Daily News

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

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.

 

21 thoughts on “ NASA’s NEW SOLID ROCKET BOOSTER…AND SOME PROBLEMS WITH ...”

  1. It is indeed baffling why NASA still cling to rockets so much. Why not ion drives? Then they would only have to get into space first and then go to the ion drive. And what happened to the solar sail research, and other more exotic (non electrogravitic technologies)?

    Surely there must be some better way to get into space over the seriously innefficient rocket engines that wouldn’t let the people know that the powers that be have (possibly, maybe) better propulsion systems.

    Its all so sad really. I’m going to be an extremely old man before I see man on Mars or the Moon (ahh but did we ever really go there … hehe??) again.

    Oh well … back to watching Space: 1999 then. Just watched an episode where Moon Base Alpha comes across an interstellar probe launched from Earth in 1985 using a revolutionary propulsion system. Unfortunately, the propulsion system threw out “fast neutrons” and killed anything in its wake … including as the episode shows, a couple of inhabited planets. Oops. Luckily the German (!) designer of the “Queller” drive is on hand to shut down the dangerous propulsion drive so that the Alphans can recover the data it has been collecting for 15 years. Unfortunately a fleet of spaceships turn up seeking revenge for the supposed “genocide” caused by the spacecraft …

    Now why hasn’t any of this happened? This was 1974, and we still haven’t been back to the bloomin’ moon yet! Oh well … sometimes fiction (even fairly silly old science fiction) is more fun than the real world … mustn’t grumble lol …

    Best wishes

    H Price

  2. This seems a good place to drop in something interesting I saw the other day. I was watching a youtube that included a segment of Michio Kako toward the end, in a recent interview where he was illustrating his point with the infamous Reagan quote about “if humanity faced an enemy from (off-planet)…how quickly we would come together….”

    Except the way Kaku told the story, he said, in the first iteration of Reagan’s outburst, Reagan supposedly said to Gorbachev in their private meeting, “If both USA and Russia were attacked by MARS…” etc.

    The emphasis on “Mars” (specific), compared to “off-planet” (generic) threat really puts a “whole ‘nuther spin” on that oft-quoted encounter. If the elite in all major power countries are clear that there is a colony of some kind on Mars (remnant of cosmic war? joined after WWII by Nazi’s?

    I don’t know if Kaku misquoted, or freudian-slipped, or “dropped” that in, in the way that he seems so handsomely to be paid to do these days, but his slip seems “time-relevant” to me. And…the trailers for the movie “Iron Sky” are now available on-line….

    They’re baacckk! Eeek!

    S ^i^

    1. above correction:

      Looks like the main point of my thought-stream dropped out (or I did!)

      Anyway, you get the point. What if THEY know that there are faction(s) on Mars who could be a mutual threat?

      Hmmmm……

  3. As Leonard Cohen say in one of his songs there is a crack in the floor where the light comes through. NASA is starting to see that their impenetrable veil of secrecy can no longer prevent the leakage of ideas into the world . We all have the tools now to see each others notes that have been extended Into the net and NASA now stands out as a great Oz . Truth when confronted with darkness still illuminates and makes fools of manipulaters . What we are being shown is the equivalent of antique technologies in an age when torsion physic is the reality.

  4. Oh gosh, that stuff has been around for decades and
    I think you know that, Joseph, I gather from your books.

    At any rate, one of the books that I’m ‘working’ on right now
    IS LaViolette’s “Secrets of Antigravity Propulsion,” as you
    mention; an eye opener indeed if you don’t know we have all that
    STUFF ! And I got your “Grid” book with de Hart.
    Working on that, too.

    It’s my 4th read of Paul’s though and previous books are out of print,
    but I will get them !!!! The man has a great mind and very much
    like you, although your original interests were not quite the same.
    It takes a special talent to be a really good researcher and
    connect diversified dots.

