Some Apparently Real Anti Gravity Aerospace Technology That Makes Sense
I do not know how real this specific craft is or is not. What I do know is that dirigible based technology is well over a hundred years old and is demonstrably real. I am skeptical and suspicious of mythic tales of huge luxury liner blimps myself, finding the Newsreel legend to seem more science fiction than science. Luxury liners at sea make sense, such things floating overhead, not so much. Size matters and not all technology can be scaled up from small models; and this is something our collective international spaced out consciousness tends to ignore. Huge rockets that can travel faster than speeding bullets are the stuff of NASA based propaganda fakery and do not represent demonstrable reality at all, no matter how clever the special effected apologetics, As future articles will show, things like parabolic flights, jet packs, hover boards, and all sorts of other Red Bull-like publicity stunts are nothing but examples of reality defying Hollywood crafted illusions. In the meantime here is a look at what would seem to represent real drone technology that makes sense. Whether or not such a balloon can remain aloft for the time periods as claimed and all the other details are something we cannot verify. What we can do is go out and get a helium filed balloon, we can go out an buy all sorts of radio controlled toy helicopters, and airplanes. We can even buy (albeit much smaller and real) rockets. The jet pack was sold as real to the public in the early 1960's or so. Can you wait on a line to either see such a feat or to go for a jet pack ride, yet, all these years later? You can go jump out of an airplane or bungee jump off a bridge, but not this.
We cannot buy things like working toy hover-boards and jet pack toys, can we?
The lack of such tangible interactive evidence is a huge clue.
P-791 Hybrid Air Vehicle source: LockheedMartinVideos
Huge Rockets Are A Lie: They Can Only Exist On Screens
"To achieve orbit, the (space) shuttle must accelerate from zero to a speed of almost 28,968 kilometers per hour (18,000 miles per hour), a speed nine times as fast as the average rifle bullet."
Communication Satellites Are Supposed To Be Extremely Far Away: So Far As To Seem To Be Useless As Communication Relay
22,300 Miles Away
"Communications satellites are often in geostationary orbit. At the high orbital altitude of 35,800 kilometers, a geostationary satellite orbits the Earth in the same amount of time it takes the Earth to revolve once. From Earth, therefore, the satellite appears to be stationary, always above the same area of the Earth."
Relative Size & Distance Matter
The Moon is even much further away than that. The International Space Station is supposed to be some 249 miles away from Earth surface. Even that distance is so far as to make seeing the space station impossible from Earth surface, despite all official claims to the contrary.
Skywaves mean Satellites Are Not Needed
If ionospheric refections need to be amplified by supposed satellite relay, would not much closer and more demonstrable manufactured means make more sense as explanation? Ham radio operators were supposedly bouncing radio signals around the planet well before anyone claimed to have put a satellite in orbit.
see: Skywave - Wikipedia
To Scale: The Solar System
Please consider how sub-atomically small even the tallest building, let alone supposed largest rocket is compared to the immensity of the imagined vacuous nothingness that may or may not be something, (depending on NASA's mood), of "outer space". Consider too how ridiculous the idea of interplanetary travel really is in the context of the relative supposed size and scale of this model. A trip to the Moon, for example, is ridiculous as the sub-atomic sized rocket would never have fuel to accomplish such an impossible feat. The subatomic sized rocket would never work in infinite vacuum anyway. The rocket propulsive gases could never do any work, they would essentially evaporate before being able to be used. Even if the rocket could function in such a vacuum, the Moon is supposed to be stuck in Earth's gravitational power and the subatomic particle sized rocket is subject to the same power for something like half its imagined trip there. It's not like it gets a free ride. We are minuscule relative to Earth's surface. We are not even bits of dust relative to imagined solar system, let alone galaxy and the rest of "infinite" imaginings.
Layers of Deceptive Lies: Huge Rockets Traveling Like Superman Are A Hoax
Highly edited footage of NASA launches with crowds seemingly watching giant rockets ascend into the sky are nothing but contrived propaganda and cannot logically be used as evidence that huge rockets were ever actually launched. The use of seeming witnesses to the event creates a perception that they actually witnessed the launches. Hearsay testimony is useless and is on the order of the similar testimony we get from obvious contrived governmental gun drills sold to the public as horrific and tragic historical and culturally shaping events. The "huge" rockets we see in this footage would seem to be nothing but Hollywood model work. These rockets look like miniatures. If you know someone who has an uncle who saw such a launch, we must wonder how true the claim is, or what was actually seen. People love the telephone game of hearsay and mistake this as evidence.
