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.

 

John Lear's Moon Pictures on ATS

page: 15
164
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 25 2006 @ 05:47 PM
link   
John, we're all suspicious of NASA and the Soviet space agencies due to the information control... that has been very obvious lately. But your indirectly suggesting the ESA is involved in this coverup of lunar gases. Not only them, but Japan, China, and India when their lunar missions happen in the next few years.

This would be a coverup of truly grand proportions.

The only other thing you have to support your theory (to my knowledge) is the flames that often appear when craters strike, and ofcourse the footage of a flame during the LM take off. However, they are hypothetically attributed to gases already present in the foreign body.




posted on Sep, 25 2006 @ 06:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by SteveR
John, we're all suspicious of NASA and the Soviet space agencies due to the information control... that has been very obvious lately. But your indirectly suggesting the ESA is involved in this coverup of lunar gases. Not only them, but Japan, China, and India when their lunar missions happen in the next few years.

This would be a coverup of truly grand proportions.

The only other thing you have to support your theory (to my knowledge) is the flames that often appear when craters strike, and ofcourse the footage of a flame during the LM take off. However, they are hypothetically attributed to gases already present in the foreign body.



This coverup is of truly grand proportions. Anybody of importance is involved. No one is part of it unless they absolutely have a need to know. They don't want some loose cannon spouting off on the internet what he knows. Many great scientists, many less greater scientists have questions. Many great astronomers many less great astronomers have questions. But if they want to keep their jobs they keep their mouths shut and their questions to themselves. Of course ESA is involved. This is the coverup of all time and they don't intend to have this exposed on some thread on the internet. Somebody went to a lot of trouble to make and keep this secret and it is not going to be exposed by some grainy photos on the internet. A few individuals might get informed and might tell a few others. But other than that its still going to be a gigantic secret. Count on it.



posted on Sep, 25 2006 @ 07:33 PM
link   
JohnLear,

Do you think it would be harder to cover these things up now if India, China or any of these other countries go to the moon in the near future? Or do you think they will just show snowy, black and white, supposedly live video when they "officially" go?



posted on Sep, 25 2006 @ 07:34 PM
link   
Sometimes it is necessary to step back and look at the big picture. Everyone has been concentrating on too small of an area to understand what you are looking at. The “Box” is an exposed ledge, probably basalt, on one end of a slide area. (Please see the marked and labeled area’s on the photo) Terracing like this in basalt layers is quite normal as evidenced in palisades along many rivers and canyons worldwide. Step back to arms length from the image and have it at 100% and you can plainly see the continuation of the layers between the ends of the slide area.

On the moon the sources of erosion are limited to gravity, seismic events (natural or caused by impact), heat differential (expansion or contraction due to temperature variations), chemical reactions or volcanism. From what I’ve found so far regarding the moons geology volcanism may be a stretch. There is probably a combination of erosion forces in play here. (If there are any Geologists here please correct my terminology as it’s been thirty years since my last Geology or Chemistry course)

The only alteration I have made, other than the labeling, is a bicubic resample to increase the image size. Bicubic resampling simply averages between pixels when resizing.




[edit on 9/25/2006 by InDirectViolation]



posted on Sep, 25 2006 @ 08:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear


It is a photo taken of the moon by the Lick Obsevatory in 1947. It is about 8 mgs so I have to send it to Springer tomorrow to put up.


I have been told it's in priority overnight mail as of ten minutes ago. If I get it tomorrow it will be UP on ATS tomorrow.


Springer...

[edit on 9-25-2006 by Springer]



posted on Sep, 25 2006 @ 08:31 PM
link   
Originally posted by SearchEngine




JohnLear,

Do you think it would be harder to cover these things up now if India, China or any of these other countries go to the moon in the near future? Or do you think they will just show snowy, black and white, supposedly live video when they "officially" go?



Nobody is going to the moon except us. We have been going there for 44 years. We will not be going publically or 'going back'. That is all smoke and mirrors for the gullible. As to whether or not it is harder to cover things up, based on some of the comments on these threads the last few days I would say it is getting easier.



posted on Sep, 25 2006 @ 08:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear
As to whether or not it is harder to cover things up, based on some of the comments on these threads the last few days I would say it is getting easier.


