A Forum Dedicated to Discussion of the New York Times Bestseller "Dark Mission - The Secret History of NASA" by Richard C. Hoagland and Mike Bara
I was talking about this one with a friend... Why are these not "landslides" as NASA claims? In the NASA "upside down" processed image, they do look like landslides. They look flat, and there are things that look like boulders in the mess.The Enterprise version jumps out of the frame when oriented and processed that way. The difference is pretty astonishing, but when flipped back "upside down" you could still see them as "landslides" if you wanted.I look forward to the explanation whether it's here or in an Enterprise article.
two things.Pixel resolution is supposedly .51 meters, i.e roughly two feet per pixel. For such a high res image, it's surprisingly... fuzzy... at full zoom.two. I've seen a lot of landslides. none of them looked remotely like this.Where are the scattered boulders at the ends of the "debris trails"Where are the intermittent "breaks in the line" for spinning rocks that went momentarily airborne while rolling to a stop?Where is the talus pile? The collection of debris right at the base of the fall? why so many streamers so far out from the cliff edge? why are they individualized so much? Why do they seem to overlay each other more than simply CROSS each other?I can't say that I would definitely call it proof of crystal towers (at least not artificial ones) but it doesn't look like a "landslide" to me.
James...The ruins jump off the page even without the processing so long as the image is oriented properly and not upside down: http://www.maxtheknife.com/compare1.jpgThey are not landslides because, once again we learn... there is TRUTH in the LIGHT.THINK about it. :-)
VI,I totally agree. I've never seen anything on the Moon that remotely resembled this, except maybe around the Apollo 17 landing site and I'm stretching that one. If James has other similar expamples that are clearly landslides, I'd like to see them.
I agree with Val.I see absolutely no sign of LBJdown there.I'm refering, of course, to old "Landslide Lyndon"....:-)Hathor -- a bit of humor to start the day;-)
I was shown just the image by a friend and asked what I thought I was looking at. My first 3 thoughts - crystals, natural, fractals. I thought it was an image of some sort of crystals under a microscope, horizontal, but with closer inspection I saw dimensions caused by light and shadow. At that point I could see nothing else but a crystal fortress. I was then told it was an image of the moon and shown this page. Simply amazing.
Note another major problem with the "landslide" theory.Since when has a landslide produced runnels of nearly equal width?Where are the very large runnels and very small ones? why do all of them appear to be of nearly equal width?There is some variation, but the thinnest one I've found appears to be approx half the width of the average size. They should be every size if this was a completely natural "rockfall"It reminds me more of individual strands of seaweed minus the leaves, long thin streamers of stalk tangled together.It is possible it might be water seepage, but again the uniformity is a problem.I can't definitively say it is artificial since it lacks the hard geometrical regularity of construction, but considering the wear of micro impacts, it's hard to be certain.There is also the fact that this should have been photographed at a 90 degree angle to the surface, so whatever this is is lying along the ground. The photo processed here looks like a 45 degree oblique shot so at least some of the three dimensionality is due to processing.What filters were used Mike?
Second note.Marius Crater is near where the "cave entrance" was found recently.Also I will note that the Nasa image is oriented properly North South. While Google Moon is too blurry to see fine detail I could find and match the extended photo to the general location. This is an artifact on the north wall extending down the wall to the south.Another idea occurred to me. This could "possibly" be a sign of an explosive decompression and collapse. I'm downloading the tiff for closer examination in Corel.
Not sure what filters he used, but nothing exotic.
I can't definitively say it isartificial since it lacks thehard geometrical regularity ofconstruction, but considering thewear of micro impacts, it's hardto be certain.Actually, I seem to see a certain abount of whatI would have to call repeating geometries....Look closely...it's as if a number of those visualobjects occur in pairs....:-)Hathor -- through the looking glass;-)
at best guess from examination I would say it resembles the kind of effect gotten from paint running down a wall. A thick fluid running down cliffs could cause it, but considering the size... I just can't think of any liquids which would hold together in "droplets" this big.It is definitely something lying along the ground though, with multiple overlapping layers of detail.
