John Lear's Moon Pictures on ATS

Originally posted by undo
why in the sam hill did someone star your post?

Fair question. That would've been me. I starred it because I think he made some very cogent, lucid points. I'm not saying there might not be something anomalous on the moon. But at this point (my opinion only), what we're seeing is analogous to a high-tech Rorschach test. Some people see things, some don't. Show 100 people a picture of a car on the street, and 100 people will likely respond, if asked, that it's a picture of a car. Nothing requiring interpretation or squinting highlighting or ... whatever. It's indisputable.

The moon shots? I see "stuff" there that could possibly/probably be explained by any number of things none of which pertain to any presence- mining or ancient, or otherwise. Certainly nothing I'd call indisputable.

I don't claim to have the answer. I'm prepared to accept any real proof when it's presented. I think it's an interesting exercise to view the evidence and see what someone can come up with.

Anyway, long way around the barn to just wave and say, "It was me. I starred the post."

reply to post by buddhasystem


Here is my take. I think the Lunar atmosphere has more ballistic attributes than atmospheres under pressure like our own. So it can be extensive, but since the pressure is so low ions like He3 bounce around the sphere before coming to rest within the first centimeter or so on top of the Lunar "soil".

That is for soft radiation, not relativistic ions. I venture to guess cosmic rays traveling at higher velocity would create secondary radiation slightly deeper within the regolith.

I would even suppose that there may be not just one, but several of these bands, depending on the history of the Sun's activity and cosmic events in the galaxy. Seeing how old the crust actually is, there may be much more He3 than is currently accepted.

Also, I have been nursing a notion lately regarding JLs claims. A great portion of his stories are likely in the case the Moon is terraformed. Well, it isn't now, but how can we tell if it was in the remote past, or will be in the remote future? There is no way. But in theory it is damn near an exact match!

There is an anomaly to consider...

/yanks out soapbox (again)

I don't get it. What is the deal with these people. They complain that some people are not educated enough to understand why they aren't seeing the anomalies they are claiming to see. If the person is educated enough, they complain that the person is obviously on the take, and just looking to sell a book to the idiot horde. If they think they see something but don't agree that its what the other people claim to see, they assume the other people are basing their viewpoints on lack of data and are therefore, kooks and lunatics. How we get from being people who can see something clearly enough to identify it, to kooks and lunatics, is beyond me.

From prison (the new insane asylum):

Prisoner 1: "So what's your crime?"
Prisoner 2: "Good depth perception."

Originally posted by undo
From prison (the new insane asylum):

Prisoner 1: "So what's your crime?"
Prisoner 2: "Good depth perception."

Prisoner 1: I'm in for Free Thinking

Okay let's toss the soap box in the fireplace and heat up the Moon Anomalies

Lets Journey back in time a little...

Surveyor 1 1966 to 1967...

On June 14, 1966, the lunar night enveloped the spacecraft plunging it into frigid cold lasting 14 days, 16 hours and 51 minutes. The spacecraft was re-activated in early July and transmitted an additional 1,000 television pictures before onset of the second lunar night. Communications with were reestablished periodically through January 1967, but no further pictures were obtained after July. During its operation on the moon Surveyor 1 responded to a total of 158,084 commands from Earth and transmitted 11,150 high quality photos of the lunar surface.

SOURCE: Boeing Integrated Defense Systems

Unlike the Ranger missions, which had hard impact landings on the Moon, Surveyor 1 is the first U.S spacecraft to make a soft landing. Settling down at a site called Flamsteed in Oceanus Procellarum, Surveyor 1 sends back 11,240 pictures of the lunar surface, revealing details as small as 2 millimeters (1/12th inch). The lander operates until January 7, 1967.

www.jpl.nasa.gov...

Okay so that is 11,000 plus pictures we have to go through Anyone know where they are?...

Lets see how many we can find...

And while we are at it let's see if we can find the spacecraft... In Lunar Orbiter 3, frame 194-H3 NASA says we can see Surveyor 1 on the surface...

Here is the full res tiff... 8.9 megs

here is the .tiff of the area to look in...
High resolution tiff file (400 kb)

Happy Hunting

11,000 picture just from ONE Mission.... gonna keep us busy... when we find them

Spoil Sport...

That's too easy just look it up on the web...

BTW I never did pass on my comment about your milk cartoon... I love that... well laid out

Now do you by chance have any sources for those 11,000 images? Found a few at the NASA history site but seems they must have lost the originals because they have to scan them out of a book...







