Nostradamus predicted the moon landing hoax

[turbonium]

In all cases, I did mention it would be particularly easy. If I were to provide you with a better fitting interpretation, one with actual logic supporting it, would you be willing to acknowledge that your interpretation is merely one of many, and not a particularly well supported one at that?

If you can do an interpretation of these 4 quatrains which fits better than mine, I will indeed acknowledge it.

So get to work on it, already.

[turbonium]

Why is Mercury grander than Apollo? Why does Nostradamus consider it significant?

He's not saying Mercury is significant, He is saying Apollo is NOT significant.

Apollo being eclipsed by Mercury means Apollo is NOT significant,

Apollo being placed ONLY second in the heavens means Apollo is NOT significant,

Apollo being put SO LOW means Apollo is NOT significant.

He mentions Mercury only once in these 4 quatrains, yet you think this is all about Mercury?

It is about Apollo.

[turbonium]

Aren't you skipping a sentence there? The one about:

"Eleven more times the Moon the Sun will not want,"

Wouldn't indicate, using your logic, that the reference to Apollo (since you are using the Sun to describe the literal Apollo project) is the many different approaches, some merely rehearsal descents, some actual landings, some in between aborted attempts, on Luna (which you defined as the literal astronomical body)?

"11 times more" in French would be "Onze fois plus"

Nostradamus wrote "Plus onze fois", which translates to 'More than 11 times'.

"11 times more" makes no sense, either. 11 times more? 11 times more than what?

He is saying there were more than 11 Apollo missions, none of which reached the Moon He emphasized the number 11 because Apollo 11 is the most significant mission - he is specifically pointing out Apollo 11 did not reach the Moon.. .

There is nothing to support your interpretation of it..

[ChrLzs]

Thread's going REALLY well, Turbs. Easily up to your best. Every one of your ridiculous and ignorant arguments has been beaten to a messy pulp in the past.

You are the master of recycling, and the poster person for those who are incapable of learning or ever acknowledging any of your multitude of errors and misinformation..

I note that you STILL will not ever say what is your BEST evidence that Apollo didn't happen as advertised, instead preferring, like every other Apollo denier before you, to simply change the subject and try to scattergun your way out of everything.

I have two observations:

1. Your gun is completely empty - it doesn't even contain blanks. If you claim otherwise, have the guts to nominate your very best evidence.

2. Thankfully (and in part due to the utter incompetence of you and your fellow deniers), the number of Apollo hoax believers has now dwindled to almost nothing. The truth has won, easily. So while there were those before you, there are very few to follow.

As for this 'addition' to your debate, I think it clear from all the responses that it is in fact a subtraction.

[taniwha]

Hey why is it so quiet in here all of a sudden...

[+Noteverythingisaconspiracy]

Turbonium do you really think that a man in the 16th Century could see the future ?

Or is it just because it fits with your personal opinion ?

Be honest !

[aquatus1]

Turbo, first and foremost, cut the crap with the 5-6 different posts. Pick a point and argue it to the end and stop introducing new points. I know you think it helps you jump around so no one can see how empty your claims are of support, but it really doesn't, and it is kind of embarrassing to respond to. It makes me feel like I am in a professional debate with a high schooler.

Nostradamus then brings up Hermes, a figure in Greek mythology.

In Greek mythology, the Sun is symbolized by Apollo, the Sun god. Apollo - or the 'Sun' - was in the skies/heavens.

Let's keep track of this: You are claiming that the "Sun" refers to "Apollo, the Sun God", which in turn refers to "Apollo, the Nasa Project", and at no time (as you said at the top), is the Sun referring to the actual Sun, the astronomical body.

We'll just skip over the part about Apollo only being the Sun God towards the last part of his mythology during the Hellenistic age when he was kind of combined with Helios the titan (mostly by the Romans), and was rather, originally the god of medicine and healing, the leader of the Muses, and the patron god of music and poetry.

After all, why would Nostradamus, the guy who wrote 900+ quatrains in rhyming verse, think of Apollo in terms of poetry? That's crazy talk.

We know Apollo spacecraft were in the skies/heavens, of course.

So everything fits to that point..And now, we come to Hermes..

1. Hermes was the messenger of the Greek gods (ie: the Sun god, Apollo). He delivered their messages to the mortals.

Hmm, no, actually, there is a bit of a problem.

