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.

 

Moon Rising - The truth about the moon revealed

page: 14
71
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 9 2009 @ 02:30 AM
link   
Looks ok so far, but they probably should have considered this a rough cut, then used it to sell to a network that could redo it in a more professional style, with better edits and narration.




posted on Jun, 9 2009 @ 02:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by contemplator
Looks ok so far, but they probably should have considered this a rough cut, then used it to sell to a network that could redo it in a more professional style, with better edits and narration.




Is that including the GIANT HUMANOID!
lost all credibility in 7:30 seconds!.
More BS about the moon thats all, to get money from the gullible so he might do well from here.



posted on Jun, 9 2009 @ 02:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by wmd_2008
7:00 to 7:20
giant humanoid in space suit
no wonder joe has scam in his name


I was also taken aback by that...

Why Jose?



[edit on 9-6-2009 by Exuberant1]



posted on Jun, 9 2009 @ 04:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by wmd_2008

Originally posted by contemplator
Looks ok so far, but they probably should have considered this a rough cut, then used it to sell to a network that could redo it in a more professional style, with better edits and narration.




Is that including the GIANT HUMANOID!
lost all credibility in 7:30 seconds!.
More BS about the moon thats all, to get money from the gullible so he might do well from here.


A network would eliminate 90% because of what this film delivers. If any of you saw the film segment you should remember he says "whether or not it is a humanoid" we won't know until NASA releases the photo that we will see what's really there. You half baked debunkers try and pick little things out of context to try and sway the purpose of the way this film was made, into a scam. The only scammers here are those of you that got to see this first segment for "free" and now are trying to destroy the film for what it really conveys. The fact is, NASA has a major problem with this opening sequence. They need to explain what that thing was on the top of that crater in 1994 when this photo was supposed to have been taken. I have seen the film and it doesn't matter what you "scammers" here at ATS say or accuse Mr. Escamilla of, the bottom line is this film delivers all that none of you have the cojones to present. I find it very funny that after all the bickering here by those complaining that he's in it "only for the money" that you scammers now try and bring the film down for it's authenticity of being the only film out there about the moon that "brings it all to the table." I have become a good friend of Mr. Escamilla's and I have seen how he puts things together. He is no fool and he brings to his films what should have been presented years ago. There is nothing any of you scammers here at ATS and his accusers will ever say that will destroy the credibility and integrity of this awesome filmmaker. So go ahead and continue with your character bashing. We all know you scammers are as credible as the crap you spew. Jimmy2theR

[edit on 9-6-2009 by Jimmy2theR]

[edit on 9-6-2009 by Jimmy2theR]



posted on Jun, 9 2009 @ 05:02 AM
link   
reply to post by Jimmy2theR
 


Jimmy,

Do you seriously entertain the possibility that the object might be a Giant Humanoid?

Don't you think it is a bit too far-fetched?


*Also, Please refrain from making ad hominem attacks against the members:


"You half baked debunkers..."

"...it doesn't matter what you "scammers" here at ATS say..."

"...you scammers are as credible as the crap you spew. "



Poor Form.



posted on Jun, 9 2009 @ 05:11 AM
link   
whilst information is revealed, half-arsed statements about giant humanoids and the like cancel out any good that the film could do.

so, Jose, if you are reading this, a few suggestions that could be taken on board ?

A re-edit with narration, not by Jose, but an impartial source
less of the tabloid headline mentality and more rationality
less speculation and more honesty - ie 'we don't know what it is'
admitting you don't know and pointing out that nobody is telling you what it is can earn more credibility than giant humanoids in jump-suits which at that point, loses any seriousness on the average watcher's behalf and thus turns it into a farcical comedy of galactic proportion.

secure funding, then let people with experience gather the facts and let them tell you what, in their educated and professional opinion, it could be and rule out what it couldn't.

more of this = more people taking this seriously = more of this
and so on.



posted on Jun, 9 2009 @ 09:16 AM
link   
reply to post by Jimmy2theR
 


I did not try to pick a little thing I picked a GIANT HUMANOID thing, like I say scam in his name ( eSCAMilla !)

