64 Comments
Jul 21Liked by Matthew Ehret

Excellent article and right on target!!

Nixon cancelled the Moon program which was supposed to continue with establishment of a permanent base on the Moon and a manned mission to Mars. Instead he embraced the Banker creeps demands for endless war. Much more costly, but ZERO benefit to humanity. Wars of conquest. And he shutdown the highly successful Molten Salt Reactor program an Oak Ridge lab, fired the Nuclear genius Alvin Weinberg, and ordered all documents destroyed. Fortunately scientists hid the documents in a Church basement which 40yrs later were uncovered by Kirk Sorenson.

Followed by Clinton shutting down the highly successful Integral Fast Reactor project with Pyroprocessing of Spent Nuclear Fuel. And imposed a gag order on the scientists working on it.

And then damaged NASA with porkbarrel spending projects, $150B on the ISS which has done very little in science advancement. $196B for the Space Shuttle program that also did very little. Offered a very expensive ride to LEO which had to be complemented by Russian Soyuz launches, which did the same job but much less expensive. And the ITER $65B Boondoggle, which has just been delayed for another 10yrs. Fusion was progressing nicely until that scam drained most of the funds & talent.

For that much expenditure, we could have permanently manned scientific research stations on the Moon & Mars right now, and likely would have already found extant life on Mars, which almost certainly exists:

We know almost 100% certain that there are living organisms on Mars, right now. The Viking landers themselves virtually proved it, and the excuses NASA came up with to deny that have been debunked. And there is multiple tracks of compelling evidence that confirm that. But NASA, ever since the Viking landers has essentially banned any further direct testing for life on Mars. And even makes sure it doesn't send rovers where there may be extant life. SOMETHING STINKS AT NASA.

Jan Spacek - 25th Annual International Mars Society Convention:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cn7wTKIvYAM

How to Search for Life on Mars. First, stop refusing to look. Robert Zubrin, Steven Benner, Jan Špaček:

https://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/how-to-search-for-life-on-mars

Steven Benner - The Case for Extant Life on Mars - 25th Annual International Mars Society Convention:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jMgIOVXQ_sI

10 Indicators that Mars Might Harbor Life:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fqf9JloNrts

Will the SpaceX Starship crew find life on Mars? An exclusive interview with Dr. Gilbert Levin:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GWMdrNpF_nY

Dr. Gilbert Levin, the only surviving Principal Investigator of the 1976 NASA Viking Lander biology team, presents his startling and overwhelming proof for life on Mars.

And now NASA is pushing an absolutely nutty boondoggle sample return mission from Mars. Pure insanity:

Rethink the Mars Program. It’s time to consider alternatives to sample return, Robert Zubrin:

https://spacenews.com/rethink-the-mars-program/

Robert Zubrin is right about the NASA Mars Sample Return Mission! Here's why! The Angry Astronaut:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WXK1V67VCec

"....A recent review of the plan of its flagship Mars Sample Return (MSR) mission pegged its cost at $10 billion, a price tag that threatens to preclude funding any other exploration missions to the Red Planet for the next decade and a half. ...

"...For the same $10 billion now projected to be spent on the MSR mission over the next 15 years, we could send 20 missions averaging $500 million each in cost. These could include landers, rovers, orbiters, drillers, highly capable helicopters, and possibly balloons or other more novel exploration vehicles as well. Instead of being limited to one exploration site, these could be targeted to 20 sites and carry a vast array of new instruments provided by hundreds of teams of investigators from around the world.

"...Furthermore, the 0.32 estimate for the probability of MSR mission success only includes technical risk. It ignores programmatic risk, which in the case of the ESA orbiter is extremely high...In short, the MSR program of record is extremely high risk. It could very well not produce any science at all... In contrast, the success of the varied program is virtually guaranteed. With 20 independent missions, each with a success probability of 0.8, the odds are that at least 16 of the 20 will succeed – most probably more, since later missions can take advantage of lessons learned on earlier flights. .."

This is the same NASA that claimed it would cost $100B to develop a new heavy lift rocket in the 1990s and take at least 15yrs. And that's a fully disposable rocket. So Musk develops a heavy lift rocket in 4yrs for $5B that lifts over double as much and get this, is also fully reusable.

