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: 8
71
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 20 2009 @ 04:05 PM
link   
reply to post by tristar
 


That link is to a baloney-filled site. A couple slices of bread and some mayo, and you'd have a sandwich. One I wouldn't feed to a dog.

I especially love the bit about the Lunar samples...880 lbs of material "collected" by robots?!?


The USSR managed to successfully land and return three spacecraft with soil samples...for a total of less than one pound!! AND that was after 1969!

EDIT: The Luna info is on Wiki....to summarize,

Luna 16 returned 101g ----1970
Luna 20 55g ----1972
Luna 24 170g ---- 1976

Total Soviet success: 326 grams. Anyone care to guess how many grams in one ounce?




[edit on 5/20/0909 by weedwhacker]




posted on May, 20 2009 @ 04:21 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


My take on the matter is"

Man did land on the moon but not what was shown, keep in mind we were in a cold war race. Way too many inconsistency's for me to accept the Hollywood production of man on the moon.



posted on May, 20 2009 @ 04:34 PM
link   
reply to post by warrenb
 


Fantastic thread, i really enjoyed watching those clips.
Kind of explains a lot about nasa and the cover up.
Disclosure could be close now, i really hope so.
Excellent thread, only fault is, i can only flag and star it once lol



posted on May, 20 2009 @ 08:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by tristar
Oh did we land on the moon, well, perhaps some should read the following and get back here

www.shriworld.com...


Some of that information is compelling to be sure. But any argument that includes:


16. No telescope can see the parts or the flag on the moon - If the parts of the Missions are present on the moon yet, why cant any powerful telescope on the earth cant see it? when even minor details are visible? If not from earth, HST even cant make it see?


discredits itself to such a degree as to render the entire argument defunct.



posted on May, 20 2009 @ 09:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Monteriano
Jose Escamilla is the kind of person that gives anyone pause to consider. He is a known liar and video manipulator. You can go back to threads on this site and search the internet. he has found his audience and is in this to make a quick buck. There may be a small fraction of truth but you would never know where to look for it because it is all manipulation and lies. He is infamous as a charleton and know thief of others hard work in this genre of film. I would not bother downloading a free version if it had his name associated with it.


I find your comments about Mr. Escamilla disgusting and unfounded. YOU don't even know the man personally and have no reason to sling dirt as you do about him. Nor anyone else slinging mud for no reason. You need to make a public apology to him for saying such things and I am surprised how ATS allows people like you to defame this man and others on this forum. Still your mad comments do not take anything away from the truth this film delivers. You don't have any of the class and integrity Mr. Escamilla has and it's your loss for not seeing this film. Jimmy2theR

[edit on 20-5-2009 by Jimmy2theR]



posted on May, 20 2009 @ 10:16 PM
link   
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


Agreed but my signature says what it means, however, could you explain to me the discrepancy's of the image and the shadow cast by :

A) Astronaut
B) Luna Module
C) Rocks closest to the camera.

media.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on May, 23 2009 @ 12:43 PM
link   
reply to post by tristar
 


Just so you know Mr. Escamilla is making Moon Rising available for viewing at an affordable price anyone can afford. Now is the time to view and download the film during this Memorial Day weekend special. Go to moonrising-themovie.com...
[edit on 23-5-2009 by Jimmy2theR]

[edit on 23-5-2009 by Jimmy2theR]

[edit on 23-5-2009 by Jimmy2theR]



posted on May, 23 2009 @ 01:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Jimmy2theR
 


I'm sorry....if you wish to advertise on ATS I suggest you contact the staff and buy space.

Otherwise, I see your last post as a complete 'shill', and of no merit whatsoever.



posted on May, 23 2009 @ 03:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by secretnasaman

Originally posted by clock1
The question here is "Did anyone watched this movie?".
YES! I have seen the whole movie. Do not judge this based on any past problems people here have about Jose E. I watched it like any other movie & did not expect to
believe it's premise that the NEW moon pics are altered! And when I finished watching...wow was I surprised at some of the amazing evidence using NASA's own High Resolution pics. I thought it was going to go over old "we never went" stuff..

But it was all new. No Watson stuff, no Rods... all very good. I had to pause & ask myself, if I could have found the NASA "blurring" etc. without a great belief that it was possible to do! And the film succeeds as you will find, like me...that there are some things in it that truly cannot be explained & you will keep thinking about these
new moon anomalies.

This is not my area of expertise, so that's all I can say...but to knock down a good film, made by a lot of people...just because of 1 person... is just wrong. The content is the only thing that counts as debatable...not a person's character. And I wish I had some way to get clips because the trailers don't show the killer evidence. For instance, I was amazed at the obvious blurred 'structure' on the moon that is larger then all L.A. & the valley! ... this one is different than any other MOON movie & we ATS members should be happy that these indie hot Docs. get made at all!

I stand by this...so it is a good deal for this long weekend.





posted on May, 23 2009 @ 03:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jimmy2theR
Just so you know Mr. Escamilla is making Moon Rising available for viewing at an affordable price anyone can afford.


