Space Shuttle Challenger Disaster
The Challenger disaster and the attendant Rogers Commission Report that followed is an instructive prophetic replay of Enoch's ascension. There is much that can be learned from understanding this story because it impacts our future understanding of NASA and Mars. Read on for more.
Enoch is first mentioned briefly in Genesis 5. Here he is found in the genealogy between Adam and Noah. Enoch lived a relatively short life for the time, 365 years, while most of the others in that genealogy lived much longer.
Most of the names in that list have no life details, only life lengths. Enoch is the exception, he pleased god and was taken away.
This 365 year life compresses on the day-for-a-year system to be 1 year of 365 days. With some details I'm skipping here, it would be the Julian calendar year of 1985, and it would force a complete day-accurate alignment between all day-accurate stories in the text and the modern world.
The last day of that year was April 6, 1986, Gregorian. So from the perspective of the timeline, something should pop related to Enoch around this April 6, 1986, date. This story would be an exception that teaches important details about how some of the dates work along prophetic replays.
The day after the basic math was worked out, on graph paper, with colored pencils, Ryan and I headed off to the now rebuilt main branch of the Seattle Public library. We checked that April 6, 1986, date on microfilms of the New York Times.
We found preparations for a summit between Reagan and Gorbachev that would be held later in Iceland. Interesting, but nothing in that story fit Enoch very well. Maybe a year later the fulfillment for Enoch became clear. At April 6, 1986, Enoch's story had been running for about 70 days, and would have another 65 or so days to go.
Enoch is mentioned a few other places, but the place that adds important commentary is in the 'hall of faith' in Hebrews 11. The link is given above, but here is the full quote...
In belief Enoch departed and did not taste death. He was not found because god took him. Before he took him away there was a testimonial about him, that, He pleased god. Without belief man cannot please god, for he who comes near to god must believe that he is and that he is a rewarder of those who seek him. (Hebrews 11:5-6, BRB)
From this Hebrews 11 passage we know that Enoch did not die. He was taken alive off the planet. In this brief passage is encapsulated the entire salvation message, but I digress. The only other detail we know is there was a testimonial about him, that he pleased god.
The Fateful Day
I remember that January 28, 1986, date quite clearly. I was sitting in my boss' office in a very large factory in Minnesota. My boss was never a happy fellow. I'd been baited into the job about 8 months before. I was now unhappily tasked with cleaning up a major accounting fraud that someone else had committed. I'd learned over Christmas vacation, from someone who worked at the IRS, that in a smaller company this fraud would have sent the owner to jail.
Since returning to work from Christmas vacation I'd been hunting for something better to do. Per chance there was a lunch time job fair for internal company transfers out of Minnesota. They were reducing headcount, after all.
Programmers were not allowed to leave. But, I was not technically programming. I was in management and could leave. I was offered an interesting software job in North Carolina on the spot.
So I was sitting in my boss' office telling my boss I would soon be leaving his unhappy job, and Minnesota, for points east. He asked me to stick it out for a full calendar year. I agreed, so the move was complete about 4 months later. I did remain with the company, there were more lessons to learn.
Our unhappy conversation was interrupted with an unhappy announcement that came over the factory's Public Address system. The only such use of the public address system I would ever hear in 16 years in working for that company.
May I have your attention! May I have your attention, please!
The announcer went on to state that morning's 25th launch of the Space Shuttle had failed. The crew was presumed dead. The announcer then offered condolences.
Many older employees at that company had previously worked as subcontractors to NASA as far back as the late 1960s. NASA was a prestigious customer and the news that day hit everyone very hard. Those involved invariably wondered if they had personally done something that caused what just happened.
When I arrived in North Carolina later that summer nearly the entire crew there had worked at NASA on various software contracts. This was the most risk-averse group of professional people I ever met. They were still afraid they could do something that would cause stuff to fall out of the sky, even though their code was to be used on desktop PCs.
Here is the news footage of the launch itself that morning. If this is before your time, I highly recommend catching up on this bit of important American history. Watch for out of place flames after launch.
Note how normal everything starts. This was the first time there was a non-astronaut passenger on a Shuttle flight. Then, out of nowhere, it is over. The world was in mourning.
This was the planned date of President Reagan's state of the union speech. He postponed that speech until February 4, 1986. Instead he addressed the nation from the Oval Office and dealt with the events earlier in the day.
President Reagan was always a good communicator and was trying to boost the spirits of many people who were heart broken over what had happened. He mentions workers at NASA but also school children who had been watching live from their classrooms across the country.
Nobody knew for sure what exactly happened earlier that day. A commission was setup to figure it out. That report will matter below. For an exhaustive account of what happened we can start with Wikipedia.
