This is directed to Mr. Lear:

The Apollo missions were so highly publicized and covered in the media of the day, so what would be the benefit of secretly going back to the moon. Even if there is proof of past or otherworldly civilizations there doesn't mean that the public has to be told about it. Some say that the Apollo program had nothing more to offer and the public just was not interested in it anymore. Why not continually keep an open program of moon launches going, nobody really cares about the Shuttle anymore(sorry to say unless some sort of tragic event happens) but they still go ahead with missions.


Now if China goes ahead with their moon program how are we going to explain our secret presence on the moon and whatever may be up there. I'm sure they would love to expose the U.S. in some way, as they really don't give a damn about disclosure.

I did listen to the radio program the other night and I am not saying that I don't believe you and I am not saying I do, I am just curious as to what are our intentions for these secret missions...military? civilian? archaelogical?

if the moon is artificial - so what
if the moon has atmosphere - what difference does it make
if there is mining on the moon - what does it have to do with me
if there is ancient sites on the moon - why cover it up

My point being, that none of this stuff bears any threat to the common person and most would continue on with their daily lives if this would be made public...but the pure historical and research benefit would be amazing to mankind, kind of like when they first opened Tut's tomb. Why hide it, let it out for the academic community and the world.

Originally posted by van001
Now if China goes ahead with their moon program how are we going to explain our secret presence on the moon and whatever may be up there. I'm sure they would love to expose the U.S. in some way, as they really don't give a damn about disclosure.

Precisely why we are rushing to get back up there....

Excellent interview Mr. Lear. I do have one question for you that is kind of an aside to this topic (albeit related).

If there is indeed all of this technology in use by the U.S. government here and on the moon, how do you explain the disasters that NASA has faced with the public "amateur" version of the space program (apollo disasters, shuttle failures). Do you believe those were all truly mechanical failures/human errors, or was anything "planned" to make it seem like the tech that is shown to the public IS the cutting edge ... and likewise still prone to problems?

This is the main issue I can't get over with this topic ... we have mines on the moon and anti-grav tech, but engineers can't figure out how to make a proper O-ring for the shuttle? Thanks.

Originally posted by Landis

Originally posted by johnlear...If you persoanlly know of any talking polar bears you need to contact George Noory as I think that would be a real interesting show...

There are no polar bears in Antarctica. The only thing that can live there are penguins and a few other bird species.

you need to read back this page of the thread and realise that what you just said should be directed at pompano not john.

Originally posted by johnlear

Originally posted by Dallas
Still waiting for Mr Lear to respond to questions of his knowledge re William English.

Sorry for the delay I must have missed this one. What is the question?

_________________________

Sorry for not seeming specific John. Please, if you could confirm or deny the written Bill English report discussed in The Government Files, Brookesmith, page 84-85-86. Which states, subject to your correction, "


English (William S.) was a member of the special forces and was sent , in 1970, to locate a B-52 'StratoFortress' bomber that had crashed in dense jungle in Laos, and if possible to rescue the crew. The B-52 had come down after a hostile encounter with a UFO, described as a large white light.

English and his A-Team located the B-52 by helicopter. It was lying amoung the trees 'Like a big giant hand had grabbed it and set it down' -- there was no damage at all to either the aircraft or its bomb load, or the vegetation around it. All the crew were on board in their seats...

Special report Grudge/Bluebook # 13 was given to researcher John Lear in 1988. The document contained notes by Dr J. Allen Hynek and others in Cyrillic handwriting.
Also included were photos English had taken of the dead crew of the downed Boeing B-52 in Laos, and the fact that the Bomber had crashed after being attacked by a UFO.

That's my question John. What is your knowledge re Mr English's experiences? Did you meet him or Mr Stevens and do you concur with Mr Stevens or English, that English found the planted B-52 in the jungle in Vietnam as desribed above in detail?

Dallas

Hello Mr. Lear,

Someone sent me an MP3 of your interview, and I must say you did an excellent job.

I'm an AST with NASA and I have overheard a few conversations that would lead me to believe some of your theories are indeed correct.

I believe I may know one or two of the people who were either directly involved in altering specific photos, or managed the people who did it. I would like to direct their attention to the material you have on this site, and forward any questions you might have.

Do you have anything you'd like to ask this person or persons?


Oh, and great site to whomever is involved. From what I've been told, a lot of people here are regular visitors, but this is my first time. Now I'm sorry I haven't been to "ATS" more often.

Originally posted by _typical_story_
Hello Mr. Lear,

Do you have anything you'd like to ask this person or persons?

Thanks for the input typical_story.

Yes, I would like to know the color of the daytime sky on the moon and whether or not the color of the daytime sky is the same on the near side as it is on the far side. I have the answer from one source but I need a confirming answer from another source. Thanks.

What difference would it make on what side of the moon the daytime sky was viewed from? Earth's daytime sky is pretty much the same regardless of which hemisphere the observer is standing. Why would it be any different on the moon?

Originally posted by johnlear

Originally posted by _typical_story_
Hello Mr. Lear,

Do you have anything you'd like to ask this person or persons?