I'm broke


I think he should send me and John an autographed copy





posted on May, 23 2009 @ 06:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by tristar
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


Agreed but my signature says what it means, however, could you explain to me the discrepancy's of the image and the shadow cast by :

A) Astronaut - is on lower ground than the ground immediately to his right. We see no shadow because it is being obstructed by the terrain. You can see that he is in a slightly lower position.
B) Luna Module
C) Rocks closest to the camera. - the shadows don't seem to match. I have seen explanations in the past that "debunked" the claim, but they are not satisfactory to me. I am unsure what could cause it....but it doesn't seem that there are multiple light sources, as the shadows in the hills in the background do not show the effects of multiple light sources. I believe, honestly, that it is more likely to be an example of poorly executed "touch ups" on the original image to obstruct our view of something else. A "rookie" can do a "copy/paste" in a graphics program and get similar results, with shadows being misaligned to the true light source. It seems as though the foreground is from a different image than the background, a composite meant to obscure something in the foreground.

media.abovetopsecret.com...


I have annotated my take in bold above.

But let me clarify: I am not much of an image analyst.



posted on May, 23 2009 @ 07:36 PM
link   
I just finished watching the video and it is well put together. I wouldn't call it earth shattering evidence, most of the stuff that was presented in the movie is discussed on these boards. However, I would highly recommend the purchase of this video to show others that aren't internet guru's like most of us here.



posted on May, 23 2009 @ 07:54 PM
link   
reply to post by ExPostFacto
 


If you have a copy of it and its okay with you , could you upload it to some rapid share or other medium and provide me a link.

Peace



posted on May, 23 2009 @ 08:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by tristar
reply to post by ExPostFacto
 


If you have a copy of it and its okay with you , could you upload it to some rapid share or other medium and provide me a link.

Peace



Are you for real?

If you are going to ask something like that, I suggest doing it through private messaging.



posted on May, 23 2009 @ 08:15 PM
link   
reply to post by tristar
 


First of all I wouldn't have a clue on how to do that. Second of all I wouldn't do that even if I could. If you were my neighbor you could borrow it.

By the way, you can now download it online through the website for a reduced price.



posted on May, 23 2009 @ 08:16 PM
link   
reply to post by triplesod
 


Okay, i see no harm in it, either way i did not intend in creating an issue of it.



posted on May, 23 2009 @ 10:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by tristar
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


Agreed but my signature says what it means, however, could you explain to me the discrepancy's of the image and the shadow cast by :

A) Astronaut
B) Luna Module
C) Rocks closest to the camera.

media.abovetopsecret.com...


Yes the terain, you can check it yourself just find an area of land with small hills ,depressions etc stand objects on the hills near the depressions and any flat area's on a bright sunny day take a picture and see the shadows at different angles!

Re the link to the picture if you look at the rocks the large clump closest to the right of the picture is slightly higher up than the rock to the left of it ,if you also look the rocks to the right the area the shadow is on falls away more steeply hence the shadow appears at a slightly different angle

Look at picture below look at slope (red arrows)




posted on May, 23 2009 @ 10:44 PM
link   
reply to post by wmd_2008
 


Yes i see your picture, but on your picture the general direction (angle) of the shadow is relevant to the light source, however in my image that i uploaded the direction (angle) of the shadows that are cast have no central point of light source.
media.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on May, 23 2009 @ 10:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jimmy2theR

Originally posted by Monteriano
Jose Escamilla is the kind of person that gives anyone pause to consider. He is a known liar and video manipulator. You can go back to threads on this site and search the internet. he has found his audience and is in this to make a quick buck. There may be a small fraction of truth but you would never know where to look for it because it is all manipulation and lies. He is infamous as a charleton and know thief of others hard work in this genre of film. I would not bother downloading a free version if it had his name associated with it.


I find your comments about Mr. Escamilla disgusting and unfounded. YOU don't even know the man personally and have no reason to sling dirt as you do about him. Nor anyone else slinging mud for no reason. You need to make a public apology to him for saying such things and I am surprised how ATS allows people like you to defame this man and others on this forum. Still your mad comments do not take anything away from the truth this film delivers. You don't have any of the class and integrity Mr. Escamilla has and it's your loss for not seeing this film. Jimmy2theR

[edit on 20-5-2009 by Jimmy2theR]



We find his comments about the astronauts the same so what do we do now the guy is out to make a quick buck.
I will ask you this question WHEN its proved they did land do you think he will give all the people who bought his DVD a refund!!!



posted on May, 23 2009 @ 10:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by tristar
reply to post by wmd_2008
 


Yes i see your picture, but on your picture the general direction (angle) of the shadow is relevant to the light source, however in my image that i uploaded the direction (angle) of the shadows that are cast have no central point of light source.
media.abovetopsecret.com...


I copied the area from YOUR picture!!!!!!!!!



new topics

top topics



 
71
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join