Asteroids and Anomalies


aka "Jack Parsons' Labs"- note 11

(FILE UNDER "X-FILES REALITY WATCH") Apocalyptic themes are increasingly dominating the media stream these days. I became aware of this story via a Joseph Farrell video update, and it tied quite nicely into a story I've been watching.
Today is "Asteroid Day," a newly-minted holiday to go with the recently made-of-whole-cloth "fireball season". Now we hear that NASA is planning yet another quasi-military operation in orbit, this being an asteroid hunting mission.
The Conspirasphere has been humming along with low rumbles of an imminent asteroid collision (or some variation thereof), hence all the stories of massive tunnel cities and so on. Farrell places all this in the context of the claims of Carol Rosin, the former secretary of Wernher Von Braun, who allegedly confided in her about a secret agenda about the weaponization of space, starting with a Communist threat, a terrorist threat and including an asteroid threat.
My problem with this narrative is that Von Braun knew full well that the original impetus behind the space program was itself military (see Project Horizon), and Communism and terrorism were already seen as serious problems long before the early 70s when this conversation reportedly took place.  Hollywood was conditioning the world with imagery of an alien threat since the early 50s, so that's not a news flash either (Rosin believes extraterrestrials are benevolent). 
And all you have to do is look at the Moon's craters to realize that the threat of asteroids and meteors- and even comets- isn't imaginary.
Either way, here is the article that Farrell was referring to (bonus X-Files tie-in):
NASA Working With National Nuclear Security Administration On Plan To Use Nukes On Doomsday Asteroid 
The space agency is teaming up with the National Nuclear Security Administration to work on a planetary defense plan to deflect a potential doomsday asteroid so it doesn't strike Earth, according to The New York Times. 
Last week's announcement came ahead of the first official "Asteroid Day" on June 30, a day scientists hope will raise awareness of the threat posed by near-Earth objects and encourage governments to develop a better plan to detect and track them. 
June 30 is the anniversary of the 1908 impact of an asteroid in Siberia that wiped out some 800 square miles of forest. The surprise impact of the 2013 Chelyabinsk meteor, which caused a 500-kiloton airburst over Russia, shows potentially threatening space rocks are still out there. 
In 2013, researchers at the Asteroid Deflection Research Center at Iowa State University came up with a plan to use a two-section spacecraft to first smash a hole in the asteroid, then dump a nuclear weapon into the crater to blow it up. 
Bong Wie, the center's director, told Space.com that 99 percent of the pieces left would miss Earth, and most of the rest would burn up in the atmosphere. However, NASA said those smaller pieces could still pose a problem, and the best approach is to deflect rather than destroy. 
"The trick is to gently nudge the asteroid out of harm's way and not to blow it up," the agency states on its Near Earth Objects website. 
NASA has also said that some asteroids may be deflected without the use of a nuclear weapon. 
"For the far more numerous asteroids that are smaller than a few hundred meters in diameter, if we have adequate early warning of several years to a decade, a weighted robotic spacecraft could be targeted to collide with the object, thereby modifying its velocity to nudge the trajectory just enough that the Earth impact would be avoided," the space agency wrote in another report. 
The problem, the agency said, is that we may not have "several years to a decade."
Farrell repeatedly muses if in fact asteroids are not the actual concern, that it might indeed be something else. I might remind you that despite all the endless ridicule of "UFO buffs", scientists are spending a lot of time looking at space and talking about aliens these days. The Catholic Church is controlled by the Jesuit Order at present, who also spend a lot of time looking at space and talking about aliens. 