[edit on 7-12-2007 by zorgon]

Okay let's toss the soap box in the fireplace and heat up the Moon Anomalies

Hey, that's my soap box! Ah, whatever. You can have it. But first, meet it's sibling, Soapbox II: Gripe revisited, restored and resolved.

/steps up

Fine, I don't want to know the truth. The truth is an evil thing with fangs. It hates women, and I know this for a fact, since it seems to find them unworthy of its attention. In fact, it runs like the dickens when a female approaches. If you're a woman, you have to stalk it like a beast, and then next thing you know, you're the whore of babylon and their roasting you over the fires of hades (witness the fate of the last soapbox *points to Zorgon's fireplace!*). But I digress.

I'm going back to my mundane, unworthy, uninformed (or ill-informed) life of not asking any questions, believing everything on the evening news, in the mainstream of whatever institution happens to be in control today, etc, and being as uncontroversial as I possibly can.

I'm a stepford wife. Bless ignorance. Run from knowledge. Poke it in the eye with a long stick named after whatever prejudice you care to apply. I would like to thank my Creator for endowing me with the interest and capacity to learn and then allowing men to deny me that capacity. Life is good.

To coin a phrase from C3PO: Oh thank the maker.

/steps down and kicks the soapbox to the curb. Stay there you mangy rascal.

[edit on 8-12-2007 by undo]

Originally posted by undo in the mainstream of whatever institution happens to be in control today, etc,

Well cheer up because NASA has some interesting news for us... I think it deserves its own thread...

Originally posted by zorgon

Well cheer up because NASA has some interesting news for us... I think it deserves its own thread...

Not interested. Knowledge is only power for those who have elected themselves worthy of it (who are primarily men, anyway, so what's the point?). According to a mason I know -- I'm not a mason so I'm not worthy of knowing the secret things of the universe, and if I was a mason, I couldn't be one of them cause only men are allowed to be one of them. Women can join that other group over yonder that was an afterthought and probably has about as much true knowledge as a box of cracker jacks, carefully arranged so that it can be usefully manipulated in the event of an emergency.

It's all true, knowledge hates women, and it has big fangs it hides from the unsuspecting. It tempts you with its siren song and then slaps you down based on your gender. Far be it from me to repeat the sins of Eve.

I'm not bitter, I'm happy, see?

Originally posted by zorgon
Spoil Sport...

That's too easy just look it up on the web...

Nope, scanned it to post in another thread. Just synchronicity, I suppose.
Didn't mean to ruin your game.

Originally posted by SpaceMax
Nope, scanned it to post in another thread. Just synchronicity, I suppose.
Didn't mean to ruin your game.

Not game... "Training Exercise"

In other News...

After all these years of skeptics telling us we are crazy for seeing clouds on the moon, despite what Astronomers and even Astronauts have reported... it seems NASA is coming clean and not only admitting to the clouds, but talking about storms... and they have known this since Surveyor

MOON STORMS

www.abovetopsecret.com...

I can just here the skeptics now... "Oh yeah we knew about this..."

uh huh right sure ya did... funny you never posted the info, but tried so hard to debunk the clouds we saw...

Sometimes even NASA has its moments

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by Zarniwoop

Here is a pic from April 22nd 1959

This looks like a perfect circle but does not blend in with the curvature of the moonscape. I'm trying to figure this one out, but I can't... any help?

Interesting Undo.

It looked like a 6 with a following subscript letter possibly "A".

I went to the CLA and that photo is identified under Full-Moon Photography as photo section "HI" but the photo just above it is "GI" and I that it might be a "G" but that wouldn't account for the following subscript which would not be an "I".

So maybe its a notational circle around an anomaly, or possibly a number 6 with a possible subscript put on there by the someone who was inspecting the photo to identify the photo itself or something else.



Interesting find.

reply to post by johnlear


John,

Zarniwoop posted it. I'm a failure. I fought the devil and lost, cause he's a prejudice s.o.b.

Originally posted by undo

John,

Zarniwoop posted it. I'm a failure. I fought the devil and lost, cause he's a prejudice s.o.b.

Whoops! Well the devil also gave me the raging flu and I am not thinking at full crazy.

Sorry Undo.

reply to post by johnlear


Well even your debilitated crazy is saner than some people's full bore crazy. .... did that make sense?

