Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Infrared Moon Images

page: 3
24
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 02:16 PM
link   
How many people said it was a nuclear reactor?
Raise hands?

Now, how many people know about the logistics of building such a thing.
Raise hands?

Thank you.

Please crawl into your respective holes and d- ... Don't ever speak again.

FYI: The best way to culminate energy whilst on the moon is solar-panels.
Not nuclear reactors.
Despite the moon's abundance of nuclear fuel.
It's all-ready been discussed.




posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 02:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Project_Silo
Quasar,

In your picture you say should'nt the crater on ethe right be just as filled in?Why would that be so......Is there evidence these two collisions happend at the same time?

The mound buildt up around the two crater is the "earth" pushed up from the impact.And that tunnel .........


I know it's off the wall to call that a tunnel. But Aristarchus should be filled in with a smooth layer of dust like its surroundings. The lightness of it in the infrared shows its warm. So now I'm thinking that theres warmth in the crater, from what could be lava. And what caused the smoothness of the dust everywhere? A thin atmosphere with a slight wind?



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 02:39 PM
link   
I'll admit if it can be proved better that that is the same hot spot as on the infared that that seems odd to me.I don't know why it would be hotter,this calls for a google search to see if craters get hotter than flat land for some reason.

Is'nt the whole moon smooth?I don't know why you think it is weird.I even believe we have a base or at least something on the moon.I mean it would almost be dumb not to "hang out" up there for a bit and do some tests and observations..

But i just have not seen that one picture that did not look like a rock or something else natural in my eyes.



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 02:59 PM
link   
Originally posted by Project_Silo



Again not trying to be mean but this is honestly what i see and here.



Thanks for the post Project_Silo and I respectfully promise you that my comments are not based on your grammer or ability to spell. I would like to respectfully propose that one (but not the only) reason you can't see anything in these photos is because you are not ready to accept reality. Either not ready or not able (for whatever reason).

Builidings on the moon reprresent a direct threat to ones sense of reality and if one is having trouble with reality even without aliens on the moon, or is perfectly content with ones perception of reality one is certainly not going to accept anything that represents a threat to his or hers perception of 'reality'. Just a guess. And thanks again for your input.



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 03:07 PM
link   
John,

Are there any quality photos of Aristarchus before they started the Space program in the 60's? Is this when they built this facility? If so, surely there have to be some sort of pre-program photos?



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 03:12 PM
link   
Great thread guys!

However....

of most conspiracies, there are some 'leaked' pictures of some sort. Not saying that they are all 100% but if we look at the bigger picture of the moon bases, soul tower, population on venus etc. Then, why are there no pictures of these from the inside? (Fake or Real!) There always seems to be someone who just manages to get some info out (pics or documents) of secret government bases, UFO's, aliens etc..

I hope you are right John, as life would be so much more interesting is all these things were the truth (not saying they are not!)

I've got my fingers crossed though John.

Cheers



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 03:19 PM
link   
Originally posted by Iblis




How many people said it was a nuclear reactor?
Raise hands?


Raises hand.


Now, how many people know about the logistics of building such a thing. Raise hands?


Raises hand.


Thank you.

Please crawl into your respective holes and d- ... Don't ever speak again.



If you will allow me to say one or two things before I crawl into my respective hole and d-...

I see you mentioned 'nuclear reactor' instead of 'fission' or 'fusion reactor' and I am assuming that the reason you didn't is because you don't know which one it is or can't figure it out.

I am not sure why you would think that the logistics of building a reactor whether fusion or fission is so insurmountable, I mean like what?

Digging the hole?
Accessing the water?
Pouring the cement?
Digging up the 3HE?
Setting up the reactor?
Shielding it?
Starting it up?
Feeding the power to the underground
laboratories and other cities on the moon?

The logistical problem is not immediately apparent to me so maybe you could elaborate?


FYI: The best way to culminate energy whilst on the moon is solar-panels.
Not nuclear reactors.
Despite the moon's abundance of nuclear fuel.
It's all-ready been discussed.


Thank you for the FYI.
However solar-panels are only used to heat swimming pools on the moon and not produce the the hundreds of terawatts required for the operation of the moon.

OK. Now I am going to crawl in my hole and d-...

Wait. What the heck does "d-..." mean?

Thanks again for your input it is always appreciated.



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 03:45 PM
link   
Thanks John for your comment, but Solar panels to heat swimming pools on the moon.....?....im not saying your wrong because i cannot prove it either way. To be honest i wouldnt mind a swim in one of those solar panel heated moon pools......sounds nice


Anyway back on topic, i think whats been raised so far is : (without getting into moon bases too much, as has been done on other threads)

1) Regadring the Infrared Image, do craters retain more heat than the surrounding landscape? Hence making all/most craters appear on the IR image look brighter.
2) Why are there no more IR images of the Moon ? from NASA, ESA etc
..
..

