The Challenger disaster - the plot thickens
Highly recommend this 15m clip of film, Level with Me, provided in the comments by
which shows two of the alleged astronauts being asked by someone about who they really are. Michael J. Smith admits he gets about two emails a month about it but simply denies it while Judith Resnik walks away looking uncomfortable.We are also shown former governor of Hawaii, George Ariyoshi, tell the remarkable tale of how Ellison Onizuka showed him a family photo that he was going to take up on the Challenger, inscribe it on its return and give it to him. Guess what? It survived the explosion and two months at sea after which Ellison’s brother Claude gave it to the governor. Remind you of anything?
Full film of Level with Me (1:07), however, the filmmakers support Flat Earth and think that space travel is fake (including the moon landings) which I’m not in agreement with so I don’t recommend the film for truth in that area … but the 15m clip below is excellent.
Preamble to updated Challenger information originally published in Is space fake? and now moved to this standalone article
I didn’t really look into the alleged Challenger disaster because I was persuaded it was a hoax by the seemingly irrefutable evidence that six of the seven alleged astronauts are walking around with either the same name or the name of an alleged sibling. It’s simply gobsmacking. However, I didn’t realise that there is evidence of Judith Resnik actually onboard a shuttle and behaving like someone in a no-gravity environment - of course, if you don’t believe in space travel it will be no problem for you to dismiss this evidence but as I do believe it I find it hard to reconcile carrying out two academic routes of very different natures and two careers in different places. Any suggestions other than “it’s all fake” welcome … if you wish to argue that space travel is fake, please go ahead but ensure you first watch this video by Dave McKeegan showing that the astronauts aren’t being controlled by strings in the ISS.
The alleged 1986 Challenger disaster is one of the most brazen psyops of all time in that the evidence shows that six of the seven alleged crew are walking around with the same or similar name or name of an alleged sibling.
Note: Only three of the alleged crew, Dick Scobee, Judith Resnik and Ellison Onizuka, had been on previous missions despite 24 space shuttle missions having occurred since 1981. In the case of Onizuka, as the mission he was on, STS-51C, was classified, there is no clear evidence of him in space and thus there is no clear evidence of his being an astronaut although that isn’t to say he wasn’t.
With regard to Dick Scobee and Ellison Onizuka no real concern about strange parallel lives needs to be investigated. We are told the non-astronaut Dick Scobee was CEO and President of The Marketing Edge, Inc. in Chicago, however, this role might have been fairly nominal or the company very small. In the case of Onizuka we are told he had a look-alike brother so no parallel life to explain. Of course, we could try to dig into the details of Onizuka’s look-alike brother to see if he really existed, however, when the evidence seems to overwhelmingly show that the Challenger disaster was faked I think it’s fair to only concern oneself with things that present problems in fitting that hypothesis.
With regard to non-astronaut, Christa McAuliffe, this is a video comparing Sharon and Christa McAuliffe’s voices and faces. It is clear there is something similar in their smiliness as they talk.
Judith Resnik, law professor, and Judith Resnik, astronaut, are a little more difficult to explain.
ChatGPT tells us that Judith Resnik, astronaut, had quite an illustrious education in science and engineering while Judith Resnik, law professor, had a similarly illustrious education in law. It seems as though Judith Resnik really was an astronaut and we can see her moving around and talking about operations performed in Space Shuttle Flight 12 (STS-41D). Intelligence can fake academic studies, however, it is difficult to explain how someone could have seemingly parallel high-powered careers both in space flight and law as Judith Resnik has seemingly done. The thing is though that all these people look much too alike - especially when you consider the multiple likenesses - to accept that they aren’t the same people.
Interestingly, the writer and space enthusiast, Emily Carney, wrote a piece entitled, I Wanted to Write a Biographical Piece About Judy Resnik. But the More Research I Did, the Less I Knew About Her.
I started my quest by ordering what I’ve heard to be the definitive account of Resnik’s 36 years: the December 1986 issue of Esquire magazine, which was feted as the “Americans at Work: A Special Year-end Edition.”
…
The only thing we discover about Resnik in the Esquire article is that her ex-boyfriend sued NASA over the loss of a Dunhill cigarette lighter she carried in her personal preference kit aboard Challenger. You read that correctly: he didn’t sue NASA over his former girlfriend’s wrongful death, but because they lost his cigarette lighter somewhere in the Atlantic. What a guy. It’s telling that NASA’s astronaut corps provided no comments to the authors during the research and writing phases of “The Epic Flight of Judith Resnik.”
How much does the inclusion of suing over the loss of a Dunhill cigarette lighter in the Esquire story seem like an example of Revelation of the Method? Apart from the base implausibility of an ex-boyfriend having any inclination to sue over such a circumstance, every gram of payload needs to be justified and an environment containing pressurised oxygen would make it hazardous. We know that there is no way on earth Judith Resnik would have taken a Dunhill lighter on board or that an ex-boyfriend tried to sue for its loss and a genuine story would not contain such nonsense.