Lunar Nazca Lines?:-)Hathor -- grasping at straws;-)
Hmmm...I wonder......if what we are seeing......is intended to be holographic?Now *there's* an idea....:-)Hathor -- taking the leap...;-)
Hey Folks!!!For starters I’m Ryan. I have a private email and its mrryanprice at gmail dot com. I READ THESE POSTS AND SO DO YOU, WELL READ THIS!!!!!Everyone on the outside speculates about whether or not we are being told the greatest - lies - in history. Well check this out. Its really so simple. Around 15,500 years ago people were like we are today, maybe with less technology or something different all together. Something??? Happened. Even back before the Egyptians, people believed in Gods. Lets imagine we were living in a time very much like our familiar "Old West". One day people see something, hear something, or somehow come across knowledge of something that explains who we are as people, why were here, what God is, and more. Back when this happened only a handful of people knew about it. To keep everything, everyone was working on the same and to make sure the people with power staid in power, information was withheld, thus allowing big business to expand. What does this sound like? Let’s review our own history for a minute. 1991 - Wal-Mart? What’s that? Compared to 2009. Let just use the sell cheap, sell more, grow-grow-grow model. There are Millions of cookie cutter franchises in America, who do you think owns most of them? Who do you think owns most of the land and or funded the financial institutions responsible for issuing loans to homebuyers? Basically what you have is a playground, here right now, everyday, every single, f-in day. Men and Women wake up to go own/buy/control more and that’s all they care about. If information that would be life changing, that would teach everyone on the planet new tricks, provide a way for everyone on the planets to live long, hell probably even allow most if not everyone on earth the opportunity to travel even a small part of a solar system, annually. Don’t think like ants anymore and our truth will become known. “To continue living in fear and ignorance, means to live and die blind."
I'm fearful!I'm ignorant!I'm...Oh, rubbish. Don't believe a word of thatnonesense.I'm obviously a cat in the know.To express it this way---with apologies toAdam Ant:"Ya don't drink, don't smoke, What do ya do Ya don't drink, don't smoke, What do ya do Ya don't drink don't smoke Don't drink don't smoke--- Must be somethin' inside!"Yep-yep-yep. Brains in the ol' skull.Functioning, too.Hope so, anyway.:-)Hathor -- And now, back to our topic...;-)P.S.: Notice how *some* Ants are worthemulating....:-))))
Here is my question:At the bottom of the "towers" it looks like large rocks or boulders are attatched to the sides. If these were towers then how do you explain the rocks on the sides of the towers?On the other hand if they are landslides then the boulders are at the tops of the landslide when I would expect them to be at the bottom. So, to me they don't fit with what I imagine landslides to look like, but don't appear to be towers either. Maybe it is the result of some sort of liquid flowing down the rim of the crater.What do you think about the boulders at the base of the towers Mike?
Bits of sidewalk chalkleft behind by the artists?Ah! Of course---Christmas tree ornaments!Oh, man....I have to admit, fieryjaguarpaw, you've got mestumped this time....This is one VERY interesting frame....:-)Hathor -- marvelling at the oddity...;-)P.S.: You know, it's strange...these things arebeginning to remind me of those little wireframeornament sets they're selling at Lowe's andHome Depot....Could it be...LUNAR ADVERTISING?!?Ay-chihuahua...the surprise commercialization ofspace...just in time for the holiday season....:-)
Upon further viewing...The "boulders" would appear to be craters.That's my best guess from the blowups I've beendoing in MS Paint (best I have to use).:-)Hathor -- squinting at pixels...;-)
Hello Mike.I took a close look at our "CrystalTowers"......There are NO crystal towers here.Landslides. Question: Are these natural landsides???...Or, is it someone's artwork"Screenshot...No enhancement.http://marsesa.9f.com/slide_shows/Samples2/MC_A3A.jpgImproved. These are surfacefeatures. Not something toweringin the air.http://marsesa.9f.com/slide_shows/Samples2/MC_A5C.jpgA negative.http://marsesa.9f.com/slide_shows/Samples2/MC_A5B2.jpgA couple more.....Screenshot...no enhancement.http://marsesa.9f.com/slide_shows/Samples2/MC_D1A.jpgImproved. Again, these are surfacefeatures.http://marsesa.9f.com/slide_shows/Samples2/MC_D2A.jpgI suspect that these "landslides",if we can call them that, are created....not something made by nature or natural geologic processes.
Hmm. Well, I'd love for you to be right, but you can tell they are rocks because compared to some obvious craters in the area the boulders have their shadows on the opposite side. You can see a lot more detail in the zoomable version on the LRO website (linked in mike's post).Sometimes I don't see much in these pictures until after Mike or Hoagland points out certain details or explains why a certain feature looks the way it does, so I was hoping Mike would go into a little more detail as to why he thinks they are crystal towers, or give his thoughts on what I think are rocks and boulders... Maybe we'll have to wait for a full on Enterprise paper, or DM II for more details though. Holds breath.
