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.

 

Firmament Discovered - Water in the Ionosphere

page: 2
27
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 16 2019 @ 10:38 AM
link   
Still a sci data on moon mission is gone and so now NASA a gov agency outsource next 6 missions or so to SpaceX who just keep broadcasting rocket launches with movie extra crowds and cgi vids and despite today's phone cam era, no amateur vids of the launches plus the rockets just go up and come back down anyways after at most, dropping some satellites into orbit... Yet they're already planning going to mars. where's the sci data on even animals surviving VA belt??




posted on Oct, 16 2019 @ 10:53 AM
link   
a reply to: serpo



no amateur vids of the launches

Where did you come up with that bullsh!t? Read carefully. The launches are witnessed by half of Florida. There are so many amateur vids I doubt you have the spare time to watch them all and on clear nights you can see them go all the way up with as little as a pair of binoculars.



posted on Oct, 16 2019 @ 11:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: Grimpachi

Where did you come up with that bullsh!t? Read carefully. The launches are witnessed by half of Florida. There are so many amateur vids I doubt you have the spare time to watch them all and on clear nights you can see them go all the way up with as little as a pair of binoculars.



If we crossed the Atlantic ocean from Europe 6 times in a row without failure, it would insist we are ready to colonize America. Yet we supposedly made it to the moon 6 times in a row without failure and have really nothing to say for it, except the Dutch government wondering why their gifted moon rock from Neil Armstrong was chemically analyzed and found to be petrified wood.

the "moon rocks" given to Holland were tested and found to be petrified wood

It is likely one of the biggest cons ever pulled on humankind. But this is exciting, because it opens up a new untapped scientific understanding of our cosmos... Maybe even one that will harmonize with quantum physics, rather than conflict with it like the current model does.
edit on 16-10-2019 by cooperton because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 16 2019 @ 11:13 AM
link   


Yet we supposedly made it to the moon 6 times in a row without failure


Apollo 13 ...

Fact exists whether you accept it or not.



posted on Oct, 16 2019 @ 11:15 AM
link   
a reply to: cooperton

I don't know about your Dutch Government claim, but comparing crossing the Ocean to crossing the vacume of space is ridiculous.



posted on Oct, 16 2019 @ 11:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: roadgravel

Apollo 13 ...

Fact exists whether you accept it or not.


Yes** forgot to add "without casualties".

The fact is, NASA scientists don't know how to get to the moon:



"The problem is we don't have the technology to (go to the moon) anymore. We used to but we destroyed that technology and its a painful process to get it back"
-NASA scientist Don Pettit



posted on Oct, 16 2019 @ 11:24 AM
link   
a reply to: Grimpachi

Crossing Thousands of miles of ocean in a rickety boat.



posted on Oct, 16 2019 @ 11:40 AM
link   
I'm sure a reasonable and at least some what educated person would understand the difference in traveling to and living on another part of our planet versus the moon.


edit on 10/16/2019 by roadgravel because: typo



posted on Oct, 16 2019 @ 11:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: roadgravel
I'm sure a reasonable and at least some what educated person would understand the difference in traveling to and living on another part of our planet versus the moon.



Don't sidetrack. The point was that if we got to the moon with such success, it should be even easier now. But NASA scientists admit they don't know how to get there:





posted on Oct, 16 2019 @ 12:04 PM
link   
a reply to: cooperton

Side track?

A person implied we crossed the ocean to live, why not the moon.

Bye



posted on Oct, 16 2019 @ 12:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: roadgravel
I'm sure a reasonable and at least some what educated person would understand the difference in traveling to and living on another part of our planet versus the moon.



Don't sidetrack. The point was that if we got to the moon with such success, it should be even easier now. But NASA scientists admit they don't know how to get there:




Where does he say "we don't know how to get there"?
NASA just don't have a heavy lift launch vehicle like the saturn v at the moment.
Please don't misrepresent things.



posted on Oct, 16 2019 @ 12:52 PM
link   
a reply to: St Udio

in my mindset... the word & concept of Firmament in the Genesis story is a broken concept...

the meaning in today's lingo 'firmament' = Bio-Sphere
… the living zone where plant / animal & human life can exist naturally
… so even on mountain tops the clouds that bring rain & snow & hail are over our heads (water Above 'firmament' )


ADD:
 





the "moon rocks" given to Holland were tested and found to be petrified wood

It is likely one of the biggest cons ever pulled on humankind.


