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 moon is artifical

page: 13
28
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 08:45 PM
link   
yeah cool reply as a species we have been round for what 30 50 thosand years in are current form and the erath is like 4.5 BILLON years old..whoknows what life evolved before us, i saw a really cool star rek episode which prosode that a spcies of dinos evovled and saw the approaching metour and evacted to another star sytem...whos to say that a species didnt evove here and the clear off millions of years ago and have decided to come back and check up on their old house(ike we all havnt done that!!!!)and got interested and decided to stick around, build a perm base on the moon(their mother ship??) and just sit and watch their new tennants.???????

thoughts??




posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 08:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by CaptAvatar
I can see how some might think that the "dark" side of the moon is, well, dark. Both sides of the moon see daylight. It spins in its orbit in a way that the same side is always facing the earth, but that doesn't mean it is dark on one side all the time.


Good point. The phases of the moon amply illustrate that the Moon is rotating with respect to the Sun.

I blame Pink Floyd.



posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 10:14 PM
link   
Hello all.
I've been a lurker member here for years but have never posted until now so, go easy on and elder and forgive my errors.
Astronomy is my love too.
This Lunar of ours that ovals our spaceship around our star is indeed so very fascinating. It has been and will be the subject of many fascinating discussions throughout many days past and yet to come.
There's absolutely no doubt at all in this posters mind, that 12 brave men walked its lunar surface and for whatever reasons we have not returned in over 37 years, it all escapes any logical reasoning I can contrive as to why.
I can and do concede to the fact that it's way too dangerous and cost very many dollars to safely go there by the USA but one thing I can't understand is this,
Why the Russians (to my knowledge), have never attempted to go there since the USA went there last in 1972.
I'm not so sure that I agree with a Mars size body colliding with Earth to form the Moon eons ago. I do agree the Moon itself is very unique in it's existence near Earth and truth is, more facts need to be known about our close neighbor.
I personally prefer not to refer to Lunar as our Moon at all and do prefer to think of the (Earth Lunar) as a double planet system instead that orbit each other 1 AU from the Sun.
With that said, I don't think the moon is hollow nor do I think that Aliens presently live there. But then again, it's indeed fascinating to speculate about such matters and I do keep an open mind as to new truths in astronomy.
Venus is fascinating to me too.
But just let me say this before I retrieve my hat from its doornail and retire for the evening.
Planet Venus of near equal Earth mass, is considered by some to be upside down in relattion to other planets , and Venus gets approx. 106 times the distance to Earth as our Moon is and, at Venus, Earth closest opposition, Venus always faces the exact same side toward Earth,Lunar.
To me, that fact is very intriguing as to why Venus does this unique same face presenting dance with the Earth Lunar system when it passes Earth Lunar on its inside orbit.
Sorry, Didn't mean to get off topic.

My novel entitled, Ancient Nemesis ( Journey to Pluto )
www.trafford.com...
70 percent of author proceeds go to children's cancer patients
www.caringbridge.org...

[edit on 8-4-2009 by Superluminal]



posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 10:24 PM
link   
ok the lst guys post was very cool anwell structured and i liked it but a lil off topic now we want to talk about venus? venus has very interesting features but start another thread..did any one read my post about the earth having a second moon??? kinda blow my mind!!! what does that second bodies have to say??? what did it do to our human devolpment maybe allthe stuff in ancient texts can linl up with this??? just wanna get a some discussion going so people ..... impress me!!!!!!



posted on Apr, 9 2009 @ 02:02 AM
link   
reply to post by insider15
 



now we want to talk about venus? venus has very interesting features but start another thread..did any one read my post about the earth having a second moon??? kinda blow my mind!!! what does that second bodies have to say??? what did it do to our human devolpment maybe allthe stuff in ancient texts can linl up with this???


If you read his post, you'll see that the man made his first post in years to answer your thread. Everything he wrote was on topic. He was drawing your attention to Venus only showing one side (at it's closest to Earth). If you think the Moon is artificial because of that fact, it seems fair that you might find similar incidences interesting elsewhere. Despite this, you dismiss him out of hand. I'd call that fairly arrogant. Show some respect for members and they'll show some respect to you. His two links tells it's own story...