See, to the Greeks (and being that Nostradamus was an avid student of Ptolemy, he most definitely knew this) Mercury, the one that was in the skies/heavens along with the Sun, wasn't known as "Mercury".

That's right, it wasn't till the Romans came around that it was dubbed "Mercury". What did the Greeks call it?

When it was visible in the morning, it was called "Apollo".

When it was visible in the afternoon, it was called "Hermes".

So, now the problem begins to rear its head.

• We took Nostradamus's "Sun" and decided that it wasn't actually the literal "Sun", but rather a reference to Apollo, the Greek sun god (who wasn't actually a sun god; arguably a song god, though), even though the Greeks actually referred to Apollo not as the literal Sun, but as the literal Mercury, and referred to the Sun as Helios, one of the Titans.
  
• Then we took Nostradamus's "Mercury", an astronomical body referred to by the Greeks as either "Hermes" or "Apollo", and decided that this was also not the literal "Mercury", but rather a reference to...a man. Not a mission, like we did for the "Sun", but rather a person, because...well, that hasn't been explained yet.
  

1.Gus Grissom spoke openly about Apollo's problems, to the point of hanging a lemon on a capsule for his own press conference!

2. Hermes was the traveler of boundaries, and the guardian/protector of all travellers.

1. You seem to be under the impression that this is of some significance. What does it signify? He was hardly the only astronaut complaining. Heck, the entire team snuck in a a crew portrait that had all of them praying they didn't blow up, instead of the official one with their confident smiles.

2. And thieves, poets, shepherds, traders, inventors, athletes; there really weren't many people Hermes didn't like.

3. In the quatrain, Hermes is burned to death

Grissom was burned to death in the Apollo 1 fire.

You think this is an "enormous stretch"? .Come on, now.

No, actually. In the quatrain, Hermes is eaten.

Being that "Come on, now." doesn't actually clarify anything, and that all you have done is repeat exactly the same things you have been saying for the past 8 pages, why exactly are you surprised that you aren't changing anyone's opinion? Here, let me give you some more of that garbage I keep using to do silly things like support my position:

You originally thought that "Vulcan" was the Roman sun god. This is, of course, wrong. The Roman sun god was called "Sol", as opposed to its Greek counterpart, "Helios". Vulcan is the roman god of fire and smithery, just like his Greek counterpart "Haphaestus". Now, the Vulcanalia is a traditional feast in the height of summer, where the ancient Romans would try to distract the god of fire from their very combustible crops and granaries by holding a festival which featured huge bonfires and fish sacrifices. What was the purpose of the fish sacrifices?

They were intended to be consumed in the place of humans. Which is pretty much the polar opposite that you are claiming Vulcan eating Hermes refers to here.

You just keep on spewing the same old crap - how "pretty much anything can be post-interpreted to mean anything"!!

Well, that and the examples that I posted.

Moby dick? Remember that one?

Are you joking??

The quatrain itself is not "self-consistent" - it mixes astronomical bodies (Sun, Mercury) with mythological figures (Hermes, Vulcan)

According to you, it does. Not according to Nostradamus. He might have been crazy, but at least he was consistent about it. Then again, most schizophrenics are.

But you think my interpretation of that quatrain has to be "self-consistent" ??!? Do you realize how idiotic that is?

Oh, I've known about the idiocy inherent in discussions with you for quite some time.

I "randomly decide" that the Sun and Mercury cannot be the real Sun and real Mercury?

If you aren't going to address the entire argument, don't bother ranting about it. It is ridiculous to take a set of four points that show an utter lack of consistency in interpretation, ignore two of them, and then pretend the remaining two are a matter of definition, as opposed to the actual accusation of inconsitency.

You've been asked several times to come up with your own interpretation, but you refuse to do it.

I'd be happy to do it. What I want from you first is an airtight admission that, once having done so, you will put an end to this nonsense. I'm not going to waste my time on another 400 odd pages of you ignoring all the work other people do to show you how utterly and completely wrong you are about 95% of what you post.

If you can do an interpretation of these 4 quatrains which fits better than mine, I will indeed acknowledge it.

So get to work on it, already.

I don't believe you. What is going to determine which is the better fit? (which is a question I know you didn't bother to ask yourself when interpreting these passages).

Again, your credibility and sincerity are lacking. Why should I believe you are going to do what you say?

He's not saying Mercury is significant, He is saying Apollo is NOT significant.

