It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by virgom129
reply to post by GeminiSky
Cool pic...It does look sorta faked, like there's nothing inside, even light..
One thing has always puzzled me and I'm sure someone here will give me the answer..
Its obvious the Moon has been hit many many times by objects but why are nearly all the craters perfectly round??
Wouldn't it get hit from all angles and create illongated hit sites???
Originally posted by GeminiSky
That is a GREAT question, you would think that if an object such as a meteor or asteroid came at an angle that it would slide across the surface and bury itself after creating a ling groove?
I would like to have that answered, because im stumped.
Most lunar craters (and those on other planets and moons) are round, as they are formed by explosions which throw material in all directions, rather than being "dug" out. However, if the object which creates a crater hits the surface at a very low angle, it may skip across the surface, producing elongated craters, such as shown in this Apollo 11 image. Moving from left to right, their impactor gouged out the 5 by 10 mile wide Messier, on the left, then the 7 by 10 mile wide Messier A, on the right, spraying material over a large area, and causing the pair of craters and their ejecta field to look very much like a comet. This is why they are named after one of the most famous comet-hunters of all time, Charles Messier.
I think whats more important is to see the underlying pattern. After the negative post, someone (like me) replys and asks for proof of the absurd claims that are made. As soon as this happens, the person (like the one in question) simply stops replying and leaves the discussion.
Another piece of evidence pointing towards the theory that all heavenly bodies are hollow is that, as you would expect with a hollow sphere, both the Earth and our moon are known to "ring like a bell" when hit with a shock wave.
In "Moongate: Suppressed findings of The US Space Program" (1982), Nuclear Engineer and researcher/writer William L. Brian II presents evidence proving that the moon, as any hollow sphere would, "rings" when hit by asteroids or heavy space junk. And that's not all. According to Dr. Brian, "the evidence provided by Apollo seismic experiments also points to the conclusion that the moon is hollow and relatively rigid."
(1) He also reports: "It is not commonly known that the Earth displays the same bell-like ringing or reverberations as the moon. Since the Earth is 81.56 times more massive than the moon, it takes a much larger explosion or shock wave to generate this effect. "Joseph Goodavage referenced such occurrences in his book, "Astrology: The Space Age Science". He mentioned that the ringing effect was recorded during the May 22, 1960 Chilean earthquake.
This was supposedly the most violent earthquake that had been recorded since the establishment of official world records in 1881. Goodavage provided a description of the effect which was given at the 1961 World Earthquake Conference, held at Helsinki, Finland. The description stated that the shock was so severe that the "entire planet rang like a bell". The ringing continued for a considerable length of time in a regular series of slow impulses which were recorded at various independent seismic stations. Goodavage also noted that the planet rang again as a result of the Anchorage, Alaska earthquake of March 27, 1964.
It seems hard to believe that scientists were so appalled in finding that the moon rang like a bell. After all, the Earth displays the same characteristic".
(2) Proof that the "ringing" of the moon is common knowledge in the scientific and NASA communities is presented in communications between Mission Control and the men aboard the Apollo 17 moon mission on December 29, 1972.
"LUNAR MODULE PILOT (LMP): Was there any indication on the seismometers on the impact about the time I saw a light flash on the surface?
CAPCOM: Stand by. We'll check on that.
LMP: A UFO perhaps, don't worry about it. It could have been one of the other flashes of light
CAPCOM: Jack, just some words from the back room for you. There may have been an impact at the time you called, but . So it would mask any other impact."
(3) Research/Writer Don Wilson presents other well-documented evidence supporting the Hollow Moon Theory. "The moon has only 60% of the density of Earth. The improbable fact that an equal amount of earth material seemed to weigh almost twice as much as moon matter mystified everyone. Why the difference? The actual answer, some scientists felt, pointed to the possibility that part or all of the moon's interior was hollow!"
(4) Then there's a report in the July 1962 issue of Astronautics by Dr. Gordon McDonald, a leading scientist at the Nation Aeronautics and Space Administration in which he states that "according to an analysis of the moon's motion, it appears that the moon is hollow: if the astronomical data are reduced, it is found that the data require that the interior of the moon is less dense than the outer parts. Indeed, it would seem that the moon is more like a hollow than a homogeneous sphere.’"
(5) In 1959 eminent scientist Professor Iosif Shklovsky put forth his findings in relation to the "moons" circling Mars. "After carefully weighing up the evidence he concludes that they are both hollow"
(6) While some "orthodox" scientists will quietly admit that some earthly bodies are probably hollow, they steadfastly refuse to accept the fact that ALL planets and moons are NATURALLY hollow and hurry to add they must be "artificial" satellites. For instance: "The moon seems to be a comparatively light world in contrast with the planet Earth. The fact that the moon is only about 60% as dense as our planet has led scientists to two theories: that the moon is without an iron core, and/or, that it is partially hollow. "Data and computations – among them, Dr. McDonald's motion studies, – point to the conclusion that our moon is internally hollow to a great extent. Since most scientists claim there is no natural explanation for such peculiar phenomenon (because satellite worlds are not naturally hollow), the inevitable conclusion indicates that the moon is artificially hollow."
(7) Once again, the "establishment" scientists are trying to "fit" the facts to their "sacred cow" theory. In no way will they "buck" the system and admit the obvious. The facts, once again, support the theory laid out by Gardner and Reed all heavenly bodies are hollow.
Originally posted by GeminiSky
reply to post by weedwhacker
It seems the info you provide may not conclusively prove that the moon is solid. Also, I am still waiting for you PROOF and EVIDENCE that NASA does NOT airbrush their photos to conceal classified material from the general public....