The immediate cause of the disaster that day was freezing temperatures at the launch site in Florida. Those temps caused a pair of rubber O-Rings on one of the solid rocket boosters to themselves turn solid. In that state they could not prevent hot gasses escaping the solid rocket boosters through their sides.
Those gasses eventually became flame. You can see that flame high up the main tank in the news video linked above. When the shuttle throttled up a few seconds after launch, that flame ignited the main fuel tank causing a massive blast.
Reagan himself set up a presidential commission to investigate the cause of the accident. That Rogers Commission produced a written report and gave it to the President on June 9, 1986. Pretty fast turn around for such work.
If you read the Wikipedia link above you will see a famous scientist at the time was put on the Rogers Commission. Richard Feynman was his name, famous in many physics circles. He drove the politicians on that commission nuts because he wanted the world to know this was a management problem, more so than a multitude of technical problems.
This is a very common problem in nearly all large organizations that you might care to name, including colleges and fast food chains. Anywhere there is no identifiable owner, or where the owner is not technically competent, this problem happens.
The problem with the launch that day was not so much the problem of O-Rings sensitive to freezing temperatures, but that the management at NASA had no idea about the freezing temperature risk. NASA leadership considered the Challenger to always be space worthy. Many technical staff inside NASA knew full well it was not.
The managers at NASA thought there was a 1 in 100,000 chance of launch failure, while the engineers thought the risk of launch failure was 1 in 100. There were also a whole lot of known conditions, like standing down in freezing weather, that management did not know.
'Hubris' is the technical term for blindly overestimating chances of success in the real world.
The Rogers Commission report, basically because of Feynman, blasted NASA who did not have the engineering talent in their management staff to even understand the complexity of Shuttle launches.
Why is Challenger Enoch?
So far I have discussed 2 elements to the Challenger disaster that match what the text says about Enoch. These are enough to match Enoch.
Reagan ended his speech that evening on the idea that the crew that day was trying to 'escape the bounds of earth and touch the face of god.' This is a line out of a famous 1940s era poem.
Enoch effectively did this, so NASA's failed attempt is a match. Presumably they would have been successful if they had launched 70 days later on the prophetic date itself, when weather was better.
The Rogers Commission report is the testimonial about this launch. In Enoch's case a commendation. In the Challenger case a scathing rebuke. This is the other match to Enoch. In this case the report is delivered about 65 days after the theoretical prophetic date.
The failed launch and the final report spread out about equal amounts of time from the prophetic date itself. The middle of the Challenger disaster episode being early by only a couple days.
This story of Enoch teaches a principle about how these prophetic timelines work in life. Nations, and all of us as individual people, are constantly replaying prophetic stories.
We can replay them successfully or we can replay them with disastrous consequences. Success often means with correct timing, and failing often means replaying prophetic stories early or late. Replay them, though, we will.
So as we work on our own spiritual growth our goal is to be ready to pass these prophetic stories and dates when they come in our own lives.
More On Enoch
3 weeks ago I did a blog titled, My Favorite Martian. In that post I started to explore stories about Mars. One of the key points on the topic of Mars is that Enoch and Noah, the first 2 walk-off kings, were originally from Mars. This is in part because Noah traveled to earth from Mars and Enoch is in Noah's pre-flood genealogy, placing Enoch on Mars.
This is an unwritten detail for the Challenger disaster. Does it matter this prophetic date may have something to do with getting back to Mars? Of course. Current launch providers, especially Space X, would not exist without this disaster. It may also indicate no government based project management will be allowed to reach Mars, just as the Challenger was not even allowed to reach orbit.
The Rogers Commission final report rebuked the management structure of NASA. By the end of Reagan's term there were a few companies managing space launches instead of NASA alone.
Most of NASA's early commercial subcontractors were also military contractors. These companies are setup to milk the public purse. They are not cost-minimizing. Some are still around in the launch business with names like Boeing and ULA.
Within about 15 years of Challenger, both Space X and Blue Origin were founded as private efforts aimed at radically reducing the cost of launches.
Blue Origin seemed to have the head start, but the primary founder, Jeff Bezos is connected to the deep state, running the Washington Post for example. Though famous for cost minimizing Amazon, his space businesses don't seem to be run the same way.
Blue has not yet achieved orbit. Their tourist launches go straight up and then back down. Blue has also been reported to have made major mistakes in their new rocket engine design. Those mistakes have been reported to be bad enough to require a complete, multi-year, redesign.
Space X was a little slower at first, but now dominates the commercial launch industry. Space X is currently working on reducing the per-ton costs to the surface of Mars by a factor of 10,000. This cost reduction should make human exploration of Mars and eventual colonies financially possible.
Without the Challenger disaster we would still have politicians running NASA launches.
