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.
Originally posted by Iblis
Helium 3 is nuclear fuel.
Don't mind him.
Furthermore, let me thank Sherpa for the one and only kind, open reply from 'the opposite side' in this entire thread.
My issue is not a freedom to believe what you want. My issue is that the ideas and thoughts he puts forth as serious fact have absolutely no backing. Not by anyone outside this community, and most importantly, not from him, despite repeated requests. He did not even give me the 'I can't!' speech, though most likely because we both know that'd be bunk.
As much as I'd like to believe we're not alone, or believe in the fantastic concept that there is a base on the moon -- I have no reason to. And neither do any of you; what I am seeing is essentially that he is lying to you all, and you believe it on the grounds that 'he said it'.
I'm asking for proof, to dignify his beliefs and for him to respect myself, and the rest of you.
Lastly, to argue that he can't say what he knows is a bit ambiguous, considering half of his answers have been 'It's simple logic' and 'It's obvious.'
If it's either of those, he should be easily able to explain it to us, who 'can't get it', rather than acting passive-aggressive and insulting our intelligences.
Edit: This brings to mind a lasting question:
He doesn't even know what Helium-3 is utilized for.
He integrates it into his little Sci-Fi story about being used for Zero-Point.
Shouldn't that say enough?
---Best wishes to everyone else, who isn't under some sort of mental dementia.
[Clinically, not being crude, here.]
Remember, 'Deny Ignorance' works both ways.
[edit on 10-8-2007 by Iblis]
I all-ready explained why I think he's lying.
Unlike Lear, I can call you ignorant and have good reason; read my posts.
Furthermore:
i. His lack of common courtesy.
ii. Lack of knowledge about what he discusses.
iii. Lack of any presentable proof, -while making observations-
Originally posted by Iblis
First, to answer the only actual question directed towards me:
No. I cannot.
I based my conclusion off the way the light is striking the surface.
Two, StreetCorner, for someone accusing me of being vile, you're pretty hostile. You automatically ridicule me without explanation, after I've explained in three or four posts by now, my own?
I all-ready explained why I think he's lying.
Unlike Lear, I can call you ignorant and have good reason; read my posts.
Furthermore:
i. His lack of common courtesy.
ii. Lack of knowledge about what he discusses.
iii. Lack of any presentable proof, -while making observations-
Is why I respond the way I do.
I am validated on all fronts, even if they are not the most friendly.
And from looking on the internet, I see many people agree with my viewpoint.
Originally posted by StreetCorner Philosopher
You should automatically know who John Lear is. End of conversation. Go listen to some of his Coast to Coast Podcasts. Do more research, i mentioned names, find others as well. Put information together, it all leads to the same answers.
Originally posted by mrRviewer
it is strange how the craters are hotter then the flat areas. even stranger is that the crater [tycho i believe] farthest south is the hottest. could it be that the dust covering the moon makes a decent insulator? under the dust in the craters is a mineral that heats up pretty well i guess? i've read somewhere a reason why. it was a theory that the moon is much older then the earth and the dust is actually the inside of the moon. the moon is in effect hollow. Supposedly done so by alien beings and brought here as a base to watch us and hide from us with. the article or story i read also said there is records in ancient human history of its arrival, no such thing ever existed and then poof next theres the moon.
i believe they also had scientific evidence to back this up but it was so long ago i dont remember all the details. something about titanium on the surface but could get there without intelligent manipulation. also during a few apollo missions the did ultra sonic testing and the moon rang like a bell. supposedly other equipment from past missions still sending info to earth heard the ringing for hours after the act yet they were placed all over the moon miles away from each other.
i wonder if there is a way to look at the moon with other types of thermal cameras to see if you can find any inner thermal heat? i also wonder what in fared pictures would look like on the dark side. "dark side yeah" they said that was another reason it was artificial was because it didn't rotate.
anyway the whole argument is mute, its not like us poor civilians here at ats will create a probe to go investigate the moon for our selves. we are but simple folk who only know what we read and watch on the boob tube. Perhaps when space travel becomes commercial i will take a moon tour and figure it out for my self. untill then lets debate!
Originally posted by Iblis
Sherpa --
This post will be brief, and I'll add to it later if you desire; a man has to eat breakfast sometime, you know!
I see a composite of many images, with several intersections blurred, or airbrushed in as to not leave holes.
I've done the same sort of photography before, though since I was able to stay in place, instead of moving thousands of miles an hour, the most I've ever had to do is simply 'lengthen' two pictures so that there was not a break in the panorama.
Originally posted by Havalon
This shot of Tycho is quite interesting, it is the (allegedly) the youngest large crater (about a 100 million years old!)
The impact zone (if that is what it is) spreads over quite a large area of the moon. My point is, could this be a cooling area, (rather like a radiator on car) it is quite huge.
[/img]
Take a look at that picture closely.
Ever peel an orange?
The lines exiting from the crater are similar to the grid lines on an orange, or say earthly meridian lines and extend across most of the surface. Interesting.
Check it out.
[edit on 11-8-2007 by weatherguru]
Originally posted by Chorlton
Originally posted by StreetCorner Philosopher
You should automatically know who John Lear is. End of conversation. Go listen to some of his Coast to Coast Podcasts. Do more research, i mentioned names, find others as well. Put information together, it all leads to the same answers.
Why should someone 'automatically' know who John lear is?
He may be well known in the US but outside of there, I doubt anyone has ever heard of him without searching around.
The world doesnt revolve around the USA you know.