John Lear's Moon Pictures on ATS

Originally posted by TheBorgAnyone have a timestamp for it? That would answer this question, and at least eliminate that possibility.

I assume you missed the fact that the above image is a simple crop of the Lick Observatory 02 picture posted here, and no enhancement or other change has been done to it. Look at the big lick photo top right. So this section is the same resolution as the rest of the image.

The date of that photo is posted.... oh heck.... I didn't copy that to the site... its about page 24 here I will go back and look.

My point is that comparing it to #1 the rest of the craters NW of Endymion are obviously obsured by something... dust or clouds being my guess

This other small "plume" is one of my favorites, because the top of it flattens out... by wind? or reaching the top of the atmosphere? Not sure but its certainly an interesting one.




Locator...

Originally posted by TheBorg

Something just occurred to me. I was looking at that image again, and it almost looks like there was a geomagnetic storm going on at the time that that image was taken. Anyone have a timestamp for it? That would answer this question, and at least eliminate that possibility.

1946 January 17d 07h 51m UT.


TheBorg, I've always found that the best way out of a hole is to stop digging.

Originally posted by TheBorg...but I'm still having trouble with this whole atmosphere thing.

My point exactly.

This is all based on what I think is a very grainy image, presented to us in all of its splendor by Zorgon.

That is a generalization. Evidence of an atmosphere is not entirly based on one grainy image. You are right, it is grainy, but there are other pictures that are clearer.

Now, after having looked at that image again, doesn't it seem odd to you that the blurry portion of the picture seems to be almost out of focus blurry, rather than smog-filled blurry?

No, it does not, because it was taken through our atmosphere, the bane of astronomers.

I understand the concept of an atmosphere and all that goes with that, but I'm still at a loss for how this image shines any light on that possibility.

As I said before, if it ain't a perfect inverted parabola, it ain't a vacuum. And this, by the three moons of Pluto, don't look like no purdy Io eruption.

To me anyway, it does nothing but damage it. I can reference countless other images, in fact 99.95% of the rest of the images, that show quite a different side to this story.

Like all them venting pipes, yeppers, that be tell-tale fer shure!

"If a theory is outweighed by overwhelming evidence to the contrary, then one must assume the obvious; that the theory is faulty." - TheBorg

This quote of yourself assumes you are "complete". Finished and perfected. But how can you be sure? What if the Earth really is round, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary? There is a song, I think it is a lyric fragment from an ancient group called Kansas, where it is sung, "...if I claim to be a wise man it surely means I don't know...". It is O-K to be Human, I am not going to attack you for it, and I won't let any one else either. Right, comrades?

Something just occurred to me. I was looking at that image again, and it almost looks like there was a geomagnetic storm going on at the time that that image was taken. Anyone have a timestamp for it? That would answer this question, and at least eliminate that possibility.

Hmm. A geomagnetic storm. I wonder how that can have any bearing. Never to mind, I will hear your explanation first.

edit for sp.

[edit on 10/25/2006 by Matyas]

Well, it's been revealed to me that the image in question was taken from Earth. That would negate any possibility of a geomagnetic storm having any bearing on the image's quality. If that's true though, then how can we be sure that the distortions that we're seeing aren't a result of earth's atmosphere interfering with the camera, rather than the Moon's atmosphere?

Just to be clear. I don't believe that the Moon has an atmosphere. However, I feel that it's important to state that if such evidence did come to light that proves that in fact it does, then I'll be more than willing to retract my statements, and accept a new outlook on it. Thing is though, I see no undeniable proof of anything of that nature, and until that evidence is put forth, I have to stand firmly on what we currently have; that there is no atmosphere on the Moon.

TheBorg

Originally posted by TheBorg...I don't believe that the Moon has an atmosphere. However, I feel that it's important to state that if such evidence did come to light that proves that in fact it does, then I'll be more than willing to retract my statements, and accept a new outlook on it.

Well then, let's try to change a small part of what you know. From a mainstream source trusted by millions of people just like you, Britannica says that it does. Supposedly it just isn't the kind of atmosphere that we are used to.

Can you accept this and abandon the hard line approach of absolutely no atmosphere?

While researching what would be mined up there and preparing a page which I will post tomorrow... I came across THIS disturbling little tidbit...

