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.

 

Nasa prepares to bomb the moon

page: 22
69
<< 19  20  21    23 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 27 2009 @ 12:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by omniologist
So, October? Any credible references for this approximate date of moon bombing?


Hmmm other than NASA? No





posted on Jun, 28 2009 @ 03:41 PM
link   
Hi everyone, this is my first post here on ATS.

I've been reading the forum discussions a lot recently...things are really coming together all at once it seems. The other day I was on ATS and I came across a thread with a link to these videos.
www.youtube.com...

Apart from it being utterly disgusting that the only nation that can get away with something like this is the USA, you seem to have overlooked something.

I find it kind of funny that now NASA is planning to launch ANOTHER object at the moon. Maybe they are systematically taking out these ruins or bases? "Oh yeah, we're totally looking for water...AGAIN" It just doesn't make sense to me. I may just be speculating, but...makes a little too much sense to me. When I heard that they were blowing another hole in the moon, everything came together in my head.




[edit on 28-6-2009 by WSmith]



posted on Jun, 28 2009 @ 03:44 PM
link   
reply to post by WSmith
 


If some ancient civilization was there, they'd have to be dug in pretty deep to escape the radiation and be wide spread.

The fact is simple. You'd need to remove the surface of the moon to get rid of all evidence. And even then it would still be there somehow.


Also, these "advanced ancients".... They never built anything strong enough to resist a rock falling from the sky? Maybe they deserved to die off for being so dumb.



posted on Jun, 28 2009 @ 03:52 PM
link   
Actually, I wasn't talking about ruins, I probably should have not wrote that. What I meant was what was said in the videos, active mining bases, etc etc. And yes some ruins, but the ruins there were crashed ships and things of the like.



posted on Jun, 28 2009 @ 03:53 PM
link   
reply to post by WSmith
 



Apart from it being utterly disgusting that the only nation that can get away with something like this is the USA...


Care to read the entire thread now?

"only" nation?

www.universetoday.com...

The Japanese lunar orbiter Kaguya will end its two-year mission with a controlled impact on the Moon’s surface on June 10th at 18:30 Universal Time. The impact location is near the southeast limb at 80ºE, 63ºS. If you live in Asia and Australia, you may have the opportunity to observe the impact event…



www.chinadaily.net...#

BEIJING -- Chang'e-1, China's first lunar probe, impacted the moon at 4:13 pm Beijing Time (0813 GMT) Sunday, said sources with the State Administration of Science, Technology and Industry for National Defense.

The satellite ended its 16-month mission Sunday when it hit the lunar surface at 1.50 degrees south latitude and 52.36 degrees east longitude.


Welcome! Now, for your first homework assignment.....


jra

posted on Jun, 28 2009 @ 05:20 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


Just to add some more to your list:

ESA's SMART-1

The very first man made object to hit the Moon was Russia's Luna-2 spacecraft in 1959.



posted on Jun, 28 2009 @ 05:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by jra
Just to add some more to your list:
ESA's SMART-1


Those are crashes... Only NASA gets away with "bombing'


But smart One always loved the dust cloud it created.. was nice to watch it disperse in the atmosphere




This mosaic was built with infrared images taken by the Canada-France-Hawaii Telescope (CFHT) 3 September 2006, and shows the flash and the dust cloud that followed the SMART-1 impact. The 15 exposures that make up the mosaic start with the one taken at the time of the flash. Courtesy of ESA/CFHT. (Click on image for hires version) ID number: SEM3353VRRE


The images are 1 minute apart and represent a 2x3 km area

Here it is in animation



NEAT HUH? Dust clouds on the moon



MOON STORMS


December 7, 2005: Every lunar morning, when the sun first peeks over the dusty soil of the moon after two weeks of frigid lunar night, a strange storm stirs the surface.

The next time you see the moon, trace your finger along the terminator, the dividing line between lunar night and day. That's where the storm is. It's a long and skinny dust storm, stretching all the way from the north pole to the south pole, swirling across the surface, following the terminator as sunrise ceaselessly sweeps around the moon.

Never heard of it? Few have. But scientists are increasingly confident that the storm is real.


science.nasa.gov...

Methink NASA speak with forked tongue



posted on Jun, 29 2009 @ 01:44 AM
link   
reply to post by zorgon
 


But the moon does have enough gravity for "dust clouds" to form out of such a collision and then fall back to the surface. Especially given the fine-grained dust/sand on the surface of the moon (which some of the apollo astronauts likened to talcum powder, if I'm not mistaken).

If the moon were not so dusty, it is more likely that the larger debris wouldn't have fallen back to the surface. It's all a matter of velocity of the debris being able to overcome gravity (escape velocity). Dust wouldn't necessarily have the escape velocity to overcome the gravity even after a collision such as this. Thus, a dust cloud forms in an area that some people might refer to as an "atmosphere" before falling back to the surface since it cannot escape lunar gravity.

