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.


Chronological Catalog of Reported Lunar Events.NTR-R-277

page: 1

log in


posted on Jan, 5 2010 @ 01:13 AM
For quick refference this site has compiled data fron the NASA report R-277, viewable online in PDF format here.

NASA Technical Report R-277, 1500's

NASA Technical Report,1600's

NASA Technical Reports 1700's

NASA Technical Report 1800's

NASA Technical Report 1900-1949

NASA Technical Report 1950-1967

Evolutionists cannot easily explain the continued geological activity evident within the astral bodies of our solar system. They believe that the Earth-Moon system is about 4.5 billion years old and that therefore the Moon must be geologically "cool" and "dead" by now. But 570 sightings made by over 300 individuals through the course of several centuries presents a radically different picture. Many of the listed sightings contend that there were actually multiple witnesses to certain observed recorded events. There is therefore good evidence that the Moon is geologically and/or meteorologically active.


[edit on 5-1-2010 by alyosha1981]

posted on Jan, 5 2010 @ 01:56 AM
Work being done on the moon? I don't know, but I will tell you that we aren't being told the whole story about our space program and whats on the moon.

posted on Jan, 5 2010 @ 04:53 AM
reply to post by alyosha1981

The placement of links beneath your external quote ('Evolutionists cannot explain...') suggests that the quote is from a NASA source. It isn't, of course; it's from a creationist propaganda site that also half-pretends to be NASA.

A typical creationist fraud, in other words.

People have been claiming to see lights on the moon for centuries. All kinds of different lights. The explanations for these may vary. There are no grounds for postulating volcanic activity as the cause of them all.

There has never been any clear evidence of volcanic or tectonic activity on the moon and yes, the surface looks pretty dead.

Five-hundred-odd sightings in five hundred years makes one sighting a year on average, by the way. Not really a big deal when you look at it that way, is it?

Sadly, I have yet to meet an active creationist who would tell the truth when a lie would serve the cause better. I eagerly await my first encounter with an honest creationist. And these people accuse scientists of lying!


log in