Amazingly I have to agree with the above. It's never occurred to me before BUT it seems as though there is a "dogmatism" almost as strong as the political version in the "space sciences feed from the government"...


Springer...


[edit on 9-25-2006 by Springer]



posted on Sep, 25 2006 @ 10:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear
Window seat or aisle?


I kinda figure I'm good for one o dem first class passes


I suppose we would have to come back though huh?






posted on Sep, 25 2006 @ 10:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Springer
Amazingly I have to agree with the above. It's never occurred to me before BUT it seems as though there is a "dogmatism" almost as strong as the political version in the "space sciences feed from the government"...


Springer...


Only I think that it is stronger, more vehement on that side... those who try to show the evidence do so calmly with excitement of discovery... those that oppose do so as if there was a real need to prove us wrong... IMO



posted on Sep, 25 2006 @ 11:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheBorg

I'd sooner believe that aliens live on Mars than on the Moon. Given the picture of the Tau that they found on Mars that is literally MILES long and wide, Mars Tau, there's little to be left to the imagination when it comes to what may or may not exist out in the vast universe. That link has a picture right at the top that is the clearest evidence that life exists outside of our planet than any I've ever seen.


Herr Borg..

I am working on a file right now that explores what happened in the past on Mars based on Tibetan and Old Vedic texts... so I am all for Mars having had life... the "face" looked at in the closeup is a classic "island" with shoreline, continetal shelf and sediment rays... and NASA has found proof that water was abundant... but the Tau looks like a sand drift.. Weird yes... right angles yes... but those right angle dunes are common on Mars...



Here is the "face"

Mars Face



posted on Sep, 26 2006 @ 03:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheBorg

I'd sooner believe that aliens live on Mars than on the Moon. Given the picture of the Tau that they found on Mars that is literally MILES long and wide, Mars Tau, there's little to be left to the imagination when it comes to what may or may not exist out in the vast universe. That link has a picture right at the top that is the clearest evidence that life exists outside of our planet than any I've ever seen.


I'm sorry, but that page is all wrong. It's not a giant Tau on the ground, it's a pair of trenches in the ground. It's just a trick of light and shadows, when you see that effect try rotating the photo and it should become clearer.



posted on Sep, 26 2006 @ 05:18 AM
link   
Originally posted by InDirectViolation



Sometimes it is necessary to step back and look at the big picture. Everyone has been concentrating on too small of an area to understand what you are looking at. The “Box” is an exposed ledge, probably basalt, on one end of a slide area. (Please see the marked and labeled area’s on the photo) Terracing like this in basalt layers is quite normal as evidenced in palisades along many rivers and canyons worldwide. Step back to arms length from the image and have it at 100% and you can plainly see the continuation of the layers between the ends of the slide area.

On the moon the sources of erosion are limited to gravity, seismic events (natural or caused by impact), heat differential (expansion or contraction due to temperature variations), chemical reactions or volcanism. From what I’ve found so far regarding the moons geology volcanism may be a stretch. There is probably a combination of erosion forces in play here. (If there are any Geologists here please correct my terminology as it’s been thirty years since my last Geology or Chemistry course)

The only alteration I have made, other than the labeling, is a bicubic resample to increase the image size. Bicubic resampling simply averages between pixels when resizing.







Classic attempt to minimize/triavialize the building in Copernicus. 'Exposed Ledge', 'basalt', 'one end of a slide area', 'heat differential', 'temperature variations', 'chemical reactions or variations', 'volcanism', 'erosion forces', gravity? I thought there was no gravity on the moon. 'Maybe a stretch'? I'll say.

Yeah, you might try stretching that tale all the way to the face on Mars but we still have a building and we still have classic Roman arches to the left and lower. Who you be kiddin' InDirectViolation? 'Bicubic resampling' simply changes the photo to look like you want it to look. If I'm not mistaken there is a resampling program to make it look like a '57 Chevy. I prefer to look at it like 'my human eye looks at it" you know, like the blue sky on Mars? But thanks for the post, I was wondering when all the Phil Plaits, James Obergs and Phil Klasses were going to check in on these posts.



posted on Sep, 26 2006 @ 05:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear
Excellent post Zorgon. The arches and the building and the images of the vapor rising and descending would leave one to believe.....:

That the Copernicus photo LO-II-162 is an image of a currently operating, gigantic mine on the moon. There are many examples of vapor rising and descending which indicate an atmosphere. The arches indicate intelligent construction, so does the building.


