NASA "Moon Bombing" mission -- DISAPPEARS

I agree there is something fishy here.

Why have the cameras trained if they weren't expecting to see anything? Why did the camera go blank at the crucial time? It's like waiting for a massive firework display on TV just for the TV to go blank at the time the fireworks start.

Maybe the satellite was fired at the moon and missed! I'll wait until someone posts the film of this on You Tube

Originally posted by randyvs
reply to post by wakinup13

 

speaking of "Phage or SGiP" .. where are they?

Has Phage ever really" chimed in" about them bombing the moon. I mean in a serious way? I doubt it very much.
Altough I must admit I can"t know for sure.
Duped that's what I'd say.

[edit on 9-10-2009 by randyvs]

may be true... but considering the theories being tossed around here I figured he would be chiming in eventually...

reply to post by mnmcandiez


that's the thing mate... all the observatories have stated they saw nothing.. and even the mighty hubble didnt see anything.

this stinks big time!

There was indeed a camera on the probe, but apparently it did not see the impact results all that well either.

news.nationalgeographic.com...

"I can certainly report that there was an impact," LCROSS principal investigator Anthony Colaprete said at a NASA press conference this morning. "We saw the impact and we saw the crater."

When the rocket crashed into the moon, though, cameras on LCROSS registered no discernable change in the crater—at least to the untrained eye.

"It was hard to tell what we saw there," said Michael Bicay, science director at NASA Ames Research Center in California, during live coverage on NASA TV.

A closer inspection of LCROSS impact images, though, has revealed a small white speck that scientists think is the debris thrown up by the first crash, but it will take time for scientists to determine whether it is evidence of water on the moon, NASA says. (See "There's Water on the Moon, Probes Confirm.")

Is NASA going to delay putting out the video footage, and if so, why?

It seems strange that both rocket shots hit nothing but rock, so that neither produced a plume. If the Indian probe could detect oxygen and hydrogen, you think it could also figure out where the solid rock was located, as opposed to the suspected underground ice. I can only guess, maybe so, maybe not.

Originally posted by LordBucket
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People

 

That's either a typo or an ambiguity in that mission summary. I've heard and read multiple other sources say "6 miles" and they have been saying that for a while.

I love it. I quote the official NASA mission summary and you say it might be a typo because other sources said something different?

I'm sure most would agree with me that they heard the plume was supposed to be 6 miles.

That's nice. And I heard the crater resulting from the impact was supposed to be five miles in diameter. I heard this repeatedly, and just a few days ago cited news sources making that claim. But when I checked, that claim did NOT appear on the NASA summary, so I dropped it.

Well, I can only tell you about the information I heard -- and that was that the plume would be 10 km (6 miles) not the 60 km that you heard. I don't discount the possibility of a typo or an ambiguity as easily as you do. Typos happen.

As for the size of the crater -- I don't know where you heard that it would make a 5-mile crater, because I have all along been hearing a 20 to 50 meter crater.

it has already been established that the plume did not go as high as expected

Do you understand the magnitude of difference? It went from "visible from earth using hobbyist telescopes" to "hey...see those couple pixels that we took with our biggest and best technology from NASA formally and officially monitoring the event? We think those couple pixels are probably the event."

The size of the plume is still unknown. All that is known id that it did not reach as high as expected (i.e., it did not reach into the sunlight where it could be seen). If the angle between the Centaur rocket and the impact site was more oblique than expected, then a large plume may have propagated sideways, but still not into the sunlight where it would have been visible.

When the UFO crowd shows vague, unclear photos they're torn to pieces and told they're idiots for believing the pictures are of anything. And now NASA is giving us a "couple pixels" and you're buying it?

Are you saying that as long as they are faking the images, they should make the fake images more clear and high-res?

I don't see how that is evidence that the impact didn't happen.

Ok. So how about give me some evidence that it did?

