The question is of prime importance, since either figure for the neutral point gives very different gravities for the Moon, and consequently, very different trajectories for any craft going there, and, more importantly, very different fuel and thrust requirements for any rocket-powered craft lifting off from the lunar surface, such as the LEM (Lunar Excursion Module). Obviously, this also raises a significant set of questions. “Is it not interesting,” Bennett and Percy ask, “that no sources agree on the exact distance of the Moon’s orbital path?”173 Moreover, in order to trajectory any craft to the Moon, both NASA and the Soviets would have had to know this average distance “to the last inch,’. So why is it so difficult for NASA to confirm some set figure? “Why is the Earth/Moon centre-to-centre distance missing from the published Apollo information? Where one can find the craft’s trajectory, the Earth/Moon distance is often missing or vague. Where one can locate the Earth/Moon distance, the craft’s trajectory is often missing or vague.”174 To confound matters even further, “space experts at NASA or elsewhere, do not state whether they are using planetary surface-to-surface or centre-to-centre measurements. Nor do they always state whether they are using nautical miles or statute miles. Nor do they stick to any one system.”175 In short, “the only consistency in the Earth/Moon measurement scenario is the inconsistency of the data emanating from official sources.”176
Percy and Bennett’s way out of this impasse is to posit that the 23,900 mile figure – the Newtonian figure – is correct, and that the figure revealed by Von Braun to Time magazine is the “experienced” neutral point. Their reasons for doing so are plain:
NASA and the Soviets used the Moon’s 1/6G as part of the calculations for their successful slingshot manoeuvres around the Moon and also for the calculations relating to energy requirements for their crash lander and soft lander probes, including those that actually returned samples to the then Soviet Union. If the evaluation of the lunar gravity had been incorrect, then surely none of these manoeuvres would have been successful.177
But what if the reverse was true?
It hardly stands to reason that Von Braun was “resigned” from NASA for having made a whopping mistake in his interview to Time. Nor does it stand to reason that he was “resigned” from NASA for having deliberately lied to Time. The only scenario that makes sense is that he was forced to resign because he revealed something that he should not have.
If one assumes that the 43,495 mile neutral point was accurate and not merely an “experienced” neutral point as Bennett and Percy would have it, then this raises a number of significant points:
1. This neutral point calculation was clearly made much earlier in both the Soviet and American space programs than it was publicly revealed by Von Braun. If, as Bennett and Percy state, the Newtonian figure had been used for early probes, these would have either crashed into the Moon or careened off into space. Telemetry data would have eventually given scientists a correct neutral point calculation.
2. But this raises a new question. For the above scenario to have occurred, then probes would have had to have been launched to the Moon much earlier than the public record shows. The question thus is, when was the 43,495 mile neutral point figure actually known, and who discovered it?
3. The Time magazine neutral point also raises another signal difficulty, and that is that with a neutral point of 43,495 miles, the gravity of the Moon would be a whopping 60% that of the Earth!178 As Bennett and Percy rightly point out, this dramatically increases the energy, and hence the fuel, requirements for any craft landing on the Moon’s surface and subsequently taking off again from it.
4. This in turn raises a significant question regarding the LEM (Lunar Excursion Module) of the Apollo missions, the craft that actually landed on and then blasted off from the surface of the Moon. Many researchers have pointed out that the LEM has little blast signature from a rocket when it is taking off from the Moon to return the astronauts to the command module. This, so many say, is evidence of a hoaxed Moon shot. I do not believe this explanation to be plausible or credible. For one thing, a rocket exhaust in a vacuum leaves little visible plume. But what the lack of blast signature may also indicate, I believe, is that the rocket was not the primary lift component of the LEM. In other words, if – and it is a very considerable if - the gravity of the Moon is considerably higher than the public has been told, then this would account not only for the unusually “heavy” movements of the astronauts while on the Moon, but also would tend to indicate that the primary lift component of the LEM was not a chemical rocket at all, but another form of technology altogether. And that means a secret technology, and a significant aspect of the space program that is also secret,
In other words, Von Braun had let something slip, something whose significance, if followed through to its logical conclusion, pointed not so much to the Apollo missions as having been hoaxed, but as having occurred by means of a science and technology vastly different from the public version.
Von Braun’s remark plus the lack of much of a rocket blast from the LEMs when lifting off from the Moon may indicate the existence of an off the books planetary science – the Moon’s actual versus its publicly-stated gravity – and an off the books technology.
