Sci-Fi Fathers of NASA (Arthur C. Clarke, Rodenberry, etc.)

[hoi.polloi]

Ugh. Clarke definitely sounds like one of the "converted" technology-obsessed drones. It's like the Skeptic Magazine religion or something. I don't think he honestly understands science enough to know what he's talking about, if indeed that was a quote by him.

BTW, I recommend getting a copy of the Dec 1966 issue of National Geographic and keeping it handy to show anyone who brings up the "reflectors on the moon proof" malarkey. I bought a copy on eBay for a few dollars. The magazine has an article about lasers which mentions that MIT has been bouncing them off the moon for years, obviously long before the Apollo Missions supposedly went there. And, just as obviously proves that you don't need a reflector to bounce lasers off the moon in the first place.

That makes sense, yes. More indication that Clarke is just rambling. He doesn't even come across as a cohesive wise old man. He sounds like a bitter young kid with a chip on his shoulder about the "unpatriotic" and a handy comedic sarcasm to bat away any arguments against his belief.

[reichstag fireman]

We are all nitwits according to Clarke:

As a long-time admirer of the United States, I am appalled to hear that a recent poll suggests that 20% of Americans are ignorant fools: I hope the figure is grossly exaggerated, as no other term is strong enough to describe anyone who believes the Moon landings have been faked. If the late unlamented Evil Empire was still around, I might have suspected some of being communist sympathisers attempting to discredit the one achievement for which the U.S.A. may be remembered a thousand years from now. Remembering how quickly Watergate unraveled, how could any sane person imagine that a conspiracy involving hundreds of thousands of people over more than a decade would not have done the same? Ben Franklin put it well: "A secret known to three people can be kept — as long as two of them are dead."

And how do these nitwits account for the fact that, for the last thirty years, the laser reflectors and radio sensors on the Moon have been transmitting terabytes of data back to Earth? Who do they think put them there — E.T.s? But I can't waste any more time on lunatics: I am too busy proving that George Washington never existed, but was invented by the British Disinformation Service to account for a certain minor unpleasantness in the Colonies.
Sincerely,
Arthur Clarke, 11 July, 2001.
source

OMG. Well, if those really are Arthur C. Clarke's words, we now know he was either a nitwit - or a perp.

I'm tempted to chalk-up Arthur C Clarke as a blackmailed serial paedophile, who did exactly what what he was told to do and say by his blackmailing handlers. Pretty commonplace situation really.

To this day, the blackmail Operation Ore keeps an army of elite kiddy fiddlers singing from the same hymnsheet on a host of topics. The army includes several former government ministers from the UK, and even a NATO Secretary General, or two.

It's said that the Moonie Sex Cult has some pretty damning goods of its own - a burgeoning portfolio of Washington insiders - politicians, judges, army top brass - all caught on camera engaged in vile child sex acts with the "Little Angels", the Moonies' travelling choir of Korean schoolgirls brought over especially to entertain certain circles. (Franklin Conspiracy et al)

If that's correct, Clarke didn't really speak freely at all. He was a paedo-puppet. How many more like him?

[simonshack]

*

While reading Arthur_C. Clarke's page on Wonkypedia, I bumped into this info:

"In 1994, Clarke appeared in a science fiction film; he portrayed himself in the telefilm Without Warning, an American production about an apocalyptic alien first contact scenario presented in the form of a faux newscast."

So I was curious to check out said telefilm. It turns out to be the crummiest crap of all times - it's so pathetically lame it's almost funny. But my point is: for Arthur C. Clarke to participate in this utter trash tells me all I need to know about the man.

Arthur C. Clarke is featured at 44min into "Without Warning"... Enjoy.


full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AACxhMP6Nrs

Note this line in the YT video description:
"First broadcast: October 30, 1994, the 56th anniversary of the "War of the Worlds" broadcast."

I'm actually watching the whole thing right now ( I must be some sort of masochist ) and the prevailing thought torturing my mind is: How can so many grown-up individuals accept to participate in such an excruciatingly silly movie?

[MrSinclair]

While Philip K Dick has no ties to NASA and the writers mentioned above he is worth bringing up for his insights into media fakery. In particular his book The Penultimate Truth which portrays a world where the populace lives underground in horrid conditions as interplanetary war has rendered the surface uninhabitable. The "survivors" below ground toil building robots to fight on behalf of Earth. The media constantly reports on the war and conditions on the surface, and needless to say it is all fake.
The book left quite an impression on me at a young age as did all his work.

From one of the Amazon reviews.
"One of his more cynical depictions of a duplicitous U.S. government, the story involves yet another one of the author's post-atomic holocaust futures. Here, it is the year 2025, and the bulk of mankind lives underground in protective "cubbies," while a pitched atomic war is fought on the surface by the "leadies" (robots) of the opposing sides. What is actually happening, however (and this is not a spoiler; it is revealed in the novel's opening chapters), is that the war has been over for a full 13 years, and the government in charge--via Agency-written and -produced fake news bulletins and televised talks from a programmed "president"--is doing its darnedest to keep the populace underground and literally in the dark; a captive labor force for its own devices! "
http://www.amazon.com/The-Penultimate-T ... mate+truth


I spent the early part of my life obsessed with his books and rereading them constantly, now it seems I'm spending the latter part in exactly the type of world he was writing about.

[fizban1977]

The first captain of the Enterprise was Christopher Pike. Always thought this was a nod to Albert Pike. Has a statue in Washington. Wrote Morals and Dogma, where he said this.


Wrote about 3 world wars. Helped start the KKK. This guy was one busy Confederate general.

The monolith in 2001 in the book is a pyramid. It was changed to a rectangle by Kuberick. Many have said that the monolith is the movie screen and manipulated perception. This was the same guy who made Eyes Wide Shut.

[Maat]

The first captain of the Enterprise was Christopher Pike. Always thought this was a nod to Albert Pike. Has a statue in Washington. Wrote Morals and Dogma, where he said this.
http://libertyforlife.com/religion/imag ... er-god.jpg

Wrote about 3 world wars. Helped start the KKK. This guy was one busy Confederate general.

The monolith in 2001 in the book is a pyramid. It was changed to a rectangle by Kuberick. Many have said that the monolith is the movie screen and manipulated perception. This was the same guy who made Eyes Wide Shut.

Hi Fizban,

Since Pike is a quite common name it could just as easily have been a reference to the Pike Expedition as anything else, being the 1st official American exploration of the western Great Plains & Rocky Mountains in what is now Colorado (even 5 British Royal Navy ships were named HMS Pike). We can only speculate on the scriptwriter's reasons for that name choice though, of course.

However, I must ask you to please include the original webpage source link to that and all images/info you post.

I would also recommend reading my post regarding the dissemination of that specifically clipped out of context quote here: viewtopic.php?p=2371503#p2371503

[burningame]

I spent the early part of my life obsessed with his books and rereading them constantly, now it seems I'm spending the latter part in exactly the type of world he was writing about.

welcome to 2012!

[hoi.polloi]

I spent the early part of my life obsessed with his books and rereading them constantly, now it seems I'm spending the latter part in exactly the type of world he was writing about.

welcome to 2012!

It's enough to make one paranoid that we create the world we focus our attention on.

That is not something I believe, but I do believe we have conscious choices and will. And that - despite the potential sketchiness of all these classic writers - their message is usually one of hope: our world can be better, and it helps to be aware of dangers.

We don't believe that when we look at a mouse trap in a kitchen that we are more likely to accidentally snap it on our finger. We choose, if we are smart, to use that knowledge to remember not to trap ourselves. So why do we errantly believe that when we are aware of the dangers posed by P.K. Dick or G. Orwell that we are more likely to create those dystopian worlds? It is only because we don't trust our own smarts.

If anything, the stories serve as true warnings -- not "predictions". At least, that is the worldview I have. I understand if others would say that's delusional, but then those people are typically arguing for "self-fulfilling prophecy" type cosmos, and I just can't get on board with that mentality. I think we have free will and choice.

[simonshack]

So why do we errantly believe that when we are aware of the dangers posed by P.K. Dick or G. Orwell that we are more likely to create those dystopian worlds? It is only because we don't trust our own smarts.

Dear Hoi,

Let me quote our member Farcevalue - who once met Tony Blair face-to-face (to attach his tie):

The funny thing is, he had that goofy amicable smile about him and nothing would have set off any bells ringing "psychopath", although I suppose he would have thought little about having one of the creepy SAS or MI6 goons lurking nearby dispense with me if he felt it necessary. It's weird being around these politicos that have no compunction about mobilizing the deaths of millions, but they don't come across as threatening at all.