And here's where we get to the X-Files Reality Watch.
X-Files fans love to heap scorn on "Space", a first season episode made while the production company was dealing with a number of problems, not the least of which was a lack of money. It was an ambitious undertaking- a feature film thesis undertaken on a small scale TV budget. Subsequently, it ran into a number of production snafus (and post-production; the computer effects are embarrassing). Here is the synopsis from iMDb:
When a space shuttle mission is sabotaged, Mulder suspects it may be the work an alien spirit that inhabits the body of a former Gemini astronaut. 
Mulder and Scully travel to Houston after a NASA employee, Michelle Generoo, shows them evidence that a space shuttle may have been sabotaged. They had recently had to abort a launch just seconds before lift-off and another launch is now scheduled. 
The second launch goes off without any problems but ground control is soon encountering difficulties communicating with the craft. It's all related to something that happened to Belt during his last Gemini flight and it's now affecting his judgment.
Why do I bring this up now? Well, recently this story made headlines all over; yet another example of strange anomalies wandering into the sightlines of the ISS cameras. And yet again, an example of NASA cutting the video feed as soon as the anomalies are seen.
A video was recently published on YouTube purportedly showing two UFOs leaving the Earth shortly before NASA’s ISS signal is abruptly cut. 
This footage is one of a few others that allegedly show NASA’s live cam feed being cut after an unidentified flying object is seen exiting the planet’s atmosphere. In the clip, two (actually three- CK) seemingly small, glowing objects are spotted leaving the Earth’s atmosphere and hurling into space. Then, just moments later, NASA’s signal was gone and an error message appeared. 
The loss of signal right after the UFOs were witnessed leaving the Earth is quite suspicious to say the least – and, according to UFO conspiracy theorists, this video further offers proof that NASA is indeed trying to cover up the existence of extraterrestrials. 
Of course, the lights could have been satellites and ISS may have just happened to have had an issue with their live feed at that particular moment — or, as some have suggested, the video could be fake. 
Still, whatever that flying object was, or wasn’t, this isn’t the first time NASA has been accused of cutting ISS’s signal after a UFO was spotted. 
Back in January, a UFO was captured on the space station’s video feed, but shortly after it was seen rising over the Earth’s horizon, NASA’s signal went black. 
The lights in question are small and indistinct, apparently a function of distance. It's amusing to see the press twist themselves in knots explaining the anomalies, saying they were just space debris one minute or they were obviously satellites the next.
 More disturbing is how many different news outlets run the same exact news story of this event as they do with so many others, including many stories that are of far greater immediate importance to their readers. The Internet has created the illusion of a free press but in fact what most outlets run are wire reports and press releases.

Now, you may be asking what do these two stories possibly have to do with each other? And how do they tie into the more serious issues I was raising earlier in the week? Well, you may have noticed the explosion of the Falcon 9 rocket on Elon Musk's birthday, a perfect example of things not always going the way of rich and powerful men. The flow of events has its own vote on how things will unfold. 
As it turns out, there's been a string of space disasters recently, following on the heels of these anomalous sightings.
String of cargo disasters puts pressure on space industry 
The first in a series of accidents came in October, when Orbital lost its Cygnus cargo carrier due to an apparent flaw in the Ukrainian-made engine aboard its Antares rocket, which exploded shortly after liftoff from Virginia. 
In April, the Russian space agency lost communication with its ISS-bound Progress cargo capsule, which burned up on re-entry to Earth's atmosphere two weeks later. 
Then, SpaceX's Falcon 9 rocket exploded just over two minutes into its flight Sunday, with the Dragon cargo ship and its 4,000 pounds (1,800 kilograms) of expensive gear falling to pieces in the Atlantic Ocean near the Florida coast. 
"This is a blow to us. We lost a lot of important research equipment on this flight," said NASA Associate Administrator Bill Gerstenmaier. 
Crew members living in orbit have plenty of food and supplies to last for the next four months, NASA said, but officials admitted that no amount of planning could have prepared them for three major accidents in a row.
The next Falcon-9 launch has been delayed indefinitely. "Space", thou art revenged.
Mere coincidence? Maybe, if you're the kind of person that believes in mere coincidence.  

50 comments:

  1. Building rockets is hard.

    Building rockets at 10-20% of the cost of existing rockets that don't explode on the way up... is even harder.

    Fun fact: A few thousand lines of the code on the Cygnus craft was written by yours truly (Not in the explodey part, but in the capsule avionics software, had she made it up there).

    A VERY small portion of the codebase, really... but still about as close to the childhood dream of space travel as I, personally, will ever get.



    ReplyDelete
  2. It is indeed. But what did Ian Fleming say about "three times" again?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. Three times... is enemy action". (One of my go-to quotes at work, ironically/synchro-mystically enough).

      Makes one wonder who (or what), that 'enemy' may be, though...

      BTW just an aside: the synchronicities I've been running into lately (both in general, real life and on this blog in particular) really have been messing with my head lately... I generally don't comment on them for fear of seeming 'nuts'. But in my experience "Sync-y" times usually precede the sort of black swan/upheaval event(s) you've been warning about. Some people see UFOs during times of global stress. Some start seeing images of the Virgin Mary in their toast. Me? I start suddenly noticing all sorts of numeric and symbolic patterns popping up all over the place, and in the most unlikely places, around the same time.

      Take from that, what you will, of course...

      Delete
    2. Well, if there's one place you can talk about that kind of thing without sounding nuts, it's here. So if you have something to get off your chest...

      Delete
    3. I'll agree that three failures is statistically suggestive of a systematic problem of one sort or another. But more easily than alien interference, the problem could be deteriorating budgets and poor project management at high levels.