While I'd like to believe that, I still don't seem to be seeing what it is that you say is so obvious. *Pokes Zorgon* [sarcasm]Even my genetically enhanced vision receptors can't see them.[/sarcasm] I see the things you say are steam vents and mine structures and such, but they don't look anything like the kinds of things that you'd associate with the objects and structures that you claim them to be. Maybe I'm just missing them is all. How come, if it's sooo obvious that a blind man can see it, that I can't?



The only people who can deny that this is a photo of a gigantic operational mine on the moon are those special people who want a personal tour of the mine before they make up their minds (or mines, as the case may be.)


Special people? What kind of people are those? Almost sounds offensive to me. If nothing else, it borders on insulting to those of us that genuinely do not see what it is that you claim to see. It's statements like these that damage your credability. If you're trying to prove something, fine. I'll listen to just about anything, but when the insults start flying, I'm out.



You can certainly deny ignorance. But you can't deny that this is a currently operating, gigantic mine, in the crater Copernicus, on earths moon.

But I'm sure some will try.


I certainly will. You mentioned just above that you were led to believe this. It sounds as though you already do believe this. And the fact that some of us do not makes you irritable enough to respond with "special people" statements.

I fail to see any evidence that anything is actually functioning on the Moon at this moment. First off, the logistics of such a mining operation would be monumental at best. It takes so much money to even lift off the Shuttle that it'd be damn near impossible for them to go to the Moon and come back with a payload without some people spotting it. Not to mention the little problem of weight distribution upon re-entry.

Maybe you could explain to me how that kind of operation could be funded and ran, all without the People's knowledge? Surely, some private astronomers would have spotted the Shuttle leaving orbit to head towards the Moon, and said something about it. To me, the evidece speaks for itself; well, the lack of it does anyway.

TheBorg



posted on Sep, 26 2006 @ 05:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear
Originally posted by InDirectViolation





Hahaha... look what the arrow on the right is pointing to.. A huge ass pipe and another building. TOO FUNNY.



posted on Sep, 26 2006 @ 06:36 AM
link   
Originally posted by TheBorg




While I'd like to believe that, I still don't seem to be seeing what it is that you say is so obvious. *Pokes Zorgon* [sarcasm]Even my genetically enhanced vision receptors can't see them.[/sarcasm] I see the things you say are steam vents and mine structures and such, but they don't look anything like the kinds of things that you'd associate with the objects and structures that you claim them to be. Maybe I'm just missing them is all. How come, if it's sooo obvious that a blind man can see it, that I can't?


How did we get a blind man into this?


by John Lear
The only people who can deny that this is a photo of a gigantic operational mine on the moon are those special people who want a personal tour of the mine before they make up their minds (or mines, as the case may be.)



by TheBorgSpecial people? What kind of people are those? Almost sounds offensive to me. If nothing else, it borders on insulting to those of us that genuinely do not see what it is that you claim to see. It's statements like these that damage your credability. If you're trying to prove something, fine. I'll listen to just about anything, but when the insults start flying, I'm out.


No offense intended, but I accept your withdrawal.


by John Lear
You can certainly deny ignorance. But you can't deny that this is a currently operating, gigantic mine, in the crater Copernicus, on earths moon.

But I'm sure some will try.



by TheBorgI certainly will. You mentioned just above that you were led to believe this. It sounds as though you already do believe this. And the fact that some of us do not makes you irritable enough to respond with "special people" statements.


"It sounds as though you already believe this?" Are you kidding? I thought I made it perfectly clear that I believe there are fully functioning and operational mining operations on the moon and that at least one of these mining operations is located on the interior portion of the northern face of the crater Copernicus.


by TheBorgI fail to see any evidence that anything is actually functioning on the Moon at this moment. First off, the logistics of such a mining operation would be monumental at best. It takes so much money to even lift off the Shuttle that it'd be damn near impossible for them to go to the Moon and come back with a payload without some people spotting it. Not to mention the little problem of weight distribution upon re-entry.

Maybe you could explain to me how that kind of operation could be funded and ran, all without the People's knowledge? Surely, some private astronomers would have spotted the Shuttle leaving orbit to head towards the Moon, and said something about it. To me, the evidece speaks for itself; well, the lack of it does anyway.