Grrrr.Five tries on 2 different computers to download the full tiff, and they keep trailing off on me... DL drops down to nothing and only a third of the pic dled
KS15,based on your work, you may well be right. But why do you only show 1 part of the overall area? There is a second "ring" which makes it look like a connected structure when it is inverted. How about some enhancements of the whole bright area instead of just the one section?
@KS15The Negative is the most interesting.Look at it closely. Where is the "scar" that the debris fell from?It's a smooth surface with very little variation until it gets to the "trickle marks" trailing from the lower edge.I quite agree, these are ground features not towers. But not a "landslide" either.rock (or particulate matter in general) does not flow like a liquid unless the surface it is flowing over is vibrating at a pretty high rate and keeping the particles semi suspended from each other.The debris "trickles" resemble the flow of a thick liquid (think paint trickling down a wall) but I really wish I could successfully DL a full res copy of the tiff to examine.Sad to say Mike, I think Richard is reaching a bit on this one. It's not a "tower" though the processing certainly creates that effect in the initial photo. Best guess is it' a melt effect, with multiple layers of flow overlaying each other. Maybe it's evidence of high energy weaponry, maybe it's an effect of melting and evaporating ice, but it definitely needs further investigation. It's too close to the "cave mouth" to simply ignore.They can read a newspaper headline from orbit, why the hell do we have to put up with such low res pics of the moon. *sigh*
Does anyone else notice a striking resemblance to the Crystal city that Superman built for himself in the Superman movie?
Hello all.A couple more images.Maybe not a crystal tower,However, I do not think theselandslides are totally natural.Maybe most of it...I think someoneadded some "graffiti"...Screenshot.http://marsesa.9f.com/slide_shows/Samples2/MariusCrater600A.jpgEnhanced. Note details towards the left center...Very curious..http://marsesa.9f.com/slide_shows/Samples2/MariusCrater600E.jpgA negative.http://marsesa.9f.com/slide_shows/Samples2/MariusCrater600F.jpg
Hello all.A few more images.As I said previously, these so-called "landslides" are not createdby natural geologic forces. At thevery least, not entirely. "Someone"maybe working with the naturallandscape.I do see gouges or V shape deep trenches extending hundreds of feet...A rolling boulder will not create such a feature (unless it is pushed!). I will point this out in future images.A screenshot showing the location.http://marsesa.9f.com/slide_shows/Samples2/MariusCrater730A1.jpgLightly enhanced. Exposure, noise,and contrast mostly. Note "A" and "C".http://marsesa.9f.com/slide_shows/Samples2/MariusCrater731B2.jpgA negative.http://marsesa.9f.com/slide_shows/Samples2/MariusCrater731BB.jpgEnlargements.http://marsesa.9f.com/slide_shows/Samples2/MariusCrater733B2.jpghttp://marsesa.9f.com/slide_shows/Samples2/MariusCrater733AA1.jpg"A" reflected.http://marsesa.9f.com/slide_shows/Samples2/MariusCrater734G1.jpg"C" reflected.http://marsesa.9f.com/slide_shows/Samples2/MariusCrater736G1.jpgSomeone likes to create artworkswith different left and right halves.
Fieryjaguarpaw,Well, seems you're right.They're rocks alright.I had to search about somewhat to find asuitable "obvious crater" for comparison,but, sure enough....So...round to "the paw".... :-)KS15,The negative seems the most revealing, butI'll say this much: the whole works looksalmost like haphazard road grading work.The only other thing it seems to resembleto any recognizable degree is a meltingprocess....Evidence of some kind of surface mining???Val,You make a darn good point. Where *IS* the"scar" where this stuff originated? To bebrief, "There ain't any!"More and more this looks like evidence ofsome kind of surface mining operation.It also looks a bit like the "miners" werequick to discover the relatively shallowdepth of the surface regolith.Hit titanium, did they? !-)And BIG ditto on the satellite comment....Spiritsplice,I swear, boy, you've been reading Hoaglandagain, haven't you....(Face On Mars, Iapetus and the Death Star,Data's Head, etc. etc. etc. to no end...):-)Hathor -- In with The In Crowd...(Cue the piano version with Ricky Nelson);-)
I've got a 5 connnection download using the free download accelerator,it's hitting an average 500K. If a site allows this kind of connection, then use it, there's also a resume built in. That's marginally important with a half Gig file. ;)
As describd, at 502 of 504 Meg it hung, stopped, froze.Without using the download manager it would have failed, but I was able to resume, and had to do so twice more, so I strongly advise finding a download manager with resume at least - but speedbits free accelerator has both a resume and a multiple connection scheme which increases the amount of data being downloaded at one time.Those 5 connections might show that any connection is limited to a total of 100K download speed, so that's all you can achieve without an accelerator.With such a huge file, standard download methods are both risky and frustrating, imagine if I'd had to ditch 502 Meg!!