      Delete
  3. I thought that *I* was the only person that liked "Space". XD Certainly the episode was not fully realized, but the themes were intriguing to me, especially if you look up the so-called "Great Galactic Ghoul". I like the actor that played Belt, as well. He played a bereaved father on ST: TNG, the parent of the cadet that was killed when Wesley and the others in Red Squadron played flash-ass.

    I have noticed all this space talk lately, the "Nuke the Asteroids" talk, the rocket failures, the ISS feed.... intriguing. And Ian Fleming's "the third time, it's enemy action" quote - haven't there been other flaps during series of rocket launch failures?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's an excellent question. The one that comes to mind is the famous Big Sur event where a UFO intercepted a missile launch. And it seems to me there was a similar incident with a Russian rocket test not too long ago....

      Delete
  4. Have you seen this? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGXTF6bs1IU

    There was a blog post your wrote in the past six months or so wherein you discussed millenials who were mocking what they deemed "conspiracy theories." You wrote the word "sigh" in italicized form at the end of a paragraph.

    I was wondering if you could help me find it again. I haven't been able to locate it since I last read it.

    This was an enlightening perusal. Great work.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I watched the 'Moon Hoax Not' video. I like it.

      It doesn't answer all of the questions I have, but I like the information about the technical limitations of film and video.

      I'm willing to keep looking at all the evidence, I haven't made up my mind about any of this. The "Kubrick's Odyssey" videos I watched the other night seemed to clear up a lot of inconsistencies, though. I have a lot of questions about the Apollo/Saturn V systems as well, but thank you for the video link. :)

      A lot to think about.

      Delete
    2. Is that guy arguing the Apollo footage couldn't be faked because high speed video wasn't invented or something? Has he heard about "classified technology?" Did he happen to notice that there were all kinds of things that didn't "exist" yet in 2001: A Space Odyssey, not the least of which was optical storage drives?

      Delete
    3. Hi Chris, yeah the guy in the video said that high speed video, and slow-down and stuffs just didn't exist in 1969.

      That is interesting to note, but it doesn't even come close to answering all the questions I have about the Apollo program. Even if he is 100% correct, it still leaves the Van Allen Belt questions, the health questions, numerous anomalies still exist.

      Delete
    4. Didn't exist. How would he know? Did it occur to him this technology was developed for precisely this reason. And whatever went through the VAB wasn't those ridiculous tin cans. It was something much larger and better shielded or nothing went at all.

      Delete
    5. Agreed. I really don't see how "Apollo" can be anything but either a total hoax, or a public cover for a more secret, powerful mission/spacecraft.

      Delete
  5. I also find it fascinating that the US is the only artificial entity in history to claim they've been on the Moon. Whether they actually were on the moon or not is irrelevant.

    What matters is that no other artificial entity has ever claimed to have been on the moon. Not a one. Even though it's a fact that Russia was capable, if not more capable than the US ever was. Especially in the last 35-40 years.

    That's what gets me. Why has no one else ever been to moon? Well, maybe people will take a moment to ponder that little game theory.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's certainly an interesting question. It may also be a question of why hasn't anyone publicly gone to the Moon as well. There are also strange details like the so-called lunar lander being way too big in the LRO photos, which makes you wonder what really is going on. We'll see what happens with the Russian investigation. Maybe an entirely new story will come out...

      Delete
  6. And today Drudge has a link to a Time article about what WWIII would look like, saying it would be at least partially fought in space:

    http://time.com/3934583/world-war-3/

    ReplyDelete
  7. Assuming one hasn't been already been going on for a while....

    ReplyDelete
  8. Yes they did go to the moon. I worked with engineers in California that had worked on the Apollo launches and also the place in Goleta developed the lunar rover. The reason nobody else had been to the moon is that it's Difficult!
    Sorry to rain on everybody's parade, but you're barking up the wrong tree here.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No, you are, "Stevven". I've been saying for several years that we did go but not with that ridiculous Apollo tinkertoy bullshit. It's counterintelligence 101- don't show your enemy your hardware. Apollo is just an update on the old inflatable tank routine.

      Delete
    2. Note that he doesn't address what we're saying, he just tells us we're wrong. That's the standard response, if you contradict the "Twuth" - denial, gaslighting, moving the goalposts, and finally abuse. Let anyone explain *any* of the photographic issues examined on AULIS Online http://www.aulis.com

      Delete
    3. There's a deeper issue, Elizabeth, and it's about how these debates are framed by the media- Apollo is absolutely true or you're a moon hoaxer. Climate change is going to kill us all now (we're actually overdue on the predictions at this point) or you're a denialist. Vaccines are all absolutely safe and side-effect free or you're an anti-vaxxer. UFOs are either alien spacecraft or swamp gas. It's creating consent by destroying any chance of intelligent, nuanced debate.