His SpaceX Falcon 9 now has launch costs now of $1500/kg vs Big Aerospace @ $11,500 to $64,500/kg to LEO. And the Starship pushing those costs down to $100/kg. Meanwhile our illustrious Congress funnels over $24B to the SLS, which so far has got one rocket off the ground at a cost to taxpayers of $4B per launch. Which is about what the Starship program will cost for reusable rockets in 1/4 the development time. Combined with the Orion capsule has cost over $50B and 17yrs with still only one load carried by the Orion (now broke down at the ISS). SpaceX Dragon has carried 11 manned and 9 cargo missions to the ISS already at a cost of $1.7B and 6yrs development time.

Expand full comment
author

I appreciate this comment immensely and the links look fascinating.

Expand full comment

Hi SmithFS thanks for the additional background about the Molten Salt Reactor program, which I'm glad has restarted in recent years. I was trying to find your mention about after the shutdown that the documents were hidden by scientists in a church, which were uncovered 40 years later. Can you share the link to that factoid?

Expand full comment
Jul 22·edited Jul 22

"SOMETHING STINKS AT NASA" Surely you didn't just notice!! :-) I've often thought NASA was a way to empty American's taxpayer pockets. That's quite a store of information you've posted. Impressive.

Expand full comment

Damn right it is. So tell us, since you claim to know so much, why is NASA hiding the fact that there is life on Mars, one of the most important scientific discoveries in all of human history? Why does NASA not want to confirm this fact?

Your pockets ain't being emptied by NASA. They are being emptied by the USSA war machine, endless wars and nutty Net Zero, Renewable Energy scams, that are destroying the economy. As well as the Covid Plandemic bioweapon release. NASA is peanuts compared to that.

So what revelations do you have about NASA, that stinks so much? Instead of mindless sarcasm, reveal your knowledge or STFU.

Expand full comment

Actually, my pockets are being emptied by Trudeau, but I get your point. :) Are you sure you are responding to the right person because I see nothing in my comment that would warrant such aggressiveness on your part? In fact, I compliment you on your amazing post.

Expand full comment

No one ever walked on the moon, and no one will ever mine the moon. We have all we need here on Earth.

Expand full comment

There is nothing stupendous about going to the moon or landing on the moon. China, Japan, India have all put landers on the moon recently. Even the Russians were able to land two large Rovers on the Moon in 1970 and 1973.

You can see the Moon Reconnaissance Orbiter photos right now. And the Japanese SELENE probe to the Moon & the Chandrayaan-2 Indian Moon orbiter. It would be an incredible job to fake those. They would have to match ground observations and invent fine detail to be compatible with that. For what purpose? A crazy notion.

Third-party evidence for Apollo Moon landings:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third-party_evidence_for_Apollo_Moon_landings

"...SELENE photographs

In 2008, the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) SELENE lunar probe obtained several photographs showing evidence of Moon landings.[1] On the left are two photos taken on the lunar surface by the Apollo 15 astronauts August 2, 1971 during EVA 3 at station 9A near Hadley Rille. On the right is a 2008 reconstruction from images taken by the SELENE terrain camera and 3D projected to the same vantage point as the surface photos. The terrain is a close match within the SELENE camera resolution of 10 metres.

AS15-82-11121: Apollo 15 Lunar Roving Vehicle

AS15-82-11121: Apollo 15 Lunar Roving Vehicle

AS15-82-11122: Apollo 15 photo

AS15-82-11122: Apollo 15 photo

3D SELENE reconstructed photo

3D SELENE reconstructed photo

I suppose you figure China's plan to send astronauts to the moon in 2027 is all to make a fake video landing. And all the amateur astronomers and hundreds of foreign science institutes with hundreds of radio & optical telescopes will be suckered in. I still can't figure out why you figure NASA would go to all that incredible expense & trouble to fake a moon landing. If they didn't want to spend the money, just cancel the program, they do it all the time. In fact cancelling these type of mission is the norm not the exception. And yet here they are going to great lengths and cost to do another series of human moon landings. I suppose you figure that's going to be fake too? Artemis missions? Fake? SpaceX's plans for private Moon flyby mission, previously financed by a Japanese billionaire.

Expand full comment

Movie magic. Stanley Kubric made us all believe. Don't be so naive.

Expand full comment

I ain't naive. I follow the truth, wherever it leads. Believing in nutty, flat Earth theories discredit everyone in the anti-Establishment movement. Seek only the Truth, no matter where that leads. Believing in silliness just because you think it makes you cool or controversial is doing damage to all of us.

Noticeable that all you have is claims, whereas I have the evidence.

Expand full comment

Evidence? Photographic evidence from known deceivers? Or have you taken your own photographs?

I make my own observations and link them up with others who do the same. This is how we discern truth.