Thanks for the input typical_story.

Yes, I would like to know the color of the daytime sky on the moon and whether or not the color of the daytime sky is the same on the near side as it is on the far side. I have the answer from one source but I need a confirming answer from another source. Thanks.

I'll see what I can do, assuming these are the people that worked with the color shots (from what I can tell, it seems like any photo in need of additional review when through these people before relase).

I can't promise anything until Monday.

Originally posted by MrPenny
What difference would it make on what side of the moon the daytime sky was viewed from? Earth's daytime sky is pretty much the same regardless of which hemisphere the observer is standing. Why would it be any different on the moon?

Because I think that the gravitational pull of the moon could be different on the far side and near side and that could make a difference in the density of the atmosphere. Maybe not, I just didn't want to leave any moon rock unturned. The moon is a very weird place.

In no way is the moon weirder than right here on this rock.

Standard physics teaches that gravitational effects would be different on the side of a planetary mass opposite another planetary mass. Hence, the moon's influence on our ocean tides.

And I'm pretty sure an atmosphere's apparent 'color' is due to the filtration of specific wavelengths of light due to the composition of said atmosphere; not its density.

Of course, the likely response is; our physicists and scientists have been lying to us, hiding the truth, etc.....

Originally posted by nyarlathotep
It's been a long time since posting. Anyway, I have uploaded the C2C interview with John on Sendspace in MP3 format. U2U me if you are interested in the download links.

Hi, Do you think that i could get these links?
i have not reached 20 posts so i cannot U2U.

Thank you

Hey John, it was a pleasure listening to you on C2C!

Is air vented from the inside out into the atmosphere? what keeps the atmosphere intact? is it artificial? I don't know if I missed it or what.

I was considdering to call C2C but I didn't have anything to say, I usually get through when I try and I have been on twice already and had 1 or 2 mentions in my fast blasts.

But I'd like to hear more about the atmosphere on the Moon, I knew it had a very thin atmosphere of some sort but I didn't realise it was to this degree! breathable air, that is facinating!

Originally posted by biotic

Originally posted by nyarlathotep
It's been a long time since posting. Anyway, I have uploaded the C2C interview with John on Sendspace in MP3 format. U2U me if you are interested in the download links.

Hi, Do you think that i could get these links?
i have not reached 20 posts so i cannot U2U.

Thank you

I am not sure if I am allowed to post the links or not. There was some discussion earlier in the thread about the legality of ATS having them on their forums. If you don't mind posting your e-mail address, I will email the links to you.

Originally posted by _typical_story_
Do you have anything you'd like to ask this person or persons?

One comes to mind...

just how did they get the big excavator up there? Even a hint would do...

And if you or your friends have anything they can say... even if its just I work "somewhere" at NASA and have heard rumors.... That would be okay

just email them to us

even little comments like the one you made here tell another part of the story Thanks!

Mind you, I'm only trying to piece together snippets of conversations, typically over beers, and am not the definitive source for a lot of this.

Originally posted by zorgon
just how did they get the big excavator up there? Even a hint would do...

From what I can recall, any "big equipment" that you may or may not be seeing was discovered. I think this means that some previous owner left it behind either because they needed to abandon their operation, or they finished. We later learned how to operate the equipment -- or so the story goes.

Originally posted by MrPenny
In no way is the moon weirder than right here on this rock.

Thanks MrPenny for your very informed comments. I was just wondering if you had an opinion or any scientific evidence as to what the gravity might be on the moon?

Originally posted by _typical_story_
From what I can recall, any "big equipment" that you may or may not be seeing was discovered. I think this means that some previous owner left it behind either because they needed to abandon their operation, or they finished. We later learned how to operate the equipment -- or so the story goes.

Except John's story of the one built on Earth destined for the moon... but the photo editors might not have an answer to that

And beer room chats are acceptable

See if you are chatting with a bunch of drunken football fans the data may be meaningless... but rocket scientists chatting over a beer... now THATS a different matter


statements like your "I'm an AST with NASA and I have overheard a few conversations that would lead me to believe some of your theories are indeed correct." are very helpful indeed

[edit on 19-1-2007 by zorgon]

Originally posted by johnlear

Originally posted by MrPenny
In no way is the moon weirder than right here on this rock.

Thanks MrPenny for your very informed comments. I was just wondering if you had an opinion or any scientific evidence as to what the gravity might be on the moon?

Jeez, lighten up John. Your sarcasm is very thinly veiled; mine was not. The comment you quoted was a light-hearted attempt to point out that 'things' get weird here too.

I'm not trying to establish how much gravity is on the moon. I have as much of an idea as you do I suppose...probably less. I only pointed out that (repeating myself now...pay attention) general consensus is that there are measureable differences in gravity dependent on the position of neighboring celestial bodies.

Finally; atmospheric color is an optical effect. I doubt gravity (or 'daytime in different hemispheres' for that matter) has any bearing on the sky's color. I've been in different hemispheres of this place (Earth), and I have seen no discernible difference in the atmosphere's appearance.

Just my opinion for discussion.

[edit on 20-1-2007 by MrPenny]