Transcription by CastingWords The End You're listening to the Hour of the Time. I'm William Cooper. How's that for double programming, folks? You get the Hour of the Time lead-in music and Jesus saves at the same time. I don't know how that happens, but who cares? They're both relevant. For those of you who wish to attend the Shindig in Phoenix on December the 10th, call 1-800-REFOUND. R-E-F-O-U-N-D. 1-800-REFOUND. You can get all the information about that conference through that number. And make sure you do it in plenty of time to make plans. It's a pretty good lineup of people speaking, including me, yours truly, William Cooper, and a couple of others that you need to hear. One in particular, and I'll talk more about that on Monday when I come in with the complete set of press releases for the thing. I call it the thing because I don't know what else to call it. Anyway, call 1-800-REFOUND. Now, ladies and gentlemen, a lot of you find it just absolutely incredible. Some of the comments I've made about our supposed trip to the moon. Now, don't get me wrong. I'm not saying that we didn't go to the moon. I don't know if we did or not. I suspect we've been going to the moon a long time before we said we went to the moon. Anyway, that's what the research that we do around here tells us. But we do know that what they tell us about the moon and the information that we glean from the releases on the scientific information by NASA just don't jive, folks. It doesn't click. It's not right. So something is a lie. What is it? What they tell us they found up there? Or what science tells us? Or what the mathematical formulas tell us? We do know that even though they may have gone to the moon, the television or televised events purported to be broadcast from the moon was not so. And we also know that many of the photographs that they have released purported to have been taken on the moon contain things that cannot possibly exist on the moon if what they tell us about the moon are correct and if what they tell us about the optics in these satellites, for instance, Lunar Orbiter 4, that supposedly took these photographs. So tonight I'm going to demonstrate to you that if I'm crazy, I'm not the only one that's crazy. And if you've got any sense about you, even half a brain, before you make any judgments on me or anyone else who has uncovered the same information, you'd better get out your pen and paper and your old mathematical textbooks and do some figuring for yourself. You should also get copies of the relevant NASA photographs, put them under high magnification and check it out yourselves. Because if you don't, then in my estimation, you're just another dummy. And you should never believe it just because I say it or somebody else says it. Because if you do that, again, you're just another dummy. And if you can prove any of this wrong, I would certainly like to see that proof. Not your allegations, not your personal attacks, not your bullshit. I want to see your proof. Okay? So if you've got it, send it. We love information. We love proof. And as I've said many, many times in the past, I would love to be wrong about all of this stuff. I really would, folks. But unfortunately, so far, no one, and I mean no one, has been able to prove me wrong. So if we can see you, but we have a good start, let us know, let us know and leave and ask for a question. So if you have assistance, let us know, I think you might hear that either we might hear something, we might hear something, and we have a right word. You know, in... August, I believe it was. When we had our convention here, I did about six hours of presenting nothing but proof. Absolute, irrefutable proof that what they told us about the space program cannot possibly be true. And everyone sitting in that audience believed that it all was true when we began that memorable presentation. And there were a couple of people there who really believed extraterrestrials were here, bonking people and zapping them and taking them up into their spacecraft and impregnating them and taking sperm and all of them, doing all kinds of strange things and dumping them by the side of the road. And by the time that was finished, everyone in that room, and there were a lot of people here, folks, had a completely different viewpoint of the space program. And anyone who takes a legitimate, hard, scientific look at it, without believing anything, going in objectively, will come out with the same conclusions. We may not agree on every point. Even scientists don't agree on all scientific points. And not everything constitutes absolute proof. But we will all agree upon one thing. We've been lied to about the space program. That there will be no doubt about whatsoever amongst anyone or any group of people who seriously study what we've been told and what science tells us and what we know to be fact. And so, I've revealed these things on the radio also. Only, I've never had six hours in a row, nor