According to you, he is talking about Mercury. That means that he considers Mercury to be more significant than any of the other events taking place. Why did Nostradamus talk about Mercury, as opposed to any of the other events?

He mentions Mercury only once in these 4 quatrains, yet you think this is all about Mercury?

Sure, in these four. He mentions Mercury in the quatrain directly prior to this one as well. Mercury is also mentioned a couple dozen times in other quatrains as well. Again, why is the NASA mission so significant that it is mentioned? It doesn't matter what the actual quantitative or subjective value of Mercury is; the simple fact remains that, according to you, out of all the missions that occurred Nostradamus chose to compare the Apollo to Mercury. The question is why Mercury? What is the reasoning behind it being important enough to mention. You are claiming that Nostradamus considered the Mercury mission important enough to compare to the Apollo mission. Why?

"11 times more" in French would be "Onze fois plus"

Nostradamus wrote "Plus onze fois", which translates to 'More than 11 times"

"11 times more" makes no sense, either. 11 times more? 11 times more than what?

He is saying there were more than 11 Apollo missions, none of which reached the Moon He emphasized the number 11 because Apollo 11 is the most significant mission - he is specifically pointing out Apollo 11 did not reach the Moon.. .

How do you get from "11 times more/more than 11 times the moon the sun will not desire" to "Apollo 11: the mission"?

There is nothing to support your interpretation of it..

It's actually nothing more than an extension of your interpretation so...agreed.

[turbonium]

See, to the Greeks (and being that Nostradamus was an avid student of Ptolemy, he most definitely knew this) Mercury, the one that was in the skies/heavens along with the Sun, wasn't known as "Mercury".

That's right, it wasn't till the Romans came around that it was dubbed "Mercury". What did the Greeks call it?

When it was visible in the morning, it was called "Apollo".

When it was visible in the afternoon, it was called "Hermes".

So, now the problem begins to rear its head.

• We took Nostradamus's "Sun" and decided that it wasn't actually the literal "Sun", but rather a reference to Apollo, the Greek sun god (who wasn't actually a sun god; arguably a song god, though), even though the Greeks actually referred to Apollo not as the literal Sun, but as the literal Mercury, and referred to the Sun as Helios, one of the Titans.
  
• Then we took Nostradamus's "Mercury", an astronomical body referred to by the Greeks as either "Hermes" or "Apollo", and decided that this was also not the literal "Mercury", but rather a reference to...a man. Not a mission, like we did for the "Sun", but rather a person, because...well, that hasn't been explained yet.
  

You think he meant it from the ancient Greeks' perspective?

The quatrain itself mixes in both Greek and Roman gods, yes?

So your argument makes no sense.

1. You seem to be under the impression that this is of some significance. What does it signify? He was hardly the only astronaut complaining. Heck, the entire team snuck in a a crew portrait that had all of them praying they didn't blow up, instead of the official one with their confident smiles.

2. And thieves, poets, shepherds, traders, inventors, athletes; there really weren't many people Hermes didn't like.

I never said Grissom was the only one complaining, but he was certainly the most outspoken one.

Moreover, he was the most significant person to speak out against NASA, at the time, and ever since.

So, what is your point here?

No, actually. In the quatrain, Hermes is eaten.

Yes, as he is food for Vulcan, god of fire.

All clear.

You originally thought that "Vulcan" was the Roman sun god.

No, it was a typo, and I've corrected it.

They were intended to be consumed in the place of humans. Which is pretty much the polar opposite that you are claiming Vulcan eating Hermes refers to here.

I've dealt with this point, above.

I'd be happy to do it. What I want from you first is an airtight admission that, once having done so, you will put an end to this nonsense. I'm not going to waste my time on another 400 odd pages of you ignoring all the work other people do to show you how utterly and completely wrong you are about 95% of what you post.

I've told you I would admit to your claim if it's at least equal to mine.

If you can do that, you'd prove it is nonsense on my part, and I'll trash it..

Btw - you (and a few others) made the original claim, yes?

Sure, you did. You said my interpretations can work as well for anything else, being all so vague, etc.

I challenged you to prove your claim.

Well?...

According to you, he is talking about Mercury. That means that he considers Mercury to be more significant than any of the other events taking place. Why did Nostradamus talk about Mercury, as opposed to any of the other events?

You can't even begin to understand Nostradamus unless you think 'outside the box' from time to time.