We have already covered your questions and/or objections in previous posts. I am assuming you want a seat on our inspection tour. That makes 4 plus me (I am going to be the tour guide) that makes 5. I had reserved a 6 seater but I am afraid we are going to need additional space so I am reserving a 10 seater.

For the rest of you, you don't have to be a 'special person' (those persons unable to see buildings, arches, vapor, cranes etc. on the moon in LO-II-162H) to go to the moon with us on an inspection tour. Anybody can go. The tour will last about 2 hours of which 20 minutes will be travel time to and from the moon; 10 minutes there 10 minutes back. The other hour and 40 minutes will be used flying around the 6 mile high tower in the Sinus Medii, the domes in Mare Crisium and the 'operation' at the Agarum Promontory. We will then cross the face of the moon east to west to view the gigantic machinery at Bullialdus. Further to the west we will see the strange objects in Gassendi. North to Mt. Piton we will see the strange triangular Peak jutting out of the Mare Imbrium then due north to Plato, the site of many strange lights and unexplained mists. Then northeast to Endymion to see the remnants of a large dome structure then northwest to de la Rue to see the famous "Arch". Then on to the mysterious 'back side' of the moon where you will see rivers, lakes, forests and large and small buildings, the largest of which was photographed by Russia's Zond 3. On our tour of the moon you will see many strange and unfathomable structures the existence of which is hidden from earth people for reasons of 'National Security'. For an inflight snack, a specially prepared portion of baked crow will be served to the 'special people'. The rest of us will enjoy pate, brie, viande seche and a glass of vintage Port. Sign up now, the seats are going fast!



posted on Sep, 26 2006 @ 07:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear
The tour will last about 2 hours of which 20 minutes will be travel time to and from the moon; 10 minutes there 10 minutes back.


Then count me out. Hardly even time for a drinkie-poo and it takes me 10 minutes just to open those little bags of peanuts. Not to mention, obviously no inflight movie.



posted on Sep, 26 2006 @ 08:34 AM
link   
For those of you who cannot get a grip of the size of the equipment needed for a mining operation, here is an example of a bucket-wheel excavator (one of the two cranes - you'll know which one):



With mining operations you need crushers and a few other pieces of "equipment". Coming from a state (Western Australia) that uses many of these types of equipment, I can say that some images are certainly "interesting". The image in this post is the one that can be identified quite easily.

Can anyone give approx. height of the bucket-excavator on the moon?

Cheers

JS



posted on Sep, 26 2006 @ 09:36 AM
link   
Here's an even closer comparison (apart from scale):



Cheers

JS



posted on Sep, 26 2006 @ 10:32 AM
link   
Originally posted by wdl



Deluded:-
A delusion is commonly defined as a fixed false belief and is used in everyday language to describe a belief that is either false, fanciful or derived from deception.


Wdl, with all due respect you are decribing yourself. NASA's data is both false and deceptive. But I wouldn't use an insulting word like deluded to describe you. I would use the more accurate 'uninformed'. Its actually not your fault you have total belief in NASA's data. Thats the plan.


By "you guys" I am refering to the those of you who believe that NASA has published photos of the moon that show alien machines that have escaped not only their attention but the attention of every other countries astronomer, photo analysist etc for the last 40 years.


Actually wdl it has not escaped their attention, they know all about it and have for almost 50 years. And it has not escaped every other countries astronomers attention either.


yet some members of this board have "discovered" these machines with days of first seeing the photographs.


It was pretty easy. After all, the images were as plain as the nose on your face. Many are going through 'denial' i.e: this can't be true. NASA wouldn't lie. I trust my government. I trust their data. The Apollo astronauts would have told us. All that sort of thing. Once they get through denial they will go through the 'rage' stage. Sometimes they will get to the 'acceptance'. But usually they stay in denial or rage until they pass on. The younger folks who grew up with this accept the truth and carry on.


I've got nothing against people asking questions and not trusting thier governments but why waste your time on this nonsense.


I understand.



posted on Sep, 26 2006 @ 10:58 AM
link   
Hey, I claim dibs on one of those ten seats!!!


My first one line post.
oh....nm



new topics

top topics



 
164
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join