I seek truth, I have no emotion involved in my search. When I discover truth I do get an emotional reaction because I have realized the spoon-fed narrative we have all been told does not resonate with truth seekers. Truth resonates.

A simple proof anyone can do to prove the Earth is not spherical is to study mountain lake reflections. If lakes "curved" the reflections would be distorted. Anyone with critical thinking skills can discern this themselves.

There is no curvature and we detect no spin. Excuses for why we detect no spin are rediculous.

You can call me any name you want. I don't care. Namecalling does not prove anything other than you are willing to resort to name calling in an attempt to discredit you comment debater.

Expand full comment

So if you have evidence it must be true "because I say so". But when others have VASTLY more evidence, much better evidence, it is all false because "they are known deceivers" according to you", which we must accept as true, "because you say so".

Garbage arguments. Show some evidence Japan, India, SpaceX, China, Russia are also trying to deceive us. So all the moon landers lately have been fake too? Including observations by amateur astronomers - are they "known deceivers".

Figures that you are also a Flat Earther.

Expand full comment

I am not asking anyone to take my word for anything. I give everyone the same simple test they can do for themselves and make their own conclusions. Curved lakes would not yield the beautiful professional mountain lake photographs we all love. If the photographs were distorted, photographers would not bother. You would not like the result. Just a little distortion would spoil the effect. I know this as photographs has been my vocation for scores of years and I have personally taken such photographs.

You Smith rely on authorities to tell you what to think. What tests have you personally performed? Any?

I suspect you are either to dumb to make your own observations or more likely you are among the intentional deceivers.

Expand full comment

If you haven't yourself gotten up early in the morning to hopefully hike to the site in time to catch the perfect early morning reflection, you probably have no idea what I am talking about.

Expand full comment

"I follow the truth" Boy oh boy, I sure wish I could determine what the truth is like you can. That would make my day. :-)

Expand full comment
Jul 22Liked by Matthew Ehret

It isn't "determine the truth", that's not what it is, not in science, not in forensics, not in geopolitics, because you likely never can know what the truth is perfectly, because nobody knows everything. It's about following the truth, looking for what is true, and that means when the evidence points in a different direction, you go in that direction, no matter that it may embarrass you that you made a mistake.

Don't be like Anthony Fauci or this Hinnenkamp dude and declare: " I am the science" equivalent to "I am the Truth".

Expand full comment

Discredit to who?

Expand full comment

They discredit everyone who is not neoliberal establishment types. Why do these kooks with their crackpot theories always appear in droves in the anti-establishment comment sites? Like they must attach themselves to the legitimate opposition. And you never see them going to the establishment sites. Like the No-Virus army of nutballs. They swamp out the Covid & Vaxx truth sites with their nutty theory but I've NEVER seen them show up at an establishment Covid zoonotic origin pro-mrna-jab site. Like they are being paid to "poison the well". CIA types trying associate legitimate critics with nutballs and crackpots, like these Flat Earther loons.

Expand full comment

Although we are blessed with an awful lot on Earth, there are still limits to what we have. Do you really think that we have everything we need?

Even if for the sake of argument there was through a scientific miracle no limit to resources, and we could transmute whatever we want into whatever we needed, we would still by limited by the amount of matter we have here on Earth if nothing else.

It is also hard to imagine our physics making significant progress when many problems in it will only be able to be solved in space. We'll never fully understand the universe, our place within it, or the laws of nature of it unless we can explore it. Don't you think such questions are worth answering?

Expand full comment

There are plenty of resources. Oil is not fossil fuels and there is plenty. Admiral Byrd said he saw enough coal in Antarctica to last 200 years. Byrd saw other resources there too. We can grow enough food. But for some reason TPTB are doing things to limit food production. Check out what is happening in The Netherlands. Farmers are outraged, and we should be too, but most of us are totally unaware.

Do you think we need to cull chicken flocks and tag cattle? Are TPTB intentionally reducing resources to engineer shortages?

The GA Guidestones laid out the plan. Reduce the population on Earth to 500 million. That means culling 6.5 billion humans.

Important part of the interview about 4:30 in. https://youtu.be/PrdSal9uH28?si=enwY9smtvS4JDQLC

Expand full comment

Oil is fossil fuels, some of it may also be Abiotic or Abiogenic. And there isn't plenty. The price is already way high, with most oil fields in decline or finished. We may already be at peak oil, they keep inflating oil production with tricks like refinery gain, NG liquids, condensates, biofuels. This while demand for energy may increase 5X with Developing Nations industrialization.

