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.

 

Has anyone heard of the Hollow moon theory?

page: 5
1
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 17 2006 @ 07:24 PM
link   
I have reservations regarding the hollow moon theory, but if aliens do exist and regularly visit, then it would make sense to set up "base" close to the Earth, for reasons of observation and transportation.

What I find more interesting is why we haven't publically been back to the moon...




posted on Jun, 17 2006 @ 08:12 PM
link   
But we will be going back in a few years though NASA has said this and the russians also want to go to mine helium 3 which is rare on Earth but abundant on the moon. Specifically to ship it back to Earth because it has unique properties that make it fissionable with out the radiation and would be an abundant fuel source and cheap.



posted on Jun, 17 2006 @ 08:18 PM
link   
Nasa stated that they wish to return to the moon by 2020, but stating this compared to actually doing this are two very seperate matters.

What confuses me is the almost 40 years of complete deselation of space exploration on Nasa's part. You would think a successful mission to the moon and back would propel space exploration rather then act as a hindrance.



posted on Jun, 17 2006 @ 08:56 PM
link   
I read about that several years ago in a book called "UFOs 101." It claimed the moon was in reality a hollow alien base with the aliens residing inside. It also stated that we did reach the moon but were warned "not to ever come back."

This might explains why we've made no further efforts in how many years? As well as the "staged" moon landing.



posted on Jun, 17 2006 @ 09:05 PM
link   
"What confuses me is the almost 40 years of complete deselation of space exploration on Nasa's part. You would think a successful mission to the moon and back would propel space exploration rather then act as a hindrance."

They did this though because of the lack of support for their moon missions.



posted on Jun, 17 2006 @ 09:08 PM
link   
Or at least thats the official line



posted on Jun, 17 2006 @ 10:12 PM
link   
Let's assume for a moment,(speculatively speaking) that we 'were' shown the way back to earth politely.. and IF we WERE being observed, would you let a violent species into the galactic neighborhood?



posted on Jun, 17 2006 @ 11:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by gfad

I'm not going to talk on Fanatics behalf but the the evidence to support this point of view is ALL OF SCIENCE. I think you would have to search pretty hard to find an actual cosmologist, physicist or even scientifically trained astronomer who believes that the earth is hollow and is home to a colony of (lets be realisitic here) fictional Zetan aliens. Do you know why that would be hard? Because anyone with scientific training is taught to look at the data and come to a logical unbiased conclusion.

Unlike your Disclosure Project who I'm pretty sure are biased. I mean their opening website says they are "a nonprofit research project working to fully disclose the facts about UFOs, extraterrestrial intelligence". I'm pretty sure these guys already believe (contrary to widely held scientific belief) that aliens exist, and they'll have to be pushed pretty hard to move away from this belief.

Let's be honest and objective here.

You apparently have very little knowledge of the subject matter and have done little or no research into the existence of extraterrestrials.

For if you even had an inkling of what was going on, you would know that the members of the Disclosure Project, of which there are hundreds, are former governmental employees. That's right. Scientists, astronauts, military officers, control tower technicians, etc.

All of which have much more knowledge about the existence of extraterrestrials (and more credibility to boot) than you have


Oh, and by the way, it is not MY disclosure project. The head of it is a medical doctor by the name of Steven Greer.

You do know who that is...right?

I doubt it.

DENY IGNORANCE



posted on Jun, 17 2006 @ 11:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Fanatic

I knew somebody would come and say "and how can you be sure of that" (that the moon is simply just the moon ) or something of that effect . Well , I was going to say that is the most logical possibility and the idea of trying to find arguments to prove that the Moon is not a giant metal-made alien base is just ridicioulus but still , I'll bite .

My only argument is why go trough all the trouble of changing moons ( the original must have existed at one point in time seeing that all planets have one ) and building something that colossal ? Don't aliens have cloaking devices ? Much more easy to be invisible and come closer than sit all the way over there in a fake moon . This hole idea is not even pratical ...

I don't know , I try to keep an open mind , but this is just too much for my head .

These are not easy ideas to contemplate.

You are speculating as to the motive of extraterrestrials in constructing an artificial moon. If our Moon is indeed artificial, there are a number or reasons why they would have done it.

A moon provides gravitational stability as it acts like a large gyroscope for the planet it orbits. It also moderates weather patterns. If you wanted a large farming planet, it makes sense to have a moon to provide both of those things. Moreover, you could also use it as a planet-side monitoring station.

