Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

NASA To Bomb The Moon Friday

page: 20
44
<< 17  18  19   >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 11 2009 @ 11:23 AM
link   
In hindsight it seems to me the booster was destroyed before impact. Let the esteemed and venerable members of the exclusive scientists club prove to me that did not happen...




posted on Oct, 11 2009 @ 11:57 AM
link   
Update:

NASA just posted some pictures of the plume.

Infrared:



The flash:



www.nasa.gov...



posted on Oct, 11 2009 @ 12:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Hal9000
 


Nice.... dots.




[edit on 11-10-2009 by Copernicus]



posted on Oct, 11 2009 @ 12:57 PM
link   
I brought an acre of the moon off ebay, can I be sure that wasnt the area that was bombed?

I have a certificate and everything.





posted on Oct, 11 2009 @ 01:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by morethanmeetstheye
I bought an acre of the moon off ebay, can I be sure that wasnt the area that was bombed?

I have a certificate and everything.





I may of sold you that moon plot....

no refunds. but I can give you galaxy credit.





[edit on 11-10-2009BC by 10001011]


[edit on 11-10-2009 by 10001011]



posted on Oct, 11 2009 @ 01:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Copernicus
 

No, it's not much to look at and to an audience that is used to seeing spectacular explosions on TV everyday it will be a disappointment.

NASA said they were able to get some data, but I wonder if the plume was big enough to get a sample.



posted on Oct, 11 2009 @ 01:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Hal9000
 


I refuse to believe with all the billions of dollars they have gotten over the last 40 years, they can't take a better picture than that.

They can photograph the cosmos in the deepest space. Hubble Deep Field showed places so far away, nobody in their wildest dreams would ever imagine getting there.

Yet all they can show me from the moon RIGHT NEXT TO US, the moon that EFFECTS OUR TIDES, are tiny white dots?

I just don't believe it. I am sure that they have satellites which could take excellent photos, and until I see those, I won't believe NASA.

Perhaps that makes me ignorant, but I feel they are using 40 year old camera technology when they should be ahead of us. It's bull, and there is a reason for it.



posted on Oct, 11 2009 @ 02:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by BaronVonGodzilla
reply to post by Hal9000
 


I refuse to believe with all the billions of dollars they have gotten over the last 40 years, they can't take a better picture than that.

They can photograph the cosmos in the deepest space. Hubble Deep Field showed places so far away, nobody in their wildest dreams would ever imagine getting there.

Yet all they can show me from the moon RIGHT NEXT TO US, the moon that EFFECTS OUR TIDES, are tiny white dots?

I just don't believe it. I am sure that they have satellites which could take excellent photos, and until I see those, I won't believe NASA.

Perhaps that makes me ignorant, but I feel they are using 40 year old camera technology when they should be ahead of us. It's bull, and there is a reason for it.


Hubble simply does not have so detailed resolution as many of you think.

hubblesite.org...



posted on Oct, 11 2009 @ 03:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Hal9000
 


Well now, that explains everything. The white out, the coincidence ~28 other satellites could not get a decent picture, the way off base prediction by our learned NASA scientists...

Yes, move along folks, nothing to see here.



posted on Oct, 11 2009 @ 04:43 PM
link   
reply to post by BaronVonGodzilla
 


The image that was taken was from the camera on the space craft itself. It would be the only thing that could get a birds eye view of the collision. That is because of the location was on the south pole of the moon, which from Earth we can only see a side view angle, and that includes Hubble. The camera was a low bandwidth so the resolution isn't very good. A higher resolution camera would take longer to transmit so you would not get as many images before it also collided.

Does that help?

[edit on 10/11/2009 by Hal9000]



posted on Oct, 11 2009 @ 04:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Matyas
Well now, that explains everything. The white out, the coincidence ~28 other satellites could not get a decent picture, the way off base prediction by our learned NASA scientists...


