NASA Astronaut Admits It Is Not Possible to Land on The Moon


Morgan Reynolds

Isn’t this an amazing admission?  Chemical engineer and NASA’s oldest active astronaut at age 62, Don Petitt says, “I’d go to the moon in a nanosecond. The problem is we don’t have the technology to do that anymore. We used to but we destroyed that technology and it’s a painful process to build it back again.”

Really!?  The dog ate my homework!  How “painful” can it be to regain old technology that succeeded so brilliantly.  Gimmee a break.  Petitt admits we do not have the means, the technology, to get “back” to the moon despite all the scientific, engineering, materials, digital and other tech advances since 1969, 48 long years ago.  I agree with him that we “don’t have the technology to do that” today but the rest of his statement is nonsense, namely, “anymore” and “we used to but we destroyed that technology.”  What a whopper.  And even if true, we could recover that old technology with little pain.  The reality is that we never had the technology to land a man on the moon and return him safely in the first place, certainly not in the 1960s slide rule era.  Petitt has pared back the big lie a little but left it in tatters nonetheless.  Many thanks Don!

Radiation, of course, is the show stopper for human travel in deep space but just consider one of thousands of engineering problems NASA and its contractors could not possibly solve in the ’60s: separation and descent/landing of the lunar module (LM) from the Command/Service Module (CSM) and, when ready to leave the Moon, “the LM would separate the descent stage and fire the ascent engine to climb back into orbit, using the descent stage as a launch platform. After a few course correction burns, the LM would rendezvous with the CSM and dock for transfer of the crew and rock samples.”  OK, sounds simple enough but it is not!  The first time two manned spacecraft docked was allegedly the Soviet Soyuz 4 and 5 spacecraft on 16 January, 1969, in low earth orbit only six months before Apollo 11 allegedly did so over the moon, 240,000 miles from earth.

Suppose the CSM is orbiting the moon at nearly 4,000 miles per hour (5,500+ feet per second = 3,750 mph), completing each orbit in slightly over one hour and 48 minutes depending on CSM altitude and (orbit) “plane” changes (NASA claims equatorial circumference of the moon is 6,783.5 miles).  The LM must “chase” the CSM and mate up with it.  “Orbital mechanics, it is often said, is real ‘rocket science'” writes Frank O’Brien.  Here is an excerpt from his extended analysis which shows how difficult rendezvous and docking is:

“Key to the flexibility of the various maneuvers was of course, the spacecraft computer. Each phase of the rendezvous had a separate computer program associated with it, which was started at the completion of the previous maneuver. Monitoring the computer, and inputting commands and data was a large part of the workload from lunar orbit insertion through terminal braking. Many of the entries appear to be rather mundane; distances, velocities, burn timings [precise rocket thrust on and off!] and the like, but they are tightly integrated into a larger picture of ‘where you are, and where you need to go’. Providing distance information and angles relative to the CSM was the rendezvous radar. Capable of providing information directly to the computer or to the crew via tapemeter displays on the Commander’s console, the radar was able to provide ranging data accurate to 0.1 nautical miles (0.18 km), and angular position, relative to the LM, of 0.01°.  Working together, the radar and computer were able to calculate to exact location of the CSM, and its relative position to the LM. The radar takes ranging marks about once per minute, and with each mark, also records the shaft and trunnion angles of the radar antenna to establish the direction to the CSM.”

What kind of computing capacity was aboard the LM?  Wickedpeedya, the fount of conventional wisdom, says, “The Apollo Guidance Computer (AGC) is a digital computer produced for the Apollo program that was installed on board each Apollo Command Module (CM) and Lunar Module (LM). The AGC provided computation and electronic interfaces for guidance, navigation, and control of the spacecraft.[2] The AGC has a 16-bit word length, with 15 data bits and one parity bit…The computer’s performance is somewhere around that of the first generation of home computers from the late 1970s, such as the Apple II, TRS-80, and Commodore PET.”

