This came up in the comment thread below, and I am not going to spend much time on it as the commenters have already done a good job for us. In my post on Apollo 1, I mentioned the crew of Challenger 7, the Space Shuttle that blew up in 1986. Clues Forum had done some work on it, and found six of the seven astronauts still alive. I went to that site and grabbed their image of Astronaut Judith Resnik, and Yale Law Professor Judith Resnik.
I didn’t look twice, as at one time I had done facial comparisons of the six, and found them all to align perfectly. I had a post up to that effect, but since it was Clues Forum’s work, took it down so as not to be a piggybacker. I am glad I did.
This post concerns the January 27th, 1967 tragedy that ended the lives of astronauts Gus Grissom, Ed White and Roger Chafee. I emphasize at the beginning that I am not certain this was a fake event, only suspicious. If indeed the deaths were real, it will come off as disrespectful of the families and friends, so I hope passage of 51 years allows me the latitude to write what follows.
I start with the premise that no human has ever walked on the surface of the moon. It is too far away for ordinary rocket technology, burdened as it is with heavy metal contraptions and the need to provide an atmosphere, food and waste facilities for humans on the the long journey. Then there is the trip (to and from) through the Van Allen Belt. In later missions, as if by osmosis, moon buggies appear on the surface. For them to be there, something else had to go – rocket boosters? Toilets? Water?
I remember the date, November 7, 2016 because it was the day before the presidential election. I was driving down into Denver, and turned on the radio. When the other channels are nothing but ads, and it is between 10 A.M. and 1 P.M., I often tune into Rush Limbaugh.
On this particular day, Rush was going on about oddities in the election campaigns. He said the Trump rallies were always full and enthusiastic, while Hillary Clinton’s were not. He went on and on about that and other signs, and I did not know what he was doing or why. Like most people, I assumed Clinton was the anointed one. After all, we had a black president, so it was time for a woman.
If there is one ‘truism’ – something obvious and neither new or interesting – it is that the vast majority of people rely on authority figures in forming their own opinions. What else can we expect when our education system at its core (the tests) punishes students for being wrong. The SAT and ACT regimes are long lists of things to be memorized, statements by authority figures that students must regurgitate to land in a good college. It instills students with fear of being wrong even as mistakes are the best teachers around.
I long ago read a book (I should stop right there) by Edward Bernays called “Propaganda.” I would imagine at a website like this many others have read it as well. It was an interesting book in that Bernays, writing in the 1920s, came right out and said things that were known to be true among insiders, but were rarely spoken outside of the club (the men of his time who managed public opinion). I cite here a passage that appears right at the opening:
Every once in a while I try to explain critical elements of global debt-slavery. It’s not a popular topic, I suppose, because we all — excluding the ruling elite — live the same lie. Democracy. Freedom. Justice. Equality. You get the picture. All giant lies. The following comment over at Moon of Alabama this morning may help bring reality into greater focus for some who either deny, or cannot, for one reason or another, bring themselves to accept what simply is. Thank you “donkeytale.” Enjoy! Continue reading “Smell the Coffee.”→
The “rose” is actually part of the string of Christmas lights that Candice Bergen left strewn about the fence before moving out with Terry Melcher.
I have not let the comment through. If I do, JJ becomes a regular, and I don’t want that. This person seems to be dealing on an intimate level with the Tate Massacre. Such people litter the landscape, and are either clueless or are deliberately casting about seeds of doubt on honest research. In either case, I don’t want him/her coming around. So I am answering here, as the odds are that the email address given with the comment is bogus.
I just got done with an interesting journey this morning and yesterday, fueled by commenters on the post below. I’ll go through the links one by one, and urge you to follow my path for your own entertainment. Otherwise, I will summarize.
440 vs 435: Tyrone took us to this link. His comment was in part
“Separating emotion from critical function is the mandate of all pop culture, corporate division. “
That’s an important insight. I have long avoided advertising in all forms for that very reason, that the object of advertising is to distract us with one message while subtly inserting another. Of course, most often that “other” message is simply “buy this product.” The larger point is, however, that advertising is never straightforward. As one young ad executive told me once in a candid moment, the purpose of advertising is to get us to change our behavior. TV has long been the best medium for dispensing this message and altering our behaviors, as we are in a mild hypnotic state while watching.