The Judith Resnik conundrum
What says the two Judiths are the same person:
There’s nothing about them that says they don’t look like the same person and there are clear similarities
They were obviously born around the same time
They both have an underbite which only 5-10% of the population have
The fact of others in the Challenger crew looking as if they are the same person as another person who is allegedly a sibling or simply a name-sharer can only support their being the same person
As alluded to in the comments: while there are fact-checkers in force denying the fakery of this event we must wonder why no evidence has been produced that would clearly prove it such as photos from childhood showing the people as being different. Why does Judith look so uncomfortable walking away from someone challenging her about being JR, astronaut? If it were me I’d refer the person to clear evidence that says I was not the same person.
Revelation of the Method is really the only possible explanation for the nonsense story about JR’s ex-boyfriend suing about a lost lighter in the Esquire story and why else would Revelation of the Method apply if not for the disaster being faked?
The puzzle: how to reconcile Judith’s seeming two parallel academic routes and careers for which both seem to have reasonably compelling evidence provided (obviously, there is no doubt about the law professor career).
EDIT 2 May 2025: Conundrum solved
My thanks to Proton Magic’s comment which prompted a second look at JR’s seemingly parallel academic and professional careers to see how they were both possible.
We are told that the father of the astronaut Judith Resnik, Dr Marvin “Mayer” Resnik, was a 32nd degree Mason, and served in the U.S. Army in military intelligence during World War II in the Pacific Theater. Judith achieved a perfect score in her SAT exam, the only woman in her year to do so and the 16th woman ever to achieve it. Additionally, she was an extremely talented pianist and even considered a career as a concert pianist. Whether she was simply naturally extremely gifted or whether her gifts were enhanced with special “military” training, it is not so difficult to see how she could have followed two exceptional career paths contemporaneously.
After her BSc qualification in 1970, we are told that JR, astronaut, registered for master’s degree evening courses at the University of Pennsylvania, a stone’s throw from Bryn Mawr College where JR, law professor, got her BA in 1972. Seemingly, JR did not obtain a master’s degree, however, those evening courses would have stood her in good stead for her eventual PhD in 1977.
Evening courses in electrical engineering, daytime arts degree courses - not so difficult for an especially brilliant student.
Chronology of qualifications
BSc: 1970
BA: 1972 (3-year degree squashed into two - certainly been done)
JD: 1975
PhD ElEng: 1977 (squashed into two years but time could be spent on both the JD and PhD degrees in any case)
Judith A. Resnik (Astronaut)
Bachelor of Science in Electrical Engineering, Carnegie Mellon University, 1970
Ph.D. in Electrical Engineering, University of Maryland, 1977
Judith Resnik (Law Professor)
Bachelor of Arts, Bryn Mawr College, 1972
Juris Doctor (J.D.), New York University School of Law, 1975
While we are told JR, law professor held academic positions at the same time JR, astronaut, was working for NASA, we know that academic positions can be on and off and no doubt being an astronaut can be on and off to a degree as well.
Obviously, JR, astronaut, was exceptionally brilliant and could also have got help from intelligence services in following an additional academic path and career. So while it cannot be denied that managing these two high-powered career paths is pretty extraordinary it’s certainly not impossible - and the evidence for them being the same person is very compelling, especially when added to the other astronauts with their supposed lookalikes.
Why was the Challenger disaster faked - “normalisation of deviance” problem?
The welfare of the people in particular has always been the alibi of tyrants, and it provides the further advantage of giving the servants of tyranny a good conscience.
Albert Camus
In order to get people to participate in the many psyops perpetrated upon us, while some may be incentivised purely by selfish gains, others may need propaganda which we can see often involves concerns for safety. I’ve seen news reports when summer is coming in about the near-miss death of a child in a backyard swimming pool which have all the signs of a staged event … and that’s just a tiny drop in the ocean. With the recent covid scamdemic, we can see “concern for safety” is one of the most powerful propaganda tools ever devised.
Certainly, a reason that could be put forward “officially” - but obviously not told to the public - is that “normalisation of deviance” as explained in this snippet by former astronaut, Mike Mullane, was becoming a problem in aviation generally and the disaster could have been faked to help reverse the trend - perhaps a similar “official” reason why so many plane crashes are faked? We are told that the rubber O ring problem had been known for a long time and that one reason for the disaster was that the flight was launched on an unusually cold morning in Florida making the O ring particularly inelastic, however, we might wonder if the scheduling (which had changed a number of times and was rescheduled for the actual date shortly before) was deliberately made for a cold day to add credence to the reason for the alleged disaster and to show what happens with the problem of “normalisation of deviance”. I’m not an engineering expert but somehow a rubber O ring being responsible for a shuttle disaster doesn’t seem credible to me.