Expand full comment

according to some the classification of oil as a 'fossil fuel' was the result of a 1892 convention in Geneva (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneva_Rules) when David Rockerfeller used the classification to create the perception of scarcity - https://thebridgelifeinthemix.info/history/oil-fossil-fuel-fake-science/

just think about it.

Expand full comment

They can trace the source of petroleum from C12 isotope depletion and various biomarkers. There still may be some that is abiotic, but clearly that is not going to change the reality of oil depletion, which is happening whatever the source of oil ultimately is.

Expand full comment

we have no idea about 'the reality of oil depletion', because it is drowned in enormous corporate interests.

Expand full comment

If oil is fossil fuels, rather than abiotic, then why is Saturn's moon, Titan practically swimming with chain hydrocarbons (methane, ethane, and higher?) Unless...Saturn's moon Titan has life in it's subsurface ocean of water? Hmmm...Gives one pause for thought. Isn't it interesting that the other moons of outer gas giants that have subsurface oceans of water (Encelaudus, Europa) don't have atmospheres, yet Titan not only has an atmosphere, but it's thicker than earth's despite its lower gravity, and it has lakes of hydrocarbons on its surface.

If Titan doesn't have life, then the appearance of chain hydrocarbons aplenty on its surface has to be explained abiotically. But, conversely, if Crude Oil on Earth is ONLY created from fossilized biomass, then one has to conclude that perhaps Titan may be a living world as well as our own, and with the highest possibility of life, outside of Earth, inside our own solar system and even more so than Mars!

Expand full comment

Methane is very common in gas giants, vast amounts of it on Uranus, Neptune, Jupiter & Saturn. Under pressure it may form Ethane largely and an odd smattering of other hydrocarbons. That is not petroleum or oil.

You don't find those vast amounts of methane in the rocky inner planets. So far most of the hydrocarbons on Earth are shown to be biotic origin, using various means including C13-C12 isotope analysis. That doesn't mean all of it is, and supposedly there has been more complex hydrocarbons formed abiotically.

I ain't no planetary astronomer/chemist so I would have to research how hydrocarbons form & are concentrated in ice or gas giants during planetary formation. You might also ask why do many small moons in the outer planets have vastly more water than the entire Earth's oceans. That's just how those worlds formed.

Also huge amounts of Helium3 on Jupiter & Saturn. Why so little on Earth? Planetary formation science.

Key point is, there is zero doubt that we are running out of economical resources of oil & gas, which will be aggravated by the rapid expansion of Developing Nations energy consumption. We will need 5X current primary energy resources. At economical prices.

Fortunately, there is plenty enough uranium and thorium in the Earth's crust to run our civilization until the expanding Sun cooks the Earth.

Expand full comment
Jul 22Liked by Matthew Ehret

I really enjoyed this essay. Reminds me of letter I wrote to my then-Congressman Ron Paul when I was a teenager. Made arguments on the need for increased NASA funding. Yes, I’m old! Hahaha. Thanks again. .

Expand full comment
Jul 21·edited Jul 21

You make probably the best and simplest argument for why we need space exploration that I've read – well done! There aren't many authors whose articles I end up feeling a need to save after reading, and refer to time and time again later.

On the subject of both space and Malthusianism, I recently read an interesting argument against the latter from an astrophysicist and aerospace engineer, Dr. Travis S. Taylor. In the context of the infamous Fermi's paradox, which he calls Fermi's blunder, he explained that this "paradox" is actually based more than anything on none other than Malthus' growth model. He says the Malthusian growth model is mathematically flawed and fails to describe what actually happens in nature; populations do not necessarily grow exponentially to the limits of their environment, but rather exponential growth eventually levels out, and this can and has been observed in many species.

Apparently there are better equations that are more likely to describe the reality of life in the universe, such as the Lotka–Volterra equations, which are used to calculate predator–prey dynamics in biological systems. What he thinks is more likely is that different species find their own niches like in the environment of our own planet, which might allow more co-existence than one might expect, the same way many species in Earth's ecosystems are not in competition with each other, but co-exist without necessarily noticing each other in the same ecosystem. Other relationships exist in nature as well, e.g mutually beneficial ones. He argues there is therefore no paradox in failing to astronomically detect other life; Fermi was simply in err with Malthusianism.

So, on top of all the other problems with them, Malthusians apparently can't even claim to be "realists," since what they believe in and want to base policy off of is actually an 18th century math error! Bad math strikes again.

