Saturday, April 15, 2017

Amerikwan Engineering To The Moon : Check it Out

NASA labels this one as taken on the Lunar Surface after
touchdown. Suck on that realism haters.

This craft flew to the moon at 250,000 miles an hour and then sat down on a dust surface finer than talcum powder impacting at just under 20 miles an hour without leaving a mark underneath it or any sort of blast imprint from the superheated jet thruster that slowed it down. All the gold pads it is supported on have no disturbance whatsoever beneath the feet.

If you look closely you can see that none of the curtain rods, corrugated cardboard or scotch tape that holds it together is even ruffled. When they were ready to leave, the astronauts then took off in the upper assembly despite it appearing just barely big enough to hold a beanbag and docked in orbit with the craft overhead.

I almost forgot to mention - in the next mission they brought a beach buggy in this same craft which is much taller than the entire construction and rode around in it kicking up dust into the air which floats behind them and then planted a flag they left fluttering in the wind.

The biggest drawback in these missions is that all the astronauts reported seeing none of the 80 trillion stars overhead at magnitude 7 which should have been so bright outside the atmosphere they were dangerous to look at directly. Instead they saw only inky blackness and that is all that ever shows in any of the photos.

Well worth the umpta-gigazillion dollars they spent on this program and it's good to know the taxpayers got their money's worth. I'd hate to think they shot all this on a big soundstage and pocketed all the 99.999999999999% money saved for hookers, cheap liquor and italian sports cars. That would really be a depressing image of mankind.

This space program had more convincing special effects at a fraction of the cost.

Everything I know today about scienmagistics I learned by watching these two out-of-work porn industry actors fight ghosts and vampires with their giant gorilla friend. I began to understand as a young child that applied scienmagistics can solve any problem with flashing lights and steam cannons if accompanied by occasional clown horns. As you can see, quality television programming for kids was extremely important to my generation. All programs featured people who had been dead for forty years laughing at the jokes to tell you what was supposed to be funny. Remember, the same society that produced this incredible intellectual food for young engineers is the same one that claimed they had effortlessly sent men to the moon. The rest of the world kept waiting for Stanley Kubrick to confess he helped shoot the moon program but I was always watching Sid & Marty Krofft. These guys never went over budget.


Edward said...

I must admit when I saw the lunar module copy in the science museum in London it seemed rather odd that something that small and made of tinfoil was actually capable of landing on the moon. The command module from Apollo 8 I think they have next to it is much more robust, and at least made of metal.

I was somewhat persuaded by the idea that the lunar module was designed to be as light as possible, and unlike the command module was never designed to be exposed to an atmosphere. It was safely tucked inside the service module during liftoff, and only extracted once in orbit, and there is no atmosphere on the moon itself apparently, so it was never exposed to any drag. Not entirely convinced it's strong enough, but it all supposedly happened long before I was born, and it's one of those things like the holocaust that you just can't ask serious questions about without being seen as a crazy conspiracy theorist, so whatever. Everyone who was alive at the time thought they saw the most amazing things on TV, and lots of people actually saw the great big rocket take off, so other than that we just have to believe what we've been told if we want to keep our jobs, or something...

It's just surprising that given how much so many other things have seemingly advanced since the 60s, not just computers but all kinds of materials science as well, we still haven't been able to go back again yet.
But if we go down the other route and start talking like Gary McKinnon about all the technology that does actually exist that we aren't being told about, well that makes us crazy conspiracy theorists too, so you can't win either way.

Ibn Nafis said...

Texas Arcane do you think it is possible to really go on the Moon and on Mars ? Would you believe it is true if, for instance, China or Russia lands on the moon and livestreams it ?

Ave said...

The moon landing were the founding event of our civilisation. I coincided with the general loss of religion : in the mid-60's, people stopped attending mass and instead mass-purchased TV sets.

Now TV is the medium, much like the priest is the medium, he's not the religion. What we could see in that TV was the Message of civilisation built on science, at last free from the superstitions of the past. The Moon was just a piece of rock, we just had a walk on it, see ?

