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.

 

John Lear's Claims Of Civilizations on Most Planets

page: 5
10
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 12 2007 @ 02:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon
Here is another picture of Venus... taken from space... taken by Magellan showing a bright sunny day clear as crystal, not a cloud in the sky except for that vapor trail with shadow...





Great research, Zorgon! Using an image created by Magellan's SAR (Synthetic Aperture Radar) imager, which was specifically designed to see through clouds, as evidence for a cloudless sky, is amazing!


With such research skills, no wonder you have everybody convinced in no time
!

BTW, your "vapor trail with shadow" just screams "image artifact"


Regards
yf




posted on Sep, 12 2007 @ 03:07 PM
link   
Well I am new to this thread and find all this very fascinating. I admire all your work Mr Lear and Zorgon. Here is a little something I happened to stumble across yesterday. Although It does not specifically pertain to this situation it is a very good example of just how we have been using camo to hide bases.





I am not sure of the authenticity of these photos, just something I stumbled across. Also if anyone wants to post the actual photos on this thread, great!



posted on Sep, 12 2007 @ 03:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Copernicus
The only way to win against a skeptic is to not argue with him, since there is no scientific proof for any of this, and that is what he want to be shown to believe it.


But that is just the problem Copernicus (Nice name
) There IS evidence and LOTS of it...

The problem with most skeptics is they refuse to follow the leads to that evidence and actually study it...

But we don't do this for the skeptics... we do this for the one person who writes us and says "Thank you for opening my eyes.." And we have a LOT of such letters..

John says The Apollo signals FIRST went to Australia then were sent to Goldstone where they were 'adjusted'

Well here is the PROOF



HONEYSUCKLE CREEK AUSTRALIA

THE SAGA OF THE MISSING MOON TAPES WASHINGTON POST

READ IT!!


John says there is an atmosphere on the Moon
we have a whole page of data NASA even has a LIST of the components of that atmosphere... we just differ on how much...

I posted this in several threads The skeptics brushed over it.. I simply want someone to explain to me how the DUST CLOUD raised when Smart 1 impacted the moon dispersed as shown below... and since I posted it ESA has added an animation...

No BS just answer the question
Should be sinple for all the scientific 'experts' out there




Animation




Here is the data page...

ATMOSPHERE

So its not that we are arguing with the Skeptics.. but answering their questions with as much data as we can find and presenting that data for the rest of those who understand, but have no resources to find it themselves




posted on Sep, 12 2007 @ 04:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon
But we don't do this for the skeptics... we do this for the one person who writes us and says "Thank you for opening my eyes.." And we have a LOT of such letters..

No surprise. With one born every minute, potential admirers of yours are not in short supply.


John says The Apollo signals FIRST went to Australia then were sent to Goldstone where they were 'adjusted'

Well here is the PROOF



BS! All this proves is that signals were relayed via Australia, which nobody denies. But there's no hint that the signals were "adjusted".


John says there is an atmosphere on the Moon
we have a whole page of data NASA even has a LIST of the components of that atmosphere... we just differ on how much...

Yes - by about 19 orders of magnitude!! You can hardly differ more than that
!


I simply want someone to explain to me how the DUST CLOUD raised when Smart 1 impacted the moon dispersed as shown below... and since I posted it ESA has added an animation...

No BS just answer the question
Should be sinple for all the scientific 'experts' out there

Huh? Probe impacts, surface material is thrown out, and falls back to the surface.

Why you claim the existence of a dense moon atmosphere from that is beyond me. I'm obviously unable to follow your your really large jumps to conclusions (viz. claiming a "clear day" on Venus from a cloudless radar image :@@


Regards
yf



posted on Sep, 12 2007 @ 04:22 PM
link   
yfxxx


BS! All this proves is that signals were relayed via Australia, which nobody denies. But there's no hint that the signals were "adjusted".


i don't believe that...if needed "major adjustment" would not be made public.



posted on Sep, 12 2007 @ 04:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by wildone106
I've seen plenty of pictures from the rovers of rather interesting shaped rocks, maybe even fossils..if nothing else they deserved a look and where completely ignored. I dont trust necessarily they have our best interest's at heart..among other things.