Expand full comment

Van Allen radiation belt

Expand full comment

That's no problem. Calculated dosage passing through the Van Allen belts to the moon and back is a meager 2.1 mSv. You will get 10mSv from a CAT scan. The overall dosage for a Moon mission is largely determined by the level of Solar Proton Flux. Which can in a bad year amount to 406mSv for an Apollo type Moon mission.

Expand full comment

Hi, Matt...I have some questions/reservations (maybe a slight disagreement?) OK...You say positive things about Trump and his space deals with China and Russia, and a lot of people in the Anti Great Reset crowd now, from The Duran to Clayton Morris, are celebrating JD Vance and Trump's possible victory...

But...What about Peter Thiel? Elon Musk? These are some of the biggest donors jumping on the Trump Train right now, and yesterday I came across an article that dovetails what you're saying here about destroying Russia/US cooperation on Space Development. From Science Alert: "NASA And SpaceX Reveal Plan to Destroy International Space Station."

Article here:

https://www.sciencealert.com/nasa-and-spacex-reveal-plan-to-destroy-international-space-station

Quote from the article:

"NASA considered doing the job with three Russian Progress spacecraft, but even that wasn't enough for the size of the space station, according to Dana Weigel, manager of NASA's ISS program.

NASA and its Russian counterpart, Roscosmos, plan to continue using the ISS until 2030, when both agencies intend to go their separate ways and transition to new space stations. NASA hopes to be one of many customers on private space stations in the future."

Then, there is Whitney Webb, who did an excellent breakdown of Palantir, Peter Thiel's company, who worked with DARPA and Total Information Awareness to set up today's social media infrastructure and track dissidents. JD Vance has come out solidly against Iran, and Peter Thiel, who backs him, is also anti-Iran.

Whitney Webb interview here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMYdu-vTuPI

What is your opinion of the fact that these anti-humanity Deep State operatives are backing Trump? What do you have to say of this? You had said that your Occult Tesla articles were leading up to an expose of Musk. How do you reconcile the pro-Human statements of Trump with the Anti-Human mindsets of these backers? It seems like a logical paradox to me and I'm trying to wrap my head around this.

Expand full comment
author

I am no fan of Vance, Thiel or musk and see them as trojan horses

Expand full comment

Thank you! I was hoping you could do an article or maybe a show discussing the implications of their involvement in the up coming Trump administration, moving forward, how they might affect (or try and affect or sabotage) Trump's pro-Space-cooperation agenda. Do you get the feeling that Musk's movement toward MAGA concerns and toward saying things that appeal to the Trump base was a result of deliberate planning, either by Musk or his handlers, with orders to move in and try and disrupt Trump's space agenda? It seems like that to me, with Musk's whole "interplanetary civilization" agenda. Few people talk about the disadvantages of Space Privatization versus the advantages of Public Space programs in the vein of Kennedy.

Another thing is the Kessler Syndrome, a cascading effect of collisions caused by broken satellites and the proliferation of space junk, causing space to become either inaccesable or prohibitively expensive due to having to create machines to clean up or scoop out space junk. It seems that Musk's starlink and 5G, with its needing of thousands of satellites, greatly increases the likelihood of a Kessler Syndrome. It seems to me that Musk is the greatest enemy of all of space travel. I dunno...what do you think?

It also seems to me that this whole privatization of space travel was designed to thwart and/or sabotage efforts by states to plan long term for bigger space agendas that are pro-humanity. Neil DeGrasse Tyson once discussed this, saying that interplanetary travel requires longer term thinking beyond the short term profit motive.

Expand full comment
author

I agree with you 100% on all points.

Additionally I am thankful for your additional insight into the possible/highly probable secondary motive behind starlink satellites to create a dangerous firewall of millions of bullets swarming around the planet as an additional form of electrical fence keeping humanity locked up into a closed system pen

Expand full comment

A lot of people here in this conspiracy research / anti-great reset crowd often like to knock Neil DeGrasse Tyson, and...granted he does shill for a lot of mainstream stuff that I do not like. But I want to say that it was Neil DeGrasse Tyson, of all people, who laid the foundation in MY thinking that would eventually lead me to accept what you and Lyndon LaRouche were saying, and that made me open to what you were saying, when I first discovered you in 2021.