His facts were also correct. Yours are incorrect. Humans like us have been around at least 100 000 years. Life didn't begin on Earth as soon as it was formed. Life is thought to have began some half a billion years later after Earth cooled etc.

Have you read about the "Second Moon?" You should. It's a three mile wide asteroid that's too small and dark to image at good resolution. It had no effect on human development.

You've read all the different ideas and evidence put forward on your thread. Weighed the evidence. Pondered the possibilities. Laughed at some replies and dismissed others. What is your conclusion?

Is the moon artificial?
Who made it?
When was it made?
Why was it made?
Where did it come from?
Who's on it?
Why have scientists spent several hundred years amassing a body of peer reviewed evidence that says the Moon is a natural satellite of Earth?
Why a moon when this planet is like a furnished house and the moon an empty shack?



posted on Apr, 9 2009 @ 02:09 AM
link   
These coincidences are known in the scientific community as Emergence Phenomina.

en.wikipedia.org...

Whether the perfect eclipse is an emergence phenomina or not is questionable, there maybe a simple answer to it all. Plus, the moon is actually increasing its distance from us, and eventually will slip out of Earth's gravitational pull.



posted on Apr, 9 2009 @ 05:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kandinsky
reply to post by JPhish
 

Hiya JFish

Hi Strawman


Who tells anyone what to believe?

Well, if someone claims something is a truth, and you believe them, they’ve told you what to believe. This is what you have done.


I believe it because it's supported by evidence and accepted by science.
Well you haven’t seen ANY of this evidence nor are you a scientist. So you essentially believe it because they told you to believe it.


It isn't claimed as conclusive, it's the theory of 'best fit' at this time.

It’s called a paradigm, as I mentioned in my first post.


You're entitled to 'doubt' the existence of moon meteorites.
of course I am, because I’ve never observed moon rocks and in all likelihood, neither have you.


I imagine your belief tends toward the idea that scientists have made it up to perpetuate the belief that the Moon is a rocky natural satellite.

No, my belief is that you should only trust inferences that you can scrutinize in real time. Instead of simply believing something because the majority of people tell you it is true . . .


Again, it's up to you what you choose to believe.

You’re right, and I’ll believe my very limited senses and personal inferences over anyone.


From my point of view the knowledge gained from the 200+ rocks is quite interesting.
knowledge??? You’ve never seen these rocks, held these rocks, tasted these rocks, smelled these rocks or banged them together to hear how hollow they are. (pun) If you are even entertaining the possibility that is knowledge, we have problems.


They've added more information about the Moon's composition than the 800+ pounds of material returned by Apollo missions.

What Apollo missions?



I'm an intelligent individual, fully able to draw my own conclusions.

You should try it.


The theory of how the Moon was created is shared by scientists across the world.
Argumentum ad populum and an appeal to authority


Scientists aren't any different to you or I. They are free thinking, intelligent normal men and women. There are hundreds of thousands of them. I know several and they are very normal. One used to work for the Police in forensics, so she was helping rather than hindering.
red herring


You are entitled to think it's there by design. If you refer to 'intelligent design', I don't understand why God or Allah would need to create a Moon. The Earth would be wholly perfect surely?
informal fallacy: appealing to ridicule


If you mean by alien design, it seems a lot of work to observe us Earthlings. Instead of hauling a planetismal from who knows where, they could have parked a mothership up there.
informal fallacy: appealing to ridicule


Whereas you have used your critical thinking skills and concluded the Moon is there by design, mine have concluded that it is not.
I never claimed to conclude anything; believing what others tell you to believe is hardly critical thinking.

[edit on 4/9/2009 by JPhish]



posted on Apr, 9 2009 @ 06:57 AM
link   
reply to post by insider15
 


It is true that the moon keeps only 1 side perfectly pointed towards us. Infact its the only body in the solar system that doesn't rotate; Which personally I find rather odd.

