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.

 

The Big NASA-Military Cover-up On Gravity And Atmosphere On The Moon!

page: 13
114
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 14 2008 @ 02:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by drevill
reply to post by Nohup
 


Physics class is irrelevant and regurgitation IMHO


Please start a bonfire and throw the following items onto it:
-Your cell phone
-Your television
-Any pharmaceuticals you might have
-Your car radio
-Any item that possesses GPS capabilities

All of these things were made possible by the "irrelevant" physics you disdain. Modern physics is based on thousands of years of observation, experiment, and independent evaluation. Are you implying that Newtonian physics is a government conspiracy, or are you Ashton Kucher and we in fact being "Punk'd"?

In my physics class, we used experimentation for a basis for individual synthesis of equations. Our professor gave us the basic tools to create Newton's equations ourselves. You need only a basic understanding of calculus (or the will to gain that understanding) in order to validate for yourself that the moon can not possibly have 2/3 of Earth's gravity or anywhere near it. If you want to throw out calculus along with physics as being "irrelevant" and "regurgitated", then I'll have to ask you to prove to me that you are not a brain in a jar and then move forward from there.

I will consider the grainy, low-resolution photos and twisting logic of the supporters of this farcical idea as soon as you can provide me proof that Newtonian physics does not model reality. I'll need about two or three million pages of good, hard evidence at the least, and all of it must be reproducible and observable in controlled conditions. Then, go ahead and disseminate your findings to the global scientific community and see if they hold water. This is the process that physics in general has had to go through to gain the level of credibility it currently has.

Deny ignorance.




posted on Sep, 15 2008 @ 08:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by mikesingh

Originally posted by Shadow_Lord
The Moon has no atmosphere. There is no wind, no weather. It can be easily seen by the lack of erosion on the surface of the Moon.


Lack of erosion? Check out the hills in the back ground. They're smooth and rounded, not sharp and rugged, and this can only happen if the Moon has an atmosphere!


Only if they were created that way. Otherwise they will stay in the state they were in.



posted on Sep, 15 2008 @ 09:28 AM
link   
reply to post by mikesingh
 





So NASA didn't mind sacrificing the astronauts just for winning the so called space race with the Soviet Union? Jeeez!!


That is pretty much the case. The astronauts knew that each trip could more than likely be a one way trip, though most hoped it would not be. There were rockets that blew op on the launch pads, let us not forget that even after the years of space capsules that even the shuttle missions were not entirely safe, "Challenger" bring up any memeories, not to mention the mishaps in present day. Have you ever wondered why civilian trips are not a tipical venture? The cost is one main thing, not real place to visit yet is another, and the final reason, it is not safe yet for the average civilian. There would be far too many liabilities and possible lawsuits.

As far as glow off the moon, take any white or even light object, place it outside in the dark, away from any kind of glow including street lamps, (best place in the woods, like a camp ground) take a picture of it, you will notce a glow off the object. This object does not have an atmosphere. Ok so you might say that the earth is providing an atmosphere and that supplies the glow. this is easy enough to get past if you have access to a vaccume chamber, easy enough to make one out of plexiglass. Palce both the object and the camera inside (place camera on timer), suck the air and atmosphere out, you get the same result.

If I can find any of my old pictures from my personal experiments I will post them, it was a long time ago, however that I did this experiment.

As far as dust storms go, there is plenty of dust on the Moon when small impacts are made from small meteors, the dust kicks up and results in dust storms, a typical enomoly on the moon.

My point is that these things do not prove an atmosphere on the moon, I am not saying that it is not possible, just that it does not prove it.



posted on Sep, 19 2008 @ 08:31 AM
link   
Guys, get a load of this...


From 1871 to 1896, 40 members of England's Royal Astronomical Society reported observing various geometrical shaped light patterns on the moon. In the following years, came confirmed sightings of a moving 50 wide opaque object, great white domes and long bridge like structures on the Plane of Mare Crisium. In 1958 , both US and Soviet scientists collectively observed a huge glowing oval object upon the lunar surface.
Washington Daily News 1968


So what's happening? Does that constitute evidence of gravity and therefore an atmosphere?

Sci fi? Imagination? Hoax report from the Washington Daily News 1968? You decide!

Cheers!


www.gafintl-adamski.com...

