Color me extremely shocked, but NASA has just scrapped its plans for the Artemis III mission. Check out this Tweet from NASA back on October 28, 2024 telling us that the Artemis III mission will send astronauts back to the Moon for the first time in over 50 years: Our #Artemis III astronauts will land on the Moon for the first time in over 50 years. Where on the Moon are they landing? We are refining a list of nine areas near the lunar South Pole, a place we’ve never set foot on before: https://t.co/v2rmELgPW9 pic.twitter.com/FIygdytbJy — NASA (@NASA) October 28, 2024 Wow! Incredible, right? Actually, I told you at the time it would never happen. They’ve been playing this same game for over 50 years. They keep telling us we’ll surely go “back” (hmmmmm, back?) to the Moon in a few months or in a few years.  Everyone gets excited.  Then at the last minute they cancel it, but no one notices or cares.  Then a few months or years later, wash, rinse, repeat. And right on schedule, NASA has just announced the Artemis III Moon Mission Is Now Scrapped: I’ll take things that will never happen for 500 Alex! They posted that crap in 2024, I am patient. https://t.co/2T22YReICJ pic.twitter.com/Bmc87X7zmf — The Secrets Of Heaven (@PlaneAndTruth) February 28, 2026 To be clear, they still claim that Artemis II will joyride Astronauts to and around the Moon in 2026 for a fun little joyride mission, but it will not bother to stop and land on the Moon. The Guardian explained more details here: Nasa announced on Friday radical changes to its delayed Artemis III mission to land humans back on the moon, as the US space agency grapples with technical glitches and criticism that it is trying to do too much too soon. The abrupt shift in strategy was laid out by the space agency’s recently confirmed administrator, Jared Isaacman. Announcing the changes on Friday, he said that Nasa would introduce at least one new moon flight before attempting to put humans back on the lunar surface for the first time in more than half a century, in 2028. The new, more incremental approach would give the Nasa team a chance to test flight and refine its technology. As part of the changes, the Artemis II mission to fly humans around the moon this year, without landing, would also be pushed back from its latest scheduled launch on 6 March to 1 April at the earliest. “Everybody agrees this is the only way forward,” Isaacman told reporters at a news conference. “I know this is how Nasa changed the world, and this is how Nasa is going to do it again.” The revised course came as Nasa has been wrestling with a number of delays and technical problems. Earlier this week, the independent body that reviews space safety issued a blunt report sharply criticising the space agency’s current plans as too risky. The aerospace safety advisory panel recommended that Nasa rethink its objectives for Artemis III, which had been conceived as the first human landing on the moon since the final flight in the Apollo series in December 1972. The panel said that the call for a revision was urgent, “given the demanding mission goals”. Isaacman said that under the new plan, the eventual moon landing would be achieved through evolutionary steps rather than big leaps in technological procedures. “We’re going to get there in steps, continue to take down risk as we learn more and we roll that information into subsequent designs,” he told CBS News. He added: “We’ve got to get back to basics.” Step one in the revised schedule is the launch of the Artemis II moon mission, which has been plagued by delays. The rocket was returned to its hangar at the Kennedy Space Center in Florida earlier this week. Engineers had discovered a blockage in the rocket’s helium flow in the upper stage of the booster. The latest delay followed disappointment in February, when Nasa was forced to put off the launch of Artemis II after hydrogen was found leaking from its Space Launch System rocket. Artemis II will send four astronauts on a 10-day journey around the moon, designed to take people further into space than ever before, beyond the record set by Apollo 13 in 1970. Isaacman said on Friday that additional missions would then be included in the schedule. He likened the extra steps to the approach taken in Nasa’s original moon landing in which Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin first stepped on to the lunar surface in 20 July 1969. That legendary event was hazarded only after three separate moon missions had been completed. The Artemis III mission will no longer aim to land on the moon. Instead, under the revised plans, it will be launched by mid-2027 as a low-Earth orbit designed to test essential technologies. Consider me shocked….shocked I say!  [massive sarcasm alert] I told you back in January that EXACTLY this very thing would happen: NASA Plans To Send Astronauts Back To The Moon In February And for more reading, you might find this absolutely fascinating: Did We Go To The Moon In 1969? The Moon Rocks Are The Clue! I had Jovan Pulitzer on my show yesterday, and you know it was a good show (because of the Guest!) when you’re still thinking about it the next day! And that’s exactly what I’ve been doing all day today…thinking about my chat with Jovan and re-running it through my head. The whole thing was fascinating as it always is each time I get the pleasure of having him come on my show…I have so much fun getting to chat with him, I suddenly look up and a couple hours have flown by! But the thing that’s still running through my head a full day later is what Jovan told me about the Moon. We were on the topic of Conspiracy Theories and so I randomly asked him “Do you think we went to the Moon in 1969?” I had no idea what his answer was going to be…. And quite frankly what he said shocked me.  It was not the answer I would have expected if you had asked me ahead of time. Let me post the full video links to the interview here in case you missed it and then scroll down and I’ll break down what he said and all my thoughts as I sit here one day later. Watch here: Backup here on Rumble if needed: And then here are all the links you need that we mentioned in the interview: