Was the Moon hauled into orbit by reptiles? Ask Icke and Lear.

It just never ends! How can seemingly highly-educated people sound like fools and continue to do it and not change their tune? David Icke can sometimes be described as brilliant when dealing with the sorry state of the world and its control by politicians. Doesn't result in changes but at least you learn some things that the MSM doesn't dare to report. John Lear, on the other hand doesn't inform and doesn't change his tune. But both men share one opinion and that is that the moon was hauled into its present position orbiting Earth. Lear explains more about this ridiculous idea than Icke who just says it is so. Lear held court here in this forum years ago and he had quite a number of believers/followers but now he's history. Icke is still current. If I could I would like to ask Icke how he learned of our moon and if Lear was the source. If not Lear, who else could have dreamed this up and Lear just borrowed it?

Yesterday I paid my daily visit to rense to get the latest news on the state of the world that the MSM doesn't touch. One of the articles was: "Icke Accuses TV Hosts Of 'Abuse' After 'Lizard' Interview". The link took me to:
www.rt.com...
David Icke accuses TV hosts of ‘abuse’ after heated interview about shape-shifting lizards

The text contains part of the dialogue between Icke and 3 TV journalists who laughed at Icke's comments about the moon being hauled into place and his comments about lizard people. He wasn't able to expand any explanation 'cause the journalists kept asking him to provide something concrete. I wanted to put the video on here but the YouTube button at the top of the page would take me to an outside page instead of providing the URL that I could add the YouTube code to. I don't know now how to embed a video so here is the URL, go and watch it.



[Conspiracy theorist David Icke clashes with TODAY Show hosts over aliens and the moon
Published on Jul 13, 2016

TODAY chat to former TV sports presenter and conspiracy theorist David Icke about his beliefs; like the moon being a space station and if aliens really exist.

FTBA
Well-known conspiracy theorist David Icke has clashed with TODAY Show hosts Karl Stefanovic and Lisa Wilkinson over the origins of the moon and the existence of aliens.

The former sports journalist, in Australia for a series of talks as part of his ‘World Wide Wake Up Tour’, claims the September 11 attacks were an inside job and says aliens secretly live amongst us in “human form”.“What’s the go with aliens then can you give us an indication of what’s happening?” co-host Karl Stefanovic asked.

“There is a common theme of a force that has been manipulating human society, and they call them all over the world different names,” Mr Icke said.“But when you do the research, and I’ve been researching this for 26 years, not 26 seconds, you find that these different names are referring to the same force.”Wilkinson then asked about his beliefs regarding the origin of the moon.“You, for example, think the moon, our moon, is a hollowed-out space station?” Wilkinson asked.“This was first suggested by Soviet scientists, who produced a detailed breakdown of how the moon cannot be natural, and everything that led them to believe the moon is hollow,” Mr Icke replied.“Mainstream science cannot explain why a body that big, bigger than Pluto, can be going around a planet this small”.

Stefanovic then accused Mr Icke of being “very defensive” about his theories.“No, I get exasperated,” Mr Icke replied.
“I get exasperated because the mainstream media and most of human society looks at the world down the wrong end of a telescope.”“No I love these theories,” Stefanovic countered, adding “but I’m not slogging people $100 to listen to my rubbish.”

Mr Icke charges between $65-$100 for tickets to his full-day seminars.

I wanted to find a website where John Lear talks about how the moon was hauled into orbit and found this and below it:
www.thelivingmoon.com...
[by John Lear
Posted March 2008

There is a civilization of human beings who live on the Moon. This is the biggest and best kept secret on earth.

The nearside of the Moon, which is the side that faces earth, appears to be a desolate and unoccupied.

The farside of the moon, which also has a breathable atmosphere also has lakes, rivers, forests, snow-capped mountains and life as we know it here on earth.

Most of mankinds misconceptions about the moon have been carefully and systematically fed to us over thousands of years.

Here is the website for the moon's moving:
www.vielewelten.at...

K: Okay. So tell us how the moon got where it is, because, you know that the moon is a satellite,
that’s actually a fake...
J: Right. It was. It’s a spaceship that was towed into orbit. I would say thirty to forty thousand years
ago. Now the reason I say thirty to forty thousand years ago, is because it’s still within the history of
man.

J: Yeah. So anyway, I go to see Norm two years ago, and in talking with him I said: “By the way,
the electromagnetic vehicle that towed the moon into orbit, where is it now”? And he said, “I think
it’s on the back side of the moon”.

