It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Lunar Wave (Hologram?) Confirmed By Two Additional Videos!

page: 14
31
<< 11  12  13    15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 22 2016 @ 05:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: thesneakiod


I got through about 5 videos in your last link, gave up because some of them weren't in HD or showed any lunar waves.


Keep looking.


So I have to troll through the videos to see a lunar wave (because the first five never) that apparently happens all the time, so it should be on nearly all videos?

How many do I have to go through before I see a close up HD lunar wave that looks exactly like crrow77's?

👍




posted on Sep, 22 2016 @ 07:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: thesneakiod
Not actually saying its a hologram. More the original moon is still there, it's just that it's now covered with a hologram, due to something appearing on the moon since 2012 that can be seen from earth with the naked eye.


Holograms work very very differently than what you see on Star Trek and Star Wars. You can't "project one" on free space.



posted on Sep, 23 2016 @ 04:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: Bedlam

originally posted by: thesneakiod
Not actually saying its a hologram. More the original moon is still there, it's just that it's now covered with a hologram, due to something appearing on the moon since 2012 that can be seen from earth with the naked eye.


Holograms work very very differently than what you see on Star Trek and Star Wars. You can't "project one" on free space.


If we do live in a controlled environment, how it works, who's working it, would be beyond or comprehension or understanding of their technology.

So we have no idea what's possible or not.

It's said what ever is projecting it, is above low earth orbit, and consider that NASA can't go above that, NASA probably don't even know how or why it works.

👍
edit on Friday20162016-09-23T04:45:30-05:00am304520169 by thesneakiod because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 23 2016 @ 06:23 AM
link   
a reply to: thesneakiod

So NASA can't go above low earth orbit...you may want to tell that to those brave souls who strapped themselves into a giant bottle rocket and rode it to the moon.

Proof you are in fact clueless.

And the fact that we have pictures from said moon proves you are wrong...but seeing as you are a flat earth believer I see why you are clueless.



posted on Sep, 23 2016 @ 06:59 AM
link   
a reply to: thesneakiod


If we do live in a controlled environment, how it works, who's working it, would be beyond or comprehension or understanding of their technology.


But we do not live in a "controlled environment," or rather, humanity is now the one beginning to control it. The technology is vast and complex, but not incomprehensible to anyone who makes the effort to understand basic science.


So we have no idea what's possible or not.


On the contrary, we know what is possible because we are capable of doing it. There are certainly future technologies that would seem impossible to us today, but thinking that the Earth is flat or that the Moon is not real is just fantasy born of ignorance.

If you are truly a radical solipsist and refuse to believe anything that you have not personally experienced, there are do it yourself science experiments I can recommend. If you have access to transportation, I can show you how you can not only prove to yourself that the Earth is a sphere, but you can actually calculate its size!
edit on 23-9-2016 by DJW001 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 23 2016 @ 07:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: tsurfer2000h
a reply to: thesneakiod

So NASA can't go above low earth orbit...you may want to tell that to those brave souls who strapped themselves into a giant bottle rocket and rode it to the moon.

Proof you are in fact clueless.

And the fact that we have pictures from said moon proves you are wrong...but seeing as you are a flat earth believer I see why you are clueless.


I've seen no evidence that we have been to the moon, only lies and manipulation.

I'm not going into the details of why or how it was faked, partly because it's so obvious, but rather other people on here can go into much better technical detail than I ever could.

But consider this, the last mission to the moon was 1972, and consider the distance is roughly a quarter of a million miles away, since then, 44 years ago, to this day, we've gone no further out than low earth orbit.

Infact the furthest we've been out is supposedly 400 miles.

400 miles. As an advancing space faring company they've gone backwards.

And yeh, the usual arguments for not going back will be cost, pointless we've already been there etc...

But that's rubbish, it really is. For not only USA not goin back, or further by now is ridiculous enough, but for no other country to ever set a man on there? In 44years? Ever?

If you believe that we landed on the moon, and the excuses for them or anyone else not going there ever again, then I believe you're type of person that NASA aims it's self at.

