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 "Moon Bombing" mission -- DISAPPEARS

page: 32
71
<< 29  30  31    33  34  35 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 11 2009 @ 12:57 AM
link   
reply to post by RiotComing
 


RiotComing,

Glad to see there are still some people out there with an open mind that is willing to entertain new thoughts without the old paradigm getting in the way....

The farther we go down the rabbit hole, the more we find out that; Truth is stranger than fiction...




posted on Oct, 11 2009 @ 01:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by Starsburnfyre
reply to post by InfaRedMan
 


You're just rude. wow! I never said they destroyed it hun. I said that it's odd I haven't seen it. And asked if anyone else has. So fine...you've seen it. congratulations! That's all I wanted to know. I'll remember to never express my concern on this site ever again. ciao!


Don't let something like immature comments cause you to leave. Just ignore the person.

When someone is being insulting and they say something similar to: "I'm not mean, I'm just being real" that's code for: "I'm superior. I know all. You're beneath me" or "I have nothing better to do but insult others over the INTERNET from behind the safety of a computer where I can't be touched"


Originally posted by rainfall

Originally posted by Skeptical Ed

But wait, there's more! How about John Lear claiming that the moon was towed into its current orbit by a huge electromagnetic vehicle, and that vehicle can be seen in a photo taken of the moon crater Tsiolkovsky. He also believes that the moon contains a breathable atmosphere, as evidenced by photos showing smoke or vapor coming from the surface.


Yeah,

And your point is.....?


He never really has a point. Just pops in to insult someone or tries to create arguments and leaves. Look at his post history for proof of that.

[edit on 11-10-2009 by nightmare_david]

[edit on 11-10-2009 by nightmare_david]


jra

posted on Oct, 11 2009 @ 01:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Duvant
1) Why did I see just a few guys filled with equipment in a tiny room, smaller than a average sized classrom? It just seemed odd to me to use a small room like that for such a huge event.


It's a small mission with a small team. There's no need for a giant room filled with hundreds of people and computers and giant screens.


2) Why did it appear to be a still image of the moon surface on the live feed? (at least, that was my first thought)


The camera only updated every second or so. There are 8 other instruments that gather the important scientific data. There is also very limited bandwidth to deal with, so you don't want the live feed to take it all up either.


4) If the mission price was incredible $79 millions, why didn't they put in just a little extra to get a better camera? I think $500.000 extra for a camera should have done the job. This event was a historic event, so it should have been well documented.


Well firstly, $79 million is cheap compared to other missions. Secondly, it's not as simple as just tossing on a better camera. There are weight and power limitations with all probes. Trying to stream HD quality footage would be difficult, especially when you have 8 other and more important instruments to deal with like I mentioned above.


5) Did NASA only see what we saw in Low Res?


We saw the same stuff that they did.


6) Why didn't I see any impact at all?


That's what everyone is trying to figure out. Not everything works as predicted and that's what makes all this interesting. Perhaps the ground was a lot harder than expected and the impactor wasn't able to kick up much debris at all. It's hard to say at this point. A lot of data still needs to be studied.


7) How did they manage to make the sattelite appear to stand still over the target area before descending?


I think the video feed simply froze, not the probe itself.


8) Shouldn't we see any ground movement at all? (like we see when the space shuttle is filming down on earth)


LCROSS was not orbiting the Moon in a low Lunar orbit. It was a a large elliptical orbit. Here's a link that explains it's orbit.



posted on Oct, 11 2009 @ 01:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by jra

Originally posted by Duvant
1) Why did I see just a few guys filled with equipment in a tiny room, smaller than a average sized classrom? It just seemed odd to me to use a small room like that for such a huge event.


It's a small mission with a small team. There's no need for a giant room filled with hundreds of people and computers and giant screens.


No it's because it's at AMES research center an all their buildings are condemned. That is why the Lunar Orbiter tapes were found in the abandoned McDonalds on the abandoned base that NASA is using




And THAT is the TRUTH and I can back it up



posted on Oct, 11 2009 @ 01:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jazz87 79 million? c'mon and that's all you have to show for it. why can't we stop being F'd wiiith!?


Because Americans like being bent over..

The Aliens get us with anal probes

The Government gets us with no WMD's etc

NASA gets us to buy anything


NASA AMES lunar orbiter processing department... I kid you not...








