Our Moon is Not Ours

reply to post by SuperSlovak

They did, 862 pounds of dust and rocks.
The explosions were for seismic testing of the interior of the moon. Guess what? It isn't hollow.

allright, fair enough...
but did they take something and dig through the surface?
that would also be a nice accurate way to find out once and for all

Originally posted by SuperSlovak
allright, fair enough...
but did they take something and dig through the surface?
that would also be a nice accurate way to find out once and for all

www.lpi.usra.edu...

Originally posted by NavalFC
There are no odd structures on the moon. You may see weird tricks of light or be able to make out pictures, But as with the mars lunacy, this is due to your brain's inate tendency to try to find familiar in the unfamiliar.

Please watch all 3 parts in this video series on the subject, which is called Pareidollia:
www.youtube.com...

You sound like an dis informing CIA spook.

reply to post by Psychonaughty




OH right!!! you cant come up with a explanation for tendencies of the human mind that have been directly observed in science (the tendency of the mind to find patterns- this evolved as a survival trait)

So NOW you have resorted to calling me a CIA dis information agent. Yes folks, the tried and true technique of SOME UFO proponents! If you cant beat them, just called them a CIA spook

this kind of irritates me, as blood circle's whiny thread calling me smug and arrogant because of my balls to the wall no nonsense approach to this.

Yet yet, I have seen on NUMEROUS occassions UFO proponents arrogantly call skeptics close minded fools , refuse to see the evidence, disinformation agents, and all sorts of ridiculous things, and I realized:

The majority here wont care if your a balls to the wall no nonsense type , as long as you do it on behalf of the proponent side! However, question that, dare to be skeptical at the same time, and all of a sudden you become "arrogant" nd "smug"

What nonsense.

May sound like an odd question, maybe one for any of the experts out there....

If the rotation of the moon matches that of the earth, why is there not a perfect circle on it's surface perpendicular to the earth, where over millions of years, the earth would have "shielded" it from impacts from space and created a smoother and definately visible area.

Daft or not? Just a thought.

I am still in the belief that something ain't quite right up there!

reply to post by nerbot


The moon has not always been tidally locked with Earth. Early in its history it did not always show the Earth the same face.

The entire surface of the moon gets exposed to space (and the Earth). Meteors and asteroids don't come from a single direction or on a schedule. The Earth is small and distant, space is large and everywhere.

[edit on 12/8/2008 by Phage]

reply to post by Phage


Hi Phage

As a well educated poster I would like to ask what is your view on the so called air brushing by NASA of many lunar surface shots.

Also the anomolies that are delivered on these sites as follows

www.marsanomalyresearch.com...

www.thelivingmoon.com...

They are very interesting to say the least and I hope that most are past relics as they say and not just freak shadows of light?

Thanks

reply to post by Bob Down Under


.
go check out www.badastronomy.com...

scroll down tell you get to "a step farther out" and read those.

reply to post by Phage


Gotcha!

How about this one then...Why isn't the moon green if it's so old and made of cheese?

another good question why would the rovers need COLOR FILTERS on them?
To hide the real color of the planets? To hide what they dont want us to see?

reply to post by SuperSlovak



Because what the human eye sees is really not very useful for scientific purposes (which is what all of these missions are about). Because scientists don't really care what color the planets are. Much more can be learned by observing specific wavelengths. You do know that most astronomy is done with filters, right?

This information is about the Mars Pathfinder but the general information holds true for all of the rovers. The current rovers use different filters but for the same purpose.

Twelve of the filters in the IMP are used to examine the geology of Mars. These filters rely on the fact that different minerals reflect varying colors (wavelengths) of light. Some of these subtle differences may not even be visible to the human eye, but individual filters can be "tuned" to specific spectra (colors of light), in order to make them very visible in the images. Geologists have made predictions about what minerals can be found in the area, and the filters geology filters have been picked accordingly.

marsweb.jpl.nasa.gov...


[edit on 12/8/2008 by Phage]

You people really think NASA would release pictures of the moon's surface that obviously contain structures/towers/pyramids/faces/etc? No, they're regulated by the government, every single thing we see, the government has seen first. Think about this. Now could NASA be hiding something much bigger than just little odd geographical phenomenon? Hell yeah, and they probably are.

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by nerbot

 

The moon has not always been tidally locked with Earth. Early in its history it did not always show the Earth the same face.

Of course not, mainstream science is ready to accept that the Earth is a part of the Moon, from an impact at the advent and slightly before the existence of Earth.

For 25 years, scientists have pondered a theory that the Moon was created when an object the size of Mars crashed into Earth less than 100 million years after the Sun was born, some 4.6 billion years ago. The general idea has been run through the paces and massaged into shape and is now the favored explanation

www.space.com...

The entire surface of the moon gets exposed to space (and the Earth).

The Earth and the moon were a reaction of the impact of one larger planetoids into to another much larger planetoids, the results are as follows, "Our Moon came from that impact." There aren't to many logical conclusions after centuries of pondering the exact beginnings of the "Earth-Moon" orbits, but human conviction to this dilemma has prevailed.