So much for moon-based Easter calender (happy Easter BTW) and other religions (yes Islam I'm looking at you).

Religions exist for one purpose only, and that is to coordinate very large number of people in what are called "complex societies". Religion itself is part of the complexity, i.e. a specialized strata of people whose purpose is to make the machine work.

Many people were suspicious about the Moon landings, but the real interesting thing is how the mere idea of this was an Anathema. Nobody was allowed to doubt this.

Because if you doubted this, you would cast doubt on THE INTENT of everything our civilisation does. We can see polluted water (Flint-Michingan, Fukushima...), robotization, drug abuse etc. etc. Our civilisation looks more and more like Hell on Earth.

Now if the Moon landings were fake, it would be because there is too much radiation out there, meaning that Outer Space is basically poison, and thus we live in a very precious place that we ought to take care of. Which is not in the interest of Wall Street / the MIC / you name it.

So this time it's not just about 9/11 or some other blatant lies, it's about the very foundation of our civilisation, and this is not something to joke about.

That said, perspectives get interesting as we realizing how counterfiet this new religion is. What would be better then than to have a *new shiny* religion to DENOUNCE the older, fake one ?

Think about it as we enter the phase of transition (robots + severe depopulation).

Texas Arcane said...


Founding mythologies of religions must be remote enough in time they cannot be assailed by anybody living. They chose badly for their origin myth because sufficient numbers have already come forward to basically confirm utter hokum.

I guess I am glad their traditions have changed since Malta, where they used to sacrifice children daily to cement their rule ... all they ask to sacrifice now are your critical reasoning skills.

Texas Arcane said...

@Ibn Nafis

Whatever really is up there, the radiation is like the inside of a microwave. The shielding necessary could not be hoisted by conventional methods. They'd need eight foot thick concrete just to persevere for a short journey. Sorry but personally I believe it is all rubbish. I think the Mars missions are from Devons Island in Greenland and formerly were shot in the Arizona desert for the original Voyager.

You notice we never see anything but very generic rolling hills in any of these shots from Titan, Mars, Venus or the Moon. Could be anywhere. We never see thousand foot high cliffs set against a trillion stars. Nope. Just bland with a red filter, bland with a yellow filter, bland with a gray filter. Could be anywhere in any conventional deserted place on Earth.

Texas Arcane said...


I saw a rocket take off and make a sharp perpendicular turn over the ocean. We were told it was on it's way to the moon.

No, it wasn't. It was just safely discharging over the sea so when it ran out of fuel it would not hit anything and would vanish.

Texas Arcane said...

@Ibn Nafis

Listen, I don't want to start listing this stuff because I could easily write a novel but you know once modern image analysis revealed that the red color of Mars was being added to an existing image in post-production, NASA confessed that is exactly what they were doing, right?

I mean ... ? I'm not sure how you bounce back from that and continue to insist these pictures are real, right? How does that work? We were told these photos were from the red planet.

Ibn Nafis said...


Yeah I think you are right Tex, I saw what you're talking about, you mean the photo where they added an orange filter ?

You know what, I guess it's better that way if they really lie about all of that stuff. Because when I read things like that:
It makes my blood boil, I don't want this to happen. I'm sure even if they didn't lie about all of this, they still wouldn't even be able to go on the moon today anyway.

bicebicebice said...

"Everything I know today about scienmagistics I learned by watching these two out-of-work porn industry actors fight ghosts and vampires with their giant gorilla friend."

You do realize your best work is when you are pissed off and people have wronged you, right? This is the Thalid curse. The legends say that the Thalid, unbeknownst to himself, seeks this state of mind to JUST produce these antics, but boy did I almost rupture my spleen laughing.

Keep fighting the Melons and their mind games Tex, just don't expect the world to listen or care at all. Voice of reason not welcome in a Master/slave society/planet.

Edward said...

