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

Sooooo..... the moon isn't real? I'd like to see someone actually fly to the moon and prove it

a reply to: signalfire

Yet again some good points you bring up.

As you mentioned the user has 1000's of hours of watching the moon through a telescope, I personally don't know anyone that has done this apart from the big boys like NASA etc, Yes I have looked up at the moon on many times for hours, but never taped it and not for 1000's off hours using a telescope, so when I see an amateur user which seems to have allot off experience regarding viewing the moon sees something and also takes the time to have others verify what he says, i think it is worth looking at.

The claims of hoax etc I see has not justification and have no bases, and people just quote what others say without experiencing or knowing for fact that is is true.
More than likely i believe these people would have been in the crowd that burnt people at the stake for saying the earth was round many centuries ago.

If we do not question everything then what do we learn?

You spotted the camera movement as well but still we see the wave over the moon.

Plus other users have filmed the same effect, so i think there is plenty for some with more knowledge and an interest to get there teeth into.

it was not long ago we were told the moon is a dead rock nothing there to see...

But now were told that there is possible traces off water and it has been suggested that there could be an atmosphere.

Thanks

a reply to: 3u40r15m

Who is saying the moon isn't real?

originally posted by: parad0x122
a reply to: TheDon

This is the same effect that happens when heat causes ripples on the sidewalk during a hot summer's day. Atmospheric distortion, not a hologram.

Besides that, the fact that our Oceans have waves tends to prove otherwise.

I had thought that as well at first, and you can see this effect in some off the videos, but if you look again at some off the videos you will also see this wave onto off that, now is it equipment? possible, but the original maker off the video is pretty sure it is not, plus as mentioned he has 3 other people confirming what he has seen with video footage with different equipment and locations.

Thanks

a reply to: usernameconspiracy

With the bh having the same gravity as our son oc, i meant you can conceal something that has gravitational properties that are similar to the current mass of our moon.

a reply to: TheDon

That's because all 3 people are looking through the same atmosphere: Earth's....

Now I must say that even though I believe this observer to be a bit sketchy in regard to him thinking that the moon is a hologram, he may have stumbled onto an observation that's relatively rare: Atmospheric Tides. They have been researched for decades and we still try to understand them, but essentially the atmosphere is effected by thermal dynamics due to the heat of the Sun, similar to the way the Ocean is effected by the gravitational pull of the Moon. (Hence why it has to be real.)

For more information, check this link: Atmospheric Tides - Wikipedia.

Edit: You're welcome.

a reply to: signalfire

(let's face it, anyone who looks at the moon through a large Celestron for thousands of hours isn't going to be stymied by that)

Thousands of hours? Assuming perfect weather, and that he observed the Moon for five hours every single day, that is at least a year and a half of observing time. He would understand how his equipment works. He does not, which calls his claim of logging thousands of hours into question.

a reply to: signalfire

I just want to clarify my own position as my first post was more flip than editorial... I see his point that the wave of interference was not his camera ...but jumping to the "hologram covering up activity" is a tad too deep-end... a wave of turbulence in the upper atmosphere is a better fit.

Though I'm of the opinion there is likely some black-op man activity up there... and a projection set up to obscure any activities isn't impossible... just veeeeeeery improbable.

originally posted by: Baddogma
a reply to: signalfire

I just want to clarify my own position as my first post was more flip than editorial... I see his point that the wave of interference was not his camera ...but jumping to the "hologram covering up activity" is a tad too deep-end... a wave of turbulence in the upper atmosphere is a better fit.

Though I'm of the opinion there is likely some black-op man activity up there... and a projection set up to obscure any activities isn't impossible... just veeeeeeery improbable.

Thanks for the clarification - there's been too many adolescent comments on this thread and it really deserves to be taken seriously. If it's a technical glitch, reproduce it and show how it's done. Should be simple with the people we have on here with both computer and camera expertise. If it's a turbulence wave, which is a great thing to rule in or out, why is it horizontal? Why wouldn't it be more like the shimmer you see on a desert road in the heat ahead of you, that 'oasis' effect? Why isn't it continuous?

I think his conclusion that it's a projection (better word than hologram) is right out of science fiction, but damn, if that's what he's on to, how cool is that?

Thousands of hours? Assuming perfect weather, and that he observed the Moon for five hours every single day, that is at least a year and a half of observing time. He would understand how his equipment works. He does not, which calls his claim of logging thousands of hours into question.

There are LOTS of amateur astronomers with expensive equipment putting in all night, every night. People into that tend to live in the desert and so most nights are perfect nights. Those Celestrons are addictive. Your claiming he's a hoax, or hasn't got the hours in, is simply your opinion. There's no proof behind your opinion. That's why I said some of the posts here remind me of the JREF forum. It's small minds thinking they're debunking everything under the sun without any proof, just ridicule. In fact, JREF is a great place to go to learn how fake debunking works...

I spend every waking hour almost on the internet, reading and writing. That's about 15 hours a day, 365 days a year, times the last 4 years since I retired. How many hours is that?** Maybe he's as obsessed as I am.

(** 5,475, ACK!)

originally posted by: parad0x122
a reply to: TheDon

That's because all 3 people are looking through the same atmosphere: Earth's....