Please add more questions if you think they are relevant

Peace.

P.S - Oh and John please dont crawl into your respective hole yet.


[edit on 8-8-2007 by 1234567]

[edit on 8-8-2007 by 1234567]



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 04:04 PM
link   
Thanks for the responses John. I still don't really see artificial structure to the "crater" in question, as it still just looks like a crater to me.

What do you mean by "radiation combining with molecules of air"? Why would this produce a blue glow? And why would radiation be leaking out of the reactor? Wouldn't it be shielded as reactors are on Earth?

But most importantly, did someone "in the know" tell you that this is a giant fission reactor or did you reach that conclusion on your own?



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 04:41 PM
link   
Originally posted by Postal76



Thanks for the responses John. I still don't really see artificial structure to the "crater" in question, as it still just looks like a crater to me.


Zorgon and I are trying to figure that out. Both of us have a number of friends who are very open-minded and educated. Some of them cannot (as you cannot) see the structure of the fusion reactor. We are trying to figure out why. It is very perplexing.


What do you mean by "radiation combining with molecules of air"? Why would this produce a blue glow?


Blue is the color that is produced by radiation combining with molecules of air. It happens anywhere including here on earth. Thats why you see the blue color in the water of nuclear reactors.


And why would radiation be leaking out of the reactor?


It does not appear to be leaking. It appears to be contained in a circular pattern.


Wouldn't it be shielded as reactors are on Earth?


It is contained in a circular pattern and there is also a dark square around the entire area. We are not sure if that is related to containment or not.




But most importantly, did someone "in the know" tell you that this is a giant fission reactor or did you reach that conclusion on your own?


I reached the conclusion on my own.



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 04:43 PM
link   
This is what I'm getting at! Is there proof from people who are actually on this base? Are there people on this base or is it an old base now?

I'm sure I heard a radio talk show of John and someone else who have similar ideas about the moon but the other person believed that it is very old building etc.. on the moon.

Surely if there are people working up there on the moon, someone could leak a picture from up there to us here?

Cheers



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 04:52 PM
link   
You may chose to consider the fact that we have not yet managed to build a fusion reactor on Earth as indicative of the real likelihood that we have done so on a lifeless and airless lump of rock 238k miles away.

Alternatively you may believe that I'm just "not ready" to accept it.

John Lear came to his own conclusions - I would urge you all to do the same - as I'm sure John would.



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 05:03 PM
link   
Originally posted by cra114




This is what I'm getting at! Is there proof from people who are actually on this base?


No, it is a secret. And if you think you government can't keep a secret...boy, have I got a surprise for you!


Are there people on this base or is it an old base now?


There are people currently on this base. Some of those people are from the moon, some are from other planets. Some are us.

I don't know how old the base is. If I had to guess I would say less than 15,000 years but I have nothing on which to base that guess except thats when I think the moon was towed into orbit the last time.


I'm sure I heard a radio talk show of John and someone else who have similar ideas about the moon but the other person believed that it is very old building etc.. on the moon.


That was Richard Hoagland talking about NASA's current private pontification about the stuff we are finding on the moon.."Oh yeah, we knew about that all the time...thats ancient artifacts left from millions of years ago."

My answer: "Well then somebody better tell them its all still runnning, and if they don't want it to run out of gas that someone needs to go over and turn it off."



Surely if there are people working up there on the moon, someone could leak a picture from up there to us here?


Never, never, never, never, never, never. Ever.



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 05:11 PM
link   
Originally posted by timeless test





You may chose to consider the fact that we have not yet managed to build a fusion reactor on Earth as indicative of the real likelihood that we have done so on a lifeless and airless lump of rock 238k miles away.


We? We? Surely your jest?

Of course it wasn't 'we' timeless test. I thought that would have been obvious in the extreme.

Oh, by the by. The moon is not a lifeless and airless lump. Thats just food for the gullible masses.

Oh, and by the way. Yes we have managed to build a fusion reactor here on earth. Its just a secret. They aren't going to announce it just yet.


Thanks for the post it is greatly appreciated.



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 05:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear
Originally posted by Project_Silo



Again not trying to be mean but this is honestly what i see and here.



Thanks for the post Project_Silo and I respectfully promise you that my comments are not based on your grammer or ability to spell. I would like to respectfully propose that one (but not the only) reason you can't see anything in these photos is because you are not ready to accept reality. Either not ready or not able (for whatever reason).

Builidings on the moon reprresent a direct threat to ones sense of reality and if one is having trouble with reality even without aliens on the moon, or is perfectly content with ones perception of reality one is certainly not going to accept anything that represents a threat to his or hers perception of 'reality'. Just a guess. And thanks again for your input.