New research by a team under Ian Crawford and Emily Baldwin of the Birkbeck College School of Earth Sciences used more sophisticated means to simulate the pressures any such terrestrial meteorites might have experienced during their arrival on the lunar surface. This confirmed Armstrong's hypothesis. In many cases, the pressures could be low enough to permit the survival of biological markers, making the lunar surface a good place to look for evidence of early terrestrial life.

Any such markers are unlikely to remain on Earth, where they would have been erased long ago by more than three billion years of volcanic activity, later meteor impacts, or simple erosion by wind and rain.

www.livescience.com...

So, the surface of the moon is untainted or unchanged, besides the meteorite impacts that it essentially protected the Earth from, and which more than likely displays what the "Early Bombardment" had done to Earth in it's earliest days.

Meteors and asteroids don't come from a single direction or on a schedule.

I will definitely agree with you on that assumption. Though we have the means to track "SOME" of the NEA's, we do not have any idea of the day when the "Earth Killer" will come, it has happened in the past, and is destined to happen again. Shoemaker -Levy provided our first visual of the devastation involved with the possible "Earth Killer" scenario.

The Earth is small and distant, space is large and everywhere.
[edit on 12/8/2008 by Phage]

being the third rock from the sun has its benefits, but we aren't that distant when it comes to the local solar system we now live in. It is a veritable "Shooting Gallery" around us, and with the moon on our side, it may very well save us again some day, might not be tomorrow, but it could do the job again as it had done so many years ago.

HOW MANY ASTEROIDS ARE THERE?

Gaspra, Asteroid #951.
There are about 40,000 known asteroids that are over 0.5 miles (1 km) in diameter in the asteroid belt. About 3,000 asteroids have been cataloged. There are many more smaller asteroids.

www.enchantedlearning.com...

As for the naysayers of there being actual bases on the moon being "Figments of Optical imagination"?
It all boils down to the details of whats being seen and what is being regarded as just out right fallacies of self acceptance for this to be true and what is being discussed for such naysayers to write the effects and or structures off as "Debunked" or "Untrue" clarifications, it all turns out to be "Personal Opinions" and not much more.
I cannot "Physically" produce the evidences they are wanting or needing for verification of such thing's, but yet they can only stand their grounds with the same old rebuttals that are so often referred to "Self acknowledgement" as to not really have any deniable evidences either.
From my own personal investigations, I have been swayed to believe that the thing's that are on the moons surface have some merit, granted, there are some that can be "Misconstrued" as structure, and those become very obvious under our ATS scrutinies, but the one's that have two sided hard argument theories, these are the ones of true verification necessity and debunking arguments, we here at the ATS forums may well be the first people to have disclosed this being factual, with all the studies and litigation's of such material and thoughts with photo's or Videos, and with that comes the PTB's, which allow us to argue and give point's with no true "Physical" disclosures for the knowledge's that are kept from us as a society of the possible "Incapabilities" to handle such truths.

Deny ignorance and be vigilant in the truth, it will only be a matter of time when something gives, for one side or the other, and then, and only then will the "REAL" truths be shared with us all.

Originally posted by Psychonaughty
You sound like an dis informing CIA spook.

No silly that would be ONI [Office of Naval Intelligence)

But he's not very good really

Originally posted by NavalFC
go check out www.badastronomy.com...

Sorry we don't do bad astronomy around here... He is a professional debunker that is in it for the money with books and lecture tours. If it wasn't for us giving him stuff to debunk he would have no income

Besides he screens his posts...

[edit on 9-12-2008 by zorgon]

Originally posted by Psychonaughty

Originally posted by NavalFC
There are no odd structures on the moon. You may see weird tricks of light or be able to make out pictures, But as with the mars lunacy, this is due to your brain's inate tendency to try to find familiar in the unfamiliar.

Please watch all 3 parts in this video series on the subject, which is called Pareidollia:
www.youtube.com...

You sound like an dis informing CIA spook.

Hmm you think?!!! Its that pattern I tell ya!!! Highly recognizable and in this day and age..unlike back in the 70's, is highly ineffective.



Cheers!!!!

Originally posted by RFBurns
Please watch all 3 parts in this video series on the subject,

I like this one better



and THIS one



When your eyes can sort it out and see the hollow you can go anomalie hunting

So after reading all these arguments and discussions about the moon I can't believe that I was wrong after all these years...


I thought the moon was made of green cheese, at least that was what I was taught at shcool...
But really is just a big round rock after all. Imagine my heartbroken face crying tears of despair as the reality sinks in. no cheese on the moon. And I suppose there are no moonmins up there either ?

Did nasa and Armstrong take an Earth cold with them when they went up there , and now the moonmins are dead and the cheese has calcified?

i think the fact that we havn't realy examined it thouroughly is weird! We havn't taken samples of its crust all we have done is look on the surface!

I think we would find some interesting things below its surface!