Is the Moon a Mothership ?

Originally posted by ThreeDeuce
Buddha, your above all attitude is not appreciated.

I know, from my long experience on ATS, that people who don't bother to try and learn or even to apply a modicum of critical thinking, and feel comfortable in this self-inflicted misery, often are inflamed when somebody calls them out on that. You can easily do the research on tidal lock, and if you have enough stamina and grey matter (not guaranteed) drill down to some math that models that, and find various proofs of how gravity works and to what precision it was tested.

All I ask is that you attempt to prove where your conclusions come from, as this is what everyone asks of everyone here at ATS.

I made it relatively clear (YMMV) that my conclusions come from sources accessible to the public, i.e. physics papers, textbooks etc. I didn't mention I love the physics experiment as a field of endeavor. A lot of my experience and knowledge comes from measuring stuff and doing actual experiment, not from reading some New Age cr@p books, which explain how the Great Pyramids are nuclear reactors, or power stations, and how they act as "crystals" (bleh).

Your ideas of tidal locking are just because that is what someone has told you,

See the above. I laugh at laypeople who pretend they are not laypeople but have some superior knowledge. Until you have done every problem in Jackson, you have no business passing judgement on physics.

Dismissed.

reply to post by buddhasystem




Your response is out of line and disrespectful.
In the beginning you admit to stereotyping without any knowledge of your criticisms.

Do not worry, Phage has been intelligently responding to my comments,
which is all that I ever asked for or expected.

Your over-defensive and disrespectful criticism is detracts from actual conversation.

You can certainly not claim a person's entire knowledge to be dependent upon
a small set of physics calculations, this is trivial and pointless.

When I ask an open ended question, I merely am giving the person who knows a little
bit more about a subject to describe it rather than myself. Again, Phage helped with this.

Also, my questions about tidal locking was NOT covered in this thread.
Here at ATS, with a subject as "HOT" as this thread, we like to make sure
to include information on the subject, as to where someone can make their
own informed decision.

We do not attack others.

Plain and simple, tidal locking does not make "sense" to me.
That would be one reason that I would study astronomy a little more.

Also, what we know, or what we think that science tells us is being changed DAILY.
I can not begin to describe what shattering revelations that we have understood recently
about Quantum Physics, that normal Physics could never fathom.

We must be open to adapting our ideas, and be open to conversation of relevant topics.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Speaking of new Science, did you know that we can now
See The Movement of Light....... this is revolutionary.
It is called Fento-Photography, and is uber-high speed photography.
It can capture video one billionth the normal speed.

Just another way that our science is changing.

Originally posted by buddhasystem
A lot of my experience and knowledge comes from measuring stuff and doing actual experiment, not from reading some New Age cr@p books, which explain how the Great Pyramids are nuclear reactors, or power stations, and how they act as "crystals" (bleh).

From about 35:15 into this www.exohuman.com... conference about 'Starchildren' , Mary Rodwell mentioned about a 5 year old child >>Two little anecdotes i will tell you is a 5 year old child in Australia, his mother was talking about the pyramids, and he got very angry with her when she said that slaves placed these huge stones by physical hard work when they built the pyramids, and he said [url=http://www.exohuman.com/wordpress/2011/02/new-human-starchildren-indigos/]>>No mommy! You got it all wrong! You don't know! Because i was there! They changed the density structure of the objects large and small, and they levitated the stones into place, and they placed a 'Crystal' on the top of the pyramids so they could communicate with other worlds! The informations are in the Sphinx i haven't found yet.

reply to post by AngryCymraeg


But how sure are you that they are not false dogmas?

How do you know that they are not constructed theories by the "Power Elite"?

reply to post by wmd_2008


Well, if your so smart Mr. scientist, then tell me this, how do you build a spaceship, mainly a model of a UFO?

reply to post by Soylent Green Is People


One small group that feel that they are the only ones that are only to have the tech, "The Power Elite"

How old is the human race?

Guess again, turns out we're not late comers at all. You want some real proof that we are very old? Shoe print!