Besides NASA, there are the observations of the impact from Kitt Peak Observatory -- which, by the way, is consistent with the initial analysis from NASA (Kitt Peak's analysis of the impact flash showed the presence of sodium, and so did NASA's analysis.)

and if you could see an (estimated) 20-meter crater prior to the 49 second mark, then you have good eyes.

I think you misunderstood my point. The image showed a very obvious crater in the center of the image. Ths image was described as "post impact crater." The implication was that the crater in the image was the result of the impact.

If you're now saying that the alleged impact-crater was not visible in the image, and that the visible crater was simply some random, unrelated crater...then WHY are people showing that image and saying "here's the impact crater!"

The impact site was inside another crater (inside Cabeus Crater), so perhaps that's what you saw. The impact site is in perpetual darkness, so it would be impossible to see in visible light, and can only be seen with infrared light while it was still "hot" from the impact.

I saw two images of the impact (linked below) in the presented during the press conference.
www.nasa.gov...
the inset image one the left is supposedly the crater (the one bright pixel) as seen in infrared. The inset on the right is supposedly the impact in infrared (the bright fuzzy ball in the center of the inset)

It just means that something unexpected happened.

Yes. It does.
But what?

I don't know -- that's why scientists do experiments such as this.

Like I said before, perhaps the Centaur rocket impacted in dry, hard bedrock rather than icy loose soil. That would be one explanation for a smaller-than-expected plume.

That result would be unexpected, but nonetheless telling to geologists studying the moon.

[edit on 10/9/2009 by Soylent Green Is People]

People we only have the BS story of why they wanted to bomb that region, "because it will cause a plume that can we can investigate for traces of water". This is the information they are giving us! Who knows what other agendas were behind this "bombing" and what if these hidden agendas were achieved minus the so called predicted plume?? Why is it that on days that something like this should be the only show in town, that massive distractions seem to take the eyes off the prize!!??? (Obama Nobel Peace Prize ??)

Am I the only one who see's we are been played??

He're my theory!

Missile was aimed to destroy buildings/structures on the "far side of the moon" , what we saw live on NASA was staged! (which explains why so many people there look confused, frustrated and couple just unhappy) it was all for a show.

It makes no sense that there are no other shots available for public other then ONE still image that constantly got zoomed. It doesn't require weeks to release the better images to public (unless it's being Photoshoped), it's simple, if they could see what was happening, so can we (tape what's on their monitor).

This explains why we couldn't see anything from Earth... explosion, even if small (2 Ton is not small) in a no atmosphere rock, the particles will float and expand in space for days... just like a small commit hitting moon, you can see the scatter rocks in space for weeks.

- They are hiding something... the real footage was not at all what we saw earlier (it was totally staged, look at the reaction people are making, they're not even good actors, they were upset for a reason)
- either they hit some buildings/structures (ET) on the far side of the moon (to hide evidence from other countries finding them)
- or the ET disabled the missile before hitting it (if so, wait for disclosure by ET).

think about it, all other countries for some odd reason racing to get this so called lifeless, meaningless rock. Why are countries spending billions (when we're in such bad economy) to go to this so called lifeless rock. Makes no sense, NASA knows something, or has something others want. They're destroying it so that other countries can't get what they got. Simple... I don't think their missile hit the moon at all.

[edit on 9-10-2009 by freighttrain]

Originally posted by poet1b

I guess so far it looks like there have not been any retaliation attacks.

Not yet...

I don't know why everyone is so upset.

You've been taking this crap from NASA for over 40 years. Doctored moon photos. Ice particle anomalies. UFO codewords. They've practically served feces on a silver platter and people have gobbled it down and asked for seconds.

Don't worry - by this time tomorrow they'll have a full course meal ready for all of you. And I don't doubt that whatever they say, most people will eat it up like it's Thanksgiving dinner.

Desert anyone?

reply to post by defcon5


I have to agree... it was like they didnt want us seeing what really happened.

Originally posted by MOTT the HOOPLE
How much of a plume would expect if you fire a bullet into mud!

