Second NASA Scientist Tells Us That ‘Somebody Else’ Is On The Moon

[Rocky_Shorz]

Another Interesting Leak: A Second NASA Scientist Tells Us That ‘Somebody Else’ Is On The Moon



We live in a strange world, and as Neil Armstrong once said, there are “great ideas undiscovered, breakthroughs available to those who can remove one of the truth’s protective layers.” (source) (source)

Fast forward to today, and a number of people have become aware of the fact that not all of what goes on behind the scenes is made public. This is precisely why the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) was created; it’s a federal freedom of information law that allows for the full or partial disclosure of previously unreleased information and documents controlled by the United States government.

There are still many obstacles in the way of full transparency, one of which is the use of ‘national security’ to keep information classified and hidden from public viewing. This has become more evident with the revelations of WikiLeaks and Edward Snowden, but the problem goes deeper still. Did you know that the U.S government classifies roughly five hundred million pages of documents every single year? This is a completely separate topic in itself and if you’re interested in learning more about this, you can check out our article about the ‘Black Budget.’
NASA Scientists & What They Say About The Moon

Multiple NASA personnel have made some pretty shocking claims about the Moon. George Leonard, a NASA scientist and photo analyst who obtained various official NASA photographs of the Moon, many of which he published in his book titled Somebody Else Is On The Moon, is just one of these personnel.

Although the photos are small in size and their resolution is not up to today’s standards, they show details of original prints which were huge. While Leonard published the identifying code numbers of the photos in his works to back up their source, we still can’t say for sure that they were real, and their poor resolution only makes matters worse. Far more compelling than these photos are his statements about what was found on the Moon, along with his verified NASA credentials. Leonard was not the only one with a credible background trying to tell the world the truth regarding the Moon and the photos that were taken from the Apollo missions.

“Ladies and gentlemen, my government, NASA, which many of us in the United States say stands for Never A Straight Answer, proceeded to erase 40 rolls of film of the Apollo Program — the flight to the Moon, the flight around the Moon, the landings on the Moon, the walking guys here and there. They erased, for Christ’s sake, 40 rolls of film of those events. Now we’re talking about several thousand individual frames that were taken that the so-called authorities determined that you did not have a right to see. Oh, they were ‘disruptive,’ ‘socially unacceptable,’ ‘politically unacceptable.’ I’ve become furious. I’m a retired Command Sergeant Major. I was never famous for having a lot of patience.” (source)

The quote above is from Bob Dean, who was speaking at a conference in Europe. Bob is a retired US Army Command Sargent Major, and he also served at the Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe (SHAPE) of NATO as an intelligence analyst.

When it comes to the UFO phenomenon, we now have public disclosure of thousands of documents along with hundreds of credible witness testimonies. But that is a separate topic, which you can learn more about here.

It’s also important to note here that the Russian government recently called for an international investigation into the U.S. moon landings regarding the disappearance of film footage from the original moon landing in 1969. They are also referring to the (approximately) 400 kilograms of lunar rock that was obtained during multiple missions between 1969 and 1972. (source)

Leonard argued that NASA knew about extraterrestrial activity on the Moon and attempted to hide that information. He’s not the only one to make such an assertion.

“Read the books, read the lore, start to understand what has really been going on, because there is no doubt that we are being visited. . . . The universe that we live in is much more wondrous, exciting, complex and far reaching than we were ever able to know up to this point in time. . . . [Mankind has long wondered if we’re] alone in the universe. [But] only in our period do we really have evidence. No, we’re not alone.” – Dr. Edgar Mitchell, ScD., NASA astronaut (6th man to walk on the moon)

Here is a clip of NASA astronaut Dr. Brian O’Leary saying the same thing.

Leonard is not the only NASA scientist to say some strange things about the Moon. Recently, a plasma scientist by the name of Dr. John Brandenburg said the same thing. He was the Deputy Manager of the Clementine Mission to the Moon, which was part of a joint space project between the Ballistic Missile Defence Organization (BMDO) and NASA. The mission discovered water at the Moon’s poles in 1994. (Source: page 16 of 18)(source)(source)

According to Brandenburg in an interview from this documentary:

It was (the Clementine Mission) a photo reconnaissance mission basically to check out if someone was building bases on the moon that we didn’t know about. Were they expanding them?