Evolution? How Darwin. I would have to say he's false, because he's brought nothing but hardship and cruelty. His methods are all theory and hold no real ground.

I'm not sure why you feel my answers (or the answers of others) are dishonest.

Because I can't trust you guys haven't received the right kind of learning procedures, for simpler terms, you've been taught what to think, not how to think.

reply to post by ThreeDeuce

The fact of the tides confuses me. Yes we have two high tides and two load tides daily.
This seems to contradict the theory that the moon is solely responsible for tides.
I am saying this because it is the idea that the moon's gravity is pulling the water to
one side of our planet, and this is creating the tides. Perhaps the answer lies in the
movement of the water, and tidal flow back and forth creating a tide, sort of like a perpetual
motion machine, but I can't wrap my head around how that works right now.

Redirecting for a fellow explorer to one Joseph H. Cater's work on what he has found with other's work,

Gravity has always been the most baffling
of all the common physical phenomena. So far, nothing even
remotely resembling a satisfactory explanation for how it actually works
has ever been advance.

The evidence is overwhelming that gravity is responsible for tides.
However, the explanation in vogue since Newton's time is so inadequate
that some cults believe gravity has nothing to do with tides

One of the most extraordinary examples of irrationalism in the history
of orthodox physics is the standard explanation of tides. In this case, the
discrepancy between reality and orthodox speculation is so colossal it is
one of the great enigmas in the history of human thought, that it has not
been challenged since the time of Newton. The origin of the difficulty is
an obvious flaw in the Newtonion concept of gravitation. It is the idea
that gravity effects have unlimited penetration. In other words, there is
no attenuation of gravity effects other than that due to the inverse square
law as it passes through matter. This is an outrageous violation of the law
of conservation of energy

It is stated that high water is not caused by any lifting of the water
against the force of the earth's gravity, but rather by horizontal tractive
forces unopposed by gravity. The horizontal component of already infinitesimal
forces reduces them almost to the vanishing point. At the
same time, the raising of water above the general level by an almost nonexistent
horizontal force is in opposition to earth gravity, which will tend
to pull the "high" water back to the original level

The Newtonian approach did seem to account for the annoying fact
that the moon is a far greater factor in producing tides then the sun, but
it created far worse problems than the one it seemed to solve. The plane
of the moon's orbit intersects the plane of the earth's equator at about 28
degrees. This means that the moon never wanders above 28 degrees north
or south latitude. According to the standard theory, the greatest tides
should all occur within this zone. Instead, the highest tides are experienced
in much higher latitudes, both north and south.

To give the reader an idea the minuteness of the tide producing force
as based on the Newtonian concept, the following calculations are presented.
According to conventional astrophysics, the moon's average distance
is about 235,000 miles from the earth. Its surface gravity is supposed
to be one-sixth that of the earth or an ability to produce an acceleration
of 5.36 ft.lsec2. The moon's diameter, according to their findings
is 2,160 miles. Since the force of gravity varies according to the inverse
square law, the gravitational force the moon would exert at the earth's
surface would be
( 1,080)^2
5.36 (235,000)^2 =.000113 ft.lsec. 2
Without considering horizontal components, the maximum total force
could not exceed the difference between the force the moon would exert
at the earth's surface and that exerted at the center of the earth. This
value turns out to be
.00013 - 5.36 ( 1,080)^2 ft.lsec.2 = .00002 ft.lsec.2
(239,000)^2
This force is so minute that it would require 13.8 hours for it to accelerate
any object to a velocity of one foot per second

It is now apparent the idea of unlimited gravity penetration is not valid.
This means the surface gravity effects of the moon penetrate the earth
for only very limited distances. Therefore, the total acceleration the surface
gravity of the moon imparts on the earth, as a whole, is very small
compared to the acceleration force exerted on an object at the earth's
surface, such as a body of water facing the moon. This means the water
not being fixed to the earth is free to move across the surface by means of
the moon's gravitational influence. The difference in gravitational accelerations
is so great the acceleration given a body at the surface follows
very closely the inverse square law, since the acceleration given the earth
as a whole can be disregarded.

