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: 158
164
<< 155  156  157    159  160  161 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 31 2007 @ 09:41 AM
link   
Would anyone know where I can get the map of the globe presented in Jaime Maussan's UFO Conference 2005 that shows what the world will look like after the melting?
www.youtube.com...

I would really appreaciate it.


sorry if I'm off topic, but I canot find anything like it anywhere.
thx in advance.


en.wikipedia.org...(zodiac)
Years and the Five Elements
Persons born within these date ranges can be said to have been born in the "year of the Dragon," while also bearing the following elemental sign:

16 February 1904 - 3 February 1905: Wood Dragon
3 February 1916 - 22 January 1917: Fire Dragon
23 January 1928 - 9 February 1929: Earth Dragon
8 February 1940 - 26 January 1941: Metal Dragon
27 January 1952 - 13 February 1953: Water Dragon
13 February 1964 - 1 February 1965: Wood Dragon
31 January 1976 - 17 February 1977: Fire Dragon
17 February 1988 - 5 February 1989: Earth Dragon
5 February 2000 - 23 January 2001: Metal Dragon
2012 - 2013: Water Dragon
2024 - 2025: Wood Dragon




posted on May, 31 2007 @ 04:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cygnific
It's my secret
It involves alot of work to add the depth.
I just asked because it is possible that the "treatment" you give to the photos is the real reason for the way that black area looks on the 3D version.

Remember that the photo where you said looked altered was the photo you altered.



posted on May, 31 2007 @ 04:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaP

I just asked because it is possible that the "treatment" you give to the photos is the real reason for the way that black area looks on the 3D version.

Remember that the photo where you said looked altered was the photo you altered.


Yes I thought the same thing. One way to be SURE is to apply the technique to Earth based images of known aerial features. Google Earth images and the like can provide the images needed for the analysis. It would have to have some matching features, like darkened parts, shadows, light areas and be and be an appropriate resolution scale etc. I don't know how much effort it takes for your 3-d process, but its worth a go in order to verify this.

It would also be interesting to see what kind of detail you can get on known objects, this would give more data on UNKNOWN features perhaps as well thru use of the comparison...



posted on May, 31 2007 @ 04:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cygnific
Nice job on the webpage and hosting Zorgon, maybe we can put it on the firstpage to together with the originals.


Yup I can do that. And I will list them as separate files as well to make them smaller

PS I need a secretary!!!!



posted on May, 31 2007 @ 04:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by greatlakes

Yes I thought the same thing.
One way to be SURE is to apply the technique to Earth based images of known aerial features.


Be my guest ... knock yourself out and show us what you mean. A little work on google and you can make your own 3D's

But Earth anomalies are in another thread



posted on May, 31 2007 @ 05:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon
But Earth anomalies are in another thread


Thanks zorgon, I have one of those Earth anomalies threads, its more of a
Google Earth Strange places thread though....

Heres the link: www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on May, 31 2007 @ 05:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by SpaceBits
sorry if I'm off topic, but I cannot find anything like it anywhere.
thx in advance.


I will see what I can find and U2U you if I have any luck... but if you are interested in the truth about crop circles...


circlemakers.org...



posted on May, 31 2007 @ 06:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by Cygnific

Originally posted by greatlakes
Also speaking about scale issues, just how big would the so-called WHEEL be in that image?

You mean if the measurements issued out by NASA are true? So what is wrong, the wheels or the sizes NASA gave?


I have seen many measurements for Copernicus anywhere from 60 feet across to 90 meters across. In any case these are giant excavators... Here is a small one on Earth believe its actually near Cygnific's home if I remember...




Zorgon or maybe John could answer this question. Do you think these monster mining machines and apparatus are placed in a Mother type ship preassembled and taken to the Moon? Or do you think they are taken in pieces and assembled on the Moon? Furthermore is it possible to place antigravity devices on certain strategic places on the monster mining machines and propell and steer them without a covered spaceship to the Moon? Rik Riley



posted on May, 31 2007 @ 07:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by rikriley Do you think these monster mining machines and apparatus are placed in a Mother type ship preassembled and taken to the Moon?


I do not know yet, but the exec that talked to John said it was assembled on Earth and if you look at the one above you will see it being transported in one piece to the mine site.

To be able to assemble it on the moon from pieces would require already having a plant that could actually build one on the moon... if you had that you wouldn't need to send one...

So I believe that it was sent in one piece... How I do not know... but Boyd Bushman's work with placing two Magnets together like poles facing to negate gravity gives me a clue


Furthermore is it possible to place antigravity devices on certain strategic places on the monster mining machines and propell and steer them without a covered spaceship to the Moon? Rik Riley


IF you accept that the gravity tech exists, then lifting it into orbit and towing it from there would be possible. You would not need a spaceship around it. You would have to make sure things like hoses etc are made to withstand the cold of space...

I thik it will be awhile before I get the answer to that one



posted on May, 31 2007 @ 07:19 PM
link   
Originally posted by rikriley



Zorgon or maybe John could answer this question. Do you think these monster mining machines and apparatus are placed in a Mother type ship preassembled and taken to the Moon? Or do you think they are taken in pieces and assembled on the Moon? Furthermore is it possible to place antigravity devices on certain strategic places on the monster mining machines and propell and steer them without a covered spaceship to the Moon? Rik Riley




My one source for the moon information said that he had built mining machines much bigger than the machine in the picture above for the moon. When I asked how they got it to the moon he said he didn't know.