However, a loophole in Space Law allows individuals and companies to hold Mineral Rights on the Moon, Mars and other celestial bodies. Growing concern from Scientists that these rights may be held hostage have been alleviated by a three man North American team; Dr. Joseph Resnick, Dr. Timothy R. O'Neill and Guy Cramer (ROC-Resnick/O'Neill/Cramer team) who have acquired the mineral rights for 95% of the side of the moon that faces Earth, the polar regions and 50% of the far side of the moon.

95%

and 50% of the back side???

Three guys???

Anybody else getting a cold shiver?

As to the atmosphere, there are many sources now that confirm at least a thin low level atmosphere. I am working on a list... didn't have the Britanica one though

I love this line from Britanica....

In addition to the near-surface gases and the extensive sodium-potassium cloud detected around the Moon, a small amount of dust circulates within a few metres of the lunar surface.

How about water ice? Wonder if there is any of that?

Wait for it... I got it... LOL

But lets get reactions on the mineral rights first... too many shocks in one day may cause info overload

[edit on 26-10-2006 by zorgon]

Originally posted by zorgon

However, a loophole in Space Law allows individuals and companies to hold Mineral Rights on the Moon, Mars and other celestial bodies. Growing concern from Scientists that these rights may be held hostage have been alleviated by a three man North American team; Dr. Joseph Resnick, Dr. Timothy R. O'Neill and Guy Cramer (ROC-Resnick/O'Neill/Cramer team) who have acquired the mineral rights for 95% of the side of the moon that faces Earth, the polar regions and 50% of the far side of the moon.

95%

and 50% of the back side???

Three guys???

Anybody else getting a cold shiver?

[edit on 26-10-2006 by zorgon]

Good find Zorgon !!

They must be the ones who are up there mining.
Who are these guys and what else to they own and control ? Hmmm...

Abundant Helium-3 on Moon Could Be Used in Fusion Reactors on Earth

more
HAARP array may use Moon


An nteresting bio on Resnick, talks of his affiliation with NASA and Defense
Link

resnick seems to administrate a UFO data centre !

INTERPLANETARY SOCIETY OF UFO ABDUCTEES AND EXPERIENCERS

Sponsor Name: ISOUFOAE
Administrator(s): Joseph A. Resnick, Ph.D.

[edit on 26-10-2006 by violet]

Originally posted by zorgon
While researching what would be mined up there and preparing a page which I will post tomorrow... I came across THIS disturbling little tidbit...

Dr. Joseph Resnick, Dr. Timothy R. O'Neill and Guy Cramer (ROC-Resnick/O'Neill/Cramer team) who have acquired the mineral rights for 95% of the side of the moon that faces Earth, the polar regions and 50% of the far side of the moon.

95%

and 50% of the back side???

Three guys???

Anybody else getting a cold shiver?

I am...

Nice find Very interesting indeed.

link to the full article (I think) ...

www.direct.ca...

Originally posted by Zarniwoop
link to the full article (I think) ...

Dag nab it! Weren't ready fer that one yet

Still on atmosphere remember?

Here is proof positive....

Lunar Atmosphere

Diurnal temperature range: >100 K to

Okay I am going to be busy for a couple of days... so I think I will leave you with a few little pieces of data now that the He3 cat is out of the bag....

Clementine (funded by the Department of Defense)



Now if anyone wanted to build a base on the Moon, or any other permanent facility, the first thing you would want to do is find a ready source of raw materials. Iron would be something you would need a lot of for structural needs. In the above image you will see the concentration of elemental iron on the surface of the Moon, red being almost 14% in composition. Most of the iron is actually in the form of FeO (reduced iron). The Clementine results when plotted as FeO are below:



I assume we all know what FeO is?

Notice where Copernicus is located in relation to these rich deposits! It is also important to note that FeO is iron oxide, more commonly known as RUST... yes you guessed it you need the presence of OXYGEN to turn iron to iron oxide or rust. The presence of water speeds up the reaction, but without oxygen... no iron oxide! So what is causing the iron on the Moon to rust? And in such quantity?

Uh huh you KNOW its coming....

Clementine made a controversial discovery, which, if proved correct, has major implications for humans returning to the Moon. Its S-band radio unit detected abnormal reflections from the rim of a huge crater (basin) around the lunar South Pole, in areas permanently sheltered from the Sun's rays...

