It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
For decades, researchers have claimed that strange objects have been seen on or above the moon — things that shouldn’t be there.
An example of a classic case was dusted off upon the recent discovery of what appears to be a natural bridge on the moon. Such a claim was made in 1950s when a bridge seen on the lunar surface; but it was argued away.
The person making the “moon bridge” claim back then was ridiculed by experts who said that such a thing was impossible. Guess it is actually possible after all.
A more recent case involved the discovery of water on the moon. Experts said in the past that water on the moon was non-existent, and that the moon was dry as a bone. Wrong again.
There’s likely to be a lot of moon-related “I told you so” finger wagging taking place in the coming decades. Will any of these I-told-you-so’s involve evidence of intelligent life being found on Earth’s moon?
Originally posted by mother1138
The person making the “moon bridge” claim back then was ridiculed by experts who said that such a thing was impossible.
where Speigal quotes some of the fantastic claims made by Richard C. Hoagland. (Wait, I suppose his claims are all pretty fantastic.)
Originally posted by Nightchild
"Evidence of Alien Life on the Moon Being 'Withheld from the American People.'"
A bit odd way to word it, I must say. Is it only the Americans it is being withheld from, while the rest of the whole World knows? If so, the contact between America and the "outside-World" must be very limited.
Originally posted by wisintel
Originally posted by markygee
Sorry I got carried away but I thought I'd stumbled on a post with real evidence in it.
Originally posted by IgnoreTheFacts
reply to post by mother1138
You didn't mention, but do you believe that there is life on the moon and that there is a secret cabal of elites that somehow manage to keep this information from the public?
Originally posted by dereks
Care to show proof that the claim was ridiculed by experts? How about naming the experts who ridiculed it?
Promontorium Olivium is the site of the somewhat infamous O'Neill's Bridge. Without access to the original documents the circumstances surrounding this event are a bit difficult to reconstruct, but it seems that in 1953, as the Sun was setting over the western shore of Mare Crisium, science writer John J. O'Neill observed a fan of light apparently emanating from the low spot between Promontorium Olivium and Promontorium Lavinium and spreading to the east. Incorrectly interpretting this as the signature of the arch of a 12-mile wide natural bridge he sent letters seeking confirmation of his discovery to a number of prominent lunar observers of the day, including H. P. Wilkins. Wilkins possibly understood that a lunar bridge would not produce a fan of light, but seems to have claimed to have observed the shadow of a much smaller arch (and the light shining through its aperture) at nearly the same location; observing this both with a 15-inch reflector at his home and with the Mount Wilson 60-in reflector (the later, at least, with a quite high Sun). Wilkins' (south up) Mount Wilson sketch (see Dobbins and Baum, 1998 article in Bibliography) shows a tiny loop to the south of the small crater known in the System of Lunar Craters as Proclus PA (just to the right of the dot for Proclus P in the Lunar Orbiter photo shown at the top of this page -- which is likely at very nearly the same sun angle as Wilkins' untimed Mount Wilson observation). Wilkins estimated the length of his smaller arch to be about 1.5-2 miles, and appears to be trying to show in his drawing that its shadow pattern changes in the manner that would be expected for an arch illuminated by a lowering Sun. With his home telescope he might possibly have been looking at Proclus PA itself, the bowl of which seems to be represented in the Mount Wilson sketch by a dark circle with a bird-like double beak extending to the south. Strangely, the axis of the bird's bill is shown diverging from the axis of Promontorium Olivium at an angle of about 30° when all photos suggest they should be nearly parallel or converging. It is unclear if Wilkins thought his arch could account for O'Neill's extremely broad fan of light when illuminated at much lower sun angles (something that would require some highly improbable reflections from shiny surfaces on the underside of the bridge). According to Charles Wood, Wilkins hinted in the 1954 edition of Wilkins and Moore that the bridge might be artificial, although other articles about the incident claim Wilkins always insisted its was natural. All references to O Neill and his bridge seem to have been expunged from the final 1961 edition of The Moon, although his name is printed just to the west of the gap between the two promontories on Wilkins' map of Section XII (p. 192), and the name is listed as having been proposed by Wilkins (p. 353).
Promontorium Olivium does not appear in later lists of IAU-approved nomenclature; yet it also does not appear on any published list of deletions, and the name does not appear to have ever been formally dropped.
Originally posted by SkyBluePegasus
Originally posted by Nightchild
"Evidence of Alien Life on the Moon Being 'Withheld from the American People.'"
A bit odd way to word it, I must say. Is it only the Americans it is being withheld from, while the rest of the whole World knows? If so, the contact between America and the "outside-World" must be very limited.
Yes, we've known about this for years. This is why whenever an American walks into a room everyone stops talking.
Originally posted by mother1138
Just saw this at Dateline Zero ... "Evidence of Alien Life on the Moon Being 'Withheld from the American People.'"
A snip from the article:
For decades, researchers have claimed that strange objects have been seen on or above the moon — things that shouldn’t be there.
An example of a classic case was dusted off upon the recent discovery of what appears to be a natural bridge on the moon. Such a claim was made in 1950s when a bridge seen on the lunar surface; but it was argued away.
