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: 252
164
<< 249  250  251    253  254  255 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 12 2008 @ 12:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon

Even darkbluesky pointed out the four legs...


"Even" Darkbluesky?

"Even"?

What the hell does that mean???

"Even"?

Just kidding.




posted on Feb, 12 2008 @ 12:53 PM
link   
Don't get yer knickers in a knot, Mate...

It was you 'gas grill' that earned the 'even"



posted on Feb, 12 2008 @ 12:55 PM
link   
Please note the alert at the top of every page in this thread:
"This thread is an ATS Big-Thread with 5021 replies, and subject to more strict moderation.
Please stay focused. Stay on-topic. Minimal or off-topic posts and T&C violations are subject deletion and/or a warning."

Let's keep posts focused on the topic.

Thanks.



posted on Feb, 12 2008 @ 12:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon
Personally I think this should be a new T&C Rule here

If you claim to be a PhD in Physics... you should have to post your shingle before being allowed to make such a claim


If you subscribe to such rule, you should really demand same from everybody, in any claim's situation. We heard much nonsense from John Lear regarding crisp and fresh air on the Moon, flourishing civilizations on multiple planets in Solar System etc. I somehow don't recall you demanding a "shingle" of proof from John before he is allowed, to use your own words, to post here.

Now, what is more likely, Weedwacker being a pilot as he says he is, or there being space bunnies on Mars?


Surely its time with all the hoaxing that has hit ATS


I submit that the now defunct John Lear forum and your participation in it contributed greatly to the amount of unreliable and openly fantastic posts which sadly polluted that sector of ATS. It appears to be somewhat disingenuous on your part to portray yourself as a paragon of veracity of information.


to demand a stricter guidance for those who 'thump chest' and wave 'doctorates' in our face, but won't let us see them...


Who is waving doctorates in your face, Zorgon? It is quite telling that my own doctorate was mentioned by me once, and ever since the now departed John Lear and a few others drag it out and put this word in quotes. It seems to be vexing to you, and it is you who's 'waving' it.


yet those same people are the quickest to attack the credentials of others like Ken Johnston


I frankly don't understand what "Metaphysics" (Ken's degree) has to do with space research, which was the context Mr.Johnston's diploma was presented. As I said before, it's about as relevant as a degree in cooking or social studies, in that regard.


[edit on 12-2-2008 by buddhasystem]



posted on Feb, 12 2008 @ 01:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon
Now lets take a vote...

A) I see a fuzzy blur...
B) I see nothing but rocks
C) I see what appears to be four walls...
D) Its obviously not natural




[edit on 12-2-2008 by zorgon]


Hey Zorgon, is this a real vote or rhetorical? Ahh, I wanna play
anyway
.......
My opinion (if it counts) theres definitley something there. I also feel theres more thats not being pointed out. Please see my cool letter diagram.


A) looks like there could be another 'wall'
B) possible 'tower', for lack of better of term - something taller than a rock...
C) our familiar 'wall' with what appears to be maybe two structures inside...
and
D).....do you see something up here???


spikeD.



posted on Feb, 13 2008 @ 06:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by spikedmilkI also feel theres more thats not being pointed out.


Actually there is a LOT in that image (and surrounding area) and the stuff is also on the other two angles of the same crater and vicinity... but there is little point showing those if they can not see the big one



So I can put you down for "C" leaning towards "D" ?



posted on Feb, 13 2008 @ 06:55 PM
link   
reply to post by zorgon
 

I Definitely think those walls DiD not form by themselves so fashionably square and gateD like. Therefore it is my opinion they are not at all of natural origin.
So yes, D, is my answer.

spikeD.



posted on Feb, 13 2008 @ 07:28 PM
link   
reply to post by zorgon
 


To answer the earlier question C.) I see 4 walls.



posted on Feb, 13 2008 @ 09:35 PM
link   
Yes I see walls as well but would anyone care to explain why there would be any walls on the moon as I just can’t see anybody breaking in and that is why we build walls down here on earth is it not?



posted on Feb, 13 2008 @ 10:05 PM
link   
rather than walls, maybe it's a platform with a reflective surface and with darker colored structures centered in it, so that it appears as if the center is concave. either way there's too many right angles in this pic to be natural, i would think?



