Did the USSR destroy a secret US Moon Base in 1977?

Exopolitic.org ^ | APRIL 19, 2019 | DR MICHAEL SALLA

[Norski]

Robert Heinlein writing about life on the moon:

“The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress” tells of a war of independence waged by the Lunar penal colonies, with significant comments from a major character, Professor La Paz, regarding the threat posed by government to individual freedom. “

[SunkenCiv]

The document was marked unclassified, which suggests that the content of the correspondence did not contain classified information...

..quelle surprise...

[VTenigma]

Hal, open the pod bay door.

[Sirius Lee]

The women at that base were HOT!

Yeah, but those were over at the Brit moon base, which later got tossed into interstellar space when the entire moon 'spoded out of orbit.

[mewzilla]

Bet Commander Koenig was pi$$ed...

[buckalfa]

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=tsmefY94E_0

Barbara Bain was hot!

[camle]

dr. peter beter, eh? or perhaps peter beater...bullspit, but entertaining., like a bad b novel

[PIF]

This was the plot to James Bond “Moonraker” of the same era.

—
And that was what the memo was about - the Senator believed it was real.

[newfreep]

I’m not a movie buff...but that remains one of my top 3 movies of all time.

IIRC, in the very excellent “2010” sequel, Candice Bergan voiced “SAL9000”

[Dr. Franklin]

Nah, the moon base was destroyed by Marvin the Martian with an
Illudium PU-36 Explosive Space Modulator.
Buggs Bunny prevented him from destroying the earth with the same device. The Soviets were blamed since the government at the time was denying that extraterrestrial life existed which is superior to our intelligence and development. This is just another baseless conspiracy theory.

[Dr. Franklin]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z40AsPaktzw&list=RDQuUJfYcn3V4&start_radio=1&rv=QuUJfYcn3V4

[Dr. Franklin]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yz1iScOFJmM&list=RDQuUJfYcn3V4&index=3

[G Larry]

Nonsense!

[Fai Mao]

I guess the sarcasm in my opening comment about this was missed.

An article written by someone with a PhD from a site on the internet, so it must be true!

[G Larry]

Sorry, my post was about the article, not your comment.

[Nateman]

Arthur C. Clarke was an atheist in search of God. He wanted to believe in something but as far as I know never found it. His 2001 movie had a sense of this spiritual search that the 2010 sequel never even came close to having. That is why 2001 is remembered to this day and 2010 is little more than a footnote.

[newfreep]

Reality...it was quite intellectually substantial & entertaining in its own right.

Roger Ebert gave 2010: The Year We Make Contact three stars out of four, writing that “It doesn’t match the poetry and the mystery of the original film, but it does continue the story, and it offers sound, pragmatic explanations for many of the strange and visionary things in 2001.”

“And yet the truth must be told: This is a good movie. Once we’ve drawn our lines, once we’ve made it absolutely clear that 2001 continues to stand absolutely alone as one of the greatest movies ever made, once we have freed 2010 of the comparisons with Kubrick’s masterpiece, what we are left with is a good-looking, sharp-edged, entertaining, exciting space opera”.