a visual medium, to present the radio audience with the same proof that I presented here to the people who attended the conference. So tonight, I will present, over the radio, information that you can check yourselves. And not too long ago, when we were discussing the same subject, someone called in and talked about a book called Moongate. And I said, yes, I knew the book. We have it. I didn't know where it was because we only have about one quarter of our books on the library shelves, and it's a lot of books. And we've been receiving books and unpacking books ever since we opened this center. And I just recently came up on the book entitled Moongate, Suppressed Findings of the United States Space Program, the NASA Military Cover-Up by William L. Bryan II. So tonight's broadcast will be based upon this book. The majority of the program I will read verbatim from this book, interjecting, as I always do, my own knowledge and what we've picked up from research through the Intelligence Service and the Citizens Agency for Joint Intelligence. We will not take calls in the air tonight, so don't bother wearing your fingers to a stub dialing. We will not answer the phone. According to conventional science, the moon, ladies and gentlemen, has only one-sixth of the Earth's surface gravity. Sir Isaac Newton formulated the law of universal gravitation in 1666. That's the year 1666, which, of course, led to this conclusion. And for many years, we lived in a Newtonian universe. Well, a man came along named Albert Einstein and sort of fractured that universe. But we're not going to get into that. The famous law states that the gravitational pull of one body on another body depends on the product of the masses of the two bodies. Therefore, Earth, a planet, will attract another object with a certain specific force. This law also states that the gravitational force decreases as the distance away from this planet increases. The further out in space an object is from the Earth or Moon, the less pull or tug is exerted upon it. Now, Newton discovered that gravity decreases away from the surface of the Earth in the same way light intensity diminishes away from a light source. Only one-fourth as much light illuminates a given surface area 200 feet from a light source as compared to 100 feet. Similarly, at 300 feet, only one-ninth as much is received as compared to 100 feet. Now, this rapid drop law follows the inverse square law for the following discussion that I'm going to impart to you. The book has some figures in it. If you can find the book, I don't know if it's still in print or not, but I've given you the title and the author. So go look for it. But there are figures that illustrate what I'm going to be talking about. Near the Earth's surface, objects fall with an acceleration of 32.2 feet per second every second. Therefore, as each second goes by, an object will gain in speed by 32.2 feet per second. It will continue to accelerate until it reaches a constant speed because of air resistance, and this is the only limitation involved here. So if there were no atmosphere, this would not apply. In moving away from the Earth's surface, an observer will find that at an altitude of 3,960 miles, or two radii, from the Earth's center, the gravitational pull has been reduced by a factor of four, just as in the light example. At this altitude, bodies have only one-fourth of their surface weight. Therefore, a 200-pound man would weigh only 50 pounds. Furthermore, he would be accelerated at one-fourth the surface rate, or eight feet per second per second. And it would take him twice as long to fall a given distance starting from a position at rest. Now, moving out to a distance of three Earth radii from the center are 7,920 miles from the surface, the force of gravity decreases to one-ninth of the surface value. You see, the 200-pound man would now weigh only 22 pounds and would be falling 3.6 feet per second faster after every second of fall. At the distance of the moon, the force exerted by the Earth is only 1,3600 of the value on the Earth's surface. Therefore, the moon should only be falling toward the Earth, 32.2 divided by 3,600 feet per second per second. It would soon crash into the Earth if it were not slowly rotating about the Earth every 27 days or so. 28 days is a misnomer as far as the Earth's period of rotation or, excuse me, the moon's period of rotation about the Earth. It's really a little over 27 days. This orbit or rotation is what keeps it from falling. You see, the laws of physics say that a body in motion will tend to go directly in a straight line unless affected by some outside force, in this case, gravity. Gravity is trying to make the moon fall through the Earth and the moon's motion forward is tending to make it go in a straight line. At a certain point, it reaches a balance and maintains an orbit. Now, man-made satellites orbit the Earth in exactly the same way the moon does. However, since they