NASA is attempting at revisiting the moon with the Artemis program. It is the replacement for the failed Constellation space program. Artemis can be seen as a reboot but this time with less enthusiasm and more flaws in the system with ongoing technical difficulties and delays. Critics of the mission have a point undefined it is hard to get excited over new stellar discoveries when we are being forced into the New Normal and the Great Reset. Others feel we should be dealing with real priorities that make the Earth more livable again. Tonight on Ground Zero, Clyde Lewis talks with Dr. Sky about THE FALSE FLAG OF ARTEMISS.
SHOW SAMPLE:
SHOW PODCAST:
https://aftermath.media/podcast/8-24-22-the-false-flag-of-artemiss-w-dr-sky/
SHOW TRANSCRIPT:
I have been noticing lately that Hollywood most certainly has run out of ideas. Therefore many people are either dismayed or looking forward to what is called a reboot of some of their old favorite shows or remakes of some of their favorite movies.
Cast reunions and old hands getting together is exciting in fact at times intoxicating, especially when a streaming network wants to bait you with more Star Trek shows with old cast members giving it one last try.
I see that Quantum Leap is getting a reboot without Scott Bakula, The Munsters are coming back with a new cast in the image of Rob Zombie and Wednesday Addams returns with a muted rebirth of the Addams Family in the image of Tim Burton.
It is like when I attended the KISS end of the road tour undefined I attended knowing full well that that creases would be covered; guitars would be tuned down, and the make-up would be applied generously to hide the wrinkles of 70 year old rockstars. The defects would become virtues, if, indeed they were ever there to begin with.
The reason I being this up is because I am feeling the same way about NASAundefineds attempt at revisiting the moon with the Artemis program. It is the replacement program after the failed Constellation space program.
It will eventually be a reboot of the Apollo program.
Artemis has faced so many setbacks and failures that I worry that we might not ne as successful as we were back in 1969 when we safely landed on the moon and brought back astronauts without killing them.
It is sad to admit that the original moon landing was a fundamental political poke, all stoked by competitive drives. This event actually was part of the old Cold War conspiracy to the first at something undefined the first at confusing the Soviets that tried hard to get to the moon first, after all their space program was at the time far superior to ours.
We were the underdogs who actually beat the space giant.
However, it is harsh to say this but the truth is always harsh. Science is aghast when anyone asks difficult questions about the moon landing undefined they treat you like the snot nosed brat that that says there is no Santa Claus at the family party.
Meanwhile, all the kids who believe cry and the parents put you in time out.
When President John F. Kennedy proclaimed his wish for the United States to land a man on the moon and safely return him by the end of the 1960s, he was caught up in the Cold War competitive syndrome.
The Soviets had been making advances in the space race, and paranoia at Red exploits was catching. A godless state had launched the nerve-wracking Sputnik in 1957 and in 1961 put Yuri Gagarin into space.
Which by the way undefined due to our current relationship with Russia has been erased frim the record by concerned scientits who have shown that politics always outweigh the facts.
Domestically, selling the moon mission was not popular, and the post-landing effort to scrub away voices of opposition in the historical record has been vigorous.
Consistently throughout the 1960s a majority of Americans did not believe Apollo was worth the cost, with the one exception to this poll taken at the time of the Apollo 11 lunar landing in July 1969.
Earthly concerns were considered more pressing. Civil rights leaders in the United States feared a loss of focus. While a million people gathered along Florida’s Space Coast to watch the launch of Apollo 11 on July 16, 1969, some 500 protestors, mostly African-American were there too.
It is very much like today undefined the majority of people donundefinedt seem to care about space or NASA -and the whole inequality issue has divided us politically. Again Artemis can be seen as a reboot undefined but this time with less enthusiasm and more flaws in the system.
NASA has to clear up some its dark past with the original moon landing- because no one is being fooled anymore.
The amoral genius that was Wernher von Braun, given the moniker of Missileman, was an illustration that science might well lack an ethical compass, as he was a Nazi war criminal brought into save the day. His designs for the moon rocket were the same designs that maimed and killed Europeans during World War II.
If anybody is familiar with my reputation they will know that I appeared on the show The Truth about the Moon landing. Even though I was cast as the bad guy in the series everything I brought up was used as fodder to either prove or disprove my doubts.
The Astronaut that appeared in the show Leland Melvin wanted to beat me up for even saying that NASA had associations with Nazis. Later he was set straight by former CNN reporter Linda Hunt who wrote the book Secret Agenda: The United States Government, Nazi Scientists, and Project Paperclip, 1945–1990.
A decade before the moon shot , von Braun was part operation paperclip conducted by US personnel to nab the best and brightest of German science, a process that did much to ensure a good deal of whitewashing of industrialized murder.