Originally posted by jamesder
what is the "official position" on the desolate Mars rover images?


You want the OFFICIAL POSITION?

Okay my friend You Got It!

There are TWO 'Official Positions'

Number one for the Press and the general public... Show pretty pictures, tell interesting stories and DO NOT EVER answer anyone about any anomaly...

Don't believe me?I have hundreds of emails for NASA Write any one of them and ask them Go on do it! Then you will have 'Official Position' number one...

Ask them about THIS one in Apollo image AS11_41_6156



No enhancement needed, just zoom in below and right of Daedalus Crater in the small crater

Here is one from a Malin Space System photo... I have not finished this page so I need to look up the original strip number but it will be available on the website later. We posted it in Blue Birds "Forest on Mars" thread but she is gone and most of her pictures as well and I only got to page 24 in recording them





Number Two... This is the in public domain "hidden in plain sight' 'Official Version'

Documents galore on Lunar and Martian Mining, about Tether experiments, about electromagnetic shielding for our spacecraft dated 1964!!! Etc Etc Etc...

It take tons of research to ferret them out... we present what we can with the time we have available and still have a life...

But here is one presentation by Dr Jim Garvin (and those who follow our research will remember his name in association with the Hubble /Aristarchus/Clementine issue)


One slide Title page of a powerpoint presentation


Here is NASA's official version of what they think of YOUR NEED TO KNOW



And seriously to the your question of Fossils

LOOK CLOSELY AT THIS SLIDE



So NASA won't answer questions about anomalies, but internally they most certainly do!!!

Under "Null" You see the true color of Mars
See "The True Color of Mars"

Under "Exciting" You see the Rover on Mars
This is what happens to them when they are done their Mission...
Somewhere in the Nevada Desert... maybe behind John's House
(Yes this IS an official NASA Photo ... just look at the label)



Under "Extraordinary" Fossils on Mars!!!
This is from a NASA presentation!!! We are tracking down the originals in that image. No luck yet... I am sure they will NOT be easy to find!
See "Fossil Evidence on Mars"

See "Mike Singh's "Critter" Collection (Anotated)"

Under "Unfathomable" ARTIFACTS ON MARS
IN A NASA PRESENTATION

We do not have the originals referred to in the presentation NASA was 'reluctant' to provide image source number but we are seeking them. As there are thousand of Rover images it will take some time

Here is the PDF NASA: Dr Jim Garvin - Mars_Search for Life Slide_Presentation PDF


So the official position is YOU DO NOT NEED TO KNOW

Your job is to work pay taxes and die...


And if you dig too deep, Gary McKinnon needs a cellmate



posted on Sep, 12 2007 @ 04:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by jtc1967
About Mars ... The biggest questions I have about mars is why does nasa insist on coloring the sky red. One explination I have found is What color is the sky on Mars


I will answer that

Again the two official positions...

For the media you get this from NASA... everything reddish



From the 'Alternate Story' websites you get this... everything sky blue



Both images have been changed to tell a story NASA prefers red and dark, the others like Sky Blue...

Only problem is that the Viking Lander in the photos above is WHITE



Here is the true color of Mars... The sky is a light blue and looks as it does in this image due to dust in the air. At the end of this post there is a sunset taken by Opportunity on its first day BLUE SKY from NASA but it was a dusty day... Mars has huge dust storms of that there is no question



The rocks in the picture are Scoria or Vesicular Basalt

Here is a piece of it on Earth you will see the bluish black color is very close in both images



The complete set of color images from ALL the Rover pictures is found here..
lyle.org...

No it is not a joke... well it is but its on you That site is a NASA/University site that stores ALL the images of the Rovers in color with the sundial included... There is no access to this site unless you have permission to do so... or find a hidden directory like Gary McKinnon did so you are on your own to get access

We will have that info available when we complete the page showing how the Secret Astronauts have been cleaning the Rovers and even repairing them but that is not for this thread

Next I will answer the question about the Fusion Reactor and then I must get back to the real work...