Again, what I consider to be the main issue here is not whether or not the Moon is hollow or artificial, but whether or not it indeed houses a large alien base that is currently in operation.

[edit on 17-6-2006 by Paul_Richard]



posted on Jun, 18 2006 @ 12:04 AM
link   
ok well since i guess this thread is popular i had to scroll a few pages to find my comment i left yesterday... alright first of all somone was talking about how the hollow moon could be of different densities to give it its gravity while also being hollow. the density would need to be somewhat uniform since the gravitational force on the moon is 1.6m/s at nearly every point and the moon is not in an erratic orbit which it would be if its gravity wasnt stable after the billions of years it has been in orbit with the earth. Now earlier someone said i didnt even know how the moon was created... well no one does! there are a few theories out there ( a large chunk of the earth was upheaved when a meteor hit it, a bunch of dust and asteroids collected and eventually formed the moon... etc). Also someone said it was "arrogant"? ( is that the right word in this context) of me to think that alien civilizations would not be able to do spectacular and very intelligent transportation difficulites. Ok now look i have several points to make so listen very closely lol. Alright now why would an alien civilization, given the fact that it has great technology to get over here using of course many different techniques to transport themselves. ok so they go all the hell over here to build a base on the inside of our moon? FOR WHAT PURPOSE I SAY!!! Why would they waste all that time and energy to build a base on our moon, like there isnt a million other moons in between our star system and thiers?? also ok you could say they are watching us.. or preparing for invasion.. blah blah blah, but in that case they would wipe us out with one biological weapon or chemical weapon.. Surely they would have a firm grasp of genetics and would be able to target all humans on earth with a very advanced virus or chemical attack. Ok and even though there are many "possible ways" to travel through space.. doesnt necessarily mean they are possible. All of the space travel speculations such as wormholes, creating timewarps, hyperdrives, etc. are all matters of speculation. They are theories and of course will take many years to prove. Now of course some will eventually be proved as fact and some as fiction... but the fact stands that there isnt one shread of hard evidence or reasoning that supports contact with intelligent alien life forms.

[edit on 18-6-2006 by txdan06]



posted on Jun, 18 2006 @ 05:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by gfad
Long Lance your source also says "This is because in the case of a hollow spheroid the center of mass is much closer to the surface of the moon if in fact the moon is hollow than if it really were a homogenous mass of rock". This is completely incorrect.




Conclusions, well, let's make our own, i'd say

The reverberation issue is imho, proven beyond reasonable doubt (nasa link) that's the most compelling reason to believe something's fishy about the moon. i don't know if the 'titanium sphere' quote is legitimate, but even without it, the moon's acoustic properties remain suspicous, don't they? combined with unidentified structures and a few edited pictures i think you will agree that there's plenty of room for speculation.


lost probes, otoh, merely indicate miscalculations on the route planners' part, but as i said, this could be the result of many things, including a center of gravity located closer to earth, or any other mass anomaly (f-ex. there's one on earth located below the indian ocean, so no aliens required here) - or simple incompetence, many probes were lost, and for many different reasons.

PS: i think i made clear i never subscribed to the 'hollow sphere' theory of the moon, nor did i deny that NASA landed there. besides you don't need to land there for snapshots, of the surface from above (these are the most interesting, the pics from the ground show nothing without lots of filtering and contrast adjustment)



posted on Jun, 18 2006 @ 06:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by Paul_Richard
Let's be honest and objective here.

You apparently have very little knowledge of the subject matter and have done little or no research into the existence of extraterrestrials.

For if you even had an inkling of what was going on, you would know that the members of the Disclosure Project, of which there are hundreds, are former governmental employees. That's right. Scientists, astronauts, military officers, control tower technicians, etc.

All of which have much more knowledge about the existence of extraterrestrials (and more credibility to boot) than you have


Oh, and by the way, it is not MY disclosure project. The head of it is a medical doctor by the name of Steven Greer.

You do know who that is...right?

I doubt it.

DENY IGNORANCE



OK lets be honest and objective here even though its totally OT.

Yes the members of the disclosure project do have more credibility and knowledge than I do as I am not a UFOlogist. My point is that these people are clearly not the most objective or unbiased people to do any form of alien research as the only people who join the group already believe in extraterrestrials. In my opinion the people who should be doing research are unbiased scientists who as a group are yet to be convinced of the existence of aliens.