Long winded, but for explorers, it's well worth it. "Awesome lifeforce" J. H. Cater. Chapter 3. It'll tell you what you seek.

reply to post by ThreeDeuce


Almost done.

For any given portion of a body of water, the horizontal component of
the moon or sun's gravitational pull will be greatest when such bodies are
seen at the horizon. This is when the tide producing force is at its maximum.
When either body is at the zenith or directly overhead, the tide producing
force drops to zero. As it passes the zenith position, it tends to
accelerate the water in the opposite direction. This force reaches a maximum
at the time the moon or sun begins to drop below the horizon. The
cause of two high and low tides during an approximate 24-hour cycle
now becomes apparent

Consider a western shore line. As the moon, for example, rises above
the horizon, a large mass of water is accelerated toward the shore. This
volume of water attains a significant momentum by the time the moon
reaches its zenith. The momentum is great enough to cause large quantities
of water to back up on the land above the general level of the sea.
As the moon passes the zenith, it tends to accelerate the water in the opposite
direction. The water soon loses its momentum in an easterly direction,
and moves back away from the shore and acquires a similar momentum
in a westerly direction by the time the moon drops below the
horizon. Both the moon's acceleration force and the earth's gravity moving
the high water back to a lower level produce the movement toward
the west. An oscillatory or wave motion of the water is produced. This
causes another high and low tide before the moon rises again.

The center of the mound of high water produced during a high tide will
tend to lag behind the moon as it moves across the sky. 'This is to be expected.
Frictional forces and the fact that no acceleration is produced on
water directly below the moon cause a time lag. The mounds of high
water in approximate positions below the moon created the illusion of
tidal bulges, especially since another mound of high water is produced on
the opposite side of the earth at the same time for reasons just given.

The relative positions of the moon and sun, depth of the water and the
shape of land masses affect the timing and magnitude of tides. The
reason for the greater tides occurring in the higher latitudes becomes apparent
from the analysis just given. Since the moon doesn't stray more
than 28 degrees above the equator, it is closer to the horizon most of the
time in the high latitudes and thus exerts a higher average horizontal
force on water masses.

Tidal forces are largely responsible for ocean currents which, as is to
be expected, are stronger in the higher latitudes. Tidal effects are not apparent
in small bodies of water, since a large enough volume of water
cannot be set into motion to offset frictional forces, and there is not
enough time for much of the water to attain a significant velocity.

Since the moon is a greater factor in producing tides, the conclusion that
the moon has a greater surface gravity than the sun is inescapable!. To
the orthodox mind this produces insurmountable paradoxes. The time
has come for these to be resolved. This can only be accomplished by
probing deeper into basic causes

Much of what follows will be completely lost on some segments of the
scientific community. Incredible as it may seem some honored members
of the scientific world seem to be totally incapable of rational thought.
Recently the author was astounded when one of these individuals, after
reading this chapter, suggested that the author read the explanation of
tides given in the Encyclopedia Britannica! Here is a classic example of
the fact that many conventional scientists have and will continue to reject
any reality that is damaging to that they hold sacred, regardless of how
obvious and incontrovertibly true it may be. It will become increasingly
evident that few in the academic world is of sufficient stature to escape
the intellectual straight jacket imposed on them by academic authority

End of my view of the chapter

reply to post by FreedomCommander

Long winded, but for explorers, it's well worth it. "Awesome lifeforce" J. H. Cater. Chapter 3. It'll tell you what you seek.

Long winded nonsense. All it does is presents strawman arguments. Tides are not a direct effect of gravity but of gravity gradient, as previously explained.

In other words, there is no attenuation of gravity effects other than that due to the inverse square law as it passes through matter. This is an outrageous violation of the law of conservation of energy

Why?

Since the moon is a greater factor in producing tides, the conclusion that the moon has a greater surface gravity than the sun is inescapable!.

Strange thing to say since he mentioned the inverse square law earlier.