👍




edit on Friday20162016-09-23T07:29:03-05:00am302920169 by thesneakiod because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 23 2016 @ 07:46 AM
link   
a reply to: thesneakiod


But consider this, the last mission to the moon was 1972, and consider the distance is roughly a quarter of a million miles away, since then, 44 years ago, to this day, we've gone no further out than low earth orbit.


If they faked it back then, why did they stop? Why not fake a Moon base and a Mars colony?



posted on Sep, 23 2016 @ 08:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: thesneakiod


But consider this, the last mission to the moon was 1972, and consider the distance is roughly a quarter of a million miles away, since then, 44 years ago, to this day, we've gone no further out than low earth orbit.


If they faked it back then, why did they stop? Why not fake a Moon base and a Mars colony?


Extremely good question! Whey haven't they?

But faking it would be a massive headache. They would be watched by astronomers from all over the world who have some of the best equipment. They would have to be seen many many times near or at least passing the moon. And they would be scrutinised with zoomed in high definition telescopes.

Plus then to actually fake putting a base on the moon (if we discount the hologram/hologram covering the moon angle) then over time, with civilian telescopes getting better and better, the bases and their activity eventually would have to be seen in great detail. Unless they were conveniently placed on the dark side of the moon of course.

I mean the logistics in doing that, well, I wouldn't have to explain how difficult or impossible that would be.

It would be easier to just do it for real...

So, with an average budget of 18 billion big ones, over 44 years, and seeing how they're doing bugger all else up there, the question of why haven't they, is an extremely good one indeed...

👍



posted on Sep, 23 2016 @ 01:24 PM
link   
Here's a question:

The Aristarchus crater on the moon is 29 miles across, and we can see it with the naked eye.

Would it be possible to see a 29 mile crater on earth from a quarter of a million miles away?

Of course it wouldn't.

So how can we possibly see the Aristarchus crater? It shouldn't be visible without a telescope, and even then you'd be pushed to see it. And to top it off they never even went near it. Probably one of the most famous and strangest craters on the moon and they avoided it. Okaaayyy....

Going by that, the moon can't be no where near as far away as they say.

Remember when we went to Pluto and got that great picture of it? Hold on what's on it? Why it's an image of Pluto the dog on it of course.

Juno, another complete farce. We're are the detailed pictures of Jupiter when Juno orbited it?

They don't even try to hide it nowadays. And what's more, no one seems bothered, even though it's shoved right in our faces.

NASA are a complete sham.

👍
edit on Friday20162016-09-23T13:26:48-05:00pm302620169 by thesneakiod because: (no reason given)

edit on Friday20162016-09-23T14:44:27-05:00pm304420169 by thesneakiod because: (no reason given)

edit on Friday20162016-09-23T14:46:49-05:00pm304620169 by thesneakiod because: (no reason given)

edit on Friday20162016-09-23T14:47:53-05:00pm304720169 by thesneakiod because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 23 2016 @ 03:49 PM
link   
a reply to: thesneakiod


It would be easier to just do it for real...


Correct, it was easier to do it for real, as you have explained.



posted on Sep, 23 2016 @ 04:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: thesneakiod


It would be easier to just do it for real...


Correct, it was easier to do it for real, as you have explained.


Apollo 13 is a good one. Amazingly by the time of launch the general public were bored of the moon. So much so that people were ringing the TV stations asking why "l love Lucy" wasn't on.

Low and behold Apollo 13 gets involved in a life and death situation, live on TV for the whole world to see. Next thing, peeps are back loving space again.

Haha. Six times in four years. six times in four years. Then we never went back.

And no one else did.

Ever.

You see the struggle they have nowadays to go to the moon, they admit they can't do it. They then have the audacity to start talking about sending people to Mars. It's a complete joke.

I can't get how people can't look at this logically and realise how laughable it is to believe all that.

👍



posted on Sep, 23 2016 @ 04:57 PM
link   
a reply to: thesneakiod


Next thing, peeps are back loving space again.


No. They cancelled the last few missions and no-one complained.


You see the struggle they have nowadays to go to the moon, they admit they can't do it.


No; in fact, the Russians are planning on taking tourists.