 


Naw, not a Con.... the petrified wood might prove to be relic wood from the Noah Ark vessel itself
wouldn't that be a wake-up call


edit on th31157124895316022019 by St Udio because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 16 2019 @ 01:07 PM
link   
Moon rocks given to Holland?
And who "gave" them to them?
Clue - it wasn't NASA.



posted on Oct, 16 2019 @ 05:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: TamtammyMacx
I've heard that it is liquid. But it is liquid Helium. Space temperature is -270 C. Liquid Helium is -270C,



You're not putting pressure or the lack thereof as a factor. Same temp doesn't mean that it will be liquid at those temps. Depends on the pressure as a major factor.



posted on Oct, 16 2019 @ 06:24 PM
link   
a reply to: cooperton

There's a world of difference between "we don't have the technology to get there", and "we don't know how to get there". We don't currently have the technology to get there and back. There is no crew rated craft, no lunar lander, and no heavy lift rocket available.



posted on Oct, 16 2019 @ 07:42 PM
link   
The other thing is why go back. Visiting and living there are two very different problems. Just figuring out a power source for when the moon wanes is an issue. Nuclear would work, but it would be huge and what about upkeep. Where to set up is another issue. A lava tube would be safe from meteorite impacts but also has its drawbacks. There are teams of people developing different aspects of what it would take to build a lunar colony/base. They have a lot figured out but there is still a lot to go.



posted on Oct, 17 2019 @ 01:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: cooperton
If we crossed the Atlantic ocean from Europe 6 times in a row without failure, it would insist we are ready to colonize America. Yet we supposedly made it to the moon 6 times in a row without failure and have really nothing to say for it, except the Dutch government wondering why their gifted moon rock from Neil Armstrong was chemically analyzed and found to be petrified wood.

the "moon rocks" given to Holland were tested and found to be petrified wood
What a total BS version of the story. Nobody ever said it was a moon rock, the inscription doesn't say it was a moon rock, and it was many, many times larger than the moon rocks that were given to countries. I already debunked this in another thread, I'll just copy that here.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

originally posted by: Arbitrageur
Here's a much better link that will hopefully enlighten you on this one topic...

usatoday30.usatoday.com...

Apollo 11 gift rocks typically weigh just 0.05 grams, scarcely more than a grain of rice. The Apollo 17 gift rocks weigh about 1.1 grams. Both are encased in plastic globes to protect them and ease viewing.
So Drees, who is hard of hearing, gets an 89 gram rock and thinks it's a moon rock? His grandson thinks Drees probably got a false impression since he couldn't hear well, and the inscription doesn't say it was a moon rock, and if it was it would be many times larger than the moon rocks give to other countries so obviously it wasn't a moon rocks nor did the inscription claim it was a moon rock.


it weighed a whopping 89 grams (3.1 ounces). In addition, its gold-colored cardboard plaque does not describe it as a moon rock.

The U.S. ambassador gave Drees the rock during an Oct. 9, 1969 visit by the Apollo 11 astronauts to the Netherlands. Drees's grandson, also named Willem, told the AP his grandfather had been out of office for more than a decade and was nearly deaf and blind in 1969, though his mind was still sharp.

"My guess is that he did not hear well what was said," said the grandson. "He may have formed his own idea about what it was."
So "its gold-colored cardboard plaque does not describe it as a moon rock"!! Why do people want to take the misinterpretation of someone who's practically deaf and blind about what it's supposed to be over the inscription.

The museum didn't vet the rock, they asked NASA if it could be a moon rocks and NASA said maybe but they couldn't confirm it without seeing it.


The Amsterdam case appears to be not fraud but the result of poor vetting by the Rijksmuseum.

Spokeswoman Xandra van Gelder said the museum checked with NASA after receiving the rock in 1992 from the estate of the late Prime Minister Willem Drees. NASA told the museum, without seeing it, that it was "possible" it was a moon rock...

The family never thought to question the story before donating the rock, to which it had not attached great importance or monetary value.

So that was was never said to be a moon rock, if it was it would say so on the inscription and it never did.
Lots of other things misrepresented in this thread too, as others have said, but I wanted to address that Dutch rock since nobody else did.



posted on Oct, 17 2019 @ 01:33 AM
link   
Hmmm




posted on Oct, 17 2019 @ 02:41 AM
link   
To the OP:
Hydrogen ions and oxygen ions are not water.

edit on 10/17/2019 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 17 2019 @ 03:19 AM
link   
a reply to: cooperton




If you want my opinion I think it may actually be both... the earth is undeniably circumnavigable, yet it also has attributes that it is a 3-Dimensional flat plane. Einstein's theory involves space (3D) bending due to the 4th-dimension: time. If time is bending space, then that means that space (3D) is not already a sphere, but instead is flat. The 3D flat plane of earth gets bent by time into a 4D spheroidal tesseract that is circumnavigable.


However you want to dress it up it's still a sphere man, unless of course you remove the "space bending" property of "time" from the universe.




new topics

top topics



 
27
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join