I want to share with you a video I saw of him back in like 2019 or 2018. He was in a room with United Arab Emirates govt and business leaders where he discussed space colonization. He said that the Arab space program reminded him of the optimism of the 1960's in the US. Neil then launches into how the Apollo program in the mid 1960's inspired creativity and excitement in the press by making each next space mission bigger and more ambitious than the last. But then when we switched to the shuttle program, he said it had the effect of "going boldly where many have gone before," and inspiration and creativity went down after each mission. So when I heard LaRouche's breakdown of how NASA was destroyed in the 1960's, it resonated and echoed with what I heard from Neil a few years earlier. If you go to 104:00 in this video and listen for a few minutes, you will hear him say this:

https://youtu.be/X_m1mPtYzTk?t=3839

Here, Neil talks about how he meets with Modi and, from what he's saying, he might have been instrumental in getting or encouraging India to join the Artemis Accords.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxdbF5qjKx0

Expand full comment

Musk's satellites are not an issue with Kessler Syndrome since they are at low altitude and will not last very long in orbit if no longer functional. It is the medium altitude satellites, that are a problem, which can take decades or more for their orbit to decay until they will be burnt up. High altitude satellites are spread out much more so are unlikely to cause the Kessler effect.

It's not difficult to prevent Kessler syndrome, at least technically. The problem, as usual, political. And the more we have the confrontational style of International Politics that are the hallmark of current Western governments (the rules based order), resolving those issues remains difficult.

Neil DeGrasse Tyson is a corporate tool of the worst sort. He was one of the most vocal championing Fauci/Big Pharmas pure bullshit claims of "We are the Science".

How on Earth could anyone claim "Musk is the greatest enemy of all of space travel"?!? That's craziness. Apart from Musk we would still be stuck with Big Aerospace's ripoff disposable rockets like the SLS @ $2B per launch.

Expand full comment

Good points, and thank you for clarifying some of this stuff. Yes, there is a lot of stuff I disagree with Neil DeGrasse Tyson on, but there are also some statements that I've heard from him that echo those of Lyndon LaRouche Jr. For instance, Neil DeGrasse Tyson once said that the greatest economic growths in history occurred when energy flux density increased, such as the transition from wood to coal and then from coal to fossil fuels. In fact, it was Neil DeGrasse Tyson, of all people, who laid the groundwork in MY thinking that led me toward accepting Lyndon LaRouche's ideas when Matt Ehret introduced them to me.

Neil DeGrasse Tyson also attended a meeting of scientists and business leaders in the United Arab Emirates to promote space development. While he was there I heard him say (on Youtube because this meeting was recorded and uploaded), that the UAE "reminded him of the optimism about space that the United States once had in the 1960's". He also told them that the first trillionaire would be the one to be able to mine an asteroid for rare earth minerals. Now you KNOW that when Arab businessmen hear something like this, dollar signs will go off in their heads and they got the money and resources to put to space. I remember at the time thinking: "Well heck! If we won't do it, at least let someone else do it and give them a nudge to do it" Neil DeGrasse Tyson was being strategic, wanting to advance space travel and he knew who to talk to. You know that oil wealth is not going to last forever and that Arabs will be wanting to diversify and go off into other venues. I thought this was a remarkable piece of genius here, what Tyson was doing.

So Tyson is not all bad.

And, what you say about Musk and the Kessler Syndrome not being a problem...granted. But then there is something ELSE you said that DOES point to Musk being an enemy of space travel: "The problem, as usual, political. And the more we have the confrontational style of International Politics that are the hallmark of current Western governments (the rules based order), resolving those issues remains difficult."

Musk IS a player in that confrontation. He is going to work with NASA in removing the ISS, symbol of cooperation with Russia, and we will then use his privatized space in lieu of cooperation with Russia and China. Number one.

Number two: his Starlink satellites are aiding and assisting Ukraine in its drone attacks against Russia.

Three: He challenged Putin, in Russian letters, to a fist fight on Twitter during the month that Russia invaded Ukraine. So juvenile!

Putin will eat him for dinner! And wipe his blood off the plate. Musk is no match for Putin in a fist fight. You're talking about a man with a lifetime experience of military and intelligence work, coming from the KGB and riding horses and doing physical activity even at his age. That man is tough as rocks!

Musk is no friend of peace and cooperation with the Eurasian powers.

Expand full comment

"Go to the moon" , "space" - are you serious Matt?

Wow, I thought you were a little bit further along than that falling for all of that old BS.

So, for me now, your work exists as good academic historical research which illucidates a more truthful perspective but from a researcher that still accepts the standard matrix of dark programming and lies.

Shame really.

I thought you'd be a bit more than that.

Expand full comment
author

You put "moon" and "space" in quotation marks. Why?

Expand full comment

Correction Matt - I put "go to the moon" and "space" in quotation marks.

Are you seriously asking me why?

Expand full comment
author

Let me rephrase that then so that I fully understand where you're coming from. You put "moon" in quotation marks. Why?