The way that he described the mining machine would lead me to believe that it was taken in one piece and not in smaller pieces. The state where it was built was somewhere in the south. He told me but I forget exactly where.



posted on May, 31 2007 @ 09:47 PM
link   
Thanks John and Zorgon for answering my questions concerning the mining machinery. This is absolutely beyond most of our comprehension a mining device much larger than this one showing in this photo being transported in one piece to the Moon. What is even stranger without being seen or detected by the masses as it is launched.

I have to agree Antarctica could be one launch site but how did they get it there in the first place. You could see them taking it out to sea to be launched because these huge oil platforms are moved in position all the time. Maybe they finish assembling the mining machinery in Antartica. Even our largest aircraft carrier could not move a piece of machinery this big. Maybe they are way ahead of us and stealth the mining machines making them invisible and launching them at night where it is manufactured using anti-gravity devices. Rik Riley



posted on May, 31 2007 @ 10:40 PM
link   
Of course, theres always the possibility that they have some completely different means of technology in transporting. Some means of teleportation, perhaps. If we're to believe in the scale of all the other coverups, it wouldn't be that far off to imagine that they created -- or aquired, all sorts of various technologies that we may find hard to even imagine.



posted on May, 31 2007 @ 10:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Navieko
Of course, theres always the possibility that they have some completely different means of technology in transporting. Some means of teleportation, perhaps. If we're to believe in the scale of all the other coverups, it wouldn't be that far off to imagine that they created -- or aquired, all sorts of various technologies that we may find hard to even imagine.


Yes but if the points are accepted that we did acquire all of this cool advanced technology, like antigrav, teleportation, advanced transportation, propulsion etc., the need for such antiquated devices such as a cranes, conveyer belts, piping etc all becomes unnecessary.



posted on Jun, 1 2007 @ 02:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by greatlakes
Yes but if the points are accepted that we did acquire all of this cool advanced technology, like antigrav, teleportation, advanced transportation, propulsion etc., the need for such antiquated devices such as a cranes, conveyer belts, piping etc all becomes unnecessary.


Perhaps... but then again, just because we figured out something like teleportation or antigravity -- doesn't necessarily mean we're able to automatically implement that technology into everything else. I'm no expert and untill we know how it'd all work theres no sure way of telling... but I can't imagine how a teleportation device (as in stargate type of thing) extracts H3 from the rocks.

Of course we're just making assumptions on a theory that isn't very clear, but nevertheless we can't rule out such possibilities.



posted on Jun, 1 2007 @ 06:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Navieko... but then again, just because we figured out something like teleportation or antigravity -- doesn't necessarily mean we're able to automatically implement that technology into everything else.


Exactly! One good example is the H car. While ideal, still hasn't overcome storage and manufacturing energy quota.

I can think of dozens more (like nuke plants)!



posted on Jun, 1 2007 @ 06:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon...I think it will be awhile before I get the answer to that one


Rik has a head on his shoulders I'd say!

Of course, a few strategically placed HW (Henry Wallace) modules and there ya go!

And of that 1% of all confirmed UFO sightings, the planet transports do not carry their own power sources. This is what Tesla showed us over a hundred years ago. All planetary power comes from mothership or superbases.



posted on Jun, 1 2007 @ 08:48 AM
link   
Hello John,

At the beginning of this thread you said “No. 5 is a scan of Lunar Orbiter 5-155M” and “LO-5-155 has been retouched which is obvious from others photos I have of 155”.

Are you claiming the picture (No. 5) you (?) provided to ATS that is posted at the beginning of this thread is also a scan from an “original” 16” x 20” negative (or more accurately a contact print made from one) like you are claiming for LO2-H162-3 (Nos. 1–4) or did you scan it from somewhere else like a book?

Also, are you claiming your (?) copy of 5-115M has been “retouched” whereas for example this recent scan by the USGS of the same frame was not?


SOURCE

Thank you in advance for any clarification you can give.

AD



posted on Jun, 1 2007 @ 08:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Matyas

Originally posted by zorgon...I think it will be awhile before I get the answer to that one


Rik has a head on his shoulders I'd say!

Of course, a few strategically placed HW (Henry Wallace) modules and there ya go!

And of that 1% of all confirmed UFO sightings, the planet transports do not carry their own power sources. This is what Tesla showed us over a hundred years ago. All planetary power comes from mothership or superbases.



Why would wireless power from a mothership even be necessary?

There are current applications that could make it possible to get free energy, even if these applications are still in the theoretical phases (on the drawing board in one form or another).

For example, Beardon's stuff on Chenier. The scalar energy seems to be a fairly obvious solution, and it also seems that it is already in use on a governmental level.

There are also new "nanobots" that produce energy from little switches and vibrate with the waves of things as mundane as acoustic vibrations and background waves. Imagine millions of these embedded into a flexible and durable metal. Then you make a ship out of this metal. The entire ship is an electric generator at this point.

Tesla was brilliant, for sure. But there is always more than one way to skin a cat...and there are some who seem to really like skinning cats.



posted on Jun, 1 2007 @ 11:34 AM
link   
not sure if this is real footage or not but i do see a frog...

Frog on the Moon?

also i found this pretty interesting, if it works and allot of us look at the moon with it set to night vision from all angles of the moon maybe we can see how there doing this and maybe find out from where? kinda like a global moon watch.

DIY web telescope



posted on Jun, 1 2007 @ 12:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan Why would wireless power from a mothership even be necessary?


I do agree, however, I did not wish to make the possibility more complex by introducing tech such as FE and OU. So I stayed focused on known methods structure mass could be minimized.

We can do that later on the antigravity thread (the Coanda one I think it is



new topics

top topics



 
164
<< 155  156  157    159  160  161 >>

log in

join