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: 242
164
<< 239  240  241    243  244  245 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 18 2007 @ 12:00 PM
link   
I knew you would not read the evidence and see the pics..I had a feeling you were exactly what you are: An opinion without a spine. You want no evidence, you want no truth, you only want to assuage your pompous confidence in your ability to find truth in your mind instead of the facts..Ok. No problem. I am happy to puch the Ignore button for you, as you have entered the place now ehere you cannot be taken seriously, and what you say should be ighnored totally and your views regarded as nothing more than the ravings of an uneducated mind. Good riddance!




posted on Dec, 18 2007 @ 12:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by eyewitness86
I knew you would not read the evidence and see the pics..


Oh, I read what you called "evidence" alright. It's not it. Calling the crater ejecta a "glow" is not evidence. Calling the crater's edges "straight" and geometrical isn't either. It's called fabrication.


I had a feeling you were exactly what you are: An opinion without a spine.


Oh my spine is just fine, thank you.


You want no evidence


I do and you happen to have none, buddy.


you only want to assuage your pompous confidence in your ability to find truth in your mind instead of the facts.


Are you sure you are talking about me and not about yourself? You know NOTHING about reactors and yet you exhibit, to quote yourself, "pompous confidence" in stating that you certainly see a very typical reactor with all the requisite attributes. You have no facts and make things up. This is laughable, really.


I am happy to puch the Ignore button for you, as you have entered the place now ehere you cannot be taken seriously, and what you say should be ighnored totally and your views regarded as nothing more than the ravings of an uneducated mind.


Just as well, my extremely well educated friend who knows nothing about reactors.



posted on Dec, 18 2007 @ 01:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Matyas
Well, Z knows, but I have doubts about a reactor, unless it is tremendously powerful, but then you have the Sun, so why all the effort? I pointed this out eons ago.
I think it may be some sort of transmitter, and the glowie is near field phenomena.


You know... its interesting that I am finding Cherenkov Radiation mentioned in association with HAARP...

And what's even more interesting is the source...

Beam Physics Branch, Plasma Physics Division, Naval Research Laboratory, Washington, DC 20375-5346

You might be on to something here Matyas


But errr the HAARPy stuff isn't ready yet... coming soon though... and with PhD backup


Check Your mail I stuffed your in box



posted on Dec, 18 2007 @ 01:12 PM
link   
To Zorgon:


Originally posted by buddhasystem
Where are the spectra of the Cherenkov radiation you said were matching with the Russian measurements from 1957? Huh?


Still can't back up your post?



posted on Dec, 18 2007 @ 01:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Matyas
Well, Z knows, but I have doubts about a reactor, unless it is tremendously powerful, but then you have the Sun, so why all the effort? I pointed this out eons ago.
I think it may be some sort of transmitter, and the glowie is near field phenomena.


You know... its interesting that I am finding Cherenkov Radiation mentioned in association with HAARP...

And what's even more interesting is the source...

Beam Physics Branch, Plasma Physics Division, Naval Research Laboratory, Washington, DC 20375-5346

You might be on to something here Matyas


But errr the HAARPy stuff isn't ready yet... coming soon though... and with PhD backup


Check Your mail I stuffed your in box



posted on Dec, 18 2007 @ 03:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Zarniwoop
 



That quote from NASA about the water getting sucked out of a person because the moon would go crazy demanding that all the moisture that was in a body be distributed equally and immediately over the entire surface of the moon made me laugh out loud!! Thats a ripper!!

They cannot be serious. My God, what science fiction are they spouting there at NASA? Unreal. Turning an astronaut to dust because he gets a leak in a space suit and loses all his ' water''? Where does that come from? If a body is exposed to freezing temps, it freezes. If it gets exposed to high temps, it burns. But under No circumstances does a body turn to dust like a vampire meeting Blade's sword: Why say such crap? Perpetuating this nonsense serves no one.



posted on Dec, 18 2007 @ 04:01 PM
link   
Breaking News

Hole in Space Suit Astronaut Survives

Pictures at Eleven!!!


"I'm really grateful the Russian specialists were able to catch that leak as fast as they did," Fincke told Houston mission controllers after the EVA attempt."We just came back in, shut the door and live to fight another day."

Oxygen Leak Scrubs Spacewalk for ISS Crew



Gotta love those Russians!!!

Use a pencil instead of a Million Dollar pen...
Fix the ISS with Jumper Cables

and now this

And I hear they have a hot meal ready when someone comes on board...



[edit on 18-12-2007 by zorgon]



posted on Dec, 18 2007 @ 04:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon
Breaking News

Hole in Space Suit Astronaut Survives

Pictures at Eleven!!!



Wait, the article is dated 24 June 2004, don't you think the news is stale?


Gotta love those Russians!!!


Thank you, Zorgon


Now, back to your Cherenkov claim (please re-read my previous post)



posted on Dec, 18 2007 @ 04:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem
Where did you hear that, Zorgon? What do you know about radiation? And what does become clear to you? You are still stuck at the pre-school level of "oh wow, it glows, it must be radiation and/or aliens", and you have the nerve to drop awkward hints about my mental capacity. Sheesh.





Hey Happy Holidays to you too




Wait, the article is dated 24 June 2004, don't you think the news is stale?


Nope just relevant to the post it was in response too...
Maybe you should switch to decaf...

Hey since your a PhD and all that you might want to add your expertise to this thread about stargates, wormholes and faster than light thingies...

Seems other physicists are finally discovering reality... You might want to keep up to date


www.abovetopsecret.com...

[edit on 18-12-2007 by zorgon]



posted on Dec, 18 2007 @ 04:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon
Hey since your a PhD and all that you might want to add your expertise to this thread about stargates, wormholes and faster than light thingies...

Seems other physicists are finally discovering reality... You might want to keep up to date


Don't worry Zorgon, I'm quite up to date with what I do:

atlas.ch...



posted on Dec, 18 2007 @ 05:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem...I'm quite up to date with what I do:

atlas.ch...


Excellent. Maybe you would consider bringing that famous charm of yours that we all love to bear upon the ignorance perpetuated regarding the LHC destroying the solar system.

Or even the Earth. I'd hate to see you out of work because of a small vocal group of ill informed activists.



posted on Dec, 18 2007 @ 05:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon


Same spectral signature as in Cherenkov Radiation


Again, Zorgon, could you kindly provide a curve describing the Cherenkov spectrum as you propose it exists in this crater, and an estimate of how much gas is needed to produce the "glow" based on some baseline assumption about the particle flux.



posted on Dec, 18 2007 @ 07:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Again, Zorgon, could you kindly provide a curve describing the Cherenkov spectrum as you propose it exists in this crater, and an estimate of how much gas is needed to produce the "glow" based on some baseline assumption about the particle flux.


Say, BS, smart as you are, can't you produce a curve describing the Cherenkov spectrum? Or maybe one of your fellow scientist there at Atlas can if you're not up to it?

Unless you're responsibe for the catering or something like that... (not meant to be disrespectable! People, even scientists, need some food now and then
)



posted on Dec, 18 2007 @ 07:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by SpijkerMuis
Say, BS, smart as you are, can't you produce a curve describing the Cherenkov spectrum?


I can not, unfortunately, honestly return the pleasantry you used in your slight.

To calculate the Cherenkov spectrum I need a few parameters which I simply don't have in my possession. However, Zorgon claims, the spectrum is just right in this crater, so he must know the right parameters!


Or maybe one of your fellow scientist there at Atlas can if you're not up to it?


Sure, I can always ask somebody to check my calculation. Nothing wrong with that.


Unless you're responsibe for the catering


I admit this is pretty lame on your part.



posted on Dec, 19 2007 @ 07:13 PM
link   
reply to post by zorgon
 


After a quick read of what I think is the same document from where you posted those pieces (available here), I thought a good idea posting some pieces I found interesting.

You should all keep in mind that I do not have any specific knowledge about the subject being discussed in this document and so what I consider interesting may be nothing special.

I kept the yellow marks you put and marked "my" text in red.





Edited because I couldn't get the thumbnails to work like they should.
Sorry about the images not appearing in its full size, but this new forum software cuts the images in the posts while it allows gigantic avatars...

[edit on 19/12/2007 by ArMaP]



posted on Dec, 23 2007 @ 01:05 PM
link   
I wonder if I'm right in thinking that most of you have seen this video?
www.disclose.tv...

It's been split into 12 parts and is about the moon oddities we've all rambled on about.

Sorry if this has already been posted but there's a lot of pages to go through to see if it has or not.. :-)



posted on Dec, 23 2007 @ 02:59 PM
link   
reply to post by zorgon
 


Hey Zorgon,

Please indulge a dumb question.

Why would there need to be a nuclear reactor on the Moon if we already have reverse-engineered or have been given access to advanced technology? I am not trying to argue here, I would like to hear something that makes sense out of all the theories being bandied about.

Point: There is a colony, underground, on Mars

Point: The Moon is a construct, built by ancients, and has a habitable atmosphere on the hemisphere that cannot be seen from the Earth.

Point: Both of those realities would require energy. The idea of an element, a stable version of 115, has been postulated as potentially a source for sustained power, possibly fusion-based?

I only addressed three 'Points'...we must also consider the energy sources used to power and operate the vessels that are both Interplanetary and Interstellar.

Nuclear 'fission' seems an unlikely candidate for efficient power sources in a colony, or in a spacecraft. (I am assuming, of course, that the radiation source being discussed on this thread is referring to a fission reactor of some kind. I had thought that any advanced fusion reactor would have no emissions, other than the energy it was designed to produce).

Hope you can clear some of this up, perhaps I missed a post or three, and if so, just provide links and save yourself some time!!

Cheers!



posted on Dec, 23 2007 @ 04:16 PM
link   
It would seem more likely that we could use a different energy source for interstellar travels. A method that allows you to draw on the potential energy sources.

Where does the energy originate from? That is the source we want to tap.

We swim in this energy, layered one atop the other. LIke a fish, we do not see the medium we live in...but it is there.



posted on Dec, 23 2007 @ 11:02 PM
link   
Originally posted by weedwhacker




Hey Zorgon,

Please indulge a dumb question.

Why would there need to be a nuclear reactor on the Moon if we already have reverse-engineered or have been given access to advanced technology? I am not trying to argue here, I would like to hear something that makes sense out of all the theories being bandied about.


Thanks for the post weedwhacker. How on earth can you think that the reactor in Aristarchus is 'ours'?

The database on strange colored lights at Aristarchus date back to 1650 or thereabouts.

What can you be thinking? That we put that up there? When? In 1650?


Nuclear 'fission' seems an unlikely candidate for efficient power sources in a colony, or in a spacecraft. (I am assuming, of course, that the radiation source being discussed on this thread is referring to a fission reactor of some kind. I had thought that any advanced fusion reactor would have no emissions, other than the energy it was designed to produce).


There are three types of nuclear reactions: fission, fusion and total annihilation. Fission is about 1 percent efficient, fusion 3 percent efficient and total annihilation 100 percent conversion of matter to energy.

A fission reactor would seem outdated for the moon. Possibly its a fusion reactor. Whichever its is the radiation particles produced are going to appear blue when exposed to molecules of air.

The possibility that we are looking at a total annihilation reactor is mind boggeling.

I'll let Zorgon answer the rest of your questions.

Thanks for the post.



posted on Dec, 24 2007 @ 12:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker

Hey Zorgon,
Please indulge a dumb question.


Can't you make it an intelligent question? Sigh.... okay if you must...



Why would there need to be a nuclear reactor on the Moon if we already have reverse-engineered or have been given access to advanced technology?


Well your right dumb question... first of all we said FUSION reactor not NUCLEAR reactor...

And what reverse-engineered tech are you talking about? I have said we have anti gravity... but be so kind as to show me where I have said it was "reverse-engineered "

And an Anti Gravity drive still requires power so a HE3 FUSION system would do that very well....


And "have been given access to advanced technology" Who gave us this advanced tech that you speak of? And pray tell what is it? I am afraid you are going to have to back this up with documentation.

And even if we did have these "reverse-engineered" ships what make you think you wouldn't need power to run a Moon Base? Or a Moon Ship if you are into that possibility?

And it may actually be something far better... something along the line of what Matyas said... but that will have to wait till I have more time...

So try to pay attention to what I actually say and you can ask less dumb questions




I am not trying to argue here, I would like to hear something that makes sense out of all the theories being bandied about.


Sure you are... as to something that makes sense... well I don't have a one page summary for you as I have not yet reached any conclusions... It may be years of research before I have that



The idea of an element, a stable version of 115, has been postulated as potentially a source for sustained power, possibly fusion-based?


Well now that I know from Bob how that works I can write a page but why mess with that when there is tons of HE3 just there for the picking?


we must also consider the energy sources used to power and operate the vessels that are both Interplanetary and Interstellar.


I have many times... and we had a whole bunch of FUSION drives listed in the Rainbow thread...



Nuclear 'fission' seems an unlikely candidate for efficient power sources in a colony, or in a spacecraft. (I am assuming, of course, that the radiation source being discussed on this thread is referring to a fission reactor of some kind.


NASA has documents for Fission reactors... but stop assuming and pay attention... WE are discussing FUSION... The Z Machine on the previous page giving off all that Cherenkov radiation is a FUSION device from SANDI Labs



I had thought that any advanced fusion reactor would have no emissions, other than the energy it was designed to produce).


And you thought this because?



Hope you can clear some of this up, perhaps I missed a post or three, and if so, just provide links and save yourself some time!!


No... all the links are at my website and in the relevant threads.. please take some time and review them now THAT will save myself a LOT of time





[edit on 24-12-2007 by zorgon]



new topics

top topics



 
164
<< 239  240  241    243  244  245 >>

log in

join