Expand full comment

I can guess why, probably. How much do you want to bet that StuartPS is a Flat Earther? Flat Earthers don't believe in Space nor do they believe that the moon exists in space, but just some flat paper illusion up in the sky or something. I know...Because I had a good friend in conspiracy research who fell for the Flat Earth thing for a while and started saying "he didn't believe in Space." Or...StuartPS could be some kind of religious fundamentalist who doesn't believe space exists or we'll ever go into it because God put us all on a limited duration stop watch that ends at The Rapture, Return of Mahdi, or whatever. (Sigh in exasperation).

Unfortunately, that is the kind of world we live in in the West right now, Matt.

Expand full comment

You use a lot of CIA labels and stories.

Expand full comment

No, you sound like one of the many sockpuppets the CIA hires, part of their "Poisoning the Well" strategy.

Expand full comment

Matt, you asked the same question.

I didn't put "moon" in quotation marks.

I put "going to the moon" in quotation marks.

Expand full comment
author

My bad I meant to write "space"... Juggling too many things at once

Expand full comment

Hi Matt

I've enjoyed your work on the nefarious hand of the EIC and freemasonry etc. very interesting.

I put those things in speech marks because they are both part of the narrative used by the same nefarious hand to control us today.

Promotion of the "going to the moon" and "space" narrative generally is usually a good tell. Those that promote this narrative usually fall into two key categories:

1. Gatekeeper

2. Ignorant of the use of these narratives by the same nefarious hands that you write about - Illuminati/freemasonry.

So, I'm disappointed to see this article.

And to be honest, as much as I've enjoyed your perspective, I don't invest too much time with those that fall into either of these two categories. So will probably leave it there.

If you fall into category 2., I seriously hope you get to see the error of your ways quickly.

Expand full comment

Yeah, were all asking you why. Seriously. Or are you brain dead?

Expand full comment
Jul 22·edited Jul 22

We know what you mean. Why not just write it plainly, if you can, instead of writing this word salad?

Expand full comment

What the fuck are you talking about?!? A whole comment with nothing but vague innuendos that only deserve a response of "Is this guy loony tunes?".

Say what you mean or don't say anything at all.

Expand full comment

Flat earther. Cringe…

Expand full comment
founding

Essayons!

The precedent and key tenets of the 19th Century “American System of Political Economy” were the basis for the BRICS, BRI, SCO, and EAEU. Consider the cooperative and concurrent Trans Siberian and Trans Continental Railways, with intent to link over the Bering Straits, with the sale of Alaska to the U.S. for this purpose. In addition, Czar Alexander II intervened on the Union’s behalf with the Russian Fleet in NY and SF harbors vs the British and French who supported the Confederacy. Such projects, as the Space Program, along with the resurrection

of JFK’s and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ proposed “North American Water and Power Alliance (NAWAPA), are and clear, viable and precedented pathway to U.S. integration into Cooperative Economic Development, Strategic Security Agreements, and a return to Sanity, vs Perpetual War. Fast forward and To Wit:

“Lyndon LaRouche turned out to be right.”

“May his memory Live Forever.”

Sergey Glasyev

(Sergey Glazyev is a Russian politician and economist, a member of the National Financial Council of the Bank of Russia, and a member of the Russian Academy of Sciences. He is presently the Commissioner for Integration and Macroeconomics within the Eurasian Economic Commission, the executive body of the Eurasian Economic Union).

https://larouchepub.com/pr/2022/20220916_glazyev_praises_larouche_on_centenary.html

Expand full comment

China adopted the American System policies of Alexander Hamilton and their economic development since Mao tse-tung proves it as they have lifted living standards and nearly eradicated poverty to become a great power.

Expand full comment

Re

Abraham Lincoln saved the union via the creation of constitutional greenbacks as a form of federal credit issued via the Treasury and tied to the actual needs of the people.

I recommend you discuss with Ryan Dawson.

Expand full comment

So, electrical & computer engineer here with an MSc in space science from the International Space University, Strasbourg, France and extensive experience in space systems engineering.

The Apollo moon landings were faked and undoubtedly so. There is no way they did it back then, for a number of reasons.

The best analysis of the subject I’ve read is “Wagging the Moondoggie” by Dave McGowan. It is freely available in the web and is a must read for anyone interested.

Also the documentary “American Moon” by Massimo Mazzucco, which can be watched for free in Odysee.

As for who was the mastermind behind the filming, the documentary "Kubrick's Odyssey" by Jay Weidner is quite convincing.

