Five Basic Types of NASA Hoaxes - most were exposed first by Matt Marriott-

Jun 12, 2007

*** ATTENTION *** NASA is putting an End to the BIG HOAX ISS - Shit-ttle, aka Space Shuttle

Space Shuttles are normal planes. A dummy is launched each time.
The real Space Shuttle takes off two hours from what is supposed to be the landing.

New Identities were given to what was supposed to be the Challenger crew, as the rocket exploded on launch in 1986.

The Columbia crash was staged to make the hoax credible.There is only one more question to be answered:
1. What is the role of Russia in all of this?
I will answer this later, if nobody comes with the right answer.

BTW, you do know what the proof that all of the above is TRUE, right? (1)

(1) a) Since I'm afraid you don't, it's time that you start asking yourself the right questions. For a start:
Why are space tours of the International Space Station offered only by computer graphics?
(1) b) More on this, following this reply:
"Hi Matt, You mention in this article that you have evidence that the space shuttle launches into space (maybe you meant "some of the launches") were faked. I have been a big skeptic of NASA so-called achievements and accomplishments with regards to the so-called moon landings and possibly some or most of the probes launched into deep space but as far as my doubts about the space shuttle are concerned I have not found anything I would describe as compelling evidence that the space shuttle launches going into earth orbit were faked.
Can you help me out here? What did I miss? Was it the inflated tires on the shuttle, the absence of stars in most if not all space shuttle low-earth-orbit pictures or is the evidence to be found in the odd shadow projections in the official shuttle EVA pictures?

Basically you have two types of evidence:
1. - what the hoaxers show to you, which leads you to the logic conclusion that the story is impossible;
2. - what they hide from you.
Everything you mention is evidence from the first type.
Once confronted with such evidence, the hoaxers will resort to the ultimate "argument": nobody can prove it is a fake, since nobody else but the hoaxers saw it with their own eyes.
Again as hinted in (1)a), my proof uses evidence of category 2.

(2) I have to post this now, because the latest "news" clearly show that the end of this Hoax is being staged right NOW:
June 12: NASA checks into potential hit on shuttle, Sensors on Atlantis’ wing edge set off; station spreads solar wings
(3) Two days after this was first published, more signs (4) that Matt Marriott translated correctly the Illuminati message (5):
HOUSTON, June 14 -  Atlantis' return to Earth may be delayed by computer failure
Russian and U.S. space scientists reported multiple computer problems late Wednesday and early Thursday aboard the International Space Station.

(4) When the Illuminati send their codes they usually add jokes in the process. June 13, using the "serious" illuminati channel BBC:
Baby monitor shows space mission
A mum in America got a shock when she turned on her baby monitor to check on her son and found herself watching something out of this world.
Natalie Meilinger thought she'd see her three-month-old son Jake in his bedroom upstairs, but instead saw pictures of astronauts on the Atlantis shuttle.
Natalie, a science teacher who lives in Chicago, said no one believed her until she showed them a video of the images.
The astronauts are fitting solar panels on the International Space Station.
(5) Hoaxes of End Times: Four BASIC Cases: (2 * Illuminati) + (2 * Matt Marriott) . check case 1..

Update: why ISS is still going around
Vladimir Putin was about to terminate the end times fable known as International Space Station, ISS.
But Illuminati killed Putin and replaced him with an impostor :

Forums - 2007


Zack G said...

you sire are obviously a fucking idiot. I cant stand who who accuse NASA for making them hoaxes! what the fuck is wrong with you. are your brain dead, are you schizophrenic. no maybe you are just a fucking stupid useless piece of SHIT in the planet. you are the filth, the maggots that will get crushed upon. so let me tell you this im my own words. go FUCKING kill yourself and DIE you useless piece of shit. how did you get this proof. better yet, who told you about this garbage. was it that BART FAGGOT!? better not be cause he is fat as a fucking cow. go be fat somewhere else. hes shit too. look at the REAL history pal. not this shit. so go back to fucking school

gjalexander said...

I have been studying this phenomena for several years now and I believe the International Space Station (ISS) and the Space Shuttle are a complete hoax. This is the evidence I have produced. I have directly viewed the ISS through a privately owned telescope (a Newtonian of 6 inch aperture at low magnification and using manual tracking). On every occasion I have viewed the ISS, and I am an experienced observer, a perfectly round object is revealed presenting no angular projections whatsoever. This entirely goes against what we have officially been told regarding the exact configuration of the ISS which could loosely be described as shaped somewhat like an ‘aeroplane’.

Knowing the quoted altitude of this object (the ISS) and estimating its approximate apparent diameter by comparing it with the apparent diameter of the planet Saturn at the time (excluding its rings), I was able to calculate its absolute diameter as being somewhere around 40 metres. A perfectly round man-made object of this size in space could only be a balloon that has been inflated in orbit. Such experimental balloon satellites were officially launched in the early 1960’s (e.g. Echo 1 and 2).

But the question is how could the Space Shuttle ever dock with a balloon? It is possible that the Space Shuttle isn’t real either and there is ample evidence to suggest that this is in fact the case. For example the Earth’s sky during the daytime glows a bright blue colour as a result of the scattering of light. But this blue colour should be just as visible from space as it is from the ground as the light in question is by necessity scattered in all directions. Yet most of the photographic and video images of the Earth taken from the ISS and Shuttle don’t show this blue glow which should appear as a blue fog clouding out much of the detail on the Earth’s surface below. In fact most of these images would suggest that the Earth’s atmosphere were completely transparent in this regard. Yet despite the absence of this blue glow we can still see blue coloured oceans which according to the opinion of some obtain their colour from the very same blue sky glow.

