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.

 

Questions for John Lear

page: 85
39
<< 82  83  84    86  87  88 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 25 2007 @ 12:50 AM
link   
Wow!!! Eighty-four pages, and you're still answering questions.

That says a lot to me about how much you believe in what you do.

The question I have for you is something I just thought of about your belief of the moon having an atmosphere. (Sorry if it's been asked before, but Eighty-four pages of posts is a lot to look through.)

Why aren't there any reports of "Shooting Stars" being sighted around the moon? I'll just leave it at that for now as I want to see what are your own thoughts on the subject.

I've been reading your theories for a while now so I hope this doesn't sound too critical as I find some of them to be quite intriguing.

It's just a thought I had and am only wondering what your thoughts may be on the subject.

Thanks.

P.S. I hope you have a great time at the convention in San Jose. Knowing that you will be there, it just kills me knowing I'm so close, and am not able to go there and speak to you in person.

[edit on 25-8-2007 by Americantrucker]




posted on Aug, 27 2007 @ 05:36 PM
link   
hello everybody, hello mr lear!

i looked up and down and searched the whole forum, but i didn't find any answers to my question concerning two pictures i've seen lately from the apollo 16 mission.
after seeing one in a book i bought a while ago, i looked up the nasa site and found the one i was looking for in a smaller resolution. while i was downloading most of the 4000+ pics i found another one that was that blurry.
my queastion is just where these "blurs" come from?
especially the first one i've linked here is kind of weird.
why should the picture be blurred to the rigfht of the satellite dish?
i assume this is a one shot picture and not built together out of more than one camshot.

please let me know why this is blurred and/or if this is a picture that is "refurbished".
thanks!







posted on Aug, 27 2007 @ 07:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by rxnnxs
hello everybody, hello mr lear!
...

please let me know why this is blurred and/or if this is a picture that is "refurbished".
thanks!






Interesting pics. The second one has a few interesting components. On the far left, there is a scattering of light that looks somewhat similar to a volcanic plume as seen from a few million miles away from Io. Not to say that is what it is....just describing its appearance.

Nice pics.



posted on Aug, 28 2007 @ 06:41 PM
link   
thank you but hey, problem solved.
its just a smear on the lens - that's my conclusion after watching a whole bunch of pics :-)

if you want to make a little moon trip, don't hesitate:

i loaded it up on you tube:


p.s.: sorry for my question anyway



posted on Aug, 29 2007 @ 10:50 PM
link   
John Lear,

Do you know if the Iraq war is being used as a cover up for so called black ops missions with alien technology? The country wants us out, but we will not back out.



posted on Aug, 30 2007 @ 12:02 AM
link   
Originally posted by TomProctor



John Lear,
Do you know if the Iraq war is being used as a cover up for so called black ops missions with alien technology? The country wants us out, but we will not back out.



Any war is used for all kinds of black ops technology. The truth is, as I see it, most wars are deliberately provoked for the sole purpose of trying out those new weapons and technology. Not to mention that war is an economy stimulus and has to be provoked anyway just for that reason.

In 1990 and 1991 three books came out that detailed how all of this is put together. They were:

“Blank Check, The Pentagon’s Black Budget” by Tim Weiner

“Desert Mirage” by Martin Yant that details how the reasons for Gulf War 1 were fabricated (just as the reasons for the Iraq war were).

“Shooting Blanks, War Making That Doesn’t Work” by James E. Dunnigan and Albert A. Nofi which exposes the perverse logic of ‘Getting Ready For the Wrong War’ and exposes such myths as ‘The Perfect Plan’ (called Shock and Awe in GW2) ‘the Unworthy Opponent’ and the ‘Surprise Attack’.

If you don’t have time to read all three books the basic idea is that wars are generally initiated by those who haven’t the faintest idea what they are doing, what they want accomplish, or how to manage it.

It is waged by those who have prepared for a completely different type of war and are totally unprepared for the current war.

And they are paid for by a generally ignorant taxpayer who believes what he sees on TV and hears out of the mouths of those who initiated the war and their sycophants.

Some of the weapons used may seem like they’re alien but in fact the technology is so far ahead of where people think it is it seems like it is alien.

As far as the country wanting us out of Iraq, unfortunately we are getting ready to wage another war and we need to use Iraq as a base.



posted on Aug, 30 2007 @ 05:57 PM
link   
Since we did not yet get a good breakdown of how the Bay Area UFO Conference went, I would like to take a moment of your time and ask you what was your thoughts on how the Conference went.

Did more people show up this time around or less people or same old, same old?

Was there a lot of interest at the ATS booth or not as much as you hoped?

Where the majority of the speakers pretty good, not so good, was there one that you just could not stand?

What about this beauty contest that you guys where talking about, did you do it, decided not to do it or was it a joke the whole time?

What else interesting can you tell us?

I know that you and the other guys are still probably recovering from that long weekend and trying to get back into your daily activities and probably need a little more time before any of you really get into the details of what happened there. I just wanted to get your take on it.


