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: 213
164
<< 210  211  212    214  215  216 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 17 2007 @ 07:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Matyas

Manifest arrogance, quite a thought! Bad, bad NASA!



It has been 'suggested' to me that I not say bad things about NASA


Well okay then back to Mr Nice Guy...


Dr. James Garvin, lead scientist for Mars and lunar exploration at NASA Headquarters, Washington, said, "NASA launched the Mars Exploration Rover mission specifically to check whether at least one part of Mars ever had a persistently wet environment that could possibly have been hospitable to life. Today we have strong evidence for an exciting answer: Yes."


Well I will leave the Mars thing for now with one last image...



EVEN BIGGER

NICE NASA --- Pretty Fossil Pictures

NASA = Nice Anomalies Shown Always



Stick THAT rock in yer pipe and smoke it bad, bad skeptics


And if I hear any of that "all we ever show is fuzzy blurry pictures" stuff

I'm getting out the Tar and Feathers

[edit on 17-9-2007 by zorgon]




posted on Sep, 18 2007 @ 12:37 AM
link   
reply to post by zorgon
 


Add this too.This is what best suits themText
No Access To Space For AnyoneText



posted on Sep, 18 2007 @ 03:23 AM
link   
@Zorgon?

Even if the picture of the NASA presentation has been made up by the NASA itself, most likely the case IMO, its very very odd they would made These specific examples to show the public.
These examples are almost exactly the same as the "real deal" found on a number of photo´s of mars.

So where is the imagination of the creater of this "made up" pics?! Why didn't he come up with something totally different?!
Well, no imagination at all. He certainly has knowledge of the "real deal" ... But he thought it would be save to do it in this way, the most easy way.

Weird... or just as simple as it is?
Agree?



posted on Sep, 19 2007 @ 01:18 PM
link   
This should surprise you, Zorgan, but I have seen plenty of crystal clear photos of things that I actually believe could be mars fossils. Nothing can be concluded, as they are only pictures (at this point), But yeah, Mars may have had water and the right conditions long enough for primitive life to form for a bit, thus leaving the same kind of small fossils you find in most earth rocks (you know, the shells and whatnot, etc) Now, just because I think that some of these photos could possibly be very primitive forms of Martian fossils, I am not ready to take the flying leap of utter absurdity that is necessary to believe the foolishness both you and John spout.

So yeah, quit posting blurry pics of and claiming their Mars fossils



posted on Sep, 19 2007 @ 01:23 PM
link   


Thanks for the laugh. You do realize that fossils very rarely preserve soft tissue. The "nose" on that rock formation wouldn't have survived fossilization. Unless you think maybe Jimmy Durante was buried on Mars somehow and he just mummified in the dry conditions.

It's rocks, people. Not fossils. It is highly doubtful that Mars had enough atmosphere and water for long enough for a life form that resembles a rock troll to have had time to evolve.

Yes, now I'm ready. make a snide comment and send me on my way. I know the penalties for doubting the rohrschach test that is the "moon pictures" thread.



posted on Sep, 19 2007 @ 07:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by IgnoreTheFacts
This should surprise you, Zorgan, but I have seen plenty of crystal clear photos of things that I actually believe could be mars fossils. Nothing can be concluded, as they are only pictures (at this point),

But yeah, Mars may have had water




Originally posted by MajorMalfunction
It is highly doubtful that Mars had enough atmosphere and water for long enough for a life form that resembles a rock troll to have had time to evolve.




This is totally amazing... I can't believe that you two have not been keeping up with the news... talk about ignorance... wow

NASA has been showing images foe a long time about the extent of water on Mars Huge river deltas, sedimentary rocks, you name it... even CURRENT flows from one scan pass to the next. You guys really need to get out once in a while and see what's out there.

:shk:

I don't want to turn this into a Martian thread so after this post I will go back to the Moon images but seriously





Of course we know that it would just be too simple for you guys to even do a simple google search for the latest on Water on Mars... but then, I suppose that is one way to main a certain level of ignorance..



And of course you are SO RIGHT about the lack of Atmosphere on Mars... I mean there wouldn't be any clouds just drifting by on a lazy day...



