on the moon landings hoax. Regardless of that the “conspiracy” MAJESTYTWELVE, Operation Majority certainly deserves a place in the topic “Conspiracy theories”
I’ve read one book of Cooper; it’s not an excellent book, because when he wrote it he still believed in the “alien invasion” (again a book by H.G. Wells – War of the worlds?). It got lots of information on symbols and numerology of the Satanists.
William Cooper – Behold a pale horse (1990): http://www.stopthecrime.net/docs/Willia ... se1991.pdf


Even at a young age, Wernher Von Braun was a huge fan of science fiction books about space travel, including the fictional stories of Jules Verne and H.G. Wells (the inventor of “The first men in the moon” and “atomic bombs”). He even wrote his own science fiction including “Lunetta” that was published in a German magazine, about a rocket flight to a space station.
Von Braun also wrote a letter to the greatest liar of the 20th century, Albert Einstein (1879–1955), with rocketry-related questions. Von Braun proudly showed Einstein’s reply to his parents, his professors and fellow students.

In 1947, the 34-year-old Von Braun married his 18-year-old maternal first cousin, Maria Luise von Quistorp (born in 1928). Von Braun had been “wooing” the underage Maria for years.
In 1955, Maria and Wernher von Braun renounced their German citizenship to become US citizens: https://ascelibrary.org/doi/full/10.106 ... 30.0000162


I had already found out that NASA has been affiliated with Hollywood and the German Nazis that were pushing the alien invasion threat with flying saucers. It should come as no surprise that many NASA astronauts were freemasons.
On 16 September 1969, Mason Edwin “Buzz” Aldrin visited the House of the Temple in Washington. He was accompanied by his father, Edwin E. Aldrin, Sr., also a Scottish Rite Mason.

John Glenn, one of NASA’s first astronauts and US senator, is a Mason.
Edgar Mitchell, a supposed moon-walker in the Apollo 14 mission, is an Order at Artesta Lodge in New Mexico.
James Irwin, who also supposedly walked on the moon in Apollo 15, was a Tejon Lodge member in Colorado Springs.

Donn Eisele, who was on Apollo 7, was a member of the Luther B. Turner Lodge in Ohio.
Gordon Cooper, who was aboard Mercury 9 and Gemini 5, was a Master Mason in Carbondale Lodge in Colorado.
Virgil Grissom, who was on Apollo 1 and 15, Mercury 5 and Gemini 3, was a Master Mason from Mitchell Lodge in Indiana.
Walter Schirra Jr., part of Apollo 7, Sigma 7, Gemini 6 and Mercury 8, was a 33rd degree Mason at Canaveral Lodge in Florida.
Thomas Stafford, on Apollo 10 and 18, Gemini 7 and 9, is a Mason at Western Star Lodge in Oklahoma.

Paul Weitz, on Skylab 2 and Challenger, is from Lawrence Lodge in Pennsylvania.
NASA astronauts Neil Armstrong, Allen Sheppard, William Pogue, Vance Brand, and Anthony England all had fathers who were Freemasons too!

The brother of C. Fred Kleinknecht, head of NASA at the time of the Apollo moon hoax program, even became Sovereign Grand Commander of the Council of the 33rd Degree of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry of the Southern Jurisdiction: https://aplanetruth.info/space-traveler ... reemasons/

See Buzz Aldrin’s 19 September 1969 “thank you” letter to Grand Commander Smith after his visit at the House of the Temple.
Image


I’ve been thinking about some “comparable” experiment to the landing on the moon of the lunar module that could be done on earth.
An ice buggy, with no steer or anything to keep it in a certain direction (like sharp irons) or brakes. It has an incredible powerful motor (like the engine of an F-16). The engine is “throttleable” but it can’t be turned in any direction for steering.
Now this ice buggy is going with a speed of 6000 km/h over an ice lake, there is no wind and the shore of the lake is at 10 km. The ice buggy has to use its powerful engine to stop before it crashes on the shore. Please don’t try this yourself!
Image


I’ve found a “good” story on rocket engines...
Isaac Newton stated in his third law that "for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction". It is upon this principle that a rocket engine supposedly operates.
The amount of mass “shot” out of the nozzle defines the thrust of the rocket engine. It is this phenomenon that pushes a garden hose backward when water flows from the nozzle, or makes a gun recoil when fired: http://www.braeunig.us/space/propuls.htm

Hypothetically this means that if 1/10 of the mass of the lunar module is “shot” out of the nozzle at 10 times the starting speed of the module it could be slowed down to 0 in vacuum (ignoring gravitation for simplicity).