The person making the “moon bridge” claim back then was ridiculed by experts who said that such a thing was impossible. Guess it is actually possible after all.
A more recent case involved the discovery of water on the moon. Experts said in the past that water on the moon was non-existent, and that the moon was dry as a bone. Wrong again.
There’s likely to be a lot of moon-related “I told you so” finger wagging taking place in the coming decades. Will any of these I-told-you-so’s involve evidence of intelligent life being found on Earth’s moon?
The article is inspired by an article from Lee Speigel at AOL's Weird News, where Speigal quotes some of the fantastic claims made by Richard C. Hoagland. (Wait, I suppose his claims are all pretty fantastic.)
But the article makes, I think, a good point. Water on the moon, and a bridge on the moon, were all waved away as ridiculous and impossible. Could evidence of life having been on the moon at one time be the next thing to make experts say "I guess we were wrong"?
Mod Edit: External Source Tags Instructions – Please Review This Link.edit on 2/11/2010 by ArMaP because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by dereks
Originally posted by mother1138
The person making the “moon bridge” claim back then was ridiculed by experts who said that such a thing was impossible.
Care to show proof that the claim was ridiculed by experts? How about naming the experts who ridiculed it?
Originally posted by IgnoreTheFacts
reply to post by mother1138
You didn't mention, but do you believe that there is life on the moon and that there is a secret cabal of elites that somehow manage to keep this information from the public?
I would love to know the mechanism you imagine that is in place for something so outlandish to even be remotely real.
Originally posted by The Shrike
It was never a bridge as we know bridges. What was seen was a featureless area and someone though it was a bridge over a chasm. B.S.! The resolution could never allow such detail.
Water on the moon? Not like here on earth. IOW, flowing water. Just rocks that could contain water molecules but it's going to take a lot of "squeezing" to get a drop.
There is no doubt that something could be said is going on on the moon since enough UFOs have been filmed flying over, scooting over, etc. I made a thread about a crater giving off what seem to be acknowledging signals to a white object that was passing over it.
But structures? Glass domes? Alien artifacts? Alien structures? I DOUBT IT!
edit on 3-11-2010 by The Shrike because: Left out a word, for coherence.
Originally posted by CaptSplatter
Originally posted by SkyBluePegasus
Originally posted by Nightchild
"Evidence of Alien Life on the Moon Being 'Withheld from the American People.'"
A bit odd way to word it, I must say. Is it only the Americans it is being withheld from, while the rest of the whole World knows? If so, the contact between America and the "outside-World" must be very limited.
Yes, we've known about this for years. This is why whenever an American walks into a room everyone stops talking.
How do you know what nation a person is from just by watching them enter a room? Personally I think this special power of yours is more ground breaking than the moon story.
Dr Kurt Retherford, a fellow expert from Southwest Research Institute in San Antonio, Texas, one of the scientists operating the LRO instruments, said the biggest surprise was finding mercury at about the same abundance as water. "Its toxicity could present a challenge for human exploration," he said.
Originally posted by CaptSplatter
Originally posted by SkyBluePegasus
Originally posted by Nightchild
"Evidence of Alien Life on the Moon Being 'Withheld from the American People.'"
A bit odd way to word it, I must say. Is it only the Americans it is being withheld from, while the rest of the whole World knows? If so, the contact between America and the "outside-World" must be very limited.
Yes, we've known about this for years. This is why whenever an American walks into a room everyone stops talking.
How do you know what nation a person is from just by watching them enter a room? Personally I think this special power of yours is more ground breaking than the moon story.
In 1783 and 1787, Herschel reported more lights on or near the moon, which he supposed were volcanic.
Bright spots seen on the moon, November, 1821 (Proc. London Roy. Soc., 2-167).
For four other instances, see Loomis (Treatise on Astronomy, p. 174).
A moving light is reported in Phil. Trans., 84-429. To the writer, it looked like a star passing over the moon—"which, on the next moment's consideration I knew to be impossible." "It was a fixed, steady light upon the dark part of the moon." I suppose "fixed" applies to luster.
In the Report of the Brit. Assoc., 1847-18, there is an observation by Rankin, upon luminous points seen on the shaded part of themoon, during an eclipse. They seemed to this observer like reflections of stars. That's not very reasonable: however, we have, in the Annual Register, 1821-687, a light not referable to a star—because it moved with the moon: was seen three nights in succession; reported by Capt. Kater. See Quart. four. Roy. Inst., 12-133.
Phil. Trans., 112-237:
Report from the Cape Town Observatory: a whitish spot on the dark part of the moon's limb. Three smaller lights were seen.
Communication from Dr. F. B. Harris (Popular Astronomy, 20398):
That, upon the evening of Jan. 27, 1912, Dr. Harris saw, upon the moon, "an intensely black object." He estimated it to be 250 miles long and 50 miles wide. "The object resembled a crow poised, as near as anything."
Science, July 31, 1896:
That, according to a newspaper account, Mr. W. R. Brooks, director of the Smith Observatory, had seen a dark round object pass rather slowly across the moon, in a horizontal direction. In Mr. Brooks' opinion it was a dark meteor.