Nostradamus and the Moon landing hoax

Nostradamus you can always decrypt ex post. Every year a new author appears on the book market who assures that he would have found the key to the understanding of Nostradamus and the guessing game continues. No offence OP just what I experience year for year.

StefanParlow
Nostradamus you can always decrypt ex post. Every year a new author appears on the book market who assures that he would have found the key to the understanding of Nostradamus and the guessing game continues. No offence OP just what I experience year for year.

I know what you mean, and that's exactly the way I saw it, too ......until recently.

The 4 moon hoax quatrains have changed my view on Nostradamus, at least on this specific case..I don't know if the rest of his work holds up, or if it's just crap. I only know that 4 quatrains he wrote DO hold up,

Several people have tried to poke holes in my interpretation of the 4 quatrains, but nothing has countered it, to this point.

After that failed, they say - as you do - that any quatrain can be interpreted to mean anything you want it to mean, because the quatrains are so vague, it's very easy to interpret them...

So I then challenged them to prove that claim, by using the same 4 quatrains.

If you'd like to try, then please go right ahead.

You could be the first one to do it, since nobody else has yet..

reply to post by allthings2allmen


You probably wouldn't like it - I'd fall asleep.

Well at least it'd give you something to do other than trolling for your cult.

Great answer when you've got nothing to counter my argument with, though!

looks like you can't recall WHY you were post-banned in the all too recent past. Pity. Those incapable of learning from their mistakes are doomed to repeat them. Doing the same thing repeatedly and expecting different results is the very definition of insanity.

Are you trying to get banned so that you don't have to respond to the hard questions?

To the readership at large: please don't alert on Siggy's post. It should stand forever as a monument to his sheer inability to respond to the comments I made concerning his claim to messiahship. Here it is again, for his "posterity":

allthings2allmen
reply to post by nenothtu

 

Nanothu. # you and the horse you rode in on.

Aleister

so please don't answer the negative stuff but just ignore it and post good data and commentary. Thanks.

Here's the thing, Aleister - he can't answer the "negative" stuff - i.e. the hard questions, and proofs that he's trolling for cult worshipers for himself. That's WHY he hasn't got any better answers or comments.

As I'm sure he'll tell you himself, "flesh" resorts to false offense, indignity, and anger when it's got no "spirit".

Amirite, Siggy?

Aleister
POST REMOVED BY STAFF

Yes I have been accused of attacking a poster - “I shouldn’t attack the Messenger, only the Message” when I only ever asked some simple questions of a poster who for obvious reasons didn’t want to answer, I was attacked and reported to a mod by another poster (which was quite interesting in itself) the outcome was that we both received a warning. So you see it’s my understanding some posters on here use this ATS policy as a form of manipulation to avoid answering questions. I took that as a strong indication I hit a nerve somewhere.

No, I totally disagree with your comments that Siggy can claim he’s mother goose as long as he brings us some good ideas. People DO have the right to question posters BS if that’s what they perceive it as. After all is not ATS about denying ignorance.

If Siggy wants to come on here and proclaim to be Sigmund Ivarsson then he has to PROVE IT. And I’m afraid photos just don’t prove anything for me. In this day and age anyone can lift photos off the internet and pretend to be that person, can produce falsified documents etc. it’s called identity theft. If I thing something is not right here, I will always voice my opinion, and I let ATS be the judge of that and NOT YOU or anyone else.

Re your comments to Siggy “please don’t answer the negative stuff”. If Siggy’s got nothing to hide then why shouldn’t he answer people’s comments, especially more so “the negative stuff”.

Siggy the ‘Prince of Peace’ – a ‘World Peace Diplomat’ – I think not. I suppose we will all have to wait and see what Siggy brings to the ATS table as to his IDEAS on the Jewish temple and his IDEAS of a free energy water project.

My apologies if I hurt anyone's feelings or if it looks like I'm calling them names. I don't know allthings outside of this site, or his reputation outside of it. I just know he brought a couple of interesting threads and ideas here, with unique slants on old and major problems. But he's got a mouth on him, doesn't he! That's why I was asking him to maybe tone it down, so he doesn't get banned. I don't think he has to defend himself from each and every question, and the tone of some of those questions seems a little rough, don't you think?, so he seems to ignore them all - which is his prerogative here.