Well to people born in the 50s and 60s the moon landings are like a really big thing I guess.

To people born in the 80s like me it's just something we had to do projects on in school, and the space shuttles, Hubble and ISS were the big exciting things, and I'm not even really old enough to actually remember the challenger accident. Then we had the human genome project, BSE / C-JD, the first animal cloning, and well various versions of the pentium processor and then Windows Vista, which thankfully the less we have to talk about the better.

I just think it's kind of scary that the kids born post 9/11 are nearly getting out of school already, and by 2050 I'll be trying to explain to children that yes, there really were a pair of identical 110 story buildings in New York that both fell down hours apart after apparently having been hit by jet planes, once I've finished trying to explain that there actually was once a person called Micheal Jackson who started out as a black man but ended up as a weird looking white guy with no nose, and died from being administered a really powerful anaesthetic in his own home by his private doctor. Oh and the man who once famously won the Olympic decathalon actually had his dick cut off, for some strange reason.

It must have been really strange living in the past grandad.

Edward said...

Oh, I screwed up, it was the Apollo 10 command module that's in the science museum.

I've yet to visit either the Smithsonian or Kennedy Space Centre at Cape Canaveral, so that's all I've seen in of the Apollo mission in real life, apart from one of the spacesuits at another museum I've been to.
It's kind of cool just to stand next to the thing that supposedly actually flew all the way around the moon and back, and yes it is surprisingly small, but clearly still big enough to hold 3 people.

The Palmer said...

Dear Tex,

I'm a long-time, loyal reader; I love your writing and I check your blog every day yet I've only commented one time, with a simple question. Since I got no answer, I'll ask again:

Examine (with an equally skeptical eye) all documentation you can find online relating to the nuclear weapons program, going back to the 1940s - film clips, photographs, news reports, etc., as well as scienmajistic theory and explanations - and ask yourself, "is this believable?"

In my humble opinion, the nuclear weapons program is about as real as the Apollo project was.

SJ Palmer

Texas Arcane said...

@The Palmer

I know what you're trying to tell me. I don't want to sound arrogant but I have formed another opinion based on everything you talked about. It will sound really bizarre but here it is. I was reading Mathers years ago and I agree with nearly everything he says except I think there is a twist he doesn't know about.

They knew enough in principle about the atomic bomb that it was possible in 1945 when they dropped a very small device on Hiroshima. They then knew the hydrogen bomb was possible but were not able to successfully detonate a real one until the end of the 50's. In between they faked it to scare the Soviet Union. As soon as they had real ones working you could tell because they began firing them into the upper atmosphere over and over again. By the 70's they had these devices down to the size of a small car. By the 80's they were down to conventional rocket nosecones and by the 90's they had them in cluster bomblets the size of a grenade.

It is possible by looking at some of the fake tests to conclude there is no such thing but they in fact were exaggerating their progress to keep Russia on the defensive. They nevertheless finally got them working eventually.

From the beginning, even in the theoretical stage, the dream was always to use them not as deterrence but as part of a long range program to depopulate the Earth of God's children. That's why they were fantasising about them before they even existed.

Edward said...

Well I haven't physically been to Japan either, but surely you can't suggest that they somehow faked basically flattening two cities and killing those hundreds of thousands of people, just to make the Americans back home feel a bit better about themselves?

So nuclear power = real, but nuclear weapons = fake?
Or just really super-powerful multiple megaton mutually assured destruction style ICBMs that have never actually been used in anger = fake, but little boy and fat man = real?

Some of this stuff is actually history right?
I mean, we do actually have a whole bunch of satellites whizzing around up there in both geostationary and polar orbits, giving us access to hundreds of TV channels, letting us teleconference around the planet, monitoring the weather, spying on other countries, and talking to our GPS receivers and so on..,
The Hubble telescope was actually launched and put in place by the manned space shuttle?
And they then actually went up in another shuttle and fixed the mirror, by going back there and gabbing hold of it with the robot arm and doing EVAs in bulky suits with jet packs?
The human crews of the Challenger and Columbia shuttles didn't just get blown up for nothing.