Normalization of deviance - Wikipedia:
The original example cited by Vaughan is the events leading to the Space Shuttle Challenger disaster in 1986, but the concept has also been applied to aviation safety,[4][5] clinical practice in medicine,[6] and the public's deviance from health measures aimed to stop the COVID-19 pandemic.[7]
Normalization of deviance can exist in conjunction with corporate omerta where deviation from rules is held up by a code of silence surrounding the deviations or an unspoken agreement on rhetoric within a group of executives. One of the reasons Lion Air Flight 610 and Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302 crashed was normalization of deviance based on a criticism of corporate omerta with a "culture of silence".[8]
“Public’s deviance from health measures aimed to stop the COVID-19 pandemic!” Oh dear, oh dear. Those of us with brains and courage didn’t “deviate”, we refused to comply as best we could! And the omerta was all with those health professionals and other relevant authorities who went along with the covid pandemic in the first place and in the second place with the inhumane and nonsensical measures.
The evidence shows Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302 was faked and at first sight the Lion Air Flight 610 accident doesn’t look convincing. Supposedly, it was a battle between man and machine:
The computer of the Lion Air Flight 610 kept pushing the plane down. And, the pilots kept bring [sic] the plane back up. This happened more than two dozen times.
There’s obviously other reasons going on for all these faked events, one of which I suggest below with regard to the Challenger disaster.
Was the faked Challenger disaster predictive programming for the disbelievers?
Could this brazen event have been a “plant” to encourage skeptics of official narratives to reject everything we are told about space just as the 1968 BBC drama, The News Benders, was? Could it also be intended to put those who recognise the reality of humans in space in an awkward position when confronted by this fakery by the “conspiracy theorists”? We know that those in power aim to divide us, have us defend nonsense and bamboozle us all the better to keep us under control - believers and disbelievers alike - so in order for the phenomenon of humans in space to be real without exception, space aficionados must defend the clear fakery of the Challenger disaster event. Those in power understand well enough that those of us who tend to accept official narratives - that is, the majority - will gloss over the very obvious fact of the alleged astronauts still being alive and it’s simply amazing that many fact-checkers deny the people are the same people.
Related
"Houston, we have a problem." Was it scripted?
I have been busy making myself unpopular by insisting that the moon landings really happened, however, courtesy of comments on Apollo 13 from Evelyn K. Brunswick (very indebted to you, Evelyn!) on my last post, Good and Bad Modal Thinking, I’ve been forced into a slight re-think. My view hasn’t changed on their reality, however, in the case of Apollo 13 - which didn’t lan…
If I was accused all over the internet of being the same person who was supposedly dead on the Challenger I would make public an album of photos, where I lived, where I went to school with yearbook photos, xray of my dentition, maybe my DNA, maybe not fingerprints (?), to get these people away from me. I wouldn't run away from curiosity seekers, I would hand them my card with the info online. This should prove I was not on the Challenger.
👉The problem is it doesn't seem that many of these persons have done that, have they? BTW, many persons go to law school after studying something else. Science, engineering, medicine are common. These persons then become patent lawyers.
Although I'll stay on the fence for a while about whether or not it was faked, I can certainly give you a very good reason for the Challenger disaster, which applies to either a faked version, or a deliberate sabotage version - also remember putting out an idea that it was faked misdirects away from the possible sabotage explanation (see also Apollo 13).
The reason for 'space travel disasters' is to actively delay and prevent the progress of space exploration. The reason for this is because an advanced, optimistic and exciting space programme creates positive feelings in a population. It makes them look forwards to a bright future. It's very, very difficult to control such a population.
Exactly the same idea is true about the SETI conspiracy to cover up existence of ETI, and especially ETI in our own stellar neighbourhood. The Brookings Report is very accurate when it says the fabric of society (read: mechanism of social control) would break up, if such information was widely known (it would also reveal the fact that 'our leaders' are not the biggest fish, which has a profound effect on people's deference to the cabal/authority).
Remember also that better space exploration leads inevitably to stuff like a good enough space telescope to detect life at, say Alpha Centauri - leading to the above paragraph.
My understanding of physics is sufficient to tell me we should be far, far more advanced in space exploration than we are, with rotating space stations (simulating gravity etc.) and advanced propulsion systems (cf. Miles Mathis). No doubt all that stuff exists secretly, but they simply can't allow the public to experience it, because then we have optimism and demands to make the world a better place, and so on, and so on.
I'm not discounting your 'normalisation of deviance' idea (more than one explanation can often be true of course), I'm simply adding a more 'big picture' idea into the mix. Social control, is what it comes down to in the end - in a psychological way.