Your source is an idiot.

reply to post by Phage


I would have to say your not helping your situation at all.

reply to post by FreedomCommander

It would be more useful to address the points I made:

1) Why does your source not consider the true source of tides which is gravity gradient?

2) Why does the fact that the force of gravity acts through matter violate the law of conservation of energy?

3) Why does your source ignore the inverse square law and declare that the Moon must have a greater surface gravity than the Sun?

The inescapable conclusion is that your source is an idiot.

reply to post by Phage


He answers them, but I think his views are more threatening to yours, so you declare him as a idiot for the sake of your views.

But your not the first to declare him as a idiot. it's usually the ones who refuse to learn, question, and seek are the idiots.

reply to post by FreedomCommander

He answers them

No. He didn't. Or maybe you can point out where he did.

so you declare him as a idiot for the sake of your views.

I declare him an idiot because what he says is gibberish.

reply to post by FreedomCommander

Since the force of gravity varies according to the inverse square law, the gravitational force the moon would exert at the earth's surface would be ( 1,080)^2 5.36 (235,000)^2 =.000113 ft./sec. 2

He's calling ft/sec^2 a measurement of force. It's a measurement of acceleration, not force. It isn't appropriate for the task.
Want to really calculate tidal force? Go here:
astronomyonline.org...

Originally posted by FreedomCommander
If I may draw your attention to the Moon's surface, there are buildings there. Rules say you can't build anything on a surface that has no air.

If you would be so kind to explain to everyone here, how is it possible for building to exist on a desolate surface with no air?

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.cavinessreport.com...

According to testimony from Karl Wolf in the late 1990's, the above-mentioned individual was shown photographs revealing a large complex on the lunar surface that included numerous structures-- towers, spherical buildings and mushroom-shaped buildings-- from what he remembered. Realizing he was seeing something he wasn't supposed to be seeing, Sergeant Wolf immediately refused to look any further. Much to his surprise, nothing was ever reported in the news in the following days. And, Sergeant Wolf kept his mouth shut. Until then, Karl Wolf had known nothing about mysterious activity on that supposedly "dead" world we call the Moon or about government cover-ups.

www.bibliotecapleyades.net...

According to the Andromedans, there were 9 huge domed cities on the moon on the far side, and these domes housed up to 5 million extraterrestrials at one time. There was water, vegetation and everything. These covered hundreds of square miles. When Richard Hoagland shows you pictures of the "shards" that are miles in height, he's right.

www.bibliotecapleyades.net...

In the article titled "I Saw Structures on the Moon" Karl Wolfe, who worked for the Director of Intelligence at Headquarters Tactical Air Command, Technical Group, documents to have indeed seen photographs of alien spacecraft and buildings. Indeed, various researchers which include Richard Hoagland, have also documented many artificial structures on the Moon, consistent with artificial structures that have been created by oppressive civilizations on Earth. If that is true, then it is plausible that allegations made by Alex Collier and other independent researchers like Dr. Michael Salla, of an on-going Manipulative Extraterrestrial presence on Earth, could be true. Richard Hoagland also suggests that the astronauts saw glass buildings and other "interesting structures" on the back of the Moon. Mr. Hoagland often says that NASA is still trying to alter photo materials before they are published in public catalogues and files.

www.abovetopsecret.com... www.bibliotecapleyades.net...

There is also absolute scientific proof that the Zetans have forcibly abducted thousands of Americans, many who were used in bizarre Nazi-like genetic experiments. The locals on the Moon, from Rigel, Betelguese, the Barnard Star, and a planet orbiting Sirius, most known as “grays” but not all (some are blue, Nordic blondes, or orange or even pale white), are the ALLIANCE OF THE HOLY ...their capital planet reportedly TYRANTOR. They have been involved in a star wars empire intergalactic war for at least 50,000 years, during which they invaded on conquered planets in Rigel and enslaved many people, the star wars against the Lyrans and Vegans, and against the Sirians who would not join the ALLIANCE OF SIX. Some of these star wars were fought on Earth in ancient times when colonies from different planets fought for our planet to try to take control. The Pleideans from planet Erra, humans from a spaceport on Venus, Sethians, Centaurians and beings from the reported 12th planet in our system were involved in these battles on Earth and were mostly driven off the planet (except for remaining secret underground cities and bases all of those civilizations still have on Earth). The Zetans now have a spaceport on the hidden dark side of the Moon, and many underground cities there too.