Thank You for your time.



posted on Sep, 2 2007 @ 03:40 PM
link   
Also John Lear,

I listened to one of your shows on some radio show and you talked about Element 115, Ununpentium being used to create antimatter with Element 116, Ununhexium. You said 500lbs of Element 115 were transported by truck because that's all the United States had obtained.

How do you explain this when the Half Life of Element 115 is a mere 32ms? It's max isotope is one minute. After that time the elements decay into naturally made elements.



posted on Sep, 2 2007 @ 05:04 PM
link   
Originally posted by TomProctor



How do you explain this when the Half Life of Element 115 is a mere 32ms? It's max isotope is one minute. After that time the elements decay into naturally made elements.


Thanks for the post Tom.

Naturally occurring element 115 could only be found in a solar system much, much larger than ours. The 2 main factors which determine the residual matter that remains after the creation of that solar system is the amount of electromagnetic energy and the amount of mass present at the time of the creation of that solar system. A much larger solar system than the one earth is in would have had to have been created to have element 115 occurring as a natural element.

There is not the slightest possiblility, not the slightest, that anybody on earth came close to synthesizing Element 115. Those who claim to have done so are misrepresenting what they have allegedly done or put more simply lying through their teeth. To what end I can only speculate.

And that is my opinion.



posted on Sep, 2 2007 @ 05:33 PM
link   
Originally posted by housegroove23



Since we did not yet get a good breakdown of how the Bay Area UFO Conference went, I would like to take a moment of your time and ask you what was your thoughts on how the Conference went.

Did more people show up this time around or less people or same old, same old?


I think the total attendance this year was about 1200. I think that last year it was about 1500.


Was there a lot of interest at the ATS booth or not as much as you hoped?


Not a lot, but it was out first time out and valuable lessons were learned.


Where the majority of the speakers pretty good, not so good, was there one that you just could not stand?


I only listened to myself and of course, I was excellent. My only problem was that I used a lot of material for the 'teaser' so when everybody got to the lecture they were essentially the same people and I ran short of material. I made up for it with dignity, grace and courage and letting them ask questions.

Johnny and Dave and I think Mark listened to some other speakers and found them excellent.

John Rhodes didn't speak as a lecturer but he gave me and Johnny and Dave and Mark a private 2 hour lecture and blew all of us half way to the Golden Gate Bridge. It was something else.


What about this beauty contest that you guys where talking about, did you do it, decided not to do it or was it a joke the whole time?


I neglected to inform everyone before the Expo that in 20 years of attending UFO conferences I have yet to see one, thats ONE attractive lady. (except, of course my daughter.)

Attractive ladies, these days, are looking for more than "The Secrets of the Universe" and stories about "How I Watched A Flying Saucer With Bob Lazar." I'm not exactly sure what it is they are searching for but whatever it is can apparently only be found in a chic night club between 11 and 4 in the morning. Probably sincerity.

The result was we had very few candidates for the ATS beauty contest. In fact we had none. Well, actually I was candidate but I didn't want to win by default. If I win I want it to be in true competition.


What else interesting can you tell us?


After the Expo on Onday I drove up to Norm Bergruns house (Los Altos Hills). Norm wrote the Ringmakers of Saturn. He is 85 and is as sharp as a frigging tack.

We discussed many things including that I offered to put Ringmakers on a CD for him for which he was very grateful. Nobody buys books anymore, especially at $60 a pop.

I told Norm that I was considering the possibility that no airplanes struck the WTC and that it was merely a holograph.

He said, "I wouldn't doubt it," and then proceeded to tell me a story that happened to him about 10 years ago.

He said he was driving to work at Lockheed in Sunnyvale with a friend of his. They were driving south on Hiway 101 from Oregon Expressway about 8:30 in the morning.

He said that a huge airplane crossed over their car at about 200 feet flying southbound and that both he and his friend saw it. It was about the size of a Boeing 747. Both were familiar with the local area and knew it to be within the San Francisco Terminal Control Area and knew that any traffic in their area would be traveling north, not south and at or above 2000 feet not 200 feet.

After a few seconds the airplane disappeared as if a light were turned off'. Norm told me that he believed that he was looking at a holograph.



posted on Sep, 2 2007 @ 05:48 PM
link   
Originally posted by Americantrucker



Why aren't there any reports of "Shooting Stars" being sighted around the moon? I'll just leave it at that for now as I want to see what are your own thoughts on the subject.


It is much easier to look up a few miles and see a shooting star than it is to look 243,000 miles and see a shooting star. To look for shooting star 243,000 miles away you would need a very powerful telescope, clear atmospheric conditions and a lot of time.

If you met all of those conditions I can see no reason why, assuming the moon has the breathable atmosphere that I claim it does, you couldn't see at least 25% (because the moon is smaller) of what we see from earth.



posted on Sep, 2 2007 @ 06:52 PM
link   
reply to post by johnlear
 



[qoute]We discussed many things including that I offered to put Ringmakers on a CD for him for which he was very grateful. Nobody buys books anymore, especially at $60 a pop.

Well you got that right I was one of those nobodies who bought one.