are usually much closer to the Earth than the moon, the Earth's pull is significantly stronger on them and, because of this, they must travel much faster to continue orbiting. The moon moves around the Earth at a speed of about 2,300 miles per hour, while a satellite only 100 miles above the Earth must travel nearly 17,500 miles per hour to maintain this balance called in orbit. You see, in orbit it's nothing more than a balance point between the speed of a mass forward in space attempting to keep it in a straight path against the force of gravity trying to make the body fall to the Earth. Newton's analysis of gravitation was devised from the observation of the orbiting moon and objects falling on the Earth. And until similar experiments are performed on planetary bodies like the moon, the exact values of their surface gravities can never be determined. Newton could not even determine the moon's mass or predict the moon's force of attraction on other objects. Its mass was later calculated to be about 180 second of the Earth's by observing how much the Earth moves around the common center of rotation of the Earth and moon. In turn, the moon's derived mass and the Earth's predicted mass were used to calculate the moon's surface gravity which came out to be one-sixth of Earth's. Now since the moon is a much smaller body than Earth, it did not seem unreasonable to scientists that it should have a correspondingly smaller surface gravity. The point where a space vehicle enters the predominant attractive zone of the moon's gravity is called the neutral point and this will become very important. It is the region in space where the Earth's force of attraction equals the moon's force of attraction. In other words, again, a balance point where an object placed between the two should neither fall toward the moon. Nor toward the moon. Since the moon is smaller and supposedly has a smaller surface gravity, the neutral point should be quite close to the moon. In fact, if it is assumed that the moon has one-sixth of the Earth's surface gravity, the neutral point is calculated to be about nine-tenths of the distance between the Earth and the moon. The average distance to the moon is about 239,000 miles. Hence, this places the neutral point approximately 23,900 miles from the moon's center. Now, to show you that this neutral point distance has been predicted and calculated time and time again by astronomical scientists and engineers for many years, there are a series of references references, and you can look them up. There's a book called Principles of Astronautics. It was written in 1965 by a fellow of the British Interplanetary Society, M. Wettrecht, gave the calculated neutral point value as follows. at a distance of 346,000 kilometers, or 215,000 miles from the Earth, and 38,000 kilometers, or 23,600 miles from the moon. That is what is called the neutral point in. The attraction exerted by the Earth is equal to that exerted by the moon. In a book called Exploration of the Moon written in 1966 by an astronomer, Franklin M. Branley, the neutral point is listed as 20,000 miles from the moon, or 220,000 miles from the Earth. In the United States on the Moon, written by U.S. News and World Report, and this is for all you socialists because you think that that publication could never lie, the neutral point distance is again displayed as 22,000 miles from the surface of the moon. Remember, the original figures we gave were from the center of the moon, so that's the basic discrepancy here. In the mathematics of space exploration written in 1965, Merle H. Arendt calculated the neutral point using Newton's gravitation law and the moon's mass expressed as 183rd of the Earth's mass. Here's the conclusion, assuming a moon-to-Earth distance of 230,000 miles was the neutral point is about 23,900 miles from the moon at a point almost precisely nine-tenths of the distance to the moon. Still another derivation of 23,800 miles was made by John A. Isel in 1967 in a book called Astrodynamics, Rockets, Satellites, and Space Travel, assuming the moon's mean distance of 238,857 miles. He assumed a ratio of Earth-to-Moon masses of 81.56. Now, within the topic space travel, in the 1961 edition of Collier's Encyclopedia, the following is stated, quote, there must come a point where the two poles are equally strong and where they balance each other. This point lies about 23,500 miles from the surface of the moon. The 1960 printing of the Encyclopedia Britannica states the following within the topic interplanetary exploration, and I quote, after a sip of coffee, the so-called neutral point between Earth and Moon, this is a fictitious station on the Earth-Moon axis, about 19 moon radii from the moon, beyond which the moon's gravitational pull is stronger than the Earth's. 19 moon radii equals 20,520 miles from the moon. So, it is probably evident to all of you that minor differences exist between these values, stars. And this is due to