It has now been almost 38 years since the last and very phony Apollo 17 mission to the moon, and we have not been able to launch any man any further than Low Earth Orbit (LEO). The reason being, and again primarily for those new readers to my column, is because of the lethal radiation of the Van Allen Radiation belts that prevent any man from venturing higher than about 400 miles up in LEO. THIS is why even the International Space Station, all Shuttle flights, and all Russian space flights have been below this deadly band of radiation. The only times in "recorded" history that any man has supposedly gone higher than 400 miles in orbit was the 9 moon flights of NASA's Project Apollo. We have not gone through these radiation belts since, and have no plans to go through in the future.
The Van Allen Radiation belts are deadly to humans and the Apollo space craft had absolutely no shielding against that radiation. Their thin aluminum spacecraft offered no protection and in fact would have subjected the so called "Astronauts" to even more deadly secondary radiation caused by solar or cosmic particles bombarding the aluminum and fragmenting into smaller just as lethal particles that would shower the "Astronauts" within the craft itself.
See my point? Project Apollo was a lie. Each flight went no higher than LEO, and the "landings" were nothing more than simulations conducted in studios or in secluded locations right here on Earth. NASA and its contractors bled the US public for 40 billion dollars and gave us total BS.
But it seems that the so called Moon landing"Astronauts" stay periodically in the media just to continue the whole lie of Apollo, and to promote NASA in the public eye. Here is a prime example, in the following article just released by MSNBC at www.msnbc.msn.com, where one of the major Apollo phonies, Neil Armstrong, blasts Barry Soetoro (Obama) for canceling the latest space exploration plans:
First moonwalker blasts Obama’s space plan
NBC News: Neil Armstrong says rocket cancellation is ‘devastating’
msnbc.com and NBC News
The first man to walk on the moon blasted President Barack Obama’s decision to cancel NASA’s back-to-the-moon program on Tuesday, saying that the move is “devastating” to America’s space effort.
Apollo 11 commander Neil Armstrong’s open letter was also signed by Apollo 17 commander Eugene Cernan, the last man to walk on the moon; and Apollo 13 commander Jim Lovell, who is marking the 40th anniversary of his famous lunar non-landing this week.
The letter was released to NBC News just two days in advance of Obama’s trip to NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida for a space policy summit. Obama is expected to flesh out his vision for the space agency's future during his speech at the summit.The most controversial part of the president's policy is the cancellation of the Constellation program, which was aimed at developing a new generation of Ares rockets and Orion spacecraft to send astronauts into Earth orbit and beyond.
The idea was that such spacecraft would replace NASA's space shuttle fleet, which is to be retired by the end of this year. But acting on the advice of an independent panel, the Obama administration determined that the Constellation program could not fulfill NASA's goals on the required timetable. NASA's budget proposal, released in February, puts the return to the moon on indefinite hold and instead focuses on developing technologies for future exploration.
‘Long downhill slide’?
Canceling Constellation could lead to thousands of layoffs at some of America's biggest aerospace contractors, including Lockheed Martin, the Boeing Co. and ATK. Such job losses are among the factors behind congressional opposition to the cancellation. Armstrong and his fellow astronauts emphasize the bigger implications, however, and say in their letter that the decision would put the nation on a "long downhill slide to mediocrity."
The letter notes that the U.S. space effort will be dependent for years to come on the Russians for transport to the International Space Station, at a cost of more than $50 million per seat.
NASA is budgeting billions of dollars to support the development of U.S. commercial spaceships that could help fill the gap. The beneficiaries of those billions would include smaller aerospace ventures, such as California-based SpaceX and Virginia-based Orbital Sciences. In their letter, the astronauts say that the availability of such craft "cannot be predicted with any certainty, but is likely to take substantially longer and be more expensive than we would hope."Armstrong and his colleagues complained that the cancellation would amount to wasting the roughly $10 billion that has been allocated to Constellation over the past five years. "Equally importantly, we will have lost the many years required to re-create the equivalent of what we will have discarded," they wrote.
"For the United States, the leading spacefaring nation for nearly half a century, to be without carriage to low Earth orbit and with no human exploration capability to go beyond Earth orbit for an indeterminate time into the future, destines our nation to become one of second- or even third-rate stature," they said in the letter.
"America must decide if it wishes to remain a leader in space," the astronauts said. "If it does, we should institute a program which will give us the very best chance of achieving that goal."Constellation pros and cons
The letter did not make specific policy recommendations, but the astronauts spoke approvingly of NASA's step-by-step Ares rocket development program. "Enthusiasm within NASA and throughout the country was very high," they said.
However, an independent panel headed by retired aerospace executive Norman Augustine concluded last year that the Ares I rocket would not be ready in time to serve its planned role for space station transport. The panel said that NASA's plan to return to the moon by 2020 was unrealistic, due to underfunding, and that Constellation's first moon landing couldn't occur until 2028 or later.
The Obama administration decided to pursue a different option, known as the "flexible path." This option involves developing the technologies for trips beyond Earth orbit, but holding off on a schedule for landings on the moon or Mars until such technologies are further along.Operations on the space station would be extended to 2020, and further steps might include trips around the moon, or to low-gravity destinations such as near-Earth asteroids or a Martian moon. Such steps would set the stage for eventual landings on Mars and the moon.
"Safely sending humans into deep space for years at a time and exploring destinations across the solar system is not something to be done overnight or to be taken lightly," NASA Administrator Charles Bolden said Tuesday at the National Space Symposium in Colorado Springs, Colo.
Bolden told reporters last week that NASA's total employment might actually go up, based on the fact that the White House wanted to increase the space agency's budget from $18.3 billion to $19 billion for fiscal 2011. He acknowledged, however, that the increases might come in climate research and aeronautics rather than human spaceflight.
Bolden said elements of the Constellation program, such as work on the Orion spacecraft and a future heavy-lift vehicle, would likely be folded into the new flexible-path approach. And indeed, White House officials confirmed on Tuesday afternoon that the Orion program and the heavy-lift development effort would go forward.
Where will flexible path lead?
The flexible-path strategy just might get astronauts into deep space and on to the moon and Mars sooner than the Constellation program would have, said James Oberg, a former NASA mission controller who is now NBC News' space analyst.
"It was widely felt outside NASA, and also within it, that Constellation was like an unguided missile, ignoring changing circumstances and blindly pushing ahead," Oberg said. "Bolden has suggested that there are cleverer and better strategies to achieve the same goals — and I'm inclined to agree with him."NTS Notes: The idea of a "Flexible Path" for US space exploration as stated in this article is absolutely laughable. These plans can never reach fruition simply because NASA still has not figured out how to get a man past LEO to this day. It is painfully obvious that they are coming forward with these new "plans" just to rake in more billions of US taxpayer dollars.
This MSNBC article is Political Theatrics at its best, and more Project Apollo propaganda by one of the best phonies in the fake moon landing business, definitely. Inundating people with the false notion of "We went to the moon" and using these so called "Astronauts" is a promotional stunt, and is part of the continuing propaganda by NASA to push for more taxpayer money to continue flowing into that corrupt government department.
I constantly ask readers to just put the stuff that has been rammed into their minds for the last 40 years aside, and consider the notion of it all being a lie. Then to do some research and find out for themselves. Guaranteed that even the most ardent skeptics realize the sham of Apollo after looking over the evidence carefully. Those that stick to the notion that Apollo was real are either too blind, too afraid to admit, or too prideful to realize, that it was all a massive hoax.
More to come