49 Comments

I mentioned in The New Self-Amplifying RNA Vaccines Promise to be Double, Triple, Quadruple the Fun! https://khmezek.substack.com/p/the-new-self-amplifying-rna-vaccines that Japan had just landed on the moon, but suffered malfunction. In this link, it shows a photo of the landing but it's just black, so I'm confused. https://www.space.com/japan-moon-landing-success-slim-spacecraft

Expand full comment

The biggest STOCK leap in ONE day in USA MORON history

A company crash lands a garbage TRUCK into the MOON and wins the GOYIM Lotto

Who knew??

https://www.zerohedge.com/technology/shares-intuitive-machines-soar-after-first-successful-us-moon-landing-half-century

Expand full comment

Japan left some garbage up there too. How long will it be before the moon is as polluted as earth.

Expand full comment

Thanks I can dig the concern.

But who knew that dumping garbage on the moon would win your $100 Billion USD in stock market lotto winnings?

Sure they will pollute the earth, no doubt its what they do, but clearly the stock-market "JEW-SHIT" has become disconnected with reality;

Hell on the environment what can you say?? THey cut down all the trees in teh MED Basin +2,000 years, ago and today USA old-growth is gone, they burned Maui to the ground, and now they shit on the moonl

Like Kissinger said the irony is Not only the shit on the earth, but the GOYIM pay them for the shit;

Expand full comment

You make some good points. It would be easier to have a conversation if you didn't phrase everything in such an aggressive manner, as if the people you are conversing with here are the ones to blame. Also, the Jew hate is repulsive. I leave the comments here because nothing should be hidden. This is the way the world is going. I do my part to leave documentation of how this hatred that was hidden for so long is now coming to the surface.

Expand full comment

NASA has largest green screen and best cgi in the world. They can take a curve on an oscilloscope or a single white pixel and create totally realistic images “photos “ of distant galaxies filled with exotic planets with orbiting moons in technicolor.

They have been pumping the breathtaking images out since they got away with all the Apollo hoax moon landings.

Expand full comment

All that stuff about the Apollo photos.... weird shadows? flags flying?? and that they lost the Apollo plans?? Really? But, I didn't know for sure until I saw the press conference with Armstrong, Aldrin, and Collins. When I saw the look of those three guys there was no doubt in my mind. Those guys did not go tho the moon. They looked miserable like they wish they were some place else. Zero pride on their faces. You wonder how they could pull off such hoax? Ask Gus Grissom.

Expand full comment

I agree. Everyone needs to see that press conference. They were ashamed and could barely lift their faces. They were not victorious heroes who had gone where no man had gone before.

It is all fake. We have been lied to. Call it creative money laundering maybe?

9 minute video here on how the lunar module could not have survived the trip: https://youtu.be/DpPMoIv1lxI?si=pR6zke-B7QdIva7V

And then there was Stanley Kubrick’s confession video, just before he died. He shot the “moon landing.”

Expand full comment

I don't have a scientific mind, but it doesn't take much critical thinking to poke holes in this charade. And at this point, I don't believe one single thing the government or talking heads say. I'm wondering when was the last time either told the truth about anything. Probably not in my lifetime.

Expand full comment

Yep tax money spent on Neptunium to power deep space probe was money laundering combined with government corruption gravy train to department of energy and their corporate contractors.

Expand full comment

I say to them: take your big news and stick it where the sun don't shine (on the dark side of the moon), dear leaders!

Expand full comment

Haha, good one!

Expand full comment

Why thank you!

Expand full comment

I’m saving this so I can come back and see the comments. This is going to be fun! Nothing gets the natives going like the lunar landing and flat earth theories!

Expand full comment

Why do you always mix flat-earth with lunar-landing

That is like mixing frogs & cats

Flat-Earth is 100% bullshit was you just have to look into the sky and see everything is a ball

On the other hand, its a known-known that everything ever done By GOVERNMENT is a big lie;

https://bilbobitch.substack.com/p/the-500-lies-that-the-usa-people

Expand full comment

I wasn’t saying anything about the validity of either. My point is that they’re controversial topics and it always gets people going. That’s all I said!