These reflections could be due either to water ice or to some abnormal surface roughness condition. If indeed ice is present in significant quantity, then this precious material (which supplies water needed for life and also oxygen, when broken down by electrolysis) might allow us to establish a manned base on the Moon.

Source - NASA

But that is just the "tip of the iceberg"....

The Primary Mission
Beginning on January 15, 1998, Lunar Prospector spent one year mapping the entire surface of the Moon from a distance of about 100 kilometers (60 miles). The data collected during this phase of the mission greatly improved on the quality of data collected previously. Among the early returns from the instruments were those from the Neutron Spectrometer indicating significant amounts of water ice at the lunar poles.

Source

So just how much water did they find? Well, I am glad you asked that...

The initial estimate of the amount, to be determined more accurately with later observations, is 30 to 300 million metric tons (recent thinking has raised the upper limit to perhaps as high as 3 billion tons). If melted, this larger number would fill a "lake" 10 square kilometers in area (3.1 x 3.1 km) to a depth of 10 meters. Surprisingly, the North Pole region contains about 50% more ice than its southern counterpart. The source of the water ice is probably residues from cometary bodies that impacted the polar regions, forming craters but allowing much of the comet mass to survive embedded in the target. The implications are encouraging for future exploration of the Moon, to the extent that we can establish and occupy a manned base facility over extended time because of the availability of vital water

Source - NASA

Now even if we don't apply NASA's normal percentage of truth vs lies...thats still a LOT of H2O... no wonder the Moon is rusty!

Ummm there is more

Information on the distribution of radioactivity on the lunar surface was one goal of Lunar Prospector. This map shows that the element thorium is highest on the front side of the Moon, mainly in the highlands south of Mare Imbrium. The correspondence with the Imbrium Basin suggests that the basaltic lavas that filled it were enriched in Th. Note that corresponding highland surfaces on the farside are lower.

Source - NASA

Hey guess what? Its all near Copernicus too! What a coincidence...

What IS Thorium?... nothing important really...

Thorium, as well as uranium and plutonium, can be used as fuel in a nuclear reactor. Although not fissile itself, 232Th will absorb slow neutrons to produce uranium-233 (233U), which is fissile. Hence, like 238U, it is fertile. In one significant respect 233U is better than the other two fissile isotopes used for nuclear fuel, 235U and plutonium-239 (239Pu), because of its higher neutron yield per neutron absorbed

Source - Wikipedia

Anyone remember the Orange Soil from Apollo 11 and 17?

The orange soil was brought back from the Taurus-Littrow landing site by the Apollo 17 crewmen. Scientist-Astronaut Harrison J. Schmitt discovered the orange soil at Shorty Crater. The orange particles, which are intermixed with black and black-speckled grains, are about the same size as the particles that compose silt on Earth. Chemical analysis of the orange soil material has show the sample to be similar to some of the samples brought back from the Apollo 11 (Sea of Tranquility) site several hundred miles to the southwest. Like those samples, it is rich in titanium (8%) and iron oxide (22%). But unlike the Apollo 11 samples, the orange soil is unexplainably rich in zinc. The orange soil is probably of volcanic origin and not the product of meteorite impact.

Source


And where is most of this Titanium? You guessed it...

If all of this is true, I may have to rethink my stance on this. I don't like being wrong, but am willing to accept it when the evidence presents itself.

When you were describing an atmosphere on the Moon, I thought you were talking about a breathable one, as in one that we humans could breathe. That I know is impossible, since there's just not enough O2 on the Moon to breathe properly.

TheBorg

Okay now for the grande finally LOL

BTW all this and more is summerized on my page Moon Mining

Some He3 is available on Earth. It is a by-product of the maintenance of nuclear weapons, which would supply us with about 300 kg of He3 and could continue to produce about 15 kg per year. The total supply in the U.S. strategic reserves of helium is about 29 kg, and another 187 kg is mixed up with the natural gas we have stored; these sources are not renewable at any significant rate....

In their 1988 paper, Kulcinski, et al. (see ref note below), estimate a total of 1,100,000 metric tonnes of He3 have been deposited by the solar wind in the lunar regolith. Since the regolith has been stirred up by collisions with meteorites, we'll probably find He3 down to depths of several meters.

