Our Moon is an Artificial Space Station ~~~ PROOF!!!, page 3
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5    6  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 133 times


reply posted on 27-10-2010 @ 12:03 AM by ConradsLaces
reply to post by maluminse


I'd love to know the criteria too... The Tweets about the cache of 9/11 footage, and Zecharia Sitchin were definitely
"OMG!" Tweet-worthy... this post.. definitely not.

I wonder if it's automatic. Maybe it picks a post in a forum that's had 'x' number of views within a certain period of time after it's posted; and looks for certain keywords... I dunno. Echelon anyone? lol! right here on ATS



reply posted on 27-10-2010 @ 01:07 AM by starless and bible black
reply to post by sp00n1

If the moon is responsible for sustaining life on earth, I am surprised they haven't tried bombing it yet. Why not test nukes there, at least? Get the ball rolling.

Alas OP, tidally locked moons are common, and as we were told, we really don't know what life would be like here on earth, were there no moon. We do know, however, that we must quiver in fear every time the BBC reports that 'it's too late to do anything about global warming', every time a sea current ceases to flow for a few days. The BBC has a way with rhetoric. When it comes to deepwater, it was all sunshine and microbes just slurping all that oil right out of sight. The powers that be never look to gain from attacking a corporation. The real money is on enslaving every one to a man, right down to the one sheet per #e proposal put forth by sheryl crow. It was never intended to be a joke, btw, just as there are persons who believe that climate change deniers belong 'on the dock at Nuremberg'. These globalist bastards have names. Rabidly low levels of self-esteem gives these usurpers their reason to be.

I wouldn't look too deeply into the moon as being artificially constructed, or as a 'satellite' or what have you. I'm not sure how you decided to place these things in your title. Just because there's a lot of wonder doesn't make it so. I would not have clicked on the thread were it not for your keywords etc.... Thankfully phage showed up and stopped the madness.


reply posted on 27-10-2010 @ 02:00 AM by Somehumanbeing
reply to post by spacekc929


I understand exactly what you mean.

We are only here today because of the rare chance that the moon would be here, so in essence without the moon we wouldn't probably be here to discuss the lack of a moon. I really dislike it when people use the whole "the chances of [object used for intelligent design here] happening is [insert figure here] thus it is incredibly improbable we would be here." But if it did not happen we would not be here to discuss it. It is a necessary coincidence that allowed us to be here, so that argument is null.
edit on 27-10-2010 by Somehumanbeing because: (no reason given)



reply posted on 27-10-2010 @ 03:09 AM by Titen-Sxull
reply to post by sp00n1


Even if everything in the OP was factually accurate it doesn't serve as proof that the moon is artificial or a space station. Stating that the moon rotates or might be hollow doesn't prove it is a space station any more than me saying the fact that an orange is round proves that oranges are apples. There is simply no link between basic facts about the moon and the idea that it is an artificial space station.


yet it is widely regarded as the strangest object in the known universe.


By whom? You don't honestly believe the moon is stranger than pulsars or black holes do you? I can think of quite a few objects in this solar system alone that I find stranger, or at least more interesting, than our moon. Titan, for instance, or perhaps Europa where life might exist under the ice. This is clearly a subjective opinion being put forward as "widely regarded" without any evidence at all to back up such a claim.


Whilst we take this for granted it has been called the biggest coincidence in the universe.


And we're going to base speculation that the moon is artificial on a coincidence? Setting aside the fact that the moon was once closer to the Earth than it is now it is very poor reasoning to assume that because something seems improbable that it must have happened by design. Winning the lottery, surviving a really bad car crash, leaving a city the day before an Earthquake strikes - these are all coincidences, are we going to assume that some design is behind them?


There is no logical reason why the Moon mimics the Sun in this way and it is only meaningful to a human standing on the Earth.


Nature is not confined to human logic. For instance it was once logical to assume the Earth was flat because all reasoning and evidence had thus far held that it was. It was once logical, based on models of the solar system, to believe the solar system was geocentric. Discoveries later overturned the knowledge of the day.

Conclusions:

I'm honestly baffled how your post managed to scare up so many stars and flags considering the total of amount of zero evidence provided to support the conclusion in the title.


reply posted on 27-10-2010 @ 07:52 AM by MR BOB
reply to post by sp00n1

edit on 27-10-2010 by MR BOB because: phage beat me to it...

Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5    6  >>    ^^TOP^^



Did NASA "bomb" the moon to hide something?
  Posted 2 days ago with 76 member flags
New Plasma Battery Technology Probably Powering Stealth Sattelites
  Posted 15 days ago with 17 member flags
Nick Pope Interview on ATSLive, Got a Question to ask?
  Posted 18 days ago with 13 member flags
Will Planet X be visible during the eclipse on May 20th?
  Posted 10 days ago with 9 member flags
Obama and the Card Game Illuminati
  Posted 10 days ago with 9 member flags
CNN wants you afraid to fly.
  Posted 19 days ago with 7 member flags