Moon Anomalies- comments?

I tried, I really tried, to go through toe moon anomaly thread. But after 30 pages and realizing that's only halfway, I had to give up.

All I'm seeing is grainy photos with parts colored in and writing that says "Mining Colony" or "Landing strip" or "Giant Lobster Tail". I read something about NASA overlaying a transparent photo of a monkey...

This is probably against the general forum rules, but since it's got it's own link in the headlines, might as well go for it. I can't be the only one wondering-

Is the general opinion of ATS that something amazing and special and historical going on in that thread? Or is it a headline simply because a handful of posters ballooned it up to 70+ pages?

I am what i call a 'conservative believer', meaning that i do believe UFO's are real phenomenon.

I do not, however, believe reptilians, NWO, moon bases etc etc... all the more out there topics are in any way believable. IMHO, they give UFOlogy a bad name. The 'tin hat' stereotype came from believers in the hardcore conspiracy theories.

I've followed the moon photo thread and all i see is rock formations... nothing man made. There is no proof in that thread, nor will there ever be. Simply because there was no bases, human or otherwise, on the moon.

And you couldnt have posted this in that exact thread? I fail to understand why starting another one will make it better.

Your other headline comment is, I guess, a good one. But there is also a thread for questions like this on the main page here:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Separate thread because that one is too long and active, so trying to carry on a separate conversation in between photo posts would be a headache. Also separate because I just can't be the only person who doesn't "get it", and this can be a place to congregate.

As for why it's a banner, I haven't been on this website in months except the odd check-in, I have no idea how that works.

I have to agree with you about the moon photos. All I saw was rocks and craters. People are funny though and they see what they want to see. Ever see that part in 'Arachnophobia' were the guy thinks he sees a spider on the wall? Turns out it was a shadow of a coat-hook. Because I know about fractals I can see the similarity to a real tree (branching off etc). My sister can't cause she isn't all that computer literate.

Someone who wants to see bases on the moon will see them. Human nature.

Sorry to go on a bit of a rant, but I think too much stock is placed in John Lear also. Sure he's experienced in flying and stuff, but who gives him the right to throw out weird theories and have people take them as gospel? what happened to providing 'proof'?

Again, sorry for the rant.

I could even have bought a couple of photos. But it's like the moon has more urban renewal going on than Detroit. Add in the claims that basically all planetary science as we know it is wrong because "An Anonymous Source" says so...

It's not exactly a "popular" thread, it seems more that there's a couple regular posters. It's basically someone's personal website, without a whole lot of back-and-forth dialogue or fact checking.

These comments are directly connected to and involved with an ongoing thread. Please direct any further comments onto the main thread.

closing