Twice the speed of a .308 and 2.2 tons? Allot of material should have been thrown all over the place!

reply to post by freighttrain


I actually said that yesterday in a thread, i basically said "wouldn't it be funny if full disclosure began after tomorrow's moon "bombing" and the E.T's had enough and by christmas we will know the truth"

i agree with your theory 100%

Just finished watching it with my 13 year old.
Boy if that was supposed to inspire an interest in science...all they got from him was a WTF? (That's what he said W. T. F.)

He said "That looks like a big reptile head. " It did.

why did they change the sampling rate? Why did they switch to the stupid animation picture at the very end?

It was like...to me...they didn't want the public to see the surface of the moon.

reply to post by kcfusion

If the moon was gone we would know by now -_-

You obviously havn't read any of my posts. Please I encourage you .
There aren't that many.

reply to post by Raider of Truth


I saw it real time on the NASA TV broadcast, but I cannot find any footage that goes back that far before impact now. I thought it was weird at the time, but I had no way to capture what was going on in the couple of minutes it was on the screen. If anyone can find it, you will see what looks like two mouse pointers with blobs at the tips that looked like small craters, about 4 times the size of the mouse pointer itself. I do not like to start rumors like this, and am generally a skeptic, but when I saw it I was like WTF is that about. It could have been due to pixilation from watching it online, but it really looked to me like they were blotting something out or placing a graphic of a smaller crater in the large crater.

If anyone else can find it, I would like to look at it closer, but I have to head off for now.

and did anyone else find it STRANGE they'd call the change in data stream

curtain?

Like curtain over our eyes?
Or Curtain call - show's on?
or both?

Originally posted by Soylent Green Is People
I don't understand what you mean by a PR mess. They hit their target and collect a lot of data. The plume was expected to be so small that I'm not surprised the ground-based photos have not detected them yet. I expect that the plume will be visible after the photos are further processed.

Have you even bothered to read mission parameters? The detonation plume (cloud of debris) was estimated to be 4 km high. A DUST CLOUD FOUR KILOMETERS HIGH. You mean no one with a telescope could detect it? Come on now, seriously.

I watched the entire broadcast.
The grey feed gets closer to moon surface.
Then just dissapears.
Everybody in the control center jump up and start to pack themselves ready to go home, in a 'recess' sort of way. (never seen control center abandon their places so suddenly)

Then we see the fishy looking guy in the studio. He makes a dry face.

"Erm, yep, the mission is a success."

I can imagine the press conference now.

"But where's the plume?"
"Erm.. It was there. I'm pretty sure it was."
"Ok, where? Is there promised video feed from another craft"
"Er... We've got lots of data."
"Can we see it?"
"Erm... No."

I mean, they are laughing in your FACE, people.

[edit on 9-10-2009 by mysteralex]

I was thinking it probably lodged itself in the cheese that makes up the moon, may have to send some Ritz to scoop it out. No water on the moon, milk maybe, only to process the cheese, take it from me, I have proof the moon is made of cheese. Just ask and I will tell.

reply to post by mysteralex


You're misrepresenting the facts in an attempt to be cute.

NASA has admitted that the plume was not as high as expected, but that's why they call it "science" -- they now need to figure out why the plume was not high enough to reach out of the dark crater and into the sunlight (where it could be seen with visible light).

Science is all about explaining results from experiments. They need to do the science to explain these unexpected results from this experiment. I don't see any "conspiracy" in that.

As for the data -- they went over some of it this morning in the press briefing. The VERY FIRST thing they said in the briefing is that they have data, but no answers (because the data had not been analyzed). However, they did show some of the raw data.


[edit on 10/9/2009 by Soylent Green Is People]

reply to post by HrdCorHillbilly


I saw the flashing light this morning while watching the infra-red camera. No one said anything or even acted like they noticed, but it freaked me out. I thought oh my God someone is trying to signal!
I am SOOOOOO glad I am not the only one that saw it!