It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Major water find on the Moon!

page: 5
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in


posted on Nov, 13 2009 @ 10:25 PM

off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


posted on Nov, 13 2009 @ 10:51 PM
reply to post by The_Truth818

I hate to burst everyones bubbles', BUT, everything you have been taught in "SCHOOL" is a PACK OF LIES!


1. The folks who control this world (NWO,OWO,MASONS,CATHOLIC CHURCH,etc...) have step-by-step, from time immemorial (at least from the time of 100-400A.D., notice time line) tricking/misdirecting/fooling/erasing/re-writing all of man's knowledge base! (note period referred to as "the DARK ages", it was called that because of the DARKENING of man's knowledge base)(there are too many examples for me to list here)(I will begin posting detailed analysis in future threads).

2. All information disseminated in this current period (The Present) is LIES!

3. Origins of planetary bodies: ALL planets/moons/proto-planets,etc.. ARE "CALVED" (calved means born/produced/originated) FROM THE SUN!

4. When a STAR ignites it blows away ALL debris/left-over gaseous/physical matter in the immediate area of ignition!( WHAT!, you think after a bomb goes off NOTHING outside of the physical diameter of said bomb is effected!)

5. See Hubble's "first pic of a new star shortly after being 'born' " a couple of months ago, It clearly shows(and said that it was identified by this characteristic) the immediate area around the new star is "CLEARED" of debris, So the "theory" of planets being formed by the "leftovers" after solar ignition is HOGWASH! see #3

6. Planetary bodies are calved off the sun in "PAIRS" due to bi-nodal coagulation of heavy particles produced in the sun as a by-product of fission ( I will post thread later on this subject) and spin off away from the sun together (relatively). note, Neptune/Uranus, Saturn/Jupiter, Planet V [imploded former planet (after expansion-which OUR planet is currently undergoing-another thread later) which is now erroniously called "The Asteroid Belt]/Mars, Earth/Venus, Mercury/Moon(OUR MOON)(shifted into current position as a result of planet V's destruction/implosion and subsequent shifting of intra-solar gravimetrics).

6. Back to "How water got on the MOON", THE MOON IS THE SAME type of body as every other planet/moon/etc.etc...Thats how the water etc. got there and everywhere else! see pic's of recent decent of lander on Saturn's moon Titan. Wow! mountains/rivers/lakes/etc...

7. So I repeat, everything you have been taught in school is a pack of lies, you expect NASA/THE GOVERNMENT to tell you the truth about ANYTHING! They gotta keep up the charade!


P.S. if you now have a degree in the "sciences" from any college/university in America, it's well, pretty much worthless

posted on Nov, 13 2009 @ 11:02 PM
reply to post by Keymaster1

if you now have a degree in the "sciences" from any college/university in America, it's well, pretty much worthless

Be sure to tell that to your dentist right before he starts working in your mouth.

posted on Nov, 13 2009 @ 11:06 PM
reply to post by Keymaster1

A star for your fine post. I see you already have the planets.

What's it like up there?

posted on Nov, 13 2009 @ 11:16 PM

off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


posted on Nov, 13 2009 @ 11:45 PM
It's difficult to tell from some of the posts, but I thought this thread was about NASA confirming that there is H2O on the moon.

For myself, I'm ready to volunteer for a terraforming and colonization mission.

Perhaps the citizens that volunteer to go off planet have some science training along with a pair. Co-ed I'm sure.

To those trying to derail for their own tired agendas, please stay on on this planet and fix the mess; and turn off the lights when you feel the urge to join Homo nouveau on the satellite colony.

Perhaps India will be the first country to mount a long term mission.

posted on Nov, 13 2009 @ 11:56 PM
reply to post by Keymaster1

Perhaps you would like to tell us all where you got your education? I am really interested in where someone could possibly become so dilusional as to believe all of that stuff you just rattled off.

I am serious. So many people today think they can just 'Google Up' and education. Go take a course in astrophysics, meet some real scientists.
Before you do that, perhaps an attitude adjustment might help as well.

Just and observation, don't take it too personally.

posted on Nov, 13 2009 @ 11:57 PM
reply to post by buddhasystem

As with any conquest, you send a Guy thousands of miles in search of gold...

The Guy returns to his kingdom with grand stories of gold, just laying there to be picked like cigarette butts on a New York sidewalk...

The King and Kindom are elated and sends the Guy back with ($trillions in financial backing) from sweat of his over-taxed citizens... only to discover later the guy lied about the amount of gold...

But, it's OK..

Because this was the Guy's plan in the first place... because he (the Guy) wanted to build a fleet of ships with his name on it... NASA.

posted on Nov, 14 2009 @ 12:34 AM
Yer I would agree that NASA never would have mentioned water on the Moon if it wasn't for India. They have made NASA look a like a little kid saying "ME TOO,Me Too!"