I think it is an investment though it was still cheaper than buying in the UK, and I got to have a quick email exchange with Norman.



posted on Sep, 2 2007 @ 07:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear
Originally posted by TomProctor



How do you explain this when the Half Life of Element 115 is a mere 32ms? It's max isotope is one minute. After that time the elements decay into naturally made elements.


Thanks for the post Tom.

Naturally occurring element 115 could only be found in a solar system much, much larger than ours. The 2 main factors which determine the residual matter that remains after the creation of that solar system is the amount of electromagnetic energy and the amount of mass present at the time of the creation of that solar system. A much larger solar system than the one earth is in would have had to have been created to have element 115 occurring as a natural element.

There is not the slightest possiblility, not the slightest, that anybody on earth came close to synthesizing Element 115. Those who claim to have done so are misrepresenting what they have allegedly done or put more simply lying through their teeth. To what end I can only speculate.

And that is my opinion.



So element 115 in "discs" came from another solar system in another galaxy? Do you know which one?

Also, element 115 can be created by smashing atoms of say for example Tungsten & Niobium to make element 115, but it will only last a few ms. But element 115 can't be created ANYWHERE in the universe as a natural element. The elements that are on earth are the same ones that arrive everywhere in the universe.

[edit on 2-9-2007 by TomProctor]



posted on Sep, 2 2007 @ 08:05 PM
link   
Originally posted by TomProctor


So element 115 in "discs" came from another solar system in another galaxy?


Thats what Bob said.


Do you know which one?


No.


Also, element 115 can be created by smashing atoms of say for example Tungsten & Niobium to make element 115, but it will only last a few ms. But element 115 can't be created ANYWHERE in the universe as a natural element.


Wow! I am impressed Tom. In the universe? Please consider that I am genuflecting humbly in your presence.


The elements that are on earth are the same ones that arrive everywhere in the universe.


I am truly impressed. Did Sleeper tell you this?



posted on Sep, 2 2007 @ 09:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by TomProctor

Also, element 115 can be created by smashing atoms of say for example Tungsten & Niobium to make element 115, but it will only last a few ms. But element 115 can't be created ANYWHERE in the universe as a natural element. The elements that are on earth are the same ones that arrive everywhere in the universe.

[edit on 2-9-2007 by TomProctor]


The elements on Earth may be the same composition, but the laws that govern their interactions change.

Modern science only posits this inflexible, unchanging grand universe as a way to cope with the inability to understand. Of course the simpler environment allows for a more simple understanding.

Perhaps scientists should be legally bound to start every statement of their knowledge with "I have reason to believe that....". This should help clarify things.



posted on Sep, 3 2007 @ 12:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan

Originally posted by TomProctor

Also, element 115 can be created by smashing atoms of say for example Tungsten & Niobium to make element 115, but it will only last a few ms. But element 115 can't be created ANYWHERE in the universe as a natural element. The elements that are on earth are the same ones that arrive everywhere in the universe.

[edit on 2-9-2007 by TomProctor]


The elements on Earth may be the same composition, but the laws that govern their interactions change.


You don't know for sure unless you have travelled other places in the Universe. I don't suppose you have.



posted on Sep, 3 2007 @ 12:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear
Originally posted by TomProctor


So element 115 in "discs" came from another solar system in another galaxy?


Thats what Bob said.


Do you know which one?


No.


Also, element 115 can be created by smashing atoms of say for example Tungsten & Niobium to make element 115, but it will only last a few ms. But element 115 can't be created ANYWHERE in the universe as a natural element.


Wow! I am impressed Tom. In the universe? Please consider that I am genuflecting humbly in your presence.


The elements that are on earth are the same ones that arrive everywhere in the universe.


I am truly impressed. Did Sleeper tell you this?




Ok...I don't know who Sleeper is or anything else...so I'll end it here.

Anyways, Do you like Ron Paul? Could you PM me or send me an email kenallen04[at]gmail[dot]com? I have a news site & would like to do an interview if possible.



posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 01:19 PM
link   
how come we only see half the moon if this is the reason i would say bull crap!!!!
1.Only one side faces Earth because moon rotates and revolves at the same time and it also take the same amount to do both.
2.The moons orbit suggests that it was artificially placed there (one side always faces the earth and its just the right size to produce eclipses
3.according to swerdlow, the greys have bases on the dark side of the moon, and there is a SECOND moon behind the one we see! brave statements! who knows?
4.Scientists have clearly explained why we never see the dark side of the moon. were can i find more info on the moon as far as why we cant see the other side of it?????



posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 05:14 PM
link   
Ok, John, now that you guys have had your little fun, Mrs Fossett wants her husband back.

Tell the guys to dump him outside the main gate. I'm sure he's learned his lesson about overflying the keep out areas.



posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 05:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by h2owater
3.according to swerdlow, the greys have bases on the dark side of the moon, and there is a SECOND moon behind the one we see! brave statements! who knows?


I do, at least as far as the second moon part, and there's not.

You can't have concentric, synchronized orbits. The one further out will orbit more slowly.

The only way to have this happen is if your other moon thrusts forward and inward at the same time, this is called a 'forced orbit'. And in that case, that's no moon, it's a space station.




top topics



 
39
<< 82  83  84    86  87  88 >>

log in

join