I don't know anything about the white out, but what other 28 satellites are capable of taking images of the moon are you talking about? I believe Hubble and maybe Spitzer are capable, but that's it. They had other ground telescopes tasked to image the plume, but like I said earlier it would only be a side view. Other than that the plume was not as big as predicted. So what? Can you recreate the same experiment for less? If you can, I say get started and let's see how close your predictions are.



posted on Oct, 12 2009 @ 11:11 AM
link   
reply to post by Hal9000
 


Well, that sure reminded me of a potential hazzardous moment for the entire local universe! Wow, you can even see the plume! Like a.... well, a dot! It's A DOT, NASA! It's a DOT! Finally we know what colour and pattern to paint the room in!

[edit on 12/10/2009 by Neo Christian Mystic]



posted on Oct, 12 2009 @ 12:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Hal9000
 


I don't know how much it cost because I havn't looked to see yet. However, and I have always maintained this, if you handed me an envelope with $40M in it I could get you a manned mission in two years. The repeat missions would be about $5M. That is mostly for the salaries of mission support. Back in '94 it was $20M and maybe $3M for repeat missions.

Sure, we may need to lease some suits from NASA, but don't you think $40M would be worth it to dispel or verify some of the rumors? I could provide some quality streaming video straight onto the people's laptops.

One more thing, I get to pick my team of engineers, managers, and scientists. I know retirees with TSC5s, they have no problems believing what everyone else says is impossible.



posted on Oct, 12 2009 @ 02:53 PM
link   
I used to spend hours at the zoo watching the monkeys.I saw a monkey steal the keyring from a trainers pocket,SNEAK over to the door,reach through the bars and begin inserting keys into the lock,one after another until he unlocked the door,he was so scared when the door clicked open that he howled and the trainer caught him in time.

I watched a monkey in the same cage do an amazing thing,the monkey was about three feet tall,one day as he was swinging overhead of the trainer he decided to pick the 6'2,200lb trainer up by his hair and swing him around a little before letting him go,no teeth no striking,just play.Thirty stitches later the trainers scalp was put back together.

The monkey is only three feet tall but he is able to almost kill his TRAINER by accident because he wants to play showing that the monkey has a considerable amount of power within the physical realm,it is only through his hurting the trainer that his surprising strength is realised momentarily by the monkey but is eternally respected by the trainer.But the monkey still cant quantify its own power or physical ability in a way that will allow it to plan an escape using its strength.The monkey is dangerous but still a monkey.If the monkey understood its own strength it would be more likely to act like the trainer instead of a monkey.But it wouldnt be natural for a monkey to sit down and calmly order its lunch,possible but not natural.

We can hurt our trainers like the monkey can hurt us,but we need to figure out how to recognise our own power so we can calmly sit down beside our trainers and order lunch,it is possible but not natural.

The monkey sure knew how to figure out the lock and keys and he even had to visualize the OTHER SIDE OF THE LOCK in order to get the keys in,but he was terrified when he actually got the door open so instead of breaking for freedom he ran back to captivity,the only thing he knew.

We are obviously finding ways to get the keys in the lock,and we are even visualising the lock on the other side,THE PROBLEM IS THAT WE DONT KNOW WHAT TO DO WHEN WE GET THE DOOR OPEN AND THERE IS A REAL DANGER THAT IF WE ARE AFRAID OF THE FREEDOM ON THE OTHER SIDE WE MIGHT RUN BACK TO OUR SAFE PLACE JUST LIKE THE MONKEY.

The reason I spent hours watching the monkeys is that I worked at a Zoo,no kidding,I am telling you I worked there so you can understand that if you are available for a long enough time period you will eventually see things happen that you could never imagine had you not actually been there.

