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.

 

Undebatable PROOF that we are not being told everything about the moon

page: 2
56
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 5 2009 @ 08:01 AM
link   
reply to post by king9072
 


The camera that took the picture of your house was from an airplane not from a satellite.
MJ2




posted on Mar, 5 2009 @ 08:07 AM
link   
There were tens of thousands of people working for the space agencies, contractors, etc. to put a man on the moon. Now given the lack of ability for people to keep secrets for any length of time it would be a heck of a lot easier to send a man to the moon than keep a conspiracy going for 50 years.

[edit on 5-3-2009 by griffinrl]



posted on Mar, 5 2009 @ 08:45 AM
link   
It is important to remember why we have such wonderful camera's in the satellites to take pictures of Earth. To spy. To spy on our "enemies". To spy on other corporations.

It is also important to understand how google earth works. It is not a "live" camera system like so many people beleive. They are years, and years worth of pictures put together.

And while it is possible that we have the technology to map every inch of Earth, we haven't. Why not? Because those places we have not mapped well, are "boring". Meaning there is no military or finanicial gain to do it.
And no, it isn't "just as easy". You have the ability to take a picture of every inch of your house. It isn't "just as easy" to do that to your neighbor's house. Distance does play it's role.

Any picture you are zooming in on from google earth, switches from space to an ariel photo. We do not have anything like that on the Moon, so it can't be done.

Now for the Moon. We do not have satellites that take the same type of pictures that we do on Earth. Main reason is, there isn't a reason to. Why waste money on it if there isn't a reason? NASA will never spend money to put launch something to take a picture of something that they put up there to begin with; because they already know it is there. That is a waste of millions of dollars. Besides, NASA has proof we have been there, and use that proof. Mirrors is just 1 example.

The logic "the fact that we aren't shown a thing is proof of a conspiracy" is flawed. Other reason's exist, the largest is simple. There is nothing to show. There is a house next to me but it does not show up on google earth. Which makes more sense, that there is a conspiracy cover up about that house, or the fact that picture that google earth is using is 5 years old and taken before that house was built?



posted on Mar, 5 2009 @ 08:50 AM
link   
While this is no where near "undebatable proof" the government is hiding something about the Moon, it is a great example of confirmation bias and circular reasoning. The government is hiding something about the moon, which is why we have don't yet have a comprehensive Google Moon, proving the government is hiding something.



posted on Mar, 5 2009 @ 08:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by king9072
Undebatable PROOF that we are not being told everything about the moon


FFS! The title should be changed!


I saw this thread title and immediately clicked it, thinking it might be interesting...

Instead, it's the same old thing -- speculative ranting with a crowd-attractive header. Nothing more.




posted on Mar, 5 2009 @ 09:36 AM
link   
reply to post by SaviorComplex
 

Why the big gap, then? A big gap from the last time we went to the Moon and next time. 50 years is a big gap. Are we just being motivated because the Chinese, Indian, Japanese, etc., are going and we don't want to be left behind?

Oh, and although indirectly related to this thread, what happened to the 700 boxes of Moon footage? There is record that they were moved. Moved where? 700 boxes is not something tiny.

1. The footage never existed and we just claim to have 700 boxes.
2. It did exist and someone doesn't want us to see it.

This is the biggest hoax or the biggest cover up. We have grown accustomed to let TPTB slide, even when they lose 2 trillion dollars.

Even Dr. Mitchell said the Kennedy speech was only a way to make the Russians think that we could. This was a 21st century endeavor being done with 20th century technology.


[edit on 5-3-2009 by Exopolitico]



posted on Mar, 5 2009 @ 09:47 AM
link   
reply to post by Exopolitico
 


I was responding to the OP's faulty reasoning and circular logic; it was not an attempt to explain each and every moon conspiracy. You are resorting to a common tactic.


Originally posted by Exopolitico
Oh, and although indirectly related to this thread, what happened to the 700 boxes of Moon footage? There is record that they were moved. Moved where? 700 boxes is not something tiny.

We have grown accustomed to let TPTB slide, even when they lose 2 trillion dollars.


I think you may have answered your own question.

[edit on 5-3-2009 by SaviorComplex]



posted on Mar, 5 2009 @ 09:50 AM
link   
I have done a thread like this in the past with no success...
ALL the same. I do not mind. I just hope this one gets more attention and i get some answers.....

It is just not acceptable at present not to be a ble to have a stroll of the moon by google eart...