I also heard from another source, which mentioned that they had found exterrerstrial life on the moon and enourmous artifacts. I'm not just saying this, it was fully documented and classified. I heard about it on the Radio station on www.devinecosmos.com and there was a guy that was talking about it , and he used to work for NASA, and that there is really a massive cover up.



posted on Apr, 9 2009 @ 07:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Sam Cerulean
reply to post by insider15
 


It is true that the moon keeps only 1 side perfectly pointed towards us. Infact its the only body in the solar system that doesn't rotate; Which personally I find rather odd.

I also heard from another source, which mentioned that they had found exterrerstrial life on the moon and enourmous artifacts. I'm not just saying this, it was fully documented and classified. I heard about it on the Radio station on www.devinecosmos.com and there was a guy that was talking about it , and he used to work for NASA, and that there is really a massive cover up.


Better to say that the Moon doesn't rotate in relation to its primary, BTW.

Question about the "source" you mention. Why do you believe him/her/it?



posted on Apr, 9 2009 @ 07:34 AM
link   
so far there is still no reasonable explanation to tell me why we have not gone back to the moon, you cant tell me that we would not be interested in drilling down into it to see what its got to offer?

or put a base up there as a logical jump off point to take the next step,after all these things were planned, what went wrong to change these ideas?

i find it hard to believe that you would shelf a project like space exploration
and just have a poxy little space station when common sense tells me the technology to be on the moon should of got to the point now where it was just matter of fact that every day ordinary people had been to the moon and could say yeah been there nothing going on rite?

And to add 1 more fact to the many in this great thread, the earth is far to small to have been able to have captured the moon with its size and mass.



posted on Apr, 9 2009 @ 07:51 AM
link   
reply to post by stealthyaroura
 


"so far there is still no reasonable explanation to tell me why we have not gone back to the moon, you cant tell me that we would not be interested in drilling down into it to see what its got to offer?"

Then you need to post what your personal definition of "reasonable explanation" is. Many people are interested in getting exact information regarding the composition of the Moon, and there are plans to go back. However, going back to prove or disprove that the Moon is an alien spaceship is not very high on the reasons that would compel a return. It does, however, IMHO, rank before "going back to prove the Moon is or is not made of green cheese."



posted on Apr, 9 2009 @ 08:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by JPhish

Originally posted by Kandinsky
reply to post by JPhish
 

Hello there Jfish



if someone claims something is a truth, and you believe them, they’ve told you what to believe. This is what you have done.

Not at all. One can explore several different explanations until one becomes preferable. It's freedom of choice and freedom of thought.



Well you haven’t seen ANY of this evidence nor are you a scientist. So you essentially believe it because they told you to believe it.

As stated above it's through reading different explanations and settling for the one I perceive as having most merit. You imply that you are able to be an independent thinker whereas others, and specifically me, may not. That is a fallacy. A 'garbage in, garbage out' argument.



knowledge??? You’ve never seen these rocks, held these rocks, tasted these rocks, smelled these rocks or banged them together to hear how hollow they are. (pun) If you are even entertaining the possibility that is knowledge, we have problems.

Ah...the empiricist argument. 'I haven't seen/held/tasted/smelled it so it might not exist' argument. Poor show Jfish. I'm on holiday in Northern Italy in summer for the first time. I guess I'll have to accept somebody else's evidence that the place and people exist.



What Apollo missions?

Same again




red herring

...or an attempt to show that scientists aren't inveterate liars and bridge the gap between some peoples perceptions of them and the mundane.



informal fallacy: appealing to ridicule


Not at all. I do not seek to ridicule and you might notice my tone is much friendlier than your own. Appealing to contempt is also an informal fallacy.



I never claimed to conclude anything; believing what others tell you to believe is hardly critical thinking.


Same as first reply. If I've missed one or two of your points it isn't through oversight. I rarely get involved in these point by point posts and rarely read the ones that do. Nevertheless, I'm still persuaded by the knowledge available that
A, The Moon exists
B, Apollo Mission happened
C, The Moon is a natural satellite.