[edit on 19-9-2008 by mikesingh]



posted on Sep, 19 2008 @ 02:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Wetware
 


what i was saying and i think i did somewhere on this thread was that the vast majority of physics, and any discipline for that a matter is regurgitated and there was very little, comparatively speaking true experimentation.

david



posted on Sep, 19 2008 @ 03:15 PM
link   
reply to post by mikesingh
 


and this


Scientific American, 46-49



Two triangular, luminous appearances reported by several observers in Lebanon, Conn., evening of July 3, 1882, on the moon's upper limb. They disappeared, and two dark triangular appearances that looked like notches were seen three minutes later upon the lower limb. They approached each other, met and instantly disappeared. The merger here is notches that have at times been seen upon the moon's limb: thought to be cross sections of craters (Monthly Notices, R.A.S., 37-432). But these appearances of July 3, 1882, were vast upon the moon--- 'seemed to be cutting off or obliterating nearly a quarter of its surface." (Page 268)


(Astro. Reg., 3-255)...April 10, 1865 -



west of Picard, according to Ingall - "a most minute point of light, glittering like a star" Sept. 5, 1865 - a conspicuous bright spot west of Picard (Astro. Reg., 3-252). It was seen again by Ingall. He saw it again upon the 7th, but upon the 8th it had gone, and there was a cloud-like effect where the light had been


david



posted on Sep, 24 2008 @ 09:20 AM
link   
reply to post by Wetware
 


Yes, I'm sure we clever humans have learned much in the few thousand years we've been conducting experiments. However, what makes you think in the grand scheme of things that a couple of thousand years is a long time?

Theories are proven incorrect all the time, physics theories too, and I think that should Earth-Based humanity still exist in a few thousand more years we'll realize that we didn't know anything...at this time...and probably won't know much then either.

It is awfully arrogant of us to assume we have mastered physics in any way. We're like blind-folded monkeys stumbling in the dark....not masters.



posted on Oct, 20 2008 @ 06:30 AM
link   
reply to post by mikesingh
 


Hmmmmm I wonder ?

Monkeys in Space?

Or is it Monkeys or Primates in the Desert on earth ????

Smells Doesn't it has a strange smell like fertiliser ? LOL

I think this is the greatest of all conspiracies here....

What will our governments expect us to believe next ????

Another good one, is the angles of Satellite dishes on earth maybe old technology, involving the bouncing of RF of the Ionosphere from ground based stations ?




[edit on 20-10-2008 by The Matrix Traveller]



posted on Nov, 10 2008 @ 03:13 PM
link   
Didn't the moon gravity increase, its not 1/6 any more.
I can't find the post with the new value.

Ever think of ether displacement as the source of gravity.
Just like Archimedes' discovered Buoyancy we can discover
ether displacement for the moon and earth gravity.
Now if we can get the right moon and earth displacements
and the correct gravity measurements.

Check it out, volume displacements are ether elated by 7.2 for
velocity.

That's not 1/6 Earth gravity for the Moon.

www.caroun.com...
www.rastko.org.yu...



posted on Nov, 10 2008 @ 06:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Malynn
reply to post by Wetware
 


Yes, I'm sure we clever humans have learned much in the few thousand years we've been conducting experiments. However, what makes you think in the grand scheme of things that a couple of thousand years is a long time?

Theories are proven incorrect all the time, physics theories too, and I think that should Earth-Based humanity still exist in a few thousand more years we'll realize that we didn't know anything...at this time...and probably won't know much then either.

It is awfully arrogant of us to assume we have mastered physics in any way. We're like blind-folded monkeys stumbling in the dark....not masters.


No truer words spoken well said!



posted on Nov, 10 2008 @ 08:15 PM
link   
absolutely brilliant stuff, we need more people as you investigating scientifically these Moon and Mars coverups, absolutely brilliant!!I would hazard a guess from investigating ancient writings that some of the ruins in the images could be remains of old mining depots? I really enjoy your posts, on the same wavelength



posted on Nov, 13 2008 @ 01:07 AM
link   
MikeSingh:

This is YOUR thread, so I will bow in deference....

However, I find some of your conclusions to be in error.

I will begin with the assertion of the 64% of Earth gravity, on the Moon.

This is, I believe, an assumption that stems from some work of Capt John Lear.

Further research shows that the calculations provided by Capt. Lear do NOT take into account the dynamics of a system in motion. Instead, Capt. Lear's calculations assume two bodies of certain masses, without any motion references involved.

I will continue....it is well known that the orbits of celestial objects rarely, if ever, follow perfectly circular orbital paths. Indeed, they can be generally seen to follow an ellipse. In fact, this is the case for ALL orbital bodies, even our Moon.

