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: 97
164
<< 94  95  96    98  99  100 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 17 2007 @ 05:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by undo

erm, um, uh, a thing


lol. That's exactly what I said.


Another interesting photo is AS10-32-4823. This photo is discussed by Keith Laney on his website, where he talks about three dimensional structures found on the moon that resembles ancient structures on Earth, such as the pyramids.

Here's a link to his website:

keithlaney.net...

What caught my attention when he was discussing AS10-32-4823, however, is that he said, "...this one contains many other oddities we will forego."

So I went searching for the foregone oddities, which I'm sure are nothing more than nicely displaced rock croppings. Here are my findings:



Here's a link to the high-res color version. Caution. It's a 6 meg file:

northstar-autoparts.com...

Here's a link to the original b/w file:

grin.hq.nasa.gov...

Enjoy.




posted on Feb, 17 2007 @ 07:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by looofo

Originally posted by rikriley
My point is this I still think the majority of the so called craters were created by mining on the Moon by Moonbies, humanoid Moon beings, or Aliens. Rik Riley


Sometimes it would be better to be blind than to read this kind of nonsense.


Looofo it is now your job since you think this is nonsense to prove me wrong. What is your take on what you determine to be the truth on what is on the Moon?



posted on Feb, 17 2007 @ 08:14 PM
link   
Loofo if you believe this is nonsence than why are you even in this thread? I know when I find a thread to be nonsence to me I move on without trying too insult the others in the thread. I guess some like to feel better about themselves by castrating others. Pretty Sad actually.
And I as well as many of you have been around open pit mines and I swear that craters teirs or steps within it uncannily resemble a strip mine or other mining process. I dont find that phonomena in many other craters as pronounced as the high res image posted above. Im of the assumption that this mining above ground was done some time ago and the lack of structures is just that very differnt vehicles and process were used. Not impossible IMO. The proven doctoring by Nasa on many images is quite a disturbing developement as well.
Maybe Von Braun did achieve his dream of a moon colony. And I also believe when Reagan gave his famous What if we were faced with an alien threat speech he just wasnt drawing distinctions over the cold war. He was talking about an actuall space born entity or entities.
Id like to know why I cant see more high res images of the moon from Nasa. I mean they have no problem showing me the Mars rovers and their tracks from the orbit of Mars but yet good moon images and of our landing craft there arent even mentionable around them. Why is that? Can you say coverup? If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck well you know the rest. Great insight by Mr.Lear and the many in this thread. Thank You all very much.



posted on Feb, 17 2007 @ 11:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaP

If you search for them you will find them.


Yuppers Sudbury has one... thats where Norcat is testing Lunar Mining techniques and equipment....




posted on Feb, 17 2007 @ 11:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by VType...I know when I find a thread to be nonsence to me I move on without trying too insult the others in the thread. I guess some like to feel better about themselves by castrating others. Pretty Sad actually.


In this case I do not believe it was looofo's intention to insult rikriley. What looofo is expressing is his disdain for ignorance at large and bad science in particular, where popular ideas swamp common sense and the scientific method. Just in a moment of rashness it was easy to forget Rik's sincerity and enthusiasm and project the foul taste of popularism onto his post.

Truth be told, I am less of a proponent of alien life now then before I came onto this board. But I do have a new world view to work with, and for that I am grateful too. Now I believe all life has an equal chance to begin on most worlds and star systems, but as the process of natural selection works over billions of years very few become sentient. And furthermore it is most distressing to come to the realization we are as alone as the numbers show, not because there is a lack of intelligent life, but because the Universe is so vast as to put them far and away out of our reach.

I believe this is this way because we need to come to an understanding of the value of life, that it is the greatest richness that can be bestowed in all cases of existence. This viewpoint spearheads the heart of the alien conspiracy, revealing minds molded of this material universe searching for the Universal Mind that exists within life, like Chinese boxes, one inside another, and so forth.

These anomalies are ghosts, the dreams of dead minds and civilizations of long ago when Man walked this perpetually green Earth from ages past in search of the truth as we are today. Well, perhaps not all of them, there are some grey areas as with all complex issues. But when we arrived we were just as surprised as we are now to view this strange record of eternity.



posted on Feb, 18 2007 @ 12:14 AM
link   
Matyas,

the biblical and pseudepigraphical texts alude to older civilizations than homosapians, here and elsewhere in the universe (and other dimensions). so do the sumerian texts, hindu texts and egyptian texts. the idea that all sentient life began as soon as we did, is the problem with the belief that distance would have any bearing on visitation. consider the age of the universe. as dr. michi kaku points out, we are infants in a vast, multi-dimensional universe. we are not the be all and end all of what's available in the sentient races, and as a result, there's probably civs out there that are millions or even billions of years more advanced than we are. vast distances of space-time, would not be a problem.