I will not respond to any of this in this thread... you know where to find me

I posted these as there are new people here who seem not to be aware of the other active and popular John Lear threads

SUNSET ON MARS




[edit on 12-9-2007 by zorgon]



posted on Sep, 12 2007 @ 05:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by bigbert81
Why the hell do people get on a subject like this that they full well know that CAN'T be proven in either side, like religion, and then keep demanding proof?


Because they can be proven, but skeptics just refuse to even look at the proof... you can lead a skeptic to water, but you can't make them read

And explain to me why NASA feels it necessary to add an AEROBRAKING DEVICE to a craft that lands on the Moon?

Be a skeptic... question everything that's fine and dandy..

But stop screaming that we have no evidence... at least show that you DO have the skills to READ official documents... (not directed at you personally)

You can refute fuzzy pictures all you want, but you can't refute a patent


As to that comment about The Living Moon 'That's ALL you have?" That comment is obviously made by someone who never bothered to check it out as it would take MONTHS to read all the data on the Pegasus site

Much of which has been collected from many people right here at ATS
www.thelivingmoon.com...



US PATENT 5,092,545

Method of Delivering Lunar Generated Fluid
to Earth Orbit Using an External Tank

Publication number: US5092545
Publication date: 1992-03-03
Inventor: BUTTERFIELD ANSEL J (US); GOSLEE JOHN W (US)
Applicant: NASA (US)

ABSTRACT

A method and apparatus are provided for delivering lunar generated fluid to Earth orbit from lunar orbit. Transport takes place in an external tank of a shuttle which has been suitably outfitted in Earth orbit for reusable travel between Earth orbit and a lunar orbit. The outfitting of the external tank includes the adding of an engine, an electrical system, a communication system, a guidance system, an aerobraking device, and a plurality of interconnected fluid storage tanks to the hydrogen and oxygen tanks of the external tank. The external tank is then propelled to lunar orbit the first time using Earth based propellant. In lunar orbit, the storage tanks are filled with the lunar generated fluid with the remainder tank volumes filled with lunar generated liquid oxygen and hydrogen which serve as propellants for returning the tank to Earth orbit where the fluid is off-loaded. The remaining lunar generated oxygen and hydrogen is then sufficient to return the external tank to lunar orbit so that a subsequent cycle of fluid delivery is repeated. A space station in a higher Earth orbit is preferably used to outfit the external tank, and a lunar node in lunar orbit is used to store and transfer the fluid and liquid oxygen and hydrogen to the external tank. The lunar generated fluid is preferably 3He.


[edit on 12-9-2007 by zorgon]



posted on Sep, 12 2007 @ 05:19 PM
link   
Who said the moon has no atmosphere? It has a very scant atmosphere which is common knowledge. As a matter of fact, here's some info. regarding the moons atmosphere. Enjoy.


We often read in books that the Moon is an airless world. This is in fact not true at all. The Moon's atmosphere is a very delicate balance between various processes and may already have been altered by human action beyond all hope of recovery.

Apollos 14-17 carried very sensitive experiments to measure the ambient lunar atmosphere at the surface, other experiments were carried in orbit in the SIMBAY of the Service Module. The surface experiments, consisting of Cold Ion Gauges in Apollos 14-16 and a Mass Spectrometer in Apollo 17, were so sensitive that leaks from the space suits of the astronauts saturated them every time that they approached to within a few metres.

These experiments revealed that there is a very tenuous lunar atmosphere, which has a total mass of only about 10 000Kg (10 tonnes). Most of the atmosphere is made up of Hydrogen, Helium and Neon captured from the solar wind. There is also a component of gases from radioactive decay in the surface rocks: 10% of the Helium appears to come from alpha decay and 90% of the Argon (at 10000 atoms per cubic centimetre it is one of the major components of the atmosphere) comes from this source. Argon actually presents a problem because, given the known amount of radioactive Potassium 40 in the rocks, it requires all the Argon 40 produced from the decay of Potassium 40 in the top 5km of the lunar crust to be released very efficiently to the atmosphere to explain the amount of gas which is detected. Smaller amounts of Carbon Dioxide and Methane are seen, but the water vapour content of the atmosphere is negligible: around 0.5 molecules per cubic centimetre and that due to reactions of solar wind particles in the soil. Totalled over the entire lunar surface there is only around half a gram of water in the atmosphere.

