Originally posted by yeahright
Cannot be trusted, or have no proof to that effect?

Cannot be trusted through their actions.

Originally posted by Paul_Richard
We are reminded of the famous transmission by an orbiting US astronaut whereby he referred on the radio to seeing an extraterrestrial craft. After that incident, NASA decided to scramble all their radio transmissions.

Originally posted by yeahright
Maybe because it wasn't an extraterrestrial craft and NASA acted to prevent causing a panic on future missions by a misunderstood or ill concieved comment?

Okay...how long have you been working for the government?

Originally posted by Paul_Richard
Not all of us are so stupid as to not see the obvious connection.

Originally posted by yeahright
I really don't think stupidity enters into it at all. I think we're perfectly capable of viewing the same set of circumstances and drawing very different conclusions. I've sure got no inside info. Wish I did. I have yet to experience, or obtain otherwise, information that would lead me to conclude to an absolute certainty that there is an ET presence in our solar system.

I trust the credibility of a US astronaut when he or she refers to an extraterrestrial craft over the radio. They have no reason to lie about something like that and the government has a number of reasons to do so. Even former employees of the government, numbering in the hundreds, say that there is an ongoing cover-up; they form the Disclosure Project.

Originally posted by yeahright
Doesn't stop me from searching, though.

[edit on 16-6-2006 by Paul_Richard]

Other anomalies of "our" moon is the puzzle of the moons age for example the first rock Neil Armstrong picked up after landing on the Sea of Tranquility was older! than the oldest rocks on earth. over 99percent of roks brought back after analyses turned out to be older than 90 percent of the oldest rock that can be found on earth.that rock turned out to be 3.6 billion years old other rocks even older at 4.3,4.5,4.6 and even one alleged to be 5.3 billion years old, the ones on earth are about 3.7 billion y.o and the rocks that were brought back was thought by scientists to be from one of the youngest areas back then of our moon!

Another one is the dark areas of the moon known as maria(dried up seas) some of these maria form the familiar "man on the moon" but astronauts found it extremely difficult to drill into the surface of these black plains, soil samples were loaded with rare metals and elements like titanium,zirconium,yttrium,and even berrylium. also rustproof iron found on the moon,pure iron particles that dont rust were unheard of before (although there is a solid iron pillar of unknown age in New Dehli,India, that has also never rusted and noone knows why). Inmense clouds of water vapour,the moons lack of dust,structures on the moon including (pyramids found on the actual Sea of Tranquility (now obviously suppressed) and of course the list goes on.

The hollow moon theory has been going around since the Moon was first discovered. There's also been the theory that it was made of cheese. Let's also not forget the theory of an Alien Lunar Base on the dark side of the Moon.

In actuality...they are all theories, until proven otherwise.

Wondering how the moon could have generated the ''gong'sound as sound does not travel in a vacuum..

Is someone suggesting that the sound reverberated through the legs of the landing module??

Originally posted by incunabula
Other anomalies of "our" moon is the puzzle of the moons age for example the first rock Neil Armstrong picked up after landing on the Sea of Tranquility was older! than the oldest rocks on earth. over 99percent of roks brought back after analyses turned out to be older than 90 percent of the oldest rock that can be found on earth.that rock turned out to be 3.6 billion years old other rocks even older at 4.3,4.5,4.6 and even one alleged to be 5.3 billion years old, the ones on earth are about 3.7 billion y.o and the rocks that were brought back was thought by scientists to be from one of the youngest areas back then of our moon!

Er, yeah. Maybe that is because the Earth has something called weather which erodes and breaks down rocks.

Let’s not forget the actions of plate tectonics also.

Originally posted by AGENT_T
Wondering how the moon could have generated the ''gong'sound as sound does not travel in a vacuum..

Is someone suggesting that the sound reverberated through the legs of the landing module??

sim•i•le (s m -l )
n.
A figure of speech in which two essentially unlike things are compared, often in a phrase introduced by like or as, as in “How like the winter hath my absence been” or “So are you to my thoughts as food to life” (Shakespeare).


The scientists were describing the siesmic motions, not a "sound."

Originally posted by incunabula
Other anomalies of "our" moon is the puzzle of the moons age for example the first rock Neil Armstrong picked up after landing on the Sea of Tranquility was older! than the oldest rocks on earth. over 99percent of roks brought back after analyses turned out to be older than 90 percent of the oldest rock that can be found on earth.that rock turned out to be 3.6 billion years old other rocks even older at 4.3,4.5,4.6 and even one alleged to be 5.3 billion years old, the ones on earth are about 3.7 billion y.o and the rocks that were brought back was thought by scientists to be from one of the youngest areas back then of our moon!

What does this prove though? And the mention of all these pictures and what not, is there anyway someone could load them on to the site? Personally I believe the moon is the moon, it is amazing enough to me without the though of aliens.

Originally posted by Communication_Burger

Originally posted by HowardRoark
No, it simply does not have the Earth's molten core and semi-liquid mantle.

I see. But how can the very unusual sustained reverberations be explained? Something doesn't add up.

They were unususal only in the sense that that type of seismic vibration doesn’t happen on the earth, due to the Earth’s different core and crust structure.

That doesn’t mean that they were unusual for the moon.

Originally posted by Communication_Burger
If it's not hollow, then there is definatly something very unusual about its innards, and its shell. Do you agree?

[edit on 16-6-2006 by Communication_Burger]

No, it simply does not have the Earth's molten core and semi-liquid mantle.

But ive heard of moonquakes before, surely that means there are tectonic plates there?

[edit on 16-6-2006 by joecool280]

[edit on 16-6-2006 by joecool280]

[edit on 16-6-2006 by joecool280]

If the moon was a hollow sphere it doesn't work with the math and here's why...

1) With all the meteoroid impacts some being as large as what they are the moon should be full of holes and not have a scared and cratered surface.

2) Though the moon only has a fraction of Earth's gravity it's pull on the Earth like in the tides are to strong. Mass determines the gravity the moon has if it were hollow and at it's distance it would not create th pull it does.

3) The physics work for the moon being a solid mass and not a hollow one it has been established by the scientific community years ago that it is solid.

Wilson, Don, 1975. Our Mysterious Spaceship Moon, Dell Publishing Co. New York.

Wilson attributes the hollow moon theory to Soviet researchers Michael Vasin and Alexander Shcherbakov. More specifically, their theory is that the moon is a gigantic spaceship piloted to earth orbit by a long vanished race of space faring aliens. He proposes that the large seas, or basaltic low-lands are in fact very large exhaust ports that have been blocked by dust and debris over the eons.

In chapter 4, Wilson goes through 9 "lunar mysteries" which he claims are resolved by the hollow/spaceship moon theory. He claims to resolve ten mysteries, but for some reason, there is no mystery number 9 listed. For example, he claims that the "mysteriously shallow" craters of the moon can be explained if meteorites are in fact hitting the armour plating of a spaceship rather than the surface of a natural planetoid.

I read about the hollow moon theory in Jim Marrs book, Alien Agenda. Its interesting, but doesn't hold much water scientifically. I think gravity itself rules out the hollow moon theory.

If the moon does hide an alien base, and if it was guided into its current orbit as someone else suggested, the surface could be camouflage made with rocks from their home in the universe. The part we don't see could be a meteor resistant shell with a very dense core.

If I were to have a need to position a secret base around another planet, this is what I would do.

Originally posted by HowardRoark
Given that we know the mass of the moon based on it's orbital dynamics, there is no way that it could be hollow.

we have a winner

boring facts ruin the kewl party again