The highest concentrations are in the lunar maria; about half the He3 is deposited in the 20% of the lunar surface covered by the maria...

Source Artemis Society International

Now if you were paying attention...all this He3 is in the SAME REGIONS... and all this stuff is ON THE SURFACE

That amount of He3 would produce approximately 20,000 terra-watt years of thermal energy, about 10 times the amount if we burned all the fossil fuels on Earth. without the polution. Another way to state it, 25 tons would power the United States for 1 year, which is about the maximum size of the payload of a Space Shuttle...

What's it worth?

The Payoff

A guess is the best we can do. Let's suppose that by the time we're slinging tanks of He3 off the moon, the world-wide demand is 100 tonnes of the stuff a year, and people are happy to pay $3 billion per tonne. That gives us gross revenues of $300 billion a year.

To put that number in perspective: Ignoring the cost of money and taxes and whatnot, that rate of income would launch a moon shot like our reference mission every day for the next 10,000 years. (At which point, we will have used up all the helium-3 on the moon and had better start thinking about something else.)

Source Artemis Society International

Any Questions?


John....Looks like we are to late to stake a claim... Now how in hell did they lay claim to all that before anyone evn know that was an option??

Russia has plans to mine the Moon by 2020 also

Russian article

and

Space: Moon Mining

Russia's Space Corp. has developed an elaborate plan to mine helium 3 on the moon. Robots would dig up the 3-meter-deep layer of lunar dust, which contains helium 3, and heat the dirt to 300 degrees Celsius to release the gas. Since a ton of lunar soil contains just 36 grams of helium, 20 square kilometers would yield just 10 tons of helium 3. To provide energy for such an operation, Russia would build nuclear reactors the size of a tabletop. Total cost: between $40 billion and $200 billion.

Originally posted by zorgonJohn....Looks like we are to late to stake a claim... Now how in hell did they lay claim to all that before anyone evn know that was an option??

I can't speak for what John knows, but wouldn't it be prudent to tone it down a bit? There is the possibility of resale, etc. Royalties could be picked up from selling technology to companies to mine the stuff. And there is the work ahead of educating investors with powerful prospectuses.

Recall how the French owned the entire midwest, and they had no idea how much petroleum reserves it contained. I bet to this day they kick themselves for the Lousiana Purchase. Same could be happening here.

Let's find some pull in Congress, sell the idea of America being number one again, get a few energy contractors in our pocket to start diversifying by developing new technologies, and ride the wave.

And for Moon's sakes, start securing mineral rights for the other planets and their moons.

Originally posted by TheBorg When you were describing an atmosphere on the Moon, I thought you were talking about a breathable one, as in one that we humans could breathe.

Well, I was, but truth be told that is wishful thinking on my part. John seems to think so, and I suspect it may be humanly possible to catch a few gasps in the deeper recesses in the event of an emergency. We don't need too much oxygen, I think what we breathe is around 14%. Sources have it that OH is prevalent, but I don't know how that would effect the blood's transport system.

What I need to do is find a meterologist. I am sure they have equations that take into account composition, height, millibars, gravity pull, and what you may find.

Originally posted by Matyas

Well, I was, but truth be told that is wishful thinking on my part. John seems to think so, and I suspect it may be humanly possible to catch a few gasps in the deeper recesses in the event of an emergency.

You guys are doing very well....but you are not quite there yet.

So here it is again.

The moon has a breathable atmosphere. Not as thick as earths. But enough atmosphere so that with proper decompression you can stand out on the the moons surface, without a space suit or helmut, look up into the clear blue sky and take a relatively deep breath of fresh moon air.

Oh, and don't try to jump up ten feet. The gravity on the moon is over 65% that of earths. Thats what holds the atmosphere to the moon.

Originally posted by johnlear
with proper decompression you can stand out on the the moons surface, without a space suit or helmut, look up into the clear blue sky and take a relatively deep breath of fresh moon air.

But where are the trees and plants that generates the oxygen?
And how do you know these things? Sorry, I haven't read EVERYTHING...

And a clear blue sky would also mean that there is much H2O there?

[edit on 2006/10/26 by TrappedSoul]