Dave McGowan's new series "Wagging the Moondoggie"

[Jacques]

I have tried several times to open Dave's page, the first time was about 1 or 2 months ago, but can't seem to be able to open it up. I followed the link given by shellycheval in the fist post of this thread, that didn't work. Then I followed Vulcan's link that lead to another thread, also tried the "wagging the moondoggie" given there, doesn't work either. Neither does "part 12" link by Vulcan59 in the post above.
Is anyone else experiencing this problem?

Works fine for me.

Maybe you can try to erase all the cookies, the temporary files and see if it working after that.

 

[Gertrudes]

I have tried several times to open Dave's page, the first time was about 1 or 2 months ago, but can't seem to be able to open it up. I followed the link given by shellycheval in the fist post of this thread, that didn't work. Then I followed Vulcan's link that lead to another thread, also tried the "wagging the moondoggie" given there, doesn't work either. Neither does "part 12" link by Vulcan59 in the post above.
Is anyone else experiencing this problem?

Works fine for me.

Maybe you can try to erase all the cookies, the temporary files and see if it working after that.

Thanks for the tip Gandalf, but it still doesn't work. I have also tried opening it up with Internet Explorer, since I use Firefox, but with no luck. Very strange, and a pity because I would really like to read them.

 

[JonnyRadar]

I have tried several times to open Dave's page, the first time was about 1 or 2 months ago, but can't seem to be able to open it up. I followed the link given by shellycheval in the fist post of this thread, that didn't work. Then I followed Vulcan's link that lead to another thread, also tried the "wagging the moondoggie" given there, doesn't work either. Neither does "part 12" link by Vulcan59 in the post above.
Is anyone else experiencing this problem?

That's a bummer Gertrudes... I've saved the parts as PDFs so I could read them later. If you want there's copies of them here, perhaps that will work for you...

 

[Gertrudes]

That's a bummer Gertrudes... I've saved the parts as PDFs so I could read them later. If you want there's copies of them here, perhaps that will work for you...

It works!! Thank you JonnyRadar!

 

[Iconoclast]

wow, i totally missed this series!

thanks for pointing it out!
(reading it now)

 

[Bluestar]

Thanks for the link to ch 12. The BS just keeps flying. So glad that NASA has already spent 9 billion on this. But hey, forget about the Moon, we can just head for Mars and beyond.

Funny thought, if Spielberg or Cameron had done the fake lunar landings movie, it may have been more believable. And yes "Man vs Moon" would be a great title.

 

[Scottie]

From the September 9, 2000 session with the C's:

Q: (L) Okay, moving right along here. We have here a guy who has written a paper that says: "To make interstellar travel believable, NASA was created. The Apollo space program foisted the idea that man could travel to and walk upon the moon. Every Apollo mission was carefully rehearsed and then filmed in the large sound stages at the Atomic Energy Commission's Top Secret test site in the Nevada Desert and in the secured and guarded sound stage at the Walt Disney studios within which was a huge, full scale mock-up of the Moon." Is it true that the Apollo missions were films as described here?

A: No.

Q: (L) Did the Apollo missions actually go into space as we think they did?

A: Yes.

Q: (L) This guy further writes that "All names, missions, landing sites and events in the Apollo space program echo the occult metaphors, rituals and symbology of the Illuminati secret religion. The most transparent was the fakes explosion on the spacecraft Apollo 13 named 'Aquarius' at 1:13 on April 13, 1970, which was a metaphor for the initiation ceremony involving the death, placement of the coffin, communion with the spiritual world, and the imparting of esoteric knowledge to the candidate, rebirth of the initiate, and the raising up of Phoenix, the new age of Aquarius by the group of the Lion's Paw..." and so on and on. Was this occult significance applied to these events, either deliberately or accidentally?

A: Maybe coincidentally.

Q: (L) If there was any coincidence of application of these principles, did it bespeak an underlying synchronous or nonlocal reality of oneness?

A: These ideas being put forth this evening are entertaining if nothing else!

Q: (L) Well, I always said that you could derive occult significance from where the paper man tosses the paper on the lawn if you try hard enough!
Nevertheless, this guy further writes that "The tremendous radiation encountered in the Van Allen belt, solar radiation, cosmic radiation, solar flares, temperature control and many other problems connected with space travel, prevent living organisms from leaving our atmosphere with our known level of technology. Any intelligent high school student with a basic physics book can prove NASA faked the Apollo moon landings. If you doubt this, please explain how the astronauts walked upon the moon surface enclosed in a space suit, in full sunlight, absorbing a minimum of 265 degrees of heat, surrounded by a vacuum. And that is not even taking into consideration any of the effects of the cosmic radiation, solar flares, micro-meteorites, etc." Comment please?

A: No comment!

There are a couple of things that bugged me about McGowan's articles.