Expand full comment

You alluded that both subjects are like a two sided coin they are not;

flat-earth fuck-heads live in the cesspools of human knowledge

lunar-landing analysis actually requires some knowledge about astrophysical engineering and space-flight; Especially the science of 'human space flight' which is 1,0000 x more expensive and complex;

Everybody knew in the 1960's when USA went down the road of 'man on the moon it was moronic' its 1000x more expensive to host man in space over a robot, and the robot gets more work done; The man was just a political gesture;

Say today why CHINA is so far ahead of the USA in space, they never bothered with manned space flight and jumped right to robotic systems and perfected them;

Expand full comment

Not going to argue with you. Final statement, I simply meant they are 2 controversial subjects that always get lots of comments. I alluded nothing other than that. End of subject - move on.

Expand full comment

Thanks, you triggered me the #1 argument that NASA people use to 'prove' that NASA went to moon in 1969 is to say that "Well moon deniers believe that the earth is flat, and moon is made of cheese as well"

I just wanted to clarify that being a doubting thomas about Moon-Shit, is not the same as believing the moon is made of cheese, or the earth is flat;

Expand full comment

So perhaps it is time you learned to differentiate.

Expand full comment

YOU can lead a cuck to water, but you cannot make them drink; ( or think )

Some things are best left alone;

Expand full comment

The PROBLEM with the moon is that it has NO atmosphere, even on MARS they can use parachutes to land and slow down an object on entry

On the moon with NO atmosphere the only way to de-accelerate a space-craft is with 'fuel', but the problem is they can't carry that much fuel;

...

Lot's of BULLSHIT, I would ask the space-craft 'landed' or it crashed? Often the solution is to bubble-wrap it and hope it isn't destroyed on impact, the moon-dust is sharp glass-like material that shreds everything;

In theory if you infinite 'fuel' it would be easy to launch and weave around the 'van allen belt' and go through the holes and reach the moon, and then hard left or right and go to the poles and look for 'water'

But in actuality they hurl the space craft off of the earths equator in the direction of the moon and then once the spacecraft enter the gravitational field it enters orbit, then 'fuel' is required to 'vector' the craft and then fuel is required to de-accelerate the craft from 1,000's of MPH

Let's see it took 3 days from launch to arrival, that's 72 hours, its 280k KM to moon that 4,000 km/hr, or 6km/min; as you all know from 'driving' that 4,000 km/h is fast, 10x faster than a commercial airline;

You also know what happens to tinfoil can when it hits a wall at 88km/h, imagine it it hit at 4,000 km/hr, so incredible amount of fuel is required to de-acclerate the craft to near zero at impact;

...

The other big bullshit is van-allen they say they just drive around through the belt going through the holes, everytime you vector the space-craft on a new course is a huge amount of fuel, same for going to the poles of the moon, once arriving at the moon, on an equatorial orbit ( earth & moon share same equatorial orbit ), then to go to the poles you need to not only de-acelerate the craft but changes its orbital direction to north south, from east west, and enormous amount of fuel required;

...

Why didn't we do this 50 years ago? Because 50 years ago we had vacuum tube radios and no semiconductors and the mttf (mean to time to failure) on most systems was in the hours;

Today with CNC CAE we can design and build high quality rockets, and MUSK has done it with Falcon-9 but NOBODY has solved the problem with the Moon lack of 'atmosphere'

Interesting is that in 1950's the Russians were first to orbit earth with a man, the first to orbit the moon and the first to land a 'probe' on the moon in 1950's

The USA was 100% failure until 1967, and there is little to no evidence they did any of the things they claim to have done; ( Other than sabotaging the Russian space program )

Expand full comment

Wow, thanks for all of this. I will read it twice!

