Nasa To Reveal New Scientific Findings About The Moon

I'm pissed because i am a fisherman and will be leaving Wednesday morning for 2 weeks. So i won't find out for a while. At the bottom of the page, it made me smile. "Science will lift its embargo at 2 p.m. EDT, Sept. 24." I know by embargo they probably meant that they are jut releasing the normal data when all the information is collected and won't drop a cool bombshell, but the way they worded it, i was smiling.

www.nasa.gov...

RedPill

Starred and Flagged!

Thanks for bringing this to our Attention OP.

I have screencapped the media advisory in case Science doesn't lift its embargo - Just in case...

Also, Embargoing means withholding something, denying something. Are some scientists going to admit to a data/information embargo?

If they do admit to withholding data, then we must suspect that they are withholding yet more information or have engaged in further acts of embargo either currently or in the past. The various incidents with missing/destroyed Apollo tapes could be a part of this embargo.

[edit on 23-9-2009 by Exuberant1]

We won't know till we find out...

I'm stoked, even though it may not be anything. But I get excited when they discover new exoplanets, so...

Good find! Star and Flag for you, good sir.

sounds interesting. thanks for posting. S&F.

i wonder if they are going to admit that there is going to be a battle to see who can successfully mine helium 3 first.

YouTube Link

YouTube Link

[edit on 23-9-2009 by grantbeed]

reply to post by grantbeed

---

Doesn't matter how much you mine if you don't have a fusion reactor.

My bet is it just going to be boring science and stuff.

phage, you do make me laugh with some of your comments.



no offense intended.

reply to post by grantbeed

---

Then it worked.

Would you say that one way to detect the presence of such a reactor would be to find records of Helium-3 deliveries to the suspected location?

"Embargo" Is very commonly used in company communication lingo, so don't expect too much . It just mean that employees can not leak the info before the embargo is lifted. They already widely communicated inside the NASA, but have to wait to talk about it with friends, family or press.

We have embargo in my company every time we are communicating results. We get the info first (usually 24h before). It can of course be used for wrong purpose (insider trading) but I would never risk it.

As for NASA, or any other company/organisation witholding sensible information ? Is that really possible ? Well it's the real world here. I don't know ANY company that doesn't do this


Edit : What will it be ? Seeing the list of speakers, it is probably about the composition of the moon. And my guess is it is about traces of water below the moon dust, discovered by M³ aboard indian probe Chandrayaan :
timesofindia.indiatimes.com...

Since there is water in meteors, and seeing the scars covering the moon, I find this very plausible.

Edit 2 : link fixed

[edit on 23-9-2009 by SpaceGoatsFarts]

reply to post by SpaceGoatsFarts

---

Indeed. Private companies can withhold proprietary information from the public.

However, this information has been withheld by NASA - who are funded by the American Taxpayers.

Nor is an Embargo a good thing - especially when it involves the embargoing of information and scientific knowledge from those that pay their salary.

No matter.

*Your attempts at minimizing this admission are entertaining. Nevertheless, this advisory implies that an embargo has been in place and will be lifted on the specified date and at the specified time.



[edit on 23-9-2009 by Exuberant1]

Sorry, I didn't meant to minimize what they will announce. Probably an important scientific discovery (water on the moon ? see my link). I just wanted to say that we should not hope for something like :

"Ok we have to tell you something. The moon is inhabited and hollow. We have knwoldege of this since 1933. The inhabitants are all females and seem to be human. We decided to keep this information for us and make the moon a holiday resort for our engineers.

We are sorry.

"

Excerpt from my link :

Did Chandrayaan find water on Moon’s surface?

It is silly to think that NASA would ever make such an announcement. (Even if it were true)

I am hoping that they will tell us what it is they have been embargoing. I am not so concerned with what it is they have been embargoing as I am concerned and interested in why they were withholding it in the first place - though I suppose that might be made clear whenever the big revelation is finally made.

It would be nice if it was something that has been covered by thelivingmoon.com.

If this knowledge required an embargo, it has to be cool.

*What is your prediction that it will be?

Hey everybody, What is your prediction that the big Revelation will be ?



Edit: I just saw your last post. But the NAVY's Clementine already discovered a small frozen lake's worth of water, so it probably isn't water. Unless it is liquid water!


[edit on 23-9-2009 by Exuberant1]

I'm interested. You have a link for that ? All I can find is :

reply to post by SpaceGoatsFarts

---

Specifically, Prospector detected hydrogen. Whether the hydrogen was in the form of H2O is yet to be determined (or announced).
lunar.lanl.gov...

It's an artificial craft - so what else is new ?

I sense more NASA shenanigans though...

---

---

Here you go:

U.S. Department of Defense
Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Public Affairs)
News Transcript
Tuesday, December 3, 1996
Subject: Discovery of Ice on the Moon

Regarding Water Ice:



www.thelivingmoon.com...



*Also, Check out this thread for more info on Clementine:

Revealed for the First Time Color Images of the Moon from Clementine Satellite

Thanks, you just answered what I was wondering. They NEVER found a lake. They say there is PROBABLY the equivalent of a small lake spread all over the poles, in the regolith, at a very low concentration. AND THAT STILL HAS TO BE CONFIRMED.

www.asi.org...

Thanks anyway. I'll stick with my first guess



Also you could have sent a link to a copy of the original doc, with the full text. Not just an excerpt out of context (that by pure chance confirms what you say), and furthermore from a website with debatable credibility

I find your interpretation of "deny ignorance" rather personal.

[edit on 23-9-2009 by SpaceGoatsFarts]

reply to post by SpaceGoatsFarts

---

The fellow could have said "a small lake's worth" - but he didn't..

...He said "It's a lake. A small lake. "