I’m no computer expert but how the heck can primitive 1st generation home computers do rocket science in real time space flight?  I don’t believe they could.  Granted, ground control could update calculations and intervene but all critical phases in navigation, control and docking must be solved aboard the LM and CSM correctly and quickly.  Houston, you have a credibility problem.

This entry was posted in Other Conspiracies. Bookmark the permalink.

14 Responses to NASA Astronaut Admits It Is Not Possible to Land on The Moon

  1. dachsielady says:

    Here is a recent video put together by Alan Weisbecker (

    Apollo 13 was a NASA/Hollywood Hoax

    A.C. Weisbecker
    Published on Nov 30, 2017
    How NASA and Hollywood teamed up to fool the world. Footage from the film ‘Apollo 13’ is based on Fair Use laws for commentary and education. For more go to and


    I remember my date, just hired by NASA Houston with A&M Engineering degree, taking me on a nighttime tour of NASA with his employee pass and showing me a LM displayed in the lobby. Can’t remember if that LM was supposed to be from one of the early Apollo program missions but think it was very late 60s or early 70s. As I look back, that whole huge NASA federal agency is a fraud and all of its space program was fraudulent from the beginning through and through. I am sure my friend worked for NASA through retirement and had to know that his whole agency was a big lie but also knew he must never in any way acknowledge that truth.

    • dachsielady says:

      As I jog my memory, the thing I saw on display in the lobby of NASA / Houston was in the about the mid-1960s, right before the Apollo program started so it was not an LM – the Lunar Module or lunar landing module associated with Apollo program. It was a capsule or Command Module, or model thereof, that housed astronauts on one of the earlier NASA manned spacecraft programs, such as the Discovery program. I do not know if these earlier manned spacecraft programs purported to go through the Van Allen belt, but if so, those programs were also a big lie.

  2. Sherrie says:

    I’ll never believe anything this country says again😡

    • Sherrie, to clarify, it’s not “this country,” it’s our lyin’ gubmint! The first rule in analysis of any contentious issue is: THE GUBMINT IS LYING. After that, PROCEED WITH CAUTION IN YOUR OWN SIFTING AND WINNOWING. Then, TRUST YOUR OWN ACTIVE MIND, NO ONE ELSE. Then, CRITICALLY EVAlUATE ALL THE EVIDENCE YOU CAN REASONABLY LOCATE. Then, IF YOU FIND YOU’VE MADE AN ERROR, ADMIT IT AND CORRECT IT. No shame in that. Well, that’s enough for now.

    • Robert E. Salt says:

      Unfortunately Stanley Kubrick must have taken all the technology with him. Henry Ford said that history is a lot of bunk, and Napoleon said pretty much the same thing. I lived through the Kennedy assassinations, the Apollo missions, the Oklahoma City bombings, 9-11, and Fukushima. All of these events have been recorded incorrectly and that’s the way they’re going down in history. Don’t ask me how much respect I have for history.

  3. Nelson Thall says:

    I am most grateful that you have stood your ground against peer pressure. You are a great example of what true science is about. You climb these mountains of truth for us and guide our way to the Promised Land. Your work and your bravery kept us alive in thosebleak dark ages created by NASA. You are a true godsend I am grateful for your hard work. I hope the world will soon wake thanks to your pioneering spirit. Thank you for sharing your treasury of wisdom and knowledge.

  4. Stan Riedel says:

    Just ask China, they were suppose to have done it too.

  5. Alf Beharie says:

    NASA’s Dr Kelly Smith also made it clear in the Orion capsule promotional video that NASA will need to solve the radiation problem before they can leave low Earth orbit…Huh? Didn’t they already have that solved before Apollo? Obviously not…Therefore his admission is yet more proof of the hoax. Yet despite admissions like this, millions of gullible people continue to believe in the Apollo science-fiction fairy tale…

  6. Bill Cain says:

    “Everything you can imagine, we already know how to do, including traversing the cosmos, but it would take an act of God to release these technologies to the public.” – 1995 deathbed confession of Ben Rich, former head of Lockheed Skunkworks.

  7. Cliff says: = fake news site. sorry.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s