alternative news

NASA’s NEW SOLID ROCKET BOOSTER…AND SOME PROBLEMS WITH ...

September 13, 2011 By Joseph P. Farrell

Phys.org is reporting on the test firing of a new NASA solid rocket booster, and I have some problems with this:

NASA successfully tests five-segment solid rocket motor

What bothers me here is probably what bothers most of you: why bother with such public displays of tests of a technology that is nothing more than an upgraded bottle rocket?

Dr. Paul A. LaViolette has written an eye-opening book, Secrets of Antigravity Propulsion, one chapter of which, chapter 13, "Black Hole Discovered in NASA," is germaine to our discussion here. In response to George H.W. Bush's 1989 call for a new space vision at NASA, a special "Space Exploration Outreach Program(SEOP)" was established at NASA under the chairmanship of then-Vice-President Dan Quayle, with the goal to cast a wide net to glean the most innovative ideas for technologies and visions for the agency. As LaViolette notes, all the suggestions were to be send to the RAND corporation (p. 379).

Well, like all interested parties, Dr. LaViolette made his own submission concerning electrogravitics, a submission that NASA's SEOP program catalogued as number "100159"(p. 379). Here it is worth citing LaViolette's actual words:

"Furthermore, I explained that application of electrogravitic technology to NASA's space program to replace outmoded rocket propulsion technology would entail a minimal amount of R&D if aircraft designs already perfected in the military aerospace sector could be declassified. Hence, the issue would not be one of technological feasibility, but rather one of political decision - the decision to declassify an advanced technology already in existence. I suggested that NASA make a serious lobbying effort to convince military authorities to declassify the technology for more open use in space exploration." (pp. 379-380)

WHen LaViolette received the final report from NASA, however, there were no references to the subject of electrogravitics at all. (p. 380). Worse yet, a paper on British inventor John Searl's levitating disks had disappeared entirely, notwithstanding successful Russian efforts to reduplicate and test the technology(p. 384). Indeed, LaViolette and others who had submitted papers of a similar nature, quickly came to the conclusion that the whole SEOP effort had been contrived as "a one-way information-gathering intelligence operation."(p. 388)

At the time, all reports and their reviews were gathered on a Macintosh computer database and computer discs, but when LaViolette and others attempted to access these, NASA, of course, denied that any such thing exists, and FOIA requests, of course, came up empty.(p. 388) LaViolette's conclusion? "...NASA is essentially a public relations organization or a front that obscures Air Force space research."(p. 395)

So what do we end with? A rocket test that is, in effect, a lot of smoke and mirrors, and a moribund public manned space program...in favor of ...what? Well, the "what" is what Nick Cook, Igor Witkowski, myself, and others have noted all along, namely, that during the 1950s, such subjects as "antigravity" or "contrabary" or "electrogravitics" suddenly disappeared from the open literature, and went deeply black, and it continues to do so. This fact, plus other little tidbits along the way, such as Ronald Reagan's admission in his memoirs that the US had a space lift capacity for some 300 people (!), or British hacker McKinnon's extradition woes, suggests that there is secret space program fire behind the rocket smoke and mirrors.