He then went on to state that:

Of all the pictures I’ve seen from the moon that show possible structures, the most impressive is a picture of a miles wide recto-linear structure. This looked unmistakably artificial, and it shouldn’t be there. As somebody in the space defence community, I look on any such structure on the moon with great concern because it isn’t ours, there’s no way we could have built such a thing. It means someone else is up there.

If you were to tell the average person that you think another civilization, advanced enough to have mastered space travel, had been to the Moon before we got there and is possibly still going there, you would, without a doubt, receive some very peculiar looks in return. On the other hand, if that other person were to decide to hear you out, you would probably get their attention pretty quickly. For some, this type of information can be overwhelming, even terrifying, and that’s okay. Many people are not ready to open their minds up to these possibilities, but the truth of the matter is, it’s something we are going to have to confront eventually. We are clearly heading towards the inevitable reality of extraterrestrial contact — that is, if we smarten up and start taking care of our planet to the best of our ability. Perhaps we can make it long enough to realize this future, or maybe it’s coming sooner than we think.

That being said, there is a good deal of evidence to suggest that extraterrestrial contact is already happening, and if you’re interested in learning more about that you can visit the exopolitics section of our website, located HERE. link

Other sources used:

http://www.richarddolanpress.com/#!t...1973-1991/c1p8

[DNA]

I always find myself stuck between things this article alludes to which is that NASA went to the moon and saw the alien spacecraft thing and then there is the whole Stanley Kubrick thing, where upon we did not go to the moon and the moon landings were fake.

I tend to lean towards the Kubrick story, but I'm still wavering.

[Sunny-side-up]

Good post Rocky_Shorz
Will read all the info soon

Posted by DNA (here)
I always find myself stuck between things this article alludes to which is that NASA went to the moon and saw the alien spacecraft thing and then there is the whole Stanley Kubrick thing, where upon we did not go to the moon and the moon landings were fake.

I tend to lean towards the Kubrick story, but I'm still wavering.

I think we did go to the moon but not when they said.
We did go but, with help from ET's.
Help as in radiation materials etc.

[mojo]

Of all the pictures I’ve seen from the moon that show possible structures, the most impressive is a picture of a miles wide recto-linear structure. This looked unmistakably artificial, and it shouldn’t be there.

Does anyone know what he is referencing? I wonder if we can find the image in question?

[DNA]

Posted by mojo (here)

Of all the pictures I’ve seen from the moon that show possible structures, the most impressive is a picture of a miles wide recto-linear structure. This looked unmistakably artificial, and it shouldn’t be there.

Does anyone know what he is referencing? I wonder if we can find the image in question?

I've got something like that, I'm not sure if it is exactly what is being referenced though.

Posted by Sunny-side-up (here)

Also,

I think we did go to the moon but not when they said.
We did go but, with help from ET's.
Help as in radiation materials etc.

I've heard the ET thing. I've also heard that the Secret Space Program had vehicles capable of anti-grav as far back as the 50's with something called the Orion project. I've always thought it possible that something from that program tailed them and helped them.
Then there is John Lear who states that every moon bound craft had a "extra" astronaut on board who operated the ABOVE TOP SECRET exotic field technology that the ships were equipped with.

[ghostrider]

Richard Hoglands website has some great photos, also John Lear has some good photos... They show a huge bridge , mining operations, and many other things... Mysterious celestial body , so close, and yet we have better pictures of Mars topography than our Moon...

[Matthew]

Posted by DNA (here)
I always find myself stuck between things this article alludes to which is that NASA went to the moon and saw the alien spacecraft thing and then there is the whole Stanley Kubrick thing, where upon we did not go to the moon and the moon landings were fake.

I tend to lean towards the Kubrick story, but I'm still wavering.

I think both. My thoughts go like this: we went and couldnt use the film without instant disclosure. So we went anyway with mostly unsuspecting astronauts as the best cover. But they knew they wouldn't be able to use real footage before hand.

