Thursday, December 4, 2008

Project Apollo: What Were They Thinking? Part III

People today are a lot smarter than the people of 40 years ago, and yet many cannot understand how we supposedly landed people on the moon in the late 60's with technology INFERIOR to what we have today, but cannot do the same with what we have now?

The reason is obvious... We did not go then, and we cannot go now! As I have said in the last two parts, the "moon landings" were nothing more than a propaganda stunt. The US Government after JFK made his commitment in 1961 to land on the moon and return a man safely to earth by the end of the decade did some serious investigation and analysis as to how to get there, and their findings were not good....
JFK was not a man of science, and he was hoping that the top scientists in the US would come up with solutions to the overwhelming difficulties of space travel... The die had been cast.
The US was in a "Cold War" with the USSR. The USSR had already beaten the US into space by placing first Sputnik, and later the manned Vostok capsules into Low Earth Orbit. The US had just finished its first suborbital manned flight by Alan Sheppard, and the public demanded more to match, or to beat the Soviets in space. The US government wanted to save face, and to respond to the Soviet "threat" by giving the people a wonderous project to captivate the public psyche. Failure was NOT an option.

NASA was created in 1958 as a department of National Defense. The original concept was to investigate the possibilities of launching a nuclear weapon into space as a means of bombing the USSR from orbit. After 1961 the program became the platform of first getting a man into low earth orbit, and then developing the platform for getting a man into interstellar space and to the moon. There was much work to be done, and the prospects were not good...
It was as early as 1963 that most of the top scientists, and physicists came back with their reports to NASA... They said point blank that it could not be done. The major hurdles of both the rockets needed, and getting through the VA belts were the obstacles that could not be done in time to meet JFK's requirement. Few people are aware that a report was presented in 1963 showing clearly that there was no possibility of putting a man on the moon by the end of the decade, and that the US should combine its efforts with the USSR for the exploration of space. It was after this that the US government dismissed the report findings, and decided to covertly create the Apollo Simulation Project (ASP).

Few people at the time were aware of the ASP, and many employed by NASA were led to believe that they were working on the machines to put men on the moon with Project Apollo. It was through the combined efforts of both NASA, and the CIA, that only a select handful were aware of the truth behind Apollo, and they did their part in keeping it secret superbly indeed!

Billions of dollars were given to contractors such as Boeing, North American Aviation, and Grumman, for both the rockets, and the LEM development. These corporations basically took the money and gave the taxpayers nothing more than massive firecrackers, and props in return!

Boeing, for example, developed and built the massive Saturn 5 rockets used by Apollo to put men on the moon. There has been much speculation today as to the actual performance of this rocket, because after the Apollo-Soyuz flight of 1975, the Saturn 5 was suddenly scrapped, and production ceased. This rocket was superceded by the lesser launch vehicle used by the shuttle flights. Many argue that if the Saturn 5 was such a great rocket, then the US could have used it to launch the shuttles into orbit with a far greater payload. Others have come forward and said that the Saturn 5 performance was only a fraction of what was claimed, and that its launches were nothing more than a spectacle to create an illusion of fantastic power. One NASA rocket expert named Bill Wood came out publicly years ago and said that the Saturn 5 launches were nothing more than a massive firecracker, and a fantastic light show for television. He claimed that the rocket was underperforming, could barely get off the ground, and was only able to attain LEO. It did not have the capability as a platform to the moon as claimed. I witnessed all of the launches, and only now after examining them closely, have come to the same conclusion. Boeing ripped off the public purse, and giving America a prop in return!

Grumman Aerospace was a defense contractor hired by NASA to develop and build the LEM to be used by Apollo for the actual moon landings. They were given over 7 BILLION dollars for the LEM project, and NASA and the public were again ripped off in return!