I was looking at the previous posts.......People, have you considered the moon has no atmosphere? Or so they claim... So whats the tricky thing in having a sattelite map it up? Or rather photo it up? Mapping is an altogether different thing where they just create a 3d model. An artificial one...

On second thoughts i will post the video i had made and posted on my post to give you a perspective of things that i cannot easily/formidably explain.



If you want to post on my vid please visit that thread.



posted on Mar, 5 2009 @ 09:52 AM
link   
reply to post by king9072
 


What you presented proves that Google moon has pretty crappy pictures. Frankly I don't care! I just wish you would have entitled your thread "Google moon picture quality is bad, therefore outer space aliens exist." This way, people would know not to click on it because of the ridiculousness of the claim. Please, don't bother using the word proof unless you are proving a piece of math. After all, that is the one area where using the word "proof" instead of "evidence" actually makes sense.

In any case, it was pointed out that the good quality of Google maps is due to aerial photography. This is not a valid point. On the moon, a satellite could orbit extremely low to the moon because there is no atmosphere. If there was no atmosphere on Earth and we somehow still had a space program, you can bet quite a lot of money that satellites would be orbiting maybe 8 miles up that would collect extremely high-res photos comparable to the aerial photo's we have today on Google maps. So why don't they bother getting great high-res photos of the moon? I don't know, it could be that they don't want to show space alien artifacts. Or, realistically, they simply have other priorities right now like getting to Mars and managing all their ridiculously over-budgeted projects. NASA is a government organization. Of course they are not going to get the job done right.



posted on Mar, 5 2009 @ 09:54 AM
link   
Well, is lack of proof for a definitive truth proof of a different kind of truth? I'd generally agree to that, so the title is technically correct from the asserted premise, albeit a tad misleading.

However, on the grounds of the topic, this certainly merits a closer look. I would certainly hope that there has been more to do with the moon than we are being told. Frankly, if there hasn't I think that would show a bit of negligence on the part of governments.

In reality, especially during the Cold War with the threat of Mutually Assured Destruction, it would have been particularly wise for nations to pursue a lunar colonization plan. If, let's say, these plans were started a little after the "first" moon landing, then, by now, there's the possibility of a real lunar colony. Whether or not this is true is irrelevant to the fact that it is technically plausible.

In the same vein, one hopes that a project like this would be taken with the utmost care and secrecy, especially if it were because of a "doomsday" type scenario. I really would love the surprise when SHTF that the government has prepared a little escape plan.
Just my 2 cents.



posted on Mar, 5 2009 @ 09:59 AM
link   
Yet another poster falls into the trap of "the Americans are keeping everything from us" syndrome, all because Google Moon doesn't have high enough resolution to see the houses of the Moon People.

Of course when the US announces to the world that we landed on the Moon people denounce it as a hoax, talk about a no-win scenario.

With the Chinese and Indians now making forays into space, anything that we evil Americans have kept hidden away for all these years will now surely come to light.

Or perhaps we'll just have another conspiracy involving the US keeping China and India quiet about what they find


That's the beauty of conspiracies, they are self-fulfilling and self-perpetuating.



posted on Mar, 5 2009 @ 09:59 AM
link   
Hmmm, there are no high res images available on Google Earth for most of the Scottish Highlands - indeed, the resolution is so poor even buildings and roads cannot be identified! Why? Because that's where all the space alien bases and massive NWO concentration camps are! Obvious innit



posted on Mar, 5 2009 @ 10:02 AM
link   
yeah, where the hell is my street view on the moon? Damn conspiracy.



posted on Mar, 5 2009 @ 10:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by nasacarl
reply to post by InfaRedMan
 


Not all of them would be biological but some LOOK like they are biological.
I am only saying this because of the recent footage i have seen :

video.google.co.uk...
- skip to about 1/3 of the way in to the video for his interview. first half hour is boring.

Watch this guys interview he is an editor and he downloaded all the NASA footage fed to the public repairing the hubble and found 2 Space Phenomenon. Its AMAZING =)
First one is Orbs
Second one is ... something very interesting you will find out if you watch


Im sure some UFOS are really flying objects that carry people in them , but some of these look like organisms.

nasacarl



First post here!

Can anyone confirm what i saw on the above linked video @ around minute 45:52 to 45:56. focus on the sky behind the person being interviewed. There seems to be a white object falling from left to right.



posted on Mar, 5 2009 @ 10:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by nasacarl
reply to post by InfaRedMan
 


Not all of them would be biological but some LOOK like they are biological.
I am only saying this because of the recent footage i have seen :

video.google.co.uk...
- skip to about 1/3 of the way in to the video for his interview. first half hour is boring.

