NASA – was it responsible?

Posted on 2 October 2011 by Scottish-Sceptic

On  20nd July 1969 a man of Scottish Ancestry stepped onto the moon, to view a desolate landscape above which rose a small blue disc: a beautiful planet, an isolated lonely planet, set against the utter blackness of space.
This was a new perspective, a new global perspective and it was this global perspective which gave rise to the world wide environmental movement. Moreover it was the space race itself, the cold war of space, the impending doom of nuclear annihilation which galvanised this environmental movement.
In 1969, NASA was heralded as the triumph of science, today NASA is the home of Hansen and the centre for climate alarmism. I do not think these are unconnected.
In a real sense I was a child of the space age, my father was director of the rocket tracking station in Australia, but I have no delusions about the space race, looking back there is now no doubt in my mind that these missions had little to do with science, indeed almost none of the astronauts had any science training and only one was a geologist. The moon landings were political. They were like the metaphorical peacocks feathers:  displaying the virility of US science and industry intended to send the clearest message to USSR military at all levels, that the USSR could not win a war against the US.
NASA was always part of the arms race, NASA was set up using German V1 rocket technology and despite alleged war crimes: German rocket scientists. WWII changed the nature of science. It may have been the engineering and economic might of the UK and US that won the war, but the US were convinced the next war would be won with German rocket science.
Science was totally revamped: gone was the gentlemen’s club of “natural philosophy”, in was factory style organisation with division such as “theoretical” and applied, and new terms like blue sky research. Science was no longer to be something one thought about – out was any philosophy, it was  something you did. UK & US science became a sausage machine: working well when producing run of the mill science in established subjects, but nothing like the hand crafted item of old and certainly without their knowledge that allowed them to adapt science to new areas. Science was dumbed down, removing the philosophical base that allowed introspection and self-knowledge and a literal understanding Nullius in verba. In its place came new science where science is the act of measurement and science-like interpretation, full of misplaced arrogance leading to delusion about its own ability, particularly its ability to act beyond its own experience in new areas like the climate.
Whilst NASA undoubtedly did good science (e.g. satellites) there is no doubt in my mind that NASA  needed this new “science” not for the science, but to publicly justify the huge cost of what was clearly another part of the cold war. The dominance of pseudo-sciences struck me when in my archaeology course I was doing some research into the use of infra red for satellite imaging. I was looking forward to climate-free reading, but time and time and time again I found the papers I was reading were ecological or climate based.  Why of all the subjects that could use satellite imagery (archaeology, surveying, mining, etc.) was ecology and climate “science” so all pervasive? It wasn’t just one or two papers, but dozens even hundreds of ecological papers each trying to ascribe another meaning to what was in reality just the one shade of a black and white pixel. How could so many papers try to ascribe so many different meanings to the same pixel: vegetative cover, moisture, temperature, evaporation … one pixel so many meanings? It was bizarre and obviously flawed.
How could people who were supposedly “scientists” fail to realise that one single colour could only have one meaning and not their multitude of interpretations? Something had created this pseudo-scientific ecological/climate monster, and I believe satellite imagery showed that in large part that something was NASA: a huge budget needing to provide a publicly acceptable and that meant scientific rational for all that money spent on space research.
What appears to have happened, is that NASA was given the money to buy scientific credibility, and in so doing, it funded a massive program of pseudo-scientific research trawling its data to provide media friendly publicity. NASA didn’t act alone, but it certainly had the funding and the need to promote these pseudo-sciences. NASA needed ecologists, not for the ecology, but in order to show that there was a “nice” reason and not just a military reason for all those space launches and satellites. NASA needed this research to provide a thin veneer of scientific credibility, just as much as the ecologists needed the free access the new satellite technology to prove how much damage we humans were doing.
When optical imagery was available, they started to map vegetative cover (presumably as a cover for all the military mapping), then, as infra-red became available, they began to build up pictures of the earth’s temperature adding to the data from ice-cores. NASA gave credibility to “pseudo-sciences” like ecology and climate “science”, that and NASA and other similar institutions like the Antarctic survey created a breeding ground for this “science” and that I believe is the root of the problem we face.
WWII changed the nature of science and removed the philosophical foundation, the global perspective and anti-nuclear campaigns fostered global ecology. NASA needed these new pseudo-sciences which nurtured a group of subjects with a new “off-earth” perspective, using the new tools of satellite imagery, and with easy access to massive government budgets ready to fund anything evenly remotely science-like in an environment:
NASA, where “science” was not justified by the science, but by the politics.

