[ISCNI*Flash thanks author Ed Stewart for permission to publish this story. Ed may be contacted by email at: email@example.com]
by Ed Stewart
[April 1, 1996] -- At his highly publicized press conference on March 21 at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., Richard Hoagland claimed that there is a cover-up in NASA on releasing information about alleged Lunar anomalies, on the premise that that type of information would lead to the de-stabilization of government and society in general, as suggested by the Brookings report officially known as "Proposed Studies on the Implications of Peaceful Space Activities For Human Affairs."
This report was prepared for NASA by the Brookings Institution in December, 1960 and sent to the House of Representatives as Report No. 242, "Report of the Committee on Science and Astronautics, U.S. House of Representatives, 87th Congress, First Session." It was ordered to be printed on April 18, 1961.
However, Hoagland neglected to make any mention whatsoever, or to include any reference in his media packets prepared for the press conference attendees, of NASA Technical Report R-277: "Chronological Catalog of Reported Lunar Events," by Barbara M. Middlehurst, Jaylee M. Burley, Patrick Moore, and Barbara L. Welther. This report was prepared by NASA and made available for public distribution and sale in July, 1968. It is currently available through William R. Corliss, The Sourcebook Project, as "Xerox Classics Scientific Reports #6."
This report cites as its purpose: "...to provide a listing of historical and modern records that may be useful in investigations of possible activity on the moon."
The report lists 579 observed lunar events referenced in the literature that have demonstrated temporary changes on the moon, some dating as far back as the year 1540, but over 300 of which were recorded after 1945. Of the almost 200 events cited since the beginnings of the space program through 1968 (date of issue), all of the source references are from outside of NASA.
Playing the devil's advocate role, the above report demonstrates that the Brookings report issued over seven years before, really had no role in influencing NASA on the subject of lunar anomalies. The lack of mention by Hoagland of this report suggests that he either did not know about it, or that knowing of its existence, he has chosen to ignore it, since it weakens his arguments of a NASA cover-up.
On the other hand, I find the report interesting in that it suggests by its existence that (speculation on my part):
1) By commissioning the report NASA was interested in the subject matter for practical purposes at the beginning of the Apollo program manned flights and for possible follow-up during future Apollo missions.
2) The absence of any NASA derived observations/citations suggests that this report may have been an initial source document to some other possible NASA study or concern.
3) If there is any validity to (2), somewhere in the NASA literature, whether available or restricted, there should be references to this report in further NASA documents, references to possible mission assignments relegated to "checking out" some of these anomalies and the results from any possible such missions, studies or follow-ups.
Both the Brookings Report and NASA Technical Report R-277 were public documents, and they fly in the face of each other, in that the existence of R-277 weakens Hoagland's premise of a cover-up. Yet, if one speculates 1), 2) and 3) above, NASA should have somewhere in its files follow-ups to R-277, if one accepts the purpose of R-277: "...[to] be useful in investigations of possible activity on the moon."
But clearly, Hoagland may not be the best source of information for telling us what NASA has or has not in their files. After all, Hoagland neglected to make any mention of R-277.
Original file name: .CNI - NASA rpt on Moon??
This file was converted with TextToHTML - (c) Logic n.v.