What was on the photo of the crater, a digital F*** UP for want of a better phrase you have to remember how these pictures get back to Earth.
Just to keep you right Jim they are not developed on the craft then stuck in an envelope and posted back to Earth.
To come out with statements that a blurred area on a picture IS a craft of some kind thats 10 times the size of Los Angeles not only that a GIANT HUMANOID wearing his disc jump suit is standing next to it. but we may be wrong THATS THE ONLY THING HE GOT RIGHT HE WAS WRONG!
By the way Jim if you bought that comedy of errors I have a big red bridge for sale in San Francisco yours for a $1000.


[edit on 9-6-2009 by wmd_2008]



posted on Jun, 9 2009 @ 09:42 AM
link   
the tabloid sensationalism that so many of these film makers adopt does not go in their favour regardless of how true some of their investigations come out to be.
All it takes is for one whiff of mysticism, mumbo-jumbo, atlantis, reptoids, anal probing and giants on the moon and people will never take anything you say serioulsy.

what should have been said was - the military, not nasa took these photos and on some of these, they have obscured details. why? we don't actually know however under scientific analysis of what we have we can tell you . . .
until someone actually goes to the moon with a lot of cameras and takes pictures of every inch we have to put up with speculation, hearsay and fantasy.



posted on Jun, 9 2009 @ 11:14 AM
link   
reply to post by Jimmy2theR
 


Could you please state openly, if you are somehow involved in the enterprise that Escamilla is running ?

You are insulting your fellow ATS members, you are clearly trying to generate traffic ( or might i say money ) for good ole Jose and your style reminds me of something we already had here a few times - so an open answer to my question would be nice. And no, i'm not interested if you and Jose are BFFs, i just want to know if you are involved in the enterprise.

Thanks and cheers
Phil



posted on Jun, 9 2009 @ 05:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by wmd_2008
Just to keep you right Jim they are not developed on the craft


Well actually the Lunar Orbiter images WERE processed on board the craft so all the original negatives are on the surface of the moon. (Will make great collectables in the future
)


So let's 'keep it right' shall we?



[edit on 9-6-2009 by zorgon]



posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 01:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phil J. Fry
reply to post by Jimmy2theR
 


Could you please state openly, if you are somehow involved in the enterprise that Escamilla is running ?

Thanks and cheers
Phil

I am not going to enter in here my association with Mr. Escamilla, because it would only get the debunkers here to ridicule me and continue trying to discredit Mr. Escamilla. For that "ATS Member" to write Mr. Escamilla's last name so disrespectfully, it only supports what I say about certain (not all) ATS members who come in here and do nothing but make remarks that have no bearing on the quality of the film and what it conveys. Those members who already have pre-conceived notions without even seeing the film and saying things like that about Mr. Escamilla, show they have no integrity. They use ATS to try and discredit the good of this film. We know the numbers of people who are voting to get Moon Rising on You Tube for free. So you ATS Members go ahead and continue with your character bashing. You continue to perpetuate ATS's reputation of being a rude group of people that have nothing better to do but debunk and ridicule. The fact remains, NASA lied to us all these years and this film proves it. Jimmy2theR



posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 01:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by wmd_2008
Just to keep you right Jim they are not developed on the craft


Well actually the Lunar Orbiter images WERE processed on board the craft so all the original negatives are on the surface of the moon. (Will make great collectables in the future
)


So let's 'keep it right' shall we?



[edit on 9-6-2009 by zorgon]



Yes processed and TRANSMITTED that was the point I am making and you dont tend to get negatives from ccd cameras



posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 01:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Jimmy2theR
 


I agree. Some people cannot handle truth and resort to ridicule and mud slinging. It's pathetic and it's what keeps humanity from moving forward at a faster pace.



posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 01:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jimmy2theR

Originally posted by Phil J. Fry
reply to post by Jimmy2theR
 


Could you please state openly, if you are somehow involved in the enterprise that Escamilla is running ?