Lol or you can throw a cheap shot in about my spelling...... And a simple response is..I don't see anything on the moon because I'm sane ,and there is simply nothing there to see.Cmon where are these photos lets see them.Wheres the undisputable evidence to prove im not excepting reality.......

It seems to me you my friend are not excepting reality.One can simply read your posts to understand this.Soul catchers and such you know...I was trying to be understanding and not rude but you take a cheap shot.

Show me just one picture John..just one.And don't say i can't see it because i won't accept it haha.I stated many times i think we do have bases or other things up there,but NOTHING in these pictures show any of these bases or structers.

Nothing you claim can be proven such as all your Oh By The Way's above this post.The reactor is hidden,the moon is alive.......

Even area 51 was denied by the goverment and we can go check it out on google earth right now...I mean just look in our past,the CIA's failed assassination attempts for another example.If the goverment ever wanted to hide something I'm pretty sure this would be on the list.

Also if I can't except reality because I say your pictures are of nothing,then you should surely delete your signature right now.pfffft




[edit on 8-8-2007 by Project_Silo]

[edit on 8-8-2007 by Project_Silo]

[edit on 8-8-2007 by Project_Silo]



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 05:29 PM
link   
Actually, I mentioned 'nuclear', as someone earlier had distinctly said fission, while some seemed to be stretching for something so absurd as fusion. Instead of going after one or another, I generalized the system of power-generating facilities.

Nothing to do with 'not being able to figure it out'.

Nope. Digging a hole is simple.
Nope. Water can simple be brought to the moon.
Nope. Cement has been poured before, after all.
Nope. We're all-ready talking about feasible ways to mine the stuff.
Nope. God knows we've done it before.
Nope. Lord knows cement works.
Nope. Lord knows we've got some tried-and-true methods.
Nope. God knows electric cable still works in space.
Nope. God knows we've built cities and laboratories before.

Ah. Except for the simple fact that we're doing this on the moon, and it costs tens of thousands of dollars per pound of object brought up to the moon, using rockets.

How does one obtain, and utilize concrete, and the mixers on the moon?
How does one get engineers, managers, and construction-workers all on some far-away base? The logistics?
How does one 'pour cement' in gravity that is very significant fraction of the Earth's?
How does one 'dig a hole' on the moon? Gravity'd also make quite a difference here.

And etc.

Some days I can only wonder what would happen if the 'We've never gone to the moon!' and 'We have moon-bases!' folk met.
Something of epic proportions, no doubt.

Mind telling me how you know solar panels are being used to heat swimming pools? Have some evidence? Some data? Some backing?

Mind telling me how you know the moon-base is so sophisticated as to require hundreds of terawatts?
I mean, given that in 2001 the entire world used nearly two terawatts -- we'd have to have .. what.. two-billion people on the moon? In a highly technological, highly inefficient society? Utilizing hundreds of nuclear reactors?

'D-' means 'Die'. However, we are not allowed to overtly show our displeasure to other members on this site. ;]

My pleasure, of course.
Intellectual Debate is one of the greatest past-times of Humankind, is it not?



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 05:32 PM
link   
OK, I'm not going to get into an argument about it, as I said above people must reach their own conclusions about the subject as you, and I, claim to have done. However, I would like to believe that those conclusions were generally based on information rather than speculation.

... and I should confess that it was I who earlier spoke of a fission reactor rather than a fusion reactor in Aristarchus - oh the shame.






[edit on 8-8-2007 by timeless test]



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 05:33 PM
link   
These pictures are very interesting indeed. I'm most interested in the 3(i believe is the number) defense contractors that have exclusive rights to all the moon's minerals. If the reactor is there to process Helium 3 then qui bono?

IF that is us up there on this supposed base/reactor then what exactly is it that is being created? My guess would be enough processed Helium 3 so that if/when this new energy would become available in market to power day to day utilities the government and their buddies will have a complete monopoly over it.

Who knows. Any idea on the intention of the base?



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 05:33 PM
link   
Without attacking anyone, or being cynical this time -- John, can you provide a basis for anything you've said?

Folks from other planets?
A 15,000 year-old moon-base?
The moon being 'towed' into orbit?
A use-able fusion reactor?

One, I can guarantee you the 'we have a fusion reactor' bit is bunk.
The logistics, and economics of that are amazing.

Two, unless the government is right and every single civilian astrophysicist from every other country is wrong, the moon is entirely natural.

Three, please, pray tell what other planets they are from? And how you know?



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 05:34 PM
link   
^^^

""Some days I can only wonder what would happen if the 'We've never gone to the moon!' and 'We have moon-bases!' folk met.
Something of epic proportions, no doubt""

haah yea no doubt.Pretty sure WW3 could start that way.

And good point on the terrwatts.I'm gonna go google that =)

[edit on 8-8-2007 by Project_Silo]






top topics



 
24
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join