“I detailed in NASA Pseudoscience Mind-Kontrol: The Advent Of Pseudoscience, the progenitor of Modern pseudoscience was Trofim Lysenko of the USSR during the fake cold war period. Lysenko’s mastery of quackery spawned the term “Lysenkoism” which encapsulates the merging of political science and science, thus creating a knowledge power differential to exercise over the population.”
As andendum to NASA Pseudoscience Mind-Kontrol: The Vacuum Of Space below is another example of NASA nonsense as it pertains to the vacuum of space and gravity.
(This is a most excellent rebuke, by simple logic and proof, that the vacuum of space is another massive hoax needed to sustain the “gravity” lie when real scientists with names like Morley and Tesla proved otherwise.)
This very simple, eloquent experiment disproves a vacuum when two objects fall at the exact same rate of completely different densities, size and shape. hmmm.
Even more to the notion space is a vacuum is this video of Physicist Brian Cox doing a science piece for the BBC. The show was based on NASA’s vacuum chamber which is the worlds largest. Apparently they simulate non-gravitational space conditions to test craft. The assertions he puts forward are the usual NASA pseudoscience horse manure but key parts of the documentary open the door to exposing the total fraud.
*****Here are the things to think about after you watch it..it’s short 4:40min
- It looks like a movie set and the command and control scenes are straight out of a Michael Bay film
- They have to move reinforced aluminum walls that interlock and then pump out the chamber to simulate space
- They conduct an experiment dropping a feather and a bowling ball in a vacuum and non-vacuum to show “gravity exists”
The facts are simple to deduce.
- It was overly produced and the command and control scenes were scripted or staged. This is a trivial fact compared to the real problems with this.
- If it requires reinforced interlocking doors to simulate the vacuum of space how could a spacecraft just permeate the vacuum of space and become weightless if such massive efforts have to be taken to reproduce space conditions on earth?
- Wouldn’t the craft crash right into the rigid boundary of the vacuum and go down in flames as if it hit the massive reinforced vacuum doors in the above section?
- The feather and bowling ball experiment does not prove gravity, but rather the density of one of NASA’s “States of Matter” The state of matter in a non-vacuum is a gas (air) and it’s density moderates the “bouyancy” of both the feather and ball. The ball is far lessbuoyant than the feather and will drop faster. Conversely, in a vacuum the removal of gas (air) reduces the density to virtually zero, thus no resistance or density is present to moderate the feather and ball so the bouyancy will be the same. This has nothing to do with the magical properties of gravity it’s simple density and bouyancy in one of NASA’s “States of Matter” which happens to be a gas (air) or lack of it.
Brian says by removing the gas (air), the bowling ball and feather will fall at the same rate, thus proving gravity exists. Sorry Brian, it only proves objects of different mass and shape will fall at different rates depending on the density and “State Of Matter” they reside in. In a vacuum there’s no density, in a non-vacuum you have density and objects do what the illustration shows below…
However you can completely destroy the gravity theory with a book and a piece of paper. You can achieve the same results as a vacuum chamber right in your home. Grab a decent size book and a smaller piece of paper or envelope. Hold one in each hand and drop them. As you guessed the book will fall faster to the ground. Now instead of firing-up NASA’s gigantic vacuum chamber that cost the taxpayers millions and doubles for a movie production set. Simply place the paper on top of the book and drop them. What happened? They fell at the same rate didn’t they?
The question of the moment is why? The density of air could not act on the envelope because the book was pushing the density away to the sides creating a vacuous pocket for the paper to fall unimpeded at the same rate as the book. Watch this simple video as proof.
This is just another example of pseudoscience nonsense that permeates academia and the majority of the population. Rest assured, you could challenge any high school science teacher or college physics professor that you can make a book and a piece of paper fall at the same rate. Once they take the bait, make a hardy wager and enjoy your earnings, you can never lose because it’s outside their paradigm.
Here is a quote from the Scientific American that reveals the subtle deception that is similar to NLP Neuro Lingusitic Programming. As the article discusses, two balls of different masses dropped and landing roughly the same time.
Scientific American Quote;
Did both balls hit the ground at the same time?
You should have found that both balls hit the ground at roughly the same time. According to legend, this is what Galileo showed in 1589 from his Tower of Pisa experiment but, again, it’s debated whether this actually happened.If you neglect air resistance, objects falling near Earth’s surface fall with the same approximate acceleration 9.8 meters per second squared (9.8 m/s2, or g) due to Earth’s gravity. So the acceleration is the same for the objects, and consequently their velocity is also increasing at a constant rate. Because the downward force on an object is equal to its mass multiplied by g, heavier objects have a greater downward force. Heavier objects, however, also have more inertia, which means they resist moving more than lighter objects do, and so heaver objects need more force to get them going at the same rate.
“If you neglect air resistance” is the misdirection in the summation. Neglecting air resistance is like testing the PH in a pool with no water. The dismissal of “air resistance” is treated as a forgone aspect and dismissed. Once they minimize “air resistance” you are hit with a blitz of pseudoscience formulas that might be pertinent in an imaginary world that has gravity, but unfortunately for the science community at large there is no gravity to apply formulas to. They’re experts in a scientific virtual reality that is totally disconnected with simple basic principles they cannot answer coherently within the laws of nature or earnest scientific research. Their view of the cosmos is seen through the military industrial complex lens which is a computer generated reality-matrix of which they reside in ignorance, malevolence or both.
Listen to this NASA representative talk about the uses for the vacuum chamber and she highlights that it’s been used for making movies such as Armageddon and Future World. So not only is this a vacuum chamber it’s also a movie set. Should we be surprised? No we shouldn’t since NASA is already proven to be a Jesuit Freemasonic Khazarian Hollywood hoax machine.
In space a new set of principles seem to apply allowing the envelope/dome/boundary to be semi-permeable and objects can graduallyenter into and out of the vacuum. Because of this very reason space cannot be considered a vacuum as compared to it’s laboratory brethren. There is obviously something wrong with the assertion that there is a “vacuum of space”. The only proof offered that a vacuum exists in space are fake astronaut images or video of either the Apollo Space Lab, ISS/Shuttle hoaxes. “The only proof of the Vacuum Of Space is the illusion of weightlessness” and without the illusion of weightlessness in space it would reveal that gravity doesn’t exist, but rather the density of NASA’s “state of matter” and it’s effect on an objects buoyancy. In other words, it’s virtually “empty space” with no gas (air). One cannot have a vacuum next to a non-vacuum and have interplay between the two, it’s impossible and paradoxical.