INDIA’S CHANDRAAYAAN-2, AND APOLLO
While there were a lot of stories to blog about this week, I wanted to finish out this week with the following stories spotted by M.C., because it's a worthwhile case to study for what does, and does not, constitute evidence. The story is, quite simply, that India's Chandraayan-2 lunar probe photographed the old Apollo lunar excursion module descent stage sitting on the lunar surface:
When Chandrayaan-2 found Neil Armstrong's Apollo lander parked on the Moon
Evidence left behind by the Apollo missions is still visible on the Moon
Now these pictures are quite intriguing to me, and when M.C. sent them along to me, I could immediately see what caught his eye, and why he sent them. Needless to say, the pictures - if one accepts them as genuine, and I do for reasons I'll get into shortly - are an argument against the whole "Apollo was hoaxed" theory. And the reason here is relatively simple: to maintain that the pictures are a hoax is to maintain that the Indian space agency is "in on the hoax". So, for that matter, one would have to maintain similar things for anyone else who has photograph the Apollo landing sites: Japan, Russia, China, Europe... they're all in on "the hoax" and "maintaining the narrative" in spite of some rather compelling geopolitical interests they might have in exposing it.
The pictures, however, are arguing, or suggesting, something entirely different from a "hoax theory," and it is the interpretation I advanced way back in my book The SS Brotherhood of the Bell: while Apollo was not hoaxed, we may have got there, and more importantly, off of there by a very different means than the public standard narrative would have it. We all recall the images from the first and subsequent landings: astronauts bouncing around slowly and carefully on the lunar surface. Footprints left in the powder-fine dust that covered the lunar surface.
Dust.
Lots of it.
Then, the lift-off from the lunar surface in the LEM (Lunar Excursion Module). This liftoff I have commented upon often in my various interviews on the subject over the years. When I was a boy, watching these liftoffs on television, I wasn't convinced. That is to say, I wasn't questioning that they happened, but rather, how they happened, for those "blastoffs" from the lunar surface did not behave like rockets. Rockets accelerate geometrically per unit of time, just like a jet aircraft taking off on a runway. It does not immediately reach takeoff speed when the pilot shoves the thrust levers on the engines forward. It takes some time for it to do so, as it gains speed rolling down the runway. The airplane does not just "pop up" into the air. But this is not what is seen on the Apollo liftoffs: what we saw there was a Lunar Excrusion Module just suddenly "popping up" and accelerating at more or less uniform speed on its ascent. There's yet another telltale fact about those liftoffs that also indicates we might not be dealing with a rocket. Indeed, this feature of the liftoffs has long been pointed out by the Apollo-was-hoaxed crowd as indicative that "we didn't really go" and that the whole thing was "staged by Stanley Kubrik" in a sound stage: the absence of any clouds of dust blown up and scattered about by that rocket engine on the LEM either during descent or ascent. Given the fine powdery dust evident in those photographs of lunar footprints, one should expect at least some indication of the response of said dust to said rockets.
But there isn't any...
...and, in these photographs, there is no indication of a circular pattern of dust scattering around the landing sites, as would be expected from a rocket-assisted descent and ascent. Nor, notably, is there any indication of heat scorching, which one might expect. An indicator that we didn't go? I doubt it.
What it indicates, as I said way back in SS Brotherhood of the Bell, is that there is an alternative, and exotic, technology in play. And there's the evidence.
And the photographs indicate something else: If as I am suggesting this is what the photographs imply, then they also imply something else, something very significant: those other space powers know that an alternative technology was in play.
And that alters the geopolitical game on planet Earth, and the interplanetary "exogeopolitics" considerably.
See you on the flip side...
(If you enjoyed today's blog, please share it with your friends.)
11 Comments
Help the Community Grow
Please understand a donation is a gift and does not confer membership or license to audiobooks. To become a paid member, visit member registration.
The belief that we never went to the moon is based on the idea that the technology of the time wasn’t capable of getting us there and back. It seems to me that positing a vastly more advanced hidden technology that got us to the moon and back is a bit of a stretch. Why spend billions on a staged version of the Saturn 5 launches and LEM takeoff when we had more advanced technology?