A typical rocket engine consists of nozzle, combustion chamber, and injector. The “problem” I see is that none of these science fiction stories explain what kind of “magical” nozzle could keep the vacuum out of the combustion chamber.
Liquids can't exist in a vacuum, so the nozzle would have to be closed to keep the vacuum “out” or the fuel couldn’t “combust”. But the nozzle has to be open to let the gasses “shoot” out for the thrust.

Another engineering problem would be the heat caused by the combustion.


There is another huge problem in the supposed working of the “lunar engine”...
According to Newton’s Action = Reaction law the “thrust” would come from “shooting” the exhausted gasses from the combustion chamber in a certain direction.
The following image shows that in vacuum the lunar module engines would at best work at a very low efficiency because in vacuum you can’t “shoot” out the air in 1 direction because it will automatically spread out in different directions.

If a nozzle couldn’t "exhausts" in only one direction in very low pressure, this would be even worse in vacuum. This proves that the "rocket engines" in vacuum couldn't work efficiently...
The following picture is based on a picture from the following Wikipedia page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocket_engine_nozzle
Image
User avatar
Firestarter
Posts: 1536
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2016 3:02 pm

NASA- Oberth, Ordway, Lange, Clarke

Post by Firestarter » Sun Jul 29, 2018 3:17 pm

It looks like all of the major science fiction movies on space travel have been made with NASA personnel...
I had already found that the first administrator of NASA, T. Keith Glennan, had been a big Hollywood manager before he became involved in staging the “hydrogen bombs” and space travel and that German Nazi Wernher von Braun worked with Glennan and Walt Disney.

notmartha wrote:
Thu Jul 19, 2018 7:58 pm
While looking for something else, I came across this by William Cooper. He explains, in detail, why the moom landing couldn't have happened the way they say it did, if it all.

http://www.hourofthetime.com/majestyt.htm
I found the Oberth connection through the story of Cooper.

Hermann Oberth was born on June 25, 1894 in Transylvania (then part of the Austro-Hungarian empire now part of Romania). He was born to German speaking parents and became a German.
At an early age, Oberth became a huge fan of spaceflight science fiction by authors like Jules Verne. Just like Wernher von Braun and Robert Goddard.

Oberth learned of the 1919 book by Robert Goddard "A Method Of Reaching Extreme Altitudes". In 1922, Oberth wrote to Goddard and suggested an international project to develop liquid-fuelled rockets.
In 1923, Oberth published his book "Die Rakete Zu Den Planetenraumen" (The Rocket Into Planetary Space).
In 1927, Oberth joined the Verein fur Raumschiffahrt (Society for Space Travel) to become its president. Members of the Verein fur Raumschiffahrt included: Willy Ley, Johannes Winkler, Max Valier, Rudolf Nebel, Kurt Hainisch, Walter Hohmannn, Eugene Sanger , Klaus Riedel, Rolf Engel, and the young Wernher von Braun.

In 1928, Oberth became technical advisor to director Fritz Lang, who was filming the movie "Frau Im Mond" (Woman in the moon). On the set Oberth was helped by Ley, Valier, Nebel, Riedel and the young and eager science fiction fan Wernher von Braun.
Oberth (with the help of Von Braun) constructed and tested a small rocket engine on 23 July 1930. See members of the Verein fur Raumschiffahrt with the rocket in Berlin, 1930. From left to right: Rudolf Nebel, Franz Ritter, unknown, Kurt Heinisch, unknown, Hermann Oberth, unknown, Klaus Riedel, Wernher von Braun, unknown.
Image

Oberth worked at Peenemunde from 1941 to 1943.
After World War II, Oberth came to the US to continue to work on science fiction with Wernher von Braun at the Army Ballistic Missile Agency: http://waterocket.explorer.free.fr/herman_oberth.htm
(archived here: http://archive.is/NBvs)

So Oberth and the young Von Braun were already involved in special effects for the movies long before they came to the US to work their “magic”...
See Hermann Oberth in the forefront with Wernher von Braun seated right behind him at the Army Ballistic Missile Agency at Huntsville, Alabama in 1956. Also pictured Ernst Stuhlinger (seated on the left); H.N. Toftoy, Commanding Officer and responsible for "Project Paperclip" (in uniform); and Robert Lusser (standing on the right).
Image

Fritz Lang is best known for his futuristic masterpiece Metropolis (1926) that nearly bankrupted Germany’s state-financed studio, Ufa.
Lang worked closely with Germany’s leading rocketry science fiction expert, Hermann Oberth, and they visually replicated the rocket described in Oberth’s book, "Die Rakete Zu Den Planetenraumen".
Forty years later the Apollo 11 moon landing closely followed Lang’s and Oberth’s “film script”.