Without the Challenger disaster the USA would still be doing launches with their traditional military contractor margins and costs. We would most likely have no commercial launch companies and no hope for reaching Mars at reasonable cost.
But, all large organizations forget their own past. NASA cannot remember Challenger. They don't remember that they are incompetent at running these activities. So, slowly, NASA is returning to the game of running the show. Hubris is back.
NASA is returning with left over parts from the Shuttle program and cobbling together a new moon landing program. It is big. It is expensive. It is using incompetent contractors who are politically connected and don't care about mission success.
Because access to Mars is not managed by political will, but by a grant from the skies, we can expect NASA to be smacked down again, just as it was January 28, 1986.
This is not just an American problem. We can easily expect the same from any attempts at Mars based in China or other parts of Asia. Would the Chinese pass an Enoch test? No.
Companies on the sidelines, like Blue Origin and Space X, will live in tension over this point until NASA has yet another spectacular failure.
That grant to visit Mars will come to an organization with the right religion. It helps to understand this point by looking at the religion of NASA.
I have read about NASA and their planned locations and times for the Apollo program moon landings. Those planned locations had the star Sirius rising at the horizon on the moon at the time and location of planned moon touchdowns.
This could not have happened by random chance, and it strongly pointed at NASA's fundamental nature as a religious organization. That religion was more important than their engineering.
Where have we see that before?
Sirius is the morning star in NASA's real, hidden, religion. Those clueless NASA managers were chosen for their religious adherence, not technical talent. The same problem exists across the tops of all large institutions across American culture. That religion intentionally takes over large organizations as founders retire or die.
This link is to a Wikipedia page describing one of the major temples in this religion. It sits almost exactly 1 mile north of the White House in Washington, DC. It is rightly called a temple, just like Solomon's Temple. Both house the tops of their respective religions. Both are false religions. The Paleo term for Temple transliterates to Fecal, if that helps.
Tesla was excluded from Biden's EV summit. While Musk ascribes that exclusion to union politics, I do not. Tesla is a first generation company. Built by raw engineering talent, and not yet taken over by that same religion. That is why Telsa was excluded.
If you want to understand this better, read Henry Ford's autobiography. Henry tangled with it too, and wrote extensively about that struggle. Ford Motor company was later taken over, having fought early religious battles in Henry's lifetime.
Those inside the religion are already working to take over Tesla. They mostly control financial markets and use tricks of those markets, especially shorting, to wrestle companies away from their founders. Think about Musk's known public enemies. What religion might they be in?
Enoch, via the link into Hebrews above, was different. He was pleasing to god while the NASA management running the show was not pleasing to god. That is a classic battle of religion.
NASA failed publicly on the Challenger disaster. The Rogers Commission final report gave a technical answer. But the prophetic story is a religious test. NASA fails that even worse.
Looking at the battle for Mars as a religious war, Musk's Space X is in the lead. It is Space X's battle to loose. Their winning strategy is not to join the enemy, but to survive them. They appear able to win with launch tech. They don't appear very well equipped to win the religious side.
The link here is a recent video by Jordan Peterson on the war in Ukraine. He gives various explanations about what this war is about. In the end he claims this is a war of religions.
I agree, and Jordan gets the Russian side correct. The western side Jordan does not understand very well. He considers the west a product of historical western Christianity. This is only superficially true.
The western side's religion is generally secret. So our current social problems are not based on a failing western Christianity. The text calls the western side Pharaoh's Egypt, or the Synagogue of the Libertines. The west has more severe problems than Russia.
Jordan has some personal exposure to Orthodox Christianity. He has some key Jewish friends. But he has not wrestled with the problems and history of Protestant Christianity. That form of Christianity fully endorses activities like Jordan's Biblical Lecture series. Anyone can become a preacher in Protestantism.
But Protestantism is easily co-opted by others. Martin Luther's changing of fundamental texts belies his own co-opting by those who wanted a different form of Christianity.
This strange hidden religion is called out as the statue in Nebuchadnezzar's dream. Russia's Christianity is still part of that statue, built on the same edited text. But Orthodox Christianity split ~1500 years ago, before the base documents of the west's other secret religions were finished about 1000 years ago.
As the Wikipedia article(s) linked above indicate, by 1930 fully 12 percent of all American adult males were dues paying members of that religion. It is not insignificant to our history and our failures.
Striking The Statue
We are at the era when a stone will strike the statue and it will collapse. It will fall to the ground like the remains of the Challenger fell from the skies January 28, 1986.
Once that happens, Mars will be open to recolonization. NASA is on the wrong side of that future history. Some of the private space companies in this area should survive, provided they survive the war and attendant social turmoil that is to come.