I've also cropped the area in question from the whole, and saving that as a tiff, it's still 22 Megs!!The FREE irfanview will load and function with files of 500 Meg, not all image software will.No, I'm not advertising here, both the progs I mentioned are free, and in my opinion, both progs are a necessary part of dealing with such massive files.Just trying to help. :)
According to the LROC/ASU website,the camera incident angle is 80 degrees.The pictures may be oriented with north toward the top, but since the satellite is in a polar orbit, half the time it it traveling north and half the time it is traveling south.So it is possible the picture was taken with south at the top then flipped to display it with north at the top. However, the "stuff" is a lot closer to the ground than the "giant crystal spires" theory, if the picture was actualy taken from 80 degees (looking nearly straight down). Still, looking in closely, there are a lot of repetitive angles and straight lines, and curves, and pieces of stuff overlaying stuff.It might be the collapsed ruins of former "giant glass spires." (that weren't "imploded" nor collapsed into their own footprint.)Anyone have an aerial shot of the WTC debris field looking almost straight down?Gort
More bullshit from the Bullshit Twins! Take a NASA photo of a crater, rotate the photo and make a stupid, indefensive claim: that what the rotated photo shows is something else.Crystal Towers my ass!Yeah, Mike, go ahead and censor my comments, that's about your intelligence level.
Gort,Search "WTC aerial photos" on Yahoo! and youget some aerial shots of the WTC post collapse.I was just looking at them, and...Not a lot of resemblance, except for one shotin particular....Sure enough, sections of infrastructure lying onthe ground....Exactly as you suggest....Hmmm...another interesting angle....:-)Hathor -- all over the map on this one...;-)P.S.: KS15, your latest comments make a strongcase...And I see we agree about the symmetries visible.I too noticed that.Some look almost like stereo pairs, and yet otherslook like mirror images.This is a good one, isn't it....:-)P.P.S.: And for those who may be wondering,the Ricky Nelson version is like the Ramsey LewisTrio version from 1965, but a little slower and,I think, a little more "cool" sounding.He played it live on TV one Sunday evening......and I was lucky enough to see it.:-)
Here's a question I had when reading the first edition. How did the Lunar Landers avoid hitting the massive glass structures during it's landing approach? The structures are said to be miles high. On page 197 of the new edition, one structure is described as "a mega-cube sitting 7 miles above the moon".
Good question Joe. I'll answer it in a couple days when I get back from Arizona.
nyceddie:I will forgive RCH and Mike their"first blush" on this image set.However, several of us, being perfectly capable ofmaking critical observations, have proceeded to doso, and...We find a high degree of suggestion of somethingother than "natural phenomena."That alone is noteworthy.While I would posit that we have yet to come toa consensus as to exactly what we are seeing here,I would dare to suggest that we are largely inagreement that there is a great deal of evidenceof artificiality of some kind.True, there are no "crystal towers" here. Andyet, there may have been at one time, as one ofour number already has suggested.Or, failing that, there is nonetheless somethinghere worthy of further investigation.Consider your position overruled.:-)Hathor -- The gavel has struck.;-)
joe_g: questions such as yours immediately come to questioning minds. But the authors do not want to realize that we, the thinkers, are out here ready to question ridiculous claims as are found throughout the book. They weren't writing for our benefit but for those who accept anything that comes down the pike.
Hey Marsandro, did you ever find me those links to the Titanium information?I gave up on trying to Dl the full image. the one time I succeeded all I got was a blank black image 500+megs in size.there is pretty evidently multiple layers to this formation, and too uniform a width to most of the streamers to be "natural" One of the streamers to the right side of the negatives shows what appears to be "trailings" to either side, making it either a ridge with a flat top, or a canyon with a flat bottom.Need better photos.