[edit on 18-2-2007 by undo]



posted on Feb, 18 2007 @ 01:49 AM
link   
Hey guys I was propted by all these great Nasa photos too go to the ESA moon image library for comparisons and there is some differences in the european photos of areas and Nasa's. In the first link below the image is of 3 craters and Ill be damned if there isnt structures or rocks somehow sticking staight out of the center of a few craters and casting huge tower like shadows. First off how do rocks protrude so high from craters of impacts? Im sure they just didnt grow and it seems impossible to have random rocks pile up in such a way from ejecta. Lots of detailed images to be sifted through. Just thought Id mention another source for photo comparisons. Plenty of annomalies as well. Warning high res images.
esamultimedia.esa.int...

This second image link has some rockformations in the bottom that seem out of place as well.

esamultimedia.esa.int...

There also used to be a small sequence vid of the Esa's moon observer decending to the surface and you could see what looked like shadows of something moving away and fast from the craft while decending and pretty close to the surface. I cant find that vid anymore but I did link to it in one of my first posts here on the forum. And the shadows didnt seem or behave like the Esa craft or orbiter at all.

Edit: Found a link to the above mentioned vid in my old thread.
www.abovetopsecret.com...





[edit on 18-2-2007 by VType]



posted on Feb, 18 2007 @ 12:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by VType
Loofo if you believe this is nonsence than why are you even in this thread? I know when I find a thread to be nonsence to me I move on without trying too insult the others in the thread. I guess some like to feel better about themselves by castrating others. Pretty Sad actually.


It was not my intention to insult someone. Sorry if it did.
But, this guy says that most of the craters on the moon are man/alien made. Now this is a bold assertion.

This goes against every scientific knowledge we have. Not that we know everything, but craters are made by meterorites. And i do not need to prove it, it has been made by men far more intelligent then me.

I can live with the idea that we are on the moon since the 60s as J.Lear tells us. I think it is possible that there are artifacts on the moon and if you look in this thread I posted some interesting pictures. I suppose there must be aliens around with such a huge universe.
That's why I am here on ATS... and don't forget: Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof!



posted on Feb, 18 2007 @ 01:30 PM
link   
When I was a child I was told there was a Santa Claus. I had taken this as the gospel. I found out there were alot of Santa Clauses at the Malls and helpers and most with good intentions. Sure I was disappointed to find out different that there was no real Santa Claus that delivered presents to everyone's door. Does the spirit of Santa Claus exist? Well of course for hundreds of years.

Have meteors hit the Earth's Moon of course? The trajectory of each meteor would not be at an exact 90 degree angle head on impacting with the Moon. There would be a varience in angle of impact with each meteor hitting the surface. Therefor you would see scooping as meteors collided with the Moon at different angles sledding across the surface. Yes there is instances of this happening but very rare. I find this hard to swollow that these are mostly craters by meteors with direct impact. Count how many almost perfect circle impressions are on the Moon. Rik Riley



posted on Feb, 18 2007 @ 02:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by rikriley
Have meteors hit the Earth's Moon of course? The trajectory of each meteor would not be at an exact 90 degree angle head on impacting with the Moon. There would be a varience in angle of impact with each meteor hitting the surface. Therefor you would see scooping as meteors collided with the Moon at different angles sledding across the surface. Yes there is instances of this happening but very rare. I find this hard to swollow that these are mostly craters by meteors with direct impact. Count how many almost perfect circle impressions are on the Moon.

The bigger craters are round because of the energy involved.

A meteor that can create a 50Km crater releases so much energy on impact that all the impact area is melted, resulting in an almost perfect circular lake of molten rock. If the energy is enough to completely liquefy the rock then the resulting crater will have a flat surface because of the liquid rock but it will be at some depth. If the energy is not enough to completely melt the rock and the rock stays more or less solid, like almost liquid clay, then it is common that the centre of the crater will have some rocks resulting from the solidification of the higher area present at the centre of such an impact.



posted on Feb, 18 2007 @ 02:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaP...The bigger craters are round because of the energy involved.


Erm..yes, as far as theory goes. I could just as easily say that the craters are machined by electrical discharges in the remote past when the solar disk was enveloped in a nebula of dust and gasses.

Point is we have never seen craters like these actually in formation. For all we know the Moonbies could have had a nuclear war with the aliens.

Santa was first to go. Then Jesus was next. The aliens will be last.



posted on Feb, 18 2007 @ 03:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Matyas
Erm..yes, as far as theory goes. I could just as easily say that the craters are machined by electrical discharges in the remote past when the solar disk was enveloped in a nebula of dust and gasses.