They then have the audacity to start talking about sending people to Mars. It's a complete joke.


There was no reason to go to the Moon; it is a dead planet. Mars is more interesting, but much, much harder to get to.


I can't get how people can't look at this logically and realise how laughable it is to believe all that.


If you weren't such a palpable troll I would pity your ignorance. Bye.



posted on Sep, 23 2016 @ 05:08 PM
link   
a reply to: DJW001

Didn't even respond to the Aristarchus crater question then?

Or why Pluto has plutos face on it?
No Jupiter pics?

Fair enough.

Bye

👍



posted on Sep, 23 2016 @ 05:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: thesneakiod


No; in fact, the Russians are planning on taking tourists




Haha now that's quality.

The Russians:

"Er....we haven't put one of trained cosmonauts on the moon yet, but we'll send some of our civilians there Instead"

Brilliant.

👍



posted on Sep, 23 2016 @ 06:09 PM
link   



posted on Sep, 23 2016 @ 06:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: thesneakiod
Apollo 13 is a good one. Amazingly by the time of launch the general public were bored of the moon. So much so that people were ringing the TV stations asking why "l love Lucy" wasn't on.

Low and behold Apollo 13 gets involved in a life and death situation, live on TV for the whole world to see. Next thing, peeps are back loving space again.


The incident with Apollo 13 never reinvigorated the public eye in the Apollo Missions again, it was an outpouring of worldwide concern and support to get those brave astronauts home safely, even right after the safe return of the the Apollo 13 crew, NASA was constantly asked why they were continuing on with sending missions and wasting money on doing so.

The crew on continued Apollo missions and NASA were asked regularly during interviews why they were still sending missions to the moon, the tune in rate was extremely low, even after the return of Apollo 13

As DJW001 stated, no-one complained when they were cancelled.

It's a shame, it would of been nice to see those new F-1A/B engines used.

edit on 23-9-2016 by MuonToGluon because: SP



posted on Sep, 23 2016 @ 06:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001


Yep you couldn't answer the questions.

NASA fanboy. Who obviously hasn't got a logical thought in his head.

You're so ensconced, so indoctirinated, so unable to grasp the fact that you're being blatantly lied to, so you resort to boring insults.

No need to reply I'm out.

👍



posted on Sep, 23 2016 @ 09:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: thesneakiod

If we do live in a controlled environment, how it works, who's working it, would be beyond or comprehension or understanding of their technology.

So we have no idea what's possible or not.


Yet, IIRC, the perpetrator of all this 'hologram moon' junk is stating a lot of malarkey about 'resolution resets' and the like. But you can't have it both ways, IMHO, if you're claiming it's literally a hologram, it's not. Because holograms don't work that way. If you want to invoke super science, it seems to be a pretty crappy implementation.



It's said what ever is projecting it, is above low earth orbit, and consider that NASA can't go above that, NASA probably don't even know how or why it works.

👍


Why do you think NASA can't go above LEO?



posted on Sep, 23 2016 @ 09:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: thesneakiod
Here's a question:

The Aristarchus crater on the moon is 29 miles across, and we can see it with the naked eye.

Would it be possible to see a 29 mile crater on earth from a quarter of a million miles away?


Yes, yes you can. Why? Because the crater has a ray system that's 250km across, and the ray contents and the crater itself exposes a very much higher albedo material that's got a very big contrast ratio to the dark maria it sits on. So, if the light is right, you see a bright spot there, but no detail.



And to top it off they never even went near it. Probably one of the most famous and strangest craters on the moon and they avoided it. Okaaayyy....


I've never been to Poughkeepsie, either, but that doesn't mean I'm avoiding it. I just never went there.



Going by that, the moon can't be no where near as far away as they say.


Pretty sad that you can determine the distance yourself, if you're technically apt.



posted on Sep, 23 2016 @ 09:31 PM
link   
a reply to: thesneakiod




It's said what ever is projecting it, is above low earth orbit, and consider that NASA can't go above that, NASA probably don't even know how or why it works.

How does a low Earth orbit work with a flat Earth?




top topics



 
31
<< 11  12  13    15 >>

log in

join