This entry was posted in Climate. Bookmark the permalink.

18 Responses to NASA – was it responsible?

  1. Banatu says:
    2 October 2011 at 21:10

    Wow thanks for this post. I was aware of the ‘operation paperclip’ connections to NASA but it never occurred to me to question the scientific background of the moon landing astronauts, and I never saw it all pieced together quite like this.
    I have much to think about now!

  2. Scottish Sceptic says:
    2 October 2011 at 21:20

    I just thought it was common knowledge! A bit like the way we now know UK intelligence didn’t want to assassinate Hitler … because he was such a help. Obviously British intelligence could not state they wanted Hitler in charge, but that is the reality.
    Likewise, it’s not much of a conspiracy as it was either:
    a) A great scientific triumph (as the PR at the time suggested).
    b) The greatest single contribution stopping WWIII.
    Should those first words have been: “one small step for man, a giant leap for peace on earth”?

  3. Banatu says:
    2 October 2011 at 23:06

    Well I don’t want to go too far off into conspiracy land (yet), it’s just the connections are really striking sometimes.
    You have paperclip feeding persons of Nazi-ish persuasion into the US (and Canadian) scientific community, especially NASA.
    NASA develops a fixation on environmental issues, which was also an obsession among the Nazi party, particularly restoring the environment to some ‘superior’ era of the past.
    Disguising post-WWII Nazi entities around the world under the pretense of studying natural resources was clearly stated in the declassified “Red House Report”:
    “These offices are to be established in large cities where they can be most successfully hidden as well as in little villages near sources of hydro-electric power where they can pretend to be studying the development of water resources.”
    And of course the proposed UN solutions to our supposed environmental problems ultimately lead to absolute global domination — particularly interesting in light of the increasing evidence that the Nazis were supported (for various reasons) by many of the countries that now make up the UN, as you touched on.
    Anyway, not trying to suggest anything, just thinking out loud. 😉

  4. futureboy says:
    3 October 2011 at 10:36

    Whether von Braun should have been hung (there is a good case but a far better case against many of our own leaders) be was such an arrigant sod that he got things done.
    What I believe happened to NASA is Pournelle’s Iron Law of Bureaucracy
    “In any bureancracy the people devoted tothe benefit of the bureaucracy otself always get in cintrol and those dedicated to the goals the bureaucracy is supposwed to accimplish gave less and less influence and are sometimes eliminated entirely”
    Once the Moon landings were over von Braun was kicked upstairs and NASA got on with the important job of ensuring its budget at all costs – which it is still doi8ng today. Occasionally this has meant actually doing something in space, at about 16 times the price it can be done for but it has also meant poreventing any free market competition.
    Currently NASA are depending on the free market SpaceX getting producing a vehicle to go back to the space station because BASA can’t. This subcontractor receives less than 5% of what NASA get.
    The same out of control bureaucracy effect is visible in every field of government – eg the new Forth bridge costing 8 times, after inflation( so far) what the previous bridge did.

  5. palantir says:
    3 October 2011 at 12:09

    “A bit like the way we now know UK intelligence didn’t want to assassinate Hitler … because he was such a help”. Have you a reference for that? I’ve read a lot about the 2nd WW but never come across that suggestion. I did read an anecdote about someone (a British agent) who was sent to assasinate Stalin, but didn’t, because, “he seemed a nice chap”.

