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.

 

200,000 Year Old Statue Found On Moon

page: 9
67
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 6 2009 @ 09:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by wazar
I'm with you TheExaminer.....
If ya'll believe this story.....well then your gonna LOVE this.....see, yesterday, when I was walking on Mars, I found what appears to be an ancient barbie doll-like artifact and smells like it's about 500,000 years old to me. That WAAAY trumps an angel thing in some moon rock thats only 200,000 yrs old pffft. Oh and just this morning.......some lady down the street from where I live gave birth to a two headed chupacabra, the thing is....one of the heads looks just like a grey.....


You know you guys make me laugh, but why is it the mods always pick on my funny post and delete them?




posted on May, 6 2009 @ 09:31 AM
link   
Holy Darwing, for goodness sake...this is a WEEKLY WORLD NEWS ARTILE!!!

is a website, originally a supermarket tabloid, which parodies sensationalist and bizarre stories


World weekly News Article about Moon Statue

Usual Weekly World News Headlines...

*ZOMBIE VERSUS KIDS
*Batboy Torments New york
*God found: and It's a woman!!!!



[edit on 6-5-2009 by Next_Heap_With]



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 09:32 AM
link   
This thread is an example of everything that is wrong with ATS. People posting things that they know aren't true, people NOT reading the entire thread, people so desperate to believe that they will believe /anything/, even the ridiculous.

I'm sorry for sounding harsh, but there's so much noise on ATS these days that it's really discouraging. I thought we were different than other places, but more and more, we're becoming just as silly and noisy as they are - and just as worthless.



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 09:54 AM
link   
Get this story off the front page someone please.



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 10:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ansiroth
Get this story off the front page someone please.
you do realise that you bumped the thread to say that, don't you



I dunno, yoof of today ect



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 10:05 AM
link   
reply to post by Ansiroth
 


A thread is only made popular by those reading, starring and flagging and responding. If members want this tabloid article out of sight, stop posting to the thread, go flag and star and post to a worthwhile thread to replace it.

It's you the user the who determines what is worthy or not, don't like it... Don't respond. Let the thread die it's natural death. Allow those who choose not to read carefully to make errors in judgment and laugh silently knowing you have the knowledge they don't or vice versa if you are believer.



[edit on 5-6-2009 by worldwatcher]



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 10:07 AM
link   
Oh dear. Some of you people will believe anything


How long before somebody posts an article from The Onion as absolute truth?



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 10:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by CurioHow long before somebody posts an article from The Onion as absolute truth?


About a year ago, as far as I can tell.



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 10:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by m4ng4n
I´m so feed up with the debunkers spoiling every good tread...


IF YOU´RE NOT INTERESTED IN THE SUBJECT WHY BOTHER POSTING?!!



When do you guys get it????

We ARE interested in the paranormal, UFOs, Aliens etc. but we are also interested in a balanced view.

ATS is just about the only place on earth where we can debunk or add a critical voice to outrageous claims.

Point is that if those who wants so badly to believe come to ATS as a source then they are ENTITLED to know if a given thread is a hoax or just a collection of lies.
If debunkers (or critical minded people as we call them) spot something stupid, hoaxy or disrespectful of the truth then it is a duty to add that critical voice.

If debunkers don't weed out untruth we can't find the truth anywhere in the huge piles of manure spread by irresponsible people.

If debunkers succesfully debunk stuff you really care about then you should be glad. You can look for genuine stuff and not look like a fool.



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 10:28 AM
link   
LMAO!!! You guys are cracking me up!



I will admit though, I wanted to believe it when I first saw it, but then I saw Batboy...



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 10:37 AM
link   
did anyone else notice the author??

Erik Van Datiken


does anyone still need proof its fake??

(sorry if someone already noticed this, i cant be bothered to trawl through all the pages of posts)



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 10:50 AM
link   
200,000-year-old baby found in moon rocks

derekclontz.wordpress.com...


There maybe something to this story after all



[edit on 6-5-2009 by MOTT the HOOPLE]



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 11:00 AM
link   
I knew it, the paradigm shift that my web-bot spirit has been hinting towards through the reflection in the mirror is at hand. Once people realise that the Gregorian calendar is out by 12 years and that the Y2K bug will hit when we're all driven mad by swine flu our new benevolent overseers will guide us through to true understanding and oneness with all.

All the signs are there, the sun rising every morning and the moon's 28 day orbit - combine this with nanotechnology and the plans the NWO have for us and we'll be pleading to be released from our reptilian jailers.

And I, for one, welcome our new insect overlords.

-m0r



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 11:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by m4ng4n
I´m so feed up with the debunkers spoiling every good tread...


IF YOU´RE NOT INTERESTED IN THE SUBJECT WHY BOTHER POSTING?!!

With that said I for one is interested in the subject of ancient and lost civilizations even if I think this is a too great evidence to be truth.

But on the other hand I´m also a believer that there actually are remains of an offspring to our older civilization on the moon so why shouldn´t there be artifacts from the very same inhabitants?

Like this one for example;
www.blinkx.com...


Now I haven´t been on the moon and neither have any of you so to say wether it´s true or not isn´t the question here. The main thing is that it´s a true possibility if we had a civilization far more advanced than ours (We should be cavemen in comparison).


"which means it was made 170,000 years before the human species appeared on Earth."


