PROJECT UNITY

Chapter Two
A Question of Doubt

For the better part of thirty years I have been involved in a little known program functioning under the code name of Project Unity, whose main objective has been to identify, define and apply the underlying dynamic force determining the form and function of physical structure. On March 24, 2002 I sent a communiqu to the Canadian Space Agency in Ottawa, describing the successful discovery of this underlying force. I pointed out the inherent limitations associated with conventional science and technology, while emphasizing the benefits Project Unity was capable of providing. In this communication I made reference to the lunar geological samples returned to Earth more than thirty years ago during the Apollo Missions, whereby tests were performed at the Johnson Space Center in Houston, Texas under the direction of the Lunar Quarantine Program, to determine if the lunar material represented a hazard to the Earths ecology. During this initial testing, numerous plant and animal species were exposed to and injected with lunar material. And in one particular test, the one which I am most familiar, two species of plants, beans and corn, were exposed to lunar material, resulting in accelerated growth, genetic deformities and cancerous anomalies, despite the fact that the lunar material was not radioactive beyond normal background levels. This test involved the lunar material being pulverized to a very fine powder and placed in solution with water, whereby this solution was applied directly to the soil in which the two species of plants, beans and corn, had been planted. Two control plots were also planted with beans and corn, but were not exposed to the lunar material, in that the watering solution applied to the control plots contained no lunar material. Both the beans and corn in the two control plots developed at a normal rate and suffered no genetic deformities or cancerous anomalies.

2006 David Barclay

PROJECT UNITY

At the time of this test the scientists involved did not understand why the lunar material affected the plants in this manner, as they were at a total loss to explain why such adverse alterations and ill effects had occurred. This test was well documented and was later aired on public television as a special presentation sanctioned by NASA. As well, information pamphlets were printed and distributed by NASA describing this test, including photos of the plants suffering the adverse alterations and ill effects resulting from exposure to the lunar material, as well as photos of the control plants which developed in a normal manner. Now, after more than thirty years of virtually isolated effort, Project Unity had finally discovered why the lunar material affected the beans and corn in such an adverse manner, which in my mind at least, represented a significant achievement. But little did I realize that the original test results had now been altered and for the most part deleted from official records. I received a reply back from the Canadian Space Agency informing me that they had checked out my contentions regarding the affects of the lunar material and had found no documentation by which to substantiate my claim that such adverse alterations and ill effects had occurred. It was further stated that the numerous plants and animals exposed to and or injected with lunar material suffered no adverse alterations of ill effects of any kind. However, there was evidence indicating that the various plant species exposed to the lunar material did experience accelerated growth, which NASA suggests might be of benefit to farmers. At first I thought this was simply the result of a most unfortunate misunderstanding, as it seemed utterly absurd to suggest that such well documented test results could simply be deleted from the record. But, in checking the on-line NASA archives, I discovered that NASA did in fact deny any adverse alterations or ill effects having occurred in relation to the various plant and animal species having been exposed to or injected with the lunar material. Wow, what a shock. After all the years of having those scary NASA photos of deformed bean and corn plants sitting on my desk, NASA was now
2006 David Barclay

PROJECT UNITY denying that any such adverse effects had occurred. There must be millions of people who remember watching NASA scientists performing this test on television, in respect to the accelerated rate of growth, genetic deformities and cancerous anomalies affecting the bean and corn plants exposed to the lunar material. So what happened? What happened was that the test results indicated the existence of a very serious problem, which would adversely affect future manned missions into space, the exploitation of extraterrestrial resources and the colonization of planetary bodies. It must be assumed that NASA did not initially comprehend the significance of this problem, as at the time they were primarily concerned with protecting public health, agriculture and other living resources from contamination. And in this respect a great deal of effort went into successfully protecting the Earths ecology from any possible hazard associated with the lunar material. Eventually someone must have realized that the adverse effects of the lunar material indicated a serious setback, whereby substantial advances in science and technology would be required to overcome such an obvious hurdle. I immediately wrote back to the Canadian Space Agency encouraging them to make a direct request to NASA for clarification, but I heard nothing further. So I must assume that they simply refused to pursue the matter or that NASA was insistent upon denying the existence of such a problem. The importance of this initial test, involving bean and corn plants, cannot be overstated as I consider the radical results of this test to represent some of the most important information derived from the exploration of space. As prior to obtaining the test information from NASA, more than thirty years ago, I had anticipated that the lunar material would in fact affect accelerated growth in plants, but I had not considered the possibility of genetic deformities or cancer. The reason for not considering the possibility of such adverse effects was due to the general belief and understanding at the time that the moon and our neighboring planets maintained a uniform relationship with our Earth, in terms of the relative uniform condition of each planetary body.

