ep110-NASA/Space fakery discussion

likes this


Showtime: Sunday, June 1, 2014 6am EDT

Guests: Clark, Simon Shack, Hoi Polloi


ISS SWIMMING POOL: cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php?… SHUTTLE (WONDERBOLT ETC..): cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php?…
BUGS BATS AND BIRDS: cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php?…
SPACE DEBRIS > Australian $150-million research centre: cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php?…


NOTICE: In December of 2008 René passed away, or more accurately left this place on his own terms. His works are still available through this site, which has been largely left as it was originally created by René. The items listed are the remaining stock the author had on hand, and all orders are filled with original, authentic Ralph René publications. This stock can be considered a true rarity, as it represents the last of the remaining original works of Ralph René. Please see the materials available page for pricing.

* * *

I guess that’s why the call them software ‘bugs’ ? :P Seriously now – the folks behind this crap must have severely fried minds.
I wish America will soon wake up and stop this ongoing sham.



Upon completion of this chapter you will be able to describe basic ingredients of spacecraft navigation including spacecraft velocity and distance measurement, angular measurement, and how orbit determination is approached. You will be able to describe spacecraft trajectory correction maneuvers and orbit trim maneuvers. You will be able to recognize four distinct Deep Space Network data types used in navigation.
* * *


The process of orbit determination is fairly taken for granted today. During the effort to launch America’s first artificial Earth satellites, the JPL craft Explorers 1 and 2, a room-sized IBM computer was employed to figure a new satellite’s trajectory using Doppler data acquired from Cape Canaveral and a few other tracking sites. The late Caltech physics professor Richard Feynman was asked to come to the Lab and assist with difficulties encountered in processing the data. He accomplished all of the calculations by hand, revealing the fact that Explorer 2 had failed to achieve orbit and had come down in the Atlantic ocean. The IBM mainframe was eventually coaxed to reach the same result, hours after Professor Feynman had departed for the weekend.

More on this story in Genius: The Life and Science
of Richard Feynman
by James Gleick.

No tags for this post.

13 thoughts on “ep110-NASA/Space fakery discussion

  1. Carole Thomas

    I just came across a British TV special from 2005 called Space Cadets showing the hoodwinking of a group of reality show contestants over a period of 10 days. The candidates basically believe they have been chosen to be the first British Space tourists and we follow their progress from “Space Camp in Russia” to “low-Earth orbit”, all simulated with the help of actors, Hollywood prop makers and sound artists. The 10 episodes are all available on You Tube, see link below. This is a description of the series from Wikipedia.

    “The series described itself as the most elaborate hoax perpetrated in television history. The title is a comical reference to the slang phrase, which is used to describe vacuous, gullible fools, untethered to reality (compare airhead).It was not clear if the contestants were aware of the show’s title, although a whiteboard in the ‘barracks’ had “Space Cadettes” written on it during one of the parties organised in the facility.

    A group of twelve contestants (who answered an advert looking for “thrill seekers”) were selected to become the first British televised space tourists, including going to Russia to train as cosmonauts at the “Space Tourist Agency of Russia” (STAR) military base, with the series culminating in a group of four embarking on a five-day space mission in low Earth orbit. The show and space mission contained aspects of Reality TV, including hidden cameras, soundproofed ‘video diary’ rooms and group dormitories.

    However, the show was in fact an elaborate practical joke, described by Commissioning Editor Angela Jain as “Candid Cameralive in space” and claimed by Channel 4 to have cost roughly £5million. Unknown to the “space cadets”, they were not in Russia at all, but at Bentwaters Parks (formerly RAF Bentwaters, a USAF airfield from 1951 to 1993) in Suffolk staffed by costumed actors, and the “space trip” was entirely fake, complete with a wooden “shuttle” and actor “pilots”. Indeed, during the shooting of Space Cadets, smokers amongst the production crew were given Russian cigarettes to smoke in case any of the cadets discovered the butts. The production crew went so far as to replace lightswitches and electrical outlets in the barracks with Russian standard. In addition, three of the Cadets were actors, included to misdirect any suspicious Cadets and to help reinforce the illusion.


    Despite the extremely irritating host, I recommend watching the series. It offers a lot of insights into:

    Wide ranges of suggestibility among potential candidates

    The power of group dynamics and convincing props

    Duping delight ( the face of the Mole during some of the more ludicrous scenes)

    The elaborate planning that goes into such a “magic trick”. It apparently cost Channel 4 over £5 million to pull it off.

    Interestingly the “actor”, Charlie Skelton, playing the part of one of the Space Cadets is now a journalist with the Guardian and covers the Bilderberg meetings.


    H/t Tigerdan – a flat earther who has an interesting theory about the ISS( which I don’t subscribe to) – SPOILER – even the astronauts are being hoaxed)


  2. Carole Thomas

    It’s 1947.
    Meet the first moon men from High Wycombe:-)
    “Tomorrow trips to the moon may be an everyday thing … And here’s what you’ll wear”

    High Wycombe, Buckinghamshire.

    Two scientists have designed a rocket they believe will get them to the moon. They are Mr Ross and Mr Smith. Various C/Us of the scientists at the drawing board and C/Us of their drawings of spaceships, a landing base and space suits. Their drawings of space suited men look very science fiction.

    They haven’t got the money to put their plans into action alas!

  3. elbuggo

    Paul Clark recently uploaded a fairly praised video on the ISS hoax called Bogus Reentry Vehicles (part 1 of 2)

    Part 2 is due in about 2 week and should last about 1.5h.