    I salute you both!
    HAL838

    1. Dr. LaViolette is been, like most academics who turn to these things, vilified. But Secrets of Antigravity Propulsion is, in my opinion, the best book out there right now…and like Dr. Judy Wood, the silence about it has been deafening…

  5. PS

    I got “Reich of the Black Sun Today.” It adds to my “Farrell Collection” which so far consists only of “The Cosmic War.” (I have also read “Babylon’s Banksters” but I checked that one out from the public library, it being the only book by you that they have and the first of your books that I read.)

    So far, I am enjoying it immensely. Your “Closing Act” information is very educational.

      1. You’re welcome. I did notice a few typos so far and I wondered about that but, out of politeness, I wasn’t going to say anything. Thanks for clearing that up.

        Please keep writing. I like your perspective on things.

  6. This news article is just more confetti intended to lead astray uninformed and otherwise gullible people. Besides, if NASA hasn’t got solid fueled rockets perfected by now then they ought to just close shop.

    It IS understandable that NASA would test fire a newer model of rocket, but this, especially being solid fueled, is NOT newsworthy.

  7. I have and read Paul La Violette and Nick Cook books and I am now reading Genes,Giants,Monsters,And Men I find that the O’Brein’s view on Yahweh I share too both believers and atheists fail to examine Yahweh as a living being and are both blind about him getting back to NASA’s rockets as I have said before both Verne and Wells knew rockets were a dead end techology and that was in the nineteeth century and repeating myself the military have allways had the good stuff this all a show for the government to prevent their slaves and people they hate from escaping their clutches and the future that awaits them death,by the way look up my comments on the Grail satellites launch delaey I left information on a new series on the Science Channel for you Mr. Farrell.

  8. “or British hacker McKinnon’s extradition woes, suggests that there is secret space program fire behind the rocket smoke and mirrors.”

    if there could just be someone else (or more) to codify this …

  9. Joseph P. F. I think you have nailed it.
    Also RCH mentioned at radio that NASA did not have
    The Saturn 5 power anymore, for moon missions.
    This time the GRAIL is building momentum to slingshot later this year.
    The Saturn 5 is as I understand, is a sensitiv enginering feat. Where are the blueprints, why have they been hidden from NASA.
    Why can’t NASA outperform Saturn 5 today ?
    Was there some extra boost in the Saturn concept.
    Answer that and you have a case.

  10. Not to the point but… supposedly NASA recently released photos of Tranquility, the site of the 1969 landing. The resolution I’ve heard was miserable permitting nothing to be seen with any certainty. They have obviously the means of photos with much greater resolution. What is going on here?

    1. If I can go on Google Earth and see my bar-b-que grill in my back yard does NASA really think we are so stupid as to buy into their lousy photos of the moon and other solar system shots?

      Dittos on the bottle rocket and Dr. Paul La Violette’s work, not that they are connected.

      I broke my reading glasses, got some new ones that are no good and I am really falling behind in my reading..Going back to the eye doc Thursday and hoping for some glasses that will work without having to use a magnifying glass.

      I’m working on Tom Bearden’s book, “Oblivion” and Dr. Judy Wood’s
      Masterwork, “Where Did The Towers go ?” And just began “Grid of the Gods’. Has anyone else read “Oblivion”?

      1. I have OBlivion and have read it many times. Wood’s book is a tour de force though I don’t quite agree with everything in it. It has to be read very closely. What amazes me is that the silence from the “truthers” to her research is deafening, and that says it all…

  11. Dave Wilcox, in his latest book the “The Source Field Investigations” synthesizes a lot of off the beaten path scientific research to define the nature of the aether and the real physics of the world around us. He uses many similar sources to your writings and even sites you in a few locations. I am a little over half way through the book were he seems to provide some reasonable explination for how anti-gravity works. Would be interested in your thoughts if this book advances our collective understanding. For me it has tied together a number of things that I previously could not connect.

Comments are closed.