This is something I have been pondering a lot about. How do the scummy leaders of this planet preserve that aura of apparent goodwill and innocence? To be sure, P.K. Dick and G. Orwell failed to predict that a future dystopian society (such as we have today, let's face it!) would be headed by a bunch of smiling and personable, "democratically elected" and "freedom-loving" hypocrites. I guess that reality has surpassed our best science-fiction writers' wildest imaginations...

[hoi.polloi]

That's true. Because even though George Lucas had the line "so this is how liberty [democracy?] dies - with thunderous applause", he's a terrible writer. Baddum chhing!

[hoi.polloi]

Well you can call it a coincidence or happenstance or a conspiracy, but it is interesting to note that as the pressure boiler on NASA fakery increases with the public's awareness of the scam, there seems to be some shuffling footwork.

J.J. Abrams, creator of the deplorably written series "Lost" (which seems in retrospect to serve no other purpose than divert conspiratorial thinking associated with aircraft disasters into a limited hangout of nonsense, where the viewers can get "Lost" and eventually lose interest in the very idea of conspiracy), has become the darling of NASA's sci-fi future recently.

You see, not only was he behind the latest Star Trek film and its sequel Star Trek: Into Darkness (replete with 9/11-esque disaster imagery and plenty of hypnotic airport-like ambience those Masons seem to love so well). He is now signed on to direct the next Star Wars movie (rumored to reprise the roles of all the original cast like Mark Hammil, Harrison Ford, et al).

Funny thing about Star Wars: it's owned by the Disney corporation now. Yes, yup, and yeppers, the same Disney/Pixar suspected since the beginning of the satellite hoaxes of NASA collaboration in that dastardly desert of disaster the Nevada/New Mexico/etc. countryside -- or is it still all being done in Laurel Canyon? Little does it matter, given the Air Force apparently has more studio acreage than any single Hollywood studio (according to the late Bill Kaysing).

I guess there aren't many mind-numbing directors willing to throw so much shit so thoroughly over their audience as the big action ones like James Cameron, Michael Bay, Steven Spielberg and now J.J. Abrams. But enough hyperbole. I just found it to be amusing news.

[Rudy Algera]

Quote simonshack:

Let me quote our member Farcevalue - who once met Tony Blair face-to-face (to attach his tie):

Farcevalue wrote:The funny thing is, he had that goofy amicable smile about him and nothing would have set off any bells ringing "psychopath", although I suppose he would have thought little about having one of the creepy SAS or MI6 goons lurking nearby dispense with me if he felt it necessary. It's weird being around these politicos that have no compunction about mobilizing the deaths of millions, but they don't come across as threatening at all.

"... would be headed by a bunch of smiling and personable ... hypocrites ..."

Shakespeare knew!

O villain, villain, smiling, damnèd villain!
My tables—meet it is I set it down
That one may smile, and smile, and be a villain—
At least I am sure it may be so in Denmark.

Hamlet Act 1, scene 5, 105–109

He pulls out his "tables" (a writing tablet) to note down that one may "smile, and smile, and be a villain." In Shakespeare's previous tragedy, Julius Caesar, the young Octavius delivered the working version of Hamlet's aphorism: "And some that smile have in their hearts, I fear,/ Millions of mischiefs" (Act 4, scene 1, 50–51).

http://www.enotes.com/shakespeare-quotes/one-may-smile-smile-villain

[hoi.polloi]

If the message of Batman's enemy Joker is that smiling is criminal in the face of a depressing life, I guess we're all kind of clowns and jokers on this site. In Tolstoy's conservative traditional classic Anna Karenina, the pseudo-villain was also a smiler and soother of spirits, despite his sometimes deplorable use of magnanimity to force people to oversee his recklessness with others' emotions. So I see the point that it is possible to get away with inhumane mischief by just smiling a great deal, Karl Rove style. But is that the quality of all laughter? Surely not! Good humor stands apart. I won't criticize the perps for displaying a bit of actual humanity. If it is that. If it is but a mask on their part, perhaps one day they can learn the humor of being decent people and forget the humor of being a sociopath. Laughter is one of humanity's great qualities and great transformers. I think it's funny that the managers of pop Sci-Fi culture like J.J. Abrams tend to be so insular and incestuous. Economy of players, I suppose.