And then, asteroids... And then....

I don't know about you, but I've seemed to discern an uptick in the chatter about asteroids lately, since the Chelyabinsk incident of 2013 which really brought it home to roost. You may recall that there was a potential observation of UFO or 'Stargate Atlantis drone technology', apparently in terms of an object, seemingly under intelligent/AI control, interfering with the final stages of the descent of that meteorite/asteroid, cracking it up in mid-air so as to minimise the risk of large rock ground impact, which certainly would have been immensely devastating, had it managed to come down largely intact. Did we witness an 'Ancient Weapons Platform' in operation, defending us from the evil space rocks? Who knows...

Anyway, in the most recent surge of interest, I'm thinking I've picked up this increase in chatter across a number of platforms, in terms of what's coming at us through the medium of TV, media & online. However, there's very little I could source regarding the matter, as it's largely been noticed in passing, when I catch a glimpse of a report on TV, or read a snippet in a newspaper, then forget about it due to other concerns. Shows such as Salvation have been coming out on Netflix, at around the same time that this (apparent to me) uptick has been cropping up in various places.

Do you recall what Carol Rosin described regarding Werner Von Braun's 'prophecy' regarding the false flag tactics of the New World Order? Here it is again if you weren't sure:

The strategy that Wernher Von Braun taught me was that first the Russians are going to be considered to be the enemy. In fact, in 1974, they were the enemy, the identified enemy. We were told that they had "killer satellites". We were told that they were coming to get us and control us-that they were "Commies."

Then terrorists would be identified, and that was soon to follow. We heard a lot about terrorism. Then we were going to identify third-world country "crazies." We now call them Nations of Concern. But he said that would be the third enemy against whom we would build space-based weapons.
The next enemy was asteroids. Now, at this point he kind of chuckled the first time he said it.

Asteroids- against asteroids we are going to build space-based weapons.

And the funniest one of all was what he called aliens, extraterrestrials. That would be the final scare. And over and over and over during the four years that I knew him and was giving speeches for him, he would bring up that last card. "And remember Carol, the last card is the alien card. We are going to have to build space-based weapons against aliens and all of it is a lie."

So in the context of the above, I would like to offer the following, as a suggestion, for all those who are presently working in the development of space-based weaponry, who may be uncertain about the actual purposes for which the weapons are being constructed. The only thing you need, to deal with asteroids, is a very simple, straightforward, easily deployed technology platform (note I avoided saying 'weapons platform'), described by genius author & academic, Dr Paul LaViolette, on his website, Starburst Foundation

He offers the following, by way of establishing a proof of one of his theories concerning an alternative physics/cosmology paradigm.. It concerns the existence of SUPERLUMINAL force/action arising from electric shock discharge. Now you may balk at the prospect, but rest assured, superluminal speeds are understood by many to be readily achievable under certain conditions. As he describes the proof of his theory, in the context of the prevailing scientific opinions at the time of his predictions, just keep in mind the possibility that asteroids really are a hazard to our collective civilisation's health - and that the material you are reading offers up the solution, without the need for ridiculous scope space-based weaponry programs. It's clear as crystal, in fact.

Gravity wave and Coulomb wave speed and gravity wave force (2003): At the time of this prediction, most physicists and astronomers believed that gravity waves and Coulomb waves should always travel at the speed of light. They also concurred that the force exerted by such waves should scale in proportion to the field gradient.
Prediction No. 11 (2003): Subquantum kinetics predicts that an electron shock discharge should produce coinciding electric and gravity potential waves that travel faster than the speed of light and that the speed of these superluminal waves at any given point in time should depend on the electric potential gradient of the discharge (LaViolette, Subquantum Kinetics, p. 130). This is predicted to be due to the movement of the ether wind created by the shocks, the velocity of the pulses being increased by the additional forward velocity of the ether wind reference frame relative to which they propagate. Furthermore subquantum kinetics also predicts that the gravitational force exerted by such shock waves should increase as the pulse’s electric potential gradient increases.