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


Also, keep in mind that just because you find a patent, it doesn't mean much. A patent can be issued for a product that may only exist on paper as an idea.



posted on Sep, 12 2007 @ 05:41 PM
link   
Hi, I'm new here. Can someone tell me how to post the pictures?
Thanks.


[edit on 12-9-2007 by 1question]



posted on Sep, 12 2007 @ 06:38 PM
link   
Okay Sorry John it took me so long to get to this question...

I really could not afford the time for all those answers but I am getting tired of these constant attack threads. They serve no purpose other than to inflate the ego of a handful of those who's purpose is God only knows what...

I know you enjoy it and in truth it shows how we are "getting to them" because they love you so much they keep doing this...

But our audience is here to see the new stuff so I need to keep focused on that...

Okay ARISTARCHUS



Originally posted by jfj123
OK so an advanced civilization traveled from another planet and colonized the moon and built a NUCLEAR REACTOR???? Why didn't they just burn coal???


FUSION reactor and to make the staement about burning coal is really stupid... don't you skeptics state there is no air on the moon? How is coal supposed to burn with no air? Or are you changing you position and stating there IS air for coal to burn? I am confused perhaps you could provide documentation on how coal could burn on the Moon?

Now FUSION reactor could work, and they use HE3

I just showed you NASA's patent for a cargo vesel that transports LIQUID OXYGEN AND HYDROGEN generated on the Moon, transported to LEO and stored there for return trips, not needing more launches... They also carry LIQUID HE3 ( so far we have not tracked where that goes - stay tuned Jack is working on it)

HE3 is real its value is 5.7 billion per ton and there are millions of tons lying around in the Lunar dust 25 tons would power the USA for one year in Fusion Reactors that require almost no shielding and produce no radioactive waste and convert the energy straight to electricity...




You see we ourselves are now working on FUSION reactors and the beginnings of Anti-matter. If a more advanced race were doing what you said, they would have left fission (ie nuclear reactors) by the wayside long ago.


Quite true if John said "fission" it would have been an accidental slip of the tongue, a mistake he did not make at the San Jose UFO expo in the lecture and workshop.. John is a pilot, not a Nuclear Physicist... The slip he made about Cherenkov radiation was because he was not familiar with that term until after the Expo (just a few weeks ago)

You see the term was given to us by an MIT Physicist who was at the lecture and talked with me for hours at our booth... This gentleman is in dialog via email and was also one of the organizers of the event

To nit pic on a term used by accident is silly... focus on the concepts

Before we left for the show John talked with me about being prepared to fend off the physicists from the area, who do attend the conference... well the opposite was true. I even had one Lawrence Livermore physicist visit the booth... the funny part of the visit was a skeptic came to the table, pleasant fellow and said he did not see anything in the Copernicus mine... Well pointing to the big poster we had, the Physicist pointed the items out to the gentlemen skeptic and said" I don't understand how you can not see them, they are as plain as the nose on your face"


The rest of the conversation is private
For now He too is in dialog



Also, the effect you are referring to is called The Cherenkov Effect or Cherenkov Radiation and it happens when radiation interacts with LIQUIDS.


Liquids yes or simply an atmosphere... I will share a little note from one of the Pegasus research team... he is a 'propulsion wizard'


But remember we are talking about a fusion reactor, not fission. What interests me is the Cherenkov radiation on a supposedly airless Moon. If it is indeed airless, then the power output must be on the scale of Sunsecs. Cherenkov radiation needs an atmosphere or water, any insulating medium to exist. The intensity of the light tells how much power is being released, and if an entire crater lights up enough to be seen from Earth, add to this the Moon is airless, a perfect vacuum as NASA would have us believe, then the power output must be enormous, so great that the closest unit of measurement would be the total energy output of the Sun over a period of time. We are talking the mass to energy equivalent of Jupiters, which is enough power to hold open a stargate. That is if the Lunar atmosphere is a near perfect vacuum. - Matt

Here is the Z-machine fusion reactor from Sandia Laboratory showing a LOT of Cherenkov Radiation in AIR not WATER




All the material about Aristarchus can be found on this page...