And you would NEVER see fog rolling in...



And to even IMAGINE huge storms like we get on Earth... that would be a REAL STRETCH wouldn't it?



Now you guys are aware that we discovered that the Earth really isn't flat some time ago, right? Hmmm?

But considering your obvious lake of understand of these events, I find it highly unlikely you would even be able to recognized a fossil on Earth...

Fortunately for the world, there are those that do...



Now then lets see if I can find some more 'fuzzy blurry" moon pictures



[edit on 19-9-2007 by zorgon]



posted on Sep, 19 2007 @ 07:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by IgnoreTheFacts
This should surprise you, Zorgan, but I have seen plenty of crystal clear photos of things that I actually believe could be mars fossils. Nothing can be concluded, as they are only pictures (at this point),


Well then if you have such pictures, then why not post them and contribute something of value to the thread? That's what ATS is all about...

Nothing can be concluded from pictures?

Tell that to the Military who plan bombing missions based on pictures

Tell that to NASA who hires people for big bucks that do nothing but analyze pictures...

If those pictures are as crystal clear as you say they are, lets see them. There are people here who do have the skills to recognize fossils


So is this one clear enough for you guys or do you still see 'fuzzy' rocks









[edit on 19-9-2007 by zorgon]



posted on Sep, 19 2007 @ 10:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by MajorMalfunction
It's rocks, people. Not fossils.

Strange, I saw the same "kind" of rock in an exhibit at the Museum of Natural History. Its a primitive sea life form alright, or was but is a rock now (gotta clarify these nuances or it discredits the whole premise for the critics)

It is highly doubtful that Mars had enough atmosphere and water for long enough for a life form that resembles a rock troll to have had time to evolve.

You must be either very smart, privy to some special information, or both, because I have no idea whether evolution works in starts and fits, or is slow and steady, and the conditions that cause it. Assuming that you do, I would like you to share with the group why you think this is so.

Yes, now I'm ready. make a snide comment and send me on my way. I know the penalties for doubting the rohrschach test that is the "moon pictures" thread.

The only penalty you will get is the iggy button, and all you have to do for that is debunk by barking demands. You don't have to contribute to stay, providing that you do not start with the "where's the proof" when it is in the rest of the thread! Or you can just ask to be ignored like std did and I'll just hit the button...



posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 10:44 AM
link   
I'm new to this subject and to this forum so I wonder if you ever saw this image (I found it in a UFO related portuguese site):
"http://images.jsc.nasa.gov/luceneweb/fullimage.jsp?photoId=AS16-121-19407"
If no, enjoy it.



posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 11:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by 2timesOO
I'm new to this subject and to this forum so I wonder if you ever saw this image (I found it in a UFO related portuguese site):
"http://images.jsc.nasa.gov/luceneweb/fullimage.jsp?photoId=AS16-121-19407"
If no, enjoy it.


Yes I have seen this one before.

I would like to play with the Hi-res Tiff version because I suspect there may be more there of interest.

Title:
Oblique view of rim of Guyot crater on lunar farside as seen by Apollo 16

Description:
An oblique view of a rim of Guyot crater on the lunar farside, as photographed from the Apollo 16 spacecraft in lunar orbit. The coordinates of the center of Guyot crater are 116.5 degrees east longitude and 10.5 degrees north latitude. Note the black coloration which appears to be lava flow down the side of the crater rim.


By the way welcome to ATS.



posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 02:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by IgnoreTheFacts
This should surprise you, Zorgan, but I have seen plenty of crystal clear photos of things that I actually believe could be mars fossils. Nothing can be concluded, as they are only pictures (at this point),


Well then if you have such pictures, then why not post them and contribute something of value to the thread? That's what ATS is all about...


You already posted one, I think in this thread? Can't find it right now. It was the one rock that clearly showed what appeared to be a segmented worm-like fossil. There is no doubt in my mind that could be the real thing, as it does not fit in to the surrounding rock's structure one bit. I'll see if I can dig it up, but you probably know what I am talking about. Cool stuff.


Nothing can be concluded from pictures?


That is a very loaded statement to answer.