NASA penny anti operators



posted on Oct, 11 2009 @ 02:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by Skeptical Ed

But wait, there's more! How about John Lear claiming that the moon was towed into its current orbit by a huge electromagnetic vehicle, and that vehicle can be seen in a photo taken of the moon crater Tsiolkovsky. He also believes that the moon contains a breathable atmosphere, as evidenced by photos showing smoke or vapor coming from the surface.



Well seems you have a fixation on John
He hasn't been here in over a year, has nothing to do with this thread, but you felt the need to bring this up why?

Please deny ignorance and look up the definition for TROLL



Lunar Camp Fire

Found by Sherpa ATS member



www.lpi.usra.edu...


NASA TLP report that has data on clouds and gasses and lights on the moon recorded since 1956...
www.thelivingmoon.com...


NASA Update July 2008
www.thelivingmoon.com...


But go ahead make you smart aleck posts Your not fooling anyone



posted on Oct, 11 2009 @ 02:24 AM
link   
reply to post by zorgon
 


Your image is from Apollo 8... Interesting. Check this out:

Apollo 8 - Bonfires spotted by Apollo astronauts on lunar surface:





Smoke or dust coming from crater (Also from Apollo 8):



as08-13-2244




[edit on 11-10-2009 by Exuberant1]



posted on Oct, 11 2009 @ 03:14 AM
link   
reply to post by zorgon
 


If we remove prozaic explanations.. such as artifacts and issues that arise from development, handling and fakery... what would you suggest it is? A natural event such as volcanism - or a 'campfire'? Also, how would you explain the movement of the plume? Atmosphere (albeit an extremely thin one)... or some other process?

IRM



posted on Oct, 11 2009 @ 03:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by InfaRedMan

... what would you suggest it is? A natural event such as volcanism - or a 'campfire'?


When they come upon volcanisms, the Apollo astronauts have described them as such. This is evident from the transcripts. (www.abovetopsecret.com...)

Luckily, due the the multiple observers on Apollo, we now have multiple observations and can compare them.

In this case we had one astronaut saying it is a bonfire, whilst another stated that it was more like a campfire.

When the astronauts come upon a volcanism they usually say something like "hey babe, look at that volcanism", - and if they were observing a volcanism, they would not say "hey babe, look at that campfire/bonfire" .






[edit on 11-10-2009 by Exuberant1]



posted on Oct, 11 2009 @ 03:45 AM
link   
reply to post by Exuberant1
 


So would you support a moon with an atmosphere... (possibly breathable) and if so, through what process is oxygen created and retained on the surface?

Edit To Add:

Also.. just wondering... If there is an atmosphere on the moon, why don't we see scintillation when a star passes behind the moon? They just blink out.. and appear about an hour later on the other side. Wouldn't an atmosphere create some kind of twinkle?


IRM


[edit on 11/10/09 by InfaRedMan]



posted on Oct, 11 2009 @ 04:11 AM
link   
reply to post by InfaRedMan
 


The nature of the atmosphere on the moon is worth researching and investigating further.

The Apollo astronauts made some very interesting statements with regards to the lunar environment that were transcribed from the DSE 'blackbox' recordings. I have posted a couple dozen examples in this thread:

NASA's Apollo DSE "Black Box" Transcripts - revealing the unscripted truth about the Moon & E.T.

In the transcripts you will read how the astronauts saw snow, volcanisms, fires, possible mines, dikes, green areas, roads, and all sorts of strange things that are not compatible with the dead moon dictum.


[edit on 11-10-2009 by Exuberant1]



posted on Oct, 11 2009 @ 04:14 AM
link   
It's a coverup obvious imo



posted on Oct, 11 2009 @ 04:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by Vic Rattlehead
It's a coverup obvious imo


What do you think it is a cover up of?

I am interested in hearing all ideas on this aspect.





[edit on 11-10-2009 by Exuberant1]



posted on Oct, 11 2009 @ 04:23 AM
link   
reply to post by zorgon
 


cheers mate..... check this piece of joke.......