Indeed, nyceddie, these authors are writing for the kind of people who would accept that NASA itself started the "Apollo was faked" rumor by arranging for a man in a greatcoat to hand out a stupid flyer at JPL, a spaceflight center that had nothing whatever to do with Apollo or any other manned spaceflight.......the kind of people who would accept that Neil Armstrong, possibly the greatest pilot in history but no great shakes when it comes to public speaking, would liken himself to a bird whose primary talent is speaking but that doesn't fly very well......the kind of people who would accept that some "powerful cabal" would deliberately sabotage three Mars Missions whose cameras would have provided a resolution of 40 m/pixel on the grounds that they would "see too much," yet somehow fail to stop many subsequent Mars missions with cameras of far higher resolution....and so on through page after page of technical error.
Anyone have an aerial shot of the WTC debris field looking almost straight down? ****Yes, and it's irrelevant.
nyceddie:"Think" This:The very first lunar lander possibly *DID*strike "The Shard," then tumbled and crashed.Direct evidence? None.Circumstantial evidence? It was slated toland almost exactly where "The Shard" SITS.And something definitely went wrong.Consider yourself out-thunk.Aiwass:I don't know how old you are, but I was inhigh school during Apollo, and...I have the darnedest recollection of WalterCronkite constantly going to people at JPL,of all places, for live updates and demosduring the Moon landing coverage.And you say---"at JPL, a spaceflight center that hadnothing whatever to do with Apollo orany other manned spaceflight...."R-E-A-L-L-Y.... !-\I'll pass on the Neil Armstrong comment,as I'm not up on that one....But THIS---"...the kind of people who would acceptthat some "powerful cabal" woulddeliberately sabotage three Mars Missionswhose cameras would have provided aresolution of 40 m/pixel on the groundsthat they would "see too much," yetsomehow fail to stop many subsequent Marsmissions with cameras of far higherresolution....Oh, you mean with images that have beenINTERMINABLY messed with, patched overwith repeating scenery, Gaussian-blurredinto oblivion, photoshopped to Hell andback, etc.? *THAT* "higher resolution?Or maybe they just didn't have the neededpersonnel or equipment during the earlierflights, to accomplish their goals thatway? Or maybe someone was being, shallwe say, "uncooperative," and had to getthe boot? And be replaced with somebodymore, shall we say, COMPLIANT?Well...whose credibility is lacking NOW?trevorj:Define "relevance."Either you haven't read the thread verycarefully, or you just plain don't get it.Which is it?I'll be happy to rehash it for you...I havethe time....One should remember that I am the son ofthe fair-haired boy of the right-hand manof the founder of SAC, now suspected to havebeen one of the men who plotted the Kennedyassassination.My father held a "Tango" clearance and knewthings that would curl your hair.I, too, was "cleared" to "Tango" but held only a"mere Secret Clearance" for my day to day duties.Yet, I also know a thing or two.I've seen the world of "dirty tricks" fromthe inside, up close and personal.I have sat in briefings given by men fromthe CIA.I once attended a private meeting at a man'sHouse in British Columbia that included thehead of CSIS (that's the Canadian SecurityIntelligence Service, folks).NOTHING Hoagland or Bara says surprises me.If anything, they're probably MISSING halfof what's going on.Now THERE is a proper criticism, if that'swhat you want to hear.:-)Hathor -- Spelling it out for the people in thecheap seats...;-)
Hi Val,Oh gosh...You'll have to refresh me...I forgot what we were discussing about that....(* sheepish cat face *) <:-)p:-)Hathor -- checking for gray hairs...;-)
Hi Val,The following page is somewhat similar in contentto the page(s) I was seeking for you (if this wasthe topic).(Assemble the URL...)http://web.archive.org/web/20050303201202/http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Hollow/8827/moonfacts.htmlThis page is a good starting point for searches onthis subject:(Assemble the URL...)http://paranormal.about.com/od/lunaranomalies/Lunar_Anomalies.htmI'll keep looking for the page I saw originally.Seems it was a NASA page, too....:-)Hathor -- remembering now...I think...;-)P.S.: When you said "Titanium," I thought of theGreenland object. That, too, is titanium (oxide),hence the color---just like what the Apolloastronauts struck while digging.:-)
Marsandro writes: "Well...whose credibility is lacking NOW?"Yours. Your attempts to justify the "spread the news at JPL" and "stop killing Mars missions with better cameras" theories are both incredibly weak. Without boring everyone with overdetail, please allow me to make a couple of simple points:I was not a mere schoolboy during Apollo. I was peripherally involved. The source of Public Affairs information was Houston, not La Cañada-Flintridge. Trust me. I know.Since you evidently believe that later Mars images have been "INTERMINABLY messed with, patched over ... etc." would that not have been equally the technique of choice for this so-called powerful cabal in respect of Observer, Polar Lander and Climate Orbiter? Why would they go to the risk, trouble and expense of scuttling an active spacecraft when they could (according to you) easily corrupt its data?