Expand full comment

Your welcome I have been writing a lot about moon shit lately, I don't know why its the season of the moon;

But seriously its a big scam right now 'moon', just like "AI" another scam, to take peoples minds off of living in the shit on drugs on USA streets;

..

I'm skeptical of all the shit, the Russians did the right thing by never going back post 1950's they learned the moon was just a rock;

...

This bullshit about 'water' on the moon is highly doubtful, and its especially hard to go to these poles where the water is said to exist, in the dark craters where its always -250C , so solar panels don't work, and everything 'freezes' which means it don't work, plastic and rubber just crumble, even metals mis-behave;

This is why all robotic craft sent to the moon poles always fail, even if they don't crash, because robots can't operate at -250C, most metallic machines use a lubricant, but oil became glue at cold temps and o-rings become rocks;

...

They talk about building gas-stations at the moon's poles, its easy they will use nuclear reactors to make electricity to mine the water and break it into hydrogen & oxygen, sounds great, the moon begans a gas-station for the solar-system;

But given that nobody can live in extreme cold and darkness, and given that no machine can operate, this is all fishy;

...

Mars make more sense, there is sun-shine and solar, and the heat/cold cycles stabilize the machines with insulation; There is an atmosphere so they can fly drones around to collect information, automatic AI drones that plan their own mission, just like "WALL-EYE"

But the current planning for the moon, is more psycho moon-shit from the operation-paperclip homo nazis ruling the NASA now +70 years;

Expand full comment

There is some good news on space

Because Trump/Obama kicked the Chinese off the ISS space-station the chinese built there own, which is a rolls-royce, and the USA ISS is like a 1800's stage-coach

China is now scheduled to have bases on MOON & MARS by 2035 and will flag both planets and call them new-china,, and the USA has gone fucking NUTS

Expand full comment

😅😅 so true

Expand full comment

https://bilbobitch.substack.com/p/explain-the-new-post-2024-moon-race

there u go;

I also linked back to your post, I have about 1,000 followers

Expand full comment

Do you mean the space program only had vacuum tube radios 50 years ago? I remember transistor radios in the 1950s -- built one from a kit -- and was experimenting with ICs in the late 60s, and designing and building things with them in the early 1970s, from kits and from scratch. Can't remember what avionics was using 50 years ago, though. Tubes were certainly still around.

Expand full comment

Please, even in the 1960's a radio-kit, a crytal diode radio included a diode, some wire and a piezo ear-phone

While heath-kit sold radio kits that had transistors, not really going until late 1960s

Transistors were only invented in the late 1950's

The first production semi-conductors were a hard sell to the US-MIL they were content with their vacuum-tubes, all the major 'super-computers' of the 1950's ran on tubes;

Most TV's were still tube in the early 1970's, when you walked into any store the first thing you saw was a 'tube testing' machine, when our TV died, we pulled the tubes carried them to the tube-tester , and bought new ones, usually it was the heating element that died;

...

Transistor radio kits were late 1960's, early 1960's transistors were still lab R&D curiosity, interestingly the semi-conductor effect had been known since 1920's

Even today the best AMPS for MUSIC are still TUBE-AMPS, they have the best sound and no distortion;

Expand full comment

1961, _Transistor Sister_: https://youtu.be/lbrDIMoi-88

I remember it playing on the kitchen radio (which used tubes).

I don't want to be contrary, but I do remember my life, mostly. My recollection is that the transistor radio kit was 1958-9, in Tacoma, Washington. There is a possibility, however, that it could have been the next year, in the next house elsewhere. We moved a lot. It comes down to a question of whether it was before or after I broke my arm falling out of a tree when I was 8. That was Tacoma for sure. The radio was assembled on a table in the laundry room, with a great deal of help from my father, whichever house it was.

I learned quite a bit about both tubes and transistors in the early 1960s (middle school) and onward. And yes, TVs back then used tubes and I remember the tube testers.