Now we can continue to go through the 'Debater's Handbook' and tick off emergent/ dominant and residual ideologies and interpellation. We can take the route of analysis favored by Baudrillard or Foucault? Terry Eagleton is a favorite of mine. We can engage in some intellectual public masturbation exercise if you really want to? I sure hope not as I find it mildly tedious
If you'd prefer to continue with a tit for tat 'debating' match please also add something to this thread. The thread is called "The Moon is Artificial."

Take it easy and try to be a little warmer in your posts. That 'icy blast of logic' persona is kinda off putting. Smile



posted on Apr, 9 2009 @ 08:31 AM
link   
According to researchers, it is suggested that the impact that formed the Moon took place during the formation of the Earth’s rocky mantle and iron core - a process that geologists believe was aided by the impact. Under high pressures, niobium becomes ‘siderophile’ or iron-loving, so much of the terrestrial niobium would have become incorporated into the Earth’s core when it formed, leaving a niobium-poor mantle.
By comparing the compositions of lunar and terrestrial rock samples, astronomers in Germany have calculated that no more than two-thirds of the Moon is impactor material. Moreover, they estimate that the Moon must be at least 4.5 billion years old. If the giant impact occurred while the core and mantle were forming, the Earth would have contributed little niobium to the Moon. The fission theory of the moon's formation might explain the moon's lack of a large core and the oxygen-isotope similarity.



posted on Apr, 9 2009 @ 09:26 AM
link   
reply to post by insider15
 


have you played the game "prey" if not you should.

matter of freaking you out.



posted on Apr, 9 2009 @ 09:36 AM
link   
reply to post by insider15
 


in the ps1 game legend of dragoons. the moon is a giant egg for the 140 species or something like it.

and towards the end of the game the moon come crash to the world. while being stoped by a giant tree. you an army of dragons spawning from the moon itself. like if the moon was the final fruit of the tree of the species.....

in prey the earth is being attack by a giant ship that looks like a small moon. the hole ship is a living entity.



posted on Apr, 9 2009 @ 09:46 AM
link   
reply to post by fight back
 


Ah, good. Proof at last. I stand corrected.

The hollow moon and the hollow Earth are both urban legends with no support or grounding in reality.



posted on Apr, 9 2009 @ 10:08 AM
link   
I also agree that it is odd that the Soviets or even another country, ceased in putting one of their own citizens on the moon. Of course you always here "but their N1 rocket kept exploding" blah blah stuff. Still 40 years and nobody returns except of course by satellites. And of course none of these satellites ever has the resolution or equipment to observe anything at any of the landing sites. Now if the moon is artificial, a space station ran by an alien species,so to speak, that would be a good reason to leave them alone. For they might leave and what would that do to our Planet?



posted on Apr, 9 2009 @ 10:22 AM
link   
reply to post by TamtammyMacx
 


"Now if the moon is artificial, a space station ran by an alien species,so to speak, that would be a good reason to leave them alone."

That's quite a leap from "we haven't been back to the Moon." Care to put up your trail of logic from A to B for us?



posted on Apr, 9 2009 @ 10:36 AM
link   
reply to post by insider15
 


I agree also. The Moon was obviously parked there, in the perfect synchronous orbit where it rides, never degrading, never changing it's orbital path, and it could not be drilled into, and di ring like a bell several times when parts of spacecraft was dropped on it. I have come to belive it was parked there by the Iggi, of the Annunuki who came here long ago and started this religious mess we are in, ans taught mankind to make war on each other. I believe they, for the most part, live in deep underground bases, and are actively waiting for reinforcements to arrive. Did you know in ancient history that are references to a time when there was no Moon in the sky? Finally, scientist confirm the Moon is much older than Earth.



posted on Apr, 9 2009 @ 11:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by autowrench
reply to post by insider15
 

Did you know in ancient history that are references to a time when there was no Moon in the sky? Finally, scientist confirm the Moon is much older than Earth.



Mind elaborating on the sources of those references about there being no moon in the sky? I am very interested in that



new topics

top topics



 
28
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join