If you’re trying to hide a secret propulsion method, why on earth (or on the moon!!) stage a huge world captivating event? Just to collect some moon rocks? They could have gone back to Antarctica and collected them for a lot less money. If it was calculated to show off our technical capability but at the same time hide our actual secret propulsion method wouldn’t that mean there was a secret conspiracy? But, as you frequently claim (and I paraphrase) “if a hack from the Dakotas can figure it out so can a lot of others.” If our government was trying to hide our advanced propulsion in plain sight, then it was pretty transparent. So transparent, that Japan, Russia, China, and Europe easily figured it out and are using the same playbook in reverse – SEE we’ve been to the moon too! And we have the pictures to prove it!
In itself, the discipline of engineering is a solid rationality, that observes the laws of nature, while adhering, to the logical approach, when studying general phenomena – whereas the oval office’s prayer meeting – that is, presently, ongoing in ‘Salem’ – is a zealot’s haven for witch-hunters, whose cold-war irrationality seeks, to have all empirical dissidence burned, at the stake, fuelled, by Russophobia.
The USA’s folly, that is parading ‘the emperor’s new clothes’, needs a lunar distraction, to deflect attention, from a Vatican narrative falling apart. The Roman Catholic Church can’t escape the unavoidable conclusion, that Yahweh-Elohim is a ‘quantum mechanical jurisprudence’, based on a ‘Yin-Yang’ principle, that balances the two brain hemispheres, in Odin’s third eye, the Tao superposition.
According, to Frank Zappa’s ‘Bobby Brown’, the ‘USS Lindsey Graham’ is a lot of lunatic ‘queer screaming’, about nothing:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/scl/fi/qwkm1jlvy7kqqdtjum2kk/bobby-brown.mp4?rlkey=2o8qabgiaydmozo8a3iqlws76&st=v3kfflnk
Am familiar with those photos. Still I do not see what I am supposed to see.
Well worh reading and you can then draw your own conclusions!
https://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/Written-Testimony-Shellenberger.pdf
Back to the Moon hoax, and while there, let’s bring in the Flat Earth. I suspect a tie-in. These useful idiots have been the fronts behind these ideas since our elites consider us as toys to be played with and lied to as well.
The alternative “method of going” possibility does raise a number of other questions … Could there possibly be an “exotic substance” of some kind required? … especially in the case of the lunar lander? If there is some “substance” required were the number of Moon landings limited because of the difficulty of producing this substance or producing it in quantity? What if we only captured a certain amount of the substance from the Germans after WWII and either the production process was “lost” or the Germans that were brought over in Project Paperclip feigned “not knowing how” or having knowledge of the “substance” and the process to produce it. How would the USSA respond should another group announce their intentions to land on the Moon and retrieve the technology we left behind? Would the technology we left behind on the Moon be able to be used to back engineer the technology? … many, many questions
Still, no explanation of the years of no manned space flight beyond a “trailer house” suspended above the Earth. It’s not like humans to stop pushing the envelope of a feat like landing on the moon. Quite suspicious. The technology has been hidden? Ba humbug.
The moon is a feflection of the greater earth. Vibes of Cosmos will be your best source.
It is suspected that Apollo 12 landed where it did in the Ocean of Storms so the crew could witness the Stone Circle (like Stonehenge or Avebury) located to the south east of the Lander at 4 o’clock position. There is even a great obelisk / central altar stone.
This is clearly visible in the India Chandrayaan-2 lunar probe image of Apollo 12.
The Apollo missions where really searching for evidence of a previous ancient civilization from Earth visiting the Moon – long, long ago!
Indeed, for Apollo 17, the Lunar Rover spend a very long time at stop 2 by Nansen- Apollo Crater in the South Massif – surely, to try and find a concealed entrance into the mountain from the crater. Keith Laney has studied this and written at length about the Hidden Mission for Apollo 17.
https://keithlaney.net/index.htm
https://the-moon.us/wiki/Nansen-Apollo
https://lroc.im-ldi.com/images/1005
Here is best image of Nansen-Apollo Crater in South Massif. Scroll down to LROC NAQ oblique view; and then below that is a superb TIF image that you can zoom in to view the Nansen-Apollo Crater (a black area at the bottom of South Massif in the middle towards the top of the image) and what looks like a concealed entrance into South Massif!
https://lroc.im-ldi.com/images/1278
I suspect there is an ancient civilization Moon base hidden inside South Massif.
It will be most interesting to see if China lands here in the next year or so when it will very likely beat the U.S.A. back to the Moon!
(Trump is too busy making war across Planet Earth!)
The lunar lander is painted, by visiting Martians:
https://youtube.com/shorts/3I13WIM5cFs