[edit on 13-2-2008 by undo]



posted on Feb, 14 2008 @ 12:21 AM
link   
reply to post by buddhasystem
 


Thanks, buddha,

re: your post on the John Lear Moon Pictures thread,

...and, someone disputing the credentials of another...I believe I saw, once or twice, our friend Capt Lear refer to a PhD as 'Piled high Degrees' in an attempt, I suppose, to somehow call into question the veracity of a person's accomplishments....

I have been on the receiving end of countless ad hominem ... I won't call them 'attacks', but, rather, subtle snide comments that would follow-on to my various posts, posts I humbly thought made a salient point.

Instead of responding to what I wrote, it was, not always, but occasionally customary to accuse me of being something other than I claim....just a regular airline pilot.

I was accused of being a part of a group, a 'cabal', perhaps?....of 'sceptics' determined to undermine others' influence on various boards. These accusations came from many directions, and I usually just shrugged them off...and just continued to post what I know, when it involves an airplane...and what I opine, when I feel the need to chime in to a discussion that I find interesting.

Any accusation of my being a part of some organized 'dis-info' group dwindled, though...and thanks to the notice of mods, I knew that I had something of value to contribute.

I guess, when I, even as a newby, agreed with someone who had, although I didn't know it at the time, a long-standing feud with another member, but then I decided to 'take the wrong side'...I got slammed by the other side....this is my simple perception, I am sure there was a lot more going on behind the scenes...

I made the mistake...ONCE!...of suggesting to a very prolific poster, that perhaps 'spellcheck' might be a good idea...and that there exist such things as 'homonyms'...I was new, it was my first week, (September 2007)and he NEVER let me forget that one faux pas....so, it's not me, it's him.

Since then, I am tagged as a 'former English teacher' (I am NOT!). I just happen to know how to spell, and how to type...with all ten fingers...so sue me!

OK, enough of my bio on ATS...thanks for reading....can I move this to my 'member page'????

[adding...to SO, or anyone else....re: staying on topic... IF I strayed from topic, my apologies. IT does, though, mention Capt John Lear in the title, although I realize it's about pictures of the Moon and subsequent discussions...so I talked about Capt Lear, check! NOW, re: those pictures...I mentioned this on some other thread already...it is difficult for me, perhaps it's my monitor? ... to see some of the anomolies that are trying to be presented here. I have said it on another thread already, but the human mind has an incredible propensity to imagine patterns, even when based on the most simplistic clues (I didn't say it that way before, I am paraphrasing...but it souns better now than the first time!). I pointed out, in essence, that WE humans can recognize each other's faces, just as Chimps can recognize their tribe's faces....but probably not vice-versa...not at first glance....]






[edit on 14-2-2008 by weedwhacker]



posted on Feb, 14 2008 @ 12:36 AM
link   
weedwhacker,

Allow me to apologize on behalf of anomalie hunters who have offended you.
Try to understand that it is one thing to tell someone why you feel scientifically a thing is impossible and quite another to tell them that what their eyes are seeing is simply not there. Since our eyes are one of the ways in which we experience reality, it would be quite unscientific to expect someone to deny what their own eyes are seeing.



posted on Feb, 14 2008 @ 12:41 AM
link   
reply to post by undo
 


Thank you, undo,

Your apology is not necessary, but your intent is appreciated.

Actually, it isn't such a big deal, really....but thanks anyway for taking the time to write!!

WW

edit....no matter how hard I try, still make spelling mistakes...!!! Should be fixed...or 'fizxeed'...LOL!

[edit on 14-2-2008 by weedwhacker]



posted on Feb, 14 2008 @ 04:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by MAC269
Yes I see walls as well but would anyone care to explain why there would be any walls on the moon as I just can’t see anybody breaking in and that is why we build walls down here on earth is it not?