All I'm saying Zorg, There are many more factors at play directly after such a collision. Definately more than a theoretical lunar atmosphere (which I have no way to dispute anyway).

-ChriS



posted on Jun, 30 2009 @ 03:49 PM
link   
Why would the want to blow a hole in the moon?



posted on Jun, 30 2009 @ 04:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Android X
Why would the want to blow a hole in the moon?


Hollow!
They will use the enormous outbreak of the probe “Centaur” for mapping the lunar underground. The enormous shock wave of the outbreak will be similar to the method used in the oil prospectings. They want to discover what has realized “Our Friends” in the depths of the moon.



posted on Jun, 30 2009 @ 08:35 PM
link   
To put things in perspective,many large objects hit the moon on a regular basis for the last few billion years.I saw one object with naked eye,which would have to be bigger than the popgun Nasa is sending.It kicked up some dirt for 2 seconds and was a non-event seconds later.



posted on Jun, 30 2009 @ 09:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by BlasteR Definately more than a theoretical lunar atmosphere (which I have no way to dispute anyway).


The atmosphere on the moon is not theoretical, only the quantity of that atmosphere is in dispute.

Astronomers have for centuries observed dust clouds on the moon... now NASA come up with dust storms that are nasty but uses electro-statics to explain it

Seems they already observed the sunset rays on Surveyor, but neglected to tell us until 20 years after Apollo 17 sketched the same thing

Any wonder there is a little distrust on what they tell us?

But what do you expect from scientists who are constantly caught saying 'We didn't expect this' and use 'BOMBING'' as an exploration tool


What pisses me off is why did the Apollo 17 dudes SKETCH the sunset rays they saw? Why the hell didn't they just point and shoot with that box on their chest?

Or did they?


I mean those would have made awesome historical photos, looked great on my wall Sunset Rays on the Moon...

Sketches? Gimme a break...





[edit on 30-6-2009 by zorgon]



posted on Jul, 1 2009 @ 01:56 AM
link   
reply to post by Taymour
 


Why are people talking about a bomb? There is no bomb other than the spacecraft itself..

This isn't like the Enola Gay dropping a bomb on Hiroshima.

This is a spacecraft that is going to hit the surface of the moon at 4 times the speed of a bullet. No explosive device is even necessary.

Where on any respectable News or NASA website is there mention of a bomb containing explosives? There is none.

I will reiterate what I said a couple pages ago..
The news stories use words like.. Missile, bomb, explosion, and then people assume some kind of explosive device. It is misleading. But it is meant to get your attention, after all. But that's about it. Even the news stories using such words all say that this is a "kinetic energy" device. Meaning it will use its kinetic energy, alone, to penetrate the moon's surface.

The impactor isn't going to explode above or at the surface like a bomb would.. The only time the word explosion is even used in the news stories is when they explain what will happen when the object hits the moon (The kinetic energy of the impactor being transferred to the impact site).

I just don't understand why everyone assumes something that is false?


-ChriS



posted on Jul, 1 2009 @ 02:07 AM
link   
Meteors much larger then a washing machine hit the moon all the time. Hence the REALLY big craters you see all over it. A missle the size of a washing machine will not do anything. The Earth's rotation is affected by the moon, if it was big enough to change its orbit or rotation in any way, NASA would not be doing it, as all life on earth would cease to exist.

If there is any truth to this, and I seriously doubt there is, most likely it is to study crater impacts to get a semi idea on how it would affect the Earth.



posted on Jul, 1 2009 @ 02:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by BlasteR
This isn't like the Enola Gay dropping a bomb on Hiroshima.


No that was Carl Sagan's plan some time ago



Where on any respectable News or NASA website is there mention of a bomb containing explosives? There is none.


NASA's mission to bomb the Moon
Scientific America
www.scientificamerican.com...

Last I heard they were respectable

The OP title is accurate from the news media as per ATS T&C... its not our fault, don't shoot the messenger


NASA launches mission to bomb the moon | World News | News.com.au
Jun 19, 2009 ... THERE are no aliens up there, as far as we know, but NASA is preparing to bomb the moon.
www.news.com.au...

Nasa prepares to bomb the moon - Telegraph
Jun 18, 2009 ... Nasa scientists are preparing to launch a space mission from Cape Canaveral carrying a missile that will fire a hole deep in the surface of
www.telegraph.co.uk...

NASA Lunar Crater Observation and Sensing Satellite Mission ...
Inside NASA's Plan to Bomb the Moon and Find Water. Short on time and tight on money, a team of NASA engineers aims to solve the mystery of lunar ice in ...
www.popularmechanics.com...

Slashdot | How NASA Will Bomb the Moon To Find Water
Aug 15, 2008 ... How NASA Will Bomb the Moon To Find Water -- article related to Moon, NASA, and Space.
Slashdot.com



I will reiterate what I said a couple pages ago..
The news stories use words like.. Missile, bomb, explosion, and then people assume some kind of explosive device. It is misleading. But it is meant to get your attention, after all. But that's about it. Even the news stories using such words all say that this is a "kinetic energy" device. Meaning it will use its kinetic energy, alone, to penetrate the moon's surface.