What is more....the influences of gravitational forces is such that, over the long term, not every orbital system is completely stable.

Given the lifespan of one Human Being, even if 100 Years, the 'dance of the Stars' is insignificant.....THIS is why most people cannot comprehend the complexity of the Universe....or even our Galaxy, let alone our Solar System!!!!!

Now that I've expanded your vision, hopefully, on the Universe....let's zero back in to the Moon....Earth's only natural satellite.

This is a body that is nearly one-fourth the diameter of the Earth! Some would have you believe it was 'constructed'....kinda sorta like a 'Death Star' from "Star Wars".

Except, this Moon has been in the sky for all of recorded Human history....

It is why, in English, we use the term 'month'. Possibly, coincidence, that the female of our species menstruates about every 28 days...but that's a WHOLE other discussion!!!

Back to the OP[ I tend to rant a bit, but it's needed for the backstory...]

The OP proclaims a NASA 'cover-up' about the true nature of the Moon.

Well....incredible claims require incredible proof.

Either put up, or shut up!

(sorry if too blunt....)



posted on Nov, 13 2008 @ 02:08 AM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


You haven't convinced me!

I'll go with "mikesingh" for now, but if you can give me something credible, to say he is wrong, with mathematical proof, then I will review my thoughts, but you haven't provided anything at all, to change my views.

Your Universe is absolutely teaming with Life it is just that Others in the Universe may Not wish to make contact with Earth Primates!

I wonder Why?

Why on Earth would they want to come to the Earth!

Maybe it has something to do with Intelligence or the lack of.

Perhaps we are like monkeys in a zoo, to those that are probably millions of years more advanced than us.

I suppose you may Laugh, but then can you prove, to me that there is No other Life forms in this Universe that is Not many years perhaps millions of years ahead of us....

One would have to be naive or in denial of ones own existence to believe there is now other Life in your universe.

but anyway I look forward to your argument on these matters.

As I have said I will review my thoughts if You can provide Solid Scientific Proof.

Give us your Maths on this please and then others may listen to you.



posted on Nov, 13 2008 @ 05:47 AM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


What if there is no Universe? What if there is no Galaxy? What if the earth isn't round like everyone believes, but is just a big box that we Live and Die in.

People speak Klingon and there are no Klingons, yet directly from imagination did this language come. What makes you think, having never verified these things for yourself as physical witness (i.e. go to the moon yourself) that what you've learned is correct science? I'm not putting you down weedwhacker, as I've seen your posts and your very intelligent, but just think about this.

All you need to control what people believe in, is control of the printing press. Observation is the same wither you are an ancient or modern, only the terms change. The science that is mostly used now a days is theory and numbers, not actual witness (i.e. observation and record)

We could believe we've been to the moon, but mind you...only twelve people in all of history can verify that as being actual participants and witnesses. Pretty easy to buy off a jury of 12, just make them hero's.

I saw an interview with an Apollo 17 astrounaut who was asked about the Kuniper belt. He didn't know what it was. He had to go through it to get to the moon, but he didn't know what it was...I'll see if I can find that. I know one of the STS mission went pretty far out (around 400 miles) and they encountered it. They said they could close their eyes and still see the radiation penetrait their eyes. Or how about the Apollo 11 news conference. Armstrong looks like he just got told they would kill his family if he didn't to the conference.

It's like the wizard of OZ. Put up a big show with all kinds of dazzling effects and awe the people, but really it's just a little old man behind the curtain who is afraid of loosing his power. What power? The power to make the population feel as little and insignificant as possible, by telling them just how small they are, because if people realized they don't need a King to lead them, being the image of God, then they would be truly free.

We are born with all the sense we need to figure things out appropriate to our lifespan. When was the last time you went out and watched the stars? It's like the double slit experiment. When your not looking, they move around a lot.

Anyway, I was just thinking. If the science is made up in the first place, how easy is it to not only make people feel that they know so much, but also to completely mislead them? After all, we just learned from the person who learned before us and so on. No reality to speak of.

Peace

I was graciously corrected by weed wacker..thank you...The above said statement to the Kuiper belt was meant to be The Van Allen Radiation belt.

Peace

[edit on 13-11-2008 by letthereaderunderstand]



posted on Nov, 13 2008 @ 06:07 AM
link   
If there has been no outer visitors to this planet, then perhaps I should point out, which is in recorded human history, the many ancient cave paintings that clearly show flying craft and strange humanoid figures within these paintings.