The information I've read, poking around on the web, points to the Apollo Guidance Computer (AGC) being the first flight computer to be designed using integrated circuits. For its size and weight, it would have had to have been. The memory was "core rope", whatever that was. My computers back then all used core except for the first one, a desk calculator in 1968. I don't know about the "rope" part.

One source for this information is https://history-computer.com/apollo-guidance-computer

I have serious doubts about the reality of the entire Apollo program, but what I have been reading about the AGC is realistic. (Whether it could have actually accomplished what was claimed is a different question.) The software design incorporated virtual machine emulation, something I worked with myself in the 1970s. This is indeed an approach for cramming a lot of code into a small space, at the expense of execution speed.

Expand full comment

All nonsense like all the previous “landings”

Expand full comment

It's all so crazy.

Expand full comment

BINGO when MUSK has a rocket that explodes on take-off he calls that a successful mission.

Like here anybody can enter the moon's orbit, and allow their package to get sucked by gravity and eventually 'fall to the moon' they problem is the object going 4,000 KM/HR vaporizes on impact, the issue is how do you slow the object down, in ZERO atmosphere

Given that the moon is 1/6th the gravity of earth, then compute the mass of obect compared to takeoff rocket and figure how much fuel was used, then figure out how much fuel is required to de-accelerate the smaller mass upon entry to the moon's gravitational field;

ON entry to earth the atmosphere naturally de-accelerates most objects to 88 ft/sec or 60 mph, where kinetic energy becomes thermal-energy, but with NO atmosphere its impossible to slow down;

How much bubble wrap is required on a 1KG rock, that is traveling 4,000 KM/HR and hits a brick wall?

In some ways its a waste of time going to the moon, unless you have INFINITE fuel, at least on MARS you can enter orbit and fall and then deploy +3 parachutes and de-accelerate and make a 'soft landing'

Expand full comment

“Odysseus is upright and starting to send data.” The company said it is working on bringing the spacecraft’s first images from the moon’s surface to Earth.

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/02/22/science/nasa-moon-landing-odysseus

Yep, this doesn't sound well, to me they're saying that it crash landed, and it landed 'head-up' a little bit and can transmit, when the recent japan lunar-lander recently 'crashed' one of its two jet nozzels 'fell off' and it when into a spin on the way down, not unlike 'WALL-E", and landed BUTT UP; Making it impossible to charge the solar panels; or transmit

But here it landed head-up, now the question is, ... are the legs broken from impact? Probably

Reading this report it sounds like at the last moment NASA gave them an untested "LIDAR" system for remote sensing and distancing the landing; LIDAR is short for "LASER" and a laser light is sent to the ground and it measures the distance, fairly accurate, but nobody really knows how well laser light reflects on moon-dust, so the accuracy could have been +- 100 meters who knows, my guess is the 'statement' landed head-up is not a good sign indicating that much of the machine was destroyed on impact but it can transmit for awhile;

This is why its going to take so long to learn to land, like our drones, eventually the computers will get it right and be able to control the descent; Problem on the moon there is no GPS, or any means of really knowing your location or distance to lunar surface to within a few inches as can be done on earth;

First step is private companys need to put GPS systems into the lunar-orbit so craft can triangulate their exact position near the moon;

Expand full comment

The biggest STOCK leap in ONE day in USA MORON history

A company crash lands a garbage TRUCK into the MOON and wins the GOYIM Lotto

Who knew??

https://www.zerohedge.com/technology/shares-intuitive-machines-soar-after-first-successful-us-moon-landing-half-century

Expand full comment

At least this one doesn't have to be faked since there were no human beings on board who could not traverse the Van Allen radiation belts.

Expand full comment

Oh and I read your Dead zone piece and loved it. The freezing nights in the synthetic sleeping bags reminded me of my back packing trips of my youth. :)

Expand full comment

Yes, we didn't have very good gear then!