First of all, how do we know that what we are told about space, the planets, the moon, etc. is actually the truth? I mean, suddenly NASA is conducting "experiments" to search for water on the moon, life on Mars, etc. Ten or twenty years ago, that would have been considered nuts because, of course, everyone knows there's no water on the moon or life on Mars!! It's just a scientific fact, you see! So, analyzing the moon landings based on "science" is unreliable at best, because "science" itself is hardly accurate or scientific since it is quite often severely biased at best and completely controlled at worst.

Then consider that certain factions in the power hierarchy (whether 3d or 4d) no doubt have extraordinarily advanced technologies at their disposal as compared to our cute little techno-toys...

And then consider that just about everything we take as "true" turns out to be a bunch of lies, whether it's about governments or science or history or whatever.

So, I would venture to guess that the moon landing was not faked. I just think all the details surrounding the whole adventure were nothing like what we are told. As an added bonus then, you have all these people who think they are being so clever by "figuring it all out", while three things are actually happening:
1. They haven't figured anything out
2. They are conveniently distracted from considering the bigger picture of this reality
3. They are, therefore, still deceived just like everyone else, and thus controlled

That's my 2 cents!

 

[cholas]

There are a couple of things that bugged me about McGowan's articles.

The same here. Though some of the photos seem to support his theories to a certain degree.

In the session quoted above, the questions aren't really framed to ask whether the Apollo missions actually landed on the moon. It would definitely appear that they went into space. And 'as described' seems to imply that the person writing the paper didn't have their facts in order.

Something very shady about the whole 'space race' drama, imo.

 

[Approaching Infinity]

In the session quoted above, the questions aren't really framed to ask whether the Apollo missions actually landed on the moon. It would definitely appear that they went into space. And 'as described' seems to imply that the person writing the paper didn't have their facts in order.

I read the session the same way. I also had similar thoughts as Mr. Scott when reading McGowan's series. The way I see it, IF the US actually went to the moon, they probably did so using black technology. I thought McGowan raised some interesting points on the absurdity of the technological innovations the Apollo programs. Perhaps they also staged several photos and/or videos as a propaganda program to stir up pro-America feelings.

 

[Breton]

At this date I have not had time to read every word of Mcowan's series, but I say it was pretty good, because it really made me think - something is kind of rotten about the whole thing! Now if this subject is brought up in discussion others, I just mention that I have looked at McGowan's site and because of it, on a scale of 1 to 10, where 10 is being absolutely sure the moon landings took place, and 0 is absolutely sure that it did not, I have to say I am at about a 4 - leaning towards they did not happen.

When I looked at this site, I immediately thought of the C's session and I noted that the questions seemed to be more about someone's writing about the moon landings, and there was no direct question made to the C's like "Did any of those astronauts, such as Armstrong, or Aldrin and so on, actually go into DEEP space and actually land on the moon?".

However, it may be that with the right research, enough information might be found to reveal the answer fairly conclusively, even without the C's direct confirmation.

 

[nwigal]

In the session quoted above, the questions aren't really framed to ask whether the Apollo missions actually landed on the moon. It would definitely appear that they went into space. And 'as described' seems to imply that the person writing the paper didn't have their facts in order.

I read the session the same way. I also had similar thoughts as Mr. Scott when reading McGowan's series. The way I see it, IF the US actually went to the moon, they probably did so using black technology. I thought McGowan raised some interesting points on the absurdity of the technological innovations the Apollo programs. Perhaps they also staged several photos and/or videos as a propaganda program to stir up pro-America feelings.

My two cents...I was told by various tech people of different ranks while in the Air Force in the 80s that we were using ion pulse generators in many different craft, including Apollo. I attended a fueling session with the SR-71, watched as the jet fuel leaked all over the runway, and asked a tech why would we build it that way...I was told the explanation of the titanium skin leaking until it heated up from friction was a cover-that it didn't matter because the fuel engines were disengaged in flight. I was also told the SR-71 was an orbital vehicle and had been to the moon in the early 60's. I don't know, could be disinfo, but I did see a lot of technology back then that would be classified as "black" even today.
This may be disinfo, but

 

[Nicholas]

Dave has posted part 13 _http://www.davesweb.cnchost.com/Apollo13.html.

Reading it now...

 

[AdamJM]

after reading the articles, i can say i am about 90% sure that if people did actually reach the moon and explore the surface it did not happen the way it is promoted, the other 10% is reserved for the part of me that thinks anything is possible. he points out too many discrepancies with the general story, like the suits being produced by a bra manufacturer? and the fact that even with all their (commercial) technology they still cannot repeat what they achieved 50 years ago when they were in a far less advanced stage. whether or not we will ever know for certain if the landings happened or not, from how seems after reading the articles and provided data, imo the probability is highly unlikely.

 

[The Mechanic]

Man that Dave is a funny guy, I wish I could write as witty and humorously as he does

 

[Vulcan59]

For info, Dave has posted a new installment in the series - Part 14. :)