The film featured a multiple-stage booster system to attain escape velocity; a fin stabilisation design for the rocket’s base; before the launch, a media frenzy descends upon the area; and a count down to zero for launch.
The movie shows a crew floating in zero gravity in the space ship.
After the rocket lands on the moon, the crew encounters lower gravity.

As part of the film’s publicity, Oberth and Wernher von Braun tried to launch an actual rocket for the film’s premiere. This stunt failed.
Oberth also advised for the American movie of the moon landing “Destination Moon” (1950)”: http://sensesofcinema.com/2004/cteq/woman_in_the_moon/
(archived here: http://archive.is/xL56h)


Here’s the Lunar landing segment from the movie “Destination Moon” (1950)” - EDIT video was deleted.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R8qqX1d7iDo


I was shocked to find out how “advanced” the special effects were in Lang’s science fiction movie, 40 years before the Apollo moon landings were staged. Judge for yourself…

Launch scene Frau im mond
https://youtu.be/I8gu1p939a4

Landing on the moon scene Frau im mond
https://youtu.be/nkiRCNMq_Es


In 2013, banker’s son Frederick Ira Ordway III (1927-2014) was awarded the Arthur C. Clarke Lifetime Achievement Award.
Ordway had been a huge fan of science fiction on space travel since he since he was 10. In 1941, Ordway (13) became a member of the American Rocket Society.
In 1950, Ordway first met science fiction writer Arthur C. Clarke, who helped him to become a fellow of the British Interplanetary Society. They became long-time friends.
Ordway became a top official at NASA and worked closely with Wernher von Braun, including on the Apollo program.

In 1965, Ordway met Clarke who was working with movie director Stanley Kubrick on a science fiction movie based on his story “The Sentinel”. After Clarke called Kubrick, Ordway was swiftly asked to become the “scientific and technical advisor” to the film that became “2001: A Space Odyssey” (1968) EDIT "new" link: http://web.archive.org/web/201801170752 ... rdway-iii/

NASA’s Associate Administrator for Manned Space Flight, George Mueller, nicknamed the film’s production facilities “NASA East”.
See from left to right NASA officials touring MGM Borehamwood during pre-production of “2001: A Space Odyssey”: Fred Ordway, Deke Slayton (astronaut), Arthur C. Clarke, anonymous NASA assistant, Stanley Kubrick, and George C. Mueller.
Image

Ordway wasn’t only working on the movie with NASA officials, but also with major corporations like General Electric, Bell Telephone Laboratories and IBM.
The name of the robot star of the movie “HAL” is notably only one letter removed from “IBM”.

Ordway explained about “rocket scientists”:
They all read H. G. Wells and Jules Verne. Science fiction got us all started in the early days, I think without exception.

In 1949, Arthur C. Clarke helped to make his friend Von Braun an honorary member of the British Interplanetary Society: http://thetruthseekersguide.blogspot.co ... art-3.html

Also involved in both NASA and “2001: A Space Odyssey” was the German-born Harry Lange (born 1930), Ordway’s partner in their General Astronautics publishing and consultancy company. Lange was specialised in making science fiction drawings.

In 1954, Ordway and Lange helped set up General Astronautics that in 1960 was acquired by NASA.
Lange made illustrations to promote the science fiction projects of Von Braun. Von Braun told him: "Harry, your work makes money".

After “2001: A Space Odyssey”, Lange settled in England to design sets for films, including Kelly's Heroes (1970); Star Wars (1977); The Empire Strikes Back (1980); The Return of the Jedi (1983); Moonraker (1979); and The Meaning of Life (1983): https://www.theguardian.com/film/2008/j ... es.culture


In the following video the presenter claims that some of the “special effects” used to give the impression of lower gravity in walking on the moon are: 1) slowed down replay; 2) wires: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zz9Bzi_ ... e=youtu.be

The NASA-bot on Davidicke.com replied with the following interesting video from the Apollo 17 hoax.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sk4bJqF-ZbQ

This indeed shows that the strange looking flashes aren’t “evidence” for wires...
General observations on this video:
- Most of the video looks like it’s played in slow motion.
- There is no reason to believe that this was one continuous “take”.

The astronauts should be conducting scientific experiments and would be on a tight schedule. I would expect them to “act” differently.

In my opinion the most damaging in this video is...
From 0:43-0:45 - First the leg of the astronaut, who is behind the flag, goes through the pole. Then the backpack goes through the flagpole and flag…
Image
Last edited by Firestarter on Tue Aug 06, 2019 3:38 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Post Reply