Just Imagine how embarrassing it's going to look when some tinpot country pops the cork on Disclosure then what will NASA do? Come out a couple of weeks later saying "We knew about aliens too!"

posted on Nov, 14 2009 @ 01:21 AM
reply to post by Raider of Truth

You have such a valid point!!!! I agree 100% with you

posted on Nov, 14 2009 @ 01:52 AM
Seems the LCROSS mission not only discovered gallons of water at the impact site, but very complex organic material show up on the spectrograph.

Source -- Richard Hoagland, in Tonight's Coast to Coast AM program (Nov 13th, 10pm - 2 am PT)

posted on Nov, 14 2009 @ 02:05 AM

off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


posted on Nov, 14 2009 @ 02:11 AM
Conveniently found after the announcement of major funding cuts from the gov't to Nasa

"pssst...lets just tell them we found water...they'll give us our money back".

*looks around nervously*

posted on Nov, 14 2009 @ 02:49 AM

Originally posted by bowlbyville
I too thought that India had discovered water on the moon first; I didn't realize that the device on the Chandrayaan-1 mission was built and operated by NASA.

Learn something everyday (well, almost every day). Thanks.

Just to set the records straight -- India's analyser in the Moon Impact Probe (MIP) which impacted near the south pole soon after Chandrayaan went into orbit detected presence of water, but ISRO held onto the discovery pending confirmation by NASA's instrument on board the orbiting Chandrayaan which happened later.

posted on Nov, 14 2009 @ 03:20 AM
Congratulations for revealing this data publicly.

I still do not see how they plan to establish a presence on the moon though.
First of all the budgets are really low and whatever they thinking of sending there just won't do the trick.
We must understand that for permanent habitats to exist on the moon, everything has to be underground to be viable, even if the decide to set a robotic base with minimal human presence the best solution is still underground.
Currently there is not one project or even a single idea pointing to that direction. Where are the ideas and models for such a kind of operation?
Simply no one ever thought of it this way in NASA.
The moon has very low gravity. Another thing that has to be taken in to consideration is the artificial environment has to resemble earth conditions in order for humans to be able to stay for long times in any Moon base. Artificial gravity has to be provided since it will not be healthy for a human organism to live 24/7 at lunar low gravity conditions for very long time. ISS crew indeed stays for some time in no gravity at all but they change every now and then rotating the crew for obvious reasons. Are thy going to do this with the Moon too? How much more expensive will such a project get in the long run? Artificial gravity unfortunately is still something present only in science-fiction. Orbital rings could be the solution but still no one has ever brought such an idea on the table. If that would seem logical then why not a bigger or more orbital stations in earth orbit for preparing for Mars? I don't know why people believe that NASA will just do some miracle and bring humans on the Moon in just a decade and a bit more.
What is the point of announcing water on the Moon or even making the mission itself, since none of the above have never been addressed? Looking for water on the Moon means that they need to find water in order for a prolonged human presence to be feasible on the Moon, but since all the other ideas they have for prolonged presence aren't then what is the point of it all?
Knowhow of underground bases would greatly help for Mars too or do we expect to learn to build super expensive fortresses on the surface in environments we know very little about?
I am afraid that no one in NASA or in the whole world for that matter is taking seriously an established presence on the Moon.
Somehow, someway these all are smoke and mirrors.
Else nothing makes sense.

[edit on 14-11-2009 by spacebot]

posted on Nov, 14 2009 @ 03:28 AM
There should be no ice on the moon! No water, no ice because of SUBLIMATION into space. In the 4.5 billion years since the moon formed from a collision (or however it formed) the ice should be long, long gone by sublimation.

Why is it still on the Moon? Well, maybe, just maybe, there is an atmosphere to prevent it from sublimating? How else to explain?

Either that or ice behaves differently on the Moon that it does here on Earth!

That, apparently is what NASA and some of the folks here on ATS would like you to believe!!

posted on Nov, 14 2009 @ 03:31 AM
reply to post by plumranch

Ok, here too:

The sublimation temperature of water ice in a vacuum is 152K. The temperature in the shadowed areas of Cabeus crater is well below that (45-50K), that is one reason it was chosen as the impact site. Water ice would not sublimate there.

posted on Nov, 14 2009 @ 03:34 AM
Didnt someone recently have a thread about water on mars?

posted on Nov, 14 2009 @ 03:42 AM
Hey Phage.

I was reading an article about this today and in the comment section somone said that "the younger scientist" repeatedly used the word species to describe what they had discovered on the Moon. I missied the press conference and couldn't find it on youtube so I don't know if this is true or not. Can you (or anyone else) explain why they would use the word species to describe water and minerals? Is there an accepted scientific usage of the word for anything other than life?

And if anyone could post a link to the press conference I'd appreciate it.

posted on Nov, 14 2009 @ 03:50 AM
reply to post by fieryjaguarpaw

The term species is applied to related chemical substances.

new topics

top topics

<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in