So when I got hooked up with Ron Schmidt, we started collecting photos on the back side of the
moon and we found it. It’s in the crater Tsiolkovsky. And the story of how we did it was so
interesting and how NASA covered it up. There’s like six different photos of Tsiolkovsky, as they
tried to airbrush this electromagnetic vehicle out if the picture by making it an island. . And ah, but
we got them. And we got two really good photos. One was discovered by a lady who works for us
in Florida, and she discovered it on a thumbnail of Tsiolkovsky. And what happened, was when
NASA was advertising this particular photo, you know, they airbrushed the big one, but, when they
had the thumbnail, somebody looked at that and said, “Hey, I’m not going to take the time to
enlarge that, take the vehicle out and put it down - nobody’ll notice it anyway.”
But we noticed it, and it’s great, and that’s where we got the photo of the EMV on the far side. And
then, Apollo 15 flew over it, and they got some movies of it, and it’s just a quick shot but it’s really
interesting.

Now that you have read how two brilliant minds have gone off their rockers, what are your views on reptile-people and the moon as an artificial body hauled to its present position? Have you seen the photo and movies Lear mentions?

Tsiolkovsky Crater


Lear's EMV turned into island

I have seen the photos and movies that Lear mentions. I've also seen photos taken by Lunar Orbiter, Clementine, LRO, Kaguya, Chang'e-2 and various Soviet probees showing Tsiolkovskiy. Apollo 8 and 17 also covered Tsiolkovskiy extensively and again no such magical vehicles, just the central peak of an impact crater. I have pre-digital versions of many of the older images.

None of them show any sign of anything remotely resembling a spaceship, and all of them show exactly the same features. Why? Because there is no spaceship there.

People like Lear and Icke, as far as I'm concerned, fall into two categories: mentally ill and fraudsters. The former, of course, does not preclude the latter. Icke does very nicely out of his act, and his website is very carefully managed to make sure that dissenting voices like mine don't last long. They rely on people not checking things, and those that do are labelled as shills, or gatekeepers, or disinfo, or whatever other epithet that means they can dismiss evidence that contradicts them.

I actually think Icke makes more sense as he ages and progresses. There are many speeches he's given which are focused solely on controlling powers and their are on par with some of the greatest philosophers of our day. Im not sure why he holds some of his crazier theories. Though, he's stated straight up he gets a lot of it from intelligence, and therein lies the problem. Intelligence agencies purposely push false information.

The question is, is Icke an idiot and the info he gets is bunk, or are we all idiots and the most outrageous information is real and he's actually on to something. The biggest problem with this topic is the more 'skeptical' you get, the more you fall in line with social engineering powers that are actually designed to make you think that way. The truth does lie out there in the abyss, some of it likely far more crazy than 99% are willing to accept, but without a guide or someone 'in' on it, you wont know which crazy is true and which is bunk. If you stick to the skeptical-'scientific' views, its not long before you realize how unscientific many of those paradigms are.

re: the moon. For instance, the Lunar Transient Phenomenon. NASA officially ended its investigation into this in the 1960s. Research into TLP dates back to the times of Galileo and Keppler. And they were very keen on recording and studying it.



Now tell me, NASA can name its satellites after these people, but they spit in the eye of some of their own questions which have gone long unanswered... Why is that?

NASA studied the impact on disclosure and how it'd effect society in the 1960s, before going to the moon, with the Brookings Report. And they just recently commission another report for 1.1 Million, to see the impact on religion. A conspiracy theorist might think the original study was to see if disclosure during the moon mission would turn out well, and the results quashed the potential disclosure. They might also think disclosure now is running on borrowed time.

As far as the moon as a spaceship. Well, I remember the "ringing like a bell" when they crashed into it. Is that accurate? Also remember the Clementine Mission came shortly after Apollo ended. A DoD mission, headed up by Navy Space Command. What military data was so important to acquire from the moon?

Actually awhile later, but it seems if you check the tech/software engineers that worked on the processing systems, they somehow began working on it 5 years before it was commissioned.

The only reason I can see for software engineers to be working on a non-existent program before it officially existed is if they were supposed to build some hidden function into the mission. Perhaps to cover up, or 'process' data so it would not come back as detected, but also appear like it had been.

a reply to: OneBigMonkeyToo

None of them show any sign of anything remotely resembling a spaceship, and all of them show exactly the same features.

Do you think it's odd that a Earth-based scope that's 14-20", can take more detailed pictures than some of the best satellite photography NASA has done around the moon?

a reply to: klassless

So, someone dragged 73,476,730,900,000,000,000 tons of rock and balanced it in orbit around the Earth (even if it is hollow it needs to have this mass to maintain its orbit).

That'll teach us because... wait a minute, what was the reason for it?

I remember reading something about the Sumerians and Tiamat smashing into the planet, i could be wrong though. Let's wait for the Anunnaki to return and ask them!

a reply to: klassless

It just never ends, you're right. Always the same story is returning. A lot could be wrong, but the heart of the matter is true. Aliens put the moon in orbit. That is what I believe and since this topic always seems to come back I feel free to always refer to what I have gathered about the issue.

www.evawaseerst.be...

a reply to: klassless

It just never ends, you're right. Always the same story is returning. A lot could be wrong, but the heart of the matter is true. Aliens put the moon in orbit. That is what I believe and since this topic always seems to come back I feel free to always refer to what I have gathered about the issue.

www.evawaseerst.be...

a reply to: klassless

I think the moon ideas came about through ignorance. People in general didn't know that moons are very common and this lent our Moon the 'wow factor.' Add in the stoner wonder, "Woah dude, the Moon is the exact size of the Sun in the sky! It CAN'T be coincidence, right? Aliens, duuuuuude, aliens." People were primed to entertain the ideas of Lear and Icke....Hoagland too.

In reality, our lovely Moon is one of hundreds. Were all of them bussed in from parts unknown? Or just ours? How would they know that?

a reply to: boncho

Now tell me, NASA can name its satellites after these people, but they spit in the eye of some of their own questions which have gone long unanswered... Why is that?

Those TLPs have had about as much study as they can be given. It looks like someone would have to drop a rover on the rim of Aristarchus and have it filming 24/7 until it captured an incident. So far, there have been observatories and amateur astronomers catching flashes and there's only so much they can do with it.

I see you've been digging in the UFO crates lately and it's sort of analogous to the TLP reports. There comes a point where accumulating reports becomes circular and pointless. We can point to Blue Book and say there's proof that people reported seeing things in the skies. Unfortunately, it doesn't help anyone to identify the unidentified remnants in the database. Same for the TLPs.

in his book Introduction to Space Science (John Wiley, 1971) acknowledges the problem and states that "The whole subject of the origin of the moon must be regarded as highly speculative." Dr. Louis B. Slichter, Professor of Geophysics at Massachusetts Institute of Technology treats this problem in great detail and concludes that "the time scale of the earth-moon system still presents a major problem."2

So yes there is something very fishy about the moon... Calculate the Roche Limit and calculate the distance at which the moon get further away from the earth (1.9cm). Big problem this awfully big moon was way within the Roche limit in earths past so....

a reply to: frenchfries

Things that looked like problems in 1971 might not look like problems today. You're referring to something called 'Slichter's Dilemma' that's frequently cited by Cremo-style guys and Creationists. Those guys tend to act like science exists in amber and hasn't progressed since 1975.

According to this page, The Recession of the Moon, it hasn't been a 'dilemma' for quite some time.

a reply to: Kandinsky

Slichter's dilemma... Me not a creationist.

Read the link thanks.

. Once all of the details are included in the physical models of the Earth-moon system, we can see that there is no fundamental conflict between the basic physics and an evolutionary time scale for the Earth-moon system.

So I understand that it's all explainable by introducing Tectonic plate movement into the eqotation... This more or less makes the 'simple' calculations of Moon distance obsolete. I couldn't find however how it's calculated now (formula's).

Reminds me of Vulcanic eruption interlocking. Nice theory but no-one can show me the paper.

Anyway let's blame it on Shape of the Earth... I dont want to be called a creationist no more

Just an Idea maybe there is plate movement because of the Moon ??

Those 3 TV hosts from the Today show in Australia are absolute jokes at the best of times. I have the displeasure of watching their show every morning and I cringe regularly.

That's not to say that I'm a fan of Icke, while I think SOME of what he says may have merit, it is overshadowed by his ridiculous talk of reptilians and crap like that.

Just saying, don't take anything those 3 jokes of TV hosts have to say seriously though. Lowest common denominator television.

a reply to: frenchfries

I wasn't describing you as a Creationist. Slichter's Dilemma has been used by Creationists to argue for the ~6000yo Earth.

Just an Idea maybe there is plate movement because of the Moon ??