Yes, that is only a theory, although it is a theory that can be partly confirmed in situations similar to those, like in volcanoes.


Point is we have never seen craters like these actually in formation. For all we know the Moonbies could have had a nuclear war with the aliens.

That is true, we have never seen a crater being created, but I, at least, have never seen a Moonbie, an alien or any clear evidence of the presence of either on the Moon, that is why I find "my" theory about the creation of the craters more probable than the theory of the mining Moonbies/aliens, for which we have to accept more unknown things that for "my" theory.

But I could be wrong, it has happened before.



posted on Feb, 19 2007 @ 12:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaP but I, at least, have never seen a Moonbie, an alien or any clear evidence of the presence of either on the Moon,


Well when we do show you pretty good evidence like 300 metre wide walking boulders you ignore them... so it would seem to me you have already made up your mind and only wish to debate image qualities, not directly the anomalies, for not once in all the pages do you address a direct question of an anomaly other than to state "you see nothing unusual"




posted on Feb, 19 2007 @ 02:33 AM
link   
Now now zorgon, no need to patronize.


The point here is that, with the example of the moving boulders that you mentioned, that proves nothing other than something moved. There's no evidence that that was moved by anything other than natural processes. I don't know why it seems so odd to so many people that objects in space move. EVERYTHING moves, so at some point or other, something's going to give, and move a little.

Just my take.

TheBorg



posted on Feb, 19 2007 @ 04:00 AM
link   
Hey guys I was studying Nasa's Whirlwind Moon. Specifically the south pole area's which are littered with annomolies by the way and seems a pretty logical area to hide or blend in seeing as its tough from an Earth vantage point to see anything. Well I found some pretty strange findings. I took screen shots in Whirlwind with the coordinates in frame so if some of you sleuths want to mull over them and any available high res pic's showing the southern pole of the moon Id be most gratefull. The first one shows two rectangular objects in a crate casting shadows and the second has a crater within a crater with weird lines or steps in it.
Sorry if the images are too big but seemed around the same size as others poted earlier. And I notice the info overlay didnt show up either. Damn.
I will work on posting exacts tomarrow but should be easily found by the pro's in this forum. Hope these help.








posted on Feb, 19 2007 @ 05:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Matyas
Point is we have never seen craters like these actually in formation.


That's not totally true.

- Impacts of meteorites on the moon have been observed durig a Leonid shower.
- "We've now seen 11 and possibly 12 lunar impacts since we started monitoring the moon one year ago," said Bill Cooke, head of NASA's Meteoroid Environment Office.
- This 81-page catalog provides details about the 20 new impact sites identified on Mars as having formed between May 1999 and March 2006

Now, multiply this by some millions years...



posted on Feb, 19 2007 @ 05:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by VType...The first one shows two rectangular objects...


These look to me like depressions, not objects. And the shadows are consistent with the direction of sunlight as reflected by the surrounding terrain. The straight and square features are a result of low resolution pixels joining together to create the straight effect.

The smaller could be a crater, but the larger is odd shaped, not consistent with an impact crater as they go. Either it is rikriley's grazed inpact crater, or the Moonbie's garage door where they come and go from under the surface. Thus I will name it the Rikriley Depression.

Havn't looked at the other yet, will comment on it as soon as I am better rested.



posted on Feb, 19 2007 @ 11:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by looofo...That's not totally true.


You're right. I forgot about the showers and Mars. And nay millions, but billions of years...

We even saw impacts on Jupiter. I wonder who the lucky stiff will be to go check those out


But couldn't there be more ways to form craters other than just meteorite impacts? Just curious



posted on Feb, 19 2007 @ 02:52 PM
link   
Looofo knowing these meteors to be very tiny that hit the surface did they cause circular depressions on the Moon? Being equivlant to 150 to 300 Lbs. of TNT detinating on impact the meteors surely had to have left some kind of circular depression on the ground. Rik Riley

[edit on 19-2-2007 by rikriley]



posted on Feb, 19 2007 @ 03:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheBorg
so at some point or other, something's going to give, and move a little.



Sorry a weak moment


Yes everything moves sooner or later, but something that big moving over hill and dale with that peculiar pattern is something worth dwelling on. Maybe its a huge lodestone that's gliding on a magnetic anomaly...



But the fact is the photo clearly shows that it has moved UPHILL at several points... I would also like to find other images of the same area of the moon and see if it is still there....

I would also like someone on the opposite team to come up with a logical explanation on how a 300 meter wide[ or more[ rock can move for what is obviously a long distance. ...

I am going to try to find the scale of that image... surely there is one crater in the complete photo that is known diameter wise to give us approximatemeasurements



new topics

top topics



 
164
<< 94  95  96    98  99  100 >>

log in

join