What do you think is the primary theme of this quatrain? Is it mainly on Mercury, or is it more about the 'Sun'?

The Sun is the main topic in this quatrain, right? Sure.

I'm sure you know that, First, the Sun is 'hidden'. And then the Sun is eclipsed by Mercury, and then the Sun is placed only second in the heavens. Then, Hermes gets cooked.

After that, the Sun is changed. It is no longer hidden, it's seen as pure, golden.

Mercury is NOT the main issue here!

If you understand that part, then we can move on...

We know Mercury is not the main issue, and we know the main issue is the Sun.

Why did he mention Mercury? You think he can't bring up Mercury without a word on Gemini!

Gemini and Mercury are not the issue, So why is Mercury chosen over Gemini?..

Mercury is used to give us the actual position of Apollo ('Sun'). Just above Mercury, and only second in the heavens. And it fits within the context of the quatrain.

How do you get from "11 times more/more than 11 times the moon the sun will not desire" to "Apollo 11: the mission"?

Imagine if you could really see into the future, way back then,

You see a milestone event - the entire world sees the first human ever to walk on the moon. But you see it was all a hoax, while it fools the world for a long time after. We eventually find out, but long after.

The hoaxed missions will be called 'Apollo'.

It will be claimed Apollo 11 lands the first humans on the moon. There will be 15(or ?) Apollo missions in all, but none of them are close to reaching the moon.

You must fit it into one tiny quatrain, while citing the most important, key points.

He cited Apollo (as the Sun) never reaches the moon, more than 11 times.

He then continues a point he made in the previous quatrain - the 'Sun' being put so low it is almost worthless. It is ONLY second in the heavens.

Two objects are in the heavens, one called the Sun, but is not the real Sun, and the other called Mercury, but is not the actual planet Mercury.

What else could have been in the heavens, to fit as his 'Sun' and his 'Mercury'?

We have a match!

The next quatrain also has a 'Sun', which is also not the real Sun.

Does it fit as Apollo, too? Like a glove.

It has more than 11 missions, with Apollo 11 being the most important.

Unless this is the most amazing group of coincidences ever seen, it must be intentional.

[Capt Amerika]

What does Nostradamus have to say about the Lunar Laser Ranging Experiment ?

That mirror got on the moon somehow and there is no doubt its there unless its a "Whole World" Conspiracy.....

[Frank Merton]

With this title I can't bring myself to read the entire thread, but I have to observe that frauds generally don't predict frauds.

[turbonium]

What does Nostradamus have to say about the Lunar Laser Ranging Experiment ?

That mirror got on the moon somehow and there is no doubt its there unless its a "Whole World" Conspiracy.....

If he predicted the moon landings were hoaxed, it's pretty obvious that the mirrors are either not on the moon, or were placed there using unmanned craft. In either case, it's not worth mentioning.

[turbonium]

With this title I can't bring myself to read the entire thread, but I have to observe that frauds generally don't predict frauds.

Yes, it's so much easier to dismiss something when you don't read it.

[Frank Merton]

Oh please, that the moon lands were a hoax is not worth any responsible person's time. This is for people who develop fixations and reject the obvious in favor of them. People can believe what they want, but I don't waste time on them.

[turbonium]

4 - 29

The Sun hidden eclipsed by Mercury

Will be placed only second in the sky:

"Of Vulcan Hermes will be made into food,"

"The Sun will be seen pure, glowing red and golden."

4 - 30

"More than eleven times the Moon will not want the Sun,"

Both raised and lowered in degree:

And put so low that one will stitch little gold:

"After famine, plague, the secret will be discovered."

4 - 31

"The Moon in the full of night over the high mountain,"

The new sage with a lone brain sees it:

"By his disciples invited to become immortal,"

"Eyes to the south. Hands to his breast, his body in the fire."

9 - 65

"He will come to go into the corner of Luna,"

Where he will be captured and put in a strange land:

"The unripe fruits will be the subject of great scandal,"

"Great blame, to one great praise."

Q. 4-29, 4-30 - confirms the 'Sun' is a symbol for Apollo, the Greek Sun god. NASA named the project after the same Apollo, the Sun god of Greek mythology. . .