2006 David Barclay

PROJECT UNITY Since then I have discovered that this is not the case at all or even physically possible, as no such uniform relationship exists. And although our planet Earth exists itself in a relatively uniform state, that uniform state or condition does not correspond to or include the relative condition of the moon or the condition of any other planets, moons or stars existing relative to the Earth. In other words, all other planetary bodies maintain a non-uniform relationship with our Earth, in terms of a relative non-uniform condition. And although this is hotly disputed, the adverse test results, which NASA now insists did not occur, indicated in very explicit terms that no such uniform relationship exists between our Earth and other planetary bodies. In this respect I have written several letters to NASA contesting the proposal to utilize Martian water thought to exist within the Martian geosphere, for the purpose of a manned mission. My contention warns that the utilization of Martian water regardless of its apparent or real purity to accommodate the requirements of a manned mission to Mars would seriously jeopardize the safety and health of the crew. My reasoning is based upon the fact that the relative non-uniformity of the lunar material adversely affected the beans and corn, whereby it can be expected that similar effects will result form the non-uniformity of Martian water should it be ingested. The problem involved here has nothing to do with an organic or chemical agent contaminating the lunar material or the Martian water, as it has to do with the underlying dynamic structure of the atoms and molecules constituting the lunar material and the Martian water. So this is not something which can be remedied with a little disinfectant or a filter. This of course might appear confusing as there appears to be nothing chemically or organically wrong with the lunar material, but there is something wrong with our existing perceptions of space, time and motion, as it relates to the structure of our universe. Unfortunately, due to the complexity of this issue, it isnt difficult for an agency like NASA to deny the existence of such a problem, they simply deny the problem exists.

2006 David Barclay

PROJECT UNITY Had the problem of non-uniformity been openly debated, in respect to the original test results defining the effects of exposure to and or injection of the lunar material, the feasibility of the existing space program would have undoubtedly been questioned. And had the space program been stalled or confined while scientists and engineers developed the necessary science and technology allowing for a uniform access to neighboring planetary bodies, much of the aerospace industry could have suffered severe financial loses. In fact, many of the existing contractors might have simply closed their doors or gone bankrupt. As we know this did not happen, as NASA was fast becoming essential to the military establishment, while the economic benefits of the aerospace industry provided prosperity for many. So it was and still is business as usual, despite the fact that to date the exploitation of extraterrestrial resources and the colonization of other planetary bodies remains technically beyond our reach. To change this existing circumstance requires major revisions to our existing science and technology which will in turn affect our basic perceptions of the universe in which we exist. China has now launched its own space program, with plans to land on the moon in the next few years. And should they succeed, they will undoubtedly return with samples of lunar material, at which point they will discover what NASA has known for more than thirty years. We have another problem Houston, but NASA does not want to admit that such a problem exists, so in an official sense the problem has become a secret. The obvious thing wrong with such a thing becoming a secret is that millions of people already know about it, which can make the possible existence of a secret appear somewhat confusing, in terms of logical reasoning. To get around that issue it is simply suggested that people are mistaken about what they believe they remember having seen or heard on television, read in newspapers or in official NASA publications. And if that doesnt shut them up, suggestions that they are victims of false memory usually will. On top of everything else you now have people claiming that NASA faked the lunar landing, as there are people who claim we did not land on the
2006 David Barclay

PROJECT UNITY Moon and that the lunar material may have actually come from a mine in Canada. As NASA contends that the lunar material caused accelerated growth in plants, the Creighton Mine in Ontario is claimed by some to be the source of the lunar material. Undoubtedly plants experience accelerated growth at the 1400 meter level of the Creighton Mine, as there is a horticultural nursery situated at this level underground, but the various plants grown at the Creighton Mine experience no adverse effects, such as genetic deformities or cancerous anomalies. The reason for this is quite simple, as the environment constituting the Earths geosphere maintains a balanced uniform relationship with the Earths biosphere. Consequently it would be impossible for the naturally occurring conditions at the 1400 meter level of the Creighton Mine to stimulate non-uniform effects corresponding to the adverse effects of the lunar material, in the form of genetic deformities and cancerous anomalies, unless highly radioactive materials were present. There is a similar nursery situated at the 365 meter level of a mine in Flin Flon, Manitoba, affecting a uniform increase in the growth rate of plants. In fact the growth of plants is accelerated in any underground setting, with the rate of growth increasing in proportion to the depth underground. Consequently the claim suggesting the lunar material came from Canada is absurd. But whether such claims are absurd or not, they do serve a purpose beneficial to NASA, as NASA claims that the lunar material, the real lunar material, also affected a perfectly uniform increase in the growth rate of plants. Confusion is an effective distraction, making it that much more difficult to ascertain the truth. And in this respect NASA does not want the original test results substantiated, whereby allowing the lunar material to indicate a nonuniform relationship existing between the Earth and the Moon. Therefore the absurd claims made by skeptics serve to reinforce the certainty of fact associated with the authority of NASA officials, who claim that the lunar material did not cause any structural alterations or adverse effects in respect to those plants and animals involved in the experimental testing, but did cause a perfectly uniform increase in the rate of plant growth.
2006 David Barclay