Aiwass:It depends entirely upon---1 - who was and was not cooperating, and when2 - exactly when given techniques and the peopleand equipment required were in hand, which theymight not always have been3 - and just as satellite technology has improved,so has PhotoShop, etc.That isn't such a stretch.I'm still waiting to hear all about how JPLhad nothing to do with Apollo....Now THERE is a stretch.Or...was STRETCH the computer you were usingat that time?:-)Hathor -- jab, cross, and HOOK...;-)P.S.: I am NOT refering to Madam Pelosi....:-))))
Postscript/Aiwass:It's also entirely possiblethat somebody made a laterdecision that the overt method of "killing thetransmission" was too attention-getting, and itwas then decided to utilize other means toobscure data.Committees are notorious for this sort ofoperation.Or am I now to believe that---"Committees are the way to go?":-)Hathor -- filling in the blanks...;-)P.S.: There is something along these lineshappening at this very moment in the so-called"climate change" arena.It seems certain UN types have been burned bysome creative hackers....These guys need to hack NASA....(LMAO):-))))
Oh, Aiwass:I just did a little googling,and...It seems JPL provided coordination of the DSN(that's Deep Space Network, folks) for mannedmission support during Apollo.So says JPL itself.HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM....:-)Hathor -- just browsing the web...;-)
marsandro writeth: "It seems JPL provided coordination of the DSN ..during Apollo."Well marsandro, that's perhaps just a whisker more relevant than if you had written "ah but don't forget, that was the year the Mets won the world series."Really, now that you've revealed the full extent of the logical gymnastics you're willing to perform to make this material seem credible, it's obvious that you are precisely the kind of credulous person Hoagland & Bara are writing for.
Hummm, that is indeed the correct topic but I am primarily interested in the nasa page if you can find it, Marsandro.As for Aiwass, he's trolling for a response hun. I learned a long time ago that close minded people cannot be convinced of anything that they do not wish to believe no matter the evidence presented, be they religious fanatics or anomaly deniers like Aiwass. When evidence such as the existence of water produced weathering on the Sphinx can be positively identified as water erosion by an entire room full of geologists only to have all of them immediately withdraw their positive identification upon discovery that it is on the Sphinx, it becomes obvious that too many people will refuse to accept any evidence at all that does not conform to their world view, regardless of how concrete.I will not say I am convinced of Richard's Glass Towers, or the existence of Aliens, or paranormal activity, or even Atlantis, despite all the evidence I have personally dug up, simply because I do not find the evidence to be sufficient to claim that no doubt can exist. Even my own personal experiences with paranormal abilities are too subjective to consider proof, due to my inability to provide documented and witnessed verification to the events in which I was a participant.Evidence trumps theory in all cases, and at present while there is substantial evidence that something is being hidden, due to such events as the "Face on Mars" refutation which resulted in the "Catbox", the release of hundreds of supposedly "nonexistant" photos of Mars following MaCain's inquiry into MSSS, and my personal viewing of the recent "Bombing" in which no explosion occurred on the live feed, and in which obvious gamma reduction was used to obscure the actual imagery as well as the declaration of "impact" of the probe while the last few seconds of video feed still showed the probe to be several miles above the surface, definitive conclusions about what is being hidden cannot be made. No single source of data can be used to make definitive claims, and until numerous data sources on the moon exist, from multiple sources, I do not feel we can conclusively say what exactly is on the moon, or if it is an artificial structure. Too much conflicting data exists to simply cherry pick only that data which supports the "accepted" viewpoints and declare all other data invalid. While I personally feel enough evidence exists to support the possibility that a previous human culture with equivalent technology to ours or higher may have been the basis for the Atlantis legends, definitive evidence is still lacking. If ruins are found on the Moon and Mars, it will constitute definitive evidence. However, until such conclusive proof is found, it remains a subject of high interest about which I am willing to accept a positive or negative conclusion.