Verification (2005 – 2006): LaViolette worked with research scientist Guy Obolensky to test this prediction with respect to the speed of electric potential waves. Earlier Obolensky had reported that he had measured the speed of electric shock fronts (Coulomb waves) propagating away from a Dome antenna and found that they traveled at a superluminal speed. Based on prediction 11, LaViolette theorized that since the shock front expanded radially outward from its emitting dome antenna, its electric field gradient should decrease inversely with increasing distance from the dome and that the superluminal speed of these shocks should correspondingly decrease inversely with distance from the dome. This prediction was confirmed. They made measurements of the time of flight of the shock pulse to six locations of progressively greater distance from the dome and found that the excess velocity of the shock (v – c) declined inversely with distance just as had been predicted. This experiment is summarized in chapter 6 of the book Secrets of Antigravity Propulsion by Paul LaViolette. It should be mentioned that Tesla also reported that the speed of his pulses began at a near infinite speed at the dome of his antenna and progressively declined toward c as they traveled further away.

Continued next post...

Continued...

Verification (2008): The prediction with respect to the force exerted by the gravity potential component of such waves was verified qualitatively. Paul LaViolette contacted Dr. Eugene Podkletnov and inquired about the performance of his gravity impulse beam generator. Previously Drs. Podkletnov and Modanese had reported in a published paper that the impulse beam was able to deflect a test mass up to 14 centimeters when 2 million volts were discharged through the generator’s superconducting cathode disc (Podkletnov and Modanese, 2002). Podkletnov had subsequently told LaViolette that the beam was able to punch 4 inch holes through concrete blocks when 10 million volt pulses were discharged through the disk. In January 2008, LaViolette asked Podkletnov if his team used a different electric pulse generator to produce the gravity pulses that punched holes through concrete blocks as compared with the ones that produced the 14 centimeter pendulum deflections and whether the former used a different Marx capacitor bank that was able to create a pulse with a steeper gradient. Dr. Podkletnov concurred that was indeed the case, the concrete smashing pulses were created with an electric discharge that had a much more rapid voltage rise-time.

Verification (2008): The prediction with respect to the superluminal speed of gravity potential component of such waves was verified qualitatively. Previously, Dr. Podkletnov had told LaViolette that he and Dr. Modanese had measured the speed of the pulses to be between 63 and 64 times the speed of light. In January of 2008, LaViolette asked Podkletnov whether the concrete smashing pulses produced by the steeper electric field gradients traveled much faster than the pendulum deflecting pulses. Podkletnov concurred and said that they had determined that these stronger pulses traveled at least several thousand times the speed of light.

(SIDE NOTE) - Now, if you take the time to review LaViolette's work carefully, and do so with an open mind & the critical application of intellect, without being swayed by the canned experts & fawning armchair echo chamber keyboard warriors, then you will find that what Ben Rich hinted at all those years ago, has in fact been a reality since something like the 1970's...!! Public consumption space programs seem to be ridiculously antiquated (artificially so, I believe) compared to what's really going on nowadays, in our solar system & possibly beyond. Read his books - they're all excellent. I especially like 'Decoding the Pulsars', but to gain the most you should start at the beginning, with 'Earth Under Fire'.

You can see from the quoted material that the technology to deflect or even to pulverise inbound asteroids, is well within the reach of the current level of technological development at which we presently exist. I would tentatively suggest that, regardless of who deployed it, a tactical use of this technology was utilised at Chelyabinsk in 2013, to rapidly break up the large inbound rock into a cluster of much smaller pieces, before it could hit the ground and cause a miles-wide scorched earth disaster zone, right on top of a heavily populated area. This technology could be deployed from satellites, from fighter jets, even from ground-based stations, potentially. If we are as advanced as I believe we indeed are, then we very likely have delta wing & spheroid craft which can do the job at lightning speed without concerns over g-forces from rapid angular turns, while maneuvering into position around the incoming object. If a basic mock-up of this technology can punch 4" holes through concrete blocks, then refinements of the technology, given a suitable deployment platform, could very easily target & repulse any inbound object with great reliability & minimum worries, if enough time was available between noticing the object & the event horizon, beyond which deflection tactics would fail.