PROJECT UNITY

I suspect that a scandal of this magnitude would not only cause a shake-up at NASA headquarters, but would also represent an embarrassment to the scientific and political communities as well. The intentional distortion of fact concerning this scientific data has directly affected the advancement of science and technology over the course of the last several decades, as it is impractical and somewhat irrational to participate in solving a problem that does not exist. Today most scientists are convinced that no structural alterations of adverse effects resulted from exposure to or the injection of lunar material. Therefore it would be highly unlikely that structural alterations and or adverse effects should be anticipated by exposure to or ingestion of Martian material having been adequately cleaned and purified. In relation to aerospace engineering, it would equally appear to most that the existing methods of transport and communication presently employed by NASA are suitable to the task of interplanetary exploration. Furthermore, it would also appear that the future establishment of a space station on the Moon or Mars can be achieved on the basis of existing science and technology. Unfortunately the existing methods are inadequate and future possibilities remain dreams, as the existing technological methods employed for the purpose of interplanetary exploration only allow for a non-uniform window of access. And a non-uniform window of access does not allow for a practical means of exploiting the extraterrestrial resources of space or for the establishment of a permanent base on another planetary body. Of course we have a space station orbiting the Earth, which further reinforces the idea of existing technology actually providing a uniform window of access to other planetary bodies. But this is an extremely complex issue, which permits a very deceptive view of the circumstance to prevail. Never for a second did I consider the possibility of NASA perpetuating a scientific fraud, but they did and they do. And for all intents and purposes the lunar skeptics might as well be right in suggesting that a manned mission has yet to land on the surface of the Moon. After all, what was the point of the exercise if we fudged the findings?
2006 David Barclay

PROJECT UNITY

At this time it would appear that the point of the exercise had more to do with political posturing than it had to do with science, just as the idea of sending a manned mission all the way to Mars or for the Chinese to send a manned mission to the Moon is a politically motivated adventure. But suppose the Chinese do go to the Moon and return lunar material to their laboratories for testing and suppose they discover that the lunar material causes structural alterations and ill effects in plants and animals. What is NASA going to say then? That the Chinese testing is faulty or fraudulent or will they suggest that the lunar material somehow became contaminated by exposure to solar radiation? I dont know what NASA will say, but at this point it is doubtful to me that they will come clean or agree to the fact that our planetary neighbors maintain a non-uniform relationship with our planet Earth. Like many of my colleagues I view the exploration of space as a scientific adventure allowing for an opportunity to take our knowledge and our talents to the limit, whereby we might discover potential possibilities not previously thought to even exist. But now I find that for the most part it is not about science at all, but about the money and the perceived power that many believe money can buy. Ive never really had a lot of money, nor do I have the ambition to acquire wealth simply for the sake of wealth, so I would just as soon let them have their money if thats all they want. But that is not all they want, they want to stop the rest of us from moving forward, from learning, from understanding and from comprehending. Unfortunately, all the money in the world cannot solve the problem of nonuniformity, nor make it go away. Only an understanding of fact can allow for a uniform window of access. Project Unity achieved its primary objective, which was to determine and define the underlying dynamic force of universe affecting the relative form and function of all physical structure and then continued on to find practical applications for the theoretical principles involved. And in order to achieve that objective it was necessary to go back to the
2006 David Barclay

PROJECT UNITY drawing board and begin anew. Starting from scratch the bits and pieces slowly took shape while others slid easily into place allowing the illusive shadows of universe to be definitively etched against the dynamic background of a relative condition. And when you start over from scratch, you assume nothing and question the validity of everything, which involves going back and examining the most basic concepts of fact. Even the most mundane assumptions must be questioned, despite the traditional certainty of historical experimental evidence. One of the most fundamental aspects of our modern science involves the quantification of the various relative values employed, whereby relative values correspond to relative relationships. In this respect it is imperative that the assumed accuracy of a relative value not be construed to represent an absolute value or to suggest the possibility of an absolute value existing in the context of a relative relationship. In relation to a relative universe, the condition of universe corresponds to a relative dynamic response, which can only be described in terms of nonabsolute values. This means that an accurate assessment of universe cannot be determined on the basis of an absolute value regardless of the apparent accuracy of the terms employed without restricting the condition of universe to a static state.

Read more about Project Unity at www.gravitycontrol.org

2006 David Barclay