In the gathering were the signs of the Cold War to come; the Soviets conducted their own version of Operation Paperclip, plundering the brain trust Nazi UFO tech.
Von Braun was treated and feted, plied with generous budgets and resources. The missiles duly came. He led a team that developed Redstone, the first US ballistic missile capable of propelling a nuclear warhead to distances of 250 miles. Then came the Jupiter-C in 1958, which shot the first US satellite, Explorer 1, into space.
The famed Saturn V rocket was created while von Braun was director of NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Centre. The line between concentration camp and the moon landing was established, as was the role of the smooth scientist communicator trading on human wonder.
I was told in the TV show by Leland Melvin that I was pissing on the graves of the astronauts who gave their lives for the moon shot buy calling out the Nazi connections.
I am sure he was referring to Gus Grissom Edward White, and Roger Chaffee that were killed in 1967 by a flash fire aboard their spacecraft during a ground test on the launch pad.
Grissom hung a lemon on the Apollo 204 CSM to demonstrate his disgust with it - stating very pointedly that he thought it was a lemon. That is, that it had a whole lot wrong with it and was a shoddy piece of equipment.
NASA knew the risks of oxygen fires – multiple military experiments in oxygen environments ended with loss of life - but didnundefinedt push for a two gas system in the spacecraft. Some accused the agency of criminal negligence.
Which led to a mountain of conspiracy theories. Theories that NASA dropped the ball undefined that they murdered those astronauts. I am sure Leland Melvin would not want to hear that.
Or that he knew and demonstrated his indignation for the cameras.
The TV series leaned heavy on the notion that the Moon landing was transparent and that we indeed landed on the moon in 1969 with out a glitch or a hitch and yet the Artemis program is taking a long time to get off the ground more than 50 years after we allegedly set foot on the moon.
On the morning of June 20, 2022 the Artemis I rocket was fully fueled for the first time despite encountering some issues during the critical pre-launch test. However, the Artemis did not achieve the pre-launch test’s objective after the team discovered a hydrogen leak.
The crucial test, also known as the ‘wet dress rehearsal’ or dry run, simulates every launch stage at Kennedy Space Center in Florida without the rocket leaving the launch pad.
After 4 failed attempts at successful rehearsals the rocket has somehow been cleared for a test launch and orbit around the moon and a return to earth.
The new moon rocket will have a test run next week if the Space Launch System succeeds then NASA will then tell the world that they are again on the cutting edge of technology, just like the Chinese did before them.
The SLS is expected to lift off on Aug. 29, sending an uncrewed Orion capsule on a journey around the Moon and back to Earth.
But the rocket is billions of dollars over budget and years behind schedule, and even a successful first launch wonundefinedt change that.
The moon launch is being done without having anyone challenging them this time -and so it may not be all that exciting.
The launch will be a test of the integrated systems before NASA puts people onboard and eventually uses the rocket and capsule to deliver people to the lunar surface in 2025.
If this launch fails, experts say it will imperil NASAundefineds entire Artemis program because a failing, over-budget program is far harder to garner political support for. If it fails we will again have to go back to square one which again is curious since we could do it more than 50 years ago with less technology- in fact there is more technology in your cell phone than there was in the Apollo mission.
The SLS was first ordered by Congress in 2010 and built in much the same way as the Apollo programundefineds Saturn V — using contracts with legacy aerospace companies that trade cost savings for reliability.
I am sure the astronauts are confident that they are about to ride on a hydrogen bomb that was built by the lowest bidder.
As this launch is happening, SpaceX is working to get its Starship vehicle ready to fly to orbit at some point this year, challenging more traditional aerospace companies.
That rocket system is designed to bring large payloads — including people — to deep space destinations like the Moon, Mars and beyond.
The Elon Musk-founded company has, in many ways, upended the traditional way that big exploration programs are done by offering major cost savings, undercutting legacy aerospace companies.
NASA itself is already turning toward public and private, fixed-price partnerships that allow the space agency to buy services from private industry and save money in the process.
A key component of the Artemis program relies on this kind of partnership with SpaceX to develop a lunar lander.
Proponents of these public/private partnerships say they save the government money and hew more closely to deadlines without the extreme cost overruns seen during the development of systems like SLS.
Other companies like Blue Origin are also working to build large rockets, but theyundefinedre years behind SpaceX.
Big exploration programs need political support, and if the leaders of these companies — like Musk — align themselves with one political party over another, as Musk has done with the Republican Party- so you can expect that there will be a complete and utter disdain for the Space program since the narrative is owned by the left.