We might wish to consider how far away from the launch site one would actually be, and we should also consider the reality that if we were far enough away from the launch site we would not expect to see any evidence of a rocket launch at all. All of this footage is the result of Hollywood editing and production techniques and is proof of nothing but a propaganda campaign and evidence of NASA space fakery. Even if this footage was flawless and very belivable, we'd be unwise to base what we consider to be real on what we've seen on a screen.
A slow ascending NASA style rocket moves like a balloon. Any rocket we can buy and launch, flies up into the sky like a bullet and does not rise like a NASA rocket balloon.
A clue to fakery is how fast what would be a huge rocket exhaust smoke cloud moves.
Please notice how fast the clouds of rocket smoke expand and consider how huge these clouds would have been. This is clearly miniature work. Film and video can never logically be used as evidence an event like this occurred, but can be used to show the footage itself is fake. If we find flaws and inconsistencies, we then have evidence of deception; yet the lack of such evidence is not proof the footage is real. We should not confuse the representation of an event with the actual event. Reality, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder and what used to pass as impressive and traditional film based, darkroom special effects of yesterday no longer impress today, in our world of CGI augmented screen reality. I recommend going back and looking at the older footage that was sold as real, if you haven't.
Launch of Apollo 11 - July 16 1969 - NASA Footage source: Space Videos
Rocketry is the imagined medium of both hope and absolute destruction.
We are supposed to believe rockets can bring us into the promised land of outer space we will never get to wait on a line to visit. We are supposed to believe the same technology can deliver world ending, nuclear annihilation many times over.
Neither claim has any basis in realty.
Much of the real top secret technology from the last century would seem to be just Hollywood based special effect engineering.
Most people accept top secrets being kept when the weaponry or transportation technology involves science fiction staples, reinforced with crowd psychology propaganda products alone, while ignoring the obvious history of film fakery and general human deception. These same minds cannot accept the more rationale and demonstrable explanation that stage illusionist and obviously Hollywood contrived and edited electronic multimedia techniques explain the supposed feats of governmental might. And that this is the great need to know secret government seeks to keep. The governments of the world need us to buy into the Oz myth of omniscience and omnipotency and this is an old canard. The allegorical man behind the curtain is a cow herd. And we are not supposed to realize the true balance of power.
Faking The Lunar Surface
"Old Mother Goose, When she wanted to wander, Would ride through the air, On a very fine gander.
Jack's mother came in, And caught the goose soon, And mounting its back, Flew up to the moon."
"There was no need for NASA to land a man on the Moon before 1970, as the photograph above left shows. Project Apollo staff at Langley had a firm grip on it as early as 1964. Move out the way fella's, this is meant to be a picture taken by astroNOTS approaching the Moon."
image and quote source: APOLLO REALITY
There's No Evidence The Moon is A Floating Rock
The Moon might forever remain a metaphysical type of mystery. The Moon we see when we look up at the sky does not look like it does in the above photo.
Photographs and video footage of the Moon tend to show it looking like a rock like structure. The Moon we actually witness glows.
What we do know is this, the Moon is bright enough to be seen during the middle of the day, unlike any other celestial body but the Sun. Yes, Venus and Mercury can be seen at sun down and around sun up; but the Moon can be seen all day long as it wanes and waxes from full to nothingness. When it is full it appear to rise and set diametrically opposed to the rising and setting of the Sun and the Moon is so bright at night as to cast shadows. The Moon is clearly a light source of sorts, seemingly reflecting back the Sun light, whether it literally does so or whether the explanation is a bit less obviously electromagnetic in nature. In any case, what is obvious is that if people could magically travel to the lunar surface we'd expect it to look and be a lot like standing on the surface of a light bulb. Perhaps even with dangerous radiation that relatively thin and minuscule, tin foil suit would be obviously unable to protect one from.
The Moon glows. Again it is bright enough to be seen as a growing and shrinking sliver during the day. The NASA lunar landings are obviously fake for many reasons, and the Moon being best described either as a mirror like reflective surface or a light source of sorts in an of itself is another clue that the lunar landing footage government and News and University authority claim real is not.