Indeed, the Chelyabinsk asteroid was speculated as having caught us all by surprise, due to observations on the opposite side of the globe at the time it occurred. This is apparently the reason for why we did not see it, or act on it, quickly enough - and this is why we witnessed the deployment of the technology in the skies over Chelyabinsk. Typically we would neither see nor hear the effects of this space-based program - but due to failures in monitoring the skies, we were caught off-guard, and had to run with it regardless of the risk of exposing the existence of the program. I can't recall where I came across this last bit of information, but I recall reading it somewhere.. (not particularly useful, I know - but it fills in some gaps in the tale, so I include it anyway).

So whaddya dink..? Do we have the capacity for deflecting or pulverising incoming asteroids by using this proposed technology as described by Dr P LaViolette? Do you find him to be a credible source of information on these exotic cosmological/physics-based research & military applications? I certainly do, though admittedly I'm no expert. My firm opinion is that we have the capacity to deal with the asteroid threat, and we have had it for decades. We were caught off-guard by Chelyabinsk in j2013 - perhaps it was a hostile action by a non-terrestrial power, and that's got something to do with the way we were caught off-guard.. Certainly that possibility is entertained in the show Salvation', but it took me a roundabout, unexpected detour from my ordinary searches before I realised the LaViolette connection, and thus raising the very real possibility that asteroids - although in natural terms, a threat - are NOT a threat in these modern times, except they be the actions of some hostile power with access to space & command over some snazzy technology.

And so, dear ATSers, if TPTB state they need a new space-based weapons program to combat asteroids? They may well be ramping up to Dr Von Braun's very own 'final solution' - the faked ET invasion scenario...

well done, and very interesting.
I have to wonder though if the ET scenario is still on the books?
that would be quite a ruse to pull off...but would be fun to watch!

Thanks for putting this together, very well done! As for the question posed in OP; I suppose any tactic is believable considering the brainwashing via tv which has been done already.. though not even sure such a drastic measure would be necessary.

a reply to: FlyInTheOintment
Hey I've never been one to shy away from this topic! While Carol Rosin only had her anecdotal claim that von Braun said the words... I've always believed it. Post WWII there were a number of works all about German scientists using advanced physics and technology to fake an alien invasion for the sole purpose of creating a single world government!

The Stars Are Too High by Agnew Bahnson has German scientists inventing a flying saucer to scare the world into uniting.The Flying Saucer by Bernard Newman, has a fake alien crash unite the governments of the world. Let's not forget The Watchmen, by noted Crowley-fan Alan Moore, which has a German supervillain genetically engineer fake "aliens" that kill millions of people, to unite the Soviets and Americans under one world government:

The movie version even changed the ending to Dr Manhattan rather than fake aliens as the cause, and removed all the illuminati symbolism from Ozymandias!

As to the feasibility of the tactic you mentioned, I have no knowledge of that science so I couldn't possibly comment. But I do know the missing trillions and black budgets must be going somewhere. Technology must be controlled from the public to keep power dynamics in place (good example would be the oil system, we could transition to better things but then the power structure would change!) I'd guarantee the black ops military capabilities are bound to be decades ahead of civilian.

The inherent flaw in this "plan" is that it's well known (relatively) and that it's too predictable, thanks in large part to the mediums used to express the concept so far. Simply put, if the other team knows your playbook then throw out the playbook.

Try applying more modern threats to the idea nd you'd be surprised how wholly inadequate space based weapons would be against such man-made joys as nanotechnology (grey goo scenario), A.I.(Camieo with a star wars weapons platform) or genetic hybridization (chimaeras and super soldiers oh my!)

As for the question. By design we only know a small portion of what is.
a reply to: Thorneblood

a reply to: Thorneblood

Yeah if a rock comes down from space and hits a populated area, or even an unpopulated area, causing sufficient devastation, and the "science" shows that for the next 500 years or so, we will be moving through a cluster of rocks or Something like that, im sure the people wont clamor for protection. They will just say its all part of the playbook, and the governments of the world will just fold their arms and say Yep, they know our playbook so we cant do anything. And when one hits a city, the people will be like Hey we know what you're up to! We cant prove it because you use technology 100 years ahead of ours, but we know..