ARISTARCHUS Blue Gem or Fusion Reactor

NASA has recorded sightings and readings for a long time and there is a JPL document from 1961 on the Aristarchus page showing emmision readings taken in 1955 that coincide with Cherenkov emmisions and the study and observation was done in Russia


The only thing not on that page yet is the latest NASA report on a Nuclear Reactor (fission) on the farside of the Moon... (based on the position of the Earth in their sketch
)

Funny thing it resembles the Aristarchus structure we have been ovserving in those Amateur astronomers photos




This is from the NASA Technical Reports Server

NASA's Exploration Technology Program in Space Power

A lot of this data I just presented is new and we have not made the full presentation yet, so some of it is jumping the gun..

But I know that in the same way that NASA hides it's documents in plain sight, they are safe because Skeptics do not reseaerch nor do they read
preferring just to verbal attck all evidence...

All that does is make them look foolish in front of the hundreds of thousands that follow these topics...


Now as I said I will NOT RESPOND to any questions in this thread... I spent far too many hours here already...

I will leave you with one last tidbit before I leave..

And that is DIRECTLY related to the original question of the thread...

"Where is your Evidence of other civilizations?"

Consider this "EXHIBIT A"

As I said earlier I am NOT prepared to go to jail for the sake of a few doubters. This report is dated April 26-28 1983. Parts of it are NOT declassified... But the portion that is has the following title page.

It also contains specs and construction of a Lunar reactor... You are welcome to write Los Alamos National Laboratory and request a copy...



This is only the beginning, as a friend from the DOD said to us at John's house... "you only have the tip of the cat's tail..."

He was right... and the cat is a tiger... and he is looking at us...

To IgnoreTheFacts...

I would suggest you change your name and open your eyes..

And get that salt and pepper ready Your going to need it

Zorgon



posted on Sep, 12 2007 @ 07:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by jfj123
Hey look a probe went to Jupiter !


So were you also aware of the fact that this probe carried 49.5 pounds of Plutonium and the reason they didn't want it to hit Europa was so it would not contaminate the environment of this water world?

I would also assume those living there would be pretty pissed if we dropped a nuke on them... The Fat Man bomb dropped on Nagasaki contained 6.2 kg (13.7 pounds) of Plutonium for perspective...

We are also looking in to the fact that it may not have 'crashed' We have found hints of a tether in operation out there (more on that as we find it)

Cassini has 72 pounds
Do they really need that much power for a little spaceship?


(CNN) -- Three canisters containing 72 pounds of radioactive plutonium, which NASA plans to blast into space, are causing an uproar.


CNN NEWS

I wonder which planet they plane to nuke with that?

Anyone remember the Comet... DEEP IMPACT MISSION?

spaceplace.nasa.gov...

Read the reports They crashed a probe into the comet and it causes a flash... all the little children in the NASA control room are bouncing up and down in glee...

"YIPPEEE We got IT..."

NASA Target practice a success we can hit small targets in space moving at high velocity

But minutes after the hit, there was a second flash... a huge secondary explosion that NASA scientists 'cannot explain' So just what did they hit?

Look at the image below taken by Hubble Look at the time stamp as the explosion GROWS




NASA's Hubble Space Telescope captured the dramatic effects of the collision that occurred early July 4, Eastern time, between an 820-pound projectile released by the Deep Impact spacecraft and comet 9P/Tempel 1. This sequence of images shows the comet before and after the impact. The visible-light images were taken by the Advanced Camera for Surveys' High Resolution Camera.

Image credit: NASA/ESA/Johns Hopkins University/Applied Physics Lab


Now they plan to do it again and plow ships into the Moon



Crash Landing On The Moon

But is it there? That's what LCROSS aims to find out. The quest begins in late 2008 when LCROSS leaves Earth tucked inside the same rocket as Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO), a larger spacecraft on a scouting mission of its own. After launch, the two ships will split up and head for the Moon, LRO to orbit, LCROSS to crash.