Some of which have been dated to be well over 10,000 years old..well byond the typical accepted 6,000 year so called recorded history.

You want credible evidence? Simply google for it.

Try search words like "ancient ufo cave paintings". That should come up with plenty of credible evidence.

As to a NASA coverup, how many times can we count that the government, which controls NASA, has covered up stuff? You can be assured that an agency created by said government, is going to do what their creators do, especially since they are controlled by said government.

Im not so sure about an atmosphere on the Moon, perhaps there may be a very slight atmosphere, but not anything of significance.

But then again, how old is the Earth and the Moon and the entire solar system? Who are we to say that one planet or another or any moon within, did or did not have something in the very distant past when us humans were not even in exsistance!

There is one thing that can truely answer alot of these questions.

A return mission to the Moon, and a mission to Mars and find out what that is all about.

Quite odd that after Apollo 18, the entire space program was stripped down to a mere fraction of what it once was and all we have done is spun around in circles for over 35 years with our trucking company shuttles and a collection of assembled tin cans we call the ISS.

With the recent India orbiter, and China's orbiter going around the moon, taking lots of pictures, we may get more answers from those programs.

And there are some private endeavors to send robotic rovers to the moon as well, such as Space-X.

Sooner or later, there will be an endeavor outside of Never Any Sensible Answer, will show us all what is really out there, and put aside alot of doubt and question.

I for one would like to see ol NASA be what it used to be in the 60's. And with today's technology, which is advancing at an even higher rate than it was during the 60's, returning to the moon and going byond is not outside of our ability, nor is it outside of the ability to fund it.

With all the minerals found on the moon and on various asteroids studied over the last 15 years, that alone could open up huge industries which in turn would create new economies and also open up space to humanity as it should be.

Cheers!!!!!



posted on Nov, 13 2008 @ 09:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
MikeSingh:

This is YOUR thread, so I will bow in deference....


No need! I ain't no Einstein!



However, I find some of your conclusions to be in error. I will begin with the assertion of the 64% of Earth gravity, on the Moon. This is, I believe, an assumption that stems from some work of Capt John Lear.

Nope! You’re jumping to wrong assumptions and conclusions. John Lear has NOTHING to do with what I wrote. I haven't even seen his hypotheses!


I will continue....it is well known that the orbits of celestial objects rarely, if ever, follow perfectly circular orbital paths. Indeed, they can be generally seen to follow an ellipse. In fact, this is the case for ALL orbital bodies, even our Moon.

Huh? So what's this got to do with the Moon's gravity?


most people cannot comprehend the complexity of the Universe....or even our Galaxy, let alone our Solar System!!!!!

But you claim to know and comprehend everything based on what has been taught to you in fourth grade almost half a century ago!


Now that I've expanded your vision, hopefully, on the Universe..

Thanks! I hope its for free.


This is a body that is nearly one-fourth the diameter of the Earth!

Wow!! I didn’t know that! A revelation of mind boggling proportions!



Except, this Moon has been in the sky for all of recorded Human history...

So? What’s this gotta do with gravity????


Well....incredible claims require incredible proof.

Nope! Not incredible, but extraordinary proof. Like the extraordinary claims of the existence of black holes, or even the incredible claim that the Moon was a part of the Earth! You’re right. Incredible claims require extraordinary (not incredible) evidence/proof. Is there any extraordinary proof of the above? I say the Moon may be an alien space ship. Prove me wrong, though I have no evidence that this is so. Produce yours.

Now after answering your rant, how much do you know about the Moon’s gravity? You said 1/6th? Oh yeah! I read that in my third grade too! Heard of MASCONS?


The gravity field of the moon has been investigated since 1966 when the Russian Luna 10 was placed in orbit around the moon and provided dynamical proof that the oblateness of the moon's gravitational potential was larger than the shape predicted from hydrostatic equilibrium. Soon thereafter, Muller and Sjogren differentiated the Doppler residuals from Lunar Orbiter (LO)-V to produce a nearside gravity map that displayed sizable positive gravity anomalies within the large circular mare basins. These positive anomalies, located in nearside equatorial regions with low topography, showed areas with mass concentrations (or "mascons") in the lunar interior.


Some Mascons have GAs almost equal to the gravity on Earth.


Either put up, or shut up!

