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.

 

Photo of an ET on the moon???

page: 4
0
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 6 2007 @ 10:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by g60kg Hi John Please can you guide me as to where I can find more information on lies about Venus' atmosphere etc.. and the moon cities or maybe you could share with us how you obtained this information thanks kg


The Venus lie, in my opinion should have been more subtle. But some dumb (probably General) heaped too much on the plate. Its as if he thought to make the lie believable he not only had to have a surface temperature of 800 degrees, but also volcanoes and lava, but also a surface pressure of 90 bars but then rap the planet in sulphuric fumes.

Now think about it for a second. Does that even sound logical?

The moon lie was pretty good. The key to that lie was that the moon had to be placed in rotational lock around the earth so that we could never see the cities on the far side.

I've always wondered why they allowed the Apollo program to proceed. They could have easily sabotaged it beyond repair and avoided having to hide or explain all the missing film and deal with the 27 astronauts who all clearly saw what was up there. The cover up of what was on the moon was almost more of an effort than the actual technology to get there.

But up to now the lie has worked well as you can see by the statements of those who consider themselves well informed.

But the moon lie is slowly starting to unravel and the next few years are surely going to be interesting.




posted on Feb, 6 2007 @ 10:27 AM
link   
Is there a link to the moon cities images?



posted on Feb, 6 2007 @ 10:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by AlphaAnuOmega
Is there a link to the moon cities images?



They can be found at www.thelivingmoon.com



posted on Feb, 6 2007 @ 12:48 PM
link   
Some of those images on there are amazing i cnt believe they still continue the lie with evidence out there to suggest otherwise some of em u must need a trained eye though cos sioem i cnt see anythin unusual. i thought they were actually goin to admit they had a moon base at one point cos they were talking about builing a base on the moon so they could use it as a stop off point to land the first man on mars or summin along those lines i thnk i heard this a few years ago now cos it quite fuzzy in my mind but dats all i remeber anyone else hear of this ??.



posted on Feb, 7 2007 @ 06:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear

The Venus lie, in my opinion should have been more subtle. But some dumb (probably General) heaped too much on the plate. Its as if he thought to make the lie believable he not only had to have a surface temperature of 800 degrees, but also volcanoes and lava, but also a surface pressure of 90 bars but then rap the planet in sulphuric fumes.

Now think about it for a second. Does that even sound logical?


Does anyone else have any knowledge to backup or debunk John's claims on Venus because I dont know the first thing about temperatures and pressure etc...

anyone?



posted on Feb, 7 2007 @ 09:38 AM
link   
so this is apparently an official NASA photo that has been photoshoped....by NASA?..that is what is being said....(i have yet to read the original thread on this ..so)

atmosphere on the moon...scoll down a bit
i guess it is just smudging on the lens or something....or an internal expulsion of gasssess, or clouds..or dust storm..
why would people own the rights to mining the moon..and they have owned them for 20 some years?!?
some of the players

both links are just quick reads....



and my shameless plug

the more one looks at it all..the more questions that arise...

is it possible that there are 2 space programs?? one for the public and one that is ..."private"...



posted on Feb, 7 2007 @ 09:42 AM
link   
What has been photoshoped???

To me it just looks like an American astronaut standing in a shadow (causeing grey looking suit)
Has his helmet visor flipped up (you can see the visor down on the other astronaut)
And his chest camera looks flat due to angle he's standing with angle of camera that took picture.
Nothing alien, nothing photoshoped!!!

[edit on 7-2-2007 by chris01621]



posted on Feb, 7 2007 @ 10:32 AM
link   
went back and looked at the first thread ...i'm gunna have to disagree with Lazarusthelong..(he pointed out that the visor is merely down in the photo in question, based on other photo of the helmuts......i think you used the same 'debunking arguement' that you said they used.......)
they do look similar but i think that the photo in question is a bit different from the 'real' astronaut helmets.
some links to helmut photos
history.nasa.gov...

history.nasa.gov...

history.nasa.gov...

history.nasa.gov...

these are from a training mission before the moon walk....hmmmm

www.lunararcheology.org...

the sides of the face window and the 'flipped up' section appear to be of a slightly different configureation from the NASA helmets....if i dare say , an attempt to mimic the NASA helmets but not quite and the top of the 'pack' behind the helmet does not have the clean lines that the NASA packs have...the size...only if there is a big depression right next to the rock...the lines of the top of the camera look raised as in comparision to the more flat top of the NASA cameras

i know, i know..it's all lights, shadows, mirrors, perspective...why would the govt lie to us, the govt couldn't keep something this big a secret..yahddy yahddy yahddy.

if it came to pass that you found out that a friend of yours had been lying about alot of things in thier life, how could you believe other things that they have said,.... now, what would you believe is the truth..and more importantly how could you trust what they say anymore.....

hay, just my buck fifty



posted on Feb, 7 2007 @ 07:45 PM
link   
WOW
no response in over 100 looks since i posted.. i either scared every body off or they are changing thier pants because they wet themselves laughing at what i posted


sorry..another shamless bump....



posted on Feb, 7 2007 @ 08:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by clearmind
WOW
no response in over 100 looks since i posted.. i either scared every body off or they are changing thier pants because they wet themselves laughing at what i posted


sorry..another shamless bump....