Q. 4-29, 4-30, 9-65 - confirms Apollo (the 'Sun')) is being "hidden", a "secret".

Q. 4-29, 4-30, 9-65 - "the secret will be discovered" causing the "great scandal".

Q. 4-29, 4-30, 9-65 - links to confirm what Apollo really did - that "more than 11 times", Apollo never reached the Moon. That Apollo was "put so low". That Apollo barely went higher than Mercury did, it was "only second in the heavens". Apollo was the "unripe fruit". (A recent report states we are lacking mature technologies required before attempting a manned lunar mission - so the 'fruit' still isn't ripe enough yet!) .

Q. 4-30, 4-31, 9-65 - the Moon, or 'Luna', is noted in 3 of the 4 quatrains,.

Q. 4-29, 4-31 - a figure suffers a fiery death is noted in 2 of the 4 quatrains.

These 4 quatrains match up, point by point, on everything,

It confirms the moon hoax.

[turbonium]

Oh please, that the moon lands were a hoax is not worth any responsible person's time. This is for people who develop fixations and reject the obvious in favor of them. People can believe what they want, but I don't waste time on them.

Or you are just a troll, wasting everyone else's time....Why else would you still be here?

[pallidin]

First of all, Nostradamus smoked opium BEFORE and during his "prophecies"

At least that's what I've heard.

So, I do not lend high confidence in his predictions if the aspect of his opium use and addiction is true.

Secondly, much of his writings seem to be entirely nonsensical. Given the opium posit, that would not surprise me.

Edited March 30, 2014 by pallidin

[+Noteverythingisaconspiracy]

Turbonium if you want us to take you seriously, you will have to explain how Nostradamus was able to see into the future. How do you think he did it ?

He himself claimed to use astrology. So if you believe that they are real, you have to believe in astrology. Do you believe in astrology ?

How is it that his quatrains have never been able to predict anything before it took place ?

If you don't have an explanation for these very basic question, the rest of your theory is just your own opinion, of the writings of a french apothecary in the 16th Century.

[turbonium]

First of all, Nostradamus smoked opium BEFORE and during his "prophecies"

At least that's what I've heard.

So, I do not lend high confidence in his predictions if the aspect of his opium use and addiction is true.

Secondly, much of his writings seem to be entirely nonsensical. Given the opium posit, that would not surprise me.

Opium? So what?

Look at the 4 quatrains - they certainly make sense

If you don't agree, you need tp show valid evidence for it,

[turbonium]

Turbonium if you want us to take you seriously, you will have to explain how Nostradamus was able to see into the future. How do you think he did it ?

He himself claimed to use astrology. So if you believe that they are real, you have to believe in astrology. Do you believe in astrology ?

How is it that his quatrains have never been able to predict anything before it took place ?

If you don't have an explanation for these very basic question, the rest of your theory is just your own opinion, of the writings of a french apothecary in the 16th Century.

If they reveal the moon landings as being hoaxed, then he obviously saw events in the distant future.

That's all I know. How he did it, nobody knows, let alone prove it.

He would have done it, though, that's what matters

[turbonium]

How is it that his quatrains have never been able to predict anything before it took place ?

He predicts a moon landing hoax, but also..

He predicted the hoax will be revealed, an event which has not happened.

And now you know, too...

[turbonium]

He also predicted where Apollo really went - in orbit, just above the altitude flown in Mercury missions.

It would be an event of the past, but nobody knows about it today.

It would be all the proof needed, that he saw the future.

[+Noteverythingisaconspiracy]

So basically turbinium, your proof that Nostradamus predicted the Apollo "hoax" is:

Because i say so

[willowdreams]

So basically turbinium, your proof that Nostradamus predicted the Apollo "hoax" is:

Because i say so

here is the thing about turbinium... he never ever even contemplates that he is obviously wrong and there is no moon hoax.

So therefore we are to 1. take his word that it is a hoax and 2. that he and he alone correctly translated the words of nostradamus..

Me? I call it a big ole Jesus complex and he is to 'spread' the word and anyone not believing him is false!!!

Just on his belief in the hoax and his translations of another mans words, a man who is dead and gone and cannot tell him what it was really all about.

makes sense to me

Edited March 30, 2014 by willowdreams

[AZDZ]

It is a cool interpretation, imo, but I don't think it means what you think it means. Even though I do have questions, (not doubts, questions) I believe we landed on the Moon.

Perhaps the 'prophecy' is about the future existence of the Moon Landing Conspiracy, that the event would not be universally believed to have occurred?

[pallidin]

Opium? So what?

How is that NOT important?