I do not know why they need walls... maybe they had the same problem up there... raids from other villages


The point though is that they are not a normal rock formation... and the point of this thread is to show that they exist...

We can get on to what they are after we acknowledge they exist and do not look natural on the Moon..



posted on Feb, 14 2008 @ 04:55 PM
link   
I just got started at ATS. This thread is huge. Can someone please point out which moon image ( and aprox. where on the image) this closeup with the 4 walls comes from. I looked at the originals at the beginning of the thread and I just see craters. I am also wondering when you blow it up like that what is the scale? Are those walls one inch or 20 yards long? With the texture of the moon its hard to tell. Thanks!!



posted on Feb, 14 2008 @ 05:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bigwhammy
I just got started at ATS. This thread is huge. Can someone please point out which moon image ( and aprox. where on the image) this closeup with the 4 walls comes from. I looked at the originals at the beginning of the thread and I just see craters. I am also wondering when you blow it up like that what is the scale? Are those walls one inch or 20 yards long? With the texture of the moon its hard to tell. Thanks!!



zorgon had the whole thing calculated roughly.
you can see alot of the data you need at
thelivingmoon.com...

just might take awhile to weed through it all. lol good luck on that.
there's at least an entire year of anomalie discoveries by several people
on that site

[edit on 14-2-2008 by undo]



posted on Feb, 14 2008 @ 05:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon
The point though is that they are not a normal rock formation... and the point of this thread is to show that they exist...
That you don't really know, do you?

The fact that something looks artificial does not mean that is really artificial, especially when we only have one photo to judge its nature.


We can get on to what they are after we acknowledge they exist and do not look natural on the Moon..
Yes, that is why I am looking for more photos of that area or better versions of that photo, although both things are likely to not give any results.

And, as I had said before, I think that those things do not look natural, so I will vote for something like C) but not really C), because to me it looks like straight lines but not like walls.



posted on Feb, 14 2008 @ 05:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaP
straight lines but not like walls.


armap, you're a great guy. we love you here because you're an honest to goodness skeptic but you know, there must be something wrong with your eyes. or, there's something wrong with mine


when you zoom in on that, stuff shows up all over the place.. i'm just
i don't know what to say. other than, if there's a God, and I believe there is,
do you think he will understand that you "can't " see these things if you really can? I mean, even to protect state secrets? to the extent some go to?
i dunno how men of faith could work in a government that tells them they have to lie. and i am not sure you are a liar because frankly, you at least give the subject a chance. but you always reach the same conclusions which to me is suspect, especially since so many of the anomalies are extremely artificial looking.



posted on Feb, 14 2008 @ 05:29 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker


So after that rather lengthy post... can you answer the question that was put and actually pick A,B, C or D on the image in question?

Is it to much to ask you to stay focused just this once?

The point of the thread is indeed to discuss the anomalies. If you cannot see the 'walls' in that image that is no problem... if you do see them but refuse to admit that... that is also no problem as you are only lying to yourself...


Though I realize its an obsession for you, just for once leave the 'spell checking' alone... just stop and I won't call you an English Teacher anymore


As to the pilot thing... I am really adamant about this... PROVE IT... as you demanded of John... who did just that... I never did understand your reasons for 'testing' John as you did despite your U2U's... but it works both ways... in the interest of fair play...

As to the PhD thing if ANYONE is going to banter about that they have some special 'document' that makes them an expert and because of this 'document' we should take their word for it that they are right... I see no reason that I cannot call for proof of this status... otherwise why should we accept their word that they have such a 'document'?

As I said I don't need it flaunted in public... send it to a Mod and I will take their word for it that its real... and I know they will keep it confidential...

If not stop thumping the chest...

Recently I had an email from a Physicist asking for some information... this led to an interesting situation... as part of this I had a response from Dr Resnick that I think is quite pertinent to this whole mess..


In essence with regard to your role in PG...your participation within makes you a 'expert' in many areas not commonly found in the general population and this fact grants you certain 'license' to make statement, advance new and avante' guarde theories, etc. So...don't be shy or intimidated by men with (or from) 'alphabets' attached to their names. To prove the accuracy of my assertion just ask yourself: "If these guys know so much...why in the world are they asking me "? The answer is obvious (a Blind Man could 'see' the answer in a second)...you 'know' something that they don't know!


Sound advice indeed


One last thing...

Doghead has been outspoken against John and to a lesser degree myself about our 'theories', quite vehemently as a matter of fact, yet when he hijacks a thread...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
and proceeds to say almost exactly what we have been saying I just have to sit back and laugh at the duplicity...

Where is Buddhasytem, Mr Penny, JRA and even weedwacker in that thread practicing their usual 'debunking skills'? (and any others I have omitted by name
)

I am not sure what is going on around here lately...

A 'cabal' of skeptics? to be sure... several have told me they 'communicate' with each other and 'cabal' is as good a name as any
(if the shoe fits... )

A horde of disinfo agents? perhaps... no way to tell

I know I will probably get slapped up side the head for this post... so be it.

Since this thread is now in the Science forum... it certainly changes the tune...

For anyone getting this far and having noticed that the earlier images in the thread are all gone there are several reasons for this... imageshack images have been removed so the user can reuse the space... and most forget that this removes them from old threads...

My images are missing due to posting changes and having moved them all to only one server... so if you want to see any you missed just write me and I will point them to you.... as there is no way to go back through all those pages and repair the links, even if I had the edit ability...

All anomalies however are tracked on the living moon website, which was originally set up to do just that... track and catalog the images from the various ATS threads

Due to limited time on my part... I will no longer engage in these kindergarten debates over spell checking, etc and answer only questions about the actual anomaly presented... perhaps even take it to a new and clean thread...

If you have any issues within this post send me a U2U as I will not respond in the thread

Seems I will have to use that ignore button more often, despite how much 'fun' the banter may be... Is it true you can only ignore TEN???


Now then weedwacker your vote on that image if you please?
A, B, C or D?




[edit on 14-2-2008 by zorgon]

[edit on 14-2-2008 by zorgon]



posted on Feb, 14 2008 @ 07:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by undo
when you zoom in on that, stuff shows up all over the place..
What do you mean by "stuff shows up all over the place", I was only talking about the straight lines (the "walls", if we like) because:

1) that was what Zorgon asked about
2) they are the only thing that do not look natural


i'm just i don't know what to say. other than, if there's a God, and I believe there is, do you think he will understand that you "can't " see these things if you really can?
I don't believe in gods (I don't see a need for gods), so I couldn't care less about what an hypothetical god could think about me. And how do you know that I can really see those things?


I mean, even to protect state secrets? to the extent some go to?
State secrets? What state? I am Portuguese, I don't think we have state secrets related to the Moon, and even if we have I am not thinking of protecting them, nations mean almost nothing to me, so state secrets mean nothing.


and i am not sure you are a liar because frankly, you at least give the subject a chance. but you always reach the same conclusions which to me is suspect, especially since so many of the anomalies are extremely artificial looking.
You may be sure that I am not a liar and that I have never, in almost 4 years here on ATS, written anything that I consider not to be true.

If I always reach the same conclusion (which I didn't did in this case, did you noticed that I have said twice, once in the previous post and once when this image was first presented on ATS, that I think that those things look artificial?) it's probably because I don't have any information that shows that what other people see is really what is on the photos. Also, in most cases I don't reach conclusions, I consider some explanation the most probable.

Have you noticed that the way you talk about my inability to see the things that you see is getting close to that of those people that accused you of seeing things that weren't there in that thread about the strange photo with the "reptilian eating the head of a woman"?

The interpretation of what our eyes see is as personal as our thoughts, and in the same way that I never accused you of seeing things where there isn't any, I think you should not accuse me, although indirectly, of lying and/or write things contrary to what I think.

But thanks for calling me a "great guy".



new topics

top topics



 
164
<< 249  250  251    253  254  255 >>

log in

join