If they see NASA enriching a strongly Republican-associated individual, that can alienate a big swath of public from this whole endeavor- and knowing the cancel culture and how they organize like vermin - you can expect some resistance.
There are those who say we never went to the moon at all, meaning none of the Moon missions are real and that he whole space program is a hoax– which I disagree with because it is just plain dumb – there are those who believe the Moon landings were shot in a studio somewhere like Area 51 which is not out of the question and then there is me, someone who wants to think we went to the Moon eventually but in 1969 it was a big PR stunt that not only had 3 astronauts orbiting in space for three days but had a big budget for making sure that every shot and camera angle looked right and with a little bit of Hollywood, like what was seen in 2001: A Space Odyssey, a Moon shot could be faked and even consulted by none other than Stanley Kubrick.
The Artemis program sounds like it is trying to capture those glory days of NASA but I sense that they are long gone. The feeble attempts and the failures speaks volumes about our attempts to land on the moon over 50 years ago.
Are we really that rusty? or is this finally the real deal and now we have to be overly cautious because 1969 was merely a dress rehearsal.
People now are not so easily fooled as everyone seems to be an expert at identifying CGI and fake planet landscapes.
Remember we were supposed to go back to the moon 2 years ago. Then we were supposed to go back on 2024- now it has been moved again to 2025.
The goal posts have been moved so many times that some doubt we will even go undefined or that we even went in the first place.
The Artemis program to return to the moon has endured undefinedtechnical difficulties and delays heightened by the Covid-19 pandemic and weather events.
Not only that but there was yet another delay because they had to redesign the space suits for the astronauts.
While for the past 15 years, the average time between awarding a contract and the first flight was eight and a half years, SpaceX was supposed to achieve this feat in half the time.
The Artemis 1 launch without an astronaut was supposed to happen last February. Artemis 2, which will take astronauts to the Moon but without landing. Artemis 3 will be the equivalent of the Apollo mission that happened in 1969.
That will be 56 years and still the mission may not even get off the ground,
The OIG report also concluded the lunar program was too expensive. It will cost as much as $93 billion by fiscal year 2025, according to the reportundefineds estimates, with a cost per launch of $4.1 billion for the first four missions.
The question now is with all of the cutbacks and the economy in shambles will taxpayers be willing to shell out the money for a very risky mission to the moon.
Do you think it is worth the investment? The question is how with all of the experience with moon landings NASA is acting like an infant just learning to crawl again.
Again, we need to understand the inconvenient truth about NASA and Apollo – we had the technology to go to the Moon in 1969, allegedly. We apparently were working on the tech for a Mars mission in the 1970s and yet it is still out of our reach.
I remember when George W. Bush proposed the Constellation program I knew that it was not going to get off the ground. I opened up the discussion about the idea that it is all just a dog and pony show and no one would listen. They would only become indignant. I understood why because it closes up the ceiling and limits our vision and horizon.
It is becoming evident to me that with all of the lip service, things just don’t add up with all of the stories about going back to Moon, mining water and creating an outpost for a launch to Mars.
While a space station sounds like all sorts of awesome, it does not seem practical.
Nothing has added up. Nothing has made sense. We have sent men to the moon without a single astronaut dying. Yet decades later the shuttle launches became safety hazards, and even though we allegedly had a successful Apollo program, no one really cared.
The only manned space flight after Apollo resulted in the Challenger and Columbia shuttles exploding and killing astronauts, even a teacher and somehow that clouded the memory of brave men leaving the confines of earth and setting foot on an extraterrestrial sphere.
Of course, that is also up for discussion. To say we never went to the Moon is anathema even though most teenagers would tell you that Louis Armstrong was the first man to step off the Lunar module into history.
It is worth a chuckle -as is the idea that Buzz lightyear was the second man to walk on the moon. Or the only astronaut to punch a moon denier in the face and the only astronaut to mumble to a little girl that perhaps we didn’t goo to the moon.
Believe it or not these silly answers are given when kids talk about the moon landing.
Conspiracists are divided on whether the earlier Apollo, Mercury, Gemini and Atlas missions were faked, whether Laika or Yuri Gagarin ever made it into space.
But while the first generation of lunar conspiracists were motivated by anger, these days it’s more likely to be boredom. The line between conspiracy and entertainment is far more blurry.
There are those who even believe that all things associated with space are fake undefined including the moon, the stars and the planets.
They even discount the images form the James Webb Telescope.
These conspiracy theories center around Flat earth theories and argue that NASA manipulates and fabricates its satellite images, based on observations that the color of the oceans changes from image to image and that continents seem to be in different places,
Recently these conspiracy theorists were vindicated when it was announced that a French Physicist attempted to pass off a picture of a slice of chorizo as a distant star.