Expand full comment

The engineers had problems they had to work around. Yea like solar flares or the Van Allen radiation belt you mean. Why is it such a big deal landing on the moon, hell we put men on the moon in the 60’s, and brought them back to a splashdown. Maybe it’s because we had better technology back then, all lost in the records of NASA.

Expand full comment

I was just talking to someone about that. It's all very fascinating and I have to study it further.

Expand full comment

The single best and most reader-friendly debunking of the moon landing that I'm aware of was written by the late great Dave McGowan. I strongly recommend you read it, perhaps before anything else because it's such an informative, accessible and amusing read and makes a solid foundation for everything else.

https://centerforaninformedamerica.com/moondoggie/

Expand full comment

or just maybe its because the USA never actually did it, that its all bullshit

https://bilbobitch.substack.com/p/russian-space-boss-says-usa-never

I trust the Russian NASA equiv head myself the Russians are 100x smarter, all of NASA post 1950's was 100% operation-paperclip homo-nazi cucks brought to USA post WW2, they ran NASA as a 'club' study the history of how "James Webb" (NAZI) convinced JFK in 1961 to take a man to the moon, and then by 1963 JFK realized he had been lied to and tried to cancel the 'moon program' and the NAZIS killed him;

Expand full comment

“Odysseus is upright and starting to send data.” The company said it is working on bringing the spacecraft’s first images from the moon’s surface to Earth.

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/02/22/science/nasa-moon-landing-odysseus

So its up right? eh? could have broken its legs this is meaningless

The recent japan failed moon-landing, one of the engines fell-off during descent, and it landed upside down; So THEIR point here is most likely and engine failed but it landed right side up;

When your hurtling towards impact, my guess is they put ballast in the craft such that it tended to land right-side up, after the recent Japan failure

Sending home radio is all good, but if the solar-panels go broken off, then the COMM home will not last long, unless it has nuclear fuel batterys

***

Sending data, ET call home, ET call home, help me mommy help me

Expand full comment

If it slammed down hard an broke its legs that means all the robotic equipment that drops out the bottom on ramps doesn't come out ever;

It's basically a radio beacon until the batterys die, & the solar panels fail; They do have flexible solar panels, but in lunar nights at -250C I don't see how they will hold up, there is no winds;

But this isn't the first lunar beacon on the moon the Russians 'successfully' landed one in 1959 with vacuum tubes;

Expand full comment

I'm sure the Nasa nazis are having a fun time playing another round of golf up there.

Expand full comment

Can you imagine how many millions of USD it cost to put those golf clubs on the moon? If it were true that it was even ever 'staged' on the moon, logic indicates that the dune-buggy, golf-clubs, photo-equipment ... could all not been kept in a the lunar-lander that barely had enough space for two astronauts; Then there is the flimsy 'ladder' where was that kept? Strapped to the side of the lander?

All people who have seen the lunar-lander at the Smithsonia agree it looks like coat-hangers, cardboard, covered in gold-foil;

Expand full comment

Truly amazing....people will pay $15 to see a crappy horror movie, what's $15 million more, eh?

Expand full comment

From the Holy Bible, Revised Standard Version (RSV),

published in 1952:

Genesis 1:6-8

[6]And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters. [7]And God made the firmament and separated the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament. And it was so. [8]And God called the firmament Heaven.

Newer bibles, such as the Good News Bible eliminate all words referring to water. Ther're likely many other translations that do the same thing.

Are we being lied to about EVERYTHING?

Elon Musk said the odds we aren't in a simulation are 1 in a billion.

There's a dude on YT who says the same thing. He says we live under a vapor canopy. Interesting how that agrees perfectly with the Bible. He takes nothing off of the internet. He's got hundreds of old books that he's read. Everything he talks about comes from old books.

Archaix on YouTube. He's got his own website, but I like watching on YT better.

Expand full comment

Got one of his books ordered.

Expand full comment