Thanks and cheers
Phil

I am not going to enter in here my association with Mr. Escamilla, because it would only get the debunkers here to ridicule me and continue trying to discredit Mr. Escamilla. For that "ATS Member" to write Mr. Escamilla's last name so disrespectfully, it only supports what I say about certain (not all) ATS members who come in here and do nothing but make remarks that have no bearing on the quality of the film and what it conveys. Those members who already have pre-conceived notions without even seeing the film and saying things like that about Mr. Escamilla, show they have no integrity. They use ATS to try and discredit the good of this film. We know the numbers of people who are voting to get Moon Rising on You Tube for free. So you ATS Members go ahead and continue with your character bashing. You continue to perpetuate ATS's reputation of being a rude group of people that have nothing better to do but debunk and ridicule. The fact remains, NASA lied to us all these years and this film proves it. Jimmy2theR



His film does not prove it and his IDIOTIC GIANT HUMNOID statement had me ROLF big time!!!

Ps that bridge is still for sale



posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 01:53 PM
link   
reply to post by wmd_2008
 


did you see the film?
share a link?



posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 03:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by warrenb
reply to post by wmd_2008
 


did you see the film?
share a link?


Looked at the free first 8mins or whatever it was on youtube and by 7:30 we all found out what a JOKE it is.

Craft 10 times the size of L A and the GIANT HUMANOID in a jump suit
If thats what he sees he needs HELP and if anyone thinks what he says is true they REALLY NEED HELP!



posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 05:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by wmd_2008
Yes processed and TRANSMITTED that was the point I am making and you dont tend to get negatives from ccd cameras


True, but then those were not CCD cameras on LO missions they were 70mm film



posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 06:20 PM
link   
OK So this whole "1 Million views and it's free" stunt really should be on it way to half now. It started this month and I figure, so many people wanted to see this, that it should be reaching 1 million votes by 20th June at the latest. But how will we know? Does anyone know where to see the exact figures?



posted on Jun, 11 2009 @ 10:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by wmd_2008

Originally posted by warrenb
reply to post by wmd_2008
 


Craft 10 times the size of L A and the GIANT HUMANOID in a jump suit
If thats what he sees he needs HELP and if anyone thinks what he says is true they REALLY NEED HELP!

Again, you are not quoting Mr. Escamilla correctly here. A standard ploy to dissuade people from viewing the film. You know he hired a forensics expert that works for the LAPD. An imaging forensics expert, and it was his opinion as to the size of the object, not Mr. Escamilla. Then you mis-quote him about the humanoid. So I'll quote him! At 7:14 minutes into Part One on You Tube he says; "this may or 'may not' be a giant humanoid, perhaps the shadows seem to reflect something of a human form, we will never know until NASA releases this photograph unblurred and with the clarity available for us to see." You come in here make these "false statements and mis-quotes" without fully presenting what is said. This makes you out to be either a disinformation agent or you're really that ignorant and don't know any better. It's easy to lie about someone but the truth slaps you right up side of your face, maybe you're in denial? Jimmy2theR



posted on Jun, 11 2009 @ 11:04 AM
link   
reply to post by Jimmy2theR
 



he says; "this may or 'may not' be a giant humanoid, perhaps the shadows seem to reflect something of a human form, we will never know until NASA releases this photograph unblurred and with the clarity available for us to see."


Yes. That is exactly what he says. That is the point!

Again: "...this may or 'may not' be a giant humanoid..." (my bold) is what drives the credibility meter down towards zero!

It doesn't matter how hard you try to spin this, the filmmaker said it, in his narration. Doesn't matter where he got the idea from -- he chose to include it in the narrative.

Also, any critical eye can look at the 'blurred' portion and should be able to instantly see it for what it truly is -- an artifact of the transmission process. A digital artifact.

Anyone with satellite TV, such as Dish Network should be familiar with picture pixelation and disruptions when the signal is interrupted, such as in a rainstorm.

Secondly, to further 'enhance' the transmission error scenario, notice how, instead of being spread out in a horizontal fashion (like the city of Los Angeles) the distorted area is mostly vertical!! This further indicates a scanning anomaly in the picture, not an intentional 'blurring' by dark, evil nefarious NASA!



new topics

top topics



 
71
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join