      Delete
    4. Steven a.k.a. "Stevven"3:49 PM, July 01, 2015

      Sorry guys, you can ridicule me all you want, but we did go to the moon with the Apollo "tinker toys". Both the USA and the Soviets knew each other's space hardware details as well. If there was a secret space program, where was the hardware manufactured? Where was it launched?
      I know about such things because I worked with JPL on Cassini. Sorry to be a know it all, Chris.

      Delete
    5. Where was the hardware manufactured? A lot of the components could have been done at the same places as everything else. How many thousands of manufacturers did they employ? My father's old company for one. Did they have any idea what anyone else was doing? Of course not. That's the whole point of compartmentalization. But a lot of it could also have been done out at Skunkworks and other top secret installations. Kind of a no-brainer, especially for a guy who claims to have worked at JPL.

      Delete
    6. Note the appeal to authority. "I worked with JPL". So what?

      Delete
    7. I think legs are being pulled here...

      Delete
    8. Yeah, worthless Trolling "humor", the other chapter of the SkepDick playbook. We must be getting closer to the target.....

      Delete
    9. I was an employee of Litton and worked a contract with JPL. I'm not a SkepDick either. I think the government is capable of keeping secrets, but the moon mission was very real and pretty much as it was portrayed. Go ahead and mock me, but I do have a science and engineering degree and background. I'm not talking out my ass. I actually worked on space programs, whether you guys like to believe it is up to you. This wasn't supposed to be about me. I guess it's "kill the messenger" time.

      Delete
    10. And you still are appealing to authority, appealing to your credentials, and you *still* have not addressed *any* of our actual objections.

      I don't care if you are the Chairman of Lockheed-Martin or the Duke of Connaught, none of that addresses the questions I raised, the examples noted on AULIS, or does much of anything to add to the debate.

      I literally *never* questioned the reality of the Apollo Program until last Saturday. The abuse and disdain I received from "Freethinkers" and SkepDicks caused me to take a look at some things, and the abuse and lies used to refute MJ-12 (which is almost certainly a hoax or deliberate disinformation) caused me to take a look at the Holy of Holies, "Did we go to the Moon". I must say, the reaction to even asking the question,( and to pointing out anomalies and omissions in the record) has been very interesting.

      Delete
    11. Well, we'll see. I think the real story will turn out to be a lot more interesting than a bunch of good ol' boys doing donuts in their moon buggy and cracking lousy football jokes.

      Delete
    12. Thanks for letting my comments through Chris. Honestly, I'm not a troll and really like what you write. I just think you're wrong about Apollo😎

      Delete
    13. I think you're right about that, Chris. I think the *real* answers might tell us something very profound about humanity.

      Delete
    14. I genuinely don't know how anyone can look at that footage and those photos and think it's an accurate representation of reality. And at the same time I don't know how anyone could believe that hundreds of companies and thousands of people would work for millions of manhours on a simple hoax. So obviously I believe there is a third option out there.

      Delete
    15. Well, I think the guys who went out and risked their lives for the Apollo mission should get get a little respect for what they did. It's very easy to be an armchair critic. I've said my peace.

      Delete
    16. Hurt feelings now? I don't care. I don't care where someone works, how they work, which gods they trust, which degrees they have, or how much money they make.

      All of these "arguments" are just deflecting from the issue.

      For what it's worth, I don't think it was a simple 'gotcha' hoax, and the only reason I can think of to fake a high-profile mission to the Moon is if they knew or expected that they'd find something that would shake the foundations of society. But that leads us into an even bigger conspiracy.

      Delete
    17. "Denial, gaslighting, moving the goalposts, and finally abuse" -- gee, where have I seen that before? Only in Anna's responses to Steven, not the other way around.

      Delete
    18. Here's where I put on my moderator cap and suggest we all step back and take a breather. There'll be plenty of time to debate the issue in the future. I'll be revisiting it in a post, probably on the 20th. The controversy certainly isn't going away but I hope we can tackle it in a structured kind of way- maybe I'll have everyone weigh in with their talking points and see where it goes.

      Delete
    19. I for one will not debate, if all we see is another parade of logical fallacies: the Appeal to Authority, the Appeal to Emotion, and if the other side isn't interested in looking at the evidence.

      Delete
  9. That's a good point. All-or-nothing, with us or against us.

    So the debate, the asking questions, must be *more* dangerous than being on whichever side? Interesting.