It was through the work of another investigator named Jim Collier several years back that the LEM was exposed as a shoddy prop, and could not have possibly functioned on the moon as claimed. In his video work: "Was It Only A Paper Moon?", which was at one time available on YouTube, but only through purchase now, he measured and examined the LEM that was to be used in Apollo 18, but is now sitting in the Smithsonian, closely. What was found was shocking!
First, the spec sheet for the entire LEM project presented by Grumman was only several hundred pages long....Usually a several billion dollar project would constitute volumes of spec sheets, and engineering standards. Second, the LEM was discovered to have very little interior space for the Astro-NOTs to operate in. That space was the equivalent to less than two phone booths in area, and yet NASA claims that these men were able to move around, get in and out of their space suits in such cramp quarters! Astounding! Grumman had even overlooked how the astro-NOTs would even enter/exit the LEM by making the hatchways way too small! Third was the use of the rocket to land/launch them from the lunar surface... The noise should have been tremendous within the craft because the interior is pressurized, and yet we see in all Apollo flights these men calmly talking as the LEM lands with almost no background noise? Astounding indeed! And of course we have in each situation of a lunar landing the LEM sitting on the surface of the moon with no sign of a landing crater, and dust directly underneath the LEM rocket totally undisturbed by the effect of the rocket! Apollo-gists claim that the lander would not have had enough thrust to disturb the dirt, but the LEM would still weigh several tons in lunar gravity, and the rocket thrust would still have been about 2500 lbs/second. At 2500 lbs of thrust, the dirt underneath the LEM should have been blown meters away! NASA blew it big time after the initial landing of Apollo 11 showing no such effect, and therefore had to duplicate it for each subsequent "landing". Bottom line is Grumman built a shoddy prop that could not possibly land on the moon, and ripped off the taxpayers for BILLIONS!

There is so much to cover in this topic, and more will come..... People have to stop and think instead of blinding themselves to the selfish pride and glory generated by propaganda stunts such as Apollo. We were all fooled by this because America needed heroes at the time. We are a lot smarter, and more cynical now.

Investigate for yourselves these points that I have presented. There can be only one conclusion!

More to come



William said...

Concerning the blast crater, I have a detailed video examining the issue in much more detail than the debunkers have done:
Pseudonautics - Episode 3.

About the LM. Indeed it does not seem suitable for housing two astronauts; also I have yet to see a proof that the van Allen belts can be safely traversed.

However we must be open to the possibility that the LM (originally named LEM) as an unmanned probe that was sent to the moon during each Apollo mission and that deployed the scientific experiment packages, retroreflectors, and relayed back communications from the moon. Finally, it would have brought back rocks, maybe less than the hundreds of kilograms claimed by NASA, but then who can check the exact amount?

That would explain why the technical and scientific details are unsatisfying in areas specifically pertaining to a manned landing.areas but

Anonymous said...

great stuff as usual, my man .... all my best during the yuletide... someday this hoax will be public knowledge and a lot of people will say I NEVER BELIEVED IT ANYHOW ... right now only 7% do.

Northerntruthseeker said...

Thanks, and to William... Sorry about the delay in answering your concerns...

I found that the lack of any exhaust plume with the LM lander should have blown the whistle in the first place about the fakery of the entire fiasco...

If you watch any of the onboard videos of the space shuttle as it rises into orbit, or as it docks with the ISS, you can easily see the plumes of the maneuvering jets fire as it approaches..... Definite white plumes!

Yet there we are with the videos of the LM blasting off from the "moon" and no plume.... The fuels burned very poorly in their intermix, and there should have been a red exhaust plume. We see none.

Retroreflectors are not needed to bounce lasers off the moon... The Soviets did it for years before Apollo, and as shown in the Moonfaker series by Jarrah White, retroreflectors are still not needed today!

The rocks are easy to answer.... Try shake and baking rocks right here on earth, as Bill Kaysing says..... Irradiate them, blast them with pellets to make them look alien, and then bake them.... Voila, instant moon rock!

I must applaud your own research though... Thanks