    He has an interesting blog series here on Space reentry vehicles: planetaryvision.blogspot.com.a…

  4. psyopticon

    This is one of my favourite episodes to date! Not sure why, because that NA$A stooge was, by design, a plonker. Yet it became all the more entertaining with SimonShack and HoiPolloi restoring sanity without resorting to insults.

  5. Henkus

    This broadcast was the reason i had to join this community.
    I really enjoy listening to you guys because it makes me feel i am not crazy.

    Keep up the good work!

  6. UNreal

    Why did the WTC towers collapse in in 9 & 11 seconds,,,??

    As much one would acknowledge the astounding perseverance in numerology from the different PsyOps departments, i personally question the cleverness & reasons behind it…

    what seems incredible to us is the mere fact that the same numbers and letters always seem to pop up in events we question the reality behind. If we turn the question around would we not have quite a good answer ?

    if we were to decide the duration of a Psy-Op or stage a false event, what would we come up with ?
    Imo, it would be quite a lot more work to actually find a valid and “real” number, because there would be no “real” number or date,,, not an easy task,,,

    on the other hand, if we ourself had already done a successful staged event on a particular date, this might establish a precedent of value,, and a shortcut,, when you then go on to the next fictitious event, why start from scratch ? you would prefer to build on your previous success just as a natural safeguard for continuos success, making some sense out of nonsense…
    it’s easier and quicker; not more devious/clever and time-consuming.

    if we add the fact that there is a long history of these events, that probably started with manipulation of typical societal highlights or celebrations where crowds were at the most affluent, like solstices etc.. this is probably why even today many events happen on various religious celebrations, or just close to these.

    so, i guess our Psy-Operators just stick with their own “histogram” and use dates out of convenience & habit moreso than by their superior intellect, although they surely added this later as to boost their own self-esteem and pride ?

  7. Carole Thomas

    To get us in the mood for the show, here’s a short excerpt from Friz Lang’s 1929 epic – “Frau im Mond” released in the UK. as ” Woman in the Moon”, and in the USA as ” Rocket to the Moon”.


    After his stunning success with Metropolis, German studio Ufa gave director Fritz Lang free rein on his next project. Excited by the idea of rockets and spaceflight (hugely popular in Germany at the time) he decided to make a film about a rocket expedition to the Moon. Lang insisted on such technical accuracy that, even though it’s a silent film made in 1929, Frau im Mond has uncanny similarities to the Apollo program three decades later. Just witness the moment where a giant three-stage rocket is assembled in a cavernous building, then trundled to the launch pad by means of a huge transport platform down a dual-tracked road. Several cliches seen in the sci-fi movies of the 1950’s and onwards also originated with this film, such as the portrayal of the crushing pressures of acceleration (close-ups of dials and straining facial expressions), the comedy of trying to eat and drink while weightless, and a crewmember making a Heroic Sacrifice so the others will have enough oxygen to survive. It was also largely responsible for changing the popular portrayal of a spacecraft from Jules Verne Steam Punk to SciFi Golden Age Retro Rocket.
    Frau im Mond had interesting historical consequences. In order to promote the film Lang persuaded his technical advisor, Hermann Oberth, to construct and launch an actual rocket as a publicity stunt! As far as they knew no-one had ever done this, as US scientist Robert Goddard had not publicized his experiments. Unfortunately Oberth, more suited to the quiet world of academia, broke down under the strain and failed to meet the deadline. The resulting publicity however provided the funding for amateur rocket enthusiasts to contine Oberth’s project. This in turn attracted the attention of the German military, who offered the groups’ most promising member — a young Wernher von Braun — a contract to work on ballistic missiles. The rest, as they say, is history

    This film actually invented the countdown, in order to increase the drama of the launch.

    Along with Destination Moon and 2001: A Space Odyssey, this was one of the few sci-fi movies where the creators paid serious attention to their technical advisors — in this case science writer Willy Ley and Romanian rocket scientist Hermann Oberth. So accurate was the film the Gestapo later confiscated the release prints and a large cutaway model of the spacecraft, for fear it would compromise Germany’s secret ballistic rocket program.

    1. xileffilex

      The Woman in the Moon film full version is now available here
      [nice comment by Psyopticon above – I endorse it myself!]

      There are some great comments under this short Frau im Mond clip

      John Boots
      1 year ago in reply to duke6991
      Your countries “achievements” are nothing but spreading death and destruction over the fucking planet and deceiving billions into believing bullshit false flag and psyop “terror” plots. If you had half a brain (and could read) you’d study CLUESFORUM in depth and develop an original thought of your own and not suck on every word of propaganda fed to you all your life (what’s that, about 15 years?)

      John Boots 1 year ago
      That was more realistic than the NA$A fairytale. At least they showed the dust that would have been kicked up on landing.

  8. Banazîr Galbasi

    Here is a question for you all regarding nasa:

    Considering how scuba divers can use a pressure guage to measure just how deep they are below the surface, how does our beloved nasa measure how far they’ve travelled into the vacuum of space? How can they be so sure they are exactly the correct distance from the earth for any given orbital or geosynchronous satellite? What such instrument does nasa rely on for this data in said vacuum? (a tape measure?)

    In star trek they simply enter the coordinates into the enterprise computer and magically the ship makes its way there. It seems somewhere along these lines.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

wp-puzzle.com logo

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.