LunarTransient Phenomena (LTP) have been reported for at least 450 years. The events range from bright flashes, to reddish or bluish glows, to obscurations. Gaseous spectra and photometric measurements of the events have been obtained. Several theories have been offered as explanations for LTP, including residual volcanic activity or outgassing, bombardment by energetic particles, and piezoelectric effects. As the first set of digital multispectral images of the entire Moon, the Clementine data offer a unique opportunity to couple inferences of compositional relationships with lunar geomorphology in the regions of LTP. We have selected 11 regions from which numerous reliable historical reports of LTP exist. Our analysis of the Clementine multispectral images shows that many events occur in regions of bright, spectrally reddish deposits, which may be characteristic of volcanic ejecta. The events may be associated with outgassing of volatiles collected in or beneath mare basalt flows. Wefind that LTP tend to occur near the edges of maria, in agreement with a suggestion originally made by Cameron (1972. Icarus 16, 339–387), and in other regions of crustal weakness. We also find that some of the reported events tend to be in craters with rims of distinctly different (bluer) composition. This compositional difference may result from recent slumping of the rim, accompanied by the appearance of fresher underlying material. In some cases, slumping may be triggered by the release of pockets of volatiles; in turn the slumping events may cause additional pockets of trapped material to be released. There are four instances in which Clementine multispectral images were acquired both before and after an event that was reported by a terrestrial team of amateur astronomers mobilized to observe the Moon during the mapping phase of Clementine. None of these four sets of images shows clear changes that could be attributed to the reported LTP.

Lunar Transient Phenomena (1.18 mb pdf)
trs-new.jpl.nasa.gov...




posted on Oct, 11 2009 @ 04:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Exuberant1
I am interested in hearing all ideas on this aspect.



haarp.... electromagnetism.... gravitomagnetism.... etc...

Oceans charge up new theory of magnetism - A radical new idea may revolutionise our understanding of one of the most vital forces on Earth
www.timesonline.co.uk...




posted on Oct, 11 2009 @ 05:28 AM
link   
and how about the anomalies in lake vostok?



posted on Oct, 11 2009 @ 06:13 AM
link   
reply to post by Exuberant1
 


Just thinking with my intuition again, because I know nothing of science, engineering, physics etc. If there was a fire seen camp fire etc would that say there had to be oxygen for the fire to burn.

As far as the greenery and other stuff I am thinking that the occupants underground and in the comflouged quarters up there do a lot of experimenting and more or less create areas of what they want, after all they have the technology for it it is just that us mushrooms don't know it.

Then there is the other ET presence up there that do there stuff and on it goes................(it is like we say down here.........keep a dancing Maria).

I know one thing for sure tptb down here have some sort of liaison, treaty or whatever with the others up there, out there and there are hords of them. Sometimes the benevolents take out one of our missiles or shut down one of your nuclear reactors but that is a good thing IMHO. In fact I would not be surprised if they are not keeping a close watch on that Haldron? whatever it is, because that is really going to stuff things up good and proper.

Ahhh, yes, if it wasn't for dopey humans like us there wouldn't be that much to worry about for the earth.



posted on Oct, 11 2009 @ 07:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by mcrom901

Originally posted by Exuberant1
I am interested in hearing all ideas on this aspect.



haarp.... electromagnetism.... gravitomagnetism.... etc...

Oceans charge up new theory of magnetism - A radical new idea may revolutionise our understanding of one of the most vital forces on Earth
www.timesonline.co.uk...



An idea came to me when I was reading your 'timesonline' link.

Maybe NASA was DELIVERING water to the Moon???

Canisters of hydrogen and oxygen - to be re-assembled into water in a secret underground base?

Which would not only provide water but also the energy that comes from the re-uniting of those gases.

Just a thought...LoOoOoOol


Just the fact that the live coverage 'failed' at the vital time, tells us that something suspect was going on. IMO.



posted on Oct, 11 2009 @ 07:44 AM
link   
Okay, how do we know they weren't delivering something to the Moon rather than bombing it? Getting all the bits and bobs ready for Project Bluebeam for instance?



posted on Oct, 11 2009 @ 08:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Flighty
Okay, how do we know they weren't delivering something to the Moon rather than bombing it? Getting all the bits and bobs ready for Project Bluebeam for instance?



Well the 'delivery' speculation would explain why there was no expected
dramatic plume. And why the live coverage was stopped.

The what-ever-it-was could have been slowed right down as it approached the surface.



new topics

top topics



 
71
<< 29  30  31    33  34  35 >>

log in

join