B. Conclusions and Speculations
A glance at the basic features of the several versions of the Two Space Programs Hypothesis is now in order:
1. The Torbitt Version has the following features:
(a) A worldwide network of dummy corporations exists to further and protect big oil interests. These entities are a literal “Murder Incorporated” since they are not above using assassination and other illegal methods to protect their interests;
(b) This network is intertwined with a network of Eastern European émigré communities, which are in turn mostly the creatures of German military intelligence on the Eastern Front during World War Two, and were thus directly answerable to General Reinhard Gehlen and possibly his successors;
(c) These business and émigré networks are intertwined with the American intelligence community via the FBI, CIA, and NASA security via the organization known as the Defense Industrial Security Command (DISC) under the direction of Werner Von Braun;
(d) By implicating Von Braun, the Torbitt Document implicates the wider Nazi connections associated with the Gehlenorg and with Operation Paperclip, though the motivations for Nazi involvement in the Kennedy assassination are never clearly spelled out. One is left to surmise that at some level the policies of the Kennedy Administration threatened some hidden technological and/or policy agenda of the space program.
2. The Hidden Planetary Geology, Climatology, and Archaeology Version:
(a) In any version – the “absurdist” or the more plausible models of Hoagland and others – the common feature is that NASA (and by implication the Soviets) know of artifacts on the Moon and Mars, relics of a long-lost technologically sophisticated civilization;
(b) NASA and associated agencies have suppressed this information, or, when it is already available to the public, has attempted to sway public opinion to the view that such photographic evidence is either a “trick of light and shadow” or artifacts of faulty computer image enhancement and processing;
(c) At the same time, NASA has released deliberately tampered photographs and other data to mask possible artifacts on the Moon and Mars and any evidence that might indicate contemporary life forms on Mars;
(d) NASA further shows repeated evidence of having scheduled launches for significant missions on dates and times that possess astrological and occult significance, and moreover has consistently employed Masonic and other esoteric symbolism in its mission logos. This in turn suggests a hidden space program or agenda is being manipulated and planned around occult lines. It should be stressed that all of the above points are stated only with regard to the American space program, and are not made of the Soviet space program.179
3. Jim Keith’s Casebook on Alternative Three Version has the following c
haracteristics:
(a) The actual television “documentary” and the book by the same name, Alternative 3, are elaborate pranks and hoaxes;
(b) Nonetheless, the broad outlines of the scenario probably contain some truths;
(c) The USA and USSR have conducted a highly secret joint space program coordinated by some unknown entity;
(d) The USA’s intelligence community was deeply penetrated in a classic “Trojan Horse” operation by General Gehlen’s Fremde Heere Ost, subsequently known as the Gehlenorg, under the guise of “fighting Communism”; the Gehlenorg maintained extensive human intelligence networks in Eastern Europe, and its analyses became the basis for America’s postwar assessments of Soviet military strength, doctrines, and intentions;
(e) Similarly, the American space program was deeply penetrated by Nazi scientists brought into it under the aegis of Operation Paperclip;
(f) Finally, a number of mysterious deaths and disappearances of physicists, computer scientists, and other technicians of benefit to the American SDI program began to occur, which Keith clearly attributes to one of two sources: the Russians, anxious to prevent the obsolescence of their nuclear arsenal, or to an unknown independent entity whose technology and interests would be threatened by SDI. In the context of the overall argument of his book, it seems clear that Keith had in mind that this entity had some ties to the postwar “Nazi International.”
4. The William Lyne Version:
For our purposes, Lyne’s version of the Two Space Programs Hypothesis is significant for three reasons:
(a) Lyne deliberately connects the covert suppression of alternative physics and its secret development to Nikola Tesla whose ideas, he maintains, were subsequently taken up by the Nazis, expanded upon, and developed. In Lyne’s view, the secret suppression and development of this technology is directly linked to facets of Nazi ideology that favor “corporate fascism”;
(b) In Lyne’s view, this covert development of “Tesla technology” concerns mostly the development of new energy and propulsion sources and technologies that make the “public consumption” technology of space exploration by chemical rockets entirely obsolete;
(c) This covert “corporate-fascist” development of alternative technology was begun by the Nazis before the war and continued by them – under various corporate and U.S. Government agency sponsors – after the war.
5. The Jan Van Helsing Version contains perhaps the most interesting – if unsubstantiated – features:
(a) German research into exotic physics and propulsion systems began long before World War Two under the direct inspiration and auspices of various secret societies;
(b) These societies in turn held doctrines that were later to become part of the ideology and belief system of the Nazi Party, among them the doctrine of racial purity, and the extraterrestrial origin of the “Aryan” race;
(c) Similarly, these societies maintained that this race and its high culture had “sunk” or disappeared beneath the earth in vast subterranean cities under the poles and the Himalayas;
(d) These societies in turn helped midwife the Nazi Party into existence, and their most hidden doctrines – The “Black Stone” and the “Black Sun” – became the hidden doctrines of the upper echelon of the SS, which also continued their research into exotic physics.