There is likely nobody on ATS who will become follower of anyone, or a fanboy of a cult leader. I only know allthings as a guy posting on ATS, and he is both entertaining and sometimes interesting. And he has a scribe, which is a hoot. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

Originally Posted by ALEISTER: I don't think he (Siggy) has to defend himself from each and every question, and the tone of some of those questions seems a little rough, don't you think?, so he seems to ignore them all - which is his prerogative here.

CHIRAM: Is sounds very much like your defending Allthings2allmen – let him defend himself IF he can, and the more so when he makes outrageous and nonsense claims about being the Prophet Elijah.

Originally Posted by ALEISTER: I only know allthings as a guy posting on ATS, and he is both entertaining and sometimes interesting. And he has a scribe, which is a hoot. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

CHIRAM: Well maybe you should get a load of this on a link Here:, found on a Japanese website. However I can’t comment on its authenticity.

Members are reminded to discuss the topic and not each other:

You are responsible for your own posts.

We expect civility and decorum within all topics.

--Off Topic, One Liners and General Back Scratching Posts--

An update -

I had interpreted one of the quatrains in which Apollo (the 'Sun') is eclipsed by Mercury, and is placed "only second in the heavens/skies".

It was noted elsewhere that Gemini flew to a higher altitude than Mercury did. So it would be Gemini placed second, and Apollo would be placed third.

But I realized -if Apollo is "only" placed second...it's because Apollo actually flew - get this - BELOW Gemini!!

The quatrains work even better than before, thanks to the Apollo-ites!

I'd like to add a note..

Nostradamus said..

4 - 29
The Sun hidden eclipsed by Mercury
Will be placed only second in the sky:
"Of Vulcan Hermes will be made into food,"
"The Sun will be seen pure, glowing red and golden."

So as I said, the "Sun" is Apollo, the Greek Sun god.

Apollo (the Sun) is hidden, eclipsed by Mercury. Of course, the planet Mercury is too far away to hide the Sun from our view in an eclipse, unlike our much-closer Moon.

Nostradamus is referring to the Mercury space capsule. It went into a sub-orbital flight. Apollo went into low-Earth orbit, which is slightly higher than sub-orbit. Hence, the Apollo capsule is "hidden" from view, "eclipsed" by the Mercury capsule.


We know that Apollo (as the Sun) and Mercury are two of the first three NASA manned space missions, with Gemini being the other one.

So Nostradamus has correctly named two of our first three manned spacecraft.

How can it be explained by luck, then...

He said these two objects - Apollo (the Sun) and Mercury are in the heavens. We know they cannot be the real Sun and planet Mercury, as well.

What else, then? Only the two spacecraft fit.

He would have no reason to call two other objects in the heavens as the 'Sun' and 'Mercury'.

How did he predict two spacecraft by name, when manned flight didn't even exist for another 400 years??

There were countless names to choose from. But let's say he decided that they might name two spacecraft that don't exist for another 400 years, for objects named within our solar system.

No reason he would do that, but let's go with it anyway...

The known objects of his day were the Sun, the Moon, Mercury, Earth, Mars, Venus, Saturn, and Jupiter, along with some of its moons.

Let's take Earth out, and all the moons too. That leaves us with the Sun, Mercury, Mars, Venus, Saturn, and Jupiter.

This is basically like someone comes to Nostradamus, and says that we will name two manned spacecraft as two of these six names, around 400 years from now, and he wants Nostradamus to try and guess which two names they will use for the two spacecraft nobody realizes we will have by that time.

A 1 in 6 pick gives us odds of 0.1666666%
He then has a 1 in 5 chance for the second name. 1 in 5 gives us 0.2% odds

Then, we multiply the two percentages, giving Nostradamus a 0.0333% chance of correctly naming both objects.

He does


I don't even have to get into the odds to also predict the primary number, 11, in connection to Apollo, or that he also connects Apollo, and 11, to attempting to reach the moon, in the next quatrain.

Another point on this quatrain...

4 - 29
The Sun hidden eclipsed by Mercury
Will be placed only second in the sky:
"Of Vulcan Hermes will be made into food,"
"The Sun will be seen pure, glowing red and golden."

Apollo (the Sun) is placed only second in the sky".

