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.

 

Why have no high powered telescopes zoomed in on "The Shard"?. Let's end this right here and now

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 15 2009 @ 12:25 PM
link   
"The Shard" is regarded as one of the most highly anomalous structures on our moon. Why has NASA or any other space agency not given us a more detailed look at this mysterious object? All we have are a couple of old, far-away pics that have done nothing but raise question after question. Every night we have the most controversial interstellar anomaly appear right in front of our noses, staring down at us, yet we do nothing to find out more about it. Granted it's on the far side of the moon, however lunar orbiters should have no problem getting a detailed look at it. It's an enigma. Do we not presently have the technology to get a closer look? I think we do and someone's not sharing. NASA I'm calling you out!

www.disclose.tv...

[edit on 15-5-2009 by genma]




posted on May, 15 2009 @ 12:33 PM
link   
The best image of the shard is grainy and indistinct at best. Hell, it may not even be there - and if it is, it's likely to just be a natural feature. Besides, it keeps Richard C. Hoagland in a job.

IRM



posted on May, 15 2009 @ 12:39 PM
link   
Like nasa cares that you are "calling them out"... do you know how many people have tried to "call them out"? You need to do more than just post a message on ATS if you are trying to get a reaction out of NASA. Not that there is much that will get their attention other than someone getting the evidence with their own equipment. Good luck with that.



posted on May, 15 2009 @ 12:40 PM
link   
It's grainy because we can only see the structure when magnifying the original shot many times over. This causes grain and distortion. So yea the quality is bad however it is distinct make no doubt about it. It rises miles above the moon's surface.



posted on May, 15 2009 @ 12:44 PM
link   
what about the high res images floating about? Any in that area? How about the Chinese ones? Are they out yet?

IRM



posted on May, 15 2009 @ 12:46 PM
link   
Beacause ther eare lots of scientist trying to grab time on the telescopes, and none of them see this as more important then what they need to look at.



posted on May, 15 2009 @ 01:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by NephraTari
You need to do more than just post a message on ATS if you are trying to get a reaction out of NASA.


I have to disagree with you this time NephraTari.

But only because of this thread, where NASA's Jim Oberg shows up because of certain posts made on ATS....


www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on May, 15 2009 @ 01:06 PM
link   
reply to post by genma
 


Because if Never A Straight Answer did point its telescopes at "The Shard" and it actually was a structure it would prove that there has been an E.T. presence here for a long time and would create mass panic resulting in chaos around the globe. I'm sure they already have, they just aren't telling anyone.



posted on May, 15 2009 @ 01:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Exuberant1
 

ah yes, I know we have a few nasa peeps among us. I still do not think that this will incite nasa to come clean with better images of that area though.
Call me cynical but I just don't see it happening. I would love to be wrong about that however.



posted on May, 15 2009 @ 01:26 PM
link   
reply to post by NephraTari
 


I bet if you post the shard in the sts-114 thread, Oberg will eventually appear and debunk it.

*When he does, you won't have to Hope anymore.. You'll know once and for all


(I would do it, but Oberg doesn't like me.)



posted on May, 15 2009 @ 01:58 PM
link   
If it's on the far side of the moon then it would be impossible to see it in any telescope on earth, due to tidal lock. You'd need an orbiter to photograph it, as it was originally.

It is intriguing, whatever it is is huge. I don't believe it could be any geological feature, as one would think meteor bombardment would have destroyed it over thousands of years. But what do i know...



posted on May, 15 2009 @ 02:03 PM
link   
A crystaline structure completey devoid of water, clear, like some sort of dehydrated quartz or something.. Isnt that on the back side of the moon? would be difficult to focus in on that considering the moon does not rotate, well, atleast to my understanding anyway. Richard Hoagland will have no problem finding a job.. its hard to turn away a former consultant to NASA from any job in science. Especially mathematics. And Oberg will debunk nothing unless he is told to do so, and just because a NASA scientist says otherwise.. thats tantemount to telling a Native American to trust the US government.
I do have to agree.. NASA, may drop in frequently, as I have an uncle thats been an engineer for them for 34 years.. they answer to no one. SOMETIMES they will answer to the government, but ultimately, thats the branch that gets away with pretty much anything.



posted on May, 15 2009 @ 02:06 PM
link   
all in all, we can hem haw around the subject until we are blue in the face with anger, demand our answeres, and have an extraterrestrial roommate as our proof.. Until the time is right (when its far too late to hide anything anymore) no answers will be given. Most answers are there infront of us anyway. but THESE answeres... Well, I have a feeling that time will answer all questions very shortly.
cheers.



posted on May, 15 2009 @ 02:14 PM
link   
how powerful of a telescope would be needed?



posted on May, 15 2009 @ 04:00 PM
link   
Using the new highway created by all the trillions of dollars that have recently been printed, couldn't we just drive up there? Wow, what a road trip that would be.

Seriously, wasn't there also a Japanese moon probe recently sent that took some good, high resolution photos? Was the area where the shard was first noticed covered during that mission?



new topics

top topics



 
1

log in

join