Government agents have been forced to do everything they can theorize or scam on, to make it look like the Moon is a dead world impossible to inhabit. What they do not tell you is that ZETANS do not need an atmosphere like ours to breath because ZETANS do not have lungs. They do not need to irrigate and grow crops because Zetans have no digestive systems. They do not need to worry about being too hot or cold because they have incredibly thick tough skin... like reptiles only more extreme and much tougher... and are cold-blooded... the sun, heat, and cold on the Moon do not damage their skin.

Originally posted by Ben81
and like Scott Carpenter said: "At no time when the astronauts were in space were they alone:
there was a constant surveillance by UFOs."

James Lovell and Frank Borman

During James Lovell's flight on Gemini 7:

Lovell: BOGEY AT 10 O'CLOCK HIGH.

Capcom: This is Houston. Say again 7.
Lovell: SAID WE HAVE A BOGEY AT 10 O'CLOCK HIGH.

Capcom: Gemini 7, is that the booster or is that an actual sighting?
Lovell: WE HAVE SEVERAL...ACTUAL SIGHTING.

Capcom: ...Estimated distance or size?
Lovell: WE ALSO HAVE THE BOOSTER IN SIGHT...

Stars and Flags to this great thread 'Ben81'

Neil Armstrong & Edwin Aldrin

NASA: Whats there?
Mission Control calling Apollo 11...

Apollo11: These "Babies" are huge, Sir! Enormous!
OH MY GOD! You wouldn't believe it!
I'm telling you there are other spacecraft out there,
Lined up on the far side of the crater edge!
They're on the Moon watching us!

A certain professor, who wished to remain anonymous, was engaged in a discussion with Neil Armstrong during a NASA symposium.

Professor: What REALLY happened out there with Apollo 11?

Armstrong: It was incredible, of course we had always known
there was a possibility, the fact is, we were
warned off! (by the Aliens). There was never any
question then of a space station or a moon city.

Professor: How do you mean "warned off"?

Armstrong: I can't go into details, except to say that their
ships were far superior to ours both in size and
technology - Boy, were they big! and menacing!
No, there is no question of a space station.

Professor: But NASA had other missions after Apollo 11?

Armstrong: Naturally - NASA was committed at that time, and
couldn't risk panic on Earth. But it really was a
quick scoop and back again.

UFO Sightings by Astronauts

And from about 3:30 into that above clip you can hear Armstrong say >>God, what is that out there?... What the h... is that???... But this is unbelievable!

Originally posted by FreedomCommander
reply to post by wmd_2008

 

Well, if your so smart Mr. scientist, then tell me this, how do you build a spaceship, mainly a model of a UFO?

You get caught out showing you talk rubbish and the toys go out the pram

Why don't you go and take some classes in say physics & mechanics ( that doesn't mean car repairs) instead of cutting a pasting HUGE lumps of BS text from some IDIOT'S web site, then when you actually understand the processes that others on here are talking about YOU might not be lead along the wrong path

Originally posted by Anunaki10
And from about 3:30 into that above clip you can hear Armstrong say >>God, what is that out there?... What the h... is that???... But this is unbelievable!

Originally posted by FreedomCommander

Since the moon is a greater factor in producing tides, the conclusion that
the moon has a greater surface gravity than the sun is inescapable!.

End of my view of the chapter

It does not seem correct to me, that you can surmise that the Moon has
more surface gravity than the sun, just because the moon has a larger
tidal effect on the Earth. The distance between the bodies has a direct
corelative effect upon gravity.

As for your views on the chapter, as you put it......
It would have been much more concise and easier to read, if you had
reworded all of the cut and paste quotes into your own words,
to show that you understood some of the information yourself,
and did not just cut and paste.

this is so 1995.

search function

use it