Kenetic Energy Bomb
Supercavitation-alisticexpealidocious
www.defensetech.org...

BOMB with no explosive





The impactor isn't going to explode above or at the surface like a bomb would.. The only time the word explosion is even used in the news stories is when they explain what will happen when the object hits the moon (The kinetic energy of the impactor being transferred to the impact site).


The 'impactor' (bomb
) is going to toss 300 tons of debris (read water ice) 6 miles into the 'air' I have watched mine blasting with no where near that result... sounds like a bomb to me You sat Potato....




I just don't understand why everyone assumes something that is false?


You sat Potato....


Just bugs me hey will waste 300 tons of water ice because as Popular Mechanics says.." Short on time and tight on money, a team of NASA engineers aims to solve the mystery of lunar ice in ..."

Maybe we could have someone drop a Bunker Buster on NASA headquarters and knock some sense into them




[edit on 1-7-2009 by zorgon]



posted on Jul, 1 2009 @ 02:53 AM
link   
reply to post by BlasteR
 


BlasteR, are you serious?
You can kill someone whit a gun (explosive) or whit a hammer...
The result is the same!



posted on Jul, 1 2009 @ 06:25 AM
link   
reply to post by 0010110011101
 


www.scientificamerican.com...

Okay great, we humans haven't wrecked enough havoc and injury to our own planet we now have to start screwing around with our moon.

There's an old expression, don't shi& where you sleep and man is doing just that.



posted on Jul, 1 2009 @ 07:08 AM
link   
reply to post by ofhumandescent
 


human,

SShhhhhhhh....don't tell anyone, but I just heard the truth about this mission...

It is a well-known fact that Full Moons bring out the crazies, and the werewolves. SO, the mission is to create a permanent Crescent Moon!!!

Not only is it prettier, but when the next mission arrives they'll have a place to sit, and dangle their fishing line. Spielberg is helping with funding, that's why they're trying to keep the real story hush-hush. It's a tie-in promotion for an upcoming DreamWorks film project.

:
:



posted on Jul, 4 2009 @ 12:28 AM
link   
reply to post by zorgon
 


Zorg,

For starters, I am well aware of Carl Sagan's involvement with plans to nuke the moon a generation ago. I have already commented on this.
It was probably meant to be an actual nuclear test on the moon and justified to the public in the name of science. But it never happened.

I still think the news stories in the media are all misleading. The stories mention "bomb" and "missile". WHICH IS IT?

Here is the answer:
It is neither..
. The stories are misleading. There are no explosives involved with this mission in any way.

The impactor is going to be a "Centaur" rocket. that is going to transfer kinetic energy to the moon as it impacts the moon at around 4 times the speed of a bullet. That is why it needs to be traveling so fast. Here is a good cutaway of the Centaur rocket and it's components. There are no explosives involved.




Destroying the rocket with an explosive charge at or above the surface of the moon would probably produce a crater. But, probably, nothing near the size of a crater the kinetic energy of the impact would produce, itself, at the velocities they're talking about. Destroying the missile would contradict the justification for an impactor with such speed and velocity. The only thing that would hit the moon is the explosion and the fragments of the rocket. It would not be able to penetrate the surface as the mission intends.

Hitting the surface of anything at 4 times the speed of a bullet is going to bury the debris of the objects ince the object would inevitably be destroyed upon initial impact. The leftovers of the rocket is what will penetrate the surface. Any explosives inside such an object would either instantly detonate upon impact or be destroyed by the impact.

-ChriS


[edit on 4-7-2009 by BlasteR]



posted on Jul, 4 2009 @ 02:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
It is a well-known fact that Full Moons bring out the crazies, and the werewolves. SO, the mission is to create a permanent Crescent Moon!!!

Thanks for the advance warning. My friend worked at a mental institution and swore they got more customers (or as you put it, "crazies" though I'm not sure that's the PC term) to come in on the full moon, that was a real effect (they believed it, I'm little skeptical). I should warn them that they might be getting less customers soon!
Now I feel bad for the reptilian aliens living there breathing the 1 air molecule per cubic meter. If they blow that much of the moon away it won't be so easy to just move to another site after their residence is destroyed in this secret attack. But Spielberg will have one heck of a good fishin' spot? He can cast just about anywhere!


reply to post by BlasteR
 
I agree completely, the word "bomb" in the title is misleading. But I must admit it sounds a lot more sensational than "Kinetic impact", and the OP and the media want's the sensational title to get their material read, right? Anyway it's not the worst stretch of a title, I have a bigger problem with a guy posting a video showing a bunch of ice and dust particles floating around and then calling it "Absolute, undeniable, indisputable proof of UFOs", that is over the edge. This title I can handle even if it's a stretch.



new topics

top topics



 
69
<< 19  20  21    23 >>

log in

join