Contrary to your opinion I have done some research into this topic and I do have some knowledge of it but I am yet to be convinced of the existence of aliens. I know that an alien and UFO board is not the best place to say this and I'm going to get flamed for it, but the only people who are ignorant here are those who subscribe to a flawed belief, with absolutely no evidence to hold it up, that there is intelligent life away from this planet. I do not believe in extraterrestrials because there is no conclusive evidence, no one has ever come forward with photos, video, radio transmissions or any form of evidence that is clear enough for proof and can stand up to professional scrutiny. NONE.

DENY IGNORANCE



posted on Jun, 18 2006 @ 07:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Paul_Richard

Originally posted by incunabula
Apperently during the Apollo missions, tests were conducted after it was recorded by NASA that when the lunar landers hit the surface of the moon a 'a Bell like 'gong' was recorded and several times after as well. Does anyone know of this?


Originally posted by masterp
How is it possible to record any sound on the moon, since it has no atmosphere?

Actually the Moon does have a scant atmosphere that could allow for sound waves, as opposed to the vacuum of space where sound waves cannot travel.


Since the moon's atmosphere is 1,000,000 times (yeap, that's a million) less dense than Earth's, I really doubt sound can be heard on the moon. I did a little search in Google but I could not find a source that verifies that the moon's atmosphere can make sound waves travel through it in a manner that can make them audible.

The other theory that the sound travelled through the spaceship is also not a valid one. Sound waves can travel through solid objects, depending on the type of material, but that does not mean the waves are transmitted to the air inside the lunar capsule.



posted on Jun, 18 2006 @ 07:44 AM
link   
I asked this question earlier in a differnt thread but cannot find the answer to my question...and I think it fits better in this one anyways...You all talk about the "dark side of moon" (maybe not all of you but I have seen it mentioned) Now this may be a dumb question but I am a newbie so go easy on me but does the Moon not rotate like the Earth? So the side that we see from Earth is the side that we always see? If so...does anyone know of any reasearch done on the dark side of the moon? Do we know whats on the other side? And if there has been research what facts have been found about the dark side? Maybe some pictures someone can post?

And if we dont know whats on the other side does anyone have any explanation to what may be on the "dark side"?



posted on Jun, 18 2006 @ 07:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by gfad
In my opinion the people who should be doing research are unbiased scientists who as a group are yet to be convinced of the existence of aliens.

Which is precisely what many Ufologists and the members of the Disclosure Project represent


It was also the perspective of the physicist and engineer, Bob Lazar, who worked at S4, prior to his involvement in the government to reverse-engineer acquired Zetan spacecraft. He had no belief in UFOs or aliens, thought that those who did were "complete lunatics," and also felt that the government was geared to help its citizens.


By his own admission, his views completely turned around.

He now believes in Zetan-aliens and feels that the government is not out to protect or enlighten us, but that it is only out for itself - that it is self-serving and deceptive.


You would know that already if you did some research on the subject.


Originally posted by gfad
I know that an alien and UFO board is not the best place to say this and I'm going to get flamed for it, but the only people who are ignorant here are those who subscribe to a flawed belief, with absolutely no evidence to hold it up, that there is intelligent life away from this planet. I do not believe in extraterrestrials because there is no conclusive evidence, no one has ever come forward with photos, video, radio transmissions or any form of evidence that is clear enough for proof and can stand up to professional scrutiny. NONE.

You won't be flamed but many will take note of your prejudice and close-mindedness. There are many ATS members (as well as those who read ATS anonymously) who have first-hand experience with Zetan-aliens


Again, if you truly have done the research you claim to have done, you would also know that those who have physical proof of the existence of extratraterrestrials are hunted down not only by the aliens themselves but also from our own government - and silenced.

This is a discussion forum, not a think tank for the Central Intelligence Agency, the National Security Agency, or MI6. You will not find irrefutable physical evidence here. For that you need to go work for the government.

What we have to go on in forums such as this one is eyewitness testimony from credible sources, personal experience, logical extrapolation, and scant physical evidence.

To expect anything more from an Internet forum is foolish and counterproductive in DENYING IGNORANCE



posted on Jun, 18 2006 @ 07:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by masterp
Since the moon's atmosphere is 1,000,000 times (yeap, that's a million) less dense than Earth's, I really doubt sound can be heard on the moon. I did a little search in Google but I could not find a source that verifies that the moon's atmosphere can make sound waves travel through it in a manner that can make them audible.

The other theory that the sound travelled through the spaceship is also not a valid one. Sound waves can travel through solid objects, depending on the type of material, but that does not mean the waves are transmitted to the air inside the lunar capsule.