Now I must say that even though I believe this observer to be a bit sketchy in regard to him thinking that the moon is a hologram, he may have stumbled onto an observation that's relatively rare: Atmospheric Tides. They have been researched for decades and we still try to understand them, but essentially the atmosphere is effected by thermal dynamics due to the heat of the Sun, similar to the way the Ocean is effected by the gravitational pull of the Moon. (Hence why it has to be real.)

For more information, check this link: Atmospheric Tides - Wikipedia.

Edit: You're welcome.

Thank you

Has anyone ever PHOTOGRAPHED atmospheric tides???

Because even if that's all it is, maybe this is still a real big deal?

a reply to: signalfire

There are LOTS of amateur astronomers with expensive equipment putting in all night, every night.

Yes... and not one of them has ever suggested that the Moon is a hologram.

a reply to: raedar

Is there a piece of evidence you could link instead of just attempting to derail the thread with name-calling?

If there were, would you deal with it or run away from it like you did here and here ?

a reply to: signalfire

That's what I was getting at too, this is definitely something that should be looked into a bit more considering it's been independently verified by multiple observers, with different gear, from different places, at different times. From the bit of research I've done so far, all I was able to find was theoretical studies made on how these atmospheric tides would work, but I was unable to find any photographic evidence of them occurring.

I'm leaning more toward the possibility that these 3 viewers may have stumbled upon an incredible natural phenomenon, rather than a hologram conspiracy. Either way, it's pretty fascinating! SnF to the OP for bringing this here, it's definitely peaked my curiosity.

Edit: Here are some links to the studies I'm referring to. These were done by pretty serious scholars as well, including the Royal Astronomical Society of Canada and the National Center for Atmospheric Research:
Atmospheric Tides - Lindzen & Chapman (PDF)
Lunar Atmospheric Tides

a reply to: signalfire

Finally someone challenges the ludicrous behaviour of the pseudosceptics.

Having been around the block, I KNOW that something funky is happening on/in our nighttime companion.

It's been that way since the days of Enoch. And if people care to investigate further with an open mind (beware the deliberately seeded misinformation) then those people might be sufficiently convinced of the lunar funkiness.

There was solid reasoning behind the scrubbing of the Clementine data, and the deliberate sabotage of certain websites, including the convenient loss of archive data. Naming no names, but someone in particular was discredited, dispossessed and quite possibly disposed of.

Fight the good fight.

Pseudoscepticism is a disease that piggy-backs on the destruction of knowledge by the powerful ones of our mote of dust in a sunbeam.

Word.

a reply to: DJW001

I may be wrong, but aren't we discussing the possibility of holographic technology being used to obfuscate the surface of the Moon? I don't think many would deny that the Moon itself exists - the gravitational effects are clear evidence that it's there. Considering that our military R&D guys have been working on image projection and surface obfuscation technology for decades, it's perfectly feasible that a Type 1 race could cover the surface of a small orbital body with a projection designed precisely for the purpose of hiding their presence while they do whatever it is they're doing.

And the weight of available evidence, after cautious research, shows that there quite possibly is more than meets the eye when it comes to our closest solar system companion.

But I know you aren't interested in feasibility, you repeatedly demonstrate your purposes, and that's okay. David Bohm said that it's ultimately more dangerous to cling to illusion than to face the truth. He was quite interested in holograms too, incidentally.

a reply to: FlyInTheOintment

Here's a quick question:

If it were a hologram to obfuscate the surface of the moon, when the ISS flew by, wouldn't people here on earth be able to see a shadow of it blocking the hologram?

originally posted by: FlyInTheOintment


Having been around the block, I KNOW that something funky is happening on/in our nighttime companion.

And by the way, I'm definitely NOT skeptical that this is absolutely true as well :-)

originally posted by: parad0x122
a reply to: signalfire

SnF to the OP for bringing this here, it's definitely peaked my curiosity.

Your welcome :-)

Without these other observers I might have passed this by.
But when you do a bit of research on them and what they do in there spare time, and take away there opinions, because that is all they are like mine and yours, you can see they have spotted something and they too are asking questions .

Thanks

The question is what are they seeing?

a reply to: TheDon

I'm really curious myself!
There's no doubt in my mind from viewing that footage (biding that it hasn't been tampered with) that there appears to be some sort of distortion/interaction going on against some sort of transparent layer or membrane. Now whether that's the atmosphere or an actual "glitch" against some sort of hologram is yet to be seen. The thing that boggles my mind is when you think of a standard setup for a projector screen, there's a source and a layer that the projection is cast on to. So if they were in fact beaming up one/several projections to cover certain areas on the Moon, you'd think looking down from space via satellite that you'd be able to spot the source of the image.

If these guys really are seeing what they think they're seeing, the next big question on the tip of my tongue is:
What is the need to cover up areas our nearest celestial neighbor?

Fascinating.

This video scan/shift is an artifact. I have seen them in displays and monitors all my life, especially in video from certain types of cameras. It is a synch artifact, and nothing more.

Think of all the incredible equipment that looks at and records the moon around the world, do you see anyone posting this "Lunar Wave Phenomena"?