Actually, Colaprete said, "we're going to crash twice."

LCROSS is a double spacecraft: a small, smart mothership and a big, not-so-smart rocket booster. The mothership is called the "shepherding spacecraft," because it shepherds the booster to the Moon. They'll travel together but hit separately.


www.moondaily.com...

On a recent mission to Venus... we have all read about Drive by Shootings, yes? Well NASA has taken this to new limits


Venus Flyby

June 5, 2007: Picture this: A spaceship swoops in from the void, plunging toward a cloudy planet about the size of Earth. A laser beam lances out from the ship; it probes the planet's clouds, striving to reach the hidden surface below. Meanwhile, back on the craft's home world, scientists perch on the edge of their seats waiting to see what happens.

Sounds like science fiction? This is real, and it's happening today.

The spacecraft is MESSENGER, and the planet is Venus. On June 5, 2007, MESSENGER will fly past Venus just 338 km above the planet's surface--and it will shoot a laser into the clouds.

science.nasa.gov...

So what are they playing at?

They call THIS science? Dropping huge amounts of Plutonium, zapping Comets with who knows waht that caused that big band, and now taking Fly By Shooting practise at Venus...

:shk:

If you ask me it sounds more like War Games than Science



And those are NASA SOURCES People

Do yourself a favor an LOOK at what's going on around you



posted on Sep, 12 2007 @ 07:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rockpuck
Whats so hard with showing people "evidence" .. unless... oh thats right... you have none.
At least NASA can show a scientific explanation, you just have your opinion, and Mr. Lear, I hate to break it to you buddy, but your opinion is not fact.


You sir have a lot less credibility than John... and it is obvious that most of you "John never shows evidence" crowd haven't realized yet that he is not alone.

But what is the point? You never look at the evidence anyway so why worry?

It is a well known tactic of skeptics of your sort to refuse to examine the evidence provided and resort to attacking the individual The past several posts deliberately show support for John's theories directly from NASA

But as usual they will be ignored by skeptics

I bet if I could see you through this computer after seeing the evidence that you CAN'T refute I bet I would see this...





posted on Sep, 12 2007 @ 07:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Postal76
You tell us that the moon has an atmosphere because one engineer and a handful of dead, dated astronomers hypothesized as such?


Stop the nonsense and answer the question about the dust cloud on the Smart 1 impact and the fact that a NASA patent of a Lunar cargo vessel requires AEROBRAKING DEICES

Its a simple request...

BOTH are current history...

BOTH are NASA sources..

Why not try just once to answer a simple direct question on the evidence presented?

:shk:



posted on Sep, 12 2007 @ 07:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by theRiverGoddess
If the moon is in fact a spaceship....then WHY would we need to do any mining on it? ........just wondering


Very good question and a very simple answer...

The Moon 'spaceship' was designed to LOOK like a natural satellite, hence it is covered with a crust or layer of rock... I assume this layer is fairly thick

The Moon has been there a very long time... whether it is a moon or a ship, this is not in doubt...

The Sun hits the Moon creates HE3 and this HE3 is deposited into the dust that has accumulated over the millennium

The Mining on the moon is SURFACE for HE3 There is also plenty of Glass Iron Titanium and Thorium all in the dust on the surface... Estimates for the HE3 are a depth of three meters

In those three meters there are trillions of metric tons of HE3

The glass can be converted to make structure out of fiberglass with a byproduct of iron and titanium oxide and OXYGEN all by simple use of a Solar Furnace....

The concentrations are around Copernicus of all those materials..

At the south pole the DoD states there is a frozen body of water 100 square kilometers 50 feet thick they describe it as "A lake... a small lake" This is from a DoD press release dated April 1996 on the Clementine Mission and only released to the public Dec 2006

So it seems to me that those that towed the Moon here might have seeded the outer covering with easy to access, useful minerals to use when we got there..

And many people assume mining requires minerals to be gold etc and be brought back to Earth...

