Saturday [6 to 8]

(0953) Just ticked over to elevenses near the end. (1118)

 

8. The Unherdables approach to its incoming intel

There’s been a bit of confusion about how readers should take what appears here … is it a ringing endorsement for, even pushing hard for all that is stated in the item? For example, here?

Last supper and agony in the garden [12 till close of play]

Answer is … sometimes, in some respects, rarely every single word of it. There’s a delicate juggling act going on on my part … yes, shutting out Wokery and Globopsycho narrative but letting through our chaps and chapesses who are regulars, plus occasionals and some newbies who obviously seem good hearts who are for saving the west, our heritage, our faith, our families etc.

On the Seder question, for example, I explored and foubd this:

“A core section of one text said: “Some Christians choose to observe a Passover Seder, adapted to emphasize Christ as the Messiah, as a way to understand the roots of their faith and the significance of Jesus’ death.”

Sounds reasonable to me … but we do need to read the fine print … plus some sources need to go on our watch list in the navbar and at NOWP.

Then we come to items 7 and 6 below. If I might take the moon landings from 1969 onwards, there are clearly anomalies, Diamonds Are Forever satirised it, so many articles also have, in detail. Some is speculative, some ask good questions. Against that, what of the moon rocks? Were they real? What of maps with the Van Allen Belt?

I simply don’t know. I do lean towards no, they did not land but you might have a good case as to why they did.

I just think we need, at Unherdables here, to at least present what people are saying, somewhere on-site, barring Woke and Globopsycho narrative of course … if any of the latter stands up in some respects, then ok, our own sources will at least address those worthy points. We don’t need trolls though, muddying everything. That’s all.

The model we follow here is … look, let’s table it, examine it, comment, see what we think of this new snippet or that. …/END.

7. IYE corner

“Hey, Franklin Graham! Read Your Bible. Or Your Torah. Or A History Book!

On the Book of Esther, the evangelical delusion, and a warning about lying about the wickedness of other people to those in power.”

”……

The alignment between American evangelicalism and Israeli hard-right politics is one of the more remarkable theological phenomena of our era, and it deserves to be named clearly: it is not principally about Christianity. It is about the myth of American providential destiny, dressed in biblical clothing. As I’ve written about here.

When Franklin Graham maps Donald Trump onto Esther — a Jewish woman who risked her life going to a foreign king uninvited, who survived by hiding who she was, who acted in secret and in fear — the theology has departed the building. What remains is something older and more American: the conviction that God is on our side, that our enemies are History’s enemies, and that military power exercised by the right people is the same thing as divine intervention.

This is not Christianity. It is not even a particularly coherent reading of the Old Testament, which is, if nothing else, a sustained argument against exactly this kind of self-congratulation. The God of the Hebrew Bible has a habit of using the wrong people — the foreigner, the woman, the coward, the liar — and embarrassing the ones who were certain of their own righteousness. Haman was certain. He had the king’s seal. He had the gallows ready. He had the date on the calendar……”

https://jonathanmillard.substack.com/p/hey-franklin-graham-read-your-bible

(What a week for Donny to be likened to Esther and Jesus! [sarc] )

6. Just reviewing this again and adding to it

… with a view to taking that, plus IYE in n7, plus Seder the other day, and drawing the threads together, restating Unherdables’ overall stance on such things.

13 replies on “Saturday [6 to 8]”

  1. With the animosity between the USA and the USSR, with the latter wanting to prove that they were the best, and the first, at everything, plus the increasing tension with China, if the moon landings had been faked, it would soon have been made public, as it would probably have brought down the American Government.

    The Americans may have got away with one hoax, but Shirley not the journeys that followed. Too many people were involved and it would have been impossible to keep everyone quiet. Either Aldrin was winding O’Brien up, or his mental state could be in question.

    Slightly off topic, now that the mother of the moon residing Clangers has been found (unable to link story), it would be nice if a future trip could give her a lift back to her family.

    Reply

      • In reply to Lyndon Wood’s question: “Did this [Lunar Module] really get back to Earth?”. None of the six that landed did. They weren’t meant to..

        Apollo 11 Eagle: Descent stage on lunar surface in Sea of Tranquility, ascent stage left in lunar orbit (could be still orbiting the moon).

        Apollo 12 Intrepid: Descent stage on lunar surface at Ocean of Storms, ascent stage deliberately crashed into Moon.

        Apollo 14 Antares: Descent stage on lunar surface at Fra Mauro, ascent stage deliberately crashed into Moon.

        Apollo 15 Falcon: Descent stage on lunar surface at Fra Mauro, ascent stage deliberately crashed into Moon.

        Apollo 16 Orion: Descent stage on lunar surface at Descartes Highlands, ascent stage left in lunar orbit, crashed on Moon.

        Apollo 17 Challenger: Descent stage on lunar surface at Descartes Highlands, ascent stage left in lunar orbit, crashed on Moon.

        Apollo 13’s Lunar Module, Aquarius, successfully served as a lifeboat for the crew for four days after the critical failure of the Service module. Re-entered Earth’s atmosphere and burned up over Fiji – the docudrama Apollo 13, directed by Ron Howard and starring Tom Hanks, is an accurate account.

        Reply

  3. 6. We could have watched the animation, who knows? My tuppence ha’penny worth is that it happened but not as it has been portrayed to us, for whatever reason. Hence the need for the animation.
    The astronauts who did the interview after the event looked as if they’d lost a pound and found a shilling. Not like people who had done something momentous. Maybe they saw something up there which wasn’t on their bingo card for that trip and they were scared into silence by the powers that were at the time.

    On the other hand maybe all the so-called space explorers of all nations have a pact to cooperate with the same narrative. It has been known.

    Reply

    • I’m firmly on the fence here. If the first landing was faked subsequent landings may not have been. The long hiatus where there were few manned launches suggest something changed, priorities maybe. Whatever, I can’t get that interview with Stanley Kubrick, where he detailed how he faked footage of the first landing. One way or another I don’t know for sure and maybe never will.

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *