NASA Forgot How To Go To The Moon!!!

I will look forward to many more discussion my friend. Good attitude.

Hey NASA, if you are reading this, i have a seriously GOOD, in fact no, BRILLIANT space engine. Once you are up there it is MOST effective and from free energy!!

Hey, send me a u2u...

I will sell it to you but you can review the design for a few hundred thousand dollars OR you will say "AH YEAH!! We had that idea and are using it!"

So perhaps i should patent it first? But her, for a Million Dollars you can patent it yourself. Viewable AFTER payment!

Seriously!

just think what nasa could do with all the money the US have spent "speading peace" in the middle east!!!

just for the record i dont think they ever went to the moon in the first place, i just dont see how they got round the problem of the radiation.

Well maybe... but they could do like ESA, Netherlands and many private companies and just contract the Russians 'to get the job done'

You know all those Progress robot controlled craft that everyone uses? Well here is the Russian Assembly line...



ISS International Space Supercenter



People keep putting the Russians down...

But Robert Bigelow just formed an 'agreement' with defense contractor ATK and ICS Kosmotras at the NEW cosmodrome in Russia...

NASA is not friendly to anyone else wanting access to Space..

Robert uses publicly the acronym NASA=No Access to Space for Americans...

www.kosmotras.ru...

Both Genesis I and Genesis II where launched from ISC Kosmotras Space and Missile Complex, Russian Federation, Province of Orenburg, Dombarovskiy which is actually a Russian ICBM site

You can track the orbits here
www.bigelowaerospace.com...

A few more years and we will see a Hotel in Space Only someone from Vegas could have though of THIS

If you want to keep up with the Russian...

Energia
www.energia.ru...

Sea Launch... Joint Boeing/Energia project
www.boeing.com...

YouTube Link

Of course maybe NASA already considered making a deal with their long time 'partners' the Russians (since WWII )




www.k26.com...


Tell you what... I will put my money on the Russians if I wanted to be sure of getting home from the Noon



Heck even CSI is going to the Russian for the CSI Lunar Express






Take the time to take the tour of the Space Station... it's a little 'tongue in cheek' but filled with info you need to know

www.thelivingmoon.com...

reply to post by zorgon

---

This is all a perfect explanation.
In other words we aren't going anywhere.
Shucks, I always wanted an Illuminati job.
Send me to another planet, cloth me, feed me, rescue me.

Radiation and something that has always vexed me (from a recent Moon
thread post):

video.google.com...

Lunar Landing

00:32 shows landing pad and the probe that touched down first.

I worked at the company that made the probe and micro switch and cables
for the flight computer hook up.

The company advertised, which is dumb for a DOD contract company, that
their product would be the first man made object to touch the Moon.

Well they were told to pull the ad.
I also heard the device was not used.

So is that a fake landing we were shown.
Any survey of landing sites from Illuminati telescopes yet.
Can we ever verify the Lunar Landings.

Yeah because tossing money at terrorists is always such a great way to solve problems...

The same way they get around it today; proper shielding and minimization of exposure. The particle radiation contained in the van allen belts is best blocked by fibrous material similar to cardboard, not lead as some hoax believers would have you believe. Heavy metals react with the particle radiation and generate large amounts of EM backscatter (directly proportional to the atomic number of the metal), requiring the material to be insanely thick to completely stop it. Fibrous materials, like the kind used for insulation in the command module, did not suffer this backscatter effect nearly as much. Furthermore, the astronauts did not stay in the van allen belts for long, they quickly passed through it minimizing their exposure. James Van Allen who predicted the existence of the belts even stated that it would not have been a deadly problem for the apollo missions.

DISGUSTED BEYOND BELIEF

This story is so atrocious..and so flat out disgusting I can just about not believe it.. I mean go with what works OK..at least use a SOVIET rocket or the ESA booster..and lift smaller loads into orbit and then assemble them..OR practice the MARS mission profile by sending the crew return vehicle out ahead..OMG something. I feel like every engineer who works at NASA should be flat out ASHAMED of their lack of foresight and planning. SURELY somebody somewhere has "back of the envelope" solution better than THIS state of affairs...
Progress STOPPED when 40 years ago. I dont want to WASTE ANY MORE MONEY ON THESE CLOWNS..its time for BURT RUTTAN, PAUL ALLAN and ANYBODY else who can think outside of the box to step up.
IF WE WANT TO GO..maybe its time for A TRANSNATIONAL APPROACH
EUROPE JAPAN UK RUSSIA & CANADA...step up and CONTRIBUTE to A BASE
and a program to STAY and EXPLORE give us all a real foothold
What an absolute crock of #%$%$ this state of affairs is.
Sorry I had to sugar coat it..U2U me if you want to know what I really think

CARDBOARD??? Your serious aren't you?