With that being said I have to state here that I totally agree with the premise that aiming for space exploration and expansion of humanity towards the stars is a noble and beneficiary goal, necessary to move humanity forward. It's just that actually putting people on the moon, and not robots, is extremely hard and expensive, even for today's standards. We need breakthrough technologies that are deliberately being systematically sabotaged. Just look at the latest ITER debacle. It's finally ready (after incredible delays and internal sabotage), but it will take a few more decades to actually start operating...

P.S. I found the latest Hollywood film "Fly my to the Moon" quite hilarious. They are actually rubbing it on our faces.

Expand full comment

Give the VIPER to Russia or China or India. They will undoubtedly put it on lunar surface and let you participate in the raw images!

Expand full comment

some have characterised earth as a 'prison planet', difficult to get away from. traveling to the moon seems to have become an aborted project and we're not told why, or do we believe NASA's many different types of explanation? as so many other branches of modern science, geology became a serious subject following the technological developments and socio-economic requirements of the Industrial Revolution (which itself was verrrrrrrrry dependent on oil/petroleum) and indeed, perhaps it is a non-finite, abiotic commodity, as argued by Fletcher Prouty (1994 interview) a.o. - https://peakoil.com/geology/abiotic-oil-and-gas-a-theory-that-refuses-to-vanish

Expand full comment
founding

Essayons!

The precedent and key tenets of the 19th Century “American System of Political Economy” were the basis for the BRICS, BRI, SCO, and EAEU. Consider the cooperative and concurrent Trans Siberian and Trans Continental Railways, with intent to link over the Bering Straits, with the sale of Alaska to the U.S. for this purpose. In addition, Czar Alexander II intervened on the Union’s behalf with the Russian Fleet in NY and SF harbors vs the British and French who supported the Confederacy. Such projects, as the Space Program, along with the resurrection

of JFK’s and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ proposed “North American Water and Power Alliance (NAWAPA), are and clear, viable and precedented pathway to U.S. integration into Cooperative Economic Development, Strategic Security Agreements, and a return to Sanity, vs Perpetual War. Fast forward and To Wit:

“Lyndon LaRouche turned out to be right.”

“May his memory Live Forever.”

Sergey Glasyev

(Sergey Glazyev is a Russian politician and economist, a member of the National Financial Council of the Bank of Russia, and a member of the Russian Academy of Sciences. He is presently the Commissioner for Integration and Macroeconomics within the Eurasian Economic Commission, the executive body of the Eurasian Economic Union).

https://larouchepub.com/pr/2022/20220916_glazyev_praises_larouche_on_centenary.html

Expand full comment

"$450 million had already been spent on this advanced rover which would have been integral for locating water resources on the moon which would have been invaluable for the long term survival of our species"

Please remind me why we finding water on the moon is invaluable for the survival of our species. I had naively assumed that the whole space program was just one of many ways to siphon off truckloads of taxpayers money. Like in, I just checked and water is running fine from my kitchen faucet, at a substantially lower price.

Expand full comment

"...whole space program was just one of many ways to siphon off truckloads of taxpayers money.."

You never use a GPS? Television, radio other communications through satellites. Now mobile phone coverage over the entire Earth through satellites. Satellites that monitor the Earth. Invaluable for military applications. Astronomy. You name it.

The survival of our species is very much in jeopardy. You ever hear of the Ukraine? Nuclear War. Bioweapons that the ruling class are developing at a reckless pace? We better develop colonies on the Moon & Mars or we might well go extinct.

Handy fact, just one of many asteroids contains a million $trillion worth of metals. Once you setup the infrastructure, that is actually easy & economical to extract and deliver to Earth. The Earth being a gravity well. Handiest to mine them from bases on the Moon & Mars. Water is a critical element in space operations.

Does that explain it to you?

Funny you could care less about 100's of $trillions wasted in endless wars, that only achieve death & destruction. And sick, demented events like the Covid bioweapon release. And destroying our entire energy infrastructure with wacky renewable energy scams like wind, solar, hydrogen and agrofuels. Focus on priorities.

Expand full comment

Please keep on educating me, I find your dedication quite admirable.

Expand full comment
Jul 22·edited Jul 22

If I was NASA, this is what I would say: We're sorry mister President, but we neglected to tell you that this rover is for Ukraine. I don't think it matters much whether anyone went to the Moon or not, since nothing of value to the advancement of our species has ever come of it. Other than a few gadgets, we probably would have developed anyway. Or decided we didn't really need after all. :-)

Expand full comment