Saids who? Did we appear on earth 30,000 years ago?
If this is a real artifact I for one have no problem with the fact that it was manmade but it feels a little bit contradictory to debunk and raise the question of it´s origin in the same sentence...


[edit on 5-5-2009 by m4ng4n]


I wrote the starting sentence NOT because it isn´t a good thing that hoaxes are proven but generally speaking people on this site are more or less called idiots if they spit something out that wasn´t well checked out.

Wouldn´t it due with a simple answer that points to facts? Why all the wickedness?

Jeeeezzz! Some of the guys here just seemes to think it´s hillarious to pick down on people with no regrets what so ever and just read the starting lines in a post and then have their mind clear while others just read one post and then judge because they never bother to read true a full thread.
So if you don´t read the responses given or answer the OP straight up then what does that make you?

I read more than I write and some people here only debunk everything whitout putting something forward to the discussion and that is what I meant by saying what I did, but then on the other hand I could try to explain myself on every frakkin page and still there´s someone spilling his guts all over the place because he doesn´t bother to read a whole tread.

Take a look at THE WHOLE TREAD before you post...

Sometimes it looks like a kindergarten here!

In order to rule the masses, one most divide them first...seems like that is happening perfectly on this site nowadays!



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 11:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jadette
This thread is an example of everything that is wrong with ATS. People posting things that they know aren't true, people NOT reading the entire thread, people so desperate to believe that they will believe /anything/, even the ridiculous.

I'm sorry for sounding harsh, but there's so much noise on ATS these days that it's really discouraging. I thought we were different than other places, but more and more, we're becoming just as silly and noisy as they are - and just as worthless.



Jadette, thanks for joining the team.
I say this same thing constantly and it always falls on deaf ears.

No one cares here anymore, no members (not enough anyway), no mods.
Maybe it's because there are so many "defenders" of this kind of nonsense that we cannot possibly see the truth in all the steamy piles of lies.

Someone posts an obvious hoax (or gag) and it gets pointed out (or proved hoax) and there are a dozen zealots screaming at the top of their lungs for the "debunkers" to leave and to stop the "disinformation".
I think the saddest part is that they are so QUICK to believe based on nothing except a blog post.
They do not source the articles. They do not scrutinize the images, they just.. automatically believe.

It is mindboggling.

This thread participants should all be in agreement that this is a funny hoax, but it's not, there are a sad amount of believers even when presented with evidence that is is pure bunk.




posted on May, 6 2009 @ 11:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by m4ng4n
I´m so feed up with the debunkers spoiling every good tread...


IF YOU´RE NOT INTERESTED IN THE SUBJECT WHY BOTHER POSTING?!!


Ground Control to Major Tom...

Pardon the debunkers for giving you the truth. How terrible of them! They should all be banned for harshing your buzz!

So even when you know it's a lie, you still prefer to believe it and flame those who choose not to be ignorant? How strange!

IRM



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 11:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by MOTT the HOOPLE
200,000-year-old baby found in moon rocks

derekclontz.wordpress.com...


There maybe something to this story after all


Oh come on, are you serious?

Why is it this Dr Richard Call's name only comes up in searches relating to the story you linked?

Why does it say:

The geologist himself stood by his charge that the agency is engaging in a cover-up and produced a top-secret photograph of a technician holding the fossilized fetus to prove it.
*SNIP*
The insiders also told him that the fossil was analyzed and shown to no less a figure than then-President Richard Nixon before it was placed in an incinerator - and destroyed.


Yet this snippet says:

The story finally emerged when South African geologist Dr. Richard Call showed newsmen the baby's preserved remains, telling the reporters the shriveled fetus had been smuggled to him by a concerned NASA lab technician.

Link

then there is the rubbish about the fossil was found inside a moon rock, since it was inside the rock that would make the rock 200,000 years old.

Firstly, moon rocks are billions on years old

Secondly, fossils aren't found inside basaltic rocks which is what Apollo 11 brought back with them.

More holes than swiss cheese.




[edit on 6/5/09 by Chadwickus]



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 11:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by On the level
Ive been thinking this must be a plant article by the mods to catch all the trolls in one net
if so please be aware I am not a troll but think this is the type of article that sets ATS back by 2 years. I am happy to add my debunker skills when needed however there is no need in this case. Stevie Wonder could see that this is fake


That is great, I agree, for it to be a fossil you would need one of two things. A calamity or an ocean or volcanos. Which I believe the moon has neither and never has. Just look at the fossil record here. 200,000 years old? And it looks like a Christmas angel for the top of a tree? Please people, get real. Plausible? Concievable?

Come on already. Sad to see this type of crap instigating arguement. Distraction from reality at best and because sooooo many people are now learning that we never actually landed on the moon. Just look at the photo evidence on NASA's own website. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see the fraud.

Why would China say it will take them 12-15 years to land a man on the moon? We did it in just a few short years. And they have all the Soviet technology at hand and the Soviets spent 500 times more time in space than we did then!!!
Again, Plausibilty...........what is more plausible?

[edit on 6-5-2009 by daddio]

[edit on 6-5-2009 by daddio]



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 11:49 AM
link   
reply to post by InfaRedMan
 


Did you even read what I wrote?

How about a crash course in reading comprehension?



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 11:51 AM
link   
Oh god why?! Why is this stupid thread still getting flags and stars?



new topics

top topics



 
67
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join