Are you suggesting that the NASA scientists who testified as to the sound made by the Moon are either lying or were mentally deranged at the time of the incident?


It occurred at 8:09 p.m. EST, April 14. The S-IVB struck the Moon with a force equivalent to 11 1/2 tons of TNT. It hit 85 miles west northwest of the site where the Apollo 12 astronauts had set up their seismometer. Scientists on Earth said, "the Moon rang like a bell."

Back in November 1969, the Apollo 12 astronauts had sent their Lunar Module crash- ing into the Moon following their return to the command craft after the lunar landing mission. That Lunar Module struck with a force of one ton of TNT. The shock waves built up to a peak in eight minutes and con- tinued for nearly an hour.

The seismic signals produced by the impact of s-IVB were 20 to 30 times greater and four times longer than those resulting from the LM crash. Peak intensity occurred in 7 minutes.

The information from these two artificial moonquakes led to reconsideration of theories proposed about the lunar interior. Among puzzling features are the rapid build- up to the peak and the prolonged reverbera- tions. Nothing comparable happens when objects strike Earth.

From this.

Or is it that they simply stated an observation that doesn't fit into your paradigm of understanding?

In which case, it is not they but you who are at fault in not viewing the situation clearly.

When faced with two or more possible explanations for a situation, choose the simpler one.

See Occam's Razor or The Law of Parsimony.



posted on Jun, 18 2006 @ 08:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Paul_Richard
Are you suggesting that the NASA scientists who testified as to the sound made by the Moon are either lying or were mentally deranged at the time of the incident?


No, I am not suggesting that. But I think there is a misinterpretation somewhere in there.




It occurred at 8:09 p.m. EST, April 14. The S-IVB struck the Moon with a force equivalent to 11 1/2 tons of TNT. It hit 85 miles west northwest of the site where the Apollo 12 astronauts had set up their seismometer. Scientists on Earth said, "the Moon rang like a bell."



The quote 'the moon rang like a bell' can be interpreted in many different ways. It could mean that:

a) the landing was so strong that made the moon move like a bell. We have heard the exact same phrase for the Indonesian tsunami: "the Earth rang like a bell for 48 hours".

b) a sound was transmitted through the instruments of the lunar capsule but the origin of the sound was not the moon itself, but the capsule, and that was due to the counter force the capsule accepted when it hit the moon's surface.




The information from these two artificial moonquakes led to reconsideration of theories proposed about the lunar interior. Among puzzling features are the rapid build- up to the peak and the prolonged reverbera- tions. Nothing comparable happens when objects strike Earth.



I do not see how one can reach the conclusion that the moon is hollow from these events. It could be that the specific area was cavernous or something else.

What about the moon's estimated mass? does it hold a candle to the hollow moon theory? is the moon's gravitional attraction weak enough to justify a hollow moon?



posted on Jun, 18 2006 @ 08:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Redefine19
So the side that we see from Earth is the side that we always see? If so...does anyone know of any reasearch done on the dark side of the moon? Do we know whats on the other side? And if there has been research what facts have been found about the dark side? Maybe some pictures someone can post?


The Moon takes more or less the same time rotating around the Earth as it takes to rotate over its own axis, so we allways see the same "side" of the Moon, I think that we see something like 55% of all the Moon's surface.

I think that the other side of the Moon as been all photographed, the first photos taken by the Soviet Union.



posted on Jun, 18 2006 @ 08:34 AM
link   
After they had had a chance to analyse the seismological information, NASA declared that the moon seemed to be a hollow sphere with a metallic layer around 34-40 metres deep. No other type of evidence has yet been found to back up the theory that the moon is hollow,----NASA is the institution that declared the moon as hollow, so if anyone else here has worked with NASA or any other space agency,speak up now .


i like cheese



posted on Jun, 18 2006 @ 08:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by masterp
The quote 'the moon rang like a bell' can be interpreted in many different ways. It could mean that:

a) the landing was so strong that made the moon move like a bell. We have heard the exact same phrase for the Indonesian tsunami: "the Earth rang like a bell for 48 hours".

b) a sound was transmitted through the instruments of the lunar capsule but the origin of the sound was not the moon itself, but the capsule, and that was due to the counter force the capsule accepted when it hit the moon's surface.


I think that what was meant was that the Moon reverberated like a bell, the instruments they had on the moon were sysmographers, not microphones.

[edit on 18/6/2006 by ArMaP]







 
1
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join