Well it seems NASA FORGOT something else too..

The electromagnetic shielding they had contracted for in 1964

Active Shielding Concepts. for the Ionizing Radiations in Space
GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY
Contract NASw-502 Final Report Rev. 31 Jan. 1964

NASA ARCHIVES

Well just where do you think Roddenberry got his ideas from?

RAISE SHIELDS MR CHEKOV

Maybe they could pay someone to dig through their old PDF archive... I have been finding some neat stuff in there..

Hehehe I'm available

What really gets me is that NASA has taken a new tactic...

Everyone on here that knows me has seen me back John Lear's claim of an atmosphere and dust clouds on the Moon and the issues of gravity...

We have suffered ridicule and abuse presenting evidence to support this..

Well NASA has always had a lunar atmosphere fact sheet (albeit they say it is minimal) but the fact is it does exost. Boston U backs this up as well

NASA published a catalog of TLP's which contain hundreds of reports, many showing clouds and moving clouds obscuring the Moon

Lick Observatory shows one photo where the craters are obscured by dust or cloud Jan 1946...

Okay so let's look at the new NASA position...

IF we are so crazy.. why is NASA planning LADEE a new mission to the Moon to study the ATMOSPHERE?

They are also planning a mission to study the gravity issues

But the best part is this..

MOON STORMS


Add to that their recent explanation of why the Astronauts (and Surveyor) saw sunrise and sunset rays on the Moon... They even sketched them but I cannot for the life of me understand why they did not take a picture... they must have been impressive going by the drawings...



Dusty "twilight rays" sketched by Apollo 17 astronauts in 1972.

NASA calls these MOON FOUNTAINS

We all know that sunset rays are caused by dust etc in the ATMOSPHERE but NASA has come up with a better explanation for these effects (that they conveniently neglected to mention until recently considering they were first recorded by Surveyor 1966-1968)

Rather than say 'atmosphere' they propose 'levitating moon dust' Apparently these dust storms follow the terminator and account for dust 'in the air' that explains what astronomers have been seeing for hundreds of years (NASA catalog records from 1500's )

It also accounts for light seen... because they figure now that these dust storm may cause electric discharges that could harm the astronauts staying on the moon for a longer period

So now NASA at leasts confirms one thing I have been sayng

DUST CLOUDS ON THE MOON

But are they building an excuse why it might be to dangerous to return?



For now I am happy with Sunset Rays and Moon Storms

MOON FOUNTAINS

MOON STORMS

[edit on 3-6-2008 by zorgon]

reply to post by zorgon

---

Dumbest thing i have ever herd. You honestly think they just forgot how do this stuff?

I mean they can land stuff on mars, but yet some how you still think they wont be able to land another human on the moon!

I really don't have a problem with the concept of NASA back engineering this equipment. If there weren't any plans or notes or engineering samples to learn from, why do all the research over again.

Yea,NASAs new 'post shuttle' program f***ing sucks,it looks like they de-evolved.Like I said its all a front anyways.

reply to post by shearder

---

Are you serious,or joking,I ask cause I am versed in astrophysics and am anxious to hear about your engine and its 'free energy' if you would u2u me,I have my own idea for FTL drive.

If CHINA goes to the moon i guess its alright to go to the moon sez who ever on the moon. I can't wait for every one to get into space so NASA can't say the only stuff out here is space debris and swamp gas and what ever happened to the HD pictures of the moon JAPAN took we did'nt see much HHHUUUMMM.

Last flight I took was in Avianca last week. Avianca`s flight magazine is usually quite boring, but somehow they had an article about the "new" space vehicle to go to the moon, I thought for a second that NASA had some new type of craft, but no. It is the same saturn rocket with a lunar module a bit bigger, if I remember correctly it can now carry FOUR astronauts to the moon, now that is what I call technological advancement.

To think that we are mining the moon, and been there for more than forty years, but I guess people are gullible and like to be lied on their faces.

We deserve what we get.

reply to post by TeslaandLyne

---

We don't have any telescopes(at least publicly)that can provide that kind of resolution to actually see the landers on the moon.

reply to post by zorgon

---

On that Russian rocket,is that a shuttle on the bottom,or another booster?

reply to post by jkrog08

---

Yeah it's true. a very simple idea really. May not be useful for high speed flight if high speed "bursts" are required but good for sustained movement and will obviously increase speed. Save them on fuel And no, i am not a crock pot or crack head LOL

It's just an idea and who knows, perhaps they heard of it or tried it but i doubt it.

Just my humble opinion. It seems the US is attempting to move to the newer Euro heavy lifter, and get off Russian reliance. Interesting I read the cosmonauts may get an early ride back home do to the loo issue. I believe it is more or a problem then let on about.

[edit on 6/4/2008 by jpm1602]