[earthdreamer]

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=W79mIGx9Ib4

(Netflix has this too) Detailed research that shows the Apollo missions were faked. Photos were hoaxed, studio lighting is evident, all kinds of discrepancies in shadow angles, impossibilities of camera heights, film cannot be changed with astronaut gloves on, temps and radiation would ruin film, reflections in astronauts helmets incorrect, moonrocks and landscape imagery aren't consistent or reappear in different settings. The whole thing was a massive propaganda campaign. Sally Ride was quoted as saying back in the late 80's that NASA could spend 1 billion a year and get humans on the moon in 30 years, whereas Apollo missions were supposedly successful with millions less spent and by 1969. The Russians were in on it with Nazi scientists split between them and the U.S.. They may have collected samples from one unmanned landing shared by the Soviets. Too many rocket failures and even satellite launches compared to the "success" of manned missions. Anyway, the authors of the book "Dark Moon: Apollo and the Whistleblowers" Mary Bennett and David S. Percy, give so much evidence it overwhelms the charade.

[Althena]

There's a reason why we never went back to the moon, WE ARE NOT WELCOME THERE...

[ozmirage]

The reason America did not "go back to the moon" is (a) there was no risk that the USSR would get there, (b) build bases, and (c) threaten the USA.
And throwing away 99% of the vehicle on each trip... while not scoring any more propaganda points.
IMHO, with politics in the way, one cannot expect sanity.

FWIW, decades before the "moon shot" it was well known what was needed for frugal access to the moon. There should have been two orbiting space stations built : one for the Earth and one for the Moon. Once they were in place, 3 specialized space craft classes would be needed : (1) Surface to orbit - and return; (2) station - to - station - and return; (3) lunar orbit to surface - and return. Only fuel and supplies would be consumed.
Instead of a few spectacularly expensive and short visits to the moon, we could have been able to do long term work.

And there should never have been a “space truck/ space bus” like the Space Shuttle. You waste cargo space to include life support, and you don’t need life support for cargo. No matter what mission, it’s a compromise and a waste.

NEVER. LET. GOVERNMENT. CONTROL. ANYTHING. YOU. DO. NOT. WANT. RUINED.

- - -
From “Space Jockey” by Robert A. Heinlein (1947) :
“... The traveling-public gripes at the lack of direct Earth-to-Moon service, but it takes three types of rocket ships and two space-station changes to make a fiddling quarter-million-mile jump for a good reason: Money.”
. . .
(From the story)
Earth’s space station : Supra-New York
Luna’s space station : Space Terminal
Earth to orbit : catapulted streamlined winged space craft
Station to station : never landing shuttles, almost all cargo space
Luna to orbit : ugly duckling pogo sticks

[drneglector]

I suggest watching the Camelot video JUMPROOM TO MARS - a new conversation with Wilcock. (Uploaded in 2007). Within this video there are some answers to the questions raised here.

Bill, Kerry and David reveals information concerning:

Did we really make it to the moon in 1969?
Do we really have a base on Mars?
Why is the secret space program so important?
What is the relationship with Montauk?
What truths may be concealed in Arthur C. Clarke's seminal film, 2001?

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=VMwJmIRF7ZE

This new Project Camelot interview captures an informal and spirited 45-minute conversation between David Wilcock and ourselves at a restaurant where we met up for dinner in early December. We were exchanging information and comparing the testimonies from Project Camelot's Henry Deacon and David's Montauk source 'Daniel', and had found some very important corroborations.

Captured live on camera with editing only to switch between the two cameras, David gives his unrehearsed response to new information Project Camelot has learned about the colony on Mars, the secret space program, the Apollo missions, and more.

This interview contains significant new information which we believe to be fully credible. Did we really make it to the moon in 1969? Do we really have a base on Mars? Why is the secret space program so important? What is the relationship with Montauk? What truths may be concealed in Arthur C. Clarke's seminal film, 2001? Join us at the restaurant table and find out in this interview - you may enjoy the ride.

At least check out the very end, at 43:15, the "moontruth" video.

[conk]

Posted by mojo (here)

Of all the pictures I’ve seen from the moon that show possible structures, the most impressive is a picture of a miles wide recto-linear structure. This looked unmistakably artificial, and it shouldn’t be there.

Does anyone know what he is referencing? I wonder if we can find the image in question?

Not sure if this is it, but this video is one of the most convincing on the net to me. It's long, but it has to be in order to share a lot of information. Truly a stunning amount of info! this thing is as large as Los Angeles! And it moves!

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=L_x0abB40mo