He tweeted the picture of a slice of chorizo and said it was an image of a far-off star captured by the James Webb telescope and has since been forced to apologize.
The photograph of the slice of Spanish sausage was posted on Twitter by renowned physicist and director of Franceundefineds Alternative Energies and Atomic Energy Commission Étienne Klein, who praised the undefineddepth of detailundefined it gave.
When asked about the fake , Klein said his goal was to undefinedto urge caution regarding images that seem to speak for themselves.
Well that certainly is an excuse but it can be used for ammunition by those who are compelled by religious belief to reject the Big Bang and round planets.
There is also a scripture found in the Book od Psalms that says that manundefineds kingdom is the earth and that the heaven and heavens are Godundefineds.
Some people adhere to what has been called the bounds of dominion mandate written by Henry Morris.
It reads that man’s dominion was to be over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl in the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth. Thus the oceans ad atmosphere, as well as the continents, are included.
The outer heavens, according to Morris, were not mentioned in the mandate and so were not placed under man’s dominion. He later quotes Psalms 115 that reads: The heaven, even the heavens, are the LORD’S: but the earth hath He given to the children of men.
He also quotes a sermon given by the Apostle Paul when he preached to the philosophers in Athens.
In the book of acts it says
God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that He is Lord of heaven and earth, . . . hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation.
To those who follow this word literally it is believed that that God has made all nations of men “to dwell on all the face of the earth”—not on Mars or Venus or some distant star, and apparently not even on an orbiting satellite such as the Moon.
None of these have the necessities for human life, such as air and water and so there is a fundamental belief that man is not meant to go to the moon or mars or anywhere in space.
The idea is that if the bible does not permit it then God does not permit it and so all that we hear from NASA and astronomers are fabrications.
This may be part of the reason that people who donundefinedt believe in the moon landing are compared to flat earthers and what are called science deniers.
However, if one investigates the Flat earth movement and Moon landing deniers you will find that they agree on almost nothing as Flat earth attempts at being a faith-based conflict in which atheists use science to suppress the Christian faith. Their argument is that atheists use pseudo-science – evolution, Big Bang, and the round Earth – to make people believe that God is an abstract idea, not real. Instead,
Moon landing deniers are mostly political and cite conspiracy theory well rooted in Cold War history -and for them it is a question of NASA falsifying the historical record rather than science denial.
However both philosophies have crossed over in many instances.
We have seen the startling images provided by the $10 billion James Webb telescope, images relentlessly hyped as an incredible scientific breakthrough by those involved in the research–but of no conceivable relevance or benefit to humanity as a whole.
Virtually all astrophysicists are now overjoyed about the astounding possibilities for new discoveries made possible by the telescope.
I admit that these discoveries certainly will open the minds of people and maybe even prove that somewhere out there an intelligent being constructed this matrix that seems so unbelievably infinite.
Scientists also tell us that they may even discover new “habitable exoplanets.”
There is a rush of excitement from geeks like me undefined even if I doubt the historical record of the 1969 moon landing.
Critics of the mission have a point undefined and that is it is hard to get excited over these discoveries when we are being lied to about things like COVID-19, Monkey Pox and conveniently evading questions about geoengineering and banning nuclear weapons, among other real priorities, might make the Earth more livable once more.
It is a wonderful tool for seeing what is out there, what may have happened in that past and with all of that achievement we are still stuck on planet earth dealing with the flaws of our new manned missions to the moon.
Seeing those possible habitable planets are great for speculation and water cooler talk but it also reinforces the so called science deniers that claim the unlikelihood–and utter pointlessness–of developing space vehicles capable of traveling close to the speed-of-light, 186,000 miles per second.
You see if you have doubts undefined you are not alone, You are not alone of you want to believe but donundefinedt understand.
Maybe it is time for these so called scientists to learn that some people have questions and that they want to believe but really donundefinedt understand how any of this possible -especially when we were all led to believe that we would all have stock in the space age and travel to other worlds in the early 21st century.
None of it has happened.
The best any typical citizen can experience is a trip some 70 miles up and that is if you are rich enough or matter enough to Jeff Bezos to get a free pass on his rocket.
The foremost benefit astronomy has contributed to human enlightenment has been the validation of Galileo’s heliocentric model of the solar system. The notion of a single, finite and perhaps flat world, in which Man is given dominion over all “creatures” and is directly punished or rewarded by an all-observing God.
What the religious fear is that all of that was replaced by the reality of a solar system, as well as myriad distant stars, in which humans merely inhabited the revolving “third planet from the Sun.”
This along with a possible alien God connection is what is threatening those who see themselves as God-fearing anti-space warriors.
undefined
undefined
undefined