We have spent enough time in the zoo on this planet to have seen amazing things happen,we even know how to open the door,now its time to step out with intent and with the goal of becoming like our trainers,NOT BECAUSE WE ARE OR WERE INFERIOR BUT SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY ARE THE NEXT INTELLIGENT STEP WE CAN TAKE,throwing poop at the moon is like the monkeys throwing poop at their trainers which I will attest to be fact,I will also attest that the monkeys throw the poop out of frustration,not anger.



posted on Oct, 12 2009 @ 06:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Matyas
 

While I admire your enthusiasm, in reality things don't work that fast. It would take you years just to develop the rockets you would need. Even if you go with off the shelf delta rocket or something, that would cost $40 million for a single stage.

I will agree that NASA should be able to reduce the cost of any space program as time goes on, but it has done the opposite and just increased with time. I would be all for an overhaul to reduce cost, but would be entirely against eliminating it. We get a lot of technological advancements from this research, let alone where it might lead in the future.



posted on Oct, 13 2009 @ 09:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Hal9000
 


Oh, you're right about that, bureaucracy is the dirty word. And I don't have anything against rockets, except for long hauls and heavy lifting out of Earth's gravity well. But where is it written in stone that I have no choice but to use them anyway?

"My" people are gnawing at the bit, they already want blueprints. There is something special watching a bunch of old fogies wanting to take the bull by the horns


Two years instills a sense of urgency, and soon those rights to land claims will go to the ones who can be there. Hell, a hand of Moondust can fetch an easy $20M, so I know returns are not the problem. Perhaps the poster above has a better take?



posted on Oct, 17 2009 @ 02:11 AM
link   
reply to post by one4all
 


I have taken time to reflect on your post, and have come to a solution. It is mundane, in that everyone knows it already. Fewer understand it, and less act upon it. I have often called it the human condition.

Monkeys are impulsive, and cannot read signs. We have bred against impulsiveness, and read signs. If a person in the presence of a monkey and a dog played here's the red, where's the red, then pointed at the correct cup, the dog would get it, but the monkey does not.

The "triangulation", or sign reading, is purely cognitive, the self control borders between the spiritual and cognitive. The next step of behavior modification lies further upwards in the spiritual. This is control of the ego.

If we cannot control our ego, then we cannot be trusted to sit at the trainer's table. But that isn't the catch. This modification must happen collectively. There has to be a critical mass which can only be arrived by way of an irrefutable point of reference.



posted on Oct, 17 2009 @ 04:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hal9000
reply to post by Copernicus
 

No, it's not much to look at and to an audience that is used to seeing spectacular explosions on TV everyday it will be a disappointment.

NASA said they were able to get some data, but I wonder if the plume was big enough to get a sample.


No I was merely implying how easy it is for NASA to fake pictures like these and claim something is there when it really isnt.

The lies are right in our faces. The plume was supposed to be really big at first, then nobody saw it, then NASA after a week says "its here!" and publishes pictures with a few random dots that nobody else saw.



[edit on 17-10-2009 by Copernicus]



posted on Oct, 17 2009 @ 04:32 PM
link   
Matyas,the most equitable path that allows humanity the ability to direct its own destiny for the first time in our present recorded history,is through mass education of the GLOBAL POPULATION in order that all of humanity be able to SHARE THE SAME PERSPECTIVE OR REALITY AT ONE TIME without the wedges of politics or religon or bias.Humanity must all be able to communicate their individual vote in their cumulative future BASED ON REAL TIME INFORMATION.

You see mankind was geneticly sandbagged or sabatoged to not be able to share one single cumulative perspective.It is not natural to not be able to share one single direction as a species.

Three billion solar powered laptops with satellite internet connections would do the trick.BELIEVE ME THE MOTHER IN AFRICA WITH STARVING CHILDREN WILL FIND A WAY TO OPEN A BANK ACCOUNT ONLINE AND EARN MONEY.

Just these laptops spread worldwide would topple governments and religons that have held people captive for thousands of years.

As a cumulative power humanity can also will or decide that other species dont have a place in our future ,and wha-la that is how it will be ,IF WE CAN ALL FINALLY GET ON THE SAME PAGE ----IN REAL TIME.









 
44
<< 17  18  19   >>

log in

join