It's key to the whole idea of plate tectonics. The tidal forces generated by our relationship with the Moon combine with the 'spin' of the Earth.

originally posted by: boncho
re: the moon. For instance, the Lunar Transient Phenomenon. NASA officially ended its investigation into this in the 1960s. Research into TLP dates back to the times of Galileo and Keppler. And they were very keen on recording and studying it.

TLP have long been explained by glints on crater walls thanks to the angle of the sun.

NASA studied the impact on disclosure and how it'd effect society in the 1960s, before going to the moon, with the Brookings Report. And they just recently commission another report for 1.1 Million, to see the impact on religion. A conspiracy theorist might think the original study was to see if disclosure during the moon mission would turn out well, and the results quashed the potential disclosure. They might also think disclosure now is running on borrowed time.

Assuming there is something to disclose, which there isn't.

As far as the moon as a spaceship. Well, I remember the "ringing like a bell" when they crashed into it. Is that accurate?

It's accurate as a metaphor. The resonance of the imapact waves recorded by Apollo seismometers allowed them to determine the moon's structure. A hollow moon would not have behaved in the way it did, and no, it is not made out of solid titanium either.

Also remember the Clementine Mission came shortly after Apollo ended. A DoD mission, headed up by Navy Space Command. What military data was so important to acquire from the moon?

"How good are our cameras?". That's why it was DoD funded.

Actually awhile later, but it seems if you check the tech/software engineers that worked on the processing systems, they somehow began working on it 5 years before it was commissioned.

Sources? You can work on a system that exists before it ends up in something else.

originally posted by: boncho
a reply to: OneBigMonkeyToo

None of them show any sign of anything remotely resembling a spaceship, and all of them show exactly the same features.

Do you think it's odd that a Earth-based scope that's 14-20", can take more detailed pictures than some of the best satellite photography NASA has done around the moon?

Totally untrue.

I have several books full of lunar images taken by terrestrial telescopes of that size and larger, and none of them compare with the images taken by Lunar Orbiter, LRO, Kaguya, Chandrayaan, Chang'e-2 and the rest.

How to move a planet:

buildengineer.com...

a reply to: klassless
I saw Ike's presentation recently, an an entertaining and thought provoking 12 hour experience it was.... anyone else here seen it yet? Do I believe it....?
Much more entertaining and thought provoking than the poop peddled day in and day out by Karl and Lisa via the Today show.... anyone else here watch it? Do I believe it....?

"It just never ends"

IMO that applies to ignorant humans with limited capacity to comprehend concepts such as this..


I personally believe the moon was brought into orbit. The ancient accounts talk of a time when we had no moon. We have an object that has been perfectly placed in order to eclipse our sun (check out the math tbis is no coincidence) also look into the math of 'squaring the circle' good short YT video on that. Without the moon there would also be no axial tilt.. Before moon was here we had no tilt and a consistent climate with no polar ice.There was also a band of water around the earth (the firmament) this is what caused the deluge from above. A recent science study also supports that much water on earth was brought here from outside..so when the deluge occurred this may well have displaced Pangea (just a thought).

Also look into carbon 14 dating, estimated to have an origin of 10,000 years. The origin of this carbon is celestial and radioactive in nature. So 10,000 years ago we have an event possibly nuclear? that destroyed our firmament, simply put, a nuke was let off or even quite possibly the origin of carbon 14 comes from the moon.

Look into a website called "tricked by the light" this will explain the true occult reasons and function of the moon. The moon, saturn and sun all play a role in projecting the 3d living matrix. Although the moon also plays a role in what is termed the 'afterlife', which is an augmented hologram designed to ensnare a soul and then recycle it back onto this plain with past life memories removed.

Tiamat can also be proven to exist. Look into Bodes math law, which predicts it in the same place as the sumeriens claimed (asteroid belt). Volcanic evidence on meteorites tells us that this can only form on a planet, look into exploding planet hypothesis, so much more to add, all this is from the top my head.

And of coarse Planet X Is real and will be passing soon as I've documented in my years plus worth of images and sightings.

so when I here a thread full of scientists claiming Ickes claims are nonsesme perhaps you'll want to think twice on your stance as you are clearly uninformed, certainly as members of ATS, you need to raise the bar Guys!

I met David a few years ago, had a nice talk with him that was thankfully devoid of hollowed out moons and lizard queens. He's a genuine thinker whether you agree with his thoughts or not, I'd also say that he handled the presenters of the Today Show pretty well.