Hey Hathor, I don't care if you've cleaned the toilets at the White House, nor does your security clearance impress, we got 'secret' by default.As for sitting in on CIA briefings, that's the lamest piece of worthless tripe I've ever heard from anyone - and my God is that a record.It might impress purple haired old ladies, like RCH but as a reference it's laughable.Trevor - couldn't give a monkey's.
Hi Val,Oh, don't worry, I knowall too well the stenchof COINTELPRO types like Aiwass and trevorj.And their ad hoc/ad hominems are more thanproof enough for me of what they are.And as for the writings of Hoagland and Bara,I could have sworn I said,"...there are no crystal towers here."You'll notice I caught Aiwass flat-footed. (Shall Idigress and quote it, Aiwass?)So...speaking of a monkey's....:-)Hathor -- back in black, with steel spikes, andan electric Cat-o-Nine-Tails(...cue AC/DC...);-)P.S.: "My" Secret Clearance ALSO was "by default."And how high did YOU clear?I cleared all the way up, bud.Oh...and with what Cabinet level officer have YOUbeen in a private meeting?And of which country?C'mon---SPILL IT---:-)
Hello Mike.Not to change the subject.......I have been looking very closely at these Mars dust devils.I am claiming that ALL dust devilson Mars are not natural events.Intelligence and technology is involved.This one from Sol 537....Click "show all"....http://www.marsesa.9f.com/slide_show.html
Hummm.Just got done watching "Symbols of an Alien Sky." which is about the mythological evidence that Mars, Venus and Saturn used to be much closer to the earth than they are now, and stacked in a unusual manner of aligned polar axis with Mars closest to us, then Venus, then Saturn.That made for a rather interesting speculation.There is certainly quite a bit of historical evidence for this in the form of many many ancient texts and symbols.So what if it were true? Could that not mean that the cataclysm 13,000 years ago which disrupted the "age of the gods" also have been the same one which devastated the lower half of mars, ended up scattering debris across the solar system and wiped out the "precursors?"Given this rather odd to our current system set up, it would mean some rather interesting things...For example, Iepatus could have been in orbit around Mars or Earth and flung into it's current orbit around Saturn before Saturn retreated to it's current position.A lot of the craters on the moon could have been from electrical arcing instead of debris. Same with Iepatus and several other odd items Richard talks about on Enterprise.With the chaotic effects of planets roaming around the system trying to stabilize into new orbits, it's quite possible that the survivors of the initial disaster would have able to salvage some of the high tech society, only to have it suffer from disaster after disaster as Venus and Mars continued to make close passes and releasing massive electrical arcs as they sought to equalize charges before electrostatic equilibrium settled them into the orbits they have now.Especially if perhaps the extremely "literal" minds which made petroglyphs and cave paintings might have been Neanderthal, with Cro Magnon (Us) arriving from Mars during the disaster to populate a previously co-evolved but non technological world and forced by such disasters to revert to primitivism themselves?It makes for some interesting speculation...Especially with historical evidence that the moon arrived 13,000 years ago, yet species apparently evolved to deal with tides. Something must have been creating tides prior to the Moon. Perhaps Iepatus?Any comments?