Tell that to the Military who plan bombing missions based on pictures


Thats just it, some things can be very much identified and assumed, while other things are a little off the deep end for some picture to answer everything. I.E. we know we see pictures of buildings, they exist, and we plan missions to level them. Taking pictures of known objects is easy and understood. Taking pictures and claiming moon bases, hanging gardens and other outlandish things require a little more than the pictures shown to be bought hook, line and sinker.


If those pictures are as crystal clear as you say they are, lets see them. There are people here who do have the skills to recognize fossils


I'll see if I can dig them up. Do you have a problem with me linking to some pictures you already posted? I am way too lazy to go through the NASA image files to find the ones that I need, and the ones that I am referring too have been plastered here and on the internet for some time (for good reason, they could be the real deal)



posted on Sep, 20 2007 @ 02:42 PM
link   
Forgive the complete and utter lack of moon pictures here, lol. I am responding to Zorgan's request to post what I think -could- have the potential to be fossils on Mars. Ignore the woo woo site I got these from, I was way too lazy to look through NASA's image files to find the ones I wanted.




Some say this is only fossilized mud. I collect fossils and am an avid rock hunter (geek, I know) and have seen mud like this before on a few occasions, however I have always found such things grouped together, but I recall seeing the NASA image files that didn't show any other anomalies within the studied area to indicate this was fossilized mud.




Another very interesting rock. You will notice though, that I do not accept these as definitive proof of anything, nor do they cause me to take the flying leap of total absurdity to state there is a civilization on Mars or anything, lol. I still retain my common sense, reason and logic you all love about me.



posted on Sep, 21 2007 @ 02:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by 2timesOO I wonder if you ever saw this image


YES I have seen it before but did not have it from an official source. I tend not to post anomalies that I cannot verify myself...

So thank you for finding a source... And they actually have the original image

I will put the rest of the clips up as soon as I am free next week



posted on Sep, 21 2007 @ 09:11 PM
link   
Zorgon...

The original link of the conference in 2005:

www.nasa.gov...


Pics of the conference (exact matching with the pics of the PDF that you posted):

www.damer.com...


And the videos of the conference:

www.aiaa.org...

www.aiaa.org...

Ops, 404 error in the last one



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 05:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by Soloist
Of course they are observed as lunar "explosions" , that's what they are, meteors slamming into the moon's surface and "exploding". What else would you possibly expect to see when a meteor slams into the ground?


Please be so kind as to show me documentation of recorded meteorites slamming into the Lunar surface in recent history...

Thanks



Aside from the Leonids, which I'm sure you would have no problem looking up, here's one from 2006 - science.nasa.gov...



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 05:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by ignorant_ape

without this data , they are just pretty pictures .


Thanks ignorant_ape, which you obviously are not...

Very pretty picures at those sites, thanks... That moon sure is a holie place isn't it? I mean the holes have holes...

What scares me the most about meeting an alien is that they'll be just like us...

cheers...



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 03:09 PM
link   
I would like to get hold of a Hi-Res image of this area only I can't identify the location.

These are the only to images I can find one is from one of the Russian Luna's I believe and the other I am not sure of the source, possibly Russian again.

Having been through the publicly available Lunar Orbiter and Apollo images I can't match them, I can't think why.

I have not tried Clem but without an approximate location it is difficult.










posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 04:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Soloist

Aside from the Leonids, which I'm sure you would have no problem looking up, here's one from 2006 - science.nasa.gov...


Do we have an image of the "meteor" that caused this flash? To me, it looks like an explosion, but we cannot discern the causative factors involved with the explosion To call it a meteor is to accept the same lack of "proof" that most would say is the downfall of "UFOlogy".

all that link is evidence of is TLP, which we have quite a few accounts of already.

Any cases where the meteor was tracked before impact? Without that, it is just lunar explosions (which might also be construed as supporting the Plasma Cosmology model).

Nice find, Sherpa....that is an interesting looking crater.



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 04:32 PM
link   
reply to post by sherpa
 


I think it's Humboldt crater.



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 04:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaP
reply to post by sherpa
 


I think it's Humboldt crater.


Thanks ArMap, I am off to start searching again.



new topics

top topics



 
164
<< 210  211  212    214  215  216 >>

log in

join