6. The Dark Moon Version:
The Dark Moon version is in many ways the most subtle of the versions, with the exception of Richard Hoagland’s, for authors Mary Bennet and David Percy are far from maintaining that there were no Apollo moon landings. They question, rather, the details of the record and the technological and political implications that those details seem to suggest:
(a) Central to one of their arguments is the Neutral Point Discrepancy between the Earth and the Moon. As has been seen, Bennett and Percy use this discrepancy to argue – in my opinion erroneously – for an “alternative physics”. While the Neutral Point Discrepancy does point in that direction, I believe that it may be taken as a significant indicator that what Von Braun let slip in his Time magazine interview was in fact a piece of information that implied the existence of a very advanced technology of propulsion in the LEM (Lunar Excursion Module) in addition to – or perhaps in place of – its conventional rockets. The existence of such a technology points to the existence of a covert space program;
(b) In Bennett and Percy’s version, the two space programs of the USA and USSR in fact represent the public and covert aspects, respectively, of one program being coordinated and manipulated behind the “public consumption events” of the Cold War. This of course implies some entity or agency of coordination existing both within the Soviet Union and the United States;
(c) In their version this coordination was planned during World War Two, implying that the Nazis and their space scientists were somehow linked to, or were identical to, the hidden agency coordinating the Two Space Programs after World War Two and during the Cold War.
7. Combining The Versions:
If one now combines the common features of these various versions of the Two Space Programs Hypothesis a rather interesting picture begins to emerge.
(a) Two of the versions – Lyne’s and “van Helsing’s” – maintain that the origin of the Two Space Programs occurred before the war, and that both of them occurred in conjunction with independent entities conducting exotic research;
(b) Two of the versions – Hoagland’s and “Van Helsing’s” (!) – maintain that some aspect of the hidden program and agenda is dominated by occult and esoteric themes;
(c) Two of the versions – Jim Keith’s and “William Torbitt’s” – connect this hidden space program to a carefully hidden and extensive Nazi network of intelligence agents and scientists, and imply a “Trojan Horse” deep penetration of the postwar American intelligence, military-industrial, and aerospace communities;
(d) All of the versions either explicitly or implicitly imply the existence of an off-the-books development of a new technology and an underlying framework in a theoretical physics that is very different from that found in texts “for public consumption;”
(e) One version – Lyne’s – explicitly offers a “hidden history” of physics to buttress its claims, offering an interpretation of some of Tesla’s late work;
(f) One version – Hoagland’s – also explicitly states that there is a new type of “hyperdimensional physics” connected with the discovery of artifacts on Mars;
(g) One version – Bennett and Percy’s – explicitly states that there was a covert element of cooperation between the USA and USSR in early space exploration, though it does not clearly name the entity for coordinating such cooperation;
(h) One version - again Bennett and Percy’s – also suggests an element of suppressed physics and planetary mechanics by exploring the problems surrounding the Earth/Moon system’s Neutral Point Discrepancy, and this implies the possibility that an alternative and secret propulsion technology may have existed in the L.E.M.(Lunar Excursion Module).
Viewed in this way it is clear that no matter how one approaches the data, there does appear to be a solid case that much more was and is afoot in the American and Russian space programs than has been publicly revealed.
Additionally, it seems clear that at least some of this hidden component involves the planetary physics that has been carefully hidden from the public, or, when that fails, the data so hopelessly obfuscated that any mathematical or physical calculation becomes problematic, since it is dependent on the already obfuscated data released by the space agencies.
This also implies the prospect that at some level there may exist a hidden technology at work. The television footage of the LEM takeoffs from the Moon, which this author believes to be genuine and not hoaxed, suggest one of two things: first, the standard explanation: a rocket lift-off from a low gravity surface, with a barely visible flame plume because of the vacuum. Or it may represent the possibility of the existence of an exotic propulsion technology. The relative lack
of an exhaust plume, plus the almost steady rate of ascent might point to the existence of a very different means of getting off the moon than we have been told.
8. Possible Entities and Requisites for Coordination
This picture raises yet another significant question: What entity or entities would be capable of coordinating such a massive venture and such an equally massive “public relations” campaign, including the suppression of alternative science and technologies and their covert development? If one excluded a high-level and very top secret diplomatic collusion between the United States and the Soviet Union at least in the version of Bennett and Percy, then that still would not explain the other versions of the Hypothesis, those of Hoagland, Lyne, or those who maintain NASA has suppressed significant facts about planetary geography.
So, if one views these various versions as somehow related, as disparate glimpses of the same two-track space program, again, what entity could possibly coordinate it all?
To answer that question, one must assume that such an entity have certain features:
1. Adequate financial power and backing;
2. An international base and extension both inside the West and the Soviet bloc;
3. Adequate penetration at various decision-making levels in the USA’s and USSR’s space programs (and anyone else’s that might come along);
4. An ideological and heavy financial commitment to the development of off-the-books technologies;
5. A thorough knowledge of the occult, ceremonial magic, and astrology, and the demonstrated willingness to schedule space missions according to those occult parameters;
SS Brotherhood of the Bell: The Nazis’ Incredible Secret Technology Page 15