I believe the images supposedly taken on board the Space Shuttle in orbit were actually filmed in an underwater film studio and possibly the same Neutral Buoyancy Laboratory specially built for the Space Shuttle astronauts to do their training in. Indeed the footage shows loose appendages and insulation foil swaying about as if being moved by currents of water. Also small white dots are sometimes seen shooting off the side of the Shuttle in straight lines and at a constant velocity which could well represent rising air bubbles as there is no way in the vacuum of space that any loose debris could leave the side of the Space Shuttle in such a manner.

In addition to this and despite the fact that we are told that the Space Shuttle performs an unpowered landing, i.e. it glides, video footage taken from both outside and inside of the Shuttle on landing appears to betray what is clearly background engine noise. Besides how could a delta winged aircraft with such a weight to wingspan ratio possibly glide anyway? Further night time landings when viewed from the rear of the Shuttle reveal peculiar red lights directly inside the rocket combustion chambers mounted at the rear of the craft. What are these, landing lights? I strongly doubt it. These lights would also indicate that the Shuttle’s engines are actually running on landing.

It is also evidently the case that NASA scientists have not been entirely honest when it comes to the immediate hazards presented to spacecraft by the space environment. For example the Earth’s upper atmosphere is comprised largely of ionized atomic oxygen at temperatures at times approaching 1,400°C. This gas apparently produces a noticeable drag factor for spacecraft such as the ISS which has to be re-boosted every three months or so. But this gas in reality would be more corrosive than any acid found in an Earth laboratory such as hydrofluoric acid which easily corrodes glass.

Further the Sun’s spectrum of radiative output (assuming it to be a blackbody of a temperature of 5,770 Kelvin) contains ultraviolet light possessing the required quantum energy to break open not only every organic bond known to man but every inorganic bond known to man as well. Obviously at the higher frequencies and at the Earth’s distance from the Sun, the flux density of this radiation is comparatively weaker than the radiation in the visible spectrum. However the effects of this high frequency radiation are nevertheless cumulative. Space suits would blacken and glass would become ‘smoked’ in appearance as the hours or even minutes passed by.

In my mind it is only too apparent who the perpetrators of this monumental fraud are. At the end of World War II Nazi scientists were taken to both the United States and the Soviet Union as part of Operation Paperclip. It were these same scientists who ultimately made up the chief executive at NASA. The first director of the Kennedy Space Center, Kurt Debus, was an ex-Nazi; the founder of the science of exobiology (the study of the possibility of life on Mars or elsewhere in the Universe), Hubertus Strughold, (whose experiments on live humans during the War at Dachau concentration camp often proved fatal) was an ex-Nazi; and the designer of the Saturn V, Wernher von Braun was Hilter’s leading rocket scientist who built the V-2.

I believe that these ex-Nazis were clearly not to be trusted and like other ‘stay behind’ Nazi operatives after the war, they actively conspired from the outset to do damage to the US government. They were directly putting into practice Hitler’s famous saying concerning the power of propaganda, “The bigger the lie, the more believable it is.” I also believe these bogus space endeavours represent a ‘plant’ from which further operations could be launched against the anti-Nazi United States possibly assisted by an international league of Nazis in hiding rescued by the Vatican’s notorious ‘ratlines’ at the end of the war.

robertgrassi said...

ciao matt, thank you for this blog, it really rehabilitates the discourse about space hoaxes, your language restores what is always perverted in the voice of the liers, it is so true that they use always this kind of pseudo aristocratic humour, very snob, that gives the half of the truth but perverted in a double trick of wordplay, i have seen in a nasa webpage about wernher von braun: "the best achievement he has ever made was to make the people believe that space travels were possible, and that he took all his inspiration for it in science fiction", and i also found in wikipedia a phrase from the new york times front page news about (against) goddard in the 1920's, that very obscurely-snobishly (cryptically) said that it was impossible to burn fuel in outerspace ("a vacuum"), and announced (with this tone like a grin adressed to the "one who would understand") in june 1969: "it is now commonly accepted that a rocket engine can work in a vacuum", i also saw a photo of a vertical lauch of a shuttle where the shuttle was so dummy-like, and also a photo of von braun standing not so far from the apollo 11 launch where the rocket looks very dummy too, just enough for a mystic ritual but not to reach the exosphere, well finally i found your blog, i was looking around for skylab, i found two pages and i already learned 25 infos, and i agree absolutely, all these space hoaxes revealed is a true relief, a liberation, i feel so much cooler and lighter since i can accept it, anyway matt, you have a great style, you can edit, i am also surprised to see such verve in the previous "ideally ascetic" comment, falsely popular, truely stoic-poetic (at least very well balanced), but not able to perform into reality what is alledged as vulgar or vaguely violent, what is definitely and obviously unreal and fake, bye bye, robert

robertgrassi said...

the "verve" being attributed to zach g

superb text by gjalexander

fake iss, balloons,
fake transparent atmosphere, underwater films, shuttle fake gliding, glass would melt in space

i fully agree

i think that the 1940's propaganda was principally made of fake weapons, fake atomic energy

the nasa's nazi past is another over emotive trick to maximize the forgiving effect, the war criminals transformed into godlike pioneers, the fake scientist albert einstein supposedly responsible of millions of deaths transformed into a magician (selling time travels) and kindly offerring to heat everyones' house for very little money

this was beggining to be hard to believe in the 1960's, that is why the tale of the atomic waste dangers took place, under 100% manipulated protestations the public was again oppressed to the max, oppressing itslelf in protestations or false dreams of super powers

Free counter and web stats