    And you can call me 'Anna'. :) 'Elizabeth' is my middle name, I just like how they look together. :)

    ReplyDelete
  10. I realized that just after I clicked "publish". Elizabeth takes up more real estate on the eye, I guess. ;-)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No probs. :) The only thing I don't like is 'Liz' :p

      But yeah, you're really hit the nail - it's the open debate that draws the most fire.

      Delete
  11. I think what is called skunk works can be just talent being snuck into a production. I mean, if doing a moonlaunch to fit a certain narrative involved experts, then at this point, what does it matter?

    A set in Nevada. A set on the Moon. Editing.

    They could not fake dust settling off the boots in zero atmosphere, and less G.

    Thing about productions, sometimes found footage creeps in.

    That would be like drawing pictures, and being there, and still needing to sell that in the market.

    No respect, but reruns.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm trying to wrap my mind around what you wrote. Skunkworks is a known place where they developed spy planes. Is that so hard to figure out?

      Delete
  12. 'NASA has also said that some asteroids may be deflected without the use of a nuclear weapon.'

    They might even learn how to catch it before then.

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/02/03/nasa_give_us_185bn_and_well_take_you_to_europa_and_beyond/

    ReplyDelete
  13. Interesting debate. I remember visiting the Smithsonian Air & Space Museum as a kid & thinking "no way could they have gone to the moon in this thing".

    However, one incident which really grabbed my attention: was watching an ep. of UFO Files/Hangar 1 where they discussed the possibility of secret bases on the moon, & there was mention that during the Apollo landing there was missing audio/video due to some kind of camera malfunction, the audio was being sent to Australia first, then sent to the US (from Pine Gap? Anyone know?) but that even though the audio had cut from TV broadcast, it was still heard by many HAM radio operators, the astronauts talking about something following them & then about spacecraft lined up on the edge of a crater, that they were being observed. & then of course there was Edgar Mitchell's weird rambling appearance on an ep. of Frasier some years back, where he said some very interesting things! The truth comes out in strange ways, almost as if it has a life of its own. Kudos Chris, you have one of the most amazing blogs out there.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If they didn't go to the moon, there couldn't be any missing audio/video from the moon. Also, if they didn't use the Apollo modules, then what did Edgar Mitchell travel to the moon in? If they launched that system, where did it go?
      I also watched the 'Moon Hoax Not' video and wonder how anyone could still support the Kubrick theory.

      Delete
    2. I'm inclined to think we did go to the moon, but that things did not quite transpire as we have been led to believe. The most obvious follow-up question being: why didn't we go back? The idea of a secret parallel space program (military-oriented & much more advanced) makes a lot of sense, esp. in light of all those triangular UFOs being seen, I have a strong feeling those are ours. After all, we've had stealth tech since the 70s but the military wouldn't admit to it until the '91 Gulf War when we actually used them. Who knows how many times stealth aircraft were reported as UFOs? But back to topic.

      In addition to the strange audio heard by the HAM operators, there was the whole mystical experience side of the space missions that doesn't often get mentioned, but look at what Mitchell did after the Apollo missions: the whole Noetic Institute thing he was involved with, & revelations about how hallucinogenic drugs were possibly being administered to the Apollo astronauts during training to get them used to the disorienting experiences of space travel. There's so much more to the story...& of course Mitchell has gone on the record about encounters with extraterrestrials before. The whole space program in general is surrounded by so much high weirdness that IMHO, there is obviously an agenda at work in terms of public perception management. But to what ends?

      Delete
  14. Rocket scientists have landed at the Sun of a secret nature. :-) Respectfully, Dennis.

    ReplyDelete
  15. The great mystery is not that we should have been thrown down here at random between the profusion of matter and that of the stars; it is that from our very prison we should draw, from our own selves, images powerful enough to deny our nothingness
    Andre Malraux quotes

    ReplyDelete
  16. I know I’m a week behind on all this but this talk of JPL really brought back memories- When I was a kid, my mother was the accountant for one of the myriad widget makers that JPL contracted out to- For a time she was dating one of the engineers in the back buildings- He wore a hazmat suit and had to talk to her on a phone in a glass booth like a prisoner when they were making plans for the day- He’d gesture and poke himself in the chest with some sharp looking instrument, silent to me which made it all the funnier- He was a passionate Turk and would probably have made a much better step-father than the one I got- The point, though, is what I saw of his work space and the tools and gadgets he worked with, if he was working on secret stuff, it was secret analog stuff- Lots of toggle switches and patch chords- Rotary phones and gear boxes that probably made quite a racket if I could hear them-

    ReplyDelete