Apollo is "eclipsed by Mercury". So Mercury is below Apollo, and is 'first' in the sky.

That means Gemini flew higher than Apollo. Gemini is 'third' in the sky.


We know the altitudes of Mercury and Gemini...

Mercury flew a sub-orbital flight, with an apogee altitude of 189-191 km

Gemini flew in LEO, with an apogee altitude of 1,369 km (Gemini XI).


That puts the Apollo flights at a minmum altitude of 192 km, and a maximum altitude of 1,368 km.

An Apollo spacecraft flew to an altitude of 229.4 km during the Apollo-Soyuz mission.

This fits the quatrain, perfectly.

originally posted by: zuimon
reply to post by turbonium

 

turbonium, I'm sorry your thread seems to have gone off in other directions rather than staying focused on you. I loved your interpretation of those quatrains. I marvel at people such as yourself who can work through it all and come up with such radical outcomes, all of which seem very plausible indeed. Have you 'cracked' any other quatrains? I'd like to read more of your work. And how do you do it - research it all?

I think i owe you an apology, first of all. I didn't see this post until now, and assumed you were replying to me in your following post, which I did see.

I am very sorry for making such a stupid mistake.

Now to your post...

I'm pleased to know that you enjoyed my interpretations.

I think it could have been interpreted the same way by anyone else - with an open mind, and decent knowledge of the moon landings from the hoax position.

For me to come across 3 consecutive quatrains on this, being on the same issue... was pure luck, as well.

I came to the realization that Nostradamus was not a fake, or a charlatan....because of these amazing quatrains. The detail in each line, interconnecting quatrains, which mesh together as one, single masterwork.

I've been asked if I've interpreted any other quatrains he wrote, about other events. I have not.

..

I've never seen any quatrains which match up so perfectly, for any other event.

This baffles me, to no end.

On the one hand, it doesn't make sense he would write nothing close to these 4 quatrains - in such excellence, in such detail, or even in sequential order, for any other events.

But on the other hand, if he did write others which are equal in quality to the 4 quatrains, it would mean centuries of studies have failed to notice any of them.

Either way, it seems quite odd.

If I've interpreted the quatrains correctly, then the Apollo moon landing hoax will be 'discovered', in the year 2255.

And, the discovery of it being a hoax will cause a great scandal.

Somehow, the entire hoax, and the subsequent scandal it causes, are intrinsically linked to the death of Gus Grissom.


I think the above points may also hold clues, to exactly how it will come to be known to the entire world as a hoax..

"the secret will be discovered" - I once thought the hoax would most likely come out through our progress in specific technologies related to the moon landings. For example, if we develop telescopes capable of identifying any objects left at landing sites, in such great detail, and then finding out no landing sites exist, we'd have no doubt about the fact we did NOT land a man on the moon.

But that would not explain Grissom. I'm very puzzled about how he fits into all this..


Maybe Grissom left evidence of the hoax, which will come to light, one day?...

a reply to: turbonium1

2255 ?

If there is a hoax in the moon landing, that date seems a bit unrealistic for disclosure. I figure...the more time passes by the less chance something will be discovered. Whitnesses die...evidence deteriorates.

Are we closer today to unraveling the JFK thing ? I dont see it. The trail gets colder by the minute...

originally posted by: MarioOnTheFly
a reply to: turbonium1

2255 ?

If there is a hoax in the moon landing, that date seems a bit unrealistic for disclosure. I figure...the more time passes by the less chance something will be discovered. Whitnesses die...evidence deteriorates.

Are we closer today to unraveling the JFK thing ? I dont see it. The trail gets colder by the minute...

The numbers of all 4 moon hoax quatrains add up to 2255, so that's how I got it. I'm only guessing, of course, but it would fit nicely within the timeline, at least.

I agree that the JFK matter has less and less chance of ever being revealed, as time passes, for the reasons you've mentioned.

But the moon hoax is just the opposite, as their landing sites (supposedly) would still remain (or nearly be) intact, on the lunar surface. Advanced technology could eventually prove it beyond doubt, one way or another, in the future.

Who knows?

a reply to: turbonium1

Advanced technology could eventually prove it beyond doubt

It certainly would...but..2255 - 2015 equals 240 years....

Maybe I just watched too many star trek episodes...but I would hope our technology would reach that capability a bit sooner.