You know what clearmind? I don't know what to say!

But here goes anyway:

Whatever that thing is, it is not a U.S. Apollo astronaut.

Is it an alien or other type astronaut? I don't know.



posted on Feb, 7 2007 @ 08:23 PM
link   
thought i was on some sort of weird global ignor feature
thanks john...

my first impression when i saw that photo was, that it didn't look like the 'standard helmet' or NASA equipment...then when i looked at some more pics of the NASA helmets..i thought, well..that sure didn't clear ANYTHING UP..just made for more ??'s...




[edit on 7-2-2007 by clearmind]



posted on Feb, 7 2007 @ 10:25 PM
link   
I just do not think that it is something "extraterrerstial" It looks kind of fake, but it doesn't entirely look as thought the helmut has been "flipped". The cameras look kinda different also.



posted on Feb, 8 2007 @ 06:17 AM
link   
Hi all isnt it obvious that the backpack on the 'mystery' moon man is just equipment sitting on the lunar surface in the background behind the astronaut. you can clearly see the actual backpack overlapping the equipment in the distance, surely someone must agree





posted on Feb, 8 2007 @ 10:30 AM
link   
according to the site
the moon buggy is not in the background. the item that seems to be part of the 'backpack' does seem to be in the background and appears to be casting a small shadow on the moon surface.....if it is not the buggy or the 'backpack'...then what is it ? there is no other equipment on the surface, at least the pictures taken at the time show no other equipment....
like i said..the more one looks, the more questions arise.....



posted on Feb, 9 2007 @ 03:31 AM
link   
well Im no expert on astronauts and their equipment but my gut instinct says its just something simple thats being blown out of proportion

anyone got any links to pictures of the bases on the moon the links provided earlier in this post do not work??


Dae

posted on Feb, 9 2007 @ 04:05 AM
link   
I cant for the life of me find the thread where we all had a good bash at this picture. Cant even find it in my subscriptions! Anyway, I did find the image I scrawled over on my computer.

The lines in pink is the visor flipped up and suit (backpack) the bright lumpy stuff behind him is a 'patch of rocks' very illuminated and casting a shadow.

Oh yes, and the astronaut is actually leaning forward a bit (examining something perhaps) that is why the backpack looks big, its just the angle.




posted on Feb, 9 2007 @ 05:55 AM
link   
To me, the most compelling evidence of a moon cover-up is not the bits of evidence that continue to circulate. Rather it is the behavior and crazy explanations that come from NASA. Astronauts that seclude themselves. High quality video footage that could arguably be called the most valuable film in the history of mankind gets lost (for crying out loud, c'mon!). Vapor clouds on the moon that are caused, as NASA says, by two of our water tanks that were left there over 100 miles apart and blew up similtaniously. And you gotta love the smudge spots where they airbrush things. I am only a casual observer, I would love to see some of you with more experience with this list off a few things.
John, what are some of your favorite luny fabrications?



posted on Feb, 9 2007 @ 06:18 AM
link   
Great thoughts, I especially like Byrd's photochop theory. I'm still back at wondering if there was a human landing on the moon. It may not give me all the answers, but even seeing some of the moon surface Apollo antiques close up from Hubble or the next gen scopes France or China may put in orbit, will make me a believer the landings happened or didn't.

Dallas



posted on Feb, 12 2007 @ 10:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mr No One


Isn't that sharp contrast from light to dark because the moon does not rotate? What does that have to do with whether or not there is an atmosphere?


No, the sharp contrast is there because an atmosphere diffuses light and thus blurs the edge between light and dark.

Incidentally, the moon does rotate but it's rotation period almost exactly matches it's period around the Earth - so it appears to us as if it doesn't rotate as the Moon always presents the same face to Earth. If you study the Moon you can sometimes see a little more of the eastern and western limbs (but not at the same time). This is where the rotation doesn't quite match the orbital period.



posted on Feb, 12 2007 @ 10:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear[/]



The moon lie was pretty good. The key to that lie was that the moon had to be placed in rotational lock around the earth so that we could never see the cities on the far side.


That was a clever trick! To go back in time millions of years and lock the Moon in a rotational period of 28 days, 'cos the heavy cratering of the far side demonstrates that it has been facing out towards space a very, very long time indeed. It would be a silly place to build cities as the far side of the Moon is under continual bombardment from meteorites.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join