slightly different assumptions of the Earth-to-Moon distance and ratio of Earth-to-Moon masses. An analysis, ladies and gentlemen, of how much this neutral point distance should vary depending on the Earth-to-Moon distance gives the results that I'm going to impart to you. And this assumes that the distances are measured from the Earth's center to the moon's center. If the total distance center-to-center is 252,710 miles, then Earth-to-neutral point should be 227,517 miles. The moon-to-neutral point should be 25,193 miles. If the center-to-center is 238,885 miles, then the moon-to-neutral point should be 23,815 miles. If the total distance center-to-center is 221,463 miles, then the moon-to-neutral point should be 22,078 miles. So in any case, the range of neutral point distances to the moon's center will be between 22,078 miles and 25,193 miles, with the assumption that the moon has one-sixth of Earth's gravity. And since so many people and organizations have stated the neutral point distance within a very close range of each other, with no major dramatic discrepancies, there seems to be no question as to where it is. Now, to satisfy the technically-minded listener, the complete derivation of the neutral point distances that I have given you, you can find presented in Appendix A in the book Moon Gate. so if you're interested in pursuing that, again, get this book. Now, I remind you that the neutral point distances were based upon Newton's law of universal gravitation. In addition, most of the writers who referenced them were probably unaware of space program findings regarding the neutral point's real location. As I mentioned previously, only by observing falling or orbiting bodies in the Moon's vicinity could the actual neutral point distance or the Moon's true gravity be determined. This information could have been available to NASA or the Russians as early as 1959 from the very first Moon probes. If Moon probes successfully orbited and landed prior to 1969, the actual neutral point distance should have been available to the public also. If it were published, there would be an exact method of determining the Moon's surface gravity. So the ramifications, ladies and gentlemen, of finding a neutral point distance greater than the 20,000 to 25,000 mile distances that I have given you can be considered. We showed you how gravity falls off with distance away from the Earth's surface. The Moon displays the same behavior as the Earth. Therefore, ladies and gentlemen, the Moon's gravitational pull, 1,080 miles above its surface, or two radii from the Moon's center, would be one-fourth the surface value. Similarly, at three Moon radii, or 2,160 miles above the surface, the force would be one-ninth the surface value. With this concept in mind, you should see that if the real neutral point distance from the Moon's surface were considerably greater than 25,000 miles, the Moon's surface gravity would have to be much greater, not just a little, but much greater than the predicted value of one-sixth of the Earth's surface gravity. It would imply that Newton's law of gravitation does not hold for bodies of planetary size. It would also imply that NASA and the military have been suppressing information on the true nature of Moon gravity. So, clearly, the neutral point distance had to have been exactly determined if astronauts were to land safely on the Moon. And this could only be determined experimentally in the history of this discovery. This discovery will be presented on this broadcast. A lunar probe, or spacecraft launched from the Earth, will continuously lose velocity until it reaches the neutral point due to the Earth's gravitational pull upon it, unless, of course, it has a constant source of acceleration. However, after it passes the neutral point, the Moon's pull becomes stronger and it begins to accelerate, increasing in velocity. It might have the proper trajectory to assume a lunar orbit or to score a direct hit upon the Moon's surface. The need, ladies and gentlemen, for an accurate measurement of the Moon's gravity, hence the precise neutral point distance, was pointed out by Hugh Odishaw, Executive Director of the United States National Committee for the International Geophysical Year. And he presented a report in 1958, which I have, to all member nations of the International Geophysical Year, entitled, Basic Objectives of a Continuing Program of Scientific Research in Outer Space. This came directly out of a symposium held for that entire year, which I've discussed in previous episodes of the Hour of the Time, in which we have the booklets that were printed and the reports that came out of that year-long colloquium. In this report, he indicated that estimates of the Moon's mass at that time were based on observations of the motions of asteroids and the Earth's polar axis. The uncertainty attributed to the Moon's mass was given as 0.3%, which was great enough to affect lunar rocket trajectories. Accordingly, Oda