Watch this guys interview he is an editor and he downloaded all the NASA footage fed to the public repairing the hubble and found 2 Space Phenomenon. Its AMAZING =)
First one is Orbs
Second one is ... something very interesting you will find out if you watch


Im sure some UFOS are really flying objects that carry people in them , but some of these look like organisms.

nasacarl



First post here!

Can anyone confirm what i saw on the above linked video @ around minute 45:52 to 45:56. focus on the sky behind the person being interviewed. There seems to be a white object falling from left to right.



posted on Mar, 5 2009 @ 10:22 AM
link   
We will never see the far side of the moon from earth. Only probes and people in space can see it. Unless, something happens to change the moon.

I also wonder why we are not allowed to see all of the moon and why there is not better resolution available of what we do get to see. Maybe it is just the money factor and no one wants to see it. I almost can't believe that this is true though, there must be a market for it. People will buy nearly anything.



posted on Mar, 5 2009 @ 10:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by king9072...Keep in mind, we have the ability to map every square inch of earth. And of course, just as easily we could map EVERY square inch of the moon fairly easily.

Does anyone not see how significant it is that they only show us a very small spot on the moon? Not only that, if all these artifacts that we apparently left behind up there existed, why wont they let us ZOOM RIGHT INTO THE MOON? I can zoom in so close to my house I can see my car, yet I am not allowed to see up close on the moon? The fact that they could show us every inch of the moon, but intentionally do not highlights the fact that we are NOT being told exactly whats going on on the moon.

Now I think this is important because it doesn't matter what side of the debate you prefer, the fact that we aren't shown a thing is proof of a conspiracy.

I suppose if we had hundreds of airplanes and hundreds of private aerial photographers flying over the moon taking pictures (like they do for GoogleEarth), then we would be able to see things as small as houses and automobiles (and even smaller) on the Moon. But since we don't, we need to rely on the satellite imagery.

Yes -- I realize that satellite image technology exists that would allow a satellite to resolve relatively small objects from orbit, but for the moment that technology is classified as "secret". Even Google Earth does not get their "close-up" pictures of houses and cars from satellites, but rather they get those close-up photos from private aerial photographers who use airplanes.

By the way, The "Lunar Reconaissance Orbiter" (LRO) is set to launch later this year and includes very Hi-Res camera technology that will in fact allow it to resolve objects smaller than a house (but obviously not as good as the airplane photographs used by GoogleEarth.) If you want good pictures of the Moon, you will need to wait for the LRO.


[edit on 3/5/2009 by Soylent Green Is People]



posted on Mar, 5 2009 @ 10:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People
 


Google has an exclusive commercial license to imagery obtained from GeoEye-1.

"Though the satellite collects imagery at 0.41-meter ground resolution, due to U.S. licensing restrictions, commercial customers will only get access to imagery that has been processed to half-meter ground resolution," GeoEye says.

www.upi.com...

Aw shucks. Only 17 inch resolution. Bummer, I want more!

[edit on 3/5/2009 by Phage]



posted on Mar, 5 2009 @ 10:35 AM
link   
Good post about absolutely nothing?!? The moon has been mapped and there are new missions to map it down to a few FEET soon from Nasa so you will have a chance to see the landing sites with a bit of luck. I cant believe I even answered this post. +1 to you..



posted on Mar, 5 2009 @ 10:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People
 


Google has an exclusive commercial license to imagery obtained from GeoEye-1.

"Though the satellite collects imagery at 0.41-meter ground resolution, due to U.S. licensing restrictions, commercial customers will only get access to imagery that has been processed to half-meter ground resolution," GeoEye says.

www.upi.com...

Aw shucks. Only 17 inch resolution. Bummer, I want more!

[edit on 3/5/2009 by Phage]

Cool!... and the LRO that will hopefully be in lunar orbit before the end of the year will be able to resolve about 18 inches.

I suppose non-restricted/non-classified satellite imagery is getting better.

I personally can't wait until the LRO begins mapping the Moon, but since we haven't sent a super-Hi-Res camera to the Moon yet, one can't say that the lack of hi-Res photos is "Undebatable Proof" of a cover-up. That argument can very easily be debated.


[edit on 3/5/2009 by Soylent Green Is People]



new topics

top topics



 
56
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join