The world isn't actually flat and supported on the back of four elephants and it's turtles all the way down.

Oh forget it, let's all just go back to our caves.

The Palmer said...


Thanks for your response. That is certainly a rational explanation of many of the inconsistencies in the data, and I wouldn't presume my interpretation is the correct one.

I've come to the point where I question all fables presented as "history" and "science", and think we are being bamboozled to a greater degree than I ever thought before. In short, I think the rivalry of nation-states is, in itself, a con; that "world leaders", going back at least as far as Napoleon (and probably much farther), have been actors playing assigned roles; and that the richest families have been manipulating local and world events - and the record of such events - as little more than a shadow play to control the rest of us. This, I believe, is the point behind Plato's parable of the cave; the illumination he said was a necessary quality to the leading class of his ideal republic was knowledge of this fakery.

But this is just my opinion, and the fact our views differ lessens my esteem for your work in no way.

Keep it up.

Texas Arcane said...

@The Palmer

I believe (you don't have to agree) that they are applying some of the principles of "The Art of War," at present.

They are trying to seem so weak as to appear ridiculous, especially in military technology. In fact, military tech and killing machines are the only thing they are spending money on. Everything else is just an illusion.

Not just nukes, either. Biological, chemical and radiological. In addition to nearly all robotic and drone armies.

They're not really worried about Russia. Russia and China are just the excuse they need to start a war which has only one purpose - reduce world population to Georgia Guidestone levels.

I believe the reason that the data on modern nukes is so fishy and ambiguous is that they are the only part left of military tech that is advancing. They plan to drop them from orbital platforms as well as launch them from surface level.

They are very singleminded and the one tech they have not been exaggerating (rather minimising) is the tech they have to kill very large numbers of people in very short time periods. They want to live to see their beautiful green gardens and walk through an almost empty world.

Ave said...

In "Reich of the Black Sun" (great Roleplaying Game inspiration source) it is claimed that the USA was going nowhere with its atomic program, but the Germans did, and (to cut a long story short) the nukes used on Japan were German ones.

Lots of interesting arguments in that book. That theory also reemerged briefly on russian alternative news sites.

About the veracity of the bombs, it seems that people were invited to witness some of them quite like they would with spaces launches two decades later. it would be difficult to fake something on so many people.

Again, the curse of our age is that so much that happened in our lifetime was faked that we're even less sure of what happened before. At one moment long after the collapse, people will not believe that there were such things as cars or movies.

Sam said...

I believe the Moon landings were real. Not one of the sites or videos I've seen, and I've seen a lot of them, have any evidence that convinces me otherwise. I've seen the back up lander and the back up moon buggy in person. The buggy was so light and small. It was more a lawn chair than a car. I have no doubt it could have been shoe horned in there. The lander was made of thin metal but it was the best metal they could make at the time and was chemically milled to take off every single ounce that wasn't needed. Look at this picture of it being assembled.

The outside that you see in pictures is mostly foil to cover things. The inside was stronger and you see the bracing. If you look at the bracing on a 100K thrust rocket motor it doesn't look at all robust but it is.

The rocket blast being a not. The Moon's soil is packed by just being there for millions of years and electrostatic attraction.

As for Mars rover pictures. Hmm...I'm not so sure about them. I've seen lots of sites on that too and it doesn't look good to me. The changing of the colors is particularly damning. I've seen pages where they have stuff that looks very much like spark plugs, oil cans, and even ground squirrels. I don't believe that Mars being bad means the Moon is. I think the reason we haven't gone back to the Moon is it is too damn costly and complicated and it's amazing we did it without killing every single one of the astronauts. I think that's why they stopped. Too damn risky.

As for nukes being fake that's complete nonsense. We have too many nuke plants, submarine nuke plants and I seriously doubt the Japanese were faking being blown up.