Shaw indicated the desirability of determining the Moon's mass more precisely in early Moon experiments. Now, this could be accomplished by tracking the rocket as it approached the Moon and deriving the Moon's pull at each point of the trajectory, hence the surface gravity. Now, by now, you probably realize how much difficulty NASA and the Russians would have had in sending successful Moon probes, even if they knew the exact position of the neutral point. For if the neutral point, hence the Moon's gravitational pull, deviated considerably from the predicted value derived from Newton's law of universal gravitation, a series of failures would be expected in attempts to send successful lunar probes. It's also reasonable, ladies and gentlemen, to conclude that a discovery of a significant difference in the expected Moon gravity would require many more years of reprogramming, rocket design, lunar probe design, and so on, and so on. The time required for people to readjust their thinking patterns would also be a very significant factor, especially after nearly 300 years of education and training in the gravitational concepts of Sir Isaac Newton. So in the style of the Department of Defense, we should also expect that suppression of the new findings would and did occur. Now, keeping these ideas in mind, along with the conventional idea of the position of the neutral point from the Moon, the history of lunar probes will now be reviewed. The Moon was chosen as the first target for exploration simply because it's the closest celestial body to the Earth, therefore giving us an excellent chance for some successes. Russia was the first nation that we know of publicly to send a successful lunar probe called Luna Warren on January the 2nd, 1959. It flew within 4,660 miles of the surface and broadcast information back to Earth after traveling into space. The United States had made three unsuccessful attempts with Pioneers 1, 2, and 3 in 1958 before achieving a flyby 37,300 miles from the surface several months after Luna 1. Luna 2 was launched on September 12, 1959 and became the first lunar probe to hit the Moon, sending back signals before impact. And we'll take a short break and resume. Don't go away, folks. I'll be right back. I'll be right back. Exciting, isn't it? Well, it wouldn't be exciting if it weren't for Swiss America Trading. In fact, there wouldn't even be a broadcast tonight if it weren't for them, to tell you the truth. I broadcast for as long as I could on satellite, paying for the broadcast with my own money, and on Sunday nights for a while on WWCR. And then we had an opportunity to go five nights a week, and we couldn't afford it. Couldn't do it. But we have a rule in our family. It's the only rule we have. Whenever we know that something is the right thing to do, our answer is, trust in God and just do it. And so that's what we did. And we broadcast, I don't know, about three months. We were trying to just make enough money to stay on the air. We did anything that we could legally and lawfully, and sold almost everything that we owned at that time. And then I began to get offers from people who wanted to sponsor the broadcast. And I wrestled for a long period of time how to handle this. Who could sponsor this broadcast and how long would they stick with us? And what would be their motive for doing it? I didn't want to be just another broadcaster sucking in the sheeple so that they could flush their money down some bottomless pit so somebody else could get rich. That was never a consideration with the hour of the time. So we instituted an investigation into the background of all of the companies and people who wanted to sponsor this program. And when it was all over, there was only one, only one, that I was even interested in talking to or even meeting, and that was Craig Smith at Swiss America Trading. And I had some serious questions to ask Mr. Smith. And he turned out had some equally serious questions to ask me. And we talked for a long time. And faxes flew back and forth and letters and phone conversations before I finally felt comfortable that this man was telling me the truth and that he was who he claimed to be. And our investigations bore that out. He had been in business for exactly the number of years that he said he had. We checked with law enforcement and with the Better Business Bureau and everyone. And as you will find with any business, there had been some complaints lodged. When we investigated those complaints, however, we found that they were all resolved amicably and that there had never been any dirty dealing or criminal actions on the part of either Swiss America Trading or or apparently any of those who had lodged any complaints in attempting to steal from them. As in most human endeavors, it is usually a lack of communication that is at the heart of most disagreements in business when businesses are legitimate. Now, Craig showed me that he had put in a