  6. Cedric Katesby says:
    4 October 2011 at 17:21

    …today NASA is the home of Hansen and the centre for climate alarmism…
    Yes, it’s impossible to talk about climate change without talking about NASA. They have been part of the global scientific conspiracy from the beginning. They do most of the heavy lifting. And the Royal Society. They are in on it too.
    And the American Physical Society. And the British Antarctic Survey. And the NAS. And the AAAS. And the AGU. And the American Chemical Society. They are all guilty. And the Royal Meteorological Society. And the CSIRO. And the USGS. And the American Geological Society. And NOAA. And the National Research Council. And the American Institute of Physics. They are all in on it. And the European Science Foundation. And the EFG. And the European Geosciences Union. And the IUGG. And the American Meterological Society. Every single scientific community is corrupt. Every single scientific community on the planet is part of the grand conspiracy.
    There are no exceptions.
    It’s been going on for many decades now.
    Follow the money, my friends. Follow the money. The plot is all encompassing and all knowing. Only a few brave souls dare speak the awful Trooth that they don’t want you to know about.

  7. futureboy says:
    4 October 2011 at 17:40

    There’s many a true word spoken in jest.
    And many a fool at least smart enough to know when they can’t put up a factual argument.

  8. Scottish Sceptic says:
    4 October 2011 at 17:42

    Cedric, you are either an overkeen sceptic, or a warmist who did not read the article – either way I suggest you reread it.
    The only conspiracy is that the moon landings were political – I doubt this is contentious. Otherwise, it explains how an environment that promoted pseudo science came into being – this had nothing to do with global warming, but was a consequence of the change in science policy post WWII and the cold war.
    Indeed, I suspect everything I wrote applies to the global cooling scare of the 1970s, Long before global warming was invented!

  9. Cedric Katesby says:
    30 August 2012 at 12:05

    Indeed, I suspect everything I wrote applies to the global cooling scare of the 1970s, Long before global warming was invented!
    I suspect that global warming is invented too. They are all in on it. Inventing things. People demand the Trooth. NASA has to stop lying to us about global warming.
    Decades and decades of lying. Thousands and thousands of scientists locked in a fiendish conspiracy of silence that is mind-bogglingly complicated, all-encompassing and yet completely unseen.
    And the US Navy. They are up to no good too! Does NASA control the US Navy or does the US Navy control NASA or perhaps does the Royal Society control both of them behind the scenes?
    How far does the rabbit hole go, my friends? How far?
    Admiral David Titley of the US Navy explains why they are taking action on climate change
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZQaSJje87zU

  10. Scottish Sceptic says:
    30 August 2012 at 12:29

    CEDRIC, The first thing you learn as a scientists going into industry is that most scientists (like you) are pretty naive about the utility of science in the real world.
    Whilst it may seem pretty cruel getting the wet-behind-the-ears scientists (like you) to go for sky hooks, long waits, etc. there is a good reason for this humiliation: it is to jolt them out of the academic nonsense they get taught that science has an answer to everything.
    When (perhaps reading your comments, I should say if ) they finally get back from the stores after asking for the long wait, most get the message and realise they have a lot more to learn before their science training can be fully appreciated and be useful.

  11. Neil Craig says:
    30 August 2012 at 12:29

    Cedric come back when you have managed to figure out what institution it could be that controls both the US Navy & NASA & in its British version funds the Royal Society.
    Better yet come back when you can come up with the name of a single solitary scientist, among over 10 million worldwide who are actually part of the alleged “consensus” on catastrophic warming, without being among the minority paid by government.
    Indeed I challenge you to do so.