You too, Mr ‘know-all’! Your sudden change in attitude is both strange and surprising. Effect of a lack of oxygen on high alt flts, I guess.

Cheers!


www.sciencemag.org...



posted on Nov, 13 2008 @ 01:00 PM
link   
reply to post by letthereaderunderstand
 


letthereader....oh dear, please go study more astronomy! The 'kuiper belt' (not 'kuniper belt) is outside the orbit of Neptune. No, I sincerely doubt the Apollo astronauts ever ventured that far!

Incidentally, the 'kuiper belt' is relevant inasmuch as it is thought to be the source of the various and sundry comets that occasionally threaten the inner planets, including Earth.

Someone else, on this thread, recently challenged me for 'the math'!!

Um....that is not possible in this sort of forum. I would suggest, instead, that anyone with certain doubts do their own research. One might start with Einstein, and work one's way back to Newton...and follow THEIR math.



posted on Nov, 13 2008 @ 01:23 PM
link   
reply to post by mikesingh
 


Hello, Mike!

Thanks for pointing out the Mascons....it DOES lend some credence to the 'artificial moon' theory....or does it?

Well, let's put our thinking caps on again. If we completely ignored mankind and everything built by mankind, here on Earth, and surveyed the planet from space, I believe we'd find it lumpy and bumpy, with 'mascons', such as Mt. Everest, for example, that would 'stand-out', so to speak.

Now, imagine we could instantly remove the oceans....and just examine a dry, static World. What would be found?

In the aggregrate, the over-all view of a planet, it is generally homogenous...until examined more closely, where we tend to see localized areas of anomalies. This is the case on the Earth, and evidently is the case on the Moon as well.

Consider Olympus Mons, on Mars! The largest ancient volcano ever observed, yet, in our Solar System! Three times higher, in comparison, than anything on Earth. (the lack of erosion may be a factor...)

In order to be taken seriously regarding a 'cover-up' of an atmosphere on the Moon, more proof would be required.

You see, every Lunar mission, whether manned or un-manned, would have seriously different parameters IF there were an atmosphere to contend with. These vehicles were designed to work in a near-vacuum...and they worked well in that environment.

I would like to remind everyone to not be confused by the term 'dark-side' of the Moon. (In no way am I accusing Mr. Mike of saying this, I am just using it for clarity).

There is the 'Far-Side'....because the Moon rotates about its axis about once every thirty Earth days, it tends to show only one hemisphere to us on our planet. (because, it also takes about thirty days to complete one orbit about the Earth). A 'day' on the Moon is equilavent to thirty 'days' on the Earth. This is a co-incidence of Nature....this particular Earth-Moon relationship will NOT be the same for all time. It is a quirk, at a time in the evolution of the Earth when Humans happen to become self-aware.

The Moon is slowly spiralling away, in every orbit she makes. About one centimetre per Earth year.

Long after the Human race is extinct, the Moon will be a possible rogue plantoid, eventually perhaps captured by the gravitation of some other body, or floating into oblivion.



posted on Nov, 13 2008 @ 02:27 PM
link   
reply to post by mikesingh
 





I say the Moon may be an alien space ship. Prove me wrong, though I have no evidence that this is so. Produce yours.


The burden of proof is on the person making claims to back them up. Even Columbus was made to prove his claims of a round world vs the norm of a flat world. It doesn't matter haow factual your claim might be, proof is on the person making claims against the norm.



posted on Nov, 13 2008 @ 02:35 PM
link   
reply to post by mikesingh
 



Originally posted by mikesingh


The gravity field of the moon has been investigated since 1966 when the Russian Luna 10 was placed in orbit around the moon and provided dynamical proof that the oblateness of the moon's gravitational potential was larger than the shape predicted from hydrostatic equilibrium. Soon thereafter, Muller and Sjogren differentiated the Doppler residuals from Lunar Orbiter (LO)-V to produce a nearside gravity map that displayed sizable positive gravity anomalies within the large circular mare basins. These positive anomalies, located in nearside equatorial regions with low topography, showed areas with mass concentrations (or "mascons") in the lunar interior.


Some Mascons have GAs almost equal to the gravity on Earth.



The average acceleration due to Earth's gravity is about 980 gal (galileos). The average gravitational acceleration on the moon is about 162 gal. The most intense gravitational anomalies on the moon are about 500mgal above the average. This would make the acceleration due to gravity in these areas 162.5 gal, still not even close to Earth.




top topics



 
114
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join