system that would cure that forever. See, everything's taped. All the terms of every deal are talked and repeated and taped. And then before your order is shipped, someone from Swiss American Trading called you and goes through all of the terms of the agreement and the order and it's taped again. So there can no longer be any of those misunderstandings. At least theoretically, there have been a couple which have been resolved immediately. And they were due usually to misunderstandings. But they've done everything they can to make their end of their business with you straight, legal, honest, in the best interest of everyone involved. Everything is taped so that nobody can tell any lies about the other one. Either the customer or Swiss American Trading. It just cannot be done. Not only that, but they bend over backwards and give you a buyback program. A buyback program. Nobody else does that. And Craig has given me his word that if there's any problem whatsoever. Any discrepancy. Anything that they have done or might have done or could possibly even have been misconstrued that he will make it good. And since over the last two years, Craig and I have become good friends, I have, at some point along the way, determined to give you my guarantee to back up his. So, if you're in your wildest dreams, thinking of doing what you all should be doing anyway, putting some of your assets into precious metals, I hope that in lieu of all of this that we've gone through to make this available for you, and unlike others who say that the people who work there are their good friends, they really are my good friends. And that's easily proven. I'm not just sitting here spouting off. And I get no pay from Swiss American trading, ladies and gentlemen. My agreement with Craig Smith was that this broadcast had to be absolutely above reproach. Which meant he pays for the air time and the satellite time. I get absolutely nothing. Nothing. So no one can stand out there and say that I'm making money from Craig Smith or Swiss America trading because I'm not. Or that this broadcast or me is profiting by putting out this information to the American people and because of this profit, this information is what it is. And that's just not true. So, folks, I hope that gives you a little better understanding of who we are and who Swiss America trading is and who Craig Smith is and what we're all about here. This relationship is to help us present you with this broadcast. To help Swiss America trading stay in business by providing them with customers and to help you get ready for what's surely to come by providing you with an honest good source of precious metals in their various forms. made available to you by people who care about you and care about this broadcast and have done everything possible to make sure that nothing, nothing goes wrong. And, folks, you've never heard me on this broadcast, unlike many others, tell you that you're going to make any profit from buying precious metals. What you'll hear me tell you is your assets will be saved from the constant devaluation of the dollar. and that's what I believe is important. So call Swiss America trading 1-800-289-2646 and do it right now. 1-800-289-2646 and if you can remember it easier, 1-800-BUY-COIN.すで円 TEC Rodrigo opens 2-800-26示 1-800-2911 and do it right now. Let's go and see and see Yonton! 1-800-29 new & the forskj and 2-800-cić of this happens even 1-800-ichte write 1-800- Mang 2-800- человек and 3-800- которых is 7-600- chapter 1-800- Luna 3 was launched October 4, 1959, and circled behind the moon, approaching within 4,372 miles. It sent back pictures of the far side. Significantly, the Russian program for exploration of the moon came to a stop for four years, following the Luna 3 lunar probe. All of the lunar shots were tracked with radar to collect trajectory and gravitational data. As previously mentioned, the trajectory of an object in the moon's vicinity enables the surface gravity to be calculated, which in turn enables the neutral point to be calculated. If the findings deviated from the expected ones, it would probably require years to reassess and re-engineer future moon probes. A soft landing would require a much larger launch vehicle and a great deal more fuel, if the gravity were a lot higher than expected. Russia's secrecy concerning its space program is well known. Therefore, the United States may not have benefited from information obtained by Russian moon probes. According to Ralph Lapp, in a book entitled Man in Space, The Next Decade, and I quote, the Soviets clamped tight secrecy over their rockets, never once releasing a photograph of a launching. Moreover, the Russian scientists were slow in making their data available to the scientific community. End quote. In addition, the United States Pioneer 4 flyby at 37,300 miles may not have been close enough to the moon to enable NASA engineers to determine the true nature of lunar gravity. At any rate, subsequent