WRONG All NASA documents on mining at LPI state ISRU In Situ Resource Utilization... They mine the glass sands for glass for fiberglass and Iron for structure, titanium for building ships, thorium for power and the byproduct of oxygen released when the ores are processed is used for breathing, for making water AND for making rocket fuel...

All the documents we see for mining equipment for the moon is surface scrapers...

The ONLY substance that we have seen brought back to LEO is the three gases in liquid form H O and HE3 The H and O stay in orbit for return trips. the HE3 we have not been able to track from LEO to Earth and we are not likely to without a knock at the door...

Any skeptic who thinks that is an excuse does not live in the real world

BTW the transport ships are AUTOMATED so if there is an accident there is no loss of life to have to account for

So we are mining the dust for HE3 and other valuable stuff and as even Hoagland states "Alien tech that they left lying around"



posted on Sep, 12 2007 @ 07:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sinsear Here is a little something I happened to stumble across yesterday.


Amazing find Sinsear. I have not seen that one before. Seems it does not have a copyright so I will repost it... Jack found this one at Kirtland AFB The Google Earth has flags on it where he found them

The white "tube" is discussed on the "Secrets of Tsiolkovski" page

[im]http://www.eatliver.com/img/2007/2350.jpg[[/im]

Thanks for the kind words and the major contribution



posted on Sep, 12 2007 @ 08:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by yfxxx
BS! All this proves is that signals were relayed via Australia, which nobody denies. But there's no hint that the signals were "adjusted".


NIT PIC NIT PIC NIT PIC

I say "adjusted" they say "reformatted" and Lebar says "bastardized"


The tale of the missing Apollo 11 tapes is made all the more awkward because televised images of subsequent Apollo missions were greatly improved. It was only for Apollo 11 that an unusually configured video feed was used. It was transmitted from the moon to ground sites in Australia and the Mojave Desert in California, where technicians reformatted the video for broadcast and transmitted long-distance over analog lines to Houston. A lot of video quality was lost during that process, turning clear, bright images into gray blobs and oddly moving shapes -- what Lebar now calls a "bastardized" version of the actual footage.


In my interpretation of the English language they mean the same thing

Clear images at one end... fuzzy blurry images that we got to see

:shk:



posted on Sep, 12 2007 @ 08:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by yfxxx
Why you claim the existence of a dense moon atmosphere from that is beyond me.


Well see it all goes back to what I said about READING a skill skeptics rarely apply...

Please show me once where I have stated that the atmosphere on the Moon is dense? I have actually never yet discussed how much I believe it to be because I have not yet reached a conclusion Even John does not say 'dense' he says a few thousand feet thicker in low lying areas enough to breath for a short time without helmet

I have theories about how much I am working on backing up all in due time... but the air would be clear as there is no water vapor in it and no dust suspended by water vapor

As to the Smart 1 impact your theory doesn't wash because if you would READ what ESA says the impact was straight on... and each section of that image is about 2 kilometers by three kilometers...

A straight on impact would throw dust up equally in a circular pattern as it indeed dues in frame two... but then it disperses all over the 2x3 area in a pattern more consistent with wind blowing the dust than just settling back in an airless environment.

And if it was airless NASA would not need to spend money on AEROBRAKING DEVICES on robotic cargo ships




posted on Sep, 12 2007 @ 08:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by jfj123

Also, keep in mind that just because you find a patent, it doesn't mean much. A patent can be issued for a product that may only exist on paper as an idea.


Thank you for that insight


But I am well aware of that.. we have a lot more to support that which will be presented shortly as my time allows... like pictures of an assembly line in production


As I said though this is just another "bash John" thread. I already spent way to much time here. All the evidence is presented in our regular threads and on our website...



posted on Sep, 12 2007 @ 10:01 PM
link   
I don't know guys. Those moon pictures in John's thread and on the living moon site are so out of focus and just generally bad that you could say pretty much anything and with a little imagination even the most skeptical would see something.

I guess what I am saying is that anything is possible but unsure if your claims are probable.

Zorgon, I am interested in hearing more about the astronauts on Mars that maintain the rovers. Please direct me to the thread or site that this is discussed.



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join