Suggestion for the flu, get a whole clove of garlic, peel off the outside skin, pop it in your mouth, cover your mouth with a towel and breath in the wonderful garlic aromas. lol Scares the germs right outta ya. And if some linger, get a nice spicy hot mexican meal, the hotta the betta, and eat it fast as you can. Sweat is gewd.

Happy B-Day, btw!

EDIT: P.S. you have to eat the garlic clove, sowwy.

[edit on 8-12-2007 by undo]

Originally posted by undo
I'm not bitter, I'm happy, see?

Jeez! What climbed up your bloomers?

Things are going well. Confidence is very high. We are making significant progress. You are warmly welcome here and much loved.

And along those lines I would like to point out that most space faring races, of which 2 or 3 exist within every 600 LY cube, popping by here is as easy as taking a stroll in the park.

And with that understanding I am conscious of my attitude, just as much if I go shopping or eat out. This state of affairs first started to dawn upon me when I noticed a majority of UFO sightings within flight corridors. Now I remember the girl with the cat's eyes, and I have seen people refuse to look, even though they were right in front of them.

The fact is we now know, and that is better than believing. Our esteemed detractors do not even have that. Pity. It is like being afloat in an ocean without a drop to drink. So for this I am thankful and wish to extend my gratitude to everyone here who have helped me open my eyes. We really are good for each other.

Not game... "Training Exercise"

Hey, whatever blows your skirt up Z...

funny you never posted the info, but tried so hard to debunk the clouds we saw...

Nope, we discussed it in the context of a breathable atmosphere. I agreed that dust and it's electrostatic properties is an area in need of study. You chose to skip any question that flummoxed you, change the subject, and cherrypick data that suited you along some other avenue.
Occulting stars and lack of billowing dust are just too difficult to I suppose.

We retain our good humor, nonetheless.

Now do you by chance have any sources for those 11,000 images?

Tried the USGS?


[edit on 8-12-2007 by SpaceMax]

reply to post by undo


Knowledge is power to anybody, the way we use our newly gained power is what makes us different.

And the fact that some people like to keep other people from gathering knowledge about anything or about specific things does not mean that knowledge hates those people that are kept away from it.

I know most of us live in a men dominated society (living in Portugal is very easy to notice that), but if you find the knowledge of how to bend, twist or avoid the obstacles put between you and the knowledge you seek then you can reach that knowledge, probably while keeping those who want to keep it from it in the dark about your newly acquired knowledge.

So, as I use to say, if you can beat them, trick them.
(But maybe you are allready doing it )

PS: although I was only a child at the time, living under a dictatorship showed me how knowledge is a strong weapon and how those who have the power try to keep other people from away from it.

Originally posted by undo
It's all true, knowledge hates women

It does? Are you sure you are not generalizing?

I've been privileged to meet many outstanding female scientists throughout my career. I haven't seen any evidence of the phenomenon you are referring to, which is "knowledge hates women". Knowledge loves women! Especially those who love knowledge.

And don't get me started on Curie and Noether... Monumental figures in the history of science!

Originally posted by Matyas
reply to post by buddhasystem

 

Here is my take. I think the Lunar atmosphere has more ballistic attributes than atmospheres under pressure like our own.

At some point in my life, I spent significant effort studying propagation of charged particle in a medium. I'm only mentioning this because you are using the term "ballistic attributes" which I've never heard before in this area of study, so I missed out on something please educate me. For the face value, I honestly think your statement is without merit.

So it can be extensive, but since the pressure is so low ions like He3 bounce around the sphere before coming to rest within the first centimeter or so on top of the Lunar "soil".

What bouncing are you talking about? There is multiple scattering to be sure, but bouncing?...

even suppose that there may be not just one, but several of these bands, depending on the history of the Sun's activity and cosmic events in the galaxy

You know, that is an interesting point, but practically, it's like comparing a firefly with a floodlight (which is the Sun emitting all this solar wind). There won't be too much signal.

Also, I have been nursing a notion lately regarding JLs claims. A great portion of his stories are likely in the case the Moon is terraformed. Well, it isn't now, but how can we tell if it was in the remote past, or will be in the remote future? There is no way. But in theory it is damn near an exact match!

Sheesh, why we have to assume something for which there is no evidence? Seriously, I can tell you that the Sun is a giant hologram and Lear is an android from the galaxy. All of that is possible, and I may be in fact an AI. Why, however, we have to venture in the world of pure fantasy? It belongs in fiction... And that's quite a legit subject, albeit for a different kind of fora.