ranger missions indicated that the United States was having many problems in achieving successful moonshots. The first rangers carried seismometers in spherical containers designed to withstand the impact of landings. Unfortunately, Ranger 3, launched on January 26, 1962, missed its target completely and went into a solar orbit. Ranger 4 hit the moon on April 23, but did not send back any useful information, at least that the public is aware of. Ranger 5 was launched on October 18 and missed the moon by 450 miles. However, it was tracked for over eight hours. Further launches were put off until 1964, and the entire program was reorganized, indicating that they had indeed located a different neutral point. It is significant that all ranger missions after number five were designed only to take pictures because of the difficulty in achieving a semi-hard landing with a seismometer package. The seismometer was encased in a 30-inch balsa wood ball, which was to be slowed up sufficiently by retro rockets to hit the surface at 150 miles per hour and still survive. It was designed to be able to impact granite at 200 miles per hour and continue to operate. If the moon had only one-sixth of Earth's surface gravity, then perhaps the seismometer packages would have survived. However, if lunar gravity were much more than expected, a successful landing without big enough retro rockets for breaking would be impossible. But even through the Apollo space program, they stuck to the one-sixth gravity figure. Evidently, the ranger scientists anticipated that the weak one-sixth gravity would keep the velocity of impact down to a low enough level, since they eliminated the package from further missions and delayed these missions for almost a year and a half. Perhaps, just perhaps, they learned something new about the moon's gravity. After Russia's four years of silence, Lunar 4 was launched on April 2, 1963. It flew within 5,300 miles of the moon, and the purpose of this probe was never revealed except for a brief announcement that, and I quote, experiments and measurements which were conducted are completed. Radio communications with the spacecraft will continue for a few more days, end quote. Typical bureaucraties. It is probable that the need for detailed gravity data was behind the mission. Soft landings could not be successful without this kind of information. The United States launched Ranger 6 on January 30, 1964, and the electrical system was allegedly burned out when the cameras were accidentally turned on during the flight. Hence, no pictures were sent. Sound familiar? After supposedly redesigning the system to eliminate this danger, Ranger 7 was launched on July 28. It was successful and sent back thousands of pictures. Ranger 8 was launched on February 17, 1965, and Ranger 9 was launched on March 21, 1965. Both were successful, and some of the Ranger 9 pictures were broadcast on television. The Russians attempted a soft landing with Luna 5 on May 9, 1964, but it crashed at full speed. Luna 6 was launched on June 8, but missed the moon, while Luna 7 crashed because the retro rockets supposedly fired too soon. Luna 8 was sent up on December 3 and also crashed. Luna 9 landed successfully on the moon on February 3, 1966, or at least this is what we've been told. The United States soft landing program was called Surveyor and began in 1960. In 1962, a decision was made to trim the weight of Surveyor by more than 300 pounds, with many experiments abandoned. And what does that say? The reason given was problems with the proposed Atlas Centaur second stage. Surveyor's scheduled 1963 launch date passed, and it was not even close to being ready. The project costs were running ten times the original estimates, and troubles forced one delay after another. A congressional inquiry was made, and the House Committee on Science and Astronautics found fault with the management practices of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, known as JPL, NASA, and the prime contractor, Hughes Aircraft. In a book entitled We Reach the Moon, John Noble Wilford gave an account of the surveyor's difficulties. It seems Jet Propulsion Lab officials conceded that they initially underestimated the difficulty of the project. Hmm. Oh, me. One official admitted that the project was not given enough support in the earlier days, and that they were overconfident in their ability to do things. It is probably more than coincidental that the Ranger 5 failure in October 18, 1962, resulted in the abandonment of the seismometer package and a significant delay in future Ranger missions due to the difficulty in a semi-hard landing. The surveyor program, folks, was delayed for 28 months from its schedule, and surveyor one did not soft land on the moon until June 2, 1966. The U.S. effort to orbit the moon using lunar probes began August 17, 1958, with Atlas Able 1. It missed the moon, as did the next two attempts. A decision was then made