  12. Cedric Katesby says:
    22 January 2013 at 13:40

    The first thing you learn as a scientists going into industry is that most scientists (like you) are pretty naive about the utility of science in the real world.
    And yet 10 million worldwide naive scientists managet to create an “alleged” consensus.
    Scary stuff. Will no one stop them?
    Cedric come back when you have managed to figure out what institution it could be that controls both the US Navy & NASA & in its British version funds the Royal Society.
    Kommunism?
    Better yet come back when you can come up with the name of a single solitary scientist, among over 10 million worldwide who are actually part of the alleged “consensus” on catastrophic warming, without being among the minority paid by government.
    Exactly! World gubbiment fascism. They are all in on it.
    And the Royal Society. They are in on it too.
    And the American Physical Society. And the British Antarctic Survey. And the NAS. And the AAAS. And the AGU. And the American Chemical Society. They are all guilty. And the Royal Meteorological Society. And the CSIRO. And the USGS. And the American Geological Society. And NOAA. And the National Research Council. And the American Institute of Physics. They are all in on it. And the European Science Foundation. And the EFG. And the European Geosciences Union. And the IUGG. And the American Meterological Society. Every single scientific community is corrupt. Every single scientific community on the planet is part of the grand conspiracy.
    It’s all-powerful.
    Deep cover KGB agents activated in the 50’s probably quietly took control of NASA to promote the grand global warming hoax. That’s how long they’ve been at this!!! To make it extra convincing, they even pretended to land people on the moon and help the free world “win” the Cold War in the meantime.
    Clever. Very Clever.
    Climate Science 1956: A Blast from the Past
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdALFnlwV_o

  13. neilfutureboy says:
    22 January 2013 at 14:07

    So Cedric has spent 5 months trying to meet my challenge to find a sinhle solitary scientist who supports the scam and failed.
    And appears to be still ignorant of the fact that the Royal Society, one of the organisation he believes cannot possiblty be linked to the state, gets £50 million a year from the state (I assume most or all of the others do too but would be open to evidence from Ced).

  14. Cedric Katesby says:
    25 January 2013 at 09:32

    Exactly, it’s a global scam. A super mega-hoax reaching back decades. Even the Royal society is in on it. 10 million naive scientists are in on this conspiracy.
    NASA continues to put out hippie-Nazi propoganda to lie to the public.
    Gubbiments all over the world are funnelling millions of dollars to NASA and all the other scientific communities in hush money. It’s exactly how Kommunism operates.
    Why else do people have this absurd idea that NASA went to the moon?
    9. Climate Change – Meet the Scientists
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qZzwRwFDXw0

  15. neilfutureboy says:
    25 January 2013 at 12:44

    5 months and a few more days and cedric still can’t name a single independent scientist who agrees with the eco-fascists.
    Despite eco-fascists continuosly lying about supporting science we now see this “they never went to the Moon” imbecility being used by them – if I am wrong in that we are going to see as much as 1 single alarmist anywhere saying Cedric is a lying imbecile

  16. Cedric Katesby says:
    26 January 2013 at 06:47

    5 months and a few more days and cedric still can’t name a single independent scientist who agrees with the eco-fascists.
    Exactly.
    10 million eco-fascist kommunist alarmist naive scientists. They are all in on it.
    For decades they have been lying.
    It’s a huge mega-hoax. The biggest secret scam in history.
    It’s a mass conspiracy involving millions.
    Big gummiment NASA lied to us about the moon. Big gummiment NASA is lying to us now about climate change.
    Big gummiment NASA is in it up to it’s neck.
    They themselves admit it!
    http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/IOTD/view.php?id=80167

  17. neilfutureboy says:
    26 January 2013 at 11:26

    While we have reached agreement that the ecofascist movement, including cedric, are wholly corrupt I would be interested in his evidence that, with the singular exception of himself, they have publicly admitted it.

  18. Cedric Katesby says:
    26 January 2013 at 15:10

    While we have reached agreement that the ecofascist movement, including cedric, are wholly corrupt…
    All 10 million of them are corrupt. All of them. Across all nations and all the physical sciences.
    Every single scientific community is corrupt. All of them are eco-fascists. All of them.
    For decades, going back to the fifties, they’ve been in Al Gore’s kommunist back pocket.
    NASA is the worst of the lot.
    They freely confess that they promote eco-fascist naive science.
    It is the biggest conspiracy ever created. Only you and I and a few blogs run by brave, aging REAL SCIENTISTS are clever enough too see through their lies.
    We are keeping the flame of REAL SCIENCE alive. One day, the world will know of our heroism.
    NASA is just full of naive, alarmist, eco-fascist, imbeciles.
    The rabbit hole goes deep, my friends. Very, very deep.
    They are even out there corrupting our precious children!
    http://climatekids.nasa.gov/

Comments are closed.