Hi Val,I sometimes forget that youmust have joined us fairlyrecently.Our present Moon arrived here about 14,500 yearsago. It was preceded by two other moons thatsuddenly just "up and left" for no visible reasonsome time before that. (Sorry, I don't have theexact departure date info.)There was no mention of a cataclysm in eithercase.As for Iapetus in particular, the present speculationvia Hoagland et al is that it might be (or once havebeen) self-propelled.Our own Moon evidently is, as it is presentlycompensating for orbital perturbations---and very precisely, too.Not only that, it appears that the Earth is being*TOWED*, albeit very slowly, away from the Sunat this moment.SOMEBODY up there knows EXACTLY what they are doing.And they're doing it right in front of us.Only now do we have the instrumentality in placeto be able to tell it.As I recall, it has been pointed out already inother venues that about 80 to 90 percent of theMoon's craters appear to be the result of electricaldischarges. Comparatively few lunar craters arethe result of impacts of any kind.Some speculate that this is some aspect of theMoon's propulsion system (like maybe a sort ofhigh-level RCS or something).:-)Hathor -- watching the astrometrics bulletins...;-)
Interesting.got any links to where this was previously discussed, I'd be interested in the source references
Hello mike.Check it out!http://marsesa.9f.com/slide_shows/PSP_003868_1875/PSP_003868_1875_C4F5.jpgI have more under the slide show"PSP 003868 1875"There are few MRO HiRise images ofMojave Crater....I will be lookingclosely....(smiling).Ken
Hi Val,Believe it or not, someof this can be gleanedfrom space.com and itsforums......since astrometric data of interest is routinelypublished there.Of course, "our" (or "my") particular take on itis *not* discussed there.... :-)But you can google ALSEP data and stuff like that,and find a lot of it.It's the stuff where the observations are beingreported, but everybody is going "duh, what'shappening?" that is of interest.When these things are considered in the somewhatlarger context of what else is known about theMoon, etc., *** THEN *** it becomes much moreinteresting.It isn't so much that somebody has some sort ofan anomaly page listing it all, rather it's a matterof being able to connect the dots, so to speak....Let's see...you might enjoy reading this:http://www.keelynet.com/It has a sizeable index, last time I looked.You might also look up Bill Beatty's Weird Sciencepages, and stuff like that.Additional links abound from there....:-)Hathor -- reading Nancy Drew...;-)P.S.: I just left some coordinates of interest toyou and T'Zairis in the "More Confirmation" blog.:-)
Hey Val,Here you go! :-)Try these for starters:http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2006/arch06/060310crater.htmhttp://www.thunderbolts.info/home.htmHere's a Cornell fellow questioning why the Earthhas only one Moon:http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/question.php?number=246There's plenty out there....:-)Hathor -- checking references...;-)
Hello all.I have more images under the slideshow "PSP_003868_1875".An image of this slide show.http://marsesa.9f.com/slide_shows/PSP_003868_1875/PSP_003868_1875_R3F3.jpgI'm convinced (smiling)....Ken
Hi KS15,What are we looking at,exactly?You've got me curious, for sure....:-)Hathor -- fascinated...;-)
Oh Val,Here's another tidbit...I seem to recall an old lunar gravimetrics probe backsome years ago that was supposed to be plottinga detailed map of the lunar gravitational fields(read, "mapping the mascons", so to speak), and...If memory serves, there was an abrupt shift inthe Moon's gravitational field that was in somesense unexpected---in other words, as if somesort of drive was operating, and somebody madea small field adjustment, and the probe picked it up.The field change was characterized as beingsomewhat unnatural, by reason of the sharpdegree of field inflection experienced by theprobe sensors.This is to say that the inflection was *not* thekind one would expect merely by reason of havingpassed through changing flux associated with theedge of a mascon.I don't have a reference for you just now, butI'll fish around the web and see if I can findsomething that refers to it.:-)Hathor -- In Search Of...ancient lunar anomalies;-)
Hello marsandro..You got to be kidding..Right?Think bird or Osprey/Hawk....That is the theme or motif....http://marsesa.9f.com/slide_shows/PSP_003868_1875/PSP_003868_1875_R3F3.jpgThe right half..As I have been saying, someone likes to create halves...in which it is designed to be reflected..You can do this mentally or by the use of software..http://marsesa.9f.com/slide_shows/PSP_003868_1875/PSP_003868_1875_R3C1.jpgThere is an eye..An eye with a pupil and a Sclera (the white part of an eye).Think Cat...Feline...http://marsesa.9f.com/slide_shows/PSP_003868_1875PSP_003868_1875_R3C1.jpgCan you see now???
anything you find would be awesome. I keep finding sites that are little more than reprints of Childress's book.I'd like something a LOT more credible.
Hello.Did some more work on PSP_003868_1875.A couple of images...http://marsesa.9f.com/slide_shows/PSP_003868_1875/PSP_003868_1875_AA13.jpgI was able to use the IAS Viewer wavelet sharpening tool....This image is more natural...Kept the color saturation to a minimum...http://marsesa.9f.com/slide_shows/PSP_003868_1875/PSP_003868_1875_AB3C5.jpgSo, there you have it.All thanks to NASA/JPL.I wonder if they knew the significance of this image...Maybe a slip up?..Or a disclosureevent?Ken
Well, yes, KS15,I mean, I see THAT...but---The location is...?And context is...?:-)Hathor -- checking the index...;-)
http://www.youtube.com/user/nsideurheadWatch this!!! huge and grands ruins....
Post a Comment