to build a larger spacecraft and to use the Atlas Agena D as the carrier. It appears, folks, that a larger rocket was necessary to carry a larger payload, which may have consisted of fuel used in breaking the proposed orbiter. This would be necessary to reduce the velocity of the satellite so that it could achieve an orbit. Again, it seems more, much more than coincidental, that the project to orbit the moon, which began in 1958, was postponed until 1964, when the Boeing Company began work on the Lunar Orbiter Project. The Russians managed to place Luna 10 into orbit around the moon on April 13, 1966, after having successfully soft-landed with Luna 9 on February 3, 1966. It appears that substantial retro-rocket breaking was required for orbit insertion as well as soft landing. At any rate, both were accomplished a short time apart. The United States Lunar Orbiter 1 successfully went into lunar orbit on August 14, 1966. Lunar Orbiter 5 was sent crashing into the moon on January 31, 1968, after a successful mission. Now, these missions photographed over 99% of the moon and led to the discovery of lunar mass guns, or increases in the moon's surface gravity in certain areas. These mass guns we'll discuss at a later time. The U.S. Just checking, folks. Now, because of the problems that we've had on satellite and we've had on getting hooked up and everything, it was important that we stop and check and make sure that we are, in fact, actually still up there. Now, we're not going to take any calls tonight, so whoever is calling, you're wasting your time. Absolutely. Wasting your time because we're not going to answer the phone. And we're going to continue this on Monday because if I get into too much detail tonight, in about four or five minutes, we're going to have to cut it. And when we do that, you're going to be left hanging. So I'm sort of going to wrap up what I was talking about real quick right now. And then we'll continue this on Monday night. And we'll continue it until you get an understanding of what I've been trying to tell you. using scientific fact and not press releases from NASA are asking you to believe what I say on this radio broadcast just because I say it or because I tell you that we've discovered these things in our research. For those of you who come to our next conference here, if there are not too many who attended the first one, we will repeat the special presentation on the space program, which will, I assure you, open your eyes like they've never been opened before. So far, tonight's analysis, folks, of the lunar probes indicates that the United States and Russia probably had a very clear picture of the nature of lunar gravity as early as 1959. And I believe, through my research, probably a lot earlier than that. However, it's a certainty that both countries learned how to work with lunar gravity and make soft landings by 1966. Now, this date is important in light of information on lunar gravity that I'm going to present to you on Monday night. Now, you've been kept in suspense concerning suggestions that moon gravity might deviate from the predicted value of one-sixth of Earth. And this was necessary to provide the background information that you need to make a proper evaluation. The analysis on Monday night will focus on the position of the neutral point as given to the public by various writers and organizations subsequent to lunar probes. Ultimately, the source of the information is probably NASA. In reference to Apollo 11, Time magazine gave the following neutral point information in the July 25, 1969 issue. Now, listen to this based upon what I've already told you. And make sure you're here Monday night because you don't want to miss one single second of this. At a point 43,495 miles from the moon, lunar gravity exerted a force equal to the gravity of the Earth, then some 200,000 miles distant. End quote. You might be surprised, ladies and gentlemen, concerning this statement since the neutral point distances presented earlier in this broadcast were all 20,000 to 25,000 miles from the moon. Now, you might think that time has made an error. but just to point out that the neutral point seems to have changed on Monday night. We'll give you other sources that substantiate that claim. So, I hope you all have a continuing good and safe Thanksgiving weekend. So far, ladies and gentlemen, it is November the 25th, 1994. 2255. Mountain Standard Time and all is well. Good night and God bless you all. Good night. Good night. Yes, Captain Kirk, it is true that all across America, the Klingons are still Klingons. the Klingons playing, you cannot miss Terry or the Klingons Thank you. Thank you. To say what no other man has dared